Member
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2020
- Messages
- 249
So there's no illness in that world how boring there's no thrill, then war is the only option to reduce population hmm interesting.
Moto-Sekai Ichii Sub-chara Ikusei Nikki ~Hi-Player, Isekai wo Kouryaku-chu!~ - Vol. 1 Ch. 2
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Lustrius
I'd say you've kinda got it backwards, assuming I interpreted your statement correctly.
People in modern, safe societies tend to have a grossly inflated fear of death because it is a relatively uncommon phenomenon that most don't experience close-up that much in their lives.
Even a hundred or so years ago, people would die for all sorts of silly reasons all over the place, and similarly people killed each other for little or no reason. Yet the irony is that there were FAR fewer humans on the planet back then, and the average human would encounter far fewer others in their lifespan.
In short, as the natural causes of fatality have diminished and the human population has sky-rocketed, the average human perception of the value of a human life has gone up while the ACTUAL value of human lives has plummeted. Humans are more disposable in the modern age than they've ever been, yet people are more horrified at the prospect of death or killing than ever before.
In a fantasy world like the one shown, I'd imagine people would have a far more casual attitude to death, and ironically death would have a far bigger impact on the quality of life of the survivors.
I'd say you've kinda got it backwards, assuming I interpreted your statement correctly.
People in modern, safe societies tend to have a grossly inflated fear of death because it is a relatively uncommon phenomenon that most don't experience close-up that much in their lives.
Even a hundred or so years ago, people would die for all sorts of silly reasons all over the place, and similarly people killed each other for little or no reason. Yet the irony is that there were FAR fewer humans on the planet back then, and the average human would encounter far fewer others in their lifespan.
In short, as the natural causes of fatality have diminished and the human population has sky-rocketed, the average human perception of the value of a human life has gone up while the ACTUAL value of human lives has plummeted. Humans are more disposable in the modern age than they've ever been, yet people are more horrified at the prospect of death or killing than ever before.
In a fantasy world like the one shown, I'd imagine people would have a far more casual attitude to death, and ironically death would have a far bigger impact on the quality of life of the survivors.
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Messages
- 100
@The5thSeraph
hmm, i see your point but i don't think that changes the fact that one truly doesn't know the weight of dying until coming close to it or nearly experiencing it. Similar to how you don't know if an amusement park is really fun or not if you've never been in one. If you've never come close to death and never seen death happening anywhere around you, it's more of a "myth" in a sense. Similar again to how you know alligators exist even if you might've never seen one. Another example can be that you know wars exist but you truly don't know the horror of it because you've only see it on the news in front of a monitor until you're actually in a battlefield.
hmm, i see your point but i don't think that changes the fact that one truly doesn't know the weight of dying until coming close to it or nearly experiencing it. Similar to how you don't know if an amusement park is really fun or not if you've never been in one. If you've never come close to death and never seen death happening anywhere around you, it's more of a "myth" in a sense. Similar again to how you know alligators exist even if you might've never seen one. Another example can be that you know wars exist but you truly don't know the horror of it because you've only see it on the news in front of a monitor until you're actually in a battlefield.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Messages
- 100
@The5thSeraph
Sorry, i'm quite confused.
This is the statement i was trying to disprove about people in safe societies having an inflated fear of death because it's an uncommon phenomenon but then why are you contradicting it by saying there are only so many times one can hear it in safe societies (assuming we were on the same page) indicating one experiences death around them a lot such as family members who're close to them? Like i said, just because you hear about it or see it on a monitor, i don't think that's anywhere close to having a near death experience... just like how just because you saw wars on Tv in front of a monitor or if someone tells you about an horrible experience in war, it doesn't mean you truly know the horrors of the person who experienced it.
In short, hearing it a bunch of times and actually experiencing it are completely different things.
Sorry, i'm quite confused.
