My video on the Marquis de Sade: th-cam.com/video/qV3RF5MNoKM/w-d-xo.html For an alternative view of the animals issue, see my video "Animals Don't Matter": th-cam.com/video/yMmr5P8WLew/w-d-xo.html
Too many words. The focal points for why humanity might deserve a complete extinction: Narcissistic Judgmental Sociopathic (apathetic) Anyone of these traits is a poison, but our society is filled to the brim with all three. Everything else is just a symptom.
What about humanity moral progress? Before, torture and slaves were common and now, in general we see it as unacceptable. I didn't see this position reflected on the video. Is not humanity making any moral progress? Even if it's very slow... What do you think @Kane B ? Also, couldn't it be that humanity behaves bad due to the natural constraints, specifically the scarcity of energy and resources? I think that if we ever discover a renewable and inexpensive source of energy (like maybe nuclear fusion) then humanity behavior will greatly improve. I know I'm being optimistic but let's try to imagine this utopia: almost free energy from water, all materials recycled, world population stabilized. Wouldn't we behave better in this scenario? What do you think?
No no no. Misanthropy is genetic, not a feeling or an opinion. I'm a genetic misanthrope. A misanthrope is born misanthropic, not acquire the traits later on. A perfect example of a famously well-known genetic misanthrope in recent decades is James Hellwig, better known as The Ultimate Warrior. I'm sure he knew he was a misanthrope, but he never publicly acknowledged it. His life, his actions, how he behaved, the words and comments he made all spell 100% genetic misanthropy. He didn't play well with his wrestling coworkers. He never hung out with his wrestling coworkers. He had his own private space away from everyone else while he was a performer. He was insanely fit. A lot of the hateful comments he made on the internet was his misanthropy on display. He loathed how soft, cartoony, delusional and lazy humankind is, but his unsophisticated style of expression made his comments be understood as racist and homophobic. I also share those same views about humanity, but I'm way more educated than he was to not make my expressions blunt, harsh and insensitive. Here's a small example of my misanthropic views: I see people in wheelchairs wishing they could walk and run like normal people, yet the world population keeps getting fatter and fatter. People are born with perfectly normal arms and legs but let themselves get so fat they can't walk up a staircase without stopping to catch their breath. Meanwhile, that person stuck for life in a wheelchair wishes they had working legs. People take what they are born with for granted. The same old excuse humankind uses is "No One Is Perfect". I agree that no one is perfect, but no one is saying you must be perfect. Just don't be an ungrateful, useless, parasitic, needy, lying, spineless, delusional, lazy, childish and waste of survival resources.
Hellwig WAS a racist by his on words . A racist is not a misanthrope, just a tribalist US v Them , not noting all humans are a plague , cancer on Earth , even the misanthrope themselves.
True humans have done good thing doesn’t change the fact that the bad outweighs the good and no I’m not a misanthrope just have low expectations of humanity’s kindness and goodness
Or could it be that you're rationalizing human inability or unwillingness to live up to any set of strict standards of behavior. Humanity does this a lot, doesn't it! I can't or don't want to follow, therefore the rules are wrong. Personally, I'm a bit tired of all our excuses. I think, whatever flaws misanthropy may have, it's right to say that we're a moral failure. We just are, and I think, deep down, it's obvious to anyone who observes the world critically.
It's perfectly fine to anylitically along the way of a movement who's planning to encode a future beast of burden is copied that way but the predictermed old world anthropic model chosen is wrong and goal posts keep getting moved until it's lectures today are opposite what darwin and them argued for. The reason the snow on our TV is now interpreted cmb was decided before discovery.. and done so because they don't even believe metamorphosis keys to the cosmos or was scared of it wanting to get in the way slow it down lol
My attitude is every time I suffered , I suffered alone and no one helped me, and if I did not cause the suffering of others why am I obliged to relieve it? I want my big f off tv thanks and a new car!
Wow I googled "misanthrope" looking to find others who think like I do and boom here I am! This is fantastic! I am half through the video and agree with everything said so far. Great work!
Seeing people argue about being misanthropes really just proves the points made about optimistic misanthropy and some of the others. Humans are the problem, therefore incapable of being a solution or solving it ourselves.
My misanthropy is far simpler. It's just the recognition that interacting with humans on a personal level is far more stressful than beneficial for me. The average human is too stupid or too close-minded to stimulate me or play the sorts of social games that I'd like to play and their values, while I'm not condemning them, are so different than mine that I find it nearly impossible to connect with them. Further, the kind of life I would like to live, which is very simple and introverted, is either prohibitively expensive (buying land) or borderline criminal due to the stupidity of my society. I don't condemn others for not wanting the same lifestyle nor do I call for others to live this way, but humans have made it nearly impossible for me to live that life. I don't condemn people morally so much as I condemn them from a personal sentiment. People just suck. I might enjoy some of the benefits of society, but there are others that just prevent me from living the way I want and personal interactions with the vast, vast majority of people are net negative experiences.
Took the words right out of my mouth. The hurdle you have to overcome just to live a life in quietness is absurd. After all, there are too many on this fucked planet.
I wonder if lots of people don’t give much to charities because they have difficulty verifying that any given charity is a legitimate enterprise and that they aren’t just being played for suckers. I feel like most people prefer to have direct control over their kindnesses and also to observe and experience the positive effects. I think this might be because most people, even very financially wealthy people, are actually quite miserable much of the time, and are (perhaps reasonably) more concerned with ameliorating their personal struggles day by day than with all of the other woes of the world that would get stacked on top of them. Don’t get me wrong, I think I tend to be pretty misanthropic. Not sure though, I think I most often feel that way when I don’t feel connected to my local community.
So looking back, I was a misanthrope back in 2022 to 23 for a few name reasons. mainly because of how humans take pleasure in dominating each other over everything in our feeble lives. It didn't matter if we were brainwashed by the powerful or that there was some benevolent and kind soul in our hearts, the damage done by the destruction of our individual minds has been done. I have a friend who essentially fits the description for what I was back then. Instead of not listening to him because of my past, I've done it so that he can have someone to talk and vent to. It gets tiring sure, but I'd rather let people show themselves for what they are rather then hide our counter cultural beliefs.
my misanthropy has in focus the notion and arrogance to not aknowledge their own stupidity(and when misantrophes understand this inherent stupidness as it is human)
Misanthropy is pretty sensible, especially given history and our modern awareness of the cartoonish levels of evil across the Earth. Also, Anprim gang represent!
Yeah, it's a bit surprising that there's so little literature on it. I'd expect ethicists to take it more seriously, especially since it seems to fairly straightforwardly follow from some popular ethical positions.
@@KaneB if ethicists talked more on it it would eventually devalue any work they have done and humans need to have achivements recognised. its not a coincidence ethicists dont focus on topics such as misanthropy.
@@KaneB What about humanity moral progress? Before, torture and slaves were common and now, in general we see it as unacceptable. I didn't see this position reflected on the video. Is not humanity making any moral progress? Even if it's very slow... What do you think @Kane B ? Also, couldn't it be that humanity behaves bad due to the natural constraints, specifically the scarcity of energy and resources? I think that if we ever discover a renewable and inexpensive source of energy (like maybe nuclear fusion) then humanity behavior will greatly improve. I know I'm being optimistic but let's try to imagine this utopia: almost free energy from water, all materials recycled, world population stabilized. Wouldn't we behave better in this scenario? What do you think?
I am not sure if "misanthropy" describes my beliefs, but it is hard to find the right term. While I do hate humanity, I hate nature (which humanity falls under) and the universe is more on point. Why should I especially hate human meat consumption, many animals eat their prey alive. The short version is I internalized "don't hate the player, hate the game", and have come to the conclusion that the most moral action (maybe the only possible moral action) would be to "turn off the game". Since the destruction of the universe itself is far beyond our means I would be content with just the destruction of earth, as that contains 100% of all known life. Any idea what this philosophy is called?
Personally I agree with both of you. We are self serving; and despite having the collective intelligence and means to live in balance, we are a cancer on the planet. Aerospace technology seems to be a blatant waste of resources. In one hand, people hold human life in the highest regard, above all other things, and in the other hand they churn out WMDs.
im sorry, but, you are humanity. You are a citizen of humanity, just the fact that your saying that makes you selfish, the thing misanthropists hold the world by.
I personally refuse to fall in the trap of this horribly toxic and destructive mindset. Humanity is a creature of equal parts good & evil. Wherever there is evil , good will always rise against it. It is a cycle of our species that has gone on since the days of living in caves and banging rocks together to make fire. To hate humanity as a whole is to also hate yourself, and to do so leads to a life of constant self-inflicted suffering. I refuse to hate myself for the very creature that I am, and instead choose to accept that while humans are flawed, we are never deserving of extinction. Our existence is one of constant struggling against everything that exists around us, whether a creation of nature or of ourselves. To judge all of mankind by the actions of its history is to ignore what it means to be human. To be human is to make mistakes, learn from those mistakes, and work towards living the best life we can make for ourselves while never bringing harm to those we care about. So I plead to those who find this comment on this video: Never let yourself become hateful of who you are at the basest level. To live a life that you are satisfied with, you must first accept that you are human.
