What about this then?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/19/lion-killed-dallas-zoo

Junky wrong it is an excellent analogy

Well no, one is fun for both parties, one is very much not fun for the other one.

One is an expression of love, the highest of human emotions. The other is sadism, so where does that fit in?

There were loads of hunters when we rode in the Alps this Summer. At one point we stopped on a long climb for a break and a bite, below us was a meadow and a large deer trotted into it, we had just passed at least ten dudes with rifles. We all watched and waited with dread for the gunshot, but thankfully the deer trotted across the meadow and away to safety. The dozy hunters must have been looking the other way.
Deer 1, Huntsman NIL 😆

Well no, one is fun for both parties, one is very much not fun for the other one.

I’m not sure that is always true

One is an expression of love, the highest of human emotions. The other is sadism, so where does that fit in?

Neither is this…

Of course it’s not always true, but it usually is.

Explain yourself if you’re going to contribute.

Explain yourself if you’re going to contribute.

OOOhhh handbags. I think I currently represent about 30% of all posts on this topic by word count, do you not think I’ve explained quite a lot? You demanding little so and so.

it is an excellent analogy as an example of a pointless human endeavour that we all accept as evolved behaviour

😕

so despite folk disagreeing with you you state what we all think again just like we all have the instinct to kill

It would be easier to debate if you could notice the disagreement and just state your opinion as yours rather than claim we all agree with it – the thread clearly shows we dont have unanimity here
Comparing sex with senseless murder is so daft i am not even prepared to engage on it tbh.

Sex for fun does not have a direct influence on reproduction,

So you are claiming the number of times I have sex has no relation on the likelyhood of getting someone pregnant?
Contraception is recent enough to have not influenced our evolution

killing for fun does not have a direct effect on sating our hunger

No one has claimed it has so why have you said this?

how many people averse to eating meat or actually killing their own meat play violent computer games where you get to simulate killing other humans?

I think pretending to kill pretend things is not actually really killing things

Thta may be as bad as comparing it to sex though,

Blimey can you and molgrips not debate without getting moody? Have you considered that it might be your lack of reading or understanding rather than mine? I am taking the time to read all your points, and not claiming any are ridiculous or not worth discussion.

It would be easier to debate if you could

read and cogitate my posts, rather than kneejerk reaction because you are thinking I am trying to piss you off.
I’m not, I want to have a discussion with you, I am interested. So instead of just rejecting my postulations about sex out of hand, why not just follow my train of thought for a while and see where I am going, like friends would do in a discussion?
1) I said accept as evolved human behaviour referring to sex, not killing for fun. I accept and agree that you do not see it as normal. Please do not take my posts as combative or disagree with you for the sake of it. I’m trying to have a discussion and learn.
2) Women are only fertile for about 5-6 days pout of 28, yet we are attracted to them throughout the cycle, this is unlike almost all other animals. Hence we do have pointless sex.
So whilst our conciseness does not know it is pointless, evolution has developed this for a reason(read the book, it has some interesting ideas)

many humans have in the past engaged in pointless killing (Sacrifice, fox hunting, pest control) I dunno if they enjoyed it or not..
I would argue that its a recent civilisation thing, a higher functioning reasoning that has moved our morals away from this behaviour.

see junky i’m not making any comparisons with the question you quoted… it appears to me that you’re assuming a comparison (i could be wrong in assuming you’re assuming of course). the question is just a question, its neither a comparison or a statement.

I think pretending to kill pretend things is not actually really killing things

damn, you’re correct, my tiny little mind didn’t work that one out 😛

see mr junky, i dont do violence whether in a virtual world or to other humans… but i’m quite comfortable in killing my dinner. i wouldn’t shoot a lion, but i’d call pest control in to kill squirrels or something.

humans are strange creatures aren’t they!

So you are claiming the number of times I have sex has no relation on the likelyhood of getting someone pregnant?

argument invalid, the only people on STW who have sex are the people who have twins and boast about it, everyone else is lying.

humans are strange creatures aren’t they!

Indeed we are the hypocrisy [ or lack of] was how they found the replicants so its a scientific FACT

read and cogitate my posts, rather than kneejerk reaction because you are thinking I am trying to piss you off.

My complaint was that you keep stating your opinion as if it is a fact not the reasons you state here – lolz at the ironing Beautiful

If a woman conceals the point at which she ovulates, indeed unlike most other animals, I have to have “pointless” sex with her as I cannot be certain when she is fertile and she will take my seed. If I am trying to impregnate her does this not somewhat defeat your “pointless” argument?

I am not disagreeing we have sex without wishing for someone to get pregnant however without contraception we could not exactly guarantee this would not happen so its easy to see it have [ from the genes view] a point
Ie sex being fun = more sex = more sowing of the seed etc

Whatever the reason we do this it is not like killing an animal for fun

I have n

OOOhhh handbags. I think I currently represent about 30% of all posts on this topic by word count, do you not think I’ve explained quite a lot?

You didn’t expalin why you said that either sex is not an expression of love or hunting for fun isn’t sadism. I don’t know which bit you are disagreeing with or why. Ok the latter point was a bit of a stretch I admit.

