I'm just commenting that 'human v animal' is an odd way of putting things, when humans are animals. — mcdoodle

Okay Sherlock, if it bothers you so much, I am happy to change to "human animal v all other animals," happy now? :roll:

↪mcdoodle :up: — 180 Proof

:rofl:

Got ya. I have nothing. Good luck. — Tom Storm

:smile: Fair enough Tom!

Yes, really. — BC

Not really. But I will try to explain better, why I repeated my 'not really.'
You typed:

The stronger power in asymmetrical war is compelled to use brutal force because it has little alternative. Israel can neither lose nor leave Palestine, — BC

This it seems to me, confirms that horror and terror tactics are used by both sides in war, regardless of which one is considered to be the more powerful. One soldier deciding to butcher innocents from the other side because they have been sanctioned to do so by those who are directing the conflict is what I am trying to discuss. It's not the psychopathy of those who commit such acts that I am trying to discuss, nor is it which side employs such tactics more than the other side.
I am trying to discuss how we might reduce or stop such atrocities from happening in the first place, or how we all might respond differently when such horror and terror has been visited on us, those we love or those innocents that we all know, did not deserve such a fate.

Perhaps a better question to ask you is why do you think some in positions of authority/power choose to use/fully sanction, butchery and torture, horror and terror, against their enemy?

Taking the Hamas example. Hamas want to inflame Israel, into responding to the horror and terror inflicted on their innocent civilians, with their own horror and terror and slaughter of innocent Palestinians in the many thousands. Hamas want Israel to do this, as they hope this will inflame all the Arabic/Islamic peoples that surround Israel, to join the fight against Israel, and this will open many new fronts in this war, so that there is much more chance of the destruction of the Israeli nation.
So, do you think that we can develop responses, that will prevent a group like Hamas, from EVER achieving such a goal, by using the kind of horror and terror tactics they have employed here?
That is the direction I am trying to take this discussion, rather than talking about why some group or side may turn to horror and terror tactics, due to being the weaker or stronger force in a conflict.

How important do you think it is for all of us to understand what's really going on, better than we do at present? — universeness

The problem is when we don't have a philosophy of life worked out.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

And most people seem to stick to the level of discussing people, or at most, events.

All the facts of a situation aren't likely to be known; this is simply the nature of events and people. I don't think there is a media conspiracy, or even a political one.

In order to get peace of mind, we'd need to address things on the level of ideas, which are largely independent of the facts of a situation. (That's why we have philosophy.)

You are right. "The horror of life itself" was badly expressed. I meant "The horror in life", horror as part of life. — Alkis Piskas

Ok.

Even then, can we render psychopaths and insane people, who cannot tell right from wrong, who can act as animals, responsible for their actions? — Alkis Piskas

Only partially imo, I think the main responsibility lies with those in authority, who CHOOSE to nurture and augment such pathology, and then wind them up to max hate status, direct them to a target, (often innocents that they can easily overcome,) and then film and record the horror that ensues, to use later, at part of their vile plan to achieve their goal. That is exactly what Hamas has done imo.

And wars, haven't they existed since the dawn of Man? Doesn't all that make them part of our nature?
So, whatever is the cause of horror, it is part of life. — Alkis Piskas

Yes, such has been part of our base primeval nature, and the horror and terror of that has been demonstrated in very bloody ways, since we came out of the wilds, but do you not think we have learned to alter our behaviours from those that were ruled mainly by pure instinctive and often bestial responses. In what way can we claim that we are now civilised, unless we can point to examples, currently or historically, when we have not been, what we would now call 'civilised'? Are we always doomed to respond to the nefarious use of horror and terror tactics, by resorting to the same or similar horror and terror tactics, in our pursuit of vengeance? Can we do no better than that?

What was it do you think that made Viking and Mongol warriors okay with being "horror-ible"? — schopenhauer1

It seems they weren't just "okay with being horror-ible", but that at the time, being that way was considered being manly, or even just a proper human.
And much later, too.







The problem with this topic is that it is mostly tabooed in modern society, and only a superficial discourse is allowable. Trying to discuss it anyway is a high tightrope balancing act.

Are we always doomed to respond to the nefarious use of horror and terror tactics, by resorting to the same or similar horror and terror tactics, in our pursuit of vengeance? Can we do no better than that? — universeness

Where then would be the drama of life ...

