| 1 |
On 2014-02-21 2:35 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Tanstaafl: |
| 3 |
>> On 2014-02-21 12:17 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Then you ignore self-destructive behaviour which is a common |
| 5 |
>>> thing in this world. It can even be intentional, causing no |
| 6 |
>>> emotional, financial, social or intellectual profit. Maybe you |
| 7 |
>>> have never met such a person or have never been in such an |
| 8 |
>>> environment. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
>> You are confusing 'intent' with 'result'. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> No. You are confusing yourself with the rest of the world. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Not really, but whatever... |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
>> Even self-destructive behavior is in the vast majority of cases |
| 17 |
>> engaged in with the *intention* of profit. Best example I can think |
| 18 |
>> of would be a drug addict/alcoholic. When they use/drink, they |
| 19 |
>> 'profit' in that the feel better (albeit temporarily), regardless |
| 20 |
>> of the ultimate result. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> I wasn't really talking about drug addicts. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
You said 'self-destructive', so I just used the best 'self-destructive' |
| 25 |
reference I could think of... |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> If you are interested in real self-destructive behaviour, talk to |
| 28 |
> someone who has worked in an asylum which is only one interesting |
| 29 |
> environment that can make you think very different about "people". |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Ok, well, I wasn't talking about the truly *insane*, and it is |
| 32 |
disingenuous to use them as any kind of example in comparison to 'the |
| 33 |
rest of us'... |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> There are even people who are not driven by anything, not even |
| 36 |
> self-destruction. Pure apathy. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I guarantee they are driven by more than that... often something as |
| 39 |
simple as 'comfort' (they would only get up in arms if you take away |
| 40 |
their TV and potato chips)... |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> Another interesting thing... talk to a trial lawyer who has been in |
| 43 |
> that business for 10+ years. I really doubt that many of those will |
| 44 |
> support your "profit intention" concept. Most of the time it's about |
| 45 |
> short-cut reactions that are merely following instincts or emotional |
| 46 |
> impulses. Strong emotions can make someone lose control and do all |
| 47 |
> sorts of weird things without any hope or intention of |
| 48 |
> improving/gaining anything for living it out. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Again, you ignore the different meanings of 'profit' and 'intent'. |
| 51 |
Following instincts or emotional impulses is *still* operating on the |
| 52 |
same principle. The profit (benefit) they get may be as simple as 'less |
| 53 |
pain', but it is still a benefit (profit). |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
> It's chemistry, it changes your consciousness. "Profit" is a bit more |
| 56 |
> complex and requires a minimum amount of reflection, even if it is |
| 57 |
> subconscious, short sighted and follows false assumptions. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Not at all. A bull 'profits' by moving when the cattle prod is jammed up |
| 60 |
his ass. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
> So these are just 3 points why your generalization does not work, |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
Actually, they all serve to *support* my generalizations... if you are |
| 65 |
in fact honest enough to admit it. |
Archives