Man's First Fatal Flaw

[Shadowmalerenamon]

This is the first thread of a series I will be calling "Man's Fatal Flaws", the basic psychological reasons I have found as to why humanity is weak. I present these ideas in hope that others will take time and reflect upon them, and if they disagree, try to prove me wrong. I love debating, and I love testing my debating skills. As they say, "Let the game begin!"

Man creates the sword, and is thus killed by the sword. The sword is born out of distrust, the inability to trust his fellow man. Distrust leads to fear, fear leads to paranoia, parnoia leads to murder. Man kills his fellow man, finding solace in knowing the threat has been removed, only to discover a new threat, or be killed by another fearful man. Man's inability to trust his fellow man is the first fatal flaw.

[+Paranoid Android]

Interesting topic, Knight. I'm not sure if you are intending to discuss this in future Fatal Flaw threads, but it's been my experience that the Number-1 flaw in humanity has always been its tendency towards selfishness. And on a more personal note, not just the selfishness but the inability to see that selfishness in themselves (but yet see it through everything else in the world). To me, this is and always will be the biggest flaw in humanity.

If you can work out ways to overcome this problem in humanity, I think you'll go a long way to solving all of humanity's problems.

Just my input I thought to add to this

Regards,

[The Silver Thong]

I would have to say that trust is not a fatal flaw at all. With out trust man probably wouldn't be here. We had to create family units, tribes, communities. With out developing trust none of these things would have happened and we would have been picked off one by one. With out trust man would not be a social creature and there for a much weaker species. As far as the invention of the sword, hell might as well use a rock, man has and always will kill each other I'm almost sure of that. As far as fear goes, it's a manditory requirment for survival, with out it we would be dropping off like flies. We have fear and trust issues for very good reason and we need them to survive. It's what makes us strong not weak in my eye's anyway.

Edited November 21, 2008 by The Silver Thong

[Shadowmalerenamon]

I would have to say that trust is not a fatal flaw at all. With out trust man probably wouldn't be here. We had to create family units, tribes, communities. With out developing trust none of these things would have happened and we would have been picked off one by one. With out trust man would not be a social creature and there for a much weaker species. As far as the invention of the sword, hell might as well use a rock, man has and always will kill each other I'm almost sure of that. As far as fear goes, it's a manditory requirment for survival, with out it we would be dropping off like flies. We have fear and trust issues for very good reason and we need them to survive. It's what makes us strong not weak in my eye's anyway.

Why does man declare war? To conquer land, and by doing so, the "enemy" is no longer a threat. What is an enemy? Someone you fear, and fear is caused by distrust