In order to get peace of mind, we'd need to address things on the level of ideas, which are largely independent of the facts of a situation. (That's why we have philosophy.) — baker

In my opinion and in my experience, a good thinker (rather than such, imo, a silly standard, as a 'great' mind,) considers life at the level of ideas, events, and people, as all such 'levels,' are relevant in the search for truth. Are we able to address things at the 'level' of human notions of horror and terror? and analyse the ways in which we see such nasty tools, manipulated by nefarious powers. We have memorialised such behaviour, being demonstrated currently and in history, sooooooo many times.
In my opinion, we have extensive examples of how such nasty tools are employed in manipulative ways. I question why it is still so easy to fool and manipulate so many of us, so often, despite all the previous examplars we have. Can we not establish a better way to combat these abuses and deliberate attempts to manipulate human fear?

Where then would be the drama of life ... — baker

Do you find the butchering and slaughtering of innocent civilians acceptable based on your need for drama in your life? I would certainly hope not!

One can learn and unlearn horror.
/.../
Terror, on the other hand, is too overwhelming a condition to be unlearned. One can become desensitized to terror, but this is not a desirable goal.

Terror and horror can be similarly bad experiences, except that horror does not normally involve actual physical threat. Terror IS threat, both physical and psychological. — BC

How do you comment on the use of horror and terror in this psalm?

Listen to my prayer, O God,
do not ignore my plea;
hear me and answer me.
My thoughts trouble me and I am distraught
because of what my enemy is saying,
because of the threats of the wicked;
for they bring down suffering on me
and assail me in their anger.

My heart is in anguish within me;
the terrors of death have fallen on me.
Fear and trembling have beset me;
horror has overwhelmed me.
I said, “Oh, that I had the wings of a dove!
I would fly away and be at rest.
I would flee far away
and stay in the desert;
I would hurry to my place of shelter,
far from the tempest and storm.”


https://biblehub.com/niv/psalms/55.htm

I have heard people describe what they would do to punish those they hate most. It normally lies somewhere on a rage from slow vivisection to tortured every moment of every day, ETERNALLY, in hell-style imagineered manifestations. Has such intent, ever been sated? Those who have tried, always end up destroyed themselves, after they have achieved their vengeance, or during the pursuit of such. They never achieve 'closure,' do they? — universeness

As for statement of intent:

Let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them.
As for me, I will call upon God; and the LORD shall save me.
Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.
He hath delivered my soul in peace from the battle that was against me: for there were many with me.
God shall hear, and afflict them, even he that abideth of old.

https://biblehub.com/kjv/psalms/55.htm

And then there are other ones about wanting to wade knee-deep in an enemy's blood and such.

Can we not establish a better way to combat these abuses and deliberate attempts to manipulate human fear? — universeness

As long as natural resources are limited and hard to obtain, probably not.

It's not like people are living in a land of plenty and fight over nothing other than honor.

You lose the moral high ground, every time, if you kill the innocent along with the guilty, imo. — universeness

It's doubtful any involved party believes there is such a thing as "innocent civilians". Warfare is essentially tribal: any member of a tribe will do.

It's doubtful any involved party believes there is such a thing as "innocent civilians". Warfare is essentially tribal: any member of a tribe will do. — baker

I don't think this is true at all. I think most civilians on both sides of such conflicts, consider the unacceptably labeled 'collateral damage,' as unacceptable. All dead civilians have the same status, regardless of where they die or how they were killed. They did not make war on anyone, but war killed them unjustly.

Perhaps a better question to ask you is why do you think some in positions of authority/power choose to use/fully sanction, butchery and torture, horror and terror, against their enemy? — universeness

This is where the taboo sets in. But you can read the Bible, the Old Testament in particular, to get some ideas.

So, do you think that we can develop responses, that will prevent a group like Hamas, from EVER achieving such a goal, by using the kind of horror and terror tactics they have employed here?

That would require that some religio-ethnic group gives up its claim to a divinely special status. Which is not likely going to happen.

It's telling how the theme of religious exceptionalism is barely ever brought up in discussions of war. Even though it is this exceptionalism that so often drives the conflict, provoking it in the first place.

Horror and terror, imo take on a much deeper and far far more nuanced sense of morality and injustice, when it is contemplated or applied to other members of the same species. — universeness

The relevant unit here is tribe, or at most, nation, not species.

You keep jumping to these extremities of possibility, in an almost knee-jerk manner imo.

It's not rocket science.

In this under 2 min clip from Babylon 5, the character Marcus, talks a little about his Minbari training.
What do you think of his brief mention of 'terror'?

Fear is a tool. Parents and teachers have used it for a long time.

How can we better defend a population against the nefarious use of horror and terror?

People are more reslient than official psychology and the media give them credit for.

