I'm pretty sure that it is simply life that 'breeds' violence. I mean I have never seem anything dead attack anything else. Fictional zombies not-withstanding.
On a personal note, my 13 year old had his first taste of death the other day. That'st right a cat(the female one) got a hold of one of his hamsters. Hamster is no more, and the cat has subsequently been renamed 'murderer' by my young boy child. On 20 July, 13:10, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe knowledge breeds violence? In the unlikely case that a man has > not been introduced to religion or politics, would he still have the > same propensity to kill as the modern man? Maybe, but the reasons > would be fewer, say for perceived territorial infringement, or > protection of family and food. > > I am sure that early man, before being saturated with media, politics, > religious dogma, and over-population, was a much more peaceful animal. > A person's conscience seems to dictate activity ranges, and today's > man has had his conscience mezmerized by over-information, over- > breeding, over-indulgence, etc. Unfortuately I cannot forsee a > reversal in this trend short of some global catastrophe that wipes out > a large number of the human animals that inhabit this rock. > > Many can speculate as to what breeds violence but, in my opinion, a > healthy conscience precludes any unsolicited violent activity. I think > a good question to ask is 'what causes the deterioration of a healthy > conscience?'. Unfortunately, I think there are too many answers to > that question. > > On Jul 18, 6:42 pm, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > A common belief today is that religion breeds violence. Isn't this > > like saying politics is violent? I read the below today, and it gave > > me food for thought, particularly that last sentence: > > > "Some kill because their faiths specifically command them to do so; > > some kill though their faiths explicitly forbid them to do so; and > > some kill because they have no faith and hence believe all things are > > permitted to them. Polytheists, monotheists, and atheists kill. Men > > kill for their gods, or for their God, or because there is no God and > > human destiny must be shaped by gigantic exertions of human will. They > > kill out of pursuit of universal truths, and out of fidelity to tribal > > allegiances; for faith, blood and soil, empire, national greatness, > > "socialist utopia", capitalism, and "democratization". Men always seek > > gods in who's name they may perform great deeds or commit unspeakable > > atrocity, even if those gods are not gods but "tribal honor", or > > "genetic imperatives" or "social ideals" or "human destiny" or > > "liberal democracy". Then again men also kill on account of money, > > land, love, pride, hatred, envy or ambition. ... The truth is that > > religion and irreligion are cultural variables, but killing is a human > > constant"(*) > > > (*) David Bently Hart, _atheist delusion_ pg > > 12http://www.librarything.com/work/book/47946437- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
