First  Prev  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next  Last
Can a meaningful romantic relationship exist between an adult and a child?
Posted 10/19/09
There's no way a child can meaningfully understand ANYTHING about the concept of 'love' they're just too indecisive when they are younger.
Posted 10/19/09

ElectroDawG wrote:

There's no way a child can meaningfully understand ANYTHING about the concept of 'love' they're just too indecisive when they are younger.


the funny part is most people still consider you to be a child, i don't but just saying lol
10521 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 10/19/09 , edited 10/19/09

DomFortress wrote:


I can think of two environmental elements that can prove you wrong on both counts:

1)in toady's developed nations, we're getting chemicals in our foods that can cause girls to enter puberty prematurely, and

2) in modern civilized society, we're constantly being morally-challenged by entertainment medias(WARNING: Extremely NSFW).

Animal behaviorism can be altered via environmental elements like climate and habitat changes. But for human behaviors that translate into social and cultural influences among our society. Therefore while we still don't know the genetic cause of pedophilia, we can at least identify the environmental influences. If you can catch my drift.



1 ) This is man's fault, is it going to get fixed ? Probably not. The entire human race(along with many others apparently) has been seeing massive increases in estrogen and massive decreases in testosterone in both genders for a while now, so this is not new. It's to be expected.

2 ) Whats the big deal here ? I personally see nothing wrong with this, if a person doesn't want a girlfriend or boyfriend, so what ? It's their choice, I don't want one myself either. If A persons morals find this to be acceptable, its not big deal either, morals vary from person to person, what is acceptable to one may not be acceptable to another. There is no universal standard on morals.

Human behaviorism = Animal behaviorism | Humans = Animals.

Some non human animals have society's and cultures of their own you know.

If your going to say sexual attraction to children is genetic or environmental, what about sexual attraction to corpses, or trees, or sheep / cows / pigs / horses / other animals( or corpses of sheep, pigs, cows or horses ) ? It's probably not environmental, since people who grew up in an environment with no corpses, sheep, cows, pigs or horses can still be sexually attracted to them

something like personal preference may have something to do with it as well. some people might simply prefer screwing a dead sheep over a live chick, dude or sheep.

And really if they want to, just leave them be, its not like its going to physically hurt you in some way, not going to impale you with a steel pole. So let them have their fun. To them its what screwing a dude / chick is to you, fun and enjoyable, who are we to deprive them of their right to enjoy sex ?
24100 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / Canada
Offline
Posted 10/19/09
Although I am a nay-sayer, allow me to punctuate my point intelligently. I do not believe that a child is mentally mature enough for a romantic relationship, and there is evidence to prove this as it is common knowledge that brain function continues to develop until the mid-twneties.
A child's mind is not capable of comprehending the complex give and take relations of romance. A very basic way of looking at it are are early-teen "relationships." There is no true deep emotional connection between the two parties or even a real compatibility. They tend to be over dramatic and meaningless, as they are simply role-playing. From a developmental standpoint, early-teen "relationships" are like praticing for the roles they will assume in future, meaningful relationships. Another way of looking at it is that if you're not even old enough to comprehend your own sexual orientation, how could you be ready for a romantic relationship?
Posted 10/20/09

CecilTheDarkKnight_234 wrote:


ElectroDawG wrote:

There's no way a child can meaningfully understand ANYTHING about the concept of 'love' they're just too indecisive when they are younger.


the funny part is most people still consider you to be a child, i don't but just saying lol


tru tru~ but i was talking about children who are like 10 years old, which is the whole concept of this forum post. Some people think that way because they just assume, and generalize teenagers as children... just with bigger bodies. But no i honestly myself don't believe i know what love is anyway, and i don't think alot of older people do either.
Posted 10/20/09

Allhailodin wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


I can think of two environmental elements that can prove you wrong on both counts:

1)in toady's developed nations, we're getting chemicals in our foods that can cause girls to enter puberty prematurely, and

2) in modern civilized society, we're constantly being morally-challenged by entertainment medias(WARNING: Extremely NSFW).

Animal behaviorism can be altered via environmental elements like climate and habitat changes. But for human behaviors that translate into social and cultural influences among our society. Therefore while we still don't know the genetic cause of pedophilia, we can at least identify the environmental influences. If you can catch my drift.



1 ) This is man's fault, is it going to get fixed ? Probably not. The entire human race(along with many others apparently) has been seeing massive increases in estrogen and massive decreases in testosterone in both genders for a while now, so this is not new. It's to be expected.

