General & Others Cognitive dissonance of human societies
- Thread starter Nobody12
- Start date
Since I like these philosophical/sociological arguments, I just listed a few contradictions of the societies (also in an exaggerated way but appropriate to increase the impact of it and the absurdity of it 🤣)
Facade: Humans are the most important beings; human life is absolute. Humans are inherently good, and “humanity” is synonymous with compassion, benevolence, and moral progress.
Reality: Humans are animals, a primate species, one among many. Human exceptionalism and importance is an anthropocentric bias. Scientifically, humanity is also a globally invasive species, it has the behavior of a parasitic species (hyperpredation, climate damage, destruction of biodiversity, deforestation, preying on other animals and not wanting to be predated by other species etc). From an ecological standpoint, human extinction could arguably benefit the planet more than our continued expansion. It is estimated that over 99.9% of all species that ever lived are extinct, and the average lifespan of species is 1–10 million years. Humanity is the same as others.
Environmental problems and disasters that caused a shift from an anthropocentric view to a biocentric or ecocentric view of life and the universe in our time through scientific discoveries and the increase of environmental awareness about many problems of nature: pollution, global warming, ozone layer depletion, acid rain, natural resource depletion, overpopulation, waste disposal, deforestation, and loss of biodiversity etc. showed all problems of the anthropization of our planet. So, as geocentrism was supplanted by heliocentrism with scientific discoveries (and now with the cosmological scientific view of the 21st century) , anthropocentrism is being supplanted by ecocentrism or biocentrism etc.
Will people, in future centuries, "mock" our anthropocentric view/morality like we, people of the 20th/21st century, mock and laugh at people of Antiquity and Middle Ages for believing that the Earth was at the center of the universe/heavens? 🤣
Also, the definition of "Humanity" (in terms of emotional state) typical of TV shows, movies, books, some philosophies, etc., is bullshit
The term “humanity” should not be reserved solely for positive feelings or behaviors. It should encompass all human emotions and tendencies, both positive and negative (sentiments like rage and hate, etc., are also human emotions, but they aren't considered in this partial and not objective/realistic definition of "humanity"). Also:
However, language is principally (even unconsciously) a tool of ideology more than it is of description. Society uses "humanity" as a rhetorical weapon, not to describe objectively and factually.
I think it is also a legitimate argument about "humans' hypocrisy" manifested in many medias (books, movies, comics) that represent alien invasions, etc. Humans predate other beings (animals, plants, etc) to survive (as well as for our convenience and interests), but if other beings like aliens (in terms of fantasy fictions, etc.) or "other theoretical species" (in terms of science/pseudo-science or fictions) predate humans, we "demonize" them and create faux "noble" philosophical and moral explanations concealing our opportunism and selfishness (predating other beings but not wanting to receive the same fate by others).
Facade: Politicians and religious leaders are the most competent and virtuous representatives of humanity; they genuinely care about their countries, communities, and the world.
Reality: Many political and religious figures are primarily driven by the pursuit of money and power. They often lie or spread misinformation, and power-holding institutions typically prioritize self-preservation over collective welfare. Statistically, this is common/the majority of cases rather than exceptional.
Facade: The biblical metaphor of the shepherd portrays a benevolent protector who saves and lovingly cares for the sheep.
Reality: In actual pastoral life, a shepherd protects the flock mainly because the sheep are property, sources of labor, milk, and meat, generation after generation. The narrative of benevolence hides the fundamentally utilitarian motive, while the wolf is demonized because it threatens the shepherd’s assets. In short: The shepherd (both real or metaphorical), in reality, wants to use the sheep for work, milk, and meat and then use their children, their grandchildren, and so on
Facade: Pedophiles and rapists, etc are regarded as the worst criminals, even by powerful social institutions.