Edited November 21, 2008 by Knight of the Twilight

[Karlis]

~~~ ...

... Man creates the sword, and is thus killed by the sword. The sword is born out of distrust, the inability to trust his fellow man. Distrust leads to fear, fear leads to paranoia, parnoia leads to murder. Man kills his fellow man, finding solace in knowing the threat has been removed, only to discover a new threat, or be killed by another fearful man. Man's inability to trust his fellow man is the first fatal flaw.

I think that perhaps you have some of the Fatal Flaws in Man a bit out of order. I agree with PA that selfishness is the first flaw in Man. I would say that distrust of others is an automatic follow-up flaw of selfishness. Because Man is by nature selfish, Man instinctively feels that others are also selfishly self-centered, and will take advantage of situations, at the expense of others. As a result Man creates the sword, initially for the purpose of self-defense ... but a weapon of self-defense in a selfish man's hand easily becomes a weapon of attack.

Man is a social being, and to thrive as a society, Man must co-operate within society, and that automatically calls for a level of trust. That co-operation involves various morals, values and standards. Mutual trust is an essential virtue in an ideal society, if that society is to flourish.

I agree that one of Man’s universal faults is distrust of others; but distrust is a result of selfishness. Distrust leads to inevitable conflict as you so clearly state.

On the other hand, in an imperfect society as exists today, where values are not moral absolutes, being too trusting can be fatal. But that is going a little off-topic here.

Hope this was of some help in starting the ball rolling,

Karlis

[Leonardo]

This is the first thread of a series I will be calling "Man's Fatal Flaws", the basic psychological reasons I have found as to why humanity is weak. I present these ideas in hope that others will take time and reflect upon them, and if they disagree, try to prove me wrong. I love debating, and I love testing my debating skills. As they say, "Let the game begin!"

Man creates the sword, and is thus killed by the sword. The sword is born out of distrust, the inability to trust his fellow man. Distrust leads to fear, fear leads to paranoia, parnoia leads to murder. Man kills his fellow man, finding solace in knowing the threat has been removed, only to discover a new threat, or be killed by another fearful man. Man's inability to trust his fellow man is the first fatal flaw.

Distrust is not a fatal flaw, but an important survival mechanism.

Only if you wish to take an idealistic view that all of mankind could simultaneously have perfect trust in each other would distrust be unnecessary for our continued survival. Such a scenario is highly unlikely.

As has been pointed out, selfishness is the basic reason for this. Not necessarily malicious selfishness, but simply a selfishness of wanting to survive and reproduce. I notice you have started another thread regarding 'gluttony'. If this is how you term selfishness then I would suggest discussing the psychology of Man in separate 'packets' is not going to allow for a full discussion of the topic. I would also suggest that you steer away from association with religious terminology as you seem to be drawing a parallel to the mythology of the 'deadly sins' (and these are a myth).

[Karlis]

Distrust is not a fatal flaw, but an important survival mechanism.

Only if you wish to take an idealistic view that all of mankind could simultaneously have perfect trust in each other would distrust be unnecessary for our continued survival. Such a scenario is highly unlikely.

As has been pointed out, selfishness is the basic reason for this. Not necessarily malicious selfishness, but simply a selfishness of wanting to survive and reproduce. I notice you have started another thread regarding 'gluttony'. If this is how you term selfishness then I would suggest discussing the psychology of Man in separate 'packets' is not going to allow for a full discussion of the topic. I would also suggest that you steer away from association with religious terminology as you seem to be drawing a parallel to the mythology of the 'deadly sins' (and these are a myth).

I think you are right, Leo -- I "felt" something amiss with the progress to the second point, gluttony, by Knight ... but I could not find words for that.

Over to you Knight,

Karlis

[Saard]

This is the first thread of a series I will be calling "Man's Fatal Flaws", the basic psychological reasons I have found as to why humanity is weak. I present these ideas in hope that others will take time and reflect upon them, and if they disagree, try to prove me wrong. I love debating, and I love testing my debating skills. As they say, "Let the game begin!"

Man creates the sword, and is thus killed by the sword. The sword is born out of distrust, the inability to trust his fellow man. Distrust leads to fear, fear leads to paranoia, parnoia leads to murder. Man kills his fellow man, finding solace in knowing the threat has been removed, only to discover a new threat, or be killed by another fearful man. Man's inability to trust his fellow man is the first fatal flaw.

Weapons aren't born out of distrust, they're born out of need.

There are people who want what the other person has got and will take it by force. This happens because survival isn't easy and the creature that doesn't get the resources is the one that dies.

Some of our earliest weapons were our fists, before that, teeth and claws. Nowadays, we don't really need to fight for the basics, but people fight for territory and power instead.

