Philosophy Now Forum

I don't understand the "attack/war mentality" -- I think it must be a primitive form of insanity or stupidity. I can appreciate "sparring" for the purpose of increasing awareness and agility, but attacks that are meant for the sole purpose of destroying another and everything associated with them seems like a form of blind fury, lacking broader awareness.

Does waging war truly RESOLVE anything? (I'm not talking about the profitability associated with it.)

Can being SMARTER be more effective than using brute force?

Why do so many men like war so much? Is it because they're not smart enough to figure out anything else? Do they instead measure their "intelligence" by the size of their weapons?

And while we're at it, why do so many men attack with their penis? How is it that they can rationalize doing such a thing? Doesn't it sound ridiculously stupid? I can't imagine ever attacking anyone with my boobs.

I look forward to all responses...

over population control

(besides, if it wasn't for the military, there'd be no computers or internet...)

-Imp

It's good for the arms manufacturers and dealers, and the politicians who accept their bribes.

Impenitent wrote: ↑Wed May 09, 2018 11:40 pm over population control

My first thought.

Without destruction there is stagnation, which is another kind of destruction. Disease, war and climate change - historically, these are the great culling forces.

It's good for the unemployed and to get the economy moving.

PhilX

Right. Better to be dead than unemployed.

Lacewing said:

"And while we're at it, why do so many men attack with their penis? How is it that they can rationalize doing such a thing? Doesn't it sound ridiculously stupid? I can't imagine ever attacking anyone with my boobs."

I wonder if I should get mine registered, like a gun?

PhilX

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu May 10, 2018 7:58 am Right. Better to be dead than unemployed.

Better to be employed than dead.

PhilX

War is good for conquest and conflict resolution, and good for voicing disapproval of war.

LW wrote: I don't understand the "attack/war mentality"

Like a sucker punch, attack/war can be pre-emptive in the face of the inevitable. Not understanding war should not be confused with disapproval of war, and since war is woven into the fabric of humanity, one should endeavor to understand war. For instance, if some moron shows up to claim your mind and body as his own, you might begin to understand the mentality of war from within, even while disapproving of your own warlike actions.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 10, 2018 1:05 pm if some moron shows up to claim your mind and body as his own, you might begin to understand the mentality of war from within, even while disapproving of your own warlike actions.

Sure! That seems to be an appropriate response in the moment. What I don't understand is the mindset of war for conquering and controlling and destroying as much as possible. There's never an end because the mindset is not interested in peace. It's essentially a mindset of continuous rape. Which I guess is what made me think of the relationship to the penis.

Re: Phil getting his penis registered as a weapon... ...love it! Please, please DO IT! I would love to see that on the News!

There are many reasons for war. One of them is treaties. WWII started due to Germany's invasion of Poland which England was bound to by treaty. WWI started due to the assassination of a member of royalty and his country was linked to other countries by treaty. It's a complicated mess.

PhilX

The weapon industry gets a massive boost, jobs, sales, cheap oil and Rothschilds gets their states bank!!

War is always about (finite) resources (real or imagined, tangible or intangible).

War is natural and normal.

Largely, human intelligence is the result of finding clever ways to off the other guy (or group) so as to have access to his or their 'stuff'.

So: the pacifism embedded in "Can being SMARTER be more effective than using brute force?" is unnatural, abnormal, and more than a little ignorant.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu May 10, 2018 5:10 pm War is always about (finite) resources (real or imagined, tangible or intangible).

War is natural and normal.

Largely, human intelligence is the result of finding clever ways to off the other guy (or group) so as to have access to his or their 'stuff'.

So: the pacifism embedded in "Can being SMARTER be more effective than using brute force?" is unnatural, abnormal, and more than a little ignorant.

I was with you until your stupid conclusion, but that's no surprise... as "being smarter than brute force" goes against your leanings. I'm guessing you'd be stumped without a gun (or other weapon).

Much less stupid than all the crap in your opening:


I think it must be a primitive form of insanity or stupidity

attacks that are meant for the sole purpose of destroying another and everything associated with them seems like a form of blind fury, lacking broader awareness.

Does waging war truly RESOLVE anything?

Can being SMARTER be more effective than using brute force?

Is it because they're not smart enough to figure out anything else?

why do so many men attack with their penis?