Are Humans Monsters?

[Guest PhoenixFlame]

Well wilder heres a better thing,the humans' version of monster is creature that looks ugly or the creature's habits are grotesque,so if humans are monsters that would make everything mosters,if everything is a monster there is no true monster.

[wilder.schwein]

PhoenixFlame: Very will said. Truly, well said.

As always, I am always delighted to read so many point of views...

[Bio]

[font=arial]PheonixFlame... That's restating exactly what I said on the other page in different words...

Humans have raped the earth of it's resources, poisoned it's water supply, filled it's air with toxins, and killed off many of it's inhabitants.

Some humans, however, are trying to stop this, and return earth to it's natural state. [b]Trying[/b] being the operative word, unfortunately, because to the governments, sometimes the economy is more important than nature.

Humans are a species ruled by their instincts, yes, but the strength of these instincts varies, obviously.

A man with completely [i]primitive[/i] human instincts would not be a man on a campaign to save the rainforest, but a man who cuts down the forest for farmland, burning the trees because it's faster and cheaper than using it as lumber.

Primitive, however, is a word I myself am not sure of. What if the instincts are the opposite of what I said? What if the primitive instincts tell a man to help nature, and the modern one's tell a man to use it for fuel? I am not sure of this.

More on the point, it is wrong to classify one [i]entire[/i] species as evil, however, I believe that we are a threat to the universe. We could do what we did to earth to other planets. Like I said before, we'd probably put the inhabitants of other planets in a zoo. It would be a typical human train of thought in my eyes.[/font]

[Guest PhoenixFlame]

Well Arch there is a thing, the instincts only differ because humans' instincts differ on how they were raised...there are occasional instincts that are not from being raised, they are from several generations thinking the same thing a.k.a. genetic memory.

[wilder.schwein]

Arch speaks the truth, but Flame is also correct. I believe highly what the two of you have stated.

[Guest PhoenixFlame]

Hhumans are different from animals because not all instincts are genetic like spiders that leave the children alone or whatever...but humans are different because they quickly absorb any information from their birth so humans are not always naturally evil unless there was about 7 generations of villains and the genetic memory thing was just a side note...but humans that are raised by animals in the wild(there has been atleast one) they seem to have the ability to climb concrete walls and trees very fast, similar to apes and/or monkeys...simply put they take in more information because of lack of enough natural instincts... see?

[Bio]

Yes, I am aware of this. Reptiles are born with instincts that tell them to go to water once they hatch, etc. But once again, the topic is straying. This is getting rather pointless, because the same thing is being said over and over again...

Humans can be monsters, and they cannot. They turn against themselves, slaughter each other and animals, descriminate against one another for stupid reasons like skin, deprive the earth of it's natural resources, and destroy the reasources that are already there.

Some humans are trying to stop all this, and I know that.

That is the basic essance of each party, and I am in both. I am leaning toward the first one, but what I say stands. To me, humans are a threat to the universe. We can stay on our own planet. No need to destroy others.

[Guest PhoenixFlame]

Well Arch you seem to think humans should just crawl under a rock and die just like everything else so what point would the universe have?Besides the universe and the planets in it wouldve been destroyed eventually.

[Bio]

[font=arial]Okay, after this, I'm not posting here. If I do, I might accidently start other little off-topic subjects. I can't stand the thought of this thread being closed.

PheonixFlame, I did not participate in this thread to get in a arguement, or to be told what I believe. I did not say that I think all humans should die. I said I am in both parties. Did you read my entire post? I've even said before that humans have hope.

Also, PheonixFlame, where do all your "facts" come from? What tells you that the entire universe will eventually be destroyed? You talk like these are proven facts. Also, contrary to popular belief, the universe is expanding, not contracting. It's getting bigger, not smaller, if that's what your getting at.(please don't start a conversation about that) What gave you the idea it would all be destroyed?

I"m only saying this in closing, the [b]point[/b] of this thread, my basic opinion.

I believe that humans are a threat to the universe. They shouldn't colonize other planets, unless it is a pollution free colony. So, do I believe humans are monsters? [b]No.[/b]
I believe humans need to get even more self conscious, and stop the polluting, killing, and burning. (don't start yelling at me, I know it's not that simple, but it would be if the governments stopped worrying about the economy and elections, and more about the environment.)

