Bullying Good For Your Health - Study Shows

[Tommi]

My question is that if raping is proven to give pleasure to the ones doing the raping in the long term (into their young adult and adult years), is their actions justified?

Is there some basis for which raping, maybe even mild rape is acceptable?

Fixed that for you. Same logic tbh.

[Korlok]

Conflict is tension, this is almost elementary level understanding of things so your whole art, literature, music stuff is fubar'd right off the bat.

You don't understand very much of human nature if you don't think conflict is necessary to human nature.

'quagmire of conflict, war, religious genocide, and a culture of Might is right' isn't what I'm talking about, which is why I said that you can't see past the whole dog eat dog.

Yes, simply saying it won't happen because it's in our genes is true. People choose not to breed and multiply, so there's nothing for you to base what you're saying there on as choice is a conscious decision, and decision implies conflict and evaluation which occurs under tension.

Humanity can never push past our baser instincts, they're there for many reasons. We can put them lower on the priorities list in order to accomplish goals and things we've chosen to pursue but just like you can't push past the need of your inner organs you can't push past them.

Disregard your Utopianism and quit emphasizing a series of efforts that is just pissing away time and energy and perhaps you'd get closer to your long term goals, as would others who think like you.

You're welcome.

Your whole argument is based on absolute assumptions about human beings and our innate nature.
The core of humanity, however, is our ability to suppress our instincts.
Thus, we have made laws that go directly against instinct, as they are for the betterment of society.

If we were to go by your absolutist idealism, then there would be no reason to push forward away from instinct at all.
If you see something you want, then you take it, regardless of the means, as that would be your instinct. (I use 'your' in the general sense here)
This is because it's 'in our genes' or 'in our nature'.

I like to think that we have evolved beyond that, even if ever so slightly.
I like to think that we have the capacity to go further, leaving instinct behind as the natural sense, something to learn from but not completely emulate.

It may sound Utopian, but then, that assumes that something inside of you agrees with the sentiment, and you are only arguing because of your absolute, unshakable faith in your own knowledge of mankind.

Personally, I prefer to keep my beliefs open, susceptible to new ideas. Neophilus versus neophobus, and all that.

[Damajin]

Your whole argument is based on absolute assumptions about human beings and our innate nature.
The core of humanity, however, is our ability to suppress our instincts.
Thus, we have made laws that go directly against instinct, as they are for the betterment of society.

If we were to go by your absolutist idealism, then there would be no reason to push forward away from instinct at all.
If you see something you want, then you take it, regardless of the means, as that would be your instinct. (I use 'your' in the general sense here)
This is because it's 'in our genes' or 'in our nature'.

I like to think that we have evolved beyond that, even if ever so slightly.
I like to think that we have the capacity to go further, leaving instinct behind as the natural sense, something to learn from but not completely emulate.

It may sound Utopian, but then, that assumes that something inside of you agrees with the sentiment, and you are only arguing because of your absolute, unshakable faith in your own knowledge of mankind.

Personally, I prefer to keep my beliefs open, susceptible to new ideas. Neophilus versus neophobus, and all that.

Suppressing our instincts doesn't remove them, doesn't push us past them as the person I was responding to was advocating.

My whole argument is based on the notion that conflicts, tensions and problems are inherent to life and therefore any attempt to sterilize them out of humanity is a waste of time, energy and resources.

Your second paragraph doesn't relate at all to what I've said because I wasn't saying that at all. Your point on suppressing instincts or adopting a system of values for individual and societal benefit goes hand in hand with what I said. My entire response to the other guy is one of incredulous wonder that anyone would still be existing in the lala land of Utopianism.

We have and we haven't evolved beyond that. It's still there and always will be there. That there are stronger impulses there now shows our advancement, yet those same base instincts are there if we need them. We'll never be rid of them and it's delusion to try.

I do not see any valid reason to leave instinct behind. At that point we just become Ipods, waiting to be programmed and empty until we are.

Some of what I said is absolute, some is fluid. There's enough room for both and they aren't contrarian.

[Malacrass]

Sounds more like those who were in the position to bully others were physically stronger and more resilient to begin with. Jock vs. skinny nerd with an inhaler scenario.

[Santti]

I don't think it has health benefits as much as it lowers the health of others, making it appear bullying is healthy, because he is healthier than the ones that are bullied.

[Magnagarde]

Something that makes you feel better about yourself and better than everyone else around you will obviously have a benefitial physiological effect on your health. This is basic physiology. It is probably one of the reasons why bullies unconciously persist in their endeavors.

At least A.C. Guyton didn't have to see this.

[Deleted]

Raping women is good for making children - Study Shows