The Furry Forums
Furry Chat => Rants and Advice => Topic started by: Tron Cat on November 14, 2011, 09:20:05 AM
-
Why do humans as a species fight with each other. I'm mean why fight over anything all one has to do if they disagree with someone then all person has to do is set down with that person and peacefully talk about their problem. If are know thinking that will not work sometimes then you are right some time it will not but at that time one just has to say to them self's get over it and go on with their life and know that tomorrow is a new day.
-
That's what I wonder all the time.
Sometimes there are things that realllly get to you though, and I understand that people have off days, but you still shouldn't take it out on others ESPECIALLY on the internet. You don't HAVE to be on, if someone makes you that angry then just block em. XD
-
That is what I'm sayings but people don't think that far when they are mad. D:
-
I hear you there and I am just as disheartened by this penchant humans have for fighting.
Do you realize they must have thousands of words for arguing and fighting? Squabble, skirmish, dust-up, disagreement, argument, lager heads, locking horns, going toe to toe, tiff, bicker, quarrel, quibble, scrap...
Unfortunately I don't know why some feel a need to escalate a difference of opinion into an all out pitched battle.
Talking about a disagreement and working it out makes so much sense and yet people still opt to bicker.
All we can do is be who we are. Settle any differences through conversation and try to avoid getting drawn into unnecessary scuffles.
And when all else fails, start stealing socks from their dryers. They hate it when that happens. XD
-
humans have a hole in their heart and it seems it can only be filled by blood and death it is really sad when you think about it. poor humans :'(
-
Humans fight for several reasons. Number one, because it is our natural instinct to fight. From the dawn of existence, humans have had to fight to live. Nature doesn't care if you want to sit down and talk it out like civilized people, it will destroy you if you don't fight against it and therefore humans have a nature that yearns to fight whenever a disagreement arises.
Second of all, next to nothing can be completely resolved peacefully. In negotiations, when people do decide to be civil about it, some one will always come out as the loser, in that either they won't get what they want exactly or they get totally screwed. And face it, if you want something, sure you can tell yourself to suck it up, but that's not going to change the fact that you want it and you can't have it.
Finally, humans like to fight. It's our natural competitive spirit brought out. It lets you know who is stronger and who is not, be that through physical confrontation or some other form. The bottom line is that we want to be better than others and if you don't think that you're lying to yourself.
And as a side note, I don't mean to be disrespectful, but when you bring up an argument like this could you please use proper grammar and spelling.
-
Ahh one of the oldest questions ever asked. Too bad most are too afraid to ask it nowadays.
We fight for dominance, power. The pack mentality requires a leader but each party desires such a covetet position. And power? Resources, respect, et cetera. The better of any respective party is the more "power" it has. This can be seen on both a political and social level.
Now I wouldn't say humans like to fight. More we see it as the most effective way to a means, or sometimes the only way to a means.
The simplest medium I can think of is on the modern, exploded political scene.
For example: control of the middle east.
The middle east is central in two very important ways. First of all, and perhaps the most lasting is its religious implications. If you can centralise a belief in the masses you have absolute control over them, and the area we know as Israel is a method of centralising three major religions. The second is oil, an important (and dwindling) resource that we cannot usually comprehend living without.
All countries want control here. They would make whomever controlled them the undisputable top dog. Human nature and societal influence instill a belief that the top dog is the only person/group capable of surviving reliably. Thus we focus on it. It consumes us. The desire to be famous is the exact same phenomena, on a slightly more ephemeral field. Freudians would claim it all routes back to the human mind focusing on breeding (and the top dog does breed) and thus we exist after death.
Of course this is all philosophical speculation. All that we can be sure of is that whether you understand it or not, war and smaller conflicts will exist alongside our race until our extinction event.
-
on a national level yes fighting and war may at some point be the best way to go. On an everyday level fighting is not the best opinion because on an everyday level we have to learn to us words because words are a means and for the people who will listen the pronunciation of a truth and the truth of the mater is that all forms of conflict can be avoided with simple conversation.
And the sooner people see that the sooner the human race can really begin to form a long lasting word for which our kids will want to live in but i at the end of the day it will come down to everyday life and how you handle it. So next time you are about to start something over nothing just think about the truth all forms of conflict can be avoided with simple conversation.
0:)
-
Internet fighting is nowhere as serious as any other type of fighting.
The thing about the internet is that it brings about anonymity, which people often abuse or use for fun, or see that anonymity as an opportunity to say what's truly on their mind without the real world consequences. The worst you have to deal with from an internet fight would be getting banned from something or having to put someone on your ignore list. The way I see it, nothing on the internet should be taken seriously unless it directly correlates with something in real life, and not much of it does, so just take it with a grain of salt.
Annnnnd fighting only happens in nature because animals aren't intelligent enough to settle things in any other manner, bless em'. Wish I could claim land by just biting someone in the neck, sounds less painful than going through the banks.
Edit: Now, see, this post was originally a response to the post above, which has changed completely since the last time I saw it, so, meh, I'm gonna leave this here anyway.