NOTE: I said [b]more[/b] about the environment, not about the environment.[/font]

[Baron Samedi]

[quote][i]Originally posted by PhoenixFlames[/i]
Well wilder heres a better thing,the humans' version of monster is creature that looks ugly or the creature's habits are grotesque,so if humans are monsters that would make everything mosters,if everything is a monster there is no true monster.[/quote]

Whatever. We are saying that humans are monsters, [i]not literally[/i] but in our concepts and actions. Some of us are, but mainly we are good. Ooh, and a mini-quote from that that I found incredibly self-centred:"so if humans are monsters that would make everything mosters".

Bull. What about animals? Babies? That was incredibly self-centred and dense. There are other things aside from humans.

[quote]Well Arch you seem to think humans should just crawl under a rock and die just like everything else so what point would the universe have?Besides the universe and the planets in it wouldve been destroyed eventually.

[/quote]

Where does he say this eh? He says that we are bad, kill each other, blah-de-blah and we should stay on our planet. Would you want us to spread through the galaxy? I don't want us to die, but if we looked after our planet, then we would not need to "move". I think Arch is perfectly right... ~_^

[AutoKill]

If you don?t think humans are monsters, here is something I will let you ponder over.
Off the cost of Cali. a boy gets eaten by a shark. Every one is sad.
Swimmers and surfers alike are scared to go into the water. Local fishermen go out on their boats, and some how capture the shark that ate the little boy. They kill the shark and put it on display upside down on a chain so the people of the town can feel some what safe that the waters are safe again...

When was the last time a animal has gone out of its way to get revenge. Really... The freaken shark was just trying to survive. And he successfully made a kill. And then we turn around and get our revenge. I can?t even think of a way we can justify that. So are human?s "monsters". I would have to say yes.

[Baron Samedi]

I agree, that is a bad thing to happen, however, as I said somewhere (o.0 lol) humans have many bad attributes. We think we are the most supreme thing, and [i]deserve[/i] to be here. We have a sort of right, but no right to act... how we do.

From our POV: The shakr is obviously a danger to us, so we should kill it, to save ourselves. This is perfectly justified, because we do not deserve to die.

from the sharks POV: It came near me, I am merely surviving by killing/eating it. it is my instinct, I have no brain. this is my territory (the water in general) and them coming here is at risk of themselevs, I do not deserve to be killed for it. this is perfectly justified.

We are not monsters. We merely have a superiority complex, compared to all the "dumb" animals. That is our problem.

In this case, depending on your viewpoint, both cases are justified.

[Brasil]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B]I agree, that is a bad thing to happen, however, as I said somewhere (o.0 lol) humans have many bad attributes. We think we are the most supreme thing, and [i]deserve[/i] to be here. We have a sort of right, but no right to act... how we do.

From our POV: The shakr is obviously a danger to us, so we should kill it, to save ourselves. This is perfectly justified, because we do not deserve to die.

from the sharks POV: It came near me, I am merely surviving by killing/eating it. it is my instinct, I have no brain. this is my territory (the water in general) and them coming here is at risk of themselevs, I do not deserve to be killed for it. this is perfectly justified.

We are not monsters. We merely have a superiority complex, compared to all the "dumb" animals. That is our problem.

In this case, depending on your viewpoint, both cases are justified. [/B][/QUOTE]

Though, Baron, Hitler had a pretty big superiority complex. Would you not consider him a monster? He felt anger toward a certain being, and decided to exterminate that being, because he decided it was for his own good.

Now, going along those same lines, Hussein killed countless numbers of people, simply because they may have disagreed with him, that is, threatening his rule.

Bin Laden. Kills those who disagree with him, who pose a threat.

USA. Kills those who pose a threat to OUR well-being.

Are you suggesting that we do not hold ourselves to the standards we hold others to?

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PoisonTongue [/i]
[B]
Are you suggesting that we do not hold ourselves to the standards we hold others to? [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=#707875]I think Baron is saying (from his last post anyway) that mankind being monsters is a matter of perspective.

We see Bin Laden as a monster because he deliberately targets and slaughters innocent people.

Whereas, I don't see my government as a monster (in this regard), because it has very strict rules of engagement -- which sometimes put our own forces in harms way, in an effort to protect innocent people.

So, it's probably more a matter of perspective and what you find to be acceptable in your own life.[/color]

[Brasil]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#707875]I think Baron is saying (from his last post anyway) that mankind being monsters is a matter of perspective.

