Something Chronic and I were discussing--about free will--sort of sparked this in my head. But I'd like to make a few proclamations which will probably surprise a lot of you.

First and foremost, is a profession of tolerance. It's probably difficult for a lot of you to reconcile the idea that I'm actually a tolerant person, but--without tooting my own horn--most of the people I know would agree with me. I'm just certain of the idea that intolerance of intolerance is no vice, and you can thank the work of Karl Popper for that one.

But, essentially, this relates to free will in the sense that we don't have it. People really aren't the conscious author of their thoughts and--in all honesty--aren't morally responsible, either. When a bear gores a person, we often think of them as amoral or otherwise not responsible for their actions in some way because. . . Y'know, it's a fucking bear. And yet, we don't hold the same view when a psychopath murders somebody, despite the fact that bad genes and neurological anomalies combine to make people like this--which are totally out of their control. This (the idea of moral responsibility) only works if you really, seriously believe that people are capable of choosing to do otherwise in certain situations.

Now, this isn't to be confused with fatalism or to say choices don't matter--of course they do. But what it seriously does is undermine any attitudes of hatred you may have towards other human beings. Retribution, in effect, makes absolutely no ethical sense whatsoever. I don't hate Jihadis, I don't hate Hitler, I don't hate Saddam Hussein and I don't hate my bipolar uncle who makes my grandpa cry and calls me a "wanker".

It doesn't make any sense to hate--at all. Of course, the recognition and willingness to deal with threats is important, but that's just part and parcel of life. So, essentially, I just wanted to extol the one message I have that really is worth giving--we need to intellectually, if not emotionally, tolerate even the scum of the Earth. Hatred and punishment breeds more hatred and punishment; the only thing that truly makes sense is operating on a mechanism which ensures future prosperity for all parties.

Gay

I actually do believe that people have some degree of control over what kind of personality they have, they just have to recognize what influences their personality and act according to what will influence them in the manner that they wish.

The first issue with this is that you can't change what has already happened, thus having certain genes, disorders, birth defects etc. is out of your control. But you can theoretically control how you are influenced by your environment by putting yourself into one of your choosing. (I say theoretically because the opportunity to put yourself into the environment of your choosing doesn't exactly present itself to everyone.)

The second issue is that the vast majority of people do not recognize this when they are developing and thus never act according to it in the most influential time of their life.

Even if that were the case, being able to control one's environment to whatever degree still can't mitigate the quite serious physical defects of people. I mean, it's not that psychopaths are evil per se, there's just an emotional deficit which prevents empathy. You really can't mitigate that.

Quote from: Yutaka on January 09, 2015, 10:37:35 AM

I'm tolerant, to most things.

A little too much I'm afraid >____>

Better than being sensitive to many things.

PSA: Anyone who is lactose intolerant needs to grow up

The thread about me being potentially Islamaphobic had reaching two-and-a-quarter pages in this amount of time.

Yeah, I'm the one who focuses on the negative.

Even if that were the case, being able to control one's environment to whatever degree still can't mitigate the quite serious physical defects of people. I mean, it's not that psychopaths are evil per se, there's just an emotional deficit which prevents empathy. You really can't mitigate that.

I don't necessarily believe that it is 100% certain a psychopath would have become one without question due to their conditioning at birth. I do believe that a person's upbringing has a significant effect on a person's conditioning when they have developed. The nature of that effect is very complex and isn't exactly straight forward. IE: Maybe a psychopath was treated with love  and care throughout his childhood but still managed to become one.

Basically I believe the ego does as it is conditioned to do. If the effect of that conditioning at birth is so strong that it can't be negated by the conditioning of a person's upbringing then that is what will happen. A person with Down's Syndrome can't influence themselves out of Down's Syndrome, obviously.

But I do believe that people have some degree of control over their conditioning.