At our core---are we animal?

[Sinister Kung Fu]

DioRte

For all you know, she's telling the truth. That's the point, you can't tell, you have to go by what you know, which is just what she said. It's not that she doesn't feel hunger or that it's not there as far as what she's trying to get across, that has nothing to do with it. The point she, and now I, was trying to get across is the statement that the strongest human urgers are eating and procreating. Hunger, for her, is not the strongest urge for her, regardless of the fact that it's there. Technicalities, get used to them, they're what you need to pay attention to if you want to make a good arguement. It's also good for law.

Take away the convenience of modern society and I guarantee you 100% that hunger would become one of the strongest urges for her again.  

[DioRte]

Might as well say take away anything that provides a human with what their urges want then they'll want it more. Of course it's going to change if you change the scenario.  

[Sinister Kung Fu]

DioRte

Might as well say take away anything that provides a human with what their urges want then they'll want it more. Of course it's going to change if you change the scenario.

It' makes more sense than basing it around asingle person with a medical anomaly.  

[zz1000zz]

Rellik San

DioRte

She's right you know.

On a technicality, I could prove every opinion of mine of a technicality.

I find it tedious to discuss things with people who attempt to defend their incorrect positions by dismissing things as "technicalities" and "anomalies." The very nature of blanket statements like yours cause them to be disproven by "anomalies."

DioRte

For all you know, she's telling the truth. That's the point, you can't tell, you have to go by what you know, which is just what she said. It's not that she doesn't feel hunger or that it's not there as far as what she's trying to get across, that has nothing to do with it. The point she, and now I, was trying to get across is the statement that the strongest human urges are eating and procreating. Hunger, for her, is not the strongest urge for her, nor is it the second strongest, regardless of the fact that it's there.

I find it even more tedious when people dismiss things by accusing other people of lying, but hiding it behind vaguenesses. I do not feel hunger; the statements are false.

That is all there is to it. Either accept it, call me a liar or change the statements.  

[Sinister Kung Fu]

zz1000zz

Rellik San

DioRte

She's right you know.

On a technicality, I could prove every opinion of mine of a technicality.

I find it tedious to discuss things with people who attempt to defend their incorrect positions by dismissing things as "technicalities" and "anomalies." The very nature of blanket statements like yours cause them to be disproven by "anomalies."

DioRte

For all you know, she's telling the truth. That's the point, you can't tell, you have to go by what you know, which is just what she said. It's not that she doesn't feel hunger or that it's not there as far as what she's trying to get across, that has nothing to do with it. The point she, and now I, was trying to get across is the statement that the strongest human urges are eating and procreating. Hunger, for her, is not the strongest urge for her, nor is it the second strongest, regardless of the fact that it's there.

I find it even more tedious when people dismiss things by accusing other people of lying, but hiding it behind vaguenesses. I do not feel hunger; the statements are false.

That is all there is to it. Either accept it, call me a liar or change the statements.

As a species, humans ARE driven by hunger. That is scientific fact, regardless of whether one person lacks the ability to feel it, or not. Essentially, your situation is entirely irrelevant to the argument.  

[DioRte]

Hunger is not a drive or urge for her, period. It's not impossible for someone to not feel hunger. I've went weeks without feeling hungry, in fact I've felt full when I've had nothing to eat, but that doesn't mean hunger is what's making me eat. I made the conscience decision to eat because I know I need to to keep my body running, that does not make it an urge or a drive, that's acting on knowledge. You're disregarding her statements as irrelevant because she's an anomaly as it's been said? That's NOT how you go about trying to prove anything. People who try to sell pills claiming they do something specific go through more people who don't get the desired effect than those who do, and they point to the minority result and claim that's what it does. They get around that by saying "results may vary". Point is, you need to realize that not everything is exactly the damn same, there are going to be people and animals who don't function the way they ought to, and you need to take those into account. You do that by saying animals almost always are driven by hunger, not they always are. There is never an always unless you're talking mathematics, and we're not talking mathematics, so take that into consideration. Not everything is black and white, especially in organisms, there are gray areas, it's really not that damn hard to comprehend. You're just being stubborn now, and it is getting tiring trying to even continue this lameass arguement with someone who doesn't even grasp that, or has any humility. Yes, animals eat, they have to, but that doesn't necessarily make it a drive. Trees are alive, they take in nutrients, but they aren't driven to, they just do. This is also straying from the main topic, about whether we're animals at our core, which is obviously yes, and you're arguing over a technicality of what was stated to define us as being so. Are you trying to say we are or aren't animals at our core, to both of you. I say yes because there's nothing that makes us anything BUT an animal, and listing the things we do has nothing to do with being an animal or not, it's just what our brains ended up allowing us to do, and saying we're not animals simply because we have a better brain, as far as manipulation of our environment is concerned, than every other animal, is flat-out egotistical bullshit.  

[Sinister Kung Fu]

DioRte

Yes, animals eat, they have to, but that doesn't necessarily make it a drive. Trees are alive, they take in nutrients, but they aren't driven to, they just do.

