Typical off topic BS.
Ok, so back on topic. Humans most certainly are bad at the core.
For example, the fact is that most women are mental retards. But does it make it morally right for men to rape retards, simply for being retards?
The majority of men must psychologically rape a female before having sex with her. This makes him evil. But at the same time, all women psychologically rape men, so females are evil.
All humans eat a disproportional amount of meat to what they actually need to sustain muscle and brain function, so they are all evil.
Children are evil because they are unconscious. Women are evil because they are unconscious + emotionally evil orientated.
Children are as evil as society is. If society was good most children, but not all, would be good. But women would still be inherently evil, and men would turn evil after puberty because of the casual effect women have on raping their psyche.
So what happened to the boys in Lord of the Flies? They were preadolescent. What “evil” did they succumb to? Being males?
They had no female role models on the island.
Gimme the synopsis.
A group of preadolescent boys find themselves stranded on a deserted island after a plane crash that killed the adult pilot. In order to survive, they reverted to the basest form of humans, which included murder of their own kind.
I’m sure a simple search of Lord of the Flies will give a fuller explanation of what happened in that situation. Wikipedia gives an outline of the full story, if you are interested.
That is what I would call, junk data or a botched science experiment. You can’t make an experiment to discover the nature of tabula rasa with schoolkids. Such a thing is an oxymoron - those entities have already been tainted by society, and school, so what they do is not inherent but also based on what they learned.
The reason that women are so evil, and scary, and why young schoolkids are so scary, is because they are feminine, but a bit masculine too. They aren’t masculine enough to be masculine, they aren’t masculine enough to be androgenous, and they aren’t feminine enough to be feminine. They are essentially, walking zombies. Aryan males have an anima, a female core, but Gentiles dont have it, they appear to have an animus inner core, and thus they are barbarians. British are the great pretenders, most aren’t aryan at all, they just look at bit aryan. Hitler wasn’t Aryan either, no true Aryan would burn Jews in ovens, the only humane way to do it would be castration.
As far as your book goes, it seems to be founded on a fundamental flaw - using schoolkids tainted by society in a land of scarce resources and alien habitats to be used as somehow indicative of human nature - its schoolkids in an alien habitat with scarce resources - nothing about it is natural!
So the way the preadolescents on the island and the situation of the island itself are not natural? This contradicts your theory that the natural school child is a mix of latent female and male influences. Instead of man against the wilderness,
we have young boys, who of course carry with them some of the indoctrinated taints of adult society. They would express some of the traits you describe as masculine and feminine. Clarity on that point is needed. The boys committed murder.
They also established tribes. I think Golding was trying to express, in this thought experiment, that how the boys acted is a microcosm of how their adult counterparts act. Heinlein wrote an alternative view in “Tunnel in the Sky” (1955).
Its a fictional story, it does not actually prove anything. Its bunk. Thats like saying quantum physics is real because it was in Star Trek.
“contradicts my theory”
I dont see how it contradicts anything, you seem confused.
It proves your theory of masculine/feminine traits. , which in itself is confusing. The boys on the island did masculine things. In any event, the book won the Pulitzer Prize, making it a legitimate thought experiment, not bunk. The book is a classic and is often recommended as required reading in schools.
It doesnt matter if it won grand semen prize of shemale dickbabes. Its not actual scientific evidence that can be used.
Its not confusing, and the theory has been around for a while and proven long ago.
What is confusing, is this statement below, which does not compute. Try rewording your syntax please so that my sensors can detect it properly.
Lord of the Flies became popular in the mid 20th century for readers who were into Freud’s ideas of the subconscious and the nature of the id. It asks the existential question of what lies at the core of human nature. That
Heinlein wrote a counterpoint proves it was once a subject of hot debate. 21st century philosophy and/or religion have not decided on whether humans at the core are basically good or bad. Of course, good and bad have many interpretations. But the books seem to suggest that a good society includes addressing the needs of everyone, whereas a bad society does not and cannot do so.
UP 1001
I simply ask for your idea of what lies at the core of human nature, and all I get is theory about how hormones translate into thought and action. Can you dig a bit deeper? And your notion that anyone who disagrees with you is a retard is debate ad hom, the weakest form of debate.
“I want it now” lies at the core of human nature.
Is that all there is?
No, there are six key hormones at play, Estrogen, Testosterone, Serotonin, Dopamine, Oxytocin and Prolactin. These Main 6 come to get to form the Elements of Consciousness, and Male Female Dichotomies. It all balances out to be overall a mix of masculine and feminine.
Girls and boys mostly have a balance, but as a result they are all stupid and ignorant. Women are evil, and men are angry. Women like being evil, men dont like being evil. Huge difference.
The process of a nice girl, becoming an evil woman, is due to an excess of estrogen giving her bipolar thoughts and infinite guilt trips. She transforms into the demonic. Instead of guilt trips making her a better person, she learns to embrace her own evil. Men have feminine elements and that is why they are evil. Testosterone, typically considered masculine, also transforms into feminine love, which is the prime plague of evil, grasping its evil claws onto helpless men. Women are driven to do evil because of love, but also they do evil just for evil’s sake. Third reason they do evil is because they are afraid of facing the facts or acting against popular opinion.
So masculinity only does evil for one reason (love) and women do evil for 3 reasons (love, because evil feels good, and because they are easily peer pressured and afraid of action and truth.) So women are almost exactly 3 times more evil than men are.
Demonic is not the same as daemonic, dAemonic has androgen and estrogen, demonic just has Estrogen only.
You extrapolate psychology from your knowledge of a few neurotransmitters and hormones. But you did not answer the question of what lies at the core of human nature. You only tell how brain chemistry affects personality.
So far, science has not gotten to the place where it can draw a straight line between brain chemistry and consciousness. So how could such a line, if there was one, explain personality. Attempts to do so are pop psychology.
About Lord of the Flies–what if the stranded children were a mix of males and females? What if they were all female? What sort of social organization would they attempt?
Survival is (obviously) the core of human nature. “I want it now” is a tenant of this, you want food now so you have enough energies to get and dont starve to death.
In an island of scarce resources, the organism cannot have it is most utopian natures. There is simply no equation which can build a utopia if there are no resources, cannibalism is the result.
I have no idea what a community of females would be like stranded on an island, but I would love for someone to run that experiment and find out, preferably with newborn specimens who aren’t indoctrinated in anything, completely feral humans. The island, of course, would have to have ample resources.
Survival is obviously the core, and you can do the experiment yourself. Just as the average modern random what their idea of what life is all about, most of them will tell you something along the lines of surviving to the next day. Most of them have no ideals, they are simply filler for the void.
Tenant? Do you mean tenet?
Some would rather starve than become cannibals.
So what is a feral female? Toddlers could not survive on the island, no matter how much food was available in the form of wild berries, wild hogs, fish, etc.
Survival is not always the bottom line since there are those who would give their lives to save another life.
Only because they’ve been instructed to by their mothers. Like I said, the experiment would have to be humans in their natural, feral, state, without social or religious indoctrination.