guys I just love talking about economics let me tell you why

[Gauteamus]

Thanks for interpreting my trolling, Loftar. I think you observed pretty well that there was some vague intention of objectivity behind the fragmentary sentences.
I think I can say of myself that I rejoice very little in seeing other people suffer physically. I do not know if this is due to upbringing/environment, the inherently good nature of dwarves, will strength or something else. On the other hand I often find myself in the sad complex of inferiority, seen above all on the internet, where I am more than happy to point out the weakness of the other, getting satisfaction from knowing he suffers on his psyche, realizing he is Wrong.
In this vein, my last post was a sad attempt to point out to Potjeh that he was jumping from one mental exercise to another, and that he would gain from keeping his examples more consistent, all clad in the social convention of the smiley.

[Avu]

It's not justice though it's just human pettiness. We got a saying in romania that seems to drive our entire society "sa moara si capra vecinului" (let the neighbours goat die too). It's meaning is somewhere along it doesn't matter how much I suffer as long as my neighbor suffers too.

As for trolling I agree with you loftar but it seems good quality trolling is not that common we mostly get stupid kids who do it for the "lulz" and failing badly at it.

[loftar]

Sense of justice is just a tool for rationalizing the guilt away.

What is this generalization? I cannot even interpret it in concrete terms.

It's why when we can't find appropriate crimes for someone we invent them, and make their religion or skin colour a crime.

Surely, you don't actually believe this? All instances I can think of where "religion or skin color were made crimes" (though I hate to even use that generalization myself) there have been all kinds of reasons for it. Not that I argue that those reasons are good or bad, but it can almost always be well understood in completely different terms than being an evil inherent to the human nature.

[Apostata]

That's all irrelevant. I'm arguing that the fact that we all enjoy suffering of our fellow man means we're evil by nature.

Thats to simplicated statement which leads to question what do you consider as evil.
Well, I am better be off of this conversation but as "enjoyment" from other's harm is sometimes considered (tested aswell on apes) simple calculation of mind not far away from other determined processes of mind like passion for reproduction : " Someones harm if not inflicting me=be happy for it", which could resolved why harm on things in your sphere ( family, circle of interest) doesnt allow such thing like enjoyment like if that happend to stranger. That would aswell describe, why is crying doing a very different reaction in our body as Loftar said. And aswell, why educated masses tend to not be so harmful to each other, as they see far more how their lifes and fates in society are connected and harm to someone can ( and really mean) harm to wider sphere of people.

In China, laughter as strange part in deviated chinese culture is used as defensive reaction against everything. You failed at something? Laugh. Did someone fart? Laugh. Have you been put into very complicated position? Laugh. Are you nervous? Laugh

[loftar]

We got a saying in romania that seems to drive our entire society "sa moara si capra vecinului" (let the neighbours goat die too). It's meaning is somewhere along it doesn't matter how much I suffer as long as my neighbor suffers too.

I'd ascribe that rather to an unfortunate side-effect of empathy. When someone suffers, he may want someone else to suffer in order to have someone who feels with him, and to have someone to feel with. The other way around, prosperous people also have a tendency to want people around them to prosper and may thus help to elevate them. Come to think of it, we have saying in Sweden: "Shared joy is double joy, and shared sorrow is half sorrow".

On a more general note: This ascription of every problem to some evil in the human nature as such seems to be a basic tenet of the collectivist program, and I don't like it. It is arguing that individuals are bad and evil, and it is only in the context of society (and preferably under the moderating influence of Government or God (often equivalent in socialist scripture)) that man can become anything but a savage animal. It is true that humans are egoistic (and that's a fact, not a generalization) and put their own well-begin above everything else, but that is precisely the reason why we care about others, too.

[niltrias]

I wish I had gotten into this earlier, hehe. But...
I would be hesitant to ascribe the tendency to laugh at the misfortune of others as proof that humans are inherently "bad".
That we have this tendency is pretty much obvious, look at "America's Funniest home Videos" and their constant ball-shot videos. Or Takashi's castle. Or any number of similar programs.

It seems to me more of an application of Dunbar's number than a simple proof of humanity's "badness". For example, while we might giggle at a stranger's misfortune, if it happened to some one in our family, we would be much less likely to be amused, and even if we did giggle it would quickly be replaced by a feeling of mortification.

[Avu]

How is that proof of us not being evil? If it's family we're afraid for our system of codependency and support in whatever form it comes. The fact that we enjoy suffering in those that we have no stake in is telling of our true nature though. There can be no true altruism if you got a stake in the well being of another so this does not balance out at all.

We're just animals who think too much of themselves.

[Wolfang]

Evil does not exist.

Even in Hitler's eyes, what he was doing, was an act of good.

It's all a matter of perspective.

[Jackard]

It's not justice though it's just human pettiness. We got a saying in romania that seems to drive our entire society "sa moara si capra vecinului" (let the neighbours goat die too). It's meaning is somewhere along it doesn't matter how much I suffer as long as my neighbor suffers too.

This is a pretty funny saying

[Sever]

Context is as important as perspective. Or rather it's another form of it.

If you're out in public and someone in front of you gets hurt somehow, say they take a hit to the head and fall over, what do you think? Myself, I would cringe to see someone get hurt that way, mainly because I don't know how serious it is. That person would then actually receive a lot of attention, some helpful and some merely observant. You could argue to the end of the world about the observer, whether they are expressing concern or just enjoying the aftermath, and most likely you'd be attributing the sadism to other twisted people in the crowd. A perspective of other people being evil might be equally evil.

In contrast, if you are watching America's Funniest Home Videos, you've got whimsical music playing, a joke-cracking voiceover from the host, and the assurance that they would never show someone getting seriously hurt. It's a set up for hilarity, not affirmation of the evil of man. You can compartmentalize an event that didn't turn out so bad and make light of it, and people have done that forever. Ever taken a big fall off a bike? If you didn't get too badly hurt and it was a good fall, you probably laugh about it with your friends years later. Would you consider your friends evil for laughing at that misfortune, or are you laughing, too?

The fact that a discussion of economics has turned to a debate of good and evil is kind of messed up, you know? We all know that money is the root of all evil because the idiom says so.