What is your opinion about this dialogue:?

Question

A: "Do you believe that men have always massacred each other as they do today, that they have always been liars, cheats, traitors, ingrates, brigands, idiots, thieves, scoundrels, gluttons, drunkards, misers, envious, ambitious, bloody-minded, calumniators, debauchees, fanatics, hypocrites and fools?"

B: "Do you believe that hawks have always eaten pigeons when they have found them?"

A: "Yes, without doubt."

B: "Well, then, if hawks have always had the same character, why should you imagine that men may have changed theirs?"

--------

Plus: bonus points (not really) for knowing who wrote it, and when.

(Hint: he's my avatar)

Answer 1

I can understand the reasoning -- up to a point.

It's not a fully adequate analogy, though.

That's because humans possess the ability to look back on our history, to see where we went wrong before, and take measures to improve ourselves and behave better.

Hawks don't possess that ability.

For instance, society has advanced in many ways, in that we have outlawed things like slavery and segregation and so so. We also punish people who commit certain crimes, such as some of the ones mentioned in the quote.

Hawks don't. They have no concept of societal improvement or redress for wrongs. They basically eat, screw, and fly around -- that's it.

Answer 2

Some people believe in man and that man is noble, and was created with the capacity to accomplish greatly. Some like you, do not. Think about this!

“Wonders are many in the world, and the wonder of all is man. With his bit in the teeth of the storm, and faith in a fragile prow, far he sails, where the waves leap white-fanged, wroth at his plan. And he has the will of the earth by the strength of his hand on the plough.” – Sophocles, an ancient Greek philosopher

“What a piece of work is man! How noble in reason! How infinite in faculty! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an angel! In apprehension how like a God! The beauty of the world!” – William Shakespeare, an English writer

There are even more people that believe man in no better than a rat, a vile and despicable animal, that has no reason to exist, since we are a random creation of nature, no better than any other animal.

“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.” – John Davis, editor of Earth First Journal

“We are an just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star.” – Stephen Hawkins, World Renown Physicist

How will a society perform based on a noble vision of man versus a despicable vision of man?

“Our span of life is brief, but it is long enough for us to live well and honestly.” – Cicero

The foundation of life is that we are created us for a purpose. We should live to create, and not destroy. Thus, the basic test for a “reality” based philosophy is: which philosophy of life causes people and society to be most moral, purposeful, creative, and productive?

That's where I hang my hat, with hope for the future and looking toward the stars, not at the gutter and mud.

Answer 3

The dialog was written by François-Marie Arouet aka sir Isaac Newton (as u can clearly see from that picture of yours is the same person http://www.mathe.tu-freiberg.de/~hebisch/cafe/newton.jpg ).

Newton wad intrigued by his words and spent the rest of his life trying do prove that he was right.

This is the demonstration (with a helping hand from his friend Gauss):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauss-Newton_algorithm

As you can read on the bottom of the page if you open the link "We can conclude that the Gauss-Newton method is the same as Newton's method with the Σ f ∇²f term ignored"

Of course you will understand it but for those who don't, this is what he mean:
1. Pigeons deserve to be eaten by hawks
2. People are stupid and that don't seam to change
4. (Newton also demonstrated that no. 3 does not exists) God does not exist

Many agree with this theory, many do not agree with this theory.

On the other hand Voltaire claimed that the dialog was his and the theory is BS but we know better.

Answer 4

Voltaire's Candide. Don't recall when.
I agree completely. As I've said many many times before, we may be inventing and discovering new things every day, and the world is definitely changing, but no one's inventing any new emotions. We're still human and motivated by the same things we were hundreds, thousands, of years ago.

Answer 5

It is a logical argument. Looking at history we really have changed very little over a vast amount of years. Just because we are more sentient beings doesn't necessarily make us any less brutal than any other part of the Animal Kingdom.

Answer 6

Voltaire

Answer 7

Johnathon Edwards?

Answer 8

If you substitute OR for AND then Yes. No hawks do not always eat pigeons when they find them.

Answer 9

your premise gives away a pessimistic outlook. However; I do think man is predatory by nature, thats the way of it i'm afraid. And, in that sense, your correct.

Ok i'm not feeling any better.

cheers anyway.

Answer 10

Not bad. It's from Voltaire's Candide.