|
I have a theory and I would like to see if my theory holds true. Please answer the following questions after reading the definitions. When evaluating a system of political beliefs I have an argument with a friend about why people believe what they believe. PLEASE VOTE IN ALL POLLS
Individualism: The belief that individuals are responsible for their own lives and that no other individual should coerce them into specific type of behaviour.
Collectivism: The belief that society is responsible for the welfare of the whole society and that it is sometimes ok to force the group to a specific behavior in order to achieve some goal.
Where would you say your political belief lies?
Poll: Individualism vs collectivismMostly Individualism (31) 37% Mostly Collectivism (23) 28% Definitely Individualism (20) 24% Definitely Collectivism (9) 11% 83 total votes Your vote: Individualism vs collectivism (Vote): Definitely Individualism
(Vote): Mostly Individualism
(Vote): Mostly Collectivism
(Vote): Definitely Collectivism
Now that you answered that I have another question.Are humans naturally inclined to unethical behavior or are humans a product of their environment?
Born Bad: Individuals are naturally inclined to bad behavior.
Born Good: Individuals are not naturally inclined to bad behavior but are heavily influenced by their environment.
If you believe that this is a bad question and that individual are neither "bad" nor "good" then please mark the answer this question in the form of born unethical or born ethical.
Poll: Born Good or Bad?Mostly Good (36) 55% Mostly Bad (17) 26% Definitely Bad (9) 14% Definitely Good (4) 6% 66 total votes Your vote: Born Good or Bad? (Vote): Definitely Good
(Vote): Mostly Good
(Vote): Mostly Bad
(Vote): Definitely Bad
For the final poll, lets combine those views.
Poll: Collectivism, Inidividualism & human conditionIndividualism & people are born good (22) 35% Individualism & people are born bad. (16) 25% Collectivism & people are born good (14) 22% Collectivism & people are born bad (11) 17% 63 total votes Your vote: Collectivism, Inidividualism & human condition (Vote): Collectivism & people are born good
(Vote): Collectivism & people are born bad
(Vote): Individualism & people are born good
(Vote): Individualism & people are born bad.
Let's see If I am right. :p
 
|
It will be fun to see your hypothesis. Maybe you should define 'good' and 'bad' as you did with collectivism/individualism.
|
I personally think that people are born 'bad' by an ethical standard, in that they would by instinct do whatever it takes to survive. If nobody taught you that stealing is wrong, someone would take what they need to eat and not feel bad about it. That in itself would be considered 'bad'.
I also think people are responsible for themselves and their choices.
|
I didn't vote in the last two polls because I don't believe that people are born good or bad. I don't even really believe in good and bad for that matter.
|
On July 04 2010 05:52 liaf wrote:
I didn't vote in the last two polls because I don't believe that people are born good or bad. I don't even really believe in good and bad for that matter.
Haha, ok, well are humans born inclined to be unethical according to human standards or is their environment the main contributing factor? Answer it that way please.
|
I realize there are a lot of assumptions going on in these questions especially over definitions and terms, but please just answer naively I guess. lol 
|
On July 04 2010 05:51 yarkO wrote:
I personally think that people are born 'bad' by an ethical standard, in that they would by instinct do whatever it takes to survive. If nobody taught you that stealing is wrong, someone would take what they need to eat and not feel bad about it. That in itself would be considered 'bad'.
I also think people are responsible for themselves and their choices.
This is pretty much my thought process while answering these polls as well. I don't think people are born "bad" in the sense of being malicious, but someone who had no interaction with society through their whole life would definetly be "bad" by today's standards due to theri survival instinct.
|
On July 04 2010 05:55 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2010 05:52 liaf wrote:
I didn't vote in the last two polls because I don't believe that people are born good or bad. I don't even really believe in good and bad for that matter. Haha, ok, well are humans born inclined to be unethical according to human standards or is their environment the main contributing factor? Answer it that way please.