2 ) Whats the big deal here ? I personally see nothing wrong with this, if a person doesn't want a girlfriend or boyfriend, so what ? It's their choice, I don't want one myself either. If A persons morals find this to be acceptable, its not big deal either, morals vary from person to person, what is acceptable to one may not be acceptable to another. There is no universal standard on morals.

Human behaviorism = Animal behaviorism | Humans = Animals.

Some non human animals have society's and cultures of their own you know.

If your going to say sexual attraction to children is genetic or environmental, what about sexual attraction to corpses, or trees, or sheep / cows / pigs / horses / other animals( or corpses of sheep, pigs, cows or horses ) ? It's probably not environmental, since people who grew up in an environment with no corpses, sheep, cows, pigs or horses can still be sexually attracted to them

something like personal preference may have something to do with it as well. some people might simply prefer screwing a dead sheep over a live chick, dude or sheep.

And really if they want to, just leave them be, its not like its going to physically hurt you in some way, not going to impale you with a steel pole. So let them have their fun. To them its what screwing a dude / chick is to you, fun and enjoyable, who are we to deprive them of their right to enjoy sex ?
I'm hearing you making a lot of excuses, when the reality is that you're just a pessimist who doesn't want to change anything of himself, and trying to convince yourself that it's fine being a pessimist while everyone should just leave the world as is by becoming a pessimist just like you.

But the truth is, you just don't what to acknowledge the fact that pedophilia is a mental sickness. Because you're blaming the world for their problem, when our world isn't sick, it just need to change. Starting with us.
Posted 10/20/09

DomFortress wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


I can think of two environmental elements that can prove you wrong on both counts:

1)in toady's developed nations, we're getting chemicals in our foods that can cause girls to enter puberty prematurely, and

2) in modern civilized society, we're constantly being morally-challenged by entertainment medias(WARNING: Extremely NSFW).

Animal behaviorism can be altered via environmental elements like climate and habitat changes. But for human behaviors that translate into social and cultural influences among our society. Therefore while we still don't know the genetic cause of pedophilia, we can at least identify the environmental influences. If you can catch my drift.



1 ) This is man's fault, is it going to get fixed ? Probably not. The entire human race(along with many others apparently) has been seeing massive increases in estrogen and massive decreases in testosterone in both genders for a while now, so this is not new. It's to be expected.

2 ) Whats the big deal here ? I personally see nothing wrong with this, if a person doesn't want a girlfriend or boyfriend, so what ? It's their choice, I don't want one myself either. If A persons morals find this to be acceptable, its not big deal either, morals vary from person to person, what is acceptable to one may not be acceptable to another. There is no universal standard on morals.

Human behaviorism = Animal behaviorism | Humans = Animals.

Some non human animals have society's and cultures of their own you know.

If your going to say sexual attraction to children is genetic or environmental, what about sexual attraction to corpses, or trees, or sheep / cows / pigs / horses / other animals( or corpses of sheep, pigs, cows or horses ) ? It's probably not environmental, since people who grew up in an environment with no corpses, sheep, cows, pigs or horses can still be sexually attracted to them

something like personal preference may have something to do with it as well. some people might simply prefer screwing a dead sheep over a live chick, dude or sheep.

And really if they want to, just leave them be, its not like its going to physically hurt you in some way, not going to impale you with a steel pole. So let them have their fun. To them its what screwing a dude / chick is to you, fun and enjoyable, who are we to deprive them of their right to enjoy sex ?
I'm hearing you making a lot of excuses, when the reality is that you're just a pessimist who doesn't want to change anything of himself, and trying to convince yourself that it's fine being a pessimist while everyone should just leave the world as is by becoming a pessimist just like you.

But the truth is, you just don't what to acknowledge the fact that pedophilia is a mental sickness. Because you're blaming the world for their problem, when our world isn't sick, it just need to change. Starting with us.


well do what the usa is doing now we are starting to execute pedo's and serves them right >.>
4559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Bermuda Triangle
Offline
Posted 10/20/09
I believe the child will have to at least be pubuscent if we consider love to be two people who acknowledge the (agape) love for one another.
10521 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 10/21/09

DomFortress wrote:

I'm hearing you making a lot of excuses, when the reality is that you're just a pessimist who doesn't want to change anything of himself, and trying to convince yourself that it's fine being a pessimist while everyone should just leave the world as is by becoming a pessimist just like you.

But the truth is, you just don't what to acknowledge the fact that pedophilia is a mental sickness. Because you're blaming the world for their problem, when our world isn't sick, it just need to change. Starting with us.