This is the statement i was trying to disprove about people in safe societies having an inflated fear of death because it's an uncommon phenomenon but then why are you contradicting it by saying there are only so many times one can hear it in safe societies (assuming we were on the same page) indicating one experiences death around them a lot such as family members who're close to them? Like i said, just because you hear about it or see it on a monitor, i don't think that's anywhere close to having a near death experience... just like how just because you saw wars on Tv in front of a monitor or if someone tells you about an horrible experience in war, it doesn't mean you truly know the horrors of the person who experienced it.
In short, hearing it a bunch of times and actually experiencing it are completely different things.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Lustrius
It isn't a contradiction. I was talking about myself. I've had it proven to me quite a few times that my personal attitude regarding death is abnormal. I regard it on the positive side of neutral, and find the way most people regard it in such a strongly negative way to be very distasteful. Death has saved many friends and family from lives of suffering.
I was the only one who didn't cry at my father's funeral, for instance. Actually I nearly laughed, but that was because the poem Joshua recited at the funeral was a veiled euphemism for male ejaculation and I don't think most of the family ever knew that. Speaking of which, Joshua's suicide was neat. He used laughing gas. I don't think his family appreciated it much though.
It isn't a contradiction. I was talking about myself. I've had it proven to me quite a few times that my personal attitude regarding death is abnormal. I regard it on the positive side of neutral, and find the way most people regard it in such a strongly negative way to be very distasteful. Death has saved many friends and family from lives of suffering.
I was the only one who didn't cry at my father's funeral, for instance. Actually I nearly laughed, but that was because the poem Joshua recited at the funeral was a veiled euphemism for male ejaculation and I don't think most of the family ever knew that. Speaking of which, Joshua's suicide was neat. He used laughing gas. I don't think his family appreciated it much though.
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Messages
- 100
@The5thSeraph
Why were you talking about yourself? Like i said, i was trying to disprove the statement i quoted last comment but then you mention your view on death which isn't even the average person's perspective whence it got nothing to do with what we were discussing...
Of course there are people like you ig but it's impossible to speak for everyone; what does an abnormal person's view on death got anything to do with society's view on death and the huge majority of the people in it like you originally brought up in your original post?
We might as well cut this discussion short as it seems we aren't even on the same page.
Why were you talking about yourself? Like i said, i was trying to disprove the statement i quoted last comment but then you mention your view on death which isn't even the average person's perspective whence it got nothing to do with what we were discussing...
Of course there are people like you ig but it's impossible to speak for everyone; what does an abnormal person's view on death got anything to do with society's view on death and the huge majority of the people in it like you originally brought up in your original post?
We might as well cut this discussion short as it seems we aren't even on the same page.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Lustrius
Because, as I was saying, it isn't that human lives are weighty or anything.
It is that most modern people don't have the experience to realise that they're not.
Once people around them start dying, sure the first one or two might hit hard, but then it starts to just blur into the background noise. Literally the opposite of what you said originally. Modern people don't realise just how cheap and trivial human lives are as they haven't experienced enough death.
Because, as I was saying, it isn't that human lives are weighty or anything.
It is that most modern people don't have the experience to realise that they're not.
Once people around them start dying, sure the first one or two might hit hard, but then it starts to just blur into the background noise. Literally the opposite of what you said originally. Modern people don't realise just how cheap and trivial human lives are as they haven't experienced enough death.
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Messages
- 100
@The5thSeraph
Okay, but you don't decide how much a human life is worth. Also, just because it blurred as background noise for you it doesn't mean it does for others, as like you said, you have an "abnormal" view on death so you most definitely can't speak for majority of the people.
I think you misunderstood my statement if you got that message out of it. The mc never seen death anywhere around him nor has he himself had a near death experience, therefore he doesn't know the weight or the true meaning of death like i constantly said (giving all these analogies). I never said anything after the first time having a near death experience nor did i even disagree about how one will get used to it after constantly witnessing it. Actually, i agree about how if one keeps seeing death or having near death experiences then they'll get used to it but not for the first time they aren't.
Okay, but you don't decide how much a human life is worth. Also, just because it blurred as background noise for you it doesn't mean it does for others, as like you said, you have an "abnormal" view on death so you most definitely can't speak for majority of the people.