Not feeling hunger, does not by any means mean that a person is not driven by the need to eat. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just being intellectually dishonest.
Until you can show me someone who does not eat at all, but otherwise lives a normal life, any statement to the contrary is complete crap.
You eat, or you die. Simple fact. Regardless of whether or not you feel an "urge" for it, you still do it.  

[zz1000zz]

Sinister Kung Fu

zz1000zz

Rellik San

DioRte

She's right you know.

On a technicality, I could prove every opinion of mine of a technicality.

I find it tedious to discuss things with people who attempt to defend their incorrect positions by dismissing things as "technicalities" and "anomalies." The very nature of blanket statements like yours cause them to be disproven by "anomalies."

DioRte

For all you know, she's telling the truth. That's the point, you can't tell, you have to go by what you know, which is just what she said. It's not that she doesn't feel hunger or that it's not there as far as what she's trying to get across, that has nothing to do with it. The point she, and now I, was trying to get across is the statement that the strongest human urges are eating and procreating. Hunger, for her, is not the strongest urge for her, nor is it the second strongest, regardless of the fact that it's there.

I find it even more tedious when people dismiss things by accusing other people of lying, but hiding it behind vaguenesses. I do not feel hunger; the statements are false.

That is all there is to it. Either accept it, call me a liar or change the statements.

As a species, humans ARE driven by hunger. That is scientific fact, regardless of whether one person lacks the ability to feel it, or not. Essentially, your situation is entirely irrelevant to the argument.

So you took my third option. You changed the statement.

Just so you know, it is considered good manners to admit you were wrong before backpedaling.  

[Sinister Kung Fu]

zz1000zz

Sinister Kung Fu

zz1000zz

Rellik San

DioRte

She's right you know.

On a technicality, I could prove every opinion of mine of a technicality.

I find it tedious to discuss things with people who attempt to defend their incorrect positions by dismissing things as "technicalities" and "anomalies." The very nature of blanket statements like yours cause them to be disproven by "anomalies."

DioRte

For all you know, she's telling the truth. That's the point, you can't tell, you have to go by what you know, which is just what she said. It's not that she doesn't feel hunger or that it's not there as far as what she's trying to get across, that has nothing to do with it. The point she, and now I, was trying to get across is the statement that the strongest human urges are eating and procreating. Hunger, for her, is not the strongest urge for her, nor is it the second strongest, regardless of the fact that it's there.

I find it even more tedious when people dismiss things by accusing other people of lying, but hiding it behind vaguenesses. I do not feel hunger; the statements are false.

That is all there is to it. Either accept it, call me a liar or change the statements.

As a species, humans ARE driven by hunger. That is scientific fact, regardless of whether one person lacks the ability to feel it, or not. Essentially, your situation is entirely irrelevant to the argument.

So you took my third option. You changed the statement.

Just so you know, it is considered good manners to admit you were wrong before backpedaling.

Who's backpedaling? I haven't changed my stance, I haven't changed what I've been saying, and I stand behind my point 100%.  

[DioRte]

A drive is an urge or motivation, it's either extrinsic or intrinsic. If you don't feel the hunger, the urge isn't there. Hunger is the urge. Requiring food to live is not an urge. She doesn't feel the hunger, therefore, she doesn't feel the urge. How are you not getting this? Also, I just feel like further correcting this thread. Eating and reproducing are not the two strongest urges. Thirst is a much more powerful urge than hunger. You can go weeks without food, try going that far without water.  

[Sinister Kung Fu]

DioRte

A drive is an urge or motivation, it's either extrinsic or intrinsic. If you don't feel the hunger, the urge isn't there. Hunger is the urge. Requiring food to live is not an urge. She doesn't feel the hunger, therefore, she doesn't feel the urge. How are you not getting this? Also, I just feel like further correcting this thread. Eating and reproducing are not the two strongest urges. Thirst is a much more powerful urge than hunger. You can go weeks without food, try going that far without water.

I'm "not getting this" because your argument is weak, and lacks any real merit.
I understand what you're saying completely, I just think it's ******** stupid.  

[DioRte]

Well that's psychology, if you think it's ******** stupid, don't even bother talking about it. That IS what it is, regardless of what you think. Learn what a drive actually is before you argue about it.  

[Sinister Kung Fu]

DioRte

Well that's psychology, if you think it's ******** stupid, don't even bother talking about it. That IS what it is, regardless of what you think. Learn what a drive actually is before you argue about it.

Don't talk down to me little boy. rolleyes  

[DioRte]

I'm jsut saying an urge is different from a requirement. Nobody's arguing that they don't need food to survive. All she said was the doesn't feel hunger, and you need to feel the urge in order to have it. She still needs to eat, it's still just as necessary for her to eat as it always was. We're talking about the feeling, not the requirement U__U; Nice sig btw, it made me giggle.  

[Henneth Annun]

Sinister Kung Fu

DioRte

Well that's psychology, if you think it's ******** stupid, don't even bother talking about it. That IS what it is, regardless of what you think. Learn what a drive actually is before you argue about it.

Don't talk down to me little boy. rolleyes

In this situation I think he has a right to correct you and to try and make you understand, he can do what he wants. And I think YOUR post here is just some pathetic reply because you having nothing to argue back besides an opinion (against fact.)