Anarchy more moral than civilisation?

Affable

In that civilisation goes along with reserve of emotions and calculation, both in it's creation, and suspension. You could argue this is a noble thing or infact an inhumane repression of our truest instincts.

What do you think?

orestes

Affable wrote: »

In that civilisation goes along woth reserve of emotions and calculation, both in it's creation, and suspension. You could argue this is a noble thing or infact an inhumane repression of our truest instincts.

What do you think?

Do you have any thoughts on the subject yourself?

Not trying to be smart, it's just usually a lot more conducive to discussion if you put forward a position on the matter when starting a thread

Affable

orestes wrote: »

Do you have any thoughts on the subject yourself?

Not trying to be smart, it's just usually a lot more conducive to discussion if you put forward a position on the matter when starting a thread

That is the position I'm putting forward, and the thought I had. But clearly I can't say I'm 100% sure of it.

Joycey

Affable wrote: »

In that civilisation goes along with reserve of emotions and calculation, both in it's creation, and suspension. You could argue this is a noble thing or infact an inhumane repression of our truest instincts.

What do you think?

Firstly its an entirely false dichotomy. How would it be possible for a state of anarchy to exist without there being some kind of civilisation? To say that something like "the State of Nature" (not meant in anyone's technical sense, but as a pre-human historical epoch) is anarchic doesnt really make sense to me. To specify that animals are "without rulers" doesnt signify anything, how is it possible to rule animals in the first place?

Secondly, how do you equate "reserve of emotions and calculations" with our operation under a government? Surely in order for a government to emerge from some more "anarchic" state, calculation would have had to be excercised. In fact don't we calculate things like distance, speed etc when we hunt things? Or pick berries? And I'd imagine that you could make a pretty good case for there never having been an instance of anybody doing anything through "reserving" their emotions, if one emotion is being held back then that is as a result of calculation motivated by some other emotion (such as the anticipation of reward).

Sorry to disect your question like that .

In answer, I think that a state of self-government brought about through a horizontally organised non-violent movement would be vastly preferable to some centralised authority telling me what to do which is outside of my power of influence by and large (although the ideal is that it is representative of me).

dreamlogic

Affable wrote: »

In that civilisation goes along with reserve of emotions and calculation, both in it's creation, and suspension. You could argue this is a noble thing or infact an inhumane repression of our truest instincts.

What do you think?

Can you give some specific or concrete example of what you mean..?
On the surface it sounds like a fascinating question and I'd like to be able to attempt an answer here, but the question as it is is way too big - almost meaningless..!

Affable

dreamlogic wrote: »

Can you give some specific or concrete example of what you mean..?
On the surface it sounds like a fascinating question and I'd like to be able to attempt an answer here, but the question as it is is way too big - almost meaningless..!

We want to submit to our primal emotions. But civilisation and values, high minded moral values were evolved as a by-product of calculation..they are a pretense, and are strategies which cope with the world for us and benefit us or are projections of our angst. This calculation is caused becaause we are suspicious of the next mans calculation, and then we calculate, and the then the next person does etc. But if you could reverse that process then the reverse of calculation would be waht obtained power, the primal would obtain power.

dreamlogic

Affable wrote: »

We want to submit to our primal emotions.

Such as...?

But civilisation and values, high minded moral values were evolved as a by-product of calculation..they are a pretense

A strange thing to say - that our moral values are a pretense! How do you arrive at that conclusion?
So let's try a random example. If someone decides they are not going to kill someone in a fit of anger(because they believe killing is wrong), are you saying that this person's internal moral belief is some kind of a sham? Even if this may be the case for a small percentage of the population who might think killing someone is okay just so long as they don't get caught, it is very strange to assume that ALL people think this way!

and are strategies which cope with the world for us and benefit us or are projections of our angst.

Well yes I suppose. But there are so many different morals(ideas of right and wrong)... As you point out, some of these agree with us, some of them don't agree with us. And yes many prevailing values are a product of underlying fear, insecurity or maybe angst. Homophobia might be one example.

This calculation is caused becaause we are suspicious of the next mans calculation, and then we calculate, and the then the next person does etc.

So are you saying that our moral values are largely based on simple oneupmanship? If so I would in general disagree with this. But again without some specific example of what you are alluding to it is difficult to really say..

But if you could reverse that process then the reverse of calculation would be waht obtained power, the primal would obtain power.

'The reverse of calculation'. I'm not sure what is meant by that. But it sounds like in itself, this would still entail a level of calculation..