I am not undermining potential social issues and neither have I said that you should let egocentric interests guide your life as we transcend biological goals by constantly fighting against our nature. However ignoring such goals are also a harmful, repressive idea. Saying “I’m not a prize” is different than saying “I’m not just a prize”.
Interactions with people aren’t prizes, and shouldn’t be conceptualized as such.
“Humans have needs and desires” and “Humans should conceptualize the fulfillment of their needs and desires as separate from the people they interact (and resulting consequences) with to achieve them” are two different things.
Most basic idea, do unto others. People sometimes want to feel wanted, even in just a purely carnal sense; people generally do not want to feel treated like an object, an abstract, or a piece of meat in the process.
I am not taking about what people want to be or what you should or should not do. My point wasn’t about “should” but about “is”. I am also not talking about all human interactions but specifically sex, which is goal oriented and has a very clear concept of a prize (a reward) if you think in terms of reinforcement learning.
I am also not talking about all human interactions but specifically sex, which is goal oriented and has a very clear concept of a prize (a reward) if you think in terms of reinforcement learning.
Okay, let me rephrase this again, in light of that wording of your position:
“Do not treat human beings simply as means to achieve a goal, even if the human being is necessary for that goal.”
I mostly agree if you look at it from a moral standpoint, even because completely guiding your actions by egocentric goals is antisocial behavior. My concern was about the complete erasure of that goal in language. It is true that humans are more than what their biology sets them to be, but obscuring the actual goal in language seems to be a repressive enactment.
Taking care of people benefits the community, so it’s also a measurement of success!
I am not undermining potential social issues and neither have I said that you should let egocentric interests guide your life as we transcend biological goals by constantly fighting against our nature. However ignoring such goals are also a harmful, repressive idea. Saying “I’m not a prize” is different than saying “I’m not just a prize”.
Interactions with people aren’t prizes, and shouldn’t be conceptualized as such.
“Humans have needs and desires” and “Humans should conceptualize the fulfillment of their needs and desires as separate from the people they interact (and resulting consequences) with to achieve them” are two different things.
Most basic idea, do unto others. People sometimes want to feel wanted, even in just a purely carnal sense; people generally do not want to feel treated like an object, an abstract, or a piece of meat in the process.
I am not taking about what people want to be or what you should or should not do. My point wasn’t about “should” but about “is”. I am also not talking about all human interactions but specifically sex, which is goal oriented and has a very clear concept of a prize (a reward) if you think in terms of reinforcement learning.
Wouldn’t the “prize” be the act of sex and not the woman herself? You are not granted ownership of a woman just by having sex with her.
True, I didn’t pay attention to that. A prize implies ownership. So she would represent a prize but not be one. Good point
Okay, let me rephrase this again, in light of that wording of your position:
“Do not treat human beings simply as means to achieve a goal, even if the human being is necessary for that goal.”
I mostly agree if you look at it from a moral standpoint, even because completely guiding your actions by egocentric goals is antisocial behavior. My concern was about the complete erasure of that goal in language. It is true that humans are more than what their biology sets them to be, but obscuring the actual goal in language seems to be a repressive enactment.
It’s repressive to ask men to not view women only as sexual conquests because of biology?
That’s not what I said and I am tired of answering
Oh no, did I misunderstand your assertion that it’s human nature to objectify women?