Reality: Throughout history, the main problems of institutions were those who spoke uncomfortable truths against institutions and societies, exactly as Plato observed in a "paraphrased" concept
Even in today's society, the problem persists, and speaking the real truth against institutions of power, etc can be the greatest problem/crime (even more than pedophiles and rapists)
In the past, throughout history, there are many examples:
Instead, in our contemporary societies, for example, there are cases of:
There are many cases of:
Facade: Modern society would admire and value figures like Socrates or the theological Jesus, etc as they are preached today.
Reality: Despite the lack of independent and appropriate historical reconstructions of figures such as Socrates (our view is mainly based on Plato's writings) and Jesus.
In short, societies often kill the one that speaks the "truth", then sanctify him later as a retrospective moral appropriation or posthumous domestication of dissidence
Facade: Contemporary civilized societies protect the so-called "human rights" and value "peace".
Reality:
Facade: Democratic debate is the best kind of debate
Reality: Democracy is often manifested as intellectual anarchy (mainly in media), where freedom of expression has become synonymous with the idea that all opinions have equal value. What a bartender says is treated as equal to what a medical professional says in their field; what a bricklayer says has the same value as what a sociologist or historian says on these arguments; what a politician claims is treated as equal to what a historian asserts; theology is treated as equivalent to history, and religion as equivalent to science, etc.
In short: Telling bullshits in political debates, media, journals, etc without consequences is normal....... in the name of freedom of expression.
Facade: Our societies are genuinely committed to justice.
Reality: Contemporary societies, including Western democracies, often invert the logic of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Individuals in positions of moral authority or institutional power should, in principle, face harsher consequences when they commit wrongdoing. Instead, they frequently receive leniency.
For example, clergy involved in sexual abuse often receive mitigation despite their moral role. Corrupt politicians, political lies and misinformation, or those institutions in improper conduct should face aggravating circumstances, yet by virtue of their office they are instead given mitigating ones, or the behavior is considered "normal".
Even democratic governments engaged in propaganda or misinformation rarely face intensified scrutiny; in democracies, preaching bullshits is considered normal without consequences, instead of aggravating public positions such as journalism, politics, institutions, etc. In short, the very individuals and institutions that should be held to higher standards are often granted lower ones.
Facade: The childish metaphorical concept of "light" is "truth" and "darkness" is "evil" (even in everyday discussions, evil has been equated with "dark", sinister, shadow, etc).
Reality: Despite the reductiveness of relating light/dark to a moral framework and concepts, the association of ‘dark’ or ‘darkness’ with evil is largely a human cultural bias, rooted in early human fears of the night, when visibility was low and predators posed real dangers. Over time, our societies, myths, and religions, created the misleading idea that darkness is inherently evil. In reality, there is nothing intrinsically evil about darkness itself.
Also, the idea that light=truth and darkness=lies is reversed.......just like public and private. Obviously our societies want to tell us that public expression is the truth; in reality, it isn't so. Truth is in "private/dark", just as the division of exoteric knowledge and esoteric knowledge, first applied by Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans.
The "truth" is in private, inner circles, behind closed doors (in the "dark") not in public "light." The idea that "truth" is in "public/light" is bullshit.
Obviously, all of this is the work of the Devil 🤣
Facade: Humans are the most important beings; human life is absolute. Humans are inherently good, and “humanity” is synonymous with compassion, benevolence, and moral progress.
Reality: Humans are animals, a primate species, one among many. Human exceptionalism and importance is an anthropocentric bias. Scientifically, humanity is also a globally invasive species, it has the behavior of a parasitic species (hyperpredation, climate damage, destruction of biodiversity, deforestation, preying on other animals and not wanting to be predated by other species etc). From an ecological standpoint, human extinction could arguably benefit the planet more than our continued expansion. It is estimated that over 99.9% of all species that ever lived are extinct, and the average lifespan of species is 1–10 million years. Humanity is the same as others.