Can I just say I LOVE how you talk about misanthropy as an ideology/philosophy, with arguments for and against it this video is really well done by considering both sides of the argument. The other videos and at places like reddit when I try to look up misanthropy only talk about how people are misanthropic because they hate themselves/ their lives. I'm sure this is true for some, but my life by most objective measures is great I have a great job, people who care about me, the whole 9 yards... And I still find I dislike humanity as a whole because of the moral and logical reasons you talk about. Thank you for treating misanthropy as an actual philosophy that people have thought about, not some angsty edgy woe is me crying so many people paint it as. There are legitimate reasons to dislike humanity; so thank you for discussing them objectively and not simply saying "just be happy bro".
I love how there is no concrete argument against the quietest and the fugitive who decides to become a hermit… there’s literally no possible way to debunk these two.
"Misanthrope? I don't hate my fellow man, even when he's tiresome and surly and tries to cheat at poker. I figure that's just the human material, and him that finds in it cause for anger and dismay is just a fool for expecting better." -- Buster Scruggs.
To answer if either pessimism or optimism is correct you must first truly answer if life is so precious as to go at all cost to save it and death so vile as to avoid it.
Kane, I would recommend using the different background colors more purposefully - For example, you could use a certain background color for a certain type of slide (e.g. slide presenting an argument, an example, or an explanation, etc. would have consistent, different colors). Or, you could use the same color throughout the whole video and use different colors for videos belonging to different series (e.g. logic, metaphysics, ethics, science, etc.), in a way that each playlist you create has a unique color. I think either of these would be better than random color changes (which is what it seems you’re doing at the moment).
It's not random; it just alternates between green and blue. The reason I started using colours was that (1) somebody pointed out that white backgrounds can be a strain on the eyes and (2) I think that switching colours makes the slide changes more noticeable. I'll consider different ways of using coloured backgrounds in the future. Thanks for the suggestion.
@@KaneB Yes absolutely. These colors are better than the blank white background; no question about that. And yes, I called the alternating pattern “random” - bad word choice but the criticism gets to the same point. Cheers
If one was not already a misanthrope. This comment section might make one into one. Arrogance, dogmatism, moral laziness, myopia, selfishness, hypocrisy..... It's all in here
I really enjoyed this. Nice to hear a breakdown on philosophy. I'm stoned right now, but might add more later. Either way, much respect for how much work you put in to this video m8
Humans are rational but only in a local sense, which manifests in a preference for immediate satisfaction and callousness towards the suffering of others. But blaming humans for the human condition seems as pointless as externalizing blame onto an external god. It simply is the way it is and we can personally try to act better if we want to.
The whole time I'm going like "humanity is bad, but in relation to what?" It seems as though the only thing humanity can be compared is one's own idea of what humanity could be if it was good. I sense a severe lack of a reliable measuring stick in this framework. Moreover, a single human's mind is incapable of perceiving and conceptualizing all of humanity so how exactly is one to judge something that one is incapable of knowing? Seems like kind of a pointless way of looking at things tbh
As a former misanthrope myself, I really appreciate how you decide to give a thesis regarding misanthropy itself not just in a philosophical sense but in tying in with our own experiences about how and why misanthropy develops in us. I see misanthropy itself as an oversimplistic explanation for why there are so many problems in the world. (Sure all of them are caused by humans but I'm mainly talking about powerful humans and the hierarchical structures they created themselves.) I see time and time again that the behaviors that philosophies like misanthropy can lead into toxic mindsets within ourselves. (and or sometimes have been co opted by powerful groups in order to oppress people in general) I generally respect misanthropes a lot when developing my own world views so it's not all flawed.
I really dislike this idea that charity is universally a good. More times than not your donation goes to stock purchases and shareholders. The problem isn’t humanity, it’s the systems we’ve found ourselves in.
This is basically my objection to that point of view too. There's another objection I have to it, and it's that charities often have backfiring effects. Food charity for African countries are a great example of this. Farmers cannot compete against free, so local African farmers tend to go out of business and either make famines worse or make these societies dependent on the charity in the long run.
14:20 "If animals matter morally, it looks like we're perpetuating an extreme moral evil, and we do this simply to achieve pleasant sensations in our mouths." Pleasant taste is the result, but it's not the reason. The meat industry is the institution that inflicts this evil, and they don't do it for the taste; they do it for the money. In other words, almost everything good in their lives depends upon doing this, and they don't usually feel good about doing it. People who work closely with animals tend to feel compassion toward animals, and they prefer to treat their animals as well as they can, but they can't allow that desire to get in the way of doing business. They can't spend more money on their animals and still be competitive. If they're not competitive then they won't make money and they'll have to shut down, so their only choices are to abuse their animals or lose their animals entirely. That's the reason, and taste has nothing to do with it. As consumers our choice to buy meat or not isn't really relevant to the issue. Even if the meat industry were to shrink to 10% of its current size, the remaining 10% would still end up abusing its animals just as terribly for exactly the same reason, and no one person's buying decisions could have a perceptible affect upon the size of the industry. Since taking a tiny sliver out of the industry is too small to notice and wouldn't address the underlying problem even if it were noticeable, it's no surprise that people are so casual about buying meat. The only way to protect animals is to address the actual cause of abuse and somehow stop putting people in a position where they are forced to abuse animals.
I think you’ve missed the point. If animals do matter morally, there is no justification for the meat industry AT ALL. The analogy is with slavery. Some owners were nice to their slaves and others not, but the problem was not with those who were not nice to their slaves, it is with slavery itself. Those in the industry can find something else to do with their time, or if it’s really necessary, can receive a payment from the state upon closing down, like was done with slavery.
@@wireless849 : The meat industry wouldn't be so bad if it were well regulated so that the animals cannot be abused. Unlike slaves, cows don't value their freedom. All cows want is a safe, peaceful place to stand around eating and other cows for company. If we give them that then a cow could lead a happy life, and then we can give them a painless death without fear or suffering. It's a better life and a better death than any cow would experience in nature. If we were to end the meat industry, then very few cows would get to exist at all. There are hundreds of millions of cows in the world, and without the meat industry that number would plummet to nearly nothing. All of those cows that could have lead comfortable lives would never even be born. It's not plainly obvious that this would be an improvement, even if we start with the assumption that cows matter morally.
@@Ansatz66 I think this is a classic case of rationalisation you have here. I’m a meat eater, but I recognise the suffering the meat industry causes and suspect that animals do probably matter morally… it is my weakness of will that stops me going vegan. I’m not comforted by the argument that “they wouldn’t exist if nobody planned to eat them” argument. They exist only as means to our ends and those ends are ultimately just aesthetic pleasure. You focus on a naive idealised picture of cows comfortably out in the fields relaxing until it’s time for them to go. This could only be competitive if cows were killed when young to keep production high. Then there is the dairy industry where cows are forcefully impregnated and then have their calves taken away from them shortly after birth for sale or slaughter (depending on whether it’s male or female) so they produce milk. The cows call after their calves constantly for days (I know several people in the dairy industry and most of them are uncomfortable with this aspect of the industry). Also, especially in the winter, most cows are kept in very small pens for most of the day and fed from a trough. Then there is the chicken industry which kills half of all chicks after hatching (billions each year) and pumps the rest full of hormones with hardly any room to move. Sheep are treated rather better, at least in the UK.
@@wireless849 "They exist only as a means to our ends." If cows matter morally then they aren't just a means to our ends. Cows have minds of their own with their own fears and desires. "This could only be competitive if cows were killed when young to keep production high." The point of regulation is that the rules apply to everyone so that no one needs to break the rules in order to be competitive. We don't have to kill the cows young if no one is allowed to kill them young so everyone is on an even playing field. The meat industry would just have to find some other way to compete. "Then there is the dairy industry where cows are forcefully impregnated and then have their calves taken away from them shortly after birth for sale or slaughter (depending on whether it’s male or female) so they produce milk." There's probably a more humane way to get cows to produce milk, but it would be more expensive, and the only way to get the dairy industry to do things in a more expensive way would be to force them through regulation. With regulation we could tell the dairy industry: Find a humane way to produce milk or be shut down. Necessity is the mother of invention, and lactation can be induced in humans so presumably it is also possible in cows.
@@Ansatz66 what I meant is that we treat them as means to our ends. All your suggestions would result in animal products becoming prohibitively expensive, essentially shutting down most of the industry. Meat and dairy would become a luxury few could afford to consume on a regular basis. I probably wouldn’t eat it.
Or would she be more analogous to the Fugitive, because the radical skeptic attempts to give up on holding beliefs? I'm assuming the epistemic analogy to misanthropy is the view that beliefs cannot be justified. In the case, I'd be more inclined to the see the skeptic as a Fugitive. I think Embracer would be somebody who holds that beliefs simply do not require justification in order to be rational. Something like the voluntarism outlined in this video: th-cam.com/video/jHnx7ddV3fA/w-d-xo.html
@@mykura2018 I don't think so, but I don't know much about Nietzsche. Based on my very limited understanding, he saw contemporary society as governed by a "slave morality", which he did not consider to be something worth embracing. My impression is that he was more of an Activist (re his "transvaluation of values" idea).