-
Just jumping in randomly here.. But theres a lot of talk about 'poor humans' and 'why do humans fight'.. Its nature in general not just humans.. Animals fight over everything! At least humans eat a meal without fighting, quite a lot of the time, animals cant..
Not being mean to animals, just saying, that humans fight because it is in their nature, just like it is in an animals nature...
I personally dont like fighting, and I dont fight. But not everyone thinks the same..
I like to think we're evolving, just a personal thought. All of us who dont want to fight, and can go against our natural instinct to fight and instead, talk things through - we're slightly more evolved than all the people who have to fight constantly. Eventually the whole world will stop fighting. But thats a long way off :(
x
-
Animals fight for survival, and humans do to.
Although humans may seem to fight over seemingly stupid stuff, it always comes to two ends: reproduction or self-preservation.
See someone fight over a parking space? They're fighting for it so that they don't have walk farther to the store, thus using up energy and time that they could be using elsewhere.
Though I say this, I'm still all for people sorting out things with words rather than fighting, because most of the time, people have the resources to make both people happy, or at the very least come to a reasonable compromise.
Even animals do it to a point, although the difference is that many times they either don't have the resources or the ability to come to a compromise. If an animal scent marks a territory, its like putting up a fence saying "If you CHOOSE to come into my home space, you'll get tore up."
However if there's a dead elephant and scavengers that usually fight are around the carcass, then they won't fight because they would waste energy doing so and there's more than enough to fill their bellies.
-
"War. War never changes. Since the dawn of human kind, when our ancestors first discovered the killing power of rock and bone, blood has been spilled in the name of everything, from God to justice to simple, psychotic rage. For man will someday succeeded in destroying the world - but war, war never changes and never stops ."
-
...And you use red text why? Comes off as rude. Dispute my opinion with your own words, not some quote probally by a long dead philisopher. :P
-
Especially that which is the opening slideshow to Fallout...
Although I made my opinion clear. We're all just animals and we certainly act like it...
-
I agree with The Redeemed and Aoren, here.
Human are animals, and animals fight. What's different about humans is that they are more capable of discussing a compromise instead of jumping to violence. But many humans would rather not take the mental effort of working things out calmly. And honestly, sometimes there is just no other choice.
-
In my experience that happens quite often.
Once one group resorts to violence discussion usually ceases to be an option, and it's certainly popular to speed up deliberations...
-
I used the quote because it would get the point across and it's true isn't it one day man kind will end its self.
-
Quite the optimistic kid, eh?
But for most people, fighting isn't a normal part of their daily curriculum. Most people like to avoid physical fights unless they're the unfortunate victim of circumstance.
How many physical fights did you get into today?
-
that may be true but just think of all the things in the world that could be different If everyone would just used simple conversion to set aside their differences and come to a compromise. before anybody reply just sit back and think about all the thing that didn't have to happen.
-
That's neat and all, but you can't change the past, just learn from it.
If you don't want to fight, you don't have to. If you don't want everyone else to fight, well, good luck with that one, but it's unlikely; you can't expect the world to change for you or for anyone.
You can blare as many peaceful messages as you want, but to want everyone to change to your liking is a restriction of freedom, yeah? It's destructive, but they have free will; everyone thinks for themselves and decides what they want or what they want to fight for, to take that away would be a restriction of their free will. Ever read a little book called Clockwork Orange?
The short version: "When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man."
See? I can bring up quotes too.
Here's another one for ya': "Does God want goodness or the choice of goodness? Is a man who chooses to be bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?"
-
That's neat and all, but you can't change the past, just learn from it.
If you don't want to fight, you don't have to. If you don't want everyone else to fight, well, good luck with that one, but it's unlikely; you can't expect the world to change for you or for anyone.
You can blare as many peaceful messages as you want, but to want everyone to change to your liking is a restriction of freedom, yeah? It's destructive, but they have free will; everyone thinks for themselves and decides what they want or what they want to fight for, to take that away would be a restriction of their free will. Ever read a little book called Clockwork Orange?
The short version: "When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man."
See? I can bring up quotes too.
Here's another one for ya': "Does God want goodness or the choice of goodness? Is a man who chooses to be bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?"
*Gives Vine many epic cookies* ^^
-
They fight because they are stupid. They want to show that they are strong and immature. It will take time before one country do the first step, sit at a table and talk.
If they where furry with the humans, well they will fight each other for a reason.
If we where all furry, well I don't think that peace will be present. Its the desire of control, to dominate. We are stuck here and can't go anywhere to have peace. If peace was on the voting board, and every one ask for peace, maybe they will. Maybe. Until then. They other solution is to bit at the politicians and tell them that we want peace or we will trow them out. (Wish full thinking).
-
We may try to say it's not true, but we all know violence solves problems. Yes, it can make more. Yes, using it is a problem by itself. And yes, wanting or liking it is the worst of them. However, in some cases problems solved seem worth problems caused - and as groups of people in power almost always act cold and reasonable, and there's no room for inefficiency - fighting is the solution of choice. If the fighting is done for resources, well - one does not want to starve. But I think that reason is the good thing - as reason never puts violence as the first tool. Emotions are not reasonable and they are the most fundamental cause of it all. It seems that emotion is obviously wrong, but without hate there wouldn't be love, too. It's what makes us more than simple mechanisms.
