New study suggests humans are not naturally violent.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan



:"They" are the ruling class, and they have exploited the possibility of violence among the common class for centuries. "Divide and conquer" was the bread and butter of the Roman playbook.

Out of touch with reality, indeed.

Yeah right?

So every warrior culture from Masai to Gallowglass to Huron to Pict has been under the influence of this 'ruling class'?

I don't think so.

Exactly, they don't want you to think so, otherwise you would become none Violent and so will your children, then they are really screwed.

and this is a conspiracy web site, the conspiracy of their being an "elite" mafia manipulating and modifying our species is one of the reasons this site was created.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by XaniMatriX

 

So, do you negate our primal animal instincts to hunt, to compete, to kill?

To hunt is not VIOLENT, and our primal instinct is actually to gather, not hunt. WOW do you have the need to kill? i am a little worried about you saying that.

Our digestive system and our stomach is built the same way every herbivore's is, unlike the carnivores who's digestive track is short, ours is long just like every other herbivore on this planet. Meat is to acidic for our bodies, it destroys our bones and in no way provide decent nutrients for the way our body is built, that is why vegetables and fruits are so good for us.

Originally posted by XaniMatriX

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan



:"They" are the ruling class, and they have exploited the possibility of violence among the common class for centuries. "Divide and conquer" was the bread and butter of the Roman playbook.

Out of touch with reality, indeed.

Yeah right?

So every warrior culture from Masai to Gallowglass to Huron to Pict has been under the influence of this 'ruling class'?

I don't think so.

Exactly, they don't want you to think so, otherwise you would become none Violent and so will your children, then they are really screwed.

Ok?

Apparently these are the same people who want me to be docile and subservient?

Your views are contradictory to those held by many on ATS about the 'ruling class'.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

:"They" are the ruling class, and they have exploited the possibility of violence among the common class for centuries. "Divide and conquer" was the bread and butter of the Roman playbook.

Out of touch with reality, indeed.

Yeah right?

So every warrior culture from Masai to Gallowglass to Huron to Pict has been under the influence of this 'ruling class'?

I don't think so.

Well, first lets be clear: your use of the word "every" is an attempt to change the conversation. There is no such thing as "every single time" when you have human behavior as the subject. But there is a "most often" or "almost always" that can be used in lieu of real numbers (which would be impossible to come up with).

But we have countless writings from leaders of days gone by, as well as first hand anecdotes, to guide us in the understanding of this.

The "divide and conquer" strategy is how Julius Caesar was able to take Gaul, and gain the power to call himself "Emperor". It is how the Nazi's took Germany. It is how the current "class war" in America is happening.

And it isn't always about starting strife, but rather capitalizing to the maximum degree on every situation. Strife just happens to be easily monetized.

And there is your key: who monetizes war? That is who manipulates it to happen. Even in the US, with the War on Drugs....who is making money off of it? That is who is manipulating the violence in people.

reply to post by seabhac-rua


I don't get it, you believe being none violent makes you a target for something?

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by XaniMatriX

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan



:"They" are the ruling class, and they have exploited the possibility of violence among the common class for centuries. "Divide and conquer" was the bread and butter of the Roman playbook.

Out of touch with reality, indeed.

Yeah right?

So every warrior culture from Masai to Gallowglass to Huron to Pict has been under the influence of this 'ruling class'?

I don't think so.

Exactly, they don't want you to think so, otherwise you would become none Violent and so will your children, then they are really screwed.

Ok?

Apparently these are the same people who want me to be docile and subservient?

Your views are contradictory to those held by many on ATS about the 'ruling class'.

"Docile and subservient", like a dog. But that dog can also be made to fight.

It isn't "docile and subservient" that is wanted of you. Just "subservient". There is no money to be made from people who are docile. The only thing that really pushes our technology is war. Without war, we would still be adding on an abacus, or your toes. War creates technology. The only other mantra that is more steady is "technology is used for porn".

Get up to about 30000 feet and look down. It takes a bit of work, and you have to figure out where the money flows. Do that....you will see. It is so obvious that it slaps you in the face. But you won't see if it you are immersed in pop culture....that is the veil.

reply to post by XaniMatriX


well...i wouldn't say we are herbivores, either. We are omnivores. Our ability to digest proteins, and the rarity of animal protein allgergies (when compared to the frequency of vegetable protein allergies) seems to indicate that we are made to digest meat as well as vegetables (and that we have typically gotten our protein from non vegetable sources).

Most vegans are fat. If veganism was the natural path of humanity, then it would also mean that being fat was part of our natural path as well.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by XaniMatriX

 

well...i wouldn't say we are herbivores, either. We are omnivores. Our ability to digest proteins, and the rarity of animal protein allgergies (when compared to the frequency of vegetable protein allergies) seems to indicate that we are made to digest meat as well as vegetables (and that we have typically gotten our protein from non vegetable sources).

Most vegans are fat. If veganism was the natural path of humanity, then it would also mean that being fat was part of our natural path as well.

Being fat or thin has nothing to do with how we are meant to be, and i am probably gonna get in trouble for saying this on a government website, but HEMP was the first source of protein for a long time, since "cave men" days, and we are NOT meant to eat meat, that is a lie (i do eat meat my self, but i do realize it is an addiction),
meat makes our blood so acidic the blood has to withdraw large numbers of calcium out of our bones, now calcium we do not get out of milk also, that is also a huge lie, because when they say 2% milk on the bag, it literally is only 2% of the actual milk, just white water that tastes like milk.