Ok voted mostly good because I believe that humans have instincts that lead them towards so called 'ethical' actions
|
The Good/Bad one is a bit...stale. The very idea of asking the individualism vs collectivism question, and then immediately following it with a question that requires anyone who voted Individualism to begin grouping people based on sweeping generalizations...not a fan. I'd suggest you provide another option for that one. Other than that, interesting idea.
|
I think I should word the question differently, but I want to see if people just answer naively how this would turn out. I would like to ask this question in a huge public setting, but I guess TL thread will have to work for now. When I have like 100 total votes I'll spit out my hypothesis.
|
2nd poll isn't really fair and accurate in my opinion. I think that people are born amoral, not good or immoral. Morality is a cultural concept.
edit: it seems that i'm not alone :p
I didn't vote.
|
On July 04 2010 06:00 darmousseh wrote:
I think I should word the question differently, but I want to see if people just answer naively how this would turn out. I would like to ask this question in a huge public setting, but I guess TL thread will have to work for now. When I have like 100 total votes I'll spit out my hypothesis.
Alright, I figured that was what you were going for. Also, TL.net tends to lean a certain way, just saying, so you may want to take that into account as well. I was thinking of doing something along these lines myself pretty soon, and would be interested to hear your full take on the topics. ^_^
|
On July 04 2010 05:55 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2010 05:52 liaf wrote:
I didn't vote in the last two polls because I don't believe that people are born good or bad. I don't even really believe in good and bad for that matter. Haha, ok, well are humans born inclined to be unethical according to human standards or is their environment the main contributing factor? Answer it that way please.
Ehm, I don't think there is a 'human standard.' I mean you could talk about some contemporary local standard and that would have some sort of meaning, but you probably don't share many basic ethics with, say, mayans in the pre-classic period? Neither is our contemporary set of standards in any way set in stone and it would seem quite ridiculous to believe that our societal values are somehow exclusively present in our biology. How would a person 1000 years from now feel about such a statement?
I do however believe that humans are born with sympathy, but depending on society as history has shown it might not necessarily be excercised toward people outside their local tribe, religion, country, race, whatever.
Edit: But regarding what I guess you're trying to get at, I do think there's somewhat of a correlation. Some Asian countries with crime rates close to zero are collectivistic as fuck as opposed to our individualistic western society.
|
On July 04 2010 06:05 hifriend wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2010 05:55 darmousseh wrote:On July 04 2010 05:52 liaf wrote:
I didn't vote in the last two polls because I don't believe that people are born good or bad. I don't even really believe in good and bad for that matter. Haha, ok, well are humans born inclined to be unethical according to human standards or is their environment the main contributing factor? Answer it that way please. Ehm, I don't think there is a 'human standard.' I mean you could talk about some contemporary local standard and that would have some sort of meaning, but you probably don't share many basic ethics with, say, mayans in the pre-classic period? Neither is our contemporary set of standards in any way set in stone and it would seem quite ridiculous to believe that our societal values are somehow exclusively present in our biology. How would a person 1000 years from now feel about such a statement? I do however believe that humans are born with sympathy, but depending on society as history has shown it might not necessarily be excercised toward people outside their local tribe, religion, country, race, whatever.
"I do however believe that humans are born with sympathy, but depending on society as history has shown it might not necessarily be excercised toward people outside their local tribe, religion, country, race, whatever." would make me believe that you think environment is the main contributing factor to a persons behavior and thus people are born good.
Ok, I'll give an example then.
A human is born into a perfect society where there is no crime. The human is raised in a very ehtical fashion and learns not to do anything bad. Is it possible for this person to become a mass murderer? (assuming no medical conditions or mental conditions) If you say yes, then you believe people are born bad, if you say no, then you believe people are born good. Answer it this way.
|
On July 04 2010 06:10 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2010 06:05 hifriend wrote:On July 04 2010 05:55 darmousseh wrote:On July 04 2010 05:52 liaf wrote:
I didn't vote in the last two polls because I don't believe that people are born good or bad. I don't even really believe in good and bad for that matter. Haha, ok, well are humans born inclined to be unethical according to human standards or is their environment the main contributing factor? Answer it that way please. Ehm, I don't think there is a 'human standard.' I mean you could talk about some contemporary local standard and that would have some sort of meaning, but you probably don't share many basic ethics with, say, mayans in the pre-classic period? Neither is our contemporary set of standards in any way set in stone and it would seem quite ridiculous to believe that our societal values are somehow exclusively present in our biology. How would a person 1000 years from now feel about such a statement? I do however believe that humans are born with sympathy, but depending on society as history has shown it might not necessarily be excercised toward people outside their local tribe, religion, country, race, whatever. "I do however believe that humans are born with sympathy, but depending on society as history has shown it might not necessarily be excercised toward people outside their local tribe, religion, country, race, whatever." would make me believe that you think environment is the main contributing factor to a persons behavior and thus people are born good. Ok, I'll give an example then. A human is born into a perfect society where there is no crime. The human is raised in a very ehtical fashion and learns not to do anything bad. Is it possible for this person to become a mass murderer? (assuming no medical conditions or mental conditions) If you say yes, then you believe people are born bad, if you say no, then you believe people are born good. Answer it this way.
