Posted: 5/31/2007 9:11:17 AM EDT
|
A group of about 100 children/prepubescent teens are placed in a secluded environment with no education other than language and extensive survival skills, no knowledge of religion and no real grasp of right and wrong. Would they become bloodthirsty savages and fight themselves into extinction, or would they form a working society with only a few scattered incidents of brutality? Just watched Lord of the Flies again and wanted to get an ARFcom opinion on the subject. |
Become bloodthirsty savages???? They already are bloodthirsty savages. Socialization through education, religious training, and family values is what seperates us from bloodthirsty savages. |
Before I even saw you had just watched Lord of the Flies I was thinking this reminded me of that movie/book. I say most of them would become savages just like they did in that movie. |
So without these teachings we all automatically become animals? I just can't believe that NOT being evil means going against our natural instincts. |
There is no chance. |
|
Yep, I'd say "Bloodthirsty savages" Those that wouldn't want to become savages would be killed by those who had no problem with it, just like the chubby kid. Really, the only way out would be if there were a core of "civilized" kids who had the backbone, will, and strength to stomp out the bullshit. Not likely though, if you ask me. |
When did I say they would become animals? Your original post did not mention the word evil. Savages are not animals nor are they evil. |
| If they were very young kids (toddlers), then their superegos would not be fully developed and thus they would not have a sense of right and wrong morality instilled in them by their parents. Having a weak superego, they would then rely more on their id, which drives their instinctual needs and desires. Therefore, they would be savages. |
In my opinion a bloodthirsty savage is both evil and an animal. Until now I doubted that anyone would ever disagree with that line of thinking. 
|