Distrust is not a fatal flaw, it's a healthy and necessary reaction to an imperfect world.

I agree with the android, selfishness is a bigger problem. It's our animal tendancy to look after ourselves and our families first. When we finally get past that, no time soon I'd imagine, we will have conquered our animal natures and be in control of our own existence.

Ideally, we need a global mindset that cares for the society as much as the individual.

Edit: damnit, I thought there were only two posts and have just parrotted points already made. Oh well, everyone seems to be in agreement. This could be a good first step to that harmonious global mindset. Obviously the people on this board know what's good for humanity, better than humanity does itself. Anyone fancy taking the world by force?

For its own good of course.

Edited November 23, 2008 by Saard

[Lt_Ripley]

pure trust is naive. And no one remains naive. it's impossible. A baby touches a pot and finds it's hot , gets stung by a bee , any number of reasons ......... trust isn't pure. We grow up and learn not all promises are kept even by those we most trust.

Mans fatal flaw isn't a lack of trust , but greed , selfishness , which leads to weaponry and arrogance . When man thinks he is above another be it for any reason from race , gender , sexuality , religion , power , money , land .......................it makes trust impossible. So as long as you have people who claim to be right , or better than ? You can forget an equal peaceful world.

[Chauncy]

This is the first thread of a series I will be calling "Man's Fatal Flaws", the basic psychological reasons I have found as to why humanity is weak. I present these ideas in hope that others will take time and reflect upon them, and if they disagree, try to prove me wrong. I love debating, and I love testing my debating skills. As they say, "Let the game begin!"

Man creates the sword, and is thus killed by the sword. The sword is born out of distrust, the inability to trust his fellow man. Distrust leads to fear, fear leads to paranoia, parnoia leads to murder. Man kills his fellow man, finding solace in knowing the threat has been removed, only to discover a new threat, or be killed by another fearful man. Man's inability to trust his fellow man is the first fatal flaw.

I agree with Leo on this one. This mistrust is a crucial survival mechanism. The ability to place trust wisely moreover. Man's ability to be on gaurd for threat and have the ability to eliminate it, has ensured survival. Its the same with any species on the planet. Its a basic rule of survival: Either eliminate the threat or be eliminated. The only thing that gets to reproduce is the one that won the fight. Survival of the Fittest.

As far as making and being killed by the sword, thats a natural survival outcome aswell......right up to the H-Bomb, and nuclear warheads, and why mankind continues to create better weapons and practice warfare.

Picture the first people that forged metal to create a sword, the people with the swords won all the fights. If you were keen on survival you too would need a sword or something better to combat threats and gaurantee survival of you and your bloodline.

If you didn't have the means or knowledge to make a sword , you would then need to steal one!!

The reason why mankind doesn't trust his fellow man is because mankind is not trustworthy.

[The Silver Thong]

Yet I have to disagree. Yes trust/miss trust is vital to our survival. However the family unit was not built out of greed and self preservation. It was built out of early humans having to rely on other humans/family members. Man has not been selfish in it's infancy. Man was forced to share and protect back then. Now it's everyman for himself. The trust and social structure that made man strong is now falling apart. We don't trust now as we use to, why is that? Yet we will trust almost anyone still, just with a wink. hmmmm

[Chauncy]

Yet I have to disagree. Yes trust/miss trust is vital to our survival. However the family unit was not built out of greed and self preservation. It was built out of early humans having to rely on other humans/family members. Man has not been selfish in it's infancy. Man was forced to share and protect back then. Now it's everyman for himself. The trust and social structure that made man strong is now falling apart. We don't trust now as we use to, why is that? Yet we will trust almost anyone still, just with a wink. hmmmm

Thats why more over mistrust, is the intelligence to place trust wisely.

What ensures survival is the ability to place trust in that which is trustworthy.

We have created things that eliminate , for the most part, our chances of succumbing to the elements....clothing shelter, electricity. As a result more rare is the situation where trust or mistrust reulsts in death.

We are smart to band together and place trust in one another and place mistrust in the clan over the river.

[Shadowmalerenamon]

We are smart to band together and place trust in one another and place mistrust in the clan over the river.

If we can trust those we band together with, why should we mistrust the others? What is the reason for that mistrust? The reason: Man, by nature, trusts no one.

(BTW, there is no particular importance in the order I present the fatal flaws, its just the order I decide on. Also, sorry for the late response, I can get online on weekends)

Edited November 24, 2008 by Knight of the Twilight

[Chauncy]

If we can trust those we band together with, why should we mistrust the others? What is the reason for that mistrust? The reason: Man, by nature, trusts no one.