I think you misunderstood my statement if you got that message out of it. The mc never seen death anywhere around him nor has he himself had a near death experience, therefore he doesn't know the weight or the true meaning of death like i constantly said (giving all these analogies). I never said anything after the first time having a near death experience nor did i even disagree about how one will get used to it after constantly witnessing it. Actually, i agree about how if one keeps seeing death or having near death experiences then they'll get used to it but not for the first time they aren't.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Lustrius
"Worth" is a measure of something's desirability divided by its commonality. For vague abstractions like human life one can only get a rough measure of change over time or comparative worth to other measures. What is crystal clear though is that the more common something becomes, all else being equal, the lower its worth becomes. As such, in the absence of consistently increasing desire for human life, the value of human life has obviously decreased over time as the population increased.
I'm not so much "deciding" it as simply extrapolating from observation.
You know Cheetahs? Everyone knows them. Lanky, spotty cats. Cute, by all accounts.
There are approximately 8000 of them left in the world.
There are about 7,800,000,000 humans in the world.
Putting aside the desirability factor for a moment, that would mean that one cheetah life is worth 975,000 human lives, and therefore it would be appropriate to... for instance... kill off the entire population of Luxembourg if it meant saving one cheetah.
O'course humans are completely full of themselves. So I expect the average human would probably rather save another human than a cheetah, which means they're overestimating their own worth almost a millionfold.
"Worth" is a measure of something's desirability divided by its commonality. For vague abstractions like human life one can only get a rough measure of change over time or comparative worth to other measures. What is crystal clear though is that the more common something becomes, all else being equal, the lower its worth becomes. As such, in the absence of consistently increasing desire for human life, the value of human life has obviously decreased over time as the population increased.
I'm not so much "deciding" it as simply extrapolating from observation.
You know Cheetahs? Everyone knows them. Lanky, spotty cats. Cute, by all accounts.
There are approximately 8000 of them left in the world.
There are about 7,800,000,000 humans in the world.
Putting aside the desirability factor for a moment, that would mean that one cheetah life is worth 975,000 human lives, and therefore it would be appropriate to... for instance... kill off the entire population of Luxembourg if it meant saving one cheetah.
O'course humans are completely full of themselves. So I expect the average human would probably rather save another human than a cheetah, which means they're overestimating their own worth almost a millionfold.
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Messages
- 100
@The5thSeraph
Will you kill yourself for a cheetah? Nevermind lol, you probably say you will, but saying and actually doing it are completely different things.
You can't just take in quantity over quality. Sure, i'd rather have cheetahs not extinct but a cheetah is overall, a "million" times dumber than a human. Not only that but we managed to beat nature and be the top of the food chain, making us superior to literally every single animal out there. Because of this, we managed to have so many people in the world.
Also, stop diverging from and ignoring the main topic. This has nothing to do with what we were originally talking about.
Will you kill yourself for a cheetah? Nevermind lol, you probably say you will, but saying and actually doing it are completely different things.
You can't just take in quantity over quality. Sure, i'd rather have cheetahs not extinct but a cheetah is overall, a "million" times dumber than a human. Not only that but we managed to beat nature and be the top of the food chain, making us superior to literally every single animal out there. Because of this, we managed to have so many people in the world.
Also, stop diverging from and ignoring the main topic. This has nothing to do with what we were originally talking about.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Lustrius
I'm more concerned about method than whether I would or not. Some ways to die are vastly preferable to others. But I'm digressing quite a bit there.
Also a cheetah isn't a million times dumber than a human. I wouldn't even necessarily say twice. A lot of humans are insufferably retarded.
Humans can't "beat nature". Humans are a part of nature. Just a part that has run rampant and oversucceeded at making more of itself. I don't know what sort of superiority you allege, but the only thing humans are clearly "superior" at is much the same thing influenza is good at: persisting in basically any environment. And as previously noted, that tends to lead to being overly commonplace and thus relatively worthless.