Alright I think that's much more of a clear definition, it's something I could answer.
|
I can't really vote in the last couple of polls. I did anyway for the sake of SCIENCE but I don't believe that people are born good or born bad. The values/actions they observe and are taught on their way to adulthood define whether they are good or bad. For that matter, their own thoughts on said values/actions can define whether they're good or bad. idk, too unspecific.
|
I just simply can not pick any from the choices you've given me defined the way you defined them.
|
Define ethics please, for Mayan and Aztec Indian tribes it was perfectly ethical and encouraged to sacrifice people to superficial beings that had no real measure of control in their daily lives. In fact if you did not sacrifice, the sun would refuse to rise.
As for collectivism and Individualism, you are already failing. Only an idiot would deal in such absolutes and make sweeping generalisations across boarders, cultures and nations.
Individualism: The belief that individuals are responsible for their own lives and that no other individual should coerce them into specific type of behaviour.
In today’s culture you are forced to adapt and obey rules so everyone can get along nicely with each others. But critical thinking and the individual, the ability to think freely and the thought of partial freedom is held high.
Collectivism: The belief that society is responsible for the welfare of the whole society and that it is sometimes ok to force the group to a specific behaviour in order to achieve some goal.
To survive and prosper humankind must cooperate, this means sacrificing the individual, in our western culture we have done such TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. So they are absolutes but in no way or form can something be considered as ONLY collectivism or ONLY individualism.
Example, I am hypothetically a racist and think all black people should be shot, as long as i do not act out my opinion i am free to believe so.
Or, I am hypothetically a Muslim and believe the world would be better if ruled by a caliphate as long as I do not join up and assault other people to express my point of view that is a perfectly valid opinion.
You see? Even politics can not truly be measured up against collectivism and individualism. The only real measure you can put on people or their culture / country in general is how feminine or masculine it is.
you wont get 100 votes on these sort of blog posts. <,<
|
Ugh, too much analysis, not enough voting lol. Just use whatever definition of ethics you believe is the best.
|
what is good and bad varies...
|
9070 Posts
I cant understand the logic of your theory. Economy is based on the fact that people are profit maximizers, no matter if they are involved in policy or not. You must define collectivism first as social behavior in the context of the cooperation between the different individuals. For example the "free-for-all" anarchy with pure individualism doesnt really exist in our world, so in truth, all our actions are reflecting our will to cooperate and be part of the society. Even if you want to have more than any anyone else, you cant just kill or steal their goods because such unproductive activities are not allowed by the state.
And what do you mean by bad behavior? Like being unproductive? Most unproductive activities are banned by the state. Sure you can free-ride on public goods or be a rent-seeker but I guess thats not exactly what you have in mind
|
I'm in favour of both collectivism and individualism as defined by you.
|
On July 04 2010 06:30 darmousseh wrote:
Ugh, too much analysis, not enough voting lol. Just use whatever definition of ethics you believe is the best.
Then your analysis is initially flawed and based on a point of view that is presented for the sake of increasing your post count or provoking discussion on a subject that is either outdated, time consuming on a basis that does not warrant further proof or discussion than going to your parents for a sound debate and face either confirmation or rejection.
You good sir is an Troll trying to sound smart, rather than presenting something genuinely interesting you have rehashed a subject from the general thread as a blog post just for the sake of post count. How horrendously wrong of me to think that you actually had something meaning full to argument or present.
<You have avoided defining anything and made 4 obsolete polls, writing only a few words to remain as vague as possible while still increasing your post count. Tits or gtfo.>
|
State's suck.
But the average individual is too stupid to make decisions.
|
Shit, the Internet Pseudo-Intellectual Brigade is on high alert today. It must be the weekend. Heaven forbid this man want to run a lil' experiment.
OP, I suggest you ignore the coming e-discussion and just think of their posts as bumps to get more votes.
|
9070 Posts
On July 04 2010 07:35 Romantic wrote:
Shit, the Internet Pseudo-Intellectual Brigade is on high alert today. It must be the weekend. Heaven forbid this man want to run a lil' experiment.