@@mykura2018 I would say he was in "constant" change, expressing a wide range of views, and could be seen as a fugitive, a quietist, an embracer, or even an activist (as unbelievable it may sound), though without optimistic sentiments. I 'd definetely not see him as an enemy.
I´m skeptical about if humanity cause more harm than good. The answer can be easily influenced by bias and it´s very hard to calculate. Obsviously we need a framework by which we can judge the question and my is consequentialist and hedonistic, in ultimate analisys, whats count is the balance of plesure and displesure caused by human actions. I don´t think beeing blameworthy is necessery, seems that a denier of free will and moral responsabily can be a misanthrope. By my self, I´m a hard determinist, and I think nobody is, in ultimate analysis, responsible for to be what they are, but even so, can cause good or bad. For my own personal life I think the relationship to other people was more bad than good: people frequently are egocentric, stupid and futile... I prefere to adopting a minimilist aproach to social life. I´m sorry for bad english, I´m from Brazil.
"We can also list a lot of good things people do." LOL, enlighten me! The only "good" they think they do is fix some of their MANY mistakes. That does NOT count.
I have struggled with being a misanthrope for a long time. For the past year, I thought I had made peace with it, but recent events in the world and my personal life has reignited my hatred of mankind. What annoys me is that both the people who defend misanthrope and those who disagree with it completely miss the point of misanthropy altogether. For example, saying humans are evil because we kill animals or because we don't treat the environment well is completely reductive and ignores historical, social and economic circumstances that cause us to treat animals and the environment the way we do. Ironically, viewpoints like this only reinforce my misanthropy, because people are given a choice, within the boundaries of their Destiny, to inform themselves on this subject or not pass judgment based on surface-level moral conundrums like "think of the environment". My own form of misanthropy comes from a concept of Destiny, that is, that we not inherently free, and that ideals like free will are not only false, but outright harmful, and that we should make peace with our Destiny (in crudely simple terms, our circumstances) in order to be better people, live better lives and overcome our existential dread. This sort of Destiny doesn't just apply to individuals either, but collectives: families, communities, regions, ethnicities, and even entire nations. A nation itself has a destiny based on its own zeitgeist and historical formation, which serves as the basis for its people their existential perception (hermeneutics is also closely tied to this). Once again, the same can be said of individuals. My misanthropy is born from the fact that the majority of humans not only eschew such Destiny, but are outright averse to it. They "swim against the current", so to speak. It's a form of willful ignorance that causes nothing but pain, yet people cling to it anyway. People would much rather listen to Donald Trump or Joe Biden than they would intellectual thinkers and philosophers, and this has been true throughout most of history, though it has been compounded in modernity and later post-modernity. Imagine how different the world would be if we listened to Nietzsche. Or Dostoevsky. Or Heidegger. Or Aquinas. Or, hell, Lao Tse if we wanna go back a couple thousand years. So many historically prominent figures have given us their own ideas on how to live better lives, how to reflect and contemplate, how not to give in to conformism, how to lead people and nations, the importance of hierarchy, the trappings of materialism. And yet we listened to none of them. Most of the time, we end up listening to exactly the kinds of individuals who have no place telling people what to do, much less being in positions of power. We squandered everything in the name of petty "freedom", and the result is we are led by stupidity, short-term goals, miscommunication, bureaucracy, profit, ignorance, and all other things that we as humans should preferably avoid when possible. The history of humanity is thus a history of mistakes, and such mistakes often have a much greater, deeper impact on us than any action deemed correct from a moral, ethical or existential point of view. We are aware of this. Our Destiny tells us that. One doesn't need to be an intellectual genius to figure this out. The average person is likely to agree with you, at least on the notion that we tend to listen to the wrong people. And yet that same person will continue to make the same mistakes that they complained about, pushing themselves further away from their Destiny and thus from wisdom and spiritual well-being. We as a species constantly swim against the current, making mountains out of molehills, solving problems we ourselves create, fooling ourselves that we always have to "act" or "do" when in reality non-action and contemplation are the keys to virtue and excellence. Look at the way people talk about depression, or suicide. They treat it as if they're illnesses, giving them neat little categories and offering people step-by-step instructions, as if solving these issues is no different than assembling an office chair or a computer. No one discusses these matters by giving them the proper dignity of depth and complexity which they inherently carry with them. And the average person has no problem with this, even though such methods are woefully wrong and outright dangerous. And then people wonder why suicide rates keep rising, or why an overrepresented percentage of people are on SSRIs, or why mass shootings are becoming increasingly common (no, banning guns will not solve that problem, but your average person thinks that's all the discussion amounts to -- just to give another example of a surface-level materialistic "debate" that has become sadly common in our times). In short, we are capable of being so, so much better than we currently are. Yet we squander it all for cheap, short-term benefits. We ignore our circumstances, our Destiny, for silly ideas of liberty and freedom, ideas which we hardly even know how to defend or support (or even why). We find ourselves incapable of making difficult, but correct decisions, out of fear of judgment. And people are terribly judgmental and petty. We can be so much more, and I have faith that maybe, just maybe, we will get there some day. But we must first contend with the fact that we are a sadly ignorant, stupid species prone to the most brazen, short-sighted decisions and deadly errors of judgment. We must contend with the fact that we have a Destiny that we must acknowledge and make peace with, for it is the path towards spiritual well-being and wisdom. And finally, we must contend with the fact that suffering is an inherent part of life, and that aligning ourselves with our Destiny will allow us to minimize potentially needless suffering and live better lives. But humanity fails to do any of this, by its own volition. That's why I'm a misanthrope. (As a final note, I may hate humanity as a collective, but I don't necessarily hate individuals, with maybe some exceptions. For the most part, I would just rather not be part of society or communicate with others unless necessary, but if I must, I try to be courteous and respectful. It's a lot better than being spiteful and mean-spirited. In a sense, unlike stereotypical misanthropes, I am okay with people, but I hate humanity.)
The best ruler is the one that doesn't wish to rule, because he struggles with his doubts too much to seek to impose his will. People follow trends because they are not curious, or confident enough to be their own self. I'm pretty sure you want to help your fellowmen. Think of them as animals, and give them love, expecting nothing in return, just to be YOU, and get out of your juicy brain, every once in a while. You still got a long life ahead of you. Save a little space for the innocent and unknowing child in you. It IS your life after all. So what if it doesn't make sense ? Who cares, if it puts a small on your pretty face. Peace be with you.
You are not alone with those thoughts, in fact you sound like my friend in high school who would share a lot of your beliefs. I agree with most of what you said accept the importance of hierarchy tbh. Humans are generally worse when coerced by other powerful humans who tell them to conform to their standards.
I think the propositions: 'we don't give enough to charity' or 'why spend all that money on luxury items', are problematic. We may not give enough to charities but we pay taxes(>1%), and a good portion of those taxes (in many countries) go to support social programs that support disadvantaged people. Also, the person who buys an expensive luxury item, but could have forgone the purchase and given it to charity, I think misses the point that the lives of many thousands of ordinary people depend on the sale of such items.
rationalizing art, culture and science which are just results of humanity whilst not mentioning the atrocities that happened during its development or were produced from its creation is just so nice to support this flawed argument isn't it? "don't focus on the negative" you're just focusing on the positive? not objectively both. This is almost on a level of satire, to any actual philosophical encompassed thought. lol this is laughable.
22:00 There are many sectors to the meat industry, and some, like grazing on otherwise unproductive land, provide benefits beyond a "nice taste in the mouth". Consider also that the meat industry output of non-synthetic fertilizer single-handedly sustains the Organic farming industry.
@@PhysicsPolice Where is the insult mate? I just simply repeated what Kane said in the video. Now when it comes to making an argument of my own, I didn't deem it necessary as it was already made in the video. But here goes, the majority of animals in farming suffer excruciating, painful lives for the sake of our pleasure. The taking care of unproductive land and output of non synthetic fertilizer are issues that could be resolved without the meat industry existing....
@@themplanetz yes, animals in factory farms suffer. About 70% of livestock are raised in those conditions, and it’s a problem. We agree on that point. At 22:00 he said the only benefit was a nice taste in the mouth. This isn’t true. Growing more food is a benefit. This is still true even if you can grow more food in other ways. The existence of added productive calories from graze land, assuming you believe they exist, is all I need to show Kane made a mistake at 22:00. Finally, no, there is no other source of non-synthetic fertilizer than animal shit. That’s what it is by definition. There aren’t enough animals to make enough shit. We have to raise them. We should do this in humane conditions. But it’s sufficient to prove Kane made a mistake that there is any benefit besides a nice taste in the mouth. The fact that farming livestock supports the entire organic food industry is a billion dollar per annum benefit. Kane made a mistake.