So your saying based on your logic that necrophilia is a mental sickness as well ?

It is just an ordinary( quite a bit rarer though) sexual preference, just like heterosexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality, its not a metal sickness just because its not common, by that logic dwarves and giants are mental sicknesses too. it occurs quite naturally in certain species in nature. Why would it be a mental sickness ? Just because its rare ? Gross( to most people ), Or immoral( again to most but not all people) ? Nature > Personal morals and personal preferences.

Humans don't get to judge nature and say what is and isn't acceptable about nature, we don't have that right, and we never will. Lots of things we think are gross / messed up / immoral is perfectly acceptable in nature, as these things mean nothing to nature, cannibalism both survival and sexual, murder, masturbation, homosexuality / bisexuality, necrophilia, and so on. Its us humans who need to accept these things are acceptable(certain ones in certain situations only though) and not to judge based on them. We are not above nature, in fact its quite the opposite. Nature is above us, has been for the 2 million years humans have been in existence, and it will continue to be.

For such intelligent animals us humans are incredibly closed minded, to most of us open mindedness is a sin, as anyone would would say something like "Hey lets try dog, cat or human meat" is automatically judged and looked down upon without question when in reality dog or cat or human(in some situations) are perfectly acceptable sources of food.

The world doesn't need to change, humans need to change. The world and its ways( survival of the fittest / evolution of species / other naturally occuring && not mankind intervened ) are perfectly fine, when left alone it works flawlessly, has for the last 4 or so billion years( before life appeared this applies to molecules competing against other molecules to become more and more complex molecules on less and less resources )

Survival of the fittest is the law of the universe, has been since before life even appeared on earth, its not going to change for us humans simply because it doesn't benefit all human beings, it doesn't need to change. Survival of the fittest has been working perfectly for billions of years, it's what produced us humans as well.

Why change it, its very effective at what it does. Works really well. If humans aren't meant to be we'll simply go extinct like all the many species before us have that weren't meant to be did. Something superior will come along and replace us if it can appear within the next 500 million years(after that Earth will no longer be able to support multicellular life as we know it, dunno about single celled beings tho, they might have a chance)
Posted 10/21/09

Allhailodin wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

I'm hearing you making a lot of excuses, when the reality is that you're just a pessimist who doesn't want to change anything of himself, and trying to convince yourself that it's fine being a pessimist while everyone should just leave the world as is by becoming a pessimist just like you.

But the truth is, you just don't what to acknowledge the fact that pedophilia is a mental sickness. Because you're blaming the world for their problem, when our world isn't sick, it just need to change. Starting with us.


So your saying based on your logic that necrophilia is a mental sickness as well ?

It is just an ordinary( quite a bit rarer though) sexual preference, just like heterosexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality, its not a metal sickness just because its not common, by that logic dwarves and giants are mental sicknesses too. it occurs quite naturally in certain species in nature. Why would it be a mental sickness ? Just because its rare ? Gross( to most people ), Or immoral( again to most but not all people) ? Nature > Personal morals and personal preferences.

Humans don't get to judge nature and say what is and isn't acceptable about nature, we don't have that right, and we never will. Lots of things we think are gross / messed up / immoral is perfectly acceptable in nature, as these things mean nothing to nature, cannibalism both survival and sexual, murder, masturbation, homosexuality / bisexuality, necrophilia, and so on. Its us humans who need to accept these things are acceptable(certain ones in certain situations only though) and not to judge based on them. We are not above nature, in fact its quite the opposite. Nature is above us, has been for the 2 million years humans have been in existence, and it will continue to be.

For such intelligent animals us humans are incredibly closed minded, to most of us open mindedness is a sin, as anyone would would say something like "Hey lets try dog, cat or human meat" is automatically judged and looked down upon without question when in reality dog or cat or human(in some situations) are perfectly acceptable sources of food.

The world doesn't need to change, humans need to change. The world and its ways( survival of the fittest / evolution of species / other naturally occuring && not mankind intervened ) are perfectly fine, when left alone it works flawlessly, has for the last 4 or so billion years( before life appeared this applies to molecules competing against other molecules to become more and more complex molecules on less and less resources )

Survival of the fittest is the law of the universe, has been since before life even appeared on earth, its not going to change for us humans simply because it doesn't benefit all human beings, it doesn't need to change. Survival of the fittest has been working perfectly for billions of years, it's what produced us humans as well.

