Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

The State of Nature


Replies to: The State of Nature

  • enfieldacademyenfieldacademy - Posts: 2,321 Senior Member
    In the same way that I wouldn't blame a dog for discriminating against humans because it was abused by one, i wouldn't blame a human for discriminating against dogs because he was bitten.

    yes, the human may have the intelligence to see that his discrimination against the dogs may be unfair, but that understanding alone may not change his reaction to seeing dogs (of fear and aversion, which could be considered discrimination).

    Where things go wrong, in my opinion, is probably when the human who is bitten teaches his kids to discriminate against dogs too. because that is not using his intelligence where it could be used - if he understands that his discrimination against dogs is largely irrational, then why would he pass it on to his kids? that's a grave and stupid mistake.

    because that is dangerous. Then you get kids who have been indoctrinated to discriminate against dogs, without the capacity to realize their discrimination of dogs is unfair, and who never give the dogs a chance because of it.

    Now, maybe some of those problems would be mitigated if the children grew up in a setting with lots of adults of different view points (some of who loved dogs), and so on, and not with an unfortunate set of parents who would impress false realities on them.
This discussion has been closed.