We see Bin Laden as a monster because he deliberately targets and slaughters innocent people.

Whereas, I don't see my government as a monster (in this regard), because it has very strict rules of engagement -- which sometimes put our own forces in harms way, in an effort to protect innocent people.

So, it's probably more a matter of perspective and what you find to be acceptable in your own life.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

Hmmhm. But, since we're saying it's a matter of perspective, there is really no answer to this, therefore...no purpose to any debate on this, correct? Because we would always be coming back to the conflict of perspective.

Now, because of this conflict of perspective, is there no set reality and no set "trueness" to this? I could say that Bush is evil because he is doing something that I feel is morally corrupt, in fact, that he himself is morally corrupt. And because of this, I say he is a drooling Alfred E Neuman monster.

And then, Bushists would accuse me of being a monster, simply because they feel threatened by my views. Some Bushists even resort to threatening "liberals," who in turn respond with friction.

We feel Bin Laden is a terrible, terrible, evil man, and many of us are willing to destroy him and his ideals. But from Bin Laden's POV, we're the monsters.

So, when we just decide it's a matter of perspective, are we not saying, "Well, since everyone feels someone else is a monster, and that someone else feels that everyone is a monster, we just can't decide who is a monster."

But, then, going with that line...

If everyone feels that someone else is a monster, we thus are all monsters, since we're going on fractured perspective, and leaving the "labeling" up to fractured perspective.

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PoisonTongue [/i]
[B]Hmmhm. But, since we're saying it's a matter of perspective, there is really no answer to this, therefore...no purpose to any debate on this, correct? Because we would always be coming back to the conflict of perspective.[/quote][/b]

[color=#707875]I would argue that almost everything is a matter of perspective. Yes, there are truths or "hard facts" out there, but even then, there are many who choose to ignore such facts.

I could ask you why we ever debate or discuss any topic on OtakuBoards. Opinions on an anime, or on a political issue are usually matters of one's perspective. Yet here we are, discussing our ideas.

I discuss ideas because I [i]like[/i] to hear what others have to say. What other people say gives me something to consider...and sometimes I adopt that view (or parts of that view), or I adapt and modify my way of thinking. It's all about improvement, in one way or another...for me, at least.[/color][quote][b]

Now, because of this conflict of perspective, is there no set reality and no set "trueness" to this? I could say that Bush is evil because he is doing something that I feel is morally corrupt, in fact, that he himself is morally corrupt. And because of this, I say he is a drooling Alfred E Neuman monster.[/quote][/b]

[color=#707875]Well, this depends. If you want to discuss whether or not Bush is a monster...I'd be happy to get into that discussion with you.

I feel that, once again, perspective rules the day. We can often look at a current political figure and think "That guy is amazing" or "that guy is an idiot". Usually, we won't form a true perspective until many years later, when every fact has been unearthed and when new revelations appear. Know what I mean? I think that history will ultimately be the judge of President Bush, the same as it will be the judge of people like Osama bin Laden.

The question is whether or not society (and its progression) has room for either or both points of view. The question is what point do we reach when we decide that we either don't want to blow up innocent civilians, or attack dictators. I can't answer that question, because I think only time can. I can only offer you my personal feeling about it.[/color][quote][b]

And then, Bushists would accuse me of being a monster, simply because they feel threatened by my views. Some Bushists even resort to threatening "liberals," who in turn respond with friction.[/quote][/b]

[color=#707875]Of course. And this comes down to the individual. Some "Bushists" will sit there and attack anyone who they feel is not a Christian conservative. Whilst others, despite their views, will happily discuss their ideas freely and without personal criticism.

This is also why I hesitate to label all humans as monsters. Just as one cannot label all "liberals" as tree-hugging-communists, one can definitely not paint any group of society (or society itself) with the same brush.[/color][quote][b]

We feel Bin Laden is a terrible, terrible, evil man, and many of us are willing to destroy him and his ideals. But from Bin Laden's POV, we're the monsters.[/quote][/b]

[color=#707875]Of course. This is a question of perspective, yes. But you can't leave it at that. You have to ask yourself "Okay, this is my perspective. Where did it come from?"