@@PhysicsPoliceHe said 77 billion animals are "killed" per year in animal farming. Referring to the ones killed for the sake of meat production hence the "taste" comment. Regarding the fertilizer issue. While I understand your point, I still believe it does not justify the suffering and killing. Maybe we should start taking more laxatives and using our own shit lol
Couldn't it be that humanity behaves bad due to the natural constraints, specifically the scarcity of energy and resources? I think that if we ever discover a renewable and inexpensive source of energy (like maybe nuclear fusion) then humanity behavior will greatly improve. I know I'm being optimistic but let's try to imagine this utopia: almost free energy from water, all materials recycled, world population stabilized. Wouldn't we behave better in this scenario? What do you think? Also what about humanity moral progress? Before, torture and slaves were common and now, in general we see it as unacceptable. I didn't see this position reflected on the video. Is not humanity making any moral progress? Even if it's very slow...
No, we have everything we could ever want and we're worse than ever before. The worst traits of people don't even have anything to do with resources: Narcissistic Judgmental Sociopathic (apathetic) Show me anything you call a "friendship", and I'll show you all the reasons why you're lying to yourself.
@@eliaswibz I wasnt talking about technological progress. Was talking about the imperative humans hold that is all about human progression. but fair i understand
Don't forget that every action you take is selfish, so "good things" humanity does, are all really pure selfishness, another moral failing. Self imposed I might add.
devils advocate: if you are altruistic and reasons/motives include doing it for god and having certain ethical and moral obligations, it is not purely self motivated
@@1594simonsays I like your train of thought, however I'd argue that you get a dopamine release from helping others, or some sort of chemical release. That's the motivation whether the people are conscious of it or not. That's my thoughts however, I don't pretend to speak facts.
@@RealAICCl thanks man. i would also argue that you and i are actually both right its a grey area. whos to say that it’s necessarily a bad thing when someone gets some sort of satisfaction and pleasure from doing altruistic things. to me it makes perfect says because doing good things aligns with our inherent/intrinsic conscience. these are natural reactions imo
@@1594simonsays yea it’s not bad in my view because bad doesn’t exist to me, I think you’re also right in the sense that people engage with life as if it were serious vs as if life was a game, so they impose a rule set on themselves, a moral franework from which to view the world. I personally get a satisfaction from pointing out their self imposed moral failings. If they don’t impose morals on themselves and live outside of any framework I believe benevolence is possible. So yea it’s a grey area for sure. Edit I honestly think that if the right person were to realize that life were a game and come out of the self imposed moral framework they could potentially rule the world and lead humanity out of the state were in . I would like to see that. However it’s not gonna be me , because I am evil in other peoples views as in the common rules that society adheres.
Who is the misanthrope? A friend or a family member? In my opinion, misanthropy isn't really a negative trait. You don't need to "fight their persona" unless they are a danger to themselves and others, in which case they should seek professional help. Otherwise, accept them for who they are and understand where they are coming from, help them see the good in life.
Real late answer, but you should probably not fight back with intent like that. Just be a good person to them. I'm a misanthropist, I despise humanity as a whole, but there are individual people I love and adore, wouldn't trade them for anything. It's my own doing if I wish to change my stance. Unless the person in question has other compounding conditions like depression or some such, then suggest they get treatment for that, and not the moral condemnation, that might soften on its own with time once more immediate problems are solved.
Can't help but feel that a lot of our views on misanthropy stem from the religious notion of humanity being "better" than animals. Animals brutally kill each other all the time, not just over food, but over petty things like sex. Animals abandon their children to death, intelligent animals often display what we would call sadism, doing things like playing with their (living) food. If animals were as smart as us and had access to our tools they'd probably do the same as us. So when you're comparing us to common sense morality, more sophisticated moral framework, or a God, then yeah. We're pretty shit. But if we compare ourselves to other animals we're pretty average.
What's the argument here? "If humans are terrible, then non-human animals are terrible. But non-human animals are not terrible. So humans are not terrible." -- I doubt that anybody attracted to misanthropy would be averse to doing a modus ponens on that conditional and concluding that there are plenty of non-human animals that are also terrible.
@@KaneB I guess I just gave another "holding humanity to too high of a standard" argument while also making what is "terrible" relative to what we see in the animal world. From some absolute moral perspective, (like that of a God) humans and all animals are terrible. But when we're relative to all animals we'd be pretty average. It's not really supposed to be a super solid argument. I'm more so wondering if our high standards from humanity stem from the religious view that humans are superior to animals.
@@KaneB Yet it's a standard that pretty much every animal fails to meet. Even animals most of us consider herbivores quite commonly kill and eat other animals.
@@TheGlenn8 So, the misanthropist will say, it turns out that most species are terrible. Most species fail to meet even the most basic standards of acceptable behaviour. What's the problem with this conclusion? I see no reason to take it for granted that the world is good.
Maybe don't use gendered pronouns for the x-types, it's needless in this sort of breakdown that is focused on a genderless problematic. Rest of the vid was interesting to digest a different angle, since I am a misanthropist, and I'm looking for that sort of thing for my own ends.
So the list of negatives of "misanthropic" people, could accurately be attributed to any group, or philosophy. Thus, makes it a highly subjective and in my opinion a utterly ridiculous break down of the misanthropes philosophy or world view, in the analysis of it's negative attributes. It holds zero water, as a black and white argument, it's only half right. But, what do expect from those who don't know what they don't know, or understand. Good video though mate. My comment is directed to the self proclaimed intellectuals that developed these list and parameters of defining the misanthrope, and not you the content creator.
My rationalisation for eating meat is that it's natural, we have evolved to eat meat and have done so for thousands of year, though I do only buy meat from places that go above and beyond in terms of animal welfare, my answer to the meat industry would be that there are simply too many humans, we take up and use much more than we should, but also a lot of the vegan products are filled and made with chemicals, when I looked at the ingredients of some of them and thought I was looking at a chemistry textbook, there's nothing natural about it, I only eat that which is within nature.
My video on the Marquis de Sade: th-cam.com/video/qV3RF5MNoKM/w-d-xo.html
For an alternative view of the animals issue, see my video "Animals Don't Matter": th-cam.com/video/yMmr5P8WLew/w-d-xo.html
Too many words. The focal points for why humanity might deserve a complete extinction:
Narcissistic
Judgmental
Sociopathic (apathetic)
Anyone of these traits is a poison, but our society is filled to the brim with all three. Everything else is just a symptom.
What about humanity moral progress? Before, torture and slaves were common and now, in general we see it as unacceptable. I didn't see this position reflected on the video.
Is not humanity making any moral progress? Even if it's very slow...
What do you think @Kane B ?
Also, couldn't it be that humanity behaves bad due to the natural constraints, specifically the scarcity of energy and resources?
I think that if we ever discover a renewable and inexpensive source of energy (like maybe nuclear fusion) then humanity behavior will greatly improve. I know I'm being optimistic but let's try to imagine this utopia: almost free energy from water, all materials recycled, world population stabilized.
Wouldn't we behave better in this scenario? What do you think?
No no no. Misanthropy is genetic, not a feeling or an opinion. I'm a genetic misanthrope. A misanthrope is born misanthropic, not acquire the traits later on. A perfect example of a famously well-known genetic misanthrope in recent decades is James Hellwig, better known as The Ultimate Warrior. I'm sure he knew he was a misanthrope, but he never publicly acknowledged it. His life, his actions, how he behaved, the words and comments he made all spell 100% genetic misanthropy. He didn't play well with his wrestling coworkers. He never hung out with his wrestling coworkers. He had his own private space away from everyone else while he was a performer. He was insanely fit. A lot of the hateful comments he made on the internet was his misanthropy on display. He loathed how soft, cartoony, delusional and lazy humankind is, but his unsophisticated style of expression made his comments be understood as racist and homophobic. I also share those same views about humanity, but I'm way more educated than he was to not make my expressions blunt, harsh and insensitive. Here's a small example of my misanthropic views: I see people in wheelchairs wishing they could walk and run like normal people, yet the world population keeps getting fatter and fatter. People are born with perfectly normal arms and legs but let themselves get so fat they can't walk up a staircase without stopping to catch their breath. Meanwhile, that person stuck for life in a wheelchair wishes they had working legs. People take what they are born with for granted. The same old excuse humankind uses is "No One Is Perfect". I agree that no one is perfect, but no one is saying you must be perfect. Just don't be an ungrateful, useless, parasitic, needy, lying, spineless, delusional, lazy, childish and waste of survival resources.
Hellwig WAS a racist by his on words . A racist is not a misanthrope, just a tribalist US v Them , not noting all humans are a plague , cancer on Earth , even the misanthrope themselves.
True humans have done good thing doesn’t change the fact that the bad outweighs the good and no I’m not a misanthrope just have low expectations of humanity’s kindness and goodness
Or could it be that you're rationalizing human inability or unwillingness to live up to any set of strict standards of behavior. Humanity does this a lot, doesn't it! I can't or don't want to follow, therefore the rules are wrong. Personally, I'm a bit tired of all our excuses. I think, whatever flaws misanthropy may have, it's right to say that we're a moral failure. We just are, and I think, deep down, it's obvious to anyone who observes the world critically.
Here HERE ! ❤
It's perfectly fine to anylitically along the way of a movement who's planning to encode a future beast of burden is copied that way but the predictermed old world anthropic model chosen is wrong and goal posts keep getting moved until it's lectures today are opposite what darwin and them argued for.