Why change it, its very effective at what it does. Works really well. If humans aren't meant to be we'll simply go extinct like all the many species before us have that weren't meant to be did. Something superior will come along and replace us if it can appear within the next 500 million years(after that Earth will no longer be able to support multicellular life as we know it, dunno about single celled beings tho, they might have a chance)


you do know that have sex with a dead corpse is like sticking your hand a jar of mayo and then fisting it repetitively >.>
Posted 10/21/09

Allhailodin wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

I'm hearing you making a lot of excuses, when the reality is that you're just a pessimist who doesn't want to change anything of himself, and trying to convince yourself that it's fine being a pessimist while everyone should just leave the world as is by becoming a pessimist just like you.

But the truth is, you just don't what to acknowledge the fact that pedophilia is a mental sickness. Because you're blaming the world for their problem, when our world isn't sick, it just need to change. Starting with us.


So your saying based on your logic that necrophilia is a mental sickness as well ?

It is just an ordinary( quite a bit rarer though) sexual preference, just like heterosexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality, its not a metal sickness just because its not common, by that logic dwarves and giants are mental sicknesses too. it occurs quite naturally in certain species in nature. Why would it be a mental sickness ? Just because its rare ? Gross( to most people ), Or immoral( again to most but not all people) ? Nature > Personal morals and personal preferences.

Humans don't get to judge nature and say what is and isn't acceptable about nature, we don't have that right, and we never will. Lots of things we think are gross / messed up / immoral is perfectly acceptable in nature, as these things mean nothing to nature, cannibalism both survival and sexual, murder, masturbation, homosexuality / bisexuality, necrophilia, and so on. Its us humans who need to accept these things are acceptable(certain ones in certain situations only though) and not to judge based on them. We are not above nature, in fact its quite the opposite. Nature is above us, has been for the 2 million years humans have been in existence, and it will continue to be.

For such intelligent animals us humans are incredibly closed minded, to most of us open mindedness is a sin, as anyone would would say something like "Hey lets try dog, cat or human meat" is automatically judged and looked down upon without question when in reality dog or cat or human(in some situations) are perfectly acceptable sources of food.

The world doesn't need to change, humans need to change. The world and its ways( survival of the fittest / evolution of species / other naturally occuring && not mankind intervened ) are perfectly fine, when left alone it works flawlessly, has for the last 4 or so billion years( before life appeared this applies to molecules competing against other molecules to become more and more complex molecules on less and less resources )

Survival of the fittest is the law of the universe, has been since before life even appeared on earth, its not going to change for us humans simply because it doesn't benefit all human beings, it doesn't need to change. Survival of the fittest has been working perfectly for billions of years, it's what produced us humans as well.

Why change it, its very effective at what it does. Works really well. If humans aren't meant to be we'll simply go extinct like all the many species before us have that weren't meant to be did. Something superior will come along and replace us if it can appear within the next 500 million years(after that Earth will no longer be able to support multicellular life as we know it, dunno about single celled beings tho, they might have a chance)

Excuses, excuses, bla, bla, bla. As a pessimist, don't you ever get tired of your own excuses?

The subject is pedophilia, so why are you dragging out necrophilia all of sudden? Start your own topic if you're just gonna avoid the subject.

And while you're at it, you can try and make your own explanation on how pedophilia is a natural course of human evolution. Instead of you making a lot of random excuses. How is pedophilia is an extension of "survival of the fittest"?

If you want to condemn yourself, do so with your life and be done with it. Enough with your whines and complains, unless you're just a coward who's afraid do to anything. When you can't even commit your life into something that yo believe in.
Posted 10/21/09

DomFortress wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

I'm hearing you making a lot of excuses, when the reality is that you're just a pessimist who doesn't want to change anything of himself, and trying to convince yourself that it's fine being a pessimist while everyone should just leave the world as is by becoming a pessimist just like you.

But the truth is, you just don't what to acknowledge the fact that pedophilia is a mental sickness. Because you're blaming the world for their problem, when our world isn't sick, it just need to change. Starting with us.


So your saying based on your logic that necrophilia is a mental sickness as well ?

It is just an ordinary( quite a bit rarer though) sexual preference, just like heterosexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality, its not a metal sickness just because its not common, by that logic dwarves and giants are mental sicknesses too. it occurs quite naturally in certain species in nature. Why would it be a mental sickness ? Just because its rare ? Gross( to most people ), Or immoral( again to most but not all people) ? Nature > Personal morals and personal preferences.