(BTW, there is no particular importance in the order I present the fatal flaws, its just the order I decide on. Also, sorry for the late response, I can get online on weekends)

I can understand how you would arrive at the conclusion that man, by nature, trusts no one.

Although one could see it more of a conclusion that man, by nature, is not trustworthy.

We obviously have the ability to trust because what has enhanced survival is placing trust wisely into things that are trustworthy.

There are endless examples of men putting trust into other men. Look at the soldiers on the front line of battle that trust their life in another man's hands and vise versa. This type trust greatly adds to the chance of survival in a battlefield setting.

[Shadowmalerenamon]

There are endless examples of men putting trust into other men. Look at the soldiers on the front line of battle that trust their life in another man's hands and vise versa. This type trust greatly adds to the chance of survival in a battlefield setting.

But why does that battlefield exist to begin with? Because man mistrusts the man on the other side, thus generating fear and creating battle

[Chauncy]

But why does that battlefield exist to begin with? Because man mistrusts the man on the other side, thus generating fear and creating battle

There are lots of reasons for war, greed and domination would come before not trusting the other men.

More practically though, it does seem that the reason why mankind has mistrust of fellow men is because mankind as a whole is not trustworthy. We can recognize that wisely placed trust can assist in survival. There is no question that we have the ability to decide where to place trust. So if this ability to trust exists then the question is why doesn't mankind trust fully in one another?

It because mankind is not trustworthy.

The flaw is not that mankind doesn't trust one another. The flaw is that mankind as a whole, does not exhibit character traits or actions that would advocate the wise placing of trust. We have allowed carnal motivation to dictate actions more often than not.

[Shadowmalerenamon]

There are lots of reasons for war, greed and domination would come before not trusting the other men.

More practically though, it does seem that the reason why mankind has mistrust of fellow men is because mankind as a whole is not trustworthy. We can recognize that wisely placed trust can assist in survival. There is no question that we have the ability to decide where to place trust. So if this ability to trust exists then the question is why doesn't mankind trust fully in one another?

It because mankind is not trustworthy.

The flaw is not that mankind doesn't trust one another. The flaw is that mankind as a whole, does not exhibit character traits or actions that would advocate the wise placing of trust. We have allowed carnal motivation to dictate actions more often than not.

Why does one wish to conquer other territory? Yes, greed is a factor, but in the end it comes down to mistrust. Man doesn't know the other man, so he cannot trust him. Since he cannot trust him, he fears him. Now that he fears him, he must kill him, so that the fear will be eliminated, although this alliviation of fear only remains until another unknown man is encountered.

[Chauncy]

Why does one wish to conquer other territory? Yes, greed is a factor, but in the end it comes down to mistrust. Man doesn't know the other man, so he cannot trust him. Since he cannot trust him, he fears him. Now that he fears him, he must kill him, so that the fear will be eliminated, although this alliviation of fear only remains until another unknown man is encountered.

There is an element of mistrust there I suppose.

Where this mistrust originated though is of interest.

When a group of people, a tribe lets say , encounters another tribe in close proximity they would surely battle. It isn't out of mistrust it is a survival mechanism. The tribe in close proximity would be direct competition for animals hunted, and land to grow food. It became a natural response to snuff out that which may infringe on the odds of survival.

This is an animal instinct. I think what happened is that this animal instinct evolved into habit, and tradition and it eventually rose above a basic reaction to environmental stimuli and became customary even ritualistic.

[The Silver Thong]

There is an element of mistrust there I suppose.

Where this mistrust originated though is of interest.

When a group of people, a tribe lets say , encounters another tribe in close proximity they would surely battle. It isn't out of mistrust it is a survival mechanism. The tribe in close proximity would be direct competition for animals hunted, and land to grow food. It became a natural response to snuff out that which may infringe on the odds of survival.

This is an animal instinct. I think what happened is that this animal instinct evolved into habit, and tradition and it eventually rose above a basic reaction to environmental stimuli and became customary even ritualistic.

Exactly, it's animal Instinct. Just as if two different pride's of lions where to come across each other. Instinctivly both prides will not trust one another and one pride will be drivin off. Not over miss-trust so much as the need to protect your own social structure. Trust or miss-trust, both are required survival skills.

[Saard]

Yet I have to disagree. Yes trust/miss trust is vital to our survival. However the family unit was not built out of greed and self preservation. It was built out of early humans having to rely on other humans/family members. Man has not been selfish in it's infancy. Man was forced to share and protect back then. Now it's everyman for himself. The trust and social structure that made man strong is now falling apart. We don't trust now as we use to, why is that? Yet we will trust almost anyone still, just with a wink. hmmmm