The reason the snow on our TV is now interpreted cmb was decided before discovery.. and done so because they don't even believe metamorphosis keys to the cosmos or was scared of it wanting to get in the way slow it down lol
Good observation 👍
My attitude is every time I suffered , I suffered alone and no one helped me, and if I did not cause the suffering of others why am I obliged to relieve it? I want my big f off tv thanks and a new car!
Wow I googled "misanthrope" looking to find others who think like I do and boom here I am! This is fantastic! I am half through the video and agree with everything said so far. Great work!
This is one of my favorite philosophy channels on yt. You deserve to blow up ahead of all these people in the recommended bar.
Thanks a lot, great to hear you like the videos!
astromatrix app debunked again. athiests and cyncial phgilsopohers against wealth. refuses to take off my social mask making them violent as hell.
Seeing people argue about being misanthropes really just proves the points made about optimistic misanthropy and some of the others. Humans are the problem, therefore incapable of being a solution or solving it ourselves.
Humans aren't the problem, we are animals just like everything else
My misanthropy is far simpler. It's just the recognition that interacting with humans on a personal level is far more stressful than beneficial for me. The average human is too stupid or too close-minded to stimulate me or play the sorts of social games that I'd like to play and their values, while I'm not condemning them, are so different than mine that I find it nearly impossible to connect with them.
Further, the kind of life I would like to live, which is very simple and introverted, is either prohibitively expensive (buying land) or borderline criminal due to the stupidity of my society. I don't condemn others for not wanting the same lifestyle nor do I call for others to live this way, but humans have made it nearly impossible for me to live that life.
I don't condemn people morally so much as I condemn them from a personal sentiment. People just suck. I might enjoy some of the benefits of society, but there are others that just prevent me from living the way I want and personal interactions with the vast, vast majority of people are net negative experiences.
You're a quietist misanthrope like me
Spot on mate.
Took the words right out of my mouth. The hurdle you have to overcome just to live a life in quietness is absurd. After all, there are too many on this fucked planet.
I wonder if lots of people don’t give much to charities because they have difficulty verifying that any given charity is a legitimate enterprise and that they aren’t just being played for suckers. I feel like most people prefer to have direct control over their kindnesses and also to observe and experience the positive effects. I think this might be because most people, even very financially wealthy people, are actually quite miserable much of the time, and are (perhaps reasonably) more concerned with ameliorating their personal struggles day by day than with all of the other woes of the world that would get stacked on top of them. Don’t get me wrong, I think I tend to be pretty misanthropic. Not sure though, I think I most often feel that way when I don’t feel connected to my local community.
This is amazing! I am misanthropic. I am a vegan, and a “quietist”. And I struggle with depression & hopelessness…
Relatable friend
Congratulations
I am »a spook« I am a »label«, and a »"special label"«. And I struggle with »psyche label 1« & »psyche label 2«...
In short: Nice spooks.
@@Caligulahahah you are the very reason on why misanthropes might exist...
Hope is for the blind
So looking back, I was a misanthrope back in 2022 to 23 for a few name reasons. mainly because of how humans take pleasure in dominating each other over everything in our feeble lives. It didn't matter if we were brainwashed by the powerful or that there was some benevolent and kind soul in our hearts, the damage done by the destruction of our individual minds has been done. I have a friend who essentially fits the description for what I was back then. Instead of not listening to him because of my past, I've done it so that he can have someone to talk and vent to. It gets tiring sure, but I'd rather let people show themselves for what they are rather then hide our counter cultural beliefs.
I used to think I was a nihilist but then I realized I was just a misanthrope. It was a very liberating experience.
You misspelled 'turd' wrong
From " I don't care about nothing" to "i care about some things, just not people for sure!"
In other words:
"I used to think I was a spook but then I realized I was just a other spook. It was a very spooky experience.
my misanthropy has in focus the notion and arrogance to not aknowledge their own stupidity(and when misantrophes understand this inherent stupidness as it is human)
Misanthropy is pretty sensible, especially given history and our modern awareness of the cartoonish levels of evil across the Earth.
Also, Anprim gang represent!
Yeah, it's a bit surprising that there's so little literature on it. I'd expect ethicists to take it more seriously, especially since it seems to fairly straightforwardly follow from some popular ethical positions.
@@KaneB indeed, I'm glad you did a video on the topic, I feel like it's especially permanent given the age
people are scumbags and sheeple. i despise people and wealth as a philosophy now.
@@KaneB if ethicists talked more on it it would eventually devalue any work they have done and humans need to have achivements recognised. its not a coincidence ethicists dont focus on topics such as misanthropy.
@@KaneB What about humanity moral progress? Before, torture and slaves were common and now, in general we see it as unacceptable. I didn't see this position reflected on the video.
Is not humanity making any moral progress? Even if it's very slow...
What do you think @Kane B ?
Also, couldn't it be that humanity behaves bad due to the natural constraints, specifically the scarcity of energy and resources?
I think that if we ever discover a renewable and inexpensive source of energy (like maybe nuclear fusion) then humanity behavior will greatly improve. I know I'm being optimistic but let's try to imagine this utopia: almost free energy from water, all materials recycled, world population stabilized.
Wouldn't we behave better in this scenario? What do you think?
Am I the only misanthropic that also hates himself for being so flawed like the rest?
No
I can relate unfortunately
Nope, I’m the same. I am part of the problem.
Welcome to earth, where everything doesn't go your way... Enjoy your stay! 😈👿
I am not sure if "misanthropy" describes my beliefs, but it is hard to find the right term. While I do hate humanity, I hate nature (which humanity falls under) and the universe is more on point. Why should I especially hate human meat consumption, many animals eat their prey alive. The short version is I internalized "don't hate the player, hate the game", and have come to the conclusion that the most moral action (maybe the only possible moral action) would be to "turn off the game". Since the destruction of the universe itself is far beyond our means I would be content with just the destruction of earth, as that contains 100% of all known life. Any idea what this philosophy is called?
antinatalism and nihilism fit your philosophy to a major extent.
seems like a lot of people who would consider themselves misanthropes still seem to think human achievement is worthy of celebration
You can resent humanity and still find SpaceX and their self-landing rockets impressive, these things are not mutually exclusive.
@@highprodigy5063 depends what premise you are celebrating said achievements for. Space exploration is not a good thing.
I disagree. Our successes in technology, science and art etc are meaningless in the face of the failures of our species.
@@bloodangel7731 yee the more we push this ideal of a necessity of human experience the quicker this planet will burn
Personally I agree with both of you. We are self serving; and despite having the collective intelligence and means to live in balance, we are a cancer on the planet. Aerospace technology seems to be a blatant waste of resources.
In one hand, people hold human life in the highest regard, above all other things, and in the other hand they churn out WMDs.
Yep I dislike humanity for many reasons.
im sorry, but, you are humanity. You are a citizen of humanity, just the fact that your saying that makes you selfish, the thing misanthropists hold the world by.
Why? You're also a human. Humans aren't "evil" because you can't say that an entire specie is "evil"
@@zrok193Most humans are no more important nor better than shit and dirt streaks on a toilet seat in a gas station bathroom, point blank period.
@@zrok193but we are though so shush
I personally refuse to fall in the trap of this horribly toxic and destructive mindset. Humanity is a creature of equal parts good & evil. Wherever there is evil , good will always rise against it. It is a cycle of our species that has gone on since the days of living in caves and banging rocks together to make fire. To hate humanity as a whole is to also hate yourself, and to do so leads to a life of constant self-inflicted suffering.
I refuse to hate myself for the very creature that I am, and instead choose to accept that while humans are flawed, we are never deserving of extinction. Our existence is one of constant struggling against everything that exists around us, whether a creation of nature or of ourselves. To judge all of mankind by the actions of its history is to ignore what it means to be human.
To be human is to make mistakes, learn from those mistakes, and work towards living the best life we can make for ourselves while never bringing harm to those we care about. So I plead to those who find this comment on this video: Never let yourself become hateful of who you are at the basest level. To live a life that you are satisfied with, you must first accept that you are human.
I cannot wait for this madness to end
Sorry bud, it won't.
@@Mallemaria273 how do uk
@@_looner Good question. Mainly because of statist and corporate overlords ether trying to kill us or leaving us to rot away
@@_looner
If humans suck, would you rather have one directly hold power over you with the help of the system?
@@Mallemaria273 uh no I'd rather be in charge over myself I don't need anyone to dictate what decision they think I need to make
*Imagine being so caught up in morality that you think that it actually exists*
God tier comment
6:20
Are you sure? I've already read some (slightly)misanthropic remarks about the flaws of the human body and genome in a book.
Can I just say I LOVE how you talk about misanthropy as an ideology/philosophy, with arguments for and against it this video is really well done by considering both sides of the argument.
The other videos and at places like reddit when I try to look up misanthropy only talk about how people are misanthropic because they hate themselves/ their lives. I'm sure this is true for some, but my life by most objective measures is great I have a great job, people who care about me, the whole 9 yards... And I still find I dislike humanity as a whole because of the moral and logical reasons you talk about.
Thank you for treating misanthropy as an actual philosophy that people have thought about, not some angsty edgy woe is me crying so many people paint it as. There are legitimate reasons to dislike humanity; so thank you for discussing them objectively and not simply saying "just be happy bro".