Humans don't get to judge nature and say what is and isn't acceptable about nature, we don't have that right, and we never will. Lots of things we think are gross / messed up / immoral is perfectly acceptable in nature, as these things mean nothing to nature, cannibalism both survival and sexual, murder, masturbation, homosexuality / bisexuality, necrophilia, and so on. Its us humans who need to accept these things are acceptable(certain ones in certain situations only though) and not to judge based on them. We are not above nature, in fact its quite the opposite. Nature is above us, has been for the 2 million years humans have been in existence, and it will continue to be.

For such intelligent animals us humans are incredibly closed minded, to most of us open mindedness is a sin, as anyone would would say something like "Hey lets try dog, cat or human meat" is automatically judged and looked down upon without question when in reality dog or cat or human(in some situations) are perfectly acceptable sources of food.

The world doesn't need to change, humans need to change. The world and its ways( survival of the fittest / evolution of species / other naturally occuring && not mankind intervened ) are perfectly fine, when left alone it works flawlessly, has for the last 4 or so billion years( before life appeared this applies to molecules competing against other molecules to become more and more complex molecules on less and less resources )

Survival of the fittest is the law of the universe, has been since before life even appeared on earth, its not going to change for us humans simply because it doesn't benefit all human beings, it doesn't need to change. Survival of the fittest has been working perfectly for billions of years, it's what produced us humans as well.

Why change it, its very effective at what it does. Works really well. If humans aren't meant to be we'll simply go extinct like all the many species before us have that weren't meant to be did. Something superior will come along and replace us if it can appear within the next 500 million years(after that Earth will no longer be able to support multicellular life as we know it, dunno about single celled beings tho, they might have a chance)

Excuses, excuses, bla, bla, bla. As a pessimist, don't you ever get tired of your own excuses?

The subject is pedophilia, so why are you dragging out necrophilia all of sudden? Start your own topic if you're just gonna avoid the subject.

And while you're at it, you can try and make your own explanation on how pedophilia is a natural course of human evolution. Instead of you making a lot of random excuses. How is pedophilia is an extension of "survival of the fittest"?

If you want to condemn yourself, do so with your life and be done with it. Enough with your whines and complains, unless you're just a coward who's afraid do to anything. When you can't even commit your life into something that yo believe in.


i am a bit o pessimist myself but yeah that's a little much for my taste but when it comes to pedos they need to be lined up and shot in the damn head <.<
10521 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 10/21/09 , edited 10/21/09

DomFortress wrote:

And while you're at it, you can try and make your own explanation on how pedophilia is a natural course of human evolution. Instead of you making a lot of random excuses. How is pedophilia is an extension of "survival of the fittest"?


Its just a sexual preference, just like hetro, bi, homo,, there are people who are sexually attracted to trees, bushes, leaves, cars, anything you can think of, somebody somewhere probably is or was in some way sexually attracted to it. It's just their personal preference.

There are people with phobias of trees, gravity, men, women, standing up, certain colors, and none of these are beneficial to the host, its a neutral trait, just like pedophillia, necrophillia, attraction to sheep, cows, whatever, they are neither harmful nor beneficial to the host, neutral traits can survive for long periods of time. Since they aren't harmful and thus generally don't cause their host to die, they can get passed on to kids and grandkids, and great grandkids, ect. and they can remain dormant through ten generations before poping up in one only to go dormant again for another 6 or 7 generations.


If you want to condemn yourself, do so with your life and be done with it. Enough with your whines and complains, unless you're just a coward who's afraid do to anything. When you can't even commit your life into something that yo believe in.


I take action based off of 2 simple questions. "Motivation and Reward ?" ( Reward not always equal to motivation ) And "Risk vs Reward

Motivation and Reward "How and why does this benefit me ?" If there is no motivation and no reward, then why bother ?, I don't gain anything from it.

However if there is motivation and reward, then the second question is asked " Is the reward/s worth the associated risk/s and if so, how much greater then the risk", for example, is killing whoever worth the ten thousand bucks I would get paid for it ?, is moving this heavy furniture and risking dropping it and getting sued worth the 60 bucks I would otherwise get in return, so on

If not, as in the cases of the 2 examples, then I won't do it, simple, if the Reward > Risk, then it depends upon how much greater, if only a little bit then no, if a lot then yes, if enough I'm generally willing to wager my life for it. I like all or nothing gambles.