Anyways, yes. The topic. One you're just as guilty of straying off as myself. Protagonist doesn't have enough experience of death, and so can't reliably gauge its influence.
That suit?
I'm more concerned about method than whether I would or not. Some ways to die are vastly preferable to others. But I'm digressing quite a bit there.
Also a cheetah isn't a million times dumber than a human. I wouldn't even necessarily say twice. A lot of humans are insufferably retarded.
Humans can't "beat nature". Humans are a part of nature. Just a part that has run rampant and oversucceeded at making more of itself. I don't know what sort of superiority you allege, but the only thing humans are clearly "superior" at is much the same thing influenza is good at: persisting in basically any environment. And as previously noted, that tends to lead to being overly commonplace and thus relatively worthless.
Anyways, yes. The topic. One you're just as guilty of straying off as myself. Protagonist doesn't have enough experience of death, and so can't reliably gauge its influence.
That suit?
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Messages
- 100
@The5thSeraph
I put quotes there "..." to reference it was supposed to be an exaggeration. Only people who're actually mentally retarted are dumber than cheatahs. And yes, there are stupid people out there who can barely be called human but these people still have generally more knowledge than any animal do. And i can assure you, there are probably geniuses out there that are literally a million times smarter than a cheetah is.
We beat nature by distorting it to our needs and being on the top of the food chain, almost to the point of destroying nature itself... Just because we're part of nature, it doesn't mean we can't beat nature. We also had huge technological advances to make life easier for ourselves. Our civilization is constantly evolving rapidly that we might someday beat death itself yet every single other animal in the world hasn't change their life style since forever. The majority* of humans rely not only on instinct but logic too to make much more rational decisions. How does this not prove our superiority and worth over animals?
I put quotes there "..." to reference it was supposed to be an exaggeration. Only people who're actually mentally retarted are dumber than cheatahs. And yes, there are stupid people out there who can barely be called human but these people still have generally more knowledge than any animal do. And i can assure you, there are probably geniuses out there that are literally a million times smarter than a cheetah is.
We beat nature by distorting it to our needs and being on the top of the food chain, almost to the point of destroying nature itself... Just because we're part of nature, it doesn't mean we can't beat nature. We also had huge technological advances to make life easier for ourselves. Our civilization is constantly evolving rapidly that we might someday beat death itself yet every single other animal in the world hasn't change their life style since forever. The majority* of humans rely not only on instinct but logic too to make much more rational decisions. How does this not prove our superiority and worth over animals?
Yes it does. I think that concludes our discussion so do you really want to continue this discussion that's strayed way off? Or do you want to continue?
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Lustrius
Nit-picking: Knowledge and Intelligence are different things, just as Ignorance and Stupidity are different things. And then there are other factors like memory traits and whatnot. Having more knowledge than a cheetah isn't difficult as humans are exposed to far more data on a regular basis, but intelligence is determined on the basis of ability to process that data and draw viable conclusions from it, and there are plenty of humans who are overwhelmingly bad at that. Admittedly I am scaling in terms of potential utilised versus potential squandered... and nothing squanders potential quite like a human that is being kept alive whether it wants to be or not.
It really isn't though. "Nature" isn't moderated. It doesn't have rules. And for that matter, there aren't special lines drawn between what is and isn't "natural". A skyscraper is every bit as "natural" as a termite mound. Nukes are as natural as volcanoes. Some animals make things for themselves out of rocks and whatnot, and humans are one of those. Humanity will fuck itself and probably everything else over eventually, just like bolide impacts and super-plinean volcanic eruptions have fucked everything over in the past. And the termites will probably still be around afterwards.
Point being that regarding your own kind as "superior" on account of the one thing your species is specialised for is a hilariously primitive and illogical thing to be thinking. Congratulations on being able to raise your hackles and bark at entire other species. Even if you think you're better on the grounds of simple numbers or mass, the insects still have you beaten.