Environmental problems and disasters that caused a shift from an anthropocentric view to a biocentric or ecocentric view of life and the universe in our time through scientific discoveries and the increase of environmental awareness about many problems of nature: pollution, global warming, ozone layer depletion, acid rain, natural resource depletion, overpopulation, waste disposal, deforestation, and loss of biodiversity etc. showed all problems of the anthropization of our planet. So, as geocentrism was supplanted by heliocentrism with scientific discoveries (and now with the cosmological scientific view of the 21st century) , anthropocentrism is being supplanted by ecocentrism or biocentrism etc.
Will people, in future centuries, "mock" our anthropocentric view/morality like we, people of the 20th/21st century, mock and laugh at people of Antiquity and Middle Ages for believing that the Earth was at the center of the universe/heavens? 🤣
Also, the definition of "Humanity" (in terms of emotional state) typical of TV shows, movies, books, some philosophies, etc., is bullshit
The term “humanity” should not be reserved solely for positive feelings or behaviors. It should encompass all human emotions and tendencies, both positive and negative (sentiments like rage and hate, etc., are also human emotions, but they aren't considered in this partial and not objective/realistic definition of "humanity"). Also:
- Acts of kindness, empathy, and affection are not exclusive to humans; many other animal species exhibit such behaviors.
- Meanwhile, greed, hatred, prejudice, selfishness, and hypocrisy are inherently "human" as well.
Merriam Webster Dictionary: "The meaning of HUMANITY is compassionate, sympathetic, or generous behavior or disposition: the quality or state of being humane".
This is a bullshit definition made by humans to "overhype" themselves and represent their intrinsic nature as "noble". In reality, it is a wrong and anthropocentric definition that should be changed.However, language is principally (even unconsciously) a tool of ideology more than it is of description. Society uses "humanity" as a rhetorical weapon, not to describe objectively and factually.
I think it is also a legitimate argument about "humans' hypocrisy" manifested in many medias (books, movies, comics) that represent alien invasions, etc. Humans predate other beings (animals, plants, etc) to survive (as well as for our convenience and interests), but if other beings like aliens (in terms of fantasy fictions, etc.) or "other theoretical species" (in terms of science/pseudo-science or fictions) predate humans, we "demonize" them and create faux "noble" philosophical and moral explanations concealing our opportunism and selfishness (predating other beings but not wanting to receive the same fate by others).
Facade: Politicians and religious leaders are the most competent and virtuous representatives of humanity; they genuinely care about their countries, communities, and the world.
Reality: Many political and religious figures are primarily driven by the pursuit of money and power. They often lie or spread misinformation, and power-holding institutions typically prioritize self-preservation over collective welfare. Statistically, this is common/the majority of cases rather than exceptional.
Facade: The biblical metaphor of the shepherd portrays a benevolent protector who saves and lovingly cares for the sheep.
Reality: In actual pastoral life, a shepherd protects the flock mainly because the sheep are property, sources of labor, milk, and meat, generation after generation. The narrative of benevolence hides the fundamentally utilitarian motive, while the wolf is demonized because it threatens the shepherd’s assets. In short: The shepherd (both real or metaphorical), in reality, wants to use the sheep for work, milk, and meat and then use their children, their grandchildren, and so on
Facade: Pedophiles and rapists, etc are regarded as the worst criminals, even by powerful social institutions.
Reality: Throughout history, the main problems of institutions were those who spoke uncomfortable truths against institutions and societies, exactly as Plato observed in a "paraphrased" concept
Even in today's society, the problem persists, and speaking the real truth against institutions of power, etc can be the greatest problem/crime (even more than pedophiles and rapists)
In the past, throughout history, there are many examples:
- Socrates was executed not for violence, but for asking questions that threatened Athenian democratic leaders.
- Jesus (stripped of later theological interpretation and not considering the historical problems of the texts) was crucified by the Roman state as a political agitator who challenged authority and social norms.
- Galileo was imprisoned and silenced for contradicting Church doctrine.
- Hypatia was murdered for being an intellectual threat to a rising religious power.
- Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake for scientific heterodox ideas.
- Socrates became the father of Western philosophy after being executed.
- Jesus became the main figure of a religion after being crucified.
