88 replies to this topic

[Wandering Jew]

Just want to see what imminst members' take could be on self-defense or what would that be in current , near future, far future. Whether you use martial arts or guns, or cyborg abilities to help maintain potential immortality

[Esoparagon]

Why wouldn't you defend yourself? It doesn't make sense. There is a social contract that you don't harm other people and if someone breaks that contract they no longer have the right to be protected. In other words, if they refuse to follow the social rules, then the rules will not protect them. As far as I'm concerned, if someone tries to kill me they have reverted back to caveman rules. Anything goes.

In a truly civilized society no one would harm anyone EVER. So self-defense would be meaningless. We are most definitely not living in a civilized world right now, even though a lot of people like to tell themselves otherwise.

[advancedatheist]

The definition of "civilized" behavior changes from one historical period to the next. Not that long ago, upper class alpha males in European societies, who considered themselves the guardians of civilization, depended on accepted standards of conduct for settling their differences through mortal duels. (Shakespeare portrayed this as normal behavior in several of his plays, for example, Romeo and Juliet.) So did warrior elites in other societies like Japan.

The upper classes have since renounced dueling, but the behavior itself has moved down the social scale. Men who get into fights over matters of "honor" these days signal themselves as lower class.

Given the drunkard's walk model of "progress," it wouldn't surprise me if some kinds of mortal violence become socially acceptable again. Robert Heinlein anticipated this development in his 1940's era novel Beyond This Horizon.

Edited by advancedatheist, 27 September 2009 - 05:28 PM.

[forever freedom]

Double yes. These are no brainers.

[niner]

I voted yes for both, and agree that they are no-brainers. Seems to be a widely held viewpoint here. I will qualify my answers by saying that they only hold in cases of real mortal danger (or serious injury) without other options. While society is not fully civilized, I've not had to kill anyone yet, and doubt that I ever will, considering the improving long term trajectory of civility in the world, despite popular opinion to the contrary.

[Wandering Jew]

I made this poll to be of a similar topic as my other thread : http://www.imminst.o...mp;#entry349381

The other one talked about do immortalists need to kill, eventually, since they've a long time to interact w/ other people. Also inspired by news stories like people actually got jailed or sued just for defending themselves, and were charged of "excessive self-defense" over-defense etc. Some deserved to be jailed since they shot trespassers and accidental intruders, most others jailed or sued because they killed or injured criminals

[TheFountain]

It's circumstance that makes people uncivil. Such as one person or group of people starving while the other lives immodestly and in excess. Is the behavior of those who can but do not share civil? Is it civil to sit back and watch other members or your species go hungry when there is absolutely no reason for it? I would say in instances in which a person is attacked by someone who has nothing and who has been kept down by society while those who do have just watched them deteriorate, the uncivil reaction on the part of the attacker is merely a reaction to the uncivil behavior of those who have just sat there and watched them sink into poverty and hunger. Yes, I said it. Selfishness is uncivil.

I will not vote in the inadequate poll.

Edited by TheFountain, 27 September 2009 - 10:08 PM.

[Wandering Jew]

When adrenaline rushes, you think fight or flight. So fight or flight? Fight or Flight?

That could be a better poll. Would you confront the bad-guy and use one battle to end all future battles, and strike to kill without mercy. It's like Ender in beginning of Ender's Game, stomping that bully to death, "one battle to end all future battles." Or would all you think is not to risk your life at all and attempt escape? If as result of your action and our imperfect society, you get sentenced to 5-10 years in jail as result of damage you do to the perpetrator, would you fight as hard or avoid jail at all costs. Little LE tools in jails.

[niner]

When adrenaline rushes, you think fight or flight. So fight or flight? Fight or Flight?

That could be a better poll. Would you confront the bad-guy and use one battle to end all future battles, and strike to kill without mercy. It's like Ender in beginning of Ender's Game, stomping that bully to death, "one battle to end all future battles." Or would all you think is not to risk your life at all and attempt escape? If as result of your action and our imperfect society, you get sentenced to 5-10 years in jail as result of damage you do to the perpetrator, would you fight as hard or avoid jail at all costs. Little LE tools in jails.

No, this would be a terrible poll because we'd all be answering a different question. It would depend on our imaginary analysis of the danger posed by the threat, the likelihood that we would be successful in dispatching the threat, and the likelihood that there would be a negative consequence if we did so, or even the likelihood that we could safely escape. The first poll was better, because the question was clear-cut. If you use preemptive force against a guy who does not present a threat of serious harm at that moment, I think you are breaking the law, so you would probably end up in jail.