what is the family unit but self-preservation? Continuation of the g-e-n-e-s (see edit for the wierd word spacing), strength in numbers... You cast an inaccurate picture there methinks. The world isn't any better or worse now, just more complicated.

If we can trust those we band together with, why should we mistrust the others? What is the reason for that mistrust? The reason: Man, by nature, trusts no one.

Nah, not true. Mistrust is learnt. There are examples of animals without predators enountering man for the first time and having no fear. We would be the same. If we lived in a world with no predators and all our needs met, we'd be wandering around that Eden without distrust or malice or most negative emotions, up until the point we became complicated enough to want something the other person has, like their partner. Selfishness is more basic than mistrust. When needs are met, we turn to wants.

The flaw is not that mankind doesn't trust one another. The flaw is that mankind as a whole, does not exhibit character traits or actions that would advocate the wise placing of trust. We have allowed carnal motivation to dictate actions more often than not.

I'd agree with this. We're not stuck with this though; we can be pretty much what we make ourselves. That's the joy of sentience. Admittedly, we've been cocking it up royally as a rule but we're capable of so much more.

Why does one wish to conquer other territory? Yes, greed is a factor, but in the end it comes down to mistrust. Man doesn't know the other man, so he cannot trust him. Since he cannot trust him, he fears him. Now that he fears him, he must kill him, so that the fear will be eliminated, although this alliviation of fear only remains until another unknown man is encountered.

You're too hung up on this mistrust as the root of all evil idea. If I was the king of a small, poor kingdom with lots of armed men and I lived next door to a big, rich kingdom full of peace-loving robe-wearers who I trusted implicitly, I'm sure it wouldn't be too long before there was one huge kingdom with a lot of bloody robes lying about.

Mistrust is a symptom, learnt at cost a long time ago, taught and never forgotten.

This is a bit of a simplified discussion though, the problems of the modern world are wrapped around greed, politics, trust, mistrust, abuse, power etc etc. If we all trusted each other, everything would be fine. If we all were no longer selfish everything would be fine. If there was no hate... even getting rid of love in its wider definition would solve some problems. None of these things can be done. It's a big old Gordian Knot, let's hope there's someone a bit brighter than Alexander out there...

Edit:

The word 'genes' above somehow got turned into a link. When I clicked on it, it sent me to an advert that crashed explorer because it wouldn't let me out. Is this spyware on my computer or something to do with the site?

Edited November 25, 2008 by Saard

[Shadowmalerenamon]

You're too hung up on this mistrust as the root of all evil idea.

It is but one of the roots of all evil, as the following "Fatal Flaw" threads will discuss the others.

[Shadowmalerenamon]

When a group of people, a tribe lets say , encounters another tribe in close proximity they would surely battle. It isn't out of mistrust it is a survival mechanism. The tribe in close proximity would be direct competition for animals hunted, and land to grow food. It became a natural response to snuff out that which may infringe on the odds of survival.

Wouldn't the merging of the tribes increase the odds of survival? Yes, more manpower, more efficiency, and even when resources begin to dwindle, the collective intelligence of the new tribe could easily find a solution to the problem. Instead, man, by nature, fears the other man will decieve him, so he eliminates the other man.

[Chauncy]

Wouldn't the merging of the tribes increase the odds of survival? Yes, more manpower, more efficiency, and even when resources begin to dwindle, the collective intelligence of the new tribe could easily find a solution to the problem. Instead, man, by nature, fears the other man will decieve him, so he eliminates the other man.

To unite usually benefits the whole.

With the tribe scenario though, I think that the single tribe while flourishing has no need to merge with other tribes. This is not to say that once placed in a situation of peril or facing extinction that they wouldn't unite with other tribes. That differences are set aside when it comes to possible extiction.

People unite when they have things in common or the same objective. Look at corporations that merge......some are always in direct competition to one another, then in tough economic times they merge for the purpose of survival.

[Saard]

It is but one of the roots of all evil, as the following "Fatal Flaw" threads will discuss the others.

yeah, okay, you're not calling it the root of all evil. My bad, I exaggerated for effect.

What I think many posts have suggested here though is that in itself it's not a fatal flaw but the after effect of something else.

What do you think?

[Xenojjin]

The only real flaw humans have is that our realities are subjective to our own understanding, thus forcing us to use a form of circular reasoning ( presuppositions ) in order to trust our own senses. Mistrust, along with pretty much everything else that is wrong with us, is simply something that stems from that one flaw.

Edited November 26, 2008 by Xenojjin