Phil. I wasn't commenting on tour disposition at all, no need to snap back. I just couldn't lice with your kind of pessimistic view of others. People are not inherently selfish and the selfish gene - the book that started this belief, never meant to imply that. It was just used by those at the political extremes in its era to justify terrible behaviours as acceptable because it's built into us, which is false. Sadly people are still doing this, as you are now.

All actions are not selfish at all I'm afraid.

Wow Phil, you really are a cynical (and quite mysogenistic) motherfucker. To be fair to you, a lot of people on here are. The view is always 'be careful, she's probably a bitch' or 'she didn't suck your cock off after you DHV'd? Bin her!!'. I'm in a committed relationship, of course I have oneitis - if I didn't I'd have kept it as an open relationship or broke things off entirely.

I've come to the conclusion that some people here have some real deep personal issues; wholes that they try to fill by shagging as many women as possible, to the detriment of their view on women.

Much love,

Craigus

Try not to make these kinds of judgements of people online. While there are indeed people in these communities that clearly have various issues that they vent by sleeping around I've been taken aback many times by prejudging in this way. Many a time people just use poor language or have an entirely different persona online to their offline one.

For example, a few people have said they can't imagine me having a laugh with the lads. Writing tends not to convey a true personality as our bodies do as much talking as our words when we communicate. It takes a lot of talent to convey exactly the right message in writing that you would usually do offline. I suspect that Phil doesn't mean things as entirely blunt/harshly as he comes across in writing all the time. For example, he changed his earlier response in this thread to another meaning upon someone else explaining what he meant better.

i hate how people make a negative view on things based on what u view as my negative trait.... i happen to thing its weakness feeling the need to be nice

a level psycologists... u cant say a demonstrates B, because the actions of each person in each situation will differ based on how they have lived their lives... ultimatly tho, it will be to their own benefit.... with the exception of ur kids.

the idea of me thinkin someone is too good for me is funny... im so stuck in my own self beleif, this is not possible... nobodys too good.

i dont trust people, coz every person ive ever given the chance to shit on me has with the exception of 1.

they dont do it with malicious intent, they just see things from their view point & benifit, ive just learned to accept it.

people are not cunts by choice, they always justify bad stuff... girls do this more.

and eventually craig, u will look back on that relationship and say, what a bitch.... itds all just about enjoying it while u have it.

Phil, you'd do well to watch Richard Dawkins' documentary "Nice Guys Finish First". He made it following the misuse of things he said in The Selfish Gene by parties like the BNP, National Front and Conservatives to justify shitty actions. This incorrect mindset you have was created by these misuses and has perpetuated throughout society since.

It's on google video. I used a clip from it, the game theory section, in my nice guys article.

Yes you can. Although people may have different lives there are general experiences and teachings throughout society that perpetuate very particular personality types and views. The false selfish gene mindset you're talking about is one such thing that travels through society. It's not something you've learned from your own experience, it's something that's built up from little things you've watched or heard from others here and there and then compared against your own experiences - unfortunately leading to falsely agreeing with it. The same thing ripples onwards and onwards, you pass the myth onto others, others pass the myth on.. And on and on. While you and your genes do seek to selfishly protect themselves traditionally selfish actions are in fact not always the best course of action for this to occur, this in turn leads to cooperative and altruistic acts being the evolved course of action because they in fact improve survival. Because these are in fact evolutionary acts they aren't conscious and therefore aren't selfish.

That and there are plenty of entirely selfless acts. A soldier throwing himself on a grenade can't possibly be argued as beneficial to him. A fireman walking into a a thousand degree burning building can't possibly be acting in favour of his self preservation - there are jobs he can do for more money with no personal risk. This kind of altruistic cooperation and nature in humans evolved because cooperation in fact increases the chance of survival. When enough who cooperate band together they surpass those who are selfish and become the dominant biological thread of evolution. Many actions that could be argued as beneficial to the self are not selfish however because they are not choosing them for selfish reasons, they may benefit the self but the INTENT and strongest motivation is not selfish.

Something genetically selfish is not something psychologically selfish.

[citation needed]

EDIT: I added a few extra bits to this post to flesh it out, I didn't remove anything though.

