Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How We Learned to Kill

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 154 posts

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#51

Post by TeMPOraL »

[deleted] wrote: post #42
vinceguidry wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This sort of behavior is not acceptable for a human being, heck its not acceptable for an animal being or a plant. Animals are ruthless killers. Cats kill for fun . Plants aren't much better. In India, a captive elephant is allowed to kill two of its handlers before they will put it down. They suspect the elephants know this and pick their targets carefully. Only man has the ability to be moral, to decide whether t…

[deleted]

> I think plants are much better. Most of them are living in amazing synergy.

And the rest of them are evil. Just like animals. Nature is a complicated thing. Some advanced animals have complex cooperation and ethics-like behaviours, but as for the rest, it's just kill or be killed, which powers the feedback loops of the ecosystem.

> How do you know? Cats for instance have very sophisticated behavior in regards to killing their own kind.

And yet they still do.

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#52

Post by [deleted] »

gnoway wrote: post #44
[deleted] wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

No, cats kill for fun, or at least they do so for reasons beyond securing their next meal. If you've had a cat, especially an 'outside cat,' you will know this to be true.

[deleted]

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#53

Post by TeMPOraL »

[deleted] wrote: post #45
mter wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> investigate after they left We tried this terrible idea once. It results in our guys dying because surprise, they detonate the ied when you walk up to it. > shoot the legs not the heads Have you ever watched programmers on tv doing things like 3 people typing on the same keyboard? That's the equivalent of this statement. > Don't shoot unless shot upon They fight by planting ieds. In your world, we'd be dying by the…

[deleted]

Sure. Bombing them. Less risk for you.

The point is, when you're a soldier on the ground, your choices are very constrained. You want the right decisions to be made? Go after people who sent those soldiers in the first place.

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#54

Post by icebraining »

[deleted] wrote: post #52
gnoway wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, cats kill for fun, or at least they do so for reasons beyond securing their next meal. If you've had a cat, especially an 'outside cat,' you will know this to be true.

[deleted]

If he didn't know it was food, but still killed it, doesn't that fit as killing for fun?

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#55

Post by TeMPOraL »

[deleted] wrote: post #52
gnoway wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, cats kill for fun, or at least they do so for reasons beyond securing their next meal. If you've had a cat, especially an 'outside cat,' you will know this to be true.

[deleted]

Watch your cat carefully the next time it catches an insect. The cat will eat it, eventually. But not after playing with it for a good few minutes. Cats are cruel. They bring their prey to the brink of death, then release it only to catch it few moments later and repeat the process.

Source: I have two cats.

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#56

Post by TeMPOraL »

methodover wrote: post #49
xvedejas wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, when it comes to firearms, incapacitation doesn't work quite like the movies show. You can't just hit someone in the arm/leg every time (aiming is harder than that), and even if you do it will fairly likely kill them anyway. If you really want to priorize incapacitating enemy soldiers, you're going to have to use different weapons than firearms, weapons that are probably shorter range and slower. That isn't a p…

What if we did have incapacitating weapons that could be used in a wartime situation?

That would be uber cool. Unfortunately, we don't have any that rival the effectiveness of lethal ones, thus if one were to use stun weaponry, one would lose to an enemy that decided not to.

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#57

Post by TeMPOraL »

wtbob wrote: post #9
fit2rule wrote: post #5

So when are we going to learn to bridge the gap, forgive and flourish with our enemies-become-friends? Or, is that just too darn hard?

> Or, is that just too darn hard? Pretty much. Sometimes people want diametrically opposed things, and cannot compromise. Force and violence have always been a part of life, and we can never do away with them entirely. All we can do is refrain from them as long as is practical, constrain them and use them as sparingly as possible.

Moreover, we seem to be too dumb as a species to avoid conflict. We just can't coordinate with one another on a big enough scale.

And yet, I still have hope for us reaching the Star Trek level of humanity.

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#58

Post by vinceguidry »

[deleted] wrote: post #42
vinceguidry wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This sort of behavior is not acceptable for a human being, heck its not acceptable for an animal being or a plant. Animals are ruthless killers. Cats kill for fun . Plants aren't much better. In India, a captive elephant is allowed to kill two of its handlers before they will put it down. They suspect the elephants know this and pick their targets carefully. Only man has the ability to be moral, to decide whether t…

[deleted]

You seem to be operating on some strange principles and are being inconsistent with your assertions. When humans kill it's abhorrent but when cats do it it's okay because it's 'exercise'? Ants fight pitched wars over territory with other ants. These battles are immensely brutal.

The ecosystem of your backyard puts our battlegrounds to shame. You don't see the warfare, but that doesn't mean it's not happening. Plants mainly fight using chemical poisons they leach into the soil and through fungal networks. What you think of as synergy is actually really awful if you were to translate what they're doing to human terms.

> Cats for instance have very sophisticated behavior in regards to killing their own kind.

It's evolved behavior on the part of felines. Other animals are perfectly fine killing each other. In fact, males of many species will specifically seek out infants of their species that they haven't fathered and kill them so as to reduce rivals.

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#59

Post by BariumBlue »

[deleted] wrote: post #30
BariumBlue wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem If you were in the situation above, what choice would you make? I'm legitimately curious, as I do not know many people that seem to think in moral absolutes.

[deleted]

The point of the Trolley 'problem' (dilemma) as I think of it is to distinguish the moral difference between actively killing someone and letting someone get killed. From a utilitarian standpoint, all you look at are the possible actions and the possible results. From a moral standpoint, actively killing someone is much worse than letting someone get killed.

--------

> I would shoot only if shot upon, not because its moral, but because I'd feel like a coward idiot to do otherwise.

You're saying social expectations would cause you to shoot someone else?

Ignoring social expectations, your total opposition to kill is the reason I asked your response to the dilemma. It's not you who're being shot at, but your friends, family, and people and things you love. Would you be willing to let everything and everyone you love perish?

Re: How We Learned to Kill

#60

Post by [deleted] »

ChrisClark wrote: post #6
darkhorn wrote: post #3

9/11 was an inside job. So, the war in Afghanistan was unnecessary for the USA. The real terrorists are Bush administration who killed 9/11 victims and US soldiers who killed Afghan children.

How many crazies regularly read Hacker News? Thought it would be less than average. Maybe darkhorn stumbled onto the wrong site. :)

[deleted]
Post reply on HN