Let’s point the finger in every direction but our own ! Whole video summary in a sentence. Thanks Bud.
Are you under the impression that the people defending misanthropy are not human beings? 😉
I love how there is no concrete argument against the quietest and the fugitive who decides to become a hermit… there’s literally no possible way to debunk these two.
"Misanthrope? I don't hate my fellow man, even when he's tiresome and surly and tries to cheat at poker. I figure that's just the human material, and him that finds in it cause for anger and dismay is just a fool for expecting better." -- Buster Scruggs.
I beg to differ, what's wrong with expectations?
To answer if either pessimism or optimism is correct you must first truly answer if life is so precious as to go at all cost to save it and death so vile as to avoid it.
Kane, I would recommend using the different background colors more purposefully - For example, you could use a certain background color for a certain type of slide (e.g. slide presenting an argument, an example, or an explanation, etc. would have consistent, different colors). Or, you could use the same color throughout the whole video and use different colors for videos belonging to different series (e.g. logic, metaphysics, ethics, science, etc.), in a way that each playlist you create has a unique color.
I think either of these would be better than random color changes (which is what it seems you’re doing at the moment).
It's not random; it just alternates between green and blue. The reason I started using colours was that (1) somebody pointed out that white backgrounds can be a strain on the eyes and (2) I think that switching colours makes the slide changes more noticeable. I'll consider different ways of using coloured backgrounds in the future. Thanks for the suggestion.
@@KaneB Yes absolutely. These colors are better than the blank white background; no question about that. And yes, I called the alternating pattern “random” - bad word choice but the criticism gets to the same point. Cheers
Make your own videos then if you think you're better. It's HIS video so let him do what HE wants..
We are not Homo sapiens. We are Homo pestis.
Damn right
Indeed.
Great work on this
If one was not already a misanthrope. This comment section might make one into one. Arrogance, dogmatism, moral laziness, myopia, selfishness, hypocrisy..... It's all in here
I really enjoyed this. Nice to hear a breakdown on philosophy. I'm stoned right now, but might add more later. Either way, much respect for how much work you put in to this video m8
Awrightawrightawright one toke over the line sweet jesus
I did perhaps the worst possible thing: posted this video to the Misanthropy group on Facebook.
Misanthropy doesnt make any sense if you dont believe in free will.
Humans are rational but only in a local sense, which manifests in a preference for immediate satisfaction and callousness towards the suffering of others. But blaming humans for the human condition seems as pointless as externalizing blame onto an external god. It simply is the way it is and we can personally try to act better if we want to.
Are you lectures on Spotify? They’d be great to listen to while cooking dinner or going for a walk
“Why doesn’t god save us all?” Because the bad don’t deserve to be saved
I don't have friends because I am a misantrope and a antinatalist
Pretty sure you are not successful career-wise either
@@alfiankamil9922 Work more than 50 hours a week doing a back breaking job something in which I'm sure you cannot do
@@nihilisticguy4106 yeah. That makes you a labor. I'm not surprised
@@alfiankamil9922 lol labor you really are dumb
@@alfiankamil9922 wow bro, nice classism. Very high brow, def doesn't make you look like a total pricker
Is that premise at 5:00 even valid? there are still people in control.
Another great presentation, thanks
The whole time I'm going like "humanity is bad, but in relation to what?" It seems as though the only thing humanity can be compared is one's own idea of what humanity could be if it was good. I sense a severe lack of a reliable measuring stick in this framework.
Moreover, a single human's mind is incapable of perceiving and conceptualizing all of humanity so how exactly is one to judge something that one is incapable of knowing?
Seems like kind of a pointless way of looking at things tbh
People call me a misanthropist. Now l have more knowledge to justify why l am that, even though l'm not that.
As a former misanthrope myself, I really appreciate how you decide to give a thesis regarding misanthropy itself not just in a philosophical sense but in tying in with our own experiences about how and why misanthropy develops in us. I see misanthropy itself as an oversimplistic explanation for why there are so many problems in the world. (Sure all of them are caused by humans but I'm mainly talking about powerful humans and the hierarchical structures they created themselves.) I see time and time again that the behaviors that philosophies like misanthropy can lead into toxic mindsets within ourselves. (and or sometimes have been co opted by powerful groups in order to oppress people in general) I generally respect misanthropes a lot when developing my own world views so it's not all flawed.
I really dislike this idea that charity is universally a good. More times than not your donation goes to stock purchases and shareholders. The problem isn’t humanity, it’s the systems we’ve found ourselves in.
This is basically my objection to that point of view too. There's another objection I have to it, and it's that charities often have backfiring effects. Food charity for African countries are a great example of this. Farmers cannot compete against free, so local African farmers tend to go out of business and either make famines worse or make these societies dependent on the charity in the long run.
The "systems" didn't build themselves...
An excellent class thank you for putting this together for us
14:20 "If animals matter morally, it looks like we're perpetuating an extreme moral evil, and we do this simply to achieve pleasant sensations in our mouths."
Pleasant taste is the result, but it's not the reason. The meat industry is the institution that inflicts this evil, and they don't do it for the taste; they do it for the money. In other words, almost everything good in their lives depends upon doing this, and they don't usually feel good about doing it. People who work closely with animals tend to feel compassion toward animals, and they prefer to treat their animals as well as they can, but they can't allow that desire to get in the way of doing business. They can't spend more money on their animals and still be competitive. If they're not competitive then they won't make money and they'll have to shut down, so their only choices are to abuse their animals or lose their animals entirely. That's the reason, and taste has nothing to do with it.
As consumers our choice to buy meat or not isn't really relevant to the issue. Even if the meat industry were to shrink to 10% of its current size, the remaining 10% would still end up abusing its animals just as terribly for exactly the same reason, and no one person's buying decisions could have a perceptible affect upon the size of the industry. Since taking a tiny sliver out of the industry is too small to notice and wouldn't address the underlying problem even if it were noticeable, it's no surprise that people are so casual about buying meat. The only way to protect animals is to address the actual cause of abuse and somehow stop putting people in a position where they are forced to abuse animals.
I think you’ve missed the point. If animals do matter morally, there is no justification for the meat industry AT ALL. The analogy is with slavery. Some owners were nice to their slaves and others not, but the problem was not with those who were not nice to their slaves, it is with slavery itself. Those in the industry can find something else to do with their time, or if it’s really necessary, can receive a payment from the state upon closing down, like was done with slavery.
@@wireless849 : The meat industry wouldn't be so bad if it were well regulated so that the animals cannot be abused. Unlike slaves, cows don't value their freedom. All cows want is a safe, peaceful place to stand around eating and other cows for company. If we give them that then a cow could lead a happy life, and then we can give them a painless death without fear or suffering. It's a better life and a better death than any cow would experience in nature.
If we were to end the meat industry, then very few cows would get to exist at all. There are hundreds of millions of cows in the world, and without the meat industry that number would plummet to nearly nothing. All of those cows that could have lead comfortable lives would never even be born. It's not plainly obvious that this would be an improvement, even if we start with the assumption that cows matter morally.
@@Ansatz66 I think this is a classic case of rationalisation you have here. I’m a meat eater, but I recognise the suffering the meat industry causes and suspect that animals do probably matter morally… it is my weakness of will that stops me going vegan. I’m not comforted by the argument that “they wouldn’t exist if nobody planned to eat them” argument. They exist only as means to our ends and those ends are ultimately just aesthetic pleasure. You focus on a naive idealised picture of cows comfortably out in the fields relaxing until it’s time for them to go. This could only be competitive if cows were killed when young to keep production high. Then there is the dairy industry where cows are forcefully impregnated and then have their calves taken away from them shortly after birth for sale or slaughter (depending on whether it’s male or female) so they produce milk. The cows call after their calves constantly for days (I know several people in the dairy industry and most of them are uncomfortable with this aspect of the industry). Also, especially in the winter, most cows are kept in very small pens for most of the day and fed from a trough. Then there is the chicken industry which kills half of all chicks after hatching (billions each year) and pumps the rest full of hormones with hardly any room to move. Sheep are treated rather better, at least in the UK.
@@wireless849 "They exist only as a means to our ends."
If cows matter morally then they aren't just a means to our ends. Cows have minds of their own with their own fears and desires.
"This could only be competitive if cows were killed when young to keep production high."
The point of regulation is that the rules apply to everyone so that no one needs to break the rules in order to be competitive. We don't have to kill the cows young if no one is allowed to kill them young so everyone is on an even playing field. The meat industry would just have to find some other way to compete.
"Then there is the dairy industry where cows are forcefully impregnated and then have their calves taken away from them shortly after birth for sale or slaughter (depending on whether it’s male or female) so they produce milk."
There's probably a more humane way to get cows to produce milk, but it would be more expensive, and the only way to get the dairy industry to do things in a more expensive way would be to force them through regulation. With regulation we could tell the dairy industry: Find a humane way to produce milk or be shut down. Necessity is the mother of invention, and lactation can be induced in humans so presumably it is also possible in cows.