Oh and HEMP is actually much better protein provider for our bodies then any other meat on this planet, we are herbivores who have been tricked into being carnivores, thus conditioning us to be violent against our nature.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I never said that there aren't people who utilize our violent tendencies for their own nefarious needs.

That is not what this thread is about, it is about whether humans are inherently violent, is it not?

I contend that humans are inherently violent, that violence is part of who we are, to deny this in my opinion is irrational. Again I'll say this, our ability to control our violent impulses is one of the traits that make us human.

And yes hunting is violent, just ask the animals we hunt and kill.

reply to post by seabhac-rua


Search up the meaning of Violent, hunting is only Violent when the person or animal enjoy the sport of hunting.
Hunting in order to feed the family or your self at a desperate need is not violent, because the being would not enjoy killing.

do a cursory study of biological science and evolution. Nature is violent

Nature is not all violent. Many species of animals are non-violent and cooperative and only fight when they are attacked. Many mammal species and even some birds live in groups where they share resources and labor.

reply to post by CB328


I agree nature is not just about violence it is about cooperation too... Without this there would be no life left on earth...

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

Search up the meaning of Violent, hunting is only Violent when the person or animal enjoy the sport of hunting.
Hunting in order to feed the family or your self at a desperate need is not violent, because the being would not enjoy killing.

I really don't understand how you come to this conclusion.

Violent by definition means: "using or involving the use of physical force to cause harm or damage to someone or something"

You can be violent towards an object, a person, or an animal.

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by CB328

 

I agree nature is not just about violence it is about cooperation too... Without this there would be no life left on earth...

Any ecosystems that have predation, and I've yet to hear of any that don't, contain violence. Nature is about balance and equilibrium.

The term violent is a personal comprehension perception. A lion is not violent if it kills for a reason but if it kills for the sport of killing than I consider it violent. People are mostly docile because of body chemistry tied to eating a certain diet. Change the diet and you can change the violent tendencies of the people. Some people have strong morals though as do others in the animal kingdom. They will die or starve before compromising those principles. A deer can eat meat to survive if need be and will violently kick the shi out of any human if needed. They choose to remain as their society wants them to. Same with humans. If humans are taught killing is necessary they will kill most times to survive. It is a moral thing that we are conditioned to accept that underlies our way of life. Forcing your doctrine on a serial killer will not change them. Some people are not changeable and should be executed while others can be reformed. Violence is a learned response even though it can be diet induced because those who think violence is right will eat foods that make them worse. People with overactive livers are often more violent and process food differently. They speak of this as Ying and Yang in chinese medicine and it has a different name in the traditional medicine of India. I studied this a little but not much yet, seems that our medical industry also studies this and designs medicines to slow liver function. Bad for people with already slow liver function though, the doctors don't understand this concept well overall and some are making big mistakes because of bad judgement.

Yeah...

"My liver made me do it."

reply to post by rickymouse


I'm sorry, but your assumption that violence is learned is simply incorrect. This may be the case for some people, but not for everyone. Primary psychopaths don't need to believe it's "good" or "bad", "right" or "wrong"...that's outside their comprehension...except as a means to manipulate other people whom they believe are weaker for having a conscience.

There is ID, and EGO, but no super-ego in primary psychopaths. Not because they came from a bad family, but because of either genetics, else something going wrong in the development of the brain at an early age, even while still in the womb.

reply to post by XaniMatriX


Go close to a mirror facing it, and open your mouth.

There is no way someone who is of reasonable intellect could think we aren't meant to eat meat. History, and human anatomy prove this is simply incorrect.

Some people process meat better than others. It comes down to genetics. Some people do fine on a purely meat diet. Some need much less than average to clear health issues. Some vegetarians swear by their diet, and I'm sure some get by on it, but on the whole it seems to lack sufficient key nutrients that cause most people to feel a bit run down compared to having some meat added.

If it works for you, cool, but please don't try to convince people that we're not meant to consume meat. It's a foolish argument.

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
because when they say 2% milk on the bag, it literally is only 2% of the actual milk, just white water that tastes like milk.

Damned dude, you're pretty ignorant. 2% milk indicates the percentage of fat of the milk. Regular milk contains ~3.5% fat by weight. So 2% is nearly half the fat reduction. That's all it means.

Oh and HEMP is actually much better protein provider for our bodies then any other meat on this planet, we are herbivores who have been tricked into being carnivores, thus conditioning us to be violent against our nature.

Than any meat on the planet Bull#.

Who has conditioned us to be violent by tricking us into being carnivores? We're not carnivores; we're omnivores. When fruits, berries, and the like are abundant in our area, we eat of it...when animal for game is abundant, we eat of it. This has been going on for tens of thousands of years. There is no one group that could "trick" us into adapting to the climate and our surroundings. It's simply how we evolved and survived.

reply to post by moniesisfun

There is no way someone who is of reasonable intellect could think we aren't meant to eat meat. History, and human anatomy prove this is simply incorrect.

Im not so sure that it is...

reply to post by seabhac-rua

Any ecosystems that have predation, and I've yet to hear of any that don't, contain violence. Nature is about balance and equilibrium.

Yes I agree both have a role to play. I think however too much attention is payed to the violence and the predation. Nature gives too and our entire biosphere exists in a state of symbiosis..