These actions are chosen with emotion, and as ive said before, emotional actions will always outweigh logical... which is why women make worse decisions than men.

and based on your whole

YES YOU CAN argument about general psychology ... ur saying people all act in a specific manner... when on countless occasions u say everyone is different.

ur also starting to take the convo outside of general life... in circumstances of danger of course things change coz instinct takes over logic. but in these situations, give someone enuf time to think about it... would they make the same choice... i doubt it.

Phil and Jay mudslinging, I've opened a can of stella this is better than watching sky +

General psychology indeed is generalised and people are generalised, one should never generalise everyone with little individual information though. Judgement of an individual's mindsets upon basic generalisations with further situational detail is absolutely acceptable though. I have only ever called you out for making absolute generalisations, as you're doing now in generalising everyone as selfish.

Instinct over logic? You mean that intinct takes over from thought. The mind does not act correctly, it attempts to but it does not. Your mind reasons the best course of action based on the knowledge it has learned. It is entirely possible for you to believe that the best course of action is not altruistic when in fact taking an entirely different course would have benefited you more.

How exactly am I taking this out of general life? A man chooses to be a soldier, a man chooses to be a fireman. The choice, the action, the thought process, it is not there to benefit the self, it's there to benefit the whole. You do not choose a job that can get you killed when there are plenty of other ways to earn money without the danger. That is not an outside of general life choice.

If as you've just said, the choice to run into a fire is instinctual, you have just completely argued against your previous point claiming that we are selfish by nature. You can't be both opposites, you either act selflessly for someone else's life or you do not, some people will take that selfless action, some will not. This in fact shows that it is not in our nature to act selflessly nor in our nature to act selfishly, it is something we learn, a choice determined by who we are.

In these communities, as people who wish to better ourselves, we choose the men we want to be.

In what goes on here we all get to choose. You choose who you are, you can choose to be selfish, others can choose to be cooperative. The cooperatives will always achieve more.

In your case, you're failing to realise that while what you think to be the most rewarding mindset is in fact not because it appears to give higher gains as it is easier to see short term gain against long term. So you choose to be who you are and justify that by believing everyone is exactly the same, they're not.

EDIT: Probably lots of things to pick at here, rushed this a little bit before going out.

WHAT?? u cant use jargon to try & baffle me, ill just ignore it, that whole paragraph was rambling crap!

How many times a day does your job mean u have to make a life threatening descision?? why not find me some stats on percentage of firemen & soldiers to the rest of the planet. generally... since we are talkin in generalisations, people dont have that sort of decision in front of them every day.



i also said when faced with logic... i hate people who try and feed me words to win arguments IM NOT ASSED!!!



why so?? coz everyones long term goals & needs are the same???


do u think i need to justify anythin, i couldnt care less how people are, im talkin from experience, not from so called facts & figures....

why dont you ask 100 people if your a sanctimonious know all!


big lectures coz u need to feel like u are winning an argument is one of the major things i hate about myself when i look back at being 16!! its a VILE trait. my experience led me to my belief on people, no psychological or pathological issues... and my life RULES so all ur shit about it being it having negative effect is crap!

if ur next post is a long one, im not gonna read it

Just because the mind acts logically does not mean the mind acts correctly. Your argument tries to say it does, you believe certain choices are most beneficial and then try to justify it by claiming everyone is the same as you. That faced with the same choices they would come to the same selfish ends as you seem to think are right, surely you can see this isn't true?

A fair point, allow me to redirect to a new direction then.

If everyone acted selfishly, as you claim, everyone would be fucking everyone else over ALL the time. People do not choose what would benefit them most all the time at all. You can't argue this as you will have done it yourself, many times. If there is a more selfish act that could have been chosen then someone did not act selfishly. Someone acting for their emotional self and against what would have in fact been most beneficial to them can't be accused of selfish behaviour.

And here's the biggest problem of all. Experience means shit if the result of that experience is the wrong judgement. What you exhibit here is confirmation bias. You WANT to believe what you've been spouting here because it justifies your actions, just as those of the particularly nasty political spectrums tried to use the same arguments. Nobody wants to truly admit that they're just nasty, they want to have reasons for being that way, excuses, everyone seeks to justify their actions. You can't try to claim otherwise, there's no other reason to have entered this argument.

Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "lalala I'm not listening" argument.