I think the answer lies in learning how to be much better at surgical removal, as opposed to being very good at using a blood axe or a large bludgeoning war hammer, on anyone who has the same or similar religious/race/societal etc, profile, to your perceived 'enemy.' Is this not happening in Gaza right now?

But for that, people would need to give up their religious or national identities. Which isn't likely going to happen.

As a classroom teacher, of over 30 years, I had many such positive 'mutual trust' experiences with individual pupils.

Really? They didn't mostly just suck up to you in order to get good grades, recommendations, etc.?

Could she have had better results and outcomes, if she had taken wiser actions?
— universeness
And what would such "wiser actions" be? Submitting to the Romans?
— baker

There was no notion of nationhood in the Island of Britain, during the days of Boudica. She is described as leading the Iceni. I doubt that is what they even called themselves. Iceni is a Latin/Roman name.
Many other local tribes joined her resistance against the Roman invaders, yes, probably to protect their own areas, resources and people, but, the fact that their tactics were ultimately totally defeated by Rome, for me, demonstrates not that they were wrong to resist Rome but that their method of doing so, proved wrong headed.

Wrong how exactly?
And you didn't answer my question.

I speculate here, but it seems the natives decided they were in a position of "live on your knees, or die fighting" and they decided that fighting to the death was better than living subjugated to the Romans.

That's the main point I am making, and the main question I was asking, is, did Boudica make too many mistakes, because her leadership was blindsided by her need for personal vengeance against Rome? Is there not an important lesson for us all to understand about such stories, even though they are mostly mythical and based on the unreliable reports, produced mainly by historians, who came from the side of the victors?

What lesson might that be? That's it's better to preserve the life of your body than your identity?

[Re: Are psychopaths and insane not being responsible for their actions?]Only partially imo, I think the main responsibility lies with those in authority, who CHOOSE to nurture and augment such pathology, ... — universeness

Of course, these are responsible. Whoever incites people to violent actions is the main responsible for the results of these actions.
Hamas, Isis, Jihad, etc. are all terrorist organizations that spread horror in the world.

do you not think we have learned to alter our behaviours from those that were ruled mainly by pure instinctive and often bestial responses. — universeness

Yes and no. Yes, our behavior is not so animalistic as in the Stone Age. And no, our behavior is governed lagely by our subconcious mind and our conditioning (in both a Pavlovian, physiological way and in a mental way, as repeated patterns of thinking, biases, beliefs, etc.) Religious fanatism, for instance, is one of the extreme cases. Wars are still crated based simply on relifgious beliefs.
So, we have just changed the our animalistic behavior to an irrational one. The consequences remain more or less the same. (Let's hope that they don't get worse!)

It's telling how the theme of religious exceptionalism is barely ever brought up in discussions of war. Even though it is this exceptionalism that so often drives the conflict, provoking it in the first place. — baker

I am an atheist. Everything in the bible came from humans, no god involved, so no gods to scapegoat. Theism, or to be more accurate, religious dogma, has been used very often indeed, to justify the use of bestial levels of horror against the proverbial 'them' by the proverbial 'us.' But that is just as I said, an attempt to scapegoat that which I am 99.999% convinced has no example existent.

I am an atheist. — universeness

Irrelevant to the wars at hand.

Wrong how exactly?
And you didn't answer my question. — baker

:grin: Do you want me to start explaining to you how I, born in 1964, would have led the Celts, born BCE, against the Romans during the time of Boudica? I would certainly not have championed her strategy, would you? She lost! Badly! If you want to start a thread titled 'Boudica ..... could you have done any better?' Then I will certainly offer you 'what I would have done in her place,' perhaps you could play the Romans and indicate what you would have done to counter me! Although it seems like we would be better playing against each other in an on-line game of Civ V or VI. Boudica responded incorrectly, to the brutality, horror and terror used by Rome imo. The Celts should have engaged in far more stealth tactics against the Roman military (but of-course, not civilians), imo.

It's doubtful any involved party believes there is such a thing as "innocent civilians". Warfare is essentially tribal: any member of a tribe will do.
— baker

I don't think this is true at all. — universeness

It's not like the civilians get to decide. The people who order the pulling of triggers do.

Irrelevant to the wars at hand. — baker

Yeah but my position as an atheist, is relevant to your mentions of some Christians who behave like monsters (same with muslims who behave like monsters), who try to scapegoat non-existent gods, to try to justify their heinous crimes. Such justifications can only fool their like and not atheists like me, or any rational thinkers, whether they are theists or atheists or any shade in-between. Getting religious fanatics, to stop using god as an excuse for their bestial behavior, is as you suggest, not going to happen, as it's too convenient and useful a scapegoat, but no-one, other than their followers, fellow fanatics, and ringmasters (and probably the ringmasters could not care less) accepts such attempted justifications anyway. Al·lahu Akbar is just some shit to shout, but 'god is most great,' is not a valid phrase to shout when you do pure evil deeds, unless you intended it, as the utter mocking of your god, that it becomes, when you are deranged enough, to take part in the slaughter of innocent civilians.

