Musings on "right" and "wrong"
Here's my thoughts, if anyone cares to read them...
People are born with, and acquire, different strengths and advantages. Some people are good looking, some are smart, some have a flair for violence.
Why is it then, in our society, that it is considered permissible for someone to play mind games, engage in trickery etc. in order to win a conflict, but using one's abilities in the realms of erotic capital and violence are frowned upon as slutty or psychotic?
IMO, if you are smarter than me, it is not in my best interest to engage in a battle of wits with you, it's in my interest to bring things into my area of expertise and smash your fucking face. Why is one socially acceptabe and not the other?
In the workplace, if you can use your mind and charisma to gain promotions and raises/rewards over me, why is it "wrong" for me to use physical intimidation to sway things back in my favor? Why SHOULDN'T I **** the boss to get ahead? I'm good at sex, you're good at spreadsheets, let's see who gets ahead, right?
On a side note, my doctors as a kid said I was on the low end of the APD spectrum, so if these seem like obviously dumb questions, I'm sorry, I really just don't get some things still. I mimic...but I don't think I get it.
You probably have too much insight and recognition of consequences to really have APD.
Anyway, I think you're echoing the Nietzche-an idea that society in it' way serves mostly to level the playing field by holding back "superior" individuals who don't abide by the culturally constructed moral code.
Bob Hare (author of Snakes in Suits) takes a more evoluationary-biological view, and sees mankind as "wired" for working together as a society, with a certain percentage of people born "cheaters" because it is advantageous (in terms of boning and producing offspring).
Probably, though I do have issues with impulse control and empathy. I tend to think I'm just an asshole. I used to have like, different charachters arranged in my head whose affects I'd adopt when it suited me. **** maybe I still do.
I dig that, it's like, why is your superiority better than mine? Why should I hold myself back from simply taking the things I want? Why is a con man less reviled than a mugger? They're both fucking thieves.
They're both reviled though, and the "why" I suppose is that society, which outnumbers you, will generally smack your punk ass back in line. However, I'm sure there are lots of cheaters out there who succeed.
I think you're wrong about a couple of things here:
Originally Posted by Tramirezmma
First, you say it's fine to play mind games in an office. I disagree with this, and so would any good HR department. Do some people still do it and get away with it? Of course, just like some people use PE drugs and get away with it in sports. But it doesn't make it acceptable.
Second, you seem to imply that fucking and fighting are socially unacceptable. They're not. They're just socially unacceptable in the contexts you're discussing. If you're better at fucking and fighting than I am, you'll succeed in ways I won't, either romantically or athletically, maybe you'll become a boxer or a marine or marry a model or go into porn and become 'huge' (pun intended) I dunno...
But if I'm better with spreadsheets than you, I deserve the promotion provided it means I'm better at the job. You fucking the boss well has no impact on the job in hand, therefore making it an unfair fight. It would be like taking a knife into an MMA match. Again, a knife is fine if you're using it to gut a fish, but it's not acceptable in every situation.
Given the amount of violence in the world (wars and crimes) and sex (seriously, do you know ANY virgins over 20 nowadays?) you can't really claim they're socially unacceptable.
Also, I'd rather have a hot wife than a promotion!
I often find myself thinking about "right and wrong". I believe ( mostly) that there is no such thing, only consequences, and living standards imposed by society and values learned from those we/I admire. I suppose ones life experiences also play a part in making up a conscience, which at the end of the day gets easier and easier to ignore , after all it's only a figment of the imagination.
Some prominent psychologists consider following one's own moral code, or otherwise transcending the morals laid down by society to be the highest level of self-actualization, or a final stage of human development (e.g. Maslow, Kohlberg).
LAst 2 comments mirror my own thoughts on the matter, i think. Just having a hard time reconciling what I want the world to be (human nobility is a nice idea) and what it IS. eople live their little lives in these nice little compartments, and think nothing can touch them, shake them from their stupor....
sometimes I just want to walk a pre-determined # of blocks and start commiting violence, to show people they don't have the control over their own lives that they think they do.
So is this more a matter of Right vs Wrong, or Socially Acceptable vs Socially Unacceptable? Or perhaps you equate those as the same thing?
Objectivism vs. Moral Relativism. The plot thickens......