A little reminder: If being even smarter conveyed a consistently greater advantage, humanity would have kept going in the bigger brains direction without even stopping. Unfortunately diminishing returns are in play. More intelligent humans kill themselves more and breed less, y'know. Humanity decided it preferred bigger boobs and dicks. That is the future of humanity: Not super intelligence. Just T&A the size of dumptrucks and pen0r like tree.
Also the GPU on my gaming computer is bust, so I've really got nothing else to do with my time right now.
Nit-picking: Knowledge and Intelligence are different things, just as Ignorance and Stupidity are different things. And then there are other factors like memory traits and whatnot. Having more knowledge than a cheetah isn't difficult as humans are exposed to far more data on a regular basis, but intelligence is determined on the basis of ability to process that data and draw viable conclusions from it, and there are plenty of humans who are overwhelmingly bad at that. Admittedly I am scaling in terms of potential utilised versus potential squandered... and nothing squanders potential quite like a human that is being kept alive whether it wants to be or not.
That is just human arrogance talking. Or at least mostly human arrogance talking. Humans have this silly obsession with trying to set themselves apart from the rest of the biodiversity on this planet, acting like they're somehow acting in opposition to it, or that "nature" is some precious balanced unity that they're somehow disrupting.
It really isn't though. "Nature" isn't moderated. It doesn't have rules. And for that matter, there aren't special lines drawn between what is and isn't "natural". A skyscraper is every bit as "natural" as a termite mound. Nukes are as natural as volcanoes. Some animals make things for themselves out of rocks and whatnot, and humans are one of those. Humanity will fuck itself and probably everything else over eventually, just like bolide impacts and super-plinean volcanic eruptions have fucked everything over in the past. And the termites will probably still be around afterwards.
Because worth doesn't have anything to do with how logical something is or isn't, obviously. And for that matter "superiority" doesn't exist in an objective sense, and pretending otherwise is an act of stupidity. A failure of that alleged logic. A human might think themselves superior because they have multi-stage memory and deduction abilities (despite completely neglecting to properly use them). A dog might regard themselves superior because they have a keener sense of smell or can bork louder. Cheetahs would have every right to regard themselves as superior being the uncontested masters of burst-sprinting on this planet, a particular metric for which humans are hilariously inferior. You can't even bring down an antelope with your teeth? Pathetic.
Point being that regarding your own kind as "superior" on account of the one thing your species is specialised for is a hilariously primitive and illogical thing to be thinking. Congratulations on being able to raise your hackles and bark at entire other species. Even if you think you're better on the grounds of simple numbers or mass, the insects still have you beaten.
A little reminder: If being even smarter conveyed a consistently greater advantage, humanity would have kept going in the bigger brains direction without even stopping. Unfortunately diminishing returns are in play. More intelligent humans kill themselves more and breed less, y'know. Humanity decided it preferred bigger boobs and dicks. That is the future of humanity: Not super intelligence. Just T&A the size of dumptrucks and pen0r like tree.
Not particularly. The real question is whether I want to expend the effort to suppress the compulsion to respond to every challenge set before me or not. I don't really want to reply, but then I don't want to scratch every itch I get either.
Also the GPU on my gaming computer is bust, so I've really got nothing else to do with my time right now.
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Messages
- 100
@The5thSeraph
Okay, cool. Sorry but i didn't actually read anything you typed because it's way too long and we aren't even going to continue this discussion anyway so there really isn't even a point. Anyway, i hope you don't feel offended by that and I hope you get to fix that GPU of yours. It was fun.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Lustrius
I don't get offended by conventional things.
I'd claim not to get offended by things at all, but if people started dancing about in asymmetric costumes kicking cats, eating fried chicken and saying "your an herbalist" or something like that, I'd get pretty peeved.
It was actually a bit painful just to type that example.
I don't get offended by conventional things.
I'd claim not to get offended by things at all, but if people started dancing about in asymmetric costumes kicking cats, eating fried chicken and saying "your an herbalist" or something like that, I'd get pretty peeved.
It was actually a bit painful just to type that example.
Similar threads
