I know a friend who has more or less the same sort of attitude as yours - I think it was meant sorta in a tongue-in-cheek way. And oui, while you can dramatize how people getting hurt and killed (because they deserved it) as part of natural selection, you might have to ask yourself; since Natural Selection(TM) has been happening throughout the history of life, why do people still care and cry for others anyway?

To me, that sort of mentality bears strong undertones of coldness. (I'd have to wonder if I wouldn't have done the same if I was made drunk enough.)

Last edited by QQQQQ (12-05-2012 11:01:57 PM)

With all due respect, fuck all this.

Someone who's under-aged is under aged because they can't, reasonably, be expected to handle alcohol or major decisions. Someone inebriated is under the influence because they're under the influence and not capable of making rational decisions like "don't lie down in the busy street." And, regardless, they're still dead. And that'd be a painful way to die. Considerably more painful than anyone deserves for being a drunk teenager.

Stupidity may be stupid. Someone being drunk may do stupid things. The world hasn't been improved by their death, though. Statistically, I'd doubt you could find very many people whose premature death would definitely benefit the world as a whole, much less their community or family.

It's not "natural selection" (and ignores what that actually, as a coined phrase, is intended to mean) and it is not corrective.

There's a reason death and torture aren't often considered "punishment" in legal systems, but torture. Extreme pain doesn't educate, it coerces and even then, it coerces weakly (which is why even the FBI interrogation materials point out that direct torture is often useless in questioning) and encourages egregious sadism with little beneficial spinoff.

Last edited by Decrescent Daytripper (12-07-2012 12:37:55 AM)

Fucking agree with both of the above. This is why I can't stomach the Darwin Awards.

ETA: And how many children have you fathered, Overlord Morgus?

Last edited by Atropos (12-06-2012 01:07:37 PM)

It's normal for a teen-aged boy to be self-absorbed to the point of sociopathy. During this time, the child is learning about the existence and importance of the outside wider world, and how insignificant they really are compared to it, but is still saddled with the self-centeredness of a child, not to mention a lack of experience in dealing with the wider world. With proper guidance from their peers, educators, parents, or other role models they can outgrow this phase.

It's normal. You're not the first or only teenaged boy to go through this. Your limited point of view and lack of experience only makes it seem that way.

Overlord Morgus wrote:

Nova wrote:

It's normal for a teen-aged boy to be self-absorbed to the point of sociopathy. During this time, the child is learning about the existence and importance of the outside wider world, and how insignificant they really are compared to it, but is still saddled with the self-centeredness of a child, not to mention a lack of experience in dealing with the wider world. With proper guidance from their peers, educators, parents, or other role models they can outgrow this phase.

It's normal. You're not the first or only teenaged boy to go through this. Your limited point of view and lack of experience only makes it seem that way.

Are you saying that the individual is insignificant? Wouldn't that imply a lack of consideration for people who get themselves killed stupidly?

I'm talking about you.

Overlord Morgus wrote:

Doesn't this then mean that we shouldn't feel sympathy for the kid who lays down in the middle of the street and gets run over?

No, we should. Compassion for others, even the stupid, is what makes us civilized humans and not a pack of wolves. It's the act of reaching out and lifting someone else up that lifts us all.

I am trying to lift you up as well. This thread is so weird and meta now.

I'm outta here.

If you look at it as part of a larger context of the culture, then you could say that on the one hand, we become more compassionate as a society if we commiserate about stupid deaths, and that on the other hand, such a public reaction excuses or even rewards stupidity. But of course, the best course of action is always to look at root causes, and the root cause, IMO, is fear, desire for recognition, and sexual frustration, as cliched and Freudian as that sounds.

Last edited by Overlord Morgus (12-07-2012 09:22:59 PM)

QQQQQ wrote:

Isn't this like saying petite Timmy shouldn't be saved from the well, because rescuing him will "excuse and even reward the stupidity" that trapped him in the well in the first place?

And if you look at the sample scenario you've candidly provided as a reflection of you - to me, this is yet another demonstration of the "Only the strong should prevail" perspective, rationalised and taken towards a Black and White extreme. I'm sure you've done a fine job of justifying this sort of logic to yourself. Maybe it makes sense, but if you don't mind my saying so.. the real world doesn't work that way.

These sorts of things don't happen very often, their ultimate significance is symbolic, by virtue of the excessive public attention given to them. And I would say that YOLO culture is, at its core, more misguidedly Darwinistic than my POV. "He who dares wins" or some stupid shit like that. And high schoolers aren't "petite Timmy." If they're mentally "petite Timmy," then that is even more inexcusable.

And I think that the vast majority of people don't change meaningfully after the age of 15. The shape may change, but the material is the same.

But of course, the best course of action is always to look at root causes, and the root cause, IMO, is fear, desire for recognition, and sexual frustration, as cliched and Freudian as that sounds.

It seems like you were going to say something to this.

Last edited by Overlord Morgus (12-07-2012 09:48:25 PM)

I guess I have to accept that the vast majority of people at all levels of society are really not worth anyone's attention. Liberal "democracy" will tell you otherwise, but that is the truth.

Overlord Morgus wrote:

I guess I have to accept that the vast majority of people at all levels of society are really not worth anyone's attention. Liberal "democracy" will tell you otherwise, but that is the truth.

The vast majority of anyone everywhere isn't worth anyone's attention.. hm, one can only worry about so many people at once, ja? Also, democracy (whether it's Liberal or Conservative) can sometimes turn out to be undemocratic, oui.

Last edited by QQQQQ (12-07-2012 11:32:20 PM)