One should look at the history of dictatorships - countries run by single men. Single men are affected by their emotions and personal biases etc. - if that single man hates something, it affects the whole country and hate leads to violence. Countries led by reasonable men or groups who are just too impersonal to be emotional have to protect themselves if the violence threatens them.
I hate to invoke politics and anger mr Godwin, but Hitler hated Jews and had some reasons for it; he had some opinions about humanity. He gathered people who thought similarly so it didn't made the government impersonal enough. Violence he started had to be stopped by violence in the end, and there was no way to reason with him, so it's not as easy as just sitting at a table and talking. Every side would have to agree with that.
And let's now take everyone into the account - if there are N people in the world and N-1 agree on peace, there will be still 1 person who sees the gain in violence and enacts it. Again, N should agree on peace and we know that if everyone would think the same way, we wouldn't be much different than mass-produced automata.
All in all, moralities, emotions and personalities make us sapient, but it comes with a price.
-
We may try to say it's not true, but we all know violence solves problems. Yes, it can make more. Yes, using it is a problem by itself. And yes, wanting or liking it is the worst of them. However, in some cases problems solved seem worth problems caused - and as groups of people in power almost always act cold and reasonable, and there's no room for inefficiency - fighting is the solution of choice. If the fighting is done for resources, well - one does not want to starve. But I think that reason is the good thing - as reason never puts violence as the first tool. Emotions are not reasonable and they are the most fundamental cause of it all. It seems that emotion is obviously wrong, but without hate there wouldn't be love, too. It's what makes us more than simple mechanisms.
One should look at the history of dictatorships - countries run by single men. Single men are affected by their emotions and personal biases etc. - if that single man hates something, it affects the whole country and hate leads to violence. Countries led by reasonable men or groups who are just too impersonal to be emotional have to protect themselves if the violence threatens them.
I hate to invoke politics and anger mr Godwin, but Hitler hated Jews and had some reasons for it; he had some opinions about humanity. He gathered people who thought similarly so it didn't made the government impersonal enough. Violence he started had to be stopped by violence in the end, and there was no way to reason with him, so it's not as easy as just sitting at a table and talking. Every side would have to agree with that.
And let's now take everyone into the account - if there are N people in the world and N-1 agree on peace, there will be still 1 person who sees the gain in violence and enacts it. Again, N should agree on peace and we know that if everyone would think the same way, we wouldn't be much different than mass-produced automata.
All in all, moralities, emotions and personalities make us sapient, but it comes with a price.
:o I never thought of it like that, but all of that's true.
(Applauds)
-
Sorry to jump in near the end of this discussion...
I have been reading and I have seen some very good positions created, opposed, and defended. I have also seen some magnificent points made. The only issue I have with this is that the original question was "Why do humans fight" or some variation thereof.
I agree with TheRedeemed (two posts above) and that view on violence. I am a Martial Artist and was always brought up to use my strength to defend those that cannot defend themselves. I was taught to be polite, kind-hearted, and respectful, but that does not preclude me (or inhibit me) from learning multiple ways to kill someone with a single hand.
Violence is a necessary part of human existence. Whether it was designed that way, randomly occurred that way, or became that way (as your religion or philosophy demands) the fact remains that violence is the way of life now. But it is not the source, it is the effect.
In my humble opinion, that source is that living creatures sustain, improve, and define themselves through conflict. Previously there was a post that spoke of "the need for dominance" (sorry, I am unable to quote as I do not really feel like digging for it, I apologize), and that cannot be more correct. In large creatures, like humans, it is necessary for a pecking order to be established. That hierarchy cannot be created through calm and quiet discussion (as much as I wish it could be), or even through heated intellectual debates that revealed who is more capable of leading. More and more often it comes down to who has the strongest arm or the largest army.
Sure violence has occurred in our past, but why was it deemed necessary? The drive for control, power, and dominance is all important to humanity.
Take it as you will.
-
BWow, I haven't been in a fight for like almost two years now.
-
I've never been in a physical fight outside of my family. And even within my family, I could probably count it on my fingers. Just over stuff like comfortable laying spaces and whatnot.
-
Uhm... How many physical conflicts have I been in? Too many to remember. Maybe it's the effect of circumstance and the fact that I tend to react negatively to people deliberately attempting to harm me or people in my immediate vicinity.
Anyway as my earlier statement of dominance suggested we are hardly any different, socially, from our tribal ancestors and their more disperse ancestors yet.
-
Let just start by saying that i'm back and I'm here it put this thing to bed.
we are all different and we all handle things differently but that is why the world is so much fun to live in. With out some form of conflict life would be boring i see that now and we need conflict to help us grow. The forum its self shows that if anything. We all have different ideas and ways of learning and i wouldn't want any other way. Just remember haters gone hate.