Instead, in our contemporary societies, for example, there are cases of:
- Rapists: There are many cases of soldiers that raped women during wars that have been covered
- Clergy members that were pedophiles have been covered by institutional churches.
There are many cases of:
- Whistleblowers are jailed using espionage laws
- Journalists revealing state wrongdoing are imprisoned or killed
- Activists exposing corruption are assassinated
- Citizens criticizing regimes are charged with “terrorism”, “sedition”, or “extremism”
- Academics or political critics are fired, blacklisted, or surveilled
- Hurting a person is punished.
- Hurting a system is punished far more severely.
Facade: Modern society would admire and value figures like Socrates or the theological Jesus, etc as they are preached today.
Reality: Despite the lack of independent and appropriate historical reconstructions of figures such as Socrates (our view is mainly based on Plato's writings) and Jesus.
- Socrates was executed for impiety, for “corrupting the youth,” and for criticizing a corrupted Athenian democracy.
- Jesus, whose historical figure is intertwined with myth and centuries of reinterpretation/mystifications, was executed for political and religious disruption.
In short, societies often kill the one that speaks the "truth", then sanctify him later as a retrospective moral appropriation or posthumous domestication of dissidence
Facade: Contemporary civilized societies protect the so-called "human rights" and value "peace".
Reality:
- Nations claiming to champion peace sell weapons to dictatorships, fuel conflicts, and support coups.
- Civilian casualties are labeled as “collateral damage.”
- Human rights language is used selectively against political enemies, not allies.
- War crimes are prosecuted only when committed by weaker nations.
Facade: Democratic debate is the best kind of debate
Reality: Democracy is often manifested as intellectual anarchy (mainly in media), where freedom of expression has become synonymous with the idea that all opinions have equal value. What a bartender says is treated as equal to what a medical professional says in their field; what a bricklayer says has the same value as what a sociologist or historian says on these arguments; what a politician claims is treated as equal to what a historian asserts; theology is treated as equivalent to history, and religion as equivalent to science, etc.
In short: Telling bullshits in political debates, media, journals, etc without consequences is normal....... in the name of freedom of expression.
Facade: Our societies are genuinely committed to justice.
Reality: Contemporary societies, including Western democracies, often invert the logic of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Individuals in positions of moral authority or institutional power should, in principle, face harsher consequences when they commit wrongdoing. Instead, they frequently receive leniency.
For example, clergy involved in sexual abuse often receive mitigation despite their moral role. Corrupt politicians, political lies and misinformation, or those institutions in improper conduct should face aggravating circumstances, yet by virtue of their office they are instead given mitigating ones, or the behavior is considered "normal".
Even democratic governments engaged in propaganda or misinformation rarely face intensified scrutiny; in democracies, preaching bullshits is considered normal without consequences, instead of aggravating public positions such as journalism, politics, institutions, etc. In short, the very individuals and institutions that should be held to higher standards are often granted lower ones.
Facade: The childish metaphorical concept of "light" is "truth" and "darkness" is "evil" (even in everyday discussions, evil has been equated with "dark", sinister, shadow, etc).
Reality: Despite the reductiveness of relating light/dark to a moral framework and concepts, the association of ‘dark’ or ‘darkness’ with evil is largely a human cultural bias, rooted in early human fears of the night, when visibility was low and predators posed real dangers. Over time, our societies, myths, and religions, created the misleading idea that darkness is inherently evil. In reality, there is nothing intrinsically evil about darkness itself.
Also, the idea that light=truth and darkness=lies is reversed.......just like public and private. Obviously our societies want to tell us that public expression is the truth; in reality, it isn't so. Truth is in "private/dark", just as the division of exoteric knowledge and esoteric knowledge, first applied by Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans.
The "truth" is in private, inner circles, behind closed doors (in the "dark") not in public "light." The idea that "truth" is in "public/light" is bullshit.