It's not like the civilians get to decide. The people who order the pulling of triggers do. — baker

And along with the actual perpetrators, those are the only ones that deserve to die, which I think you would agree with.

Of course, these are responsible. Whoever incites people to violent actions is the main responsible for the results of these actions.
Hamas, Isis, Jihad, etc. are all terrorist organizations that spread horror in the world. — Alkis Piskas

Yeah but don't forget to also accuse such as the FBI, CIA, MI5, MI6, the old KGB and many others, including groups like the KKK, the proud boys, neo-nazi groups and nefarious rich elites.
All gangsters everywhere! Yet still, I believe we can defeat all that shit, if we all learn to value cooperation and common cause for a better way to live, more than any other goal our species has.

Yes and no. Yes, our behavior is not so animalistic as in the Stone Age. And no, our behavior is governed lagely by our subconcious mind and our conditioning (in both a Pavlovian, physiological way and in a mental way, as repeated patterns of thinking, biases, beliefs, etc.) Religious fanatism, for instance, is one of the extreme cases. Wars are still crated based simply on relifgious beliefs.
So, we have just changed the our animalistic behavior to an irrational one. The consequences remain more or less the same. (Let's hope that they don't get worse!) — Alkis Piskas

Do you believe hope is all we have? Can hard work, focused intent, a united common cause to live better, revulsion against the status quo, discussion, debate, protest, organising, politicising, pressurising, etc, make a difference? BUT never, ever, ever mimicking or responding to the use of horror and terror tactics with like for like, or anything akin to such? Is that not what nations and peoples, have to LEARN to do, no matter what depraved horrors are spewed against them? You do not defeat horror and terror by responding with more horror and terror imo.

It would be pretty nervy of me to review any of the psalms (#55 here). Apparently an old King David was lamenting political adversity.

Much closer to horror and terror is this Psalm verse: “Happy is the one who seizes your infants / and dashes them against the rocks.” Psalm 137:9. Whose children? The children of Israel's enemies, the Edomites and Babylonians. Who does the bashing? Presumably that would be ANCIENT Israel.

What's the point? The point is to make sure there are no future generations of one's enemies.

I absolutely am not drawing a parallel between ancient Israel and the modern world, but The Final Solution was also intended to root out future generations of the hated Jew.

Yeah but don't forget to also accuse such as the FBI, CIA, MI5, MI6, the old KGB and many others, including groups like the KKK, the proud boys, neo-nazi groups and nefarious rich elites. — universeness

Of course. There so many of them ... Criminality, and the insanity that accompanies it, can take all forms and faces. And in mind come only the notorious and most discussed cases. There are other, more "silent" cases, that have been glorified in history, and yet they were insane and responsible for a lot of killings. All conquerors in history fall into this category: Gengis Kahn, Alexander the Great, Ceasar, Attila, ... We take the side of the conqueror and winner and we ignore and forget about the opposite side, the victims on the bodies of whom these conquerors have stepped on, the violence used, rapes by the men under their command, and so on, and on a mass scale.

Do you believe hope is all we have? Can hard work, focused intent, a united common cause to live better ... — universeness

I'm not a pessimist by nature, but I can't hide what my reason says and the bad news that sometimes follow it. To your question about hope, I will bring in history, whuch has not shown such a tendency in the long run. There are of course periods of peace and prosperity after big wars, as there is calm and freshness after a storm. But in the long run we see resurges of mass violence in the form of war, as the relatively recent Ukraine war about year and half ago, an escalation od the Russo-Ukrainian War that started in 2014. And we have of course, even more recently, the Israeli–Palestinian confict, with about 7,000 dead Palestinians and 1,500 Israelis unti now, and counting.
So, no, I can't see any signs that would make us change so radically as to reverse the course of history.
It has been said, and justifiably so, that if a common enemy to and threat for the whole humanity appeared suddenly, then people would forget about the conflicts between each other unite in order tio fight the enemy or just be protected from it. Covid-19 is a good example of that. It made people more cooperative, amicable and helpful between each other and there has been "a reduction in many types of crime around the world" as Wikipedia says.

