Parasitical Behaviours

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Parasitical Behaviours

Post #1

Post by Purple Knight »

otseng wrote:I would generalize this to everyone, not just believers. As you've experienced, just go anywhere on the internet and it's rare to find civil discussions.
That's because insults win. If you want a civil debate, you have to do what this site does and just ban anyone who uses the objectively superior tactic.

I'm not really knocking it. It's just the way things are. People will murder unless forced not to. People will steal unless forced not to. People will win every argument with insults unless forced not to.

Insulting always wins a debate against someone who doesn't insult.

But if both parties insult, there isn't much of an exchange.

Insulting to win a debate is therefore a parasitical behaviour - a behaviour that succeeds over mutually advantageous behaviour by destroying the mutual advantage (in this case, the exchange of ideas) and converting it into personal advantage.

Another example of a parasitical behaviour is theft. Not everyone can be a thief, or everyone loses. Some people must use the non-theft strategy for there to be anything to steal.

Are all parasitical behaviours wrong, or just some?

User avatar
Wootah
Savant
Posts: 9161
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
Has thanked: 186 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: Parasitical Behaviours

Post #2

Post by Wootah »

[Replying to post 1 by Purple Knight]

I'd think parasite behaviour is wrong.

St Paul says if you don't work you dont eat.

We can all lie and steal at times but if we all do society breaks down. As soon as the working half of society stop we are in big trouble arent we?
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826

"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image :)."

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Parasitical Behaviours

Post #3

Post by Divine Insight »

Purple Knight wrote: People will murder unless forced not to. People will steal unless forced not to. People will win every argument with insults unless forced not to.
You don't have a very high opinion of any humans do you?

Would you murder if you weren't forced not to?

Would you steal if you weren't forced not to?

Would you use insults to try to win every argument if you weren't forced not to?

I'm not asking you to answer these questions. I'm simply trying to bring your attention to the fact that if you are a counter-example for any of these accusations you've made against people, then your argument obviously fails.

I can't speak for you, but I can speak for myself. And I have no desire to murder anyone. So I don't need to be forced not to murder people. Therefore I'm a counter-example to your argument.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Wootah
Savant
Posts: 9161
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
Has thanked: 186 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: Parasitical Behaviours

Post #4

Post by Wootah »

[Replying to post 3 by Divine Insight]

You would be an outlier. History is ample actual evidence, as well as nature. Half of America are voting for Sanders to steal from the other half. Aren't you a Sanders supporter?
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826

"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image :)."

Menotu
Sage
Posts: 530
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:34 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Parasitical Behaviours

Post #5

Post by Menotu »

Purple Knight wrote:
otseng wrote:I would generalize this to everyone, not just believers. As you've experienced, just go anywhere on the internet and it's rare to find civil discussions.
That's because insults win. If you want a civil debate, you have to do what this site does and just ban anyone who uses the objectively superior tactic.

I'm not really knocking it. It's just the way things are. People will murder unless forced not to. People will steal unless forced not to. People will win every argument with insults unless forced not to.

Insulting always wins a debate against someone who doesn't insult.

But if both parties insult, there isn't much of an exchange.

Insulting to win a debate is therefore a parasitical behaviour - a behaviour that succeeds over mutually advantageous behaviour by destroying the mutual advantage (in this case, the exchange of ideas) and converting it into personal advantage.

Another example of a parasitical behaviour is theft. Not everyone can be a thief, or everyone loses. Some people must use the non-theft strategy for there to be anything to steal.

Are all parasitical behaviours wrong, or just some?
Symbiotic behaviors would be fine I think
Parasitic, not so much

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Parasitical Behaviours

Post #6

Post by Divine Insight »

Wootah wrote: [Replying to post 3 by Divine Insight]

You would be an outlier. History is ample actual evidence, as well as nature. Half of America are voting for Sanders to steal from the other half. Aren't you a Sanders supporter?
Sanders is only suggesting that we do as Jesus taught.

Do you have a problem with the teachings of Jesus? :-k

If you like Jesus you should be a huge Sanders fan!
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: Parasitical Behaviours

Post #7

Post by Purple Knight »

Divine Insight wrote:I'm not asking you to answer these questions. I'm simply trying to bring your attention to the fact that if you are a counter-example for any of these accusations you've made against people, then your argument obviously fails.

I can't speak for you, but I can speak for myself. And I have no desire to murder anyone. So I don't need to be forced not to murder people. Therefore I'm a counter-example to your argument.
Fine, you're a counter-example. But that doesn't prove that parasitical behaviour doesn't win.

I have decided in an environment where insults were allowed, not to utilise them. And thus, I lost every argument.

The environment is so favourable to parasitical behaviours that it does shape the nature of humanity. The only people who choose against this natural flow are destined to be losers.

By people will, I simply mean people as a whole. It will be done, it will gain advantage, and the behaviour will increase. If I had meant there were no counter-examples, I would have said, "All people will murder, steal and cheat unless forced not to."

Overcomer
Guru
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Post #8

Post by Overcomer »

Purple Knight wrote:
Insulting always wins a debate against someone who doesn't insult.
No, it doesn't. Insulting someone in a discussion is called an Ad Hominem. It's a fallacious argument. Therefore, when employed, it's tantamount to conceding victory to the opponent. When people attack someone instead of the argument that person has made, they are basically saying that they don't have a valid counter-argument. However, they won't admit it.

See here:

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/log ... em-Abusive

I also think that some people purposely bait others because they want to get a rise out of them. They get some kind of perverse pleasure in that.

I think the best thing to do is simply not to engage in conversations with such people. It's really fruitless.

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Post #9

Post by Purple Knight »

Overcomer wrote:No, it doesn't. Insulting someone in a discussion is called an Ad Hominem. It's a fallacious argument. Therefore, when employed, it's tantamount to conceding victory to the opponent. When people attack someone instead of the argument that person has made, they are basically saying that they don't have a valid counter-argument. However, they won't admit it.

See here:

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/log ... em-Abusive
This is called a rule. It's only valid if both parties have agreed to it. Really it's only valid in an environment where it's generally accepted as a valid rule.

You've probably never been in an environment where those who are so obviously right can just jeer people into submission, because everyone, and I mean everyone, sees that they are absolutely correct without any need of an explanation, much less an argument.

The ultimate evidence that insults win is this very forum, and its rules. There would be absolutely no need to prevent the behaviour if it didn't provide an unfair advantage. Insulting is tantamount to a concession, you say? Then why outlaw a form of concession?
Overcomer wrote:I also think that some people purposely bait others because they want to get a rise out of them. They get some kind of perverse pleasure in that.

I think the best thing to do is simply not to engage in conversations with such people. It's really fruitless.
If I could find others willing to talk about those topics, I would.

Post Reply