Obviously, all of this is the work of the Devil 🤣
It's indeed too good to be true. Seems like this is an AI post. Thanks for raising the concern @Bisoromi Bear I could be fooled easily by stuff like that.
What do you mean? I'm person like you (🤦) that wanted to do a philosophical discussion about philosophical/scientific cognitive fallacies and anthropocentrism.......then the only replies were about this AI bot bullshits (I'm using a grammar corrector since English isn't my mother tongue, just that)......
I also already posted on the section of HXH, before and presented myself..... on the "Hello thread" months ago 😂. Maybe I have to write without the grammar corrector since people here think "I'm a bot" 😂
Post automatically merged:
I also already posted on the section of HXH, before and presented myself..... on the "Hello thread" months ago 😂. Maybe I have to write without the grammar corrector since people here think "I'm a bot" 😂
Oh ! Ok I'm sorry! You are completely right.. perhaps I have made an error.
You know errors... how they work.. Funny right? Sometimes we don't even notice we make them. I mean the other day I was planning to make a program to help me make less errors but it turned out that made one making the program big an error.
Now then! Since we are new friends of discussions now, do you think you could help me that with and correct ?
Here is the code, I think it's in CSS:
import tkinter as tk
def action_verifier():
# Change le texte quand on clique sur "Vérifier"
label_question.config(text="non ce n'est pas une erreur tkt", fg="green")
def action_non():
# Change le texte quand on clique sur "Non"
label_question.config(text="bien vu, t'es trop for", fg="blue")
# 1. Création de la fenêtre principale
fenetre = tk.Tk()
fenetre.title("Programme Test")
fenetre.geometry("400x200") # Définit la taille de la fenêtre (Largeur x Hauteur)
# 2. Création du texte (Label)
label_question = tk.Label(fenetre, text="est-ce que j'ai fais une erreur ?", font=("Arial", 14))
label_question.pack(pady=30) # pady ajoute un peu d'espace vertical
# 3. Création des boutons
# Bouton Vérifier
bouton_verifier = tk.Button(fenetre, text="Verifier", command=action_verifier, font=("Arial", 10))
bouton_verifier.pack(pady=5)
# Bouton Non
bouton_non = tk.Button(fenetre, text="Non", command=action_non, font=("Arial", 10))
bouton_non.pack(pady=5)
# 4. Lancement de la boucle principale (pour afficher la fenêtre)
fenetre.mainloop()
Can you help me?
That should make us understand more the dissonance of the human societies.
You know errors... how they work.. Funny right? Sometimes we don't even notice we make them. I mean the other day I was planning to make a program to help me make less errors but it turned out that made one making the program big an error.
Now then! Since we are new friends of discussions now, do you think you could help me that with and correct ?
Here is the code, I think it's in CSS:
import tkinter as tk
def action_verifier():
# Change le texte quand on clique sur "Vérifier"
label_question.config(text="non ce n'est pas une erreur tkt", fg="green")
def action_non():
# Change le texte quand on clique sur "Non"
label_question.config(text="bien vu, t'es trop for", fg="blue")
# 1. Création de la fenêtre principale
fenetre = tk.Tk()
fenetre.title("Programme Test")
fenetre.geometry("400x200") # Définit la taille de la fenêtre (Largeur x Hauteur)
# 2. Création du texte (Label)
label_question = tk.Label(fenetre, text="est-ce que j'ai fais une erreur ?", font=("Arial", 14))
label_question.pack(pady=30) # pady ajoute un peu d'espace vertical
# 3. Création des boutons
# Bouton Vérifier
bouton_verifier = tk.Button(fenetre, text="Verifier", command=action_verifier, font=("Arial", 10))
bouton_verifier.pack(pady=5)
# Bouton Non
bouton_non = tk.Button(fenetre, text="Non", command=action_non, font=("Arial", 10))
bouton_non.pack(pady=5)
# 4. Lancement de la boucle principale (pour afficher la fenêtre)
fenetre.mainloop()
Can you help me?
That should make us understand more the dissonance of the human societies.