Can you explain to me the term “socially constructed “, and why it is so relevant here? Isn’t all of law, and the rules we live by, socially constructed?
To an extent yes they are. Things like speeding, where and who you can have sex with, are really good examples of social constructs. Things like murder are things we intrinsically understand as wrong, even without laws. It’s instinctual.
The fact that it is a social construct is important because society can decide to change it. It’s not actually part of our core programming the way murder is. Look at the number of people saying this is self defense. That’s society discussing how the terrorism label is used because survival is also a core human instinct. This is why it’s really hard to hold your breath until you pass out or purposely attempt to breathe water.
In classical ethics and philosophy this conflict falls under the Harm Principal. At what point does the CEO’s conduct pose an existential danger to those around them? Thus permitting the act of murder as a method of survival.
Throwing the social construct of Terrorism in there confuses that core question because it reminds us that we’ve all been taught that using violence to achieve your goals is wrong, unless society says it’s right. (Like declaring war)
So now we face a bunch of questions. Is this actually terrorism? Or is this a moment of society approving the use of violence?
The idea that murder is some kind of part of our human instinct needs a reference. Institutionalised murder has been a part of human civilisation throughout history. Think war, holocaust, death penalty, cannibalism, gladiator games, witch trials, ritual sacrifice etc etc.
As humans our defining feature is our cultural variety. Almost all rules one could think of have at some point been tried by a civilisation. Core programming only affects the very basics of requiring sustenance and reproduction.
Yeah it certainly has been a part of our civilization and when you look at that you find extremes. You find people in life or death situations, people who have trained to overcome the barrier to killing, people who are desperate, and people who are just trying to survive. Take war for example, first you train to overcome your inhibitions by repeatedly drilling killing blows. The hope is that you do it almost automatically when you end up in combat. Even the rifle range targets are human shaped. Then when you get there you are in a life or death situation. It’s the ultimate prisoner’s dilemma. Imagine the most basic scenario it is just you and a soldier from the other army in a room with pistols drawn at each other. You have both been told it is not only legal, but morally preferred for you to shoot the other even if they attempt to run.
Okay but we can all pretend that’s moral, what about the Holocaust? One the greatest and most horrible things about humans is our ability to delude ourselves. To believe things that are demonstrably not true. This has helped us achieve space flight where there are several key things that go against what you would assume by looking at them. But it also allows us to look at people and see them as animals instead of people. Dangerous animals even. That’s why Germany, and other countries committing similar atrocities use that exact line almost verbatim. Think about how a racist person draws a black person. They always make them look like some kind of animal. That’s on purpose, they are de-humanizing them to make violence against them easier.
Finally we come to the last big way to get over the barrier. We all agreed it was better this way. Humans have the capacity to think themselves past the border if they try hard enough, and lock their emotions down. That is not to say you don’t feel them, you just aren’t letting them control you, freeze you. You’re listening to society say this was the agreed upon output of a rigorous process and for (insert ideological reason here) this must be done. Usually the ideological reason is eye for and eye, honor, or because they believe it will dissuade others from doing the same thing.
Alright this has been a lot of blather, how do we know this is true? Well I can offer two studies before I go to bed. In one study they looked at the actual Physical reaction that occurs when the body believes it’s going to do harm. I didn’t typo, the body has a reaction that is so far down we don’t even know it exists without specifically looking at it. The other study was done among combat vets. Specifically veterans who were involved in death they felt responsible for. It turns out if you keep thinking about it you are very likely to get PTSD. The problem of course is you can’t just turn it off. You can’t wipe it from your memory. It’s a damaging thought that’s always ready to do more damage.
So there is absolutely a barrier there, an inhibition you have to get over if you want to kill someone.
Can you explain to me the term “socially constructed “, and why it is so relevant here? Isn’t all of law, and the rules we live by, socially constructed?
To an extent yes they are. Things like speeding, where and who you can have sex with, are really good examples of social constructs. Things like murder are things we intrinsically understand as wrong, even without laws. It’s instinctual.
The fact that it is a social construct is important because society can decide to change it. It’s not actually part of our core programming the way murder is. Look at the number of people saying this is self defense. That’s society discussing how the terrorism label is used because survival is also a core human instinct. This is why it’s really hard to hold your breath until you pass out or purposely attempt to breathe water.
In classical ethics and philosophy this conflict falls under the Harm Principal. At what point does the CEO’s conduct pose an existential danger to those around them? Thus permitting the act of murder as a method of survival.
Throwing the social construct of Terrorism in there confuses that core question because it reminds us that we’ve all been taught that using violence to achieve your goals is wrong, unless society says it’s right. (Like declaring war)
So now we face a bunch of questions. Is this actually terrorism? Or is this a moment of society approving the use of violence?
The idea that murder is some kind of part of our human instinct needs a reference. Institutionalised murder has been a part of human civilisation throughout history. Think war, holocaust, death penalty, cannibalism, gladiator games, witch trials, ritual sacrifice etc etc.
As humans our defining feature is our cultural variety. Almost all rules one could think of have at some point been tried by a civilisation. Core programming only affects the very basics of requiring sustenance and reproduction.
Yeah it certainly has been a part of our civilization and when you look at that you find extremes. You find people in life or death situations, people who have trained to overcome the barrier to killing, people who are desperate, and people who are just trying to survive. Take war for example, first you train to overcome your inhibitions by repeatedly drilling killing blows. The hope is that you do it almost automatically when you end up in combat. Even the rifle range targets are human shaped. Then when you get there you are in a life or death situation. It’s the ultimate prisoner’s dilemma. Imagine the most basic scenario it is just you and a soldier from the other army in a room with pistols drawn at each other. You have both been told it is not only legal, but morally preferred for you to shoot the other even if they attempt to run.
Okay but we can all pretend that’s moral, what about the Holocaust? One the greatest and most horrible things about humans is our ability to delude ourselves. To believe things that are demonstrably not true. This has helped us achieve space flight where there are several key things that go against what you would assume by looking at them. But it also allows us to look at people and see them as animals instead of people. Dangerous animals even. That’s why Germany, and other countries committing similar atrocities use that exact line almost verbatim. Think about how a racist person draws a black person. They always make them look like some kind of animal. That’s on purpose, they are de-humanizing them to make violence against them easier.
Finally we come to the last big way to get over the barrier. We all agreed it was better this way. Humans have the capacity to think themselves past the border if they try hard enough, and lock their emotions down. That is not to say you don’t feel them, you just aren’t letting them control you, freeze you. You’re listening to society say this was the agreed upon output of a rigorous process and for (insert ideological reason here) this must be done. Usually the ideological reason is eye for and eye, honor, or because they believe it will dissuade others from doing the same thing.
Alright this has been a lot of blather, how do we know this is true? Well I can offer two studies before I go to bed. In one study they looked at the actual Physical reaction that occurs when the body believes it’s going to do harm. I didn’t typo, the body has a reaction that is so far down we don’t even know it exists without specifically looking at it. The other study was done among combat vets. Specifically veterans who were involved in death they felt responsible for. It turns out if you keep thinking about it you are very likely to get PTSD. The problem of course is you can’t just turn it off. You can’t wipe it from your memory. It’s a damaging thought that’s always ready to do more damage.
So there is absolutely a barrier there, an inhibition you have to get over if you want to kill someone.