@@Ansatz66 what I meant is that we treat them as means to our ends. All your suggestions would result in animal products becoming prohibitively expensive, essentially shutting down most of the industry. Meat and dairy would become a luxury few could afford to consume on a regular basis. I probably wouldn’t eat it.
So judge holden is an embracer?
Based Cormac reference
Humanity is the course of ALL problems in the world. No people=no problems!! Even charities are taking advantage out of the disadvantage. 💸💰
I guess the Radical Skeptic can be an embracer in the epistemic sense what do you think about that ?
Or would she be more analogous to the Fugitive, because the radical skeptic attempts to give up on holding beliefs? I'm assuming the epistemic analogy to misanthropy is the view that beliefs cannot be justified. In the case, I'd be more inclined to the see the skeptic as a Fugitive. I think Embracer would be somebody who holds that beliefs simply do not require justification in order to be rational. Something like the voluntarism outlined in this video: th-cam.com/video/jHnx7ddV3fA/w-d-xo.html
@@KaneB Oh nice will give a watch of that video I see what you mean she would be a fugitive indeed
@@KaneB was Nietzche kinda embracer?
@@mykura2018 I don't think so, but I don't know much about Nietzsche. Based on my very limited understanding, he saw contemporary society as governed by a "slave morality", which he did not consider to be something worth embracing. My impression is that he was more of an Activist (re his "transvaluation of values" idea).
@@mykura2018 I would say he was in "constant" change, expressing a wide range of views, and could be seen as a fugitive, a quietist, an embracer, or even an activist (as unbelievable it may sound), though without optimistic sentiments. I 'd definetely not see him as an enemy.
Goatis is a good example of modern day embracer
I´m skeptical about if humanity cause more harm than good. The answer can be easily influenced by bias and it´s very hard to calculate. Obsviously we need a framework by which we can judge the question and my is consequentialist and hedonistic, in ultimate analisys, whats count is the balance of plesure and displesure caused by human actions. I don´t think beeing blameworthy is necessery, seems that a denier of free will and moral responsabily can be a misanthrope. By my self, I´m a hard determinist, and I think nobody is, in ultimate analysis, responsible for to be what they are, but even so, can cause good or bad.
For my own personal life I think the relationship to other people was more bad than good: people frequently are egocentric, stupid and futile... I prefere to adopting a minimilist aproach to social life.
I´m sorry for bad english, I´m from Brazil.
"We can also list a lot of good things people do." LOL, enlighten me!
The only "good" they think they do is fix some of their MANY mistakes.
That does NOT count.
I have struggled with being a misanthrope for a long time. For the past year, I thought I had made peace with it, but recent events in the world and my personal life has reignited my hatred of mankind. What annoys me is that both the people who defend misanthrope and those who disagree with it completely miss the point of misanthropy altogether. For example, saying humans are evil because we kill animals or because we don't treat the environment well is completely reductive and ignores historical, social and economic circumstances that cause us to treat animals and the environment the way we do. Ironically, viewpoints like this only reinforce my misanthropy, because people are given a choice, within the boundaries of their Destiny, to inform themselves on this subject or not pass judgment based on surface-level moral conundrums like "think of the environment".
My own form of misanthropy comes from a concept of Destiny, that is, that we not inherently free, and that ideals like free will are not only false, but outright harmful, and that we should make peace with our Destiny (in crudely simple terms, our circumstances) in order to be better people, live better lives and overcome our existential dread. This sort of Destiny doesn't just apply to individuals either, but collectives: families, communities, regions, ethnicities, and even entire nations. A nation itself has a destiny based on its own zeitgeist and historical formation, which serves as the basis for its people their existential perception (hermeneutics is also closely tied to this). Once again, the same can be said of individuals. My misanthropy is born from the fact that the majority of humans not only eschew such Destiny, but are outright averse to it. They "swim against the current", so to speak. It's a form of willful ignorance that causes nothing but pain, yet people cling to it anyway. People would much rather listen to Donald Trump or Joe Biden than they would intellectual thinkers and philosophers, and this has been true throughout most of history, though it has been compounded in modernity and later post-modernity. Imagine how different the world would be if we listened to Nietzsche. Or Dostoevsky. Or Heidegger. Or Aquinas. Or, hell, Lao Tse if we wanna go back a couple thousand years. So many historically prominent figures have given us their own ideas on how to live better lives, how to reflect and contemplate, how not to give in to conformism, how to lead people and nations, the importance of hierarchy, the trappings of materialism. And yet we listened to none of them. Most of the time, we end up listening to exactly the kinds of individuals who have no place telling people what to do, much less being in positions of power. We squandered everything in the name of petty "freedom", and the result is we are led by stupidity, short-term goals, miscommunication, bureaucracy, profit, ignorance, and all other things that we as humans should preferably avoid when possible. The history of humanity is thus a history of mistakes, and such mistakes often have a much greater, deeper impact on us than any action deemed correct from a moral, ethical or existential point of view. We are aware of this. Our Destiny tells us that. One doesn't need to be an intellectual genius to figure this out. The average person is likely to agree with you, at least on the notion that we tend to listen to the wrong people. And yet that same person will continue to make the same mistakes that they complained about, pushing themselves further away from their Destiny and thus from wisdom and spiritual well-being. We as a species constantly swim against the current, making mountains out of molehills, solving problems we ourselves create, fooling ourselves that we always have to "act" or "do" when in reality non-action and contemplation are the keys to virtue and excellence. Look at the way people talk about depression, or suicide. They treat it as if they're illnesses, giving them neat little categories and offering people step-by-step instructions, as if solving these issues is no different than assembling an office chair or a computer. No one discusses these matters by giving them the proper dignity of depth and complexity which they inherently carry with them. And the average person has no problem with this, even though such methods are woefully wrong and outright dangerous. And then people wonder why suicide rates keep rising, or why an overrepresented percentage of people are on SSRIs, or why mass shootings are becoming increasingly common (no, banning guns will not solve that problem, but your average person thinks that's all the discussion amounts to -- just to give another example of a surface-level materialistic "debate" that has become sadly common in our times).
In short, we are capable of being so, so much better than we currently are. Yet we squander it all for cheap, short-term benefits. We ignore our circumstances, our Destiny, for silly ideas of liberty and freedom, ideas which we hardly even know how to defend or support (or even why). We find ourselves incapable of making difficult, but correct decisions, out of fear of judgment. And people are terribly judgmental and petty. We can be so much more, and I have faith that maybe, just maybe, we will get there some day. But we must first contend with the fact that we are a sadly ignorant, stupid species prone to the most brazen, short-sighted decisions and deadly errors of judgment. We must contend with the fact that we have a Destiny that we must acknowledge and make peace with, for it is the path towards spiritual well-being and wisdom. And finally, we must contend with the fact that suffering is an inherent part of life, and that aligning ourselves with our Destiny will allow us to minimize potentially needless suffering and live better lives.
But humanity fails to do any of this, by its own volition.
That's why I'm a misanthrope.
(As a final note, I may hate humanity as a collective, but I don't necessarily hate individuals, with maybe some exceptions. For the most part, I would just rather not be part of society or communicate with others unless necessary, but if I must, I try to be courteous and respectful. It's a lot better than being spiteful and mean-spirited. In a sense, unlike stereotypical misanthropes, I am okay with people, but I hate humanity.)
The best ruler is the one that doesn't wish to rule, because he struggles with his doubts too much to seek to impose his will. People follow trends because they are not curious, or confident enough to be their own self. I'm pretty sure you want to help your fellowmen. Think of them as animals, and give them love, expecting nothing in return, just to be YOU, and get out of your juicy brain, every once in a while. You still got a long life ahead of you. Save a little space for the innocent and unknowing child in you. It IS your life after all. So what if it doesn't make sense ? Who cares, if it puts a small on your pretty face. Peace be with you.
You wrote something absolutely beautiful. Thank you for expressing your thoughts.
You are not alone with those thoughts, in fact you sound like my friend in high school who would share a lot of your beliefs. I agree with most of what you said accept the importance of hierarchy tbh. Humans are generally worse when coerced by other powerful humans who tell them to conform to their standards.
I think the propositions: 'we don't give enough to charity' or 'why spend all that money on luxury items', are problematic. We may not give enough to charities but we pay taxes(>1%), and a good portion of those taxes (in many countries) go to support social programs that support disadvantaged people. Also, the person who buys an expensive luxury item, but could have forgone the purchase and given it to charity, I think misses the point that the lives of many thousands of ordinary people depend on the sale of such items.
charity isn't needed in a well built world
rationalizing art, culture and science which are just results of humanity whilst not mentioning the atrocities that happened during its development or were produced from its creation is just so nice to support this flawed argument isn't it? "don't focus on the negative" you're just focusing on the positive? not objectively both. This is almost on a level of satire, to any actual philosophical encompassed thought. lol this is laughable.
What do you think of Benatar’s antinatalism arguments? Personally I’m not persuaded by his pessimism but I think they’re pretty solid
👍🏻
22:00 There are many sectors to the meat industry, and some, like grazing on otherwise unproductive land, provide benefits beyond a "nice taste in the mouth". Consider also that the meat industry output of non-synthetic fertilizer single-handedly sustains the Organic farming industry.