[DJS]

I know that this may upset some of the libertarians on the forums, but one of the points that Pinker brings up in this video seems correct. The institution of 'the state' is largely responsible for producing civilized society (not perfectly civilized, of course) because it eliminates the dynamic where interpersonal preemptive violence is seen as a necessary form of self defense.

Edited by DJS, 28 September 2009 - 05:27 PM.

[exapted]

According to my definition of a civilized society, physical self-defense will be built in to the technology and the legal system. Individuals need not be steadfast in their allegiance to "non violence" when it simply doesn't make sense. But most of the time violence would not make sense. But as every good computer programmer knows, there are times when programs don't behave as expected. So there needs to be some physical defense systems, in case something goes wrong. I see no inherent virtue in having a central authority control all of the defense systems. What's wrong with private defense? So really, believing that a civilized society doesn't need physical self-defense is just sort of..... odd.

And there is nothing about society that would suggest it will one day achieve a state where physical risk analysis and countermeasures are unnecessary. If that state is ever reached then security would be a waste of course.

Edited by exapted, 29 September 2009 - 06:51 AM.

[eternaltraveler]

I know that this may upset some of the libertarians on the forums, but one of the points that Pinker brings up in this video seems correct. The institution of 'the state' is largely responsible for producing civilized society (not perfectly civilized, of course) because it eliminates the dynamic where interpersonal preemptive violence is seen as a necessary form of self defense.

Last I checked libertarians supported having courts and police

You must be worried about upsetting anarchists on the forum

[DJS]

Last I checked libertarians supported having courts and police

You must be worried about upsetting anarchists on the forum

Heh. Yeah, after I let that one fly, what you're saying occurred to me. Should have deleted it right then and there.

It is peculiar that I have this strong inner urge to try to find flaws in libertarianism.

[Wandering Jew]

Poll supports my hypothesis too. Agree it's a no-brainer. Even hardcore pacifists would defend themselves, I think. Better for you to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. If you are really smart and pull off a perfect one like Jack the Ripper, you may save both self and headache with the law/revenge/vigilantes.

[fatboy]

My body-building, power-lifting, personal security specialist brother once pointed out to me, "Bob, being a pacifist doesn't count if you can't defend yourself and have no other option."

[TheFountain]

There are no such things as Alpha Males anymore, they are an obsolete evolutionary cul de sac. Those men who believe they are Alpha male types are just confused adolescent minded fools who need to be educated. Those are generally the types who sit back in their chairs and vicariously live through UFC and MMA while doing nothing to enhance the society we live in. Again education is the answer.

[Wandering Jew]

There are no such things as Alpha Males anymore, they are an obsolete evolutionary cul de sac. Those men who believe they are Alpha male types are just confused adolescent minded fools who need to be educated. Those are generally the types who sit back in their chairs and vicariously live through UFC and MMA while doing nothing to enhance the society we live in. Again education is the answer.

There are still plenty of "alpha males" around, tho I agree they're immature. Immature, but can cause many needless sufferings like physically assaulting someone. They tend to take risks, including risking others' lives and their own. If physically confronted, we may need "alpha bodies" , but most of us have smarter ways of descalation.

[niner]

There are no such things as Alpha Males anymore, they are an obsolete evolutionary cul de sac. Those men who believe they are Alpha male types are just confused adolescent minded fools who need to be educated. Those are generally the types who sit back in their chairs and vicariously live through UFC and MMA while doing nothing to enhance the society we live in. Again education is the answer.

I see you have no experience with the corporate world...

[TheFountain]

There are no such things as Alpha Males anymore, they are an obsolete evolutionary cul de sac. Those men who believe they are Alpha male types are just confused adolescent minded fools who need to be educated. Those are generally the types who sit back in their chairs and vicariously live through UFC and MMA while doing nothing to enhance the society we live in. Again education is the answer.

There are still plenty of "alpha males" around, tho I agree they're immature. Immature, but can cause many needless sufferings like physically assaulting someone. They tend to take risks, including risking others' lives and their own. If physically confronted, we may need "alpha bodies" , but most of us have smarter ways of descalation.

It doesn't make any sense that there could still be Alpha males because the environmental and instinctive components which are necessary for these types doesn't exist anymore. Maybe in tribal jungle cultures where it is all one knows their entire lives and for generations of cultural inheritance. But we have been beyond those physical Components in civilized societies for about a thousand years. Any man who calls himself an Alpha male is a product of what he is conditioned and taught. Nothing more. And I say this because of you go to a city like New York for example, you have so many Alpha Male wannabes but soon as you place them in a jungle type setting they are lost and want to return to the convenience of city life lest they die alone and hungry in the wild.

Edited by TheFountain, 01 October 2009 - 01:48 AM.

[TheFountain]

There are no such things as Alpha Males anymore, they are an obsolete evolutionary cul de sac. Those men who believe they are Alpha male types are just confused adolescent minded fools who need to be educated. Those are generally the types who sit back in their chairs and vicariously live through UFC and MMA while doing nothing to enhance the society we live in. Again education is the answer.

I see you have no experience with the corporate world...

That's conditioning.

[eternaltraveler]

Where have all the cowboys gone?

http://m.youtube.com...p;v=3OaYzZ8VEok

[Wandering Jew]

in straight combat, in life and death situation, bet we can fight them off. If we have weapons like guns, even Bruce Lee may not beat us. If they use traps, poison, or explosives, haha, we may die

[Wandering Jew]

another question, will you take the law into your own hands and simply dispose the body if it happens to be an imperfect self-defense, which means potentially justifiable homicide? you can dispose by dumping, buring, bathtub of sulfric acid, or wound the bad-guy and fear for future retribution.

[DJS]

I'm reminded of this news story from back in september:

Buglar meets katana blade

[Wandering Jew]

I'm reminded of this news story from back in september:

Buglar meets katana blade

Yes, the burglar's slashed to death by the katana, but the Hopkins student faces 3 years in jail, since MD is not a Castle Law state. They require "duty to retreat" If convicted, it ruins the Johns Hopkins student's life, years in jail for killing a burglar? It ruins his health too I bet.

If he got in Hopkins, maybe he is smart enough to dispose of body? Too bad he has roommates (witness). If alone, couldn't he bury it in his backyard or throw in bathtub and get some sulfuric acid from the chemistry department?

[Wandering Jew]

The castle doctrine only applies when you're at home, not outside, right? So then you need to retreat, not retaliating and killing the criminal. Each state's different, which makes it a bit confusing.

In some east asian nations, including China specifically, there is a doctrine akin to unlimited self-defense under extreme circumstance. The unlimited doctrine says if the criminal commiting murder, rape, battery with intent to kill, or even if murdering another citizen and you happen to see it, then you are allowed to use unlimited forces to stop the criminal, including killing the that bad guy. In those cases, you have free-to-kill, shoot-at-will license (except if you possess gun in china, you're criminal too).

good for them. Beats the heck out of the laws of some countries such as Kuwait and Italy, where you can only defend yourself against a pickpocket or thief using open-palm slaps, because a fist is considered an aggravated assault on your part. or countries, such as the UK...... where a homeowner is expected to abandon his home if it's invaded, and allow a burglar or robber to take whatever he likes without interference.

Edited by Wandering Jew, 06 October 2009 - 07:57 PM.

[ForeverYouthful]

Man we have some serious pussy laws. Very strange; they seem to discriminate against home owners. Where do they come up with this stuff?

I wonder what the laws are in my home state?

[Wandering Jew]

Man we have some serious pussy laws. Very strange; they seem to discriminate against home owners. Where do they come up with this stuff?

I wonder what the laws are in my home state?

you refering to "Beats the heck out of the laws of some countries such as Kuwait and Italy, where you can only defend yourself against a pickpocket or thief using open-palm slaps, because a fist is considered an aggravated assault on your part. or countries, such as the UK...... where a homeowner is expected to abandon his home if it's invaded, and allow a burglar or robber to take whatever he likes without interference."

[niner]

If he got in Hopkins, maybe he is smart enough to dispose of body? Too bad he has roommates (witness). If alone, couldn't he bury it in his backyard or throw in bathtub and get some sulfuric acid from the chemistry department?

Yeah, bury it in his backyard. They'd never figure that one out. Do you know how much acid it would take to dissolve a body? Why are you even obsessing over this stuff, anyway?

[Wandering Jew]

If he got in Hopkins, maybe he is smart enough to dispose of body? Too bad he has roommates (witness). If alone, couldn't he bury it in his backyard or throw in bathtub and get some sulfuric acid from the chemistry department?

Yeah, bury it in his backyard. They'd never figure that one out. Do you know how much acid it would take to dissolve a body? Why are you even obsessing over this stuff, anyway?

just curious. nothing criminal, so don't worry I don't ever want to kill or be killed. Fascinating stuff though, people get punished for defending themselves or make a wrong decision and a life's ruined.