***

Something else now. As the discussion has been progressing, and after both of us having used the word "horific" a few times, I realized that indeed horror is felt while something is happening and after it has happened, whereas terror is felt in anticipation, as you said, of something that is about to happen or may happen. So, we can say that they differ sequentially or time-wise, in the sense of "before" (terror) and "during" or "after" (horror).
(But still they cannot be considered "opposite".)

All conquerors in history fall into this category: Gengis Kahn, Alexander the Great, Ceasar, Attila, ... We take the side of the conqueror and winner and we ignore and forget about the opposite side, the victims on the bodies of whom these conquerors have stepped on, the violence used, rapes by the men under their command, and so on, and on a mass scale. — Alkis Piskas

:clap: :clap: Well typed Alkis! It would be such a big step forward in the human psyche imo, if we stopped presenting these historical butchers as anything other than that. Our children should not be taught that these are people we revere, in any way at all. That is an example of how we could change the future of our species for the better, imo. These butchers are of their time and era, but that's no excuse imo, they represent the worst side of humanity and we need to resist and defeat that primeval burden and only ever use it in defense and not respond to like for like punitive action. Rape for rape, slaughter and butchery in response to slaughter and butchery. No, no, no, no, no! No fucking more! Gandhi said it so correctly:


I am sooooo glad that I am not alone in my hope that all these past so-called 'leaders,' from Alexander the butcher, to Caesar the butcher, to Hitler/Stalin/ Napolean the butcher to Putin the butcher and Hamas the butchers, they all need to be utterly vilified and never admired. The day that a majority of human beings grasp that, will be a very good day for the progression of our species imo.

So, no, I can't see any signs that would make us change so radically as to reverse the course of history. — Alkis Piskas

Yet you offered a great start for us all, imo. A full reassessment of what we value most from the history and events of our species. Such a move in the education of all future generations everywhere, would cause such change in the human psyche for the better, imo. If we could also combine that with a major campaign, to educate on the utter folly and pernicious affects of presenting any theology or theosophism as 'the actual word and commands of existent supernaturals,' then I think that would be another massive progressive step for our species. No more dictates or presentations of authority from Popes or Kings or Imams or Pastors etc from anywhere!

Too many on TPF keep asserting 'what can we do about it? We just can't change this shit! It all runs too deep and it is too embedded in who we are.' That's just total BS to me. We can change, we are a very adaptable species. It does not matter how deep the rot goes, we have a great deal of healthy flesh as well! We can slowly and surgically remove the rot. It may take a long long time for our flesh to heal but it will heal.

Something else now. As the discussion has been progressing, and after both of us having used the word "horific" a few times, I realized that indeed horror is felt while something is happening and after it has happened, whereas terror is felt in anticipation, as you said, of something that is about to happen or may happen. So, we can say that they differ sequentially or time-wise, in the sense of "before" (terror) and "during" or "after" (horror).
(But still they cannot be considered "opposite".) — Alkis Piskas

Yeah I agree, they are more like variations on the theme of human fear, rather than opposites.

It would be such a big step forward in the human psyche imo, if we stopped presenting these historical butchers as anything other than that. — universeness

It would be indeed. And I find it, like you, totally unacceptable. Only that all this has been written with permanent ink both in the records of history and the minds of people. And of course, they are in all (?) the curriculi in schools. But what can be done at least is for the History teachers to also talk about the "other side" of the stories. I know that this is done in colleges, but it's too late. (I was lucky to have such a teacher in college. It was the first time I liked History!)

The day that a majority of human beings grasp that, will be a very good day for the progression of our species imo. — universeness

It will certainly be. Personally, it took me years to realize that Alexander was actually and insane, I mean pathologically. And consider that I used to think critically since my youth. The only thing was that Historey wa never my cup of coffee; it was never in my menu of the day.

Yet you offered a great start for us all, imo. — universeness

Thanks for your kind words. I wish I really did, though! :smile:

A full reassessment of what we value most from the history and events of our species. Such a move in the education of all future generations everywhere, would cause such change in the human psyche for the better, imo. — universeness

That would be great, indeed.

We can change, we are a very adaptable species. It does not matter how deep the rot goes, we have a great deal of healthy flesh as well! We can slowly and surgically remove the rot. It may take a long long time for our flesh to heal but it will heal. — universeness

I really admire you for your passion and your ideals, universeness. I have seen this vein of yours in other exchanges too.)

[Re "terror" and "horror"] they are more like variations on the theme of human fear, rather than opposites. — universeness

:up:

@universeness

You seem to think that Israel is doing what it is doing (the overkill) as a less-than-wise reaction to the terror/horror they feel because of Hamas?

Is this your stance?

Such justifications can only fool their like and not atheists like me — universeness

Oh, you did get fooled.