You have to go further and ask [i]why[/i] Osama bin Laden is a violent, religious zealot. In the same way, rather than simply saying "All Arab nations should be democracies", one should ask [i]why[/i] they aren't democracies. Life and history is never so simple; one must always be prepared to ask questions and to consider things from multiple angles.[/color][quote][b]

So, when we just decide it's a matter of perspective, are we not saying, "Well, since everyone feels someone else is a monster, and that someone else feels that everyone is a monster, we just can't decide who is a monster."[/quote][/b]

[color=#707875]That's exactly right. And then we have to ask ourselves how we define "monster"? Our very definitions might be different.

This is why I don't think that anyone can really say that [b]all[/b] human beings are monsters. Some are and some aren't, depending on your point of view. Someone like Hitler is considered to be a monster because of what he did. And, to our society, what he did is inexcuseable. So, to us, he is a monster. That is most definitely a matter of one's perspective. I think he's a monster and you do too. I don't think it's a question of right or wrong at all. It's just a question of what we find acceptable and unacceptable.

And over time, that tends to change, when talking about various issues.[/color][quote][b]

But, then, going with that line...

If everyone feels that someone else is a monster, we thus are all monsters, since we're going on fractured perspective, and leaving the "labeling" up to fractured perspective. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=#707875]Well...even if everyone thinks that everyone else is a monster...do you think that [i]you[/i] are a monster? I mean, we will still all have different views on that; on who is and isn't a monster.

If anything, I'd say that means humans aren't all monsters. Humans are beings with individual perspectives -- "monster" is word created by human beings, afterall.[/color]

[Baron Samedi]

What I was saying, was that, entirely depending on who/where you are and what ideals you hold, that is what the term "monster" is dependant upon. I feel that Bin Laden/[insert other "bad" person here] is what I would term to be a monster. What the essence of my post was, is that dependng upon your circumstances, a "monster" is an inter-changeable term and has no set meaning.

Hitler, to my mind, was a monster.
Hitler, to his mind, was righteous and justified in expunging his version of "monsters".


There are two sides to every coin.

[Charles]

I've been studying for quite a while now and my back is killing me from hunching over this machine. So, this probably will not be a quintessentially sound or memorable post. And at this time in the morning, I doubt I can add anything particularly noteworthy that hasn't already been treaded upon. But, this is one of those threads I've been meaning to reply to, so I'll make the effort.

Now, first of all--what are [i]monsters[/i]? Generally, they're human brainchildren. They're monstrosities because they're foreign to us--and it's that alien trait that makes them so scary--so despicable. [I]Monstrous[/I]. If you watch a monster movie, you'll notice that the "monster" represented in the film usually feeds off of humanity's general fears at the time. Such is the reason why the killers in slasher flicks wear a mask. We don?t know who they are [I]and that makes them even more dangerous.[/I] This is an idea that goes back to childhood: don't talk to strangers.

Oh, and we can?t forget that monsters typically kill young, beautiful, people. Citizens our society values immensely.

When I think of monsters, I may think of larger-than-life hulking beasts that would scare the wits out of anyone: icy-white fangs, crimson gums, wicked breath, snarling with slobbering jaws. A massive, raw presence. That sort of thing. Or, I might fear someone like Leatherface if I fear chainsaws. So, the idea of what constitutes a "monster" is completely subjective. Unless you're an individual who fears or detests all others of your kind, I seriously doubt you can consider people in general to be monsters. They're parasitic. Yes. Selfish. Sure. Monstrous? Nah.

[i]Anything[/i] can be a monster. It just has to possess qualities that we do not understand or represent ideals with disagree with or fear. Something different. You know, man bites dog.

If you?re thinking within reason, humanity on the whole cannot be considered a population of monsters because we operate on universal values. We don?t behave like monsters. There?s an inherent nature to abide by laws and principles. That alone separates us from such a visceral, animalistic category. When you hear acts of human cruelty in the media, it, by far, involves the minority of individuals in our population.

[AutoKill]

To Comment on James & PoisonTongue post,

In or society we have a basic POV. Most peoples POV correlates with others. You have already pointed out that globaly pov's change dramatically. United States likes to think of it self as a global leader. It seems like we try to bridge the gap to other cultures and generally try to unit the world some how. This is all fine and dandy. Unfortunately for us there is not a book on uniting the world. So we are shooting blind.

So yes, In every ones pov's every one can seem to be a monster. Not every one has to be exactly the same for society to work. We just need to be open minded about others, and their ideas on life.