Tree-hugging destroying the environment

POSTED BY: Hardware
UPDATED: Sunday, June 26, 2011 13:18
VIEWED: 4151
PAGE 4 of 5

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE

FREMDFIRMA

Sunday, June 19, 2011 9:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Things higher up on Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Could you post that scale ?
I'm interested, both in a general sense, as as to how that developed as a concept.

-F

SIGNYM

Monday, June 20, 2011 6:53 AM

Had a heckuva time finding one in jpg.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, June 20, 2011 9:19 AM

it's an important concept, and why wealthy western nations need to lead the way on environmental issues. Because we can afford to.

NIKI2

Monday, June 20, 2011 4:26 PM

Mmm, good point, Magons; because we can afford it. Buddhism is partly about leading by example (NOT by force, law or preaching), and the same could be said for environmentalism; if we do it, that in itself would be somewhat of an encouragement for others to do so.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

SIGNYM

Monday, June 20, 2011 4:30 PM

However, I disagree with the hierarchy as Maslow proposed. In my view, the desire for acceptance trumps even the desire for survival. That is how you can convince people to go to war and get killed, and to neglect their own interests for the approval of sociopaths. It gets worse when people are fearful- they tend to clump together behind a "leader" for safety... as any good tyrant knows. That's why we're in the shape we are today... not because we're so selfish, but because we're too damn cooperative.

BYTEMITE

Monday, June 20, 2011 5:14 PM

Well... Depends on when you're talking about Germany. I know for a fact that German factories actually caused a lot of acid rain in Switzerland early on, which really pissed Switzerland off. Being that the Swiss are both powerful and a neutral nation, the Germans had to make some concessions to appease them.

Otherwise I agree with Sig's point about the Hierarchy. Perhaps not so much that desire for acceptance trumps survival, but rather desire for acceptance is a survival mechanism on par with need for food, water, and so on. Humans are social animals, so were our ancestors, and a lone or outcast human has a much reduced chance of survival. Thus a willingness to make horrific compromises to remain "in the fold" so to speak.

NIKI2

Monday, June 20, 2011 5:24 PM

Are you sure it trumps desire for SURVIVAL? The chart is too small for me to make out, but it seems to me that desire for acceptance, being part of the pack, can be seen as a result of short-term decision making, without considering the long-term consequences of survival. Gawd knows, we're a short-term species, and a particularly short-term one in America, it seems to me.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, June 20, 2011 6:25 PM

I believe it does - simply BECAUSE it is initially and foremost a survival mechanism to begin with, while perhaps not stated explicitly within, that concept is part of the integral foundation of Kropotkins Mutual Aid - being the very drive that allowed us to build civilization in the first place, as opposed to the laughable myth that we needed civilizations men with weapons to come force us to build civilization.. *eyeroll*

Thanks for that Siggy - I honestly think this is worth it's own topic though, and would be a better served that way instead of forgotten at the bottom of an idiotic one and subjected to thread-baggage.

And while in some, okay, many cases - the LACK of a desire for acceptance can have awful consequences in that someone without any incentive to treat others well... I don't necessaruly mean sociopathy, as much as sufficient lack of attachment that they just don't bond that way with other humans, which can LOOK the same, but anyhows.... generally goes really badly.

But what if that person CHOOSES, not necessarily acceptance, but actively and purposely CHOOSES to work towards the benefit of their fellow humans, *WITHOUT* that emotional drive ?

I think, in retrospect, some of our most historic visionaries, especially the ones who's misdeeds are as appalling as their nobler ones were decent, may well have been this - but that's all I got at the moment, it's been a loooong weekend.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, June 20, 2011 8:51 PM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Maslow%27s_hierarch
y_of_needs.svg

is that easier?

KWICKO

Tuesday, June 21, 2011 4:38 AM

Niki, I believe the point Signy was making was that in many cases, the desire to be ACCEPTED - as a soldier, hero, patriot, etc. - by the tribe can be so great that one will put it ahead of one's own need to survive.

It doesn't make sense, but then again, does a kid throwing himself on a grenade to save his buddies really make a lot of sense? It doesn't, but it's still done, and it's still heroic. It's the act of gaining acceptance, ironically, of a group that you're already such an intrinsic part of that you'd give your life to save YOUR group, showing that you've already been accepted. A bit of a conundrum, actually! ;)

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE