/lit/ - Literature

The idea that morality should only apply to people who serve a purpose for you is against human nature. I think a lot of philosophers are sociopaths, because they think of people as ideas and not as actual human beings. Wanting to stop someone from suffering is a natural part of human nature, deeply engrained in our genetics from us evolving to coexist. Even in prehistoric times, people had to coexist in villages, and not everyone liked each other; however, even before any religions brought about the concept of forced morality, they would still protect each other because it is how they evolved. Although the root of morality on a primal level is to benefit oneself by benefitting your fellow man, it's a twisted interpretation to say you should only help people if it's directly for your benefit. Most people will help someone they see suffering to an extreme degree (e.g. someone getting beaten to death with a brick, as per OP's retarded example) if they are able to, simply because they are able to, and an innate part of their nature drives them to help their fellow man. Basic human morality predates the philosophies that try to pick it apart by millennia, and it's absurd that people still think they can debunk the "myth" that people are inherently good unless led astray from their nature.

>>17008099
Wizardrous

>>17005029
Who here has any more relaxing fruit images like these? I'm high and schizoposting, and honestly really just want to make this a soothing and appropriate work environment for anyone who enjoys fruit, if you know what I mean. ;)