Ha here it is. The flimsiest of arguments people will claw onto Kane was talking about....
@@themplanetz at least I made an argument. You’re two years late and have nothing to say but petty insults. Nice.
@@PhysicsPolice Where is the insult mate? I just simply repeated what Kane said in the video. Now when it comes to making an argument of my own, I didn't deem it necessary as it was already made in the video. But here goes, the majority of animals in farming suffer excruciating, painful lives for the sake of our pleasure. The taking care of unproductive land and output of non synthetic fertilizer are issues that could be resolved without the meat industry existing....
@@themplanetz yes, animals in factory farms suffer. About 70% of livestock are raised in those conditions, and it’s a problem. We agree on that point. At 22:00 he said the only benefit was a nice taste in the mouth. This isn’t true. Growing more food is a benefit. This is still true even if you can grow more food in other ways. The existence of added productive calories from graze land, assuming you believe they exist, is all I need to show Kane made a mistake at 22:00. Finally, no, there is no other source of non-synthetic fertilizer than animal shit. That’s what it is by definition. There aren’t enough animals to make enough shit. We have to raise them. We should do this in humane conditions. But it’s sufficient to prove Kane made a mistake that there is any benefit besides a nice taste in the mouth. The fact that farming livestock supports the entire organic food industry is a billion dollar per annum benefit. Kane made a mistake.
@@PhysicsPoliceHe said 77 billion animals are "killed" per year in animal farming. Referring to the ones killed for the sake of meat production hence the "taste" comment. Regarding the fertilizer issue. While I understand your point, I still believe it does not justify the suffering and killing. Maybe we should start taking more laxatives and using our own shit lol
Does anybody else think Vecna from the new season of Stranger Things is a minanthrope?
There's no "think" about it...he is. He's a textbook "enemy."
Me-ism.
Based and doomer pilled
Couldn't it be that humanity behaves bad due to the natural constraints, specifically the scarcity of energy and resources?
I think that if we ever discover a renewable and inexpensive source of energy (like maybe nuclear fusion) then humanity behavior will greatly improve. I know I'm being optimistic but let's try to imagine this utopia: almost free energy from water, all materials recycled, world population stabilized.
Wouldn't we behave better in this scenario? What do you think?
Also what about humanity moral progress? Before, torture and slaves were common and now, in general we see it as unacceptable. I didn't see this position reflected on the video.
Is not humanity making any moral progress? Even if it's very slow...
No, we have everything we could ever want and we're worse than ever before.
The worst traits of people don't even have anything to do with resources:
Narcissistic
Judgmental
Sociopathic (apathetic)
Show me anything you call a "friendship", and I'll show you all the reasons why you're lying to yourself.
@@manictiger exactly. Everybody on their own. Death to humanity is my beloved dream.
it shouldnt all be about human progression. our progression is destroying the earth we live on. humans need for experience is going to kill the world.
@@erictim9052 I was talking specifically about moral progress giving the example of slavery, no technological progress.
@@eliaswibz I wasnt talking about technological progress. Was talking about the imperative humans hold that is all about human progression. but fair i understand
Why do I see myself here 😅
20:14 why don't you just take off your shoes then go into the pond lol
Don't forget that every action you take is selfish, so "good things" humanity does, are all really pure selfishness, another moral failing. Self imposed I might add.
devils advocate: if you are altruistic and reasons/motives include doing it for god and having certain ethical and moral obligations, it is not purely self motivated
@@1594simonsays I like your train of thought, however I'd argue that you get a dopamine release from helping others, or some sort of chemical release. That's the motivation whether the people are conscious of it or not. That's my thoughts however, I don't pretend to speak facts.
@@RealAICCl thanks man. i would also argue that you and i are actually both right its a grey area. whos to say that it’s necessarily a bad thing when someone gets some sort of satisfaction and pleasure from doing altruistic things. to me it makes perfect says because doing good things aligns with our inherent/intrinsic conscience. these are natural reactions imo
@@1594simonsays yea it’s not bad in my view because bad doesn’t exist to me, I think you’re also right in the sense that people engage with life as if it were serious vs as if life was a game, so they impose a rule set on themselves, a moral franework from which to view the world. I personally get a satisfaction from pointing out their self imposed moral failings. If they don’t impose morals on themselves and live outside of any framework I believe benevolence is possible. So yea it’s a grey area for sure. Edit I honestly think that if the right person were to realize that life were a game and come out of the self imposed moral framework they could potentially rule the world and lead humanity out of the state were in . I would like to see that. However it’s not gonna be me , because I am evil in other peoples views as in the common rules that society adheres.
@@RealAICCl forsure man. good exchange
Dam. I’m a misanthrope. 😂
You misspelled turd wrong
@@alfiankamil9922 dont project so much
Can you help me, how do you coexist with misanthropy person, how do I fight their persona to put it on "normal" path
Who is the misanthrope? A friend or a family member? In my opinion, misanthropy isn't really a negative trait. You don't need to "fight their persona" unless they are a danger to themselves and others, in which case they should seek professional help. Otherwise, accept them for who they are and understand where they are coming from, help them see the good in life.
Tbh I'm considering killing them the exact moment they proudly proclaimrd themselves as one
Real late answer, but you should probably not fight back with intent like that. Just be a good person to them. I'm a misanthropist, I despise humanity as a whole, but there are individual people I love and adore, wouldn't trade them for anything. It's my own doing if I wish to change my stance.
Unless the person in question has other compounding conditions like depression or some such, then suggest they get treatment for that, and not the moral condemnation, that might soften on its own with time once more immediate problems are solved.
Misanthropy doesn't make you a different person. Our actions mostly still remain the same, but its only the perception of things that changes.
So damn good video. Thanks.
well done video
Can't help but feel that a lot of our views on misanthropy stem from the religious notion of humanity being "better" than animals. Animals brutally kill each other all the time, not just over food, but over petty things like sex. Animals abandon their children to death, intelligent animals often display what we would call sadism, doing things like playing with their (living) food. If animals were as smart as us and had access to our tools they'd probably do the same as us.
So when you're comparing us to common sense morality, more sophisticated moral framework, or a God, then yeah. We're pretty shit. But if we compare ourselves to other animals we're pretty average.
What's the argument here? "If humans are terrible, then non-human animals are terrible. But non-human animals are not terrible. So humans are not terrible." -- I doubt that anybody attracted to misanthropy would be averse to doing a modus ponens on that conditional and concluding that there are plenty of non-human animals that are also terrible.
@@KaneB
I guess I just gave another "holding humanity to too high of a standard" argument while also making what is "terrible" relative to what we see in the animal world. From some absolute moral perspective, (like that of a God) humans and all animals are terrible. But when we're relative to all animals we'd be pretty average.
It's not really supposed to be a super solid argument. I'm more so wondering if our high standards from humanity stem from the religious view that humans are superior to animals.
@@TheGlenn8 "Don't cause intense suffering to other beings" doesn't seem like a very high standard to me tbh.
@@KaneB
Yet it's a standard that pretty much every animal fails to meet. Even animals most of us consider herbivores quite commonly kill and eat other animals.
@@TheGlenn8 So, the misanthropist will say, it turns out that most species are terrible. Most species fail to meet even the most basic standards of acceptable behaviour. What's the problem with this conclusion? I see no reason to take it for granted that the world is good.
Nice
Anþrodiċy?
Humans are just like any other animal out there, intelligence just grotesquely magnifies brutality of existence on this life feeds on life Planet.
222
I loved this video soo much I disliked it
Maybe don't use gendered pronouns for the x-types, it's needless in this sort of breakdown that is focused on a genderless problematic.
Rest of the vid was interesting to digest a different angle, since I am a misanthropist, and I'm looking for that sort of thing for my own ends.
this is completely logically flawed.
What is logically flawed? The explanation or misanthropy?
So the list of negatives of "misanthropic" people, could accurately be attributed to any group, or philosophy. Thus, makes it a highly subjective and in my opinion a utterly ridiculous break down of the misanthropes philosophy or world view, in the analysis of it's negative attributes. It holds zero water, as a black and white argument, it's only half right. But, what do expect from those who don't know what they don't know, or understand.
Good video though mate. My comment is directed to the self proclaimed intellectuals that developed these list and parameters of defining the misanthrope, and not you the content creator.
I became kind of embracer. Need to spread the wound before I leave 🤘🔥
My rationalisation for eating meat is that it's natural, we have evolved to eat meat and have done so for thousands of year, though I do only buy meat from places that go above and beyond in terms of animal welfare, my answer to the meat industry would be that there are simply too many humans, we take up and use much more than we should, but also a lot of the vegan products are filled and made with chemicals, when I looked at the ingredients of some of them and thought I was looking at a chemistry textbook, there's nothing natural about it, I only eat that which is within nature.
I eat meat ... I am a hunter. Thats a survival thing.
Me 😂
You’re very indoctrinated.
Misanthropy = Donald Trump
I’ve learnt from Jesus… as the Son of God he did great work as a philanthropist. Next time he visits us he will be a MISANTHROPE, amen 🙏🏽🇦🇺
💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀 wtf