Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (61389)	10/7/2002 7:39:07 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"Sociopaths do not internalize values" First of all...that is not true. And they often DO have guilt or shame. Many of the thousands of "witches" and such were "SOCIOPATHS"! NOW...Neocon...were THEY immoral and derelict in DUTY?!...or were the people that dutifully KILLED THEM...just innocent kiddies...;-) ;-) ;-( I guess you would know thank goodness...<g>

To: Neocon who wrote (61389)	10/7/2002 7:49:38 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

You can internalize values without seeing the utility of guilt and shame, and the need to "have them". For the educated mind learning from mistakes is enough- guilt and shame are unnecessary and a waste of energy (imo).

To: Neocon who wrote (61389)	10/8/2002 8:05:46 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I'm sure your inbox is crammed. But I woke up this morning--would you believe it--thinking about a different way to explain our difference so I'm going to type it out before heading for the pool. <<Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.>> That's an accepted moral scheme. The religious, authoritarians, or traditionalists among us might take that as a command and find in it a duty to others. One could, however, read that as simple wisdom. Once could conclude that it is wise to model behaviors that one would like to see others adapt because they would make for a nicer world to live in. There's no duty in that. It's self interest. In practical application, you may not be able to distinguish between those who are treating that as a commandment and those who think it's the smart way to live. Absent a discussion like we're having, you may assume that everyone is doing it out of duty just as I might assume that everyone is doing it out of self interest. Those who are doing it out of self interest aren't feral or sociopaths, although there may be some of those hiding amongst us, co-opting our messages, just as there are pretenders in your scheme. We feel compassion and concern for others. We empathize. We feel guilt and embarrassment when we fail to live up to our standards. We do not, however, feel shame when we fail to live up to someone else's inappropriate or unrealistic expectations. The differences between our behaviors, in practice, are at the margins. If we treat people as we would like to be treated, we may not apologize when it is expected, not because we are sociopaths but because we would not expect an apology so it does not occur to us to offer one. The most sophisticated and empathetic amongst us might be able to read the expectations of others and honor them as a courtesy a good bit of the time even though we, ourselves, would not want such treatment for ourselves. Sometimes, though, we are unable or unwilling to go above and beyond and offer the kindness and courtesy of treating others as they would like to be treated rather than as we would like to be treated. That does not make us feral, merely imperfect or unsaintly.