I'd pretty much do just about anything if the motivation and reward was great enough. Although there are still some things I simply won't do no matter how great the reward is :

Killing a person in a developed nation with good forensic abilities.
Blowing something up again in a developed nation with good forensics. ( Both of these should be obvious, as the chances of getting caught are way too high, its basically a guaranteed lose, I refuse to go into something knowing I'm going to get screwed over either way, only stupid fucks would commit a murder in a developed nation with good forensics, anyone stupid enough to do that, should be exiled to the forests of south america, although we don't that. Solves prision overcrowding issues perfectly though )
Treason
Killing family or someone I would consider a friend.
Other things of the sort.

So I am more than willing to do something / take action, it just generally has to benefit me and be worthwhile to me while being reasonably greater than the risks that come with it.
10521 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 10/21/09 , edited 10/21/09

CecilTheDarkKnight_234 wrote:

you do know that have sex with a dead corpse is like sticking your hand a jar of mayo and then fisting it repetitively >.>


Hrmm, guess it would depend upon how "fresh" the corpse is wouldn't it ?

If it was really fresh than it wouldn't be any different from doing someone who's alive and asleep or knocked out.( except they obviously wouldn't be breathing nor making any sounds )

And on the other hand if it was too old, it would practically fall apart while your doing it.
Posted 10/22/09 , edited 10/22/09

Allhailodin wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

And while you're at it, you can try and make your own explanation on how pedophilia is a natural course of human evolution. Instead of you making a lot of random excuses. How is pedophilia is an extension of "survival of the fittest"?


Its just a sexual preference, just like hetro, bi, homo,, there are people who are sexually attracted to trees, bushes, leaves, cars, anything you can think of, somebody somewhere probably is or was in some way sexually attracted to it. It's just their personal preference.

There are people with phobias of trees, gravity, men, women, standing up, certain colors, and none of these are beneficial to the host, its a neutral trait, just like pedophillia, necrophillia, attraction to sheep, cows, whatever, they are neither harmful nor beneficial to the host, neutral traits can survive for long periods of time.
Since they aren't harmful and thus generally don't cause their host to die, they can get passed on to kids and grandkids, and great grandkids, ect. and they can remain dormant through ten generations before poping up in one only to go dormant again for another 6 or 7 generations.


If you want to condemn yourself, do so with your life and be done with it. Enough with your whines and complains, unless you're just a coward who's afraid do to anything. When you can't even commit your life into something that yo believe in.


I take action based off of 2 simple questions. "Motivation and Reward ?" ( Reward not always equal to motivation ) And "Risk vs Reward

Motivation and Reward "How and why does this benefit me ?" If there is no motivation and no reward, then why bother ?, I don't gain anything from it.


However if there is motivation and reward, then the second question is asked " Is the reward/s worth the associated risk/s and if so, how much greater then the risk", for example, is killing whoever worth the ten thousand bucks I would get paid for it ?, is moving this heavy furniture and risking dropping it and getting sued worth the 60 bucks I would otherwise get in return, so on

If not, as in the cases of the 2 examples, then I won't do it, simple, if the Reward > Risk, then it depends upon how much greater, if only a little bit then no, if a lot then yes, if enough I'm generally willing to wager my life for it. I like all or nothing gambles.

I'd pretty much do just about anything if the motivation and reward was great enough. Although there are still some things I simply won't do no matter how great the reward is :

Killing a person in a developed nation with good forensic abilities.
Blowing something up again in a developed nation with good forensics. ( Both of these should be obvious, as the chances of getting caught are way too high, its basically a guaranteed lose, I refuse to go into something knowing I'm going to get screwed over either way, only stupid fucks would commit a murder in a developed nation with good forensics, anyone stupid enough to do that, should be exiled to the forests of south america, although we don't that. Solves prision overcrowding issues perfectly though )
Treason
Killing family or someone I would consider a friend.
Other things of the sort.

So I am more than willing to do something / take action, it just generally has to benefit me and be worthwhile to me while being reasonably greater than the risks that come with it.

No, there are those who live their lives in the pursuit of happiness. Just like those people who aren't afraid to have a life worth living for. For them, their pursuit of happiness is their rights, freedom, and justice to have the courage at doing what they want to do that will make them happy. And that's something that those who living with fear will never understand, as long as they are afraid to live.

But that's not you, for as long as you outweigh your fear with reward, you'll end up doing something that you didn't even have the motivation to do so because it's not in your nature to do those things.

Which is why you're here again, when you'll risk yourself at the reward of not discussing the subject of pedophilia with me, by you making up more excuses for yourself. Or does this means that you're happy when you get to make excuses for yourself for not doing anything?
First  Prev  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.