Anyway, sex could be considered an important part of relationship bonding, which is important for the human species since stable relationships historically helped bring up our high maintenance young. From a more philanderous standpoint, constant sexual desire from men could be useful because females have concealed ovulation, so unlike many species you can’t tell when they are fertile. Most likely tactic to succeed then is for men to want to shag all the time.

So not pointless.

But this is now WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY OT and getting less useful by the post…

If I am trying to impregnate her does this not somewhat defeat your “pointless” argument?

No, it is not about what you are aware of, or not. Evolution has us committing “pointless sex” to ensure we get procreation, before science, at some point we would have had no idea what we were doing, much like animals, it is instinct. My point is that humans often do things that our reasoning or current understanding can not explain.

You only think it is not pointless because you understand it (or think you do).
Somebody may well come up with an explanation of pointless killing, will it suddenly become morally acceptable then?

I agree with junky on this, lots of behaviours have been selected through evolution. Rape being a prime example, base instincts do not however provide justification for your own morality in todays society.

Toys19’s argument is rather disingenuous and reads like the ramblings of a 6th former.

Humans enjoy:

a. sex
b. killing animals
c. killing humans from other tribes

its all evolutionary, isn’t it?

tomw and somewhatslightlydazed. I think you are agreeing with my point.

eg

Rape being a prime example, base instincts do not however provide justification for your own morality in todays society.

I agree, much like killing for the sake of it, it may well be instinct, but our civilisation stops us from doing it.

I was teaching a lad to shoot in the field…

He’s a lifelong vegetarian and pet rabbit owner.

He asked if he could shoot a rabbit. I said sure. He was happy… then I added “but you have to eat it”. He wasn’t up for that.

What was the question again?

Not entirely toys19, for example the last line of your prior post….we do have biological explanations for pointless killing. However, after science has informed of us of that…. a moral decision is often taken on the basis of philosophy and the needs of society in general. Science can in certain circumstances further inform morality (eg self-awareness, the differences between animals and humans).

Pointless consensual sex (there is no such thing btw) does not remove another animals own biological interests (like killing them does) nor does it cause acute suffering. You can’t compare the two at all.

Toys19’s argument is rather disingenuous and reads like the ramblings of a 6th former.

I don’t remember resorting to ad hominen, which is what your 6th former might do?

I am happy to be in this discussion, but please try and be civil? If you are the leviathan you think you are, you would not resort to just insulting people. If you think I am wrong, educate, explain and discuss there is little need for condescension, belittling or just plain rudeness.

What about killer sex? Is that ok, hoping for a bit at the weekend. Yes pest control is ok. I wouldn’t kill little mammals if I could help it, just trap them. Would like to eat a squirrel though, they taste nutty apparently. If chimps and elephants were bred for hunting then that would make them fair game. Don’t agree with it, but I don’t expect to agree with everybody. Vice versa. Let’s not get our knickers in a knot. Toys19 have you read the other title ” Guns, Germs & Steel” sounds like a craker 😉

guns germs and steel is very good, as is Collapse.

I read Collapse. Well, I read half of it and got so massively bored I couldn’t carry on.

Some societies didn’t manage their natural resources well and collapsed. Ok, I get it, no need to ram the same point into my brain page after page…

skim reading is your friend..

I don’t remember resorting to ad hominen

well you accuse molly and myself of being moody, handbags and knee jerk reactions and you followed that quote up with

If you are the leviathan you think you are

These are all, clearly, aimed at the person not the argument.

Evolution has us committing “pointless sex” to ensure we get procreation,

well if it has a point [ procreation] its not pointless which was my point that you were attempting to refute – that is a fairly impressive fail

Somebody may well come up with an explanation of pointless killing, will it suddenly become morally acceptable then?

it depends on what the point is as as a point and a moral are not equivalent.

well you accuse molly and myself of being moody, handbags and knee jerk reactions and you followed that quote up with

you did get arsey did you not? I was just pointing it out. I did not say you were pathetic or not worth arguing with like you did, I just asked you to stop having a go and stick to the argument.

If you are the leviathan you think you are

As insults go, it is not particulalry powerful is it? It was actually an attempt to get him to live up to the compliment, as so far he has given some decent thinking. Aside from his snide comment he garnered my interest.

Do you want to discuss this or just resort to discrediting me to try and prove your point or shall we just go for last wordism.

I have asked you to be civil, and to stick to the topic in hand. To be honest you have just made this whole thing boring, why pick on the person, surely we can have a discussion about the topic in hand.

you did get arsey did you not? I was just pointing it out.

No. You said some things about us rather than about our argument, which is the very definition of ad hom. You then tried, incredulously, to claim you dont do this and then did it again to someone else.

I did not say you were pathetic or not worth arguing with like you did,

I never said those things and it is a lie to claim i did
please quote me directly saying this – its a lie
I am not interested in you claiming this is an ad hom [ it may be but only if untrue] prove I said that – i will eat humble pie and apologise – best of luck

As insults go, it is not particulalry powerful is it

Your point was that you did not do ad homs not that the ad homs you did were poor

Do you want to discuss this

This would have had more credit if any part of your post had been about what we were discussing
This is either trolling or some sort of epic self awareness irony fail.

Junkyard, toys19.. step away…

ok molly