OP, I suggest you ignore the coming e-discussion and just think of their posts as bumps to get more votes.
As an economy student I felt quite provoked by the OP. I dont know anything about the background of his theory, but I think its absolutely alright to have thoughts about this exact topic, no matter how involved you are with it
|
On July 04 2010 07:35 Romantic wrote:
Shit, the Internet Pseudo-Intellectual Brigade is on high alert today. It must be the weekend. Heaven forbid this man want to run a lil' experiment.
OP, I suggest you ignore the coming e-discussion and just think of their posts as bumps to get more votes.
I never knew flawed dichotomies were above logical scrutiny.
|
So the point of this blog is to make yourself feel smarter when you see the results you already know will appear?
|
I voted Definitely Collectivism, Mostly Good, Collectivism\Good.
|
I didn't vote in any of the polls. Reality is far more complex than these polls give credit.
|
mostly Collectivism and people are born "bad", i would say most ppl fall into collectivism people are not solo anything you do effects other things in the world may not be large but it does effect other things.
people are born "bad" becuase we are all bad we want things we desire our happiness nothing that is not clearly defined and many people do different things to obtain that happiness. Personally i'm the belief that i am the one with the problem when other people annoy me not the other people. So i should come to terms with them being annoying and change or get over it becuase i despise the idea of forcing others to your will.
As we live in an society we must know we are a part of it and effect it's outcome but again to that extent you must acknowledge that you are an individual. As an individual you have the most control over yourself, so in your happiness seeking mind you should take care of yourself first in context to observing your actions will effect the society.
That's my thoughts ionno if it's clear.
|
I answered definitely individualism. The other two are unanswerable in their current form. I believe neither to be true. Though I'm not convinced that the two choices presented in the first one are mutually exclusive either. Furthermore I'm not a fan of the uses of "definitely" or "mostly" rofl
|
On July 04 2010 08:24 Motiva wrote:I answered definitely individualism. The other two are unanswerable in their current form. I believe neither to be true. Though I'm not convinced that the two choices presented in the first one are mutually exclusive either. Furthermore I'm not a fan of the uses of "definitely" or "mostly" rofl
I agree.
I am a very strong individualist and I do not believe we are naturally "good" or "evil" The same person could be considered either depending on your frame of reference. We are born logical and self-serving. With this comes a certain empathy towards others ingrained in us due to our necessary cohabitation and cooperation with others, but our own needs will almost always superceed those of others and this isn't necessarily a bad thing.
|
i skipped the 2nd and 3rd q's
so i will answer them here
i believe that to a certain extent, the individual is inclined to be a certain way by genetics
but his/her life experiences/influences/inspirations and a million other factors can influence whether he or she is "good" or "bad". on that note, i believe nobody is wholly "good" or "bad" - everyone is somewhere in the gray area between. however, i have to note that im referencing a lot of these things from my self experience, and i feel i would land on the good half of the spectrum... so this may not apply well to people currently oriented on the other side of the line.
i believe an individual needs to be left to discover things for himself/herself to truly understand things for themselves, and that being forced by a collective society into certain behaviors keeps them in ignorance about the benefit of the action they have been forced into. such an example would be religion, or laws. Being raised as a catholic, i have a skewed perception of "good" and "bad" according to the church values i grew up with. now i am questioning all of these values in order to see if they really are valid and worth following or not. the same goes for laws - laws are kind of a necessity in society in order to make it possible for many people to live together without constant conflict and dissoncance, but at the same time, laws are not absolute (kind of an obvious statement, but i know some people who blindly follow all laws). the individual must process the validity of these laws according to his/her conscience to see whether they are logical/worth following.
so i believe in individualism, and that individualism leaves the "good" and "bad" disposition pretty open ended upon what life choices the person makes
hope this was helpful to what u were looking for
|
I'm actually pretty surprised at the results so far, I am definitely going to have to reevaluate my thesis. Just need like 20 more votes then I will start discussing what I think the issue here is and why I did this poll.
|
On July 04 2010 06:56 Mothxal wrote:
I'm in favour of both collectivism and individualism as defined by you. This. It probably wouldn't have helped prove/disprove whatever hypothesis you're trying to figure out, but I found it a bit odd that you offered very little middle ground on that question =/
For what it's worth though, I voted collectivism and born "good" (as in, people are influenced more by their environment than any innate desire to do good or bad).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
