Basicly, when being bastard is easier and more efficient, humasn take that route. However, if minimal sacrifice is needed to not to act liek bastard, humans take that because, well, we like Warm and Fuzzy feeling we get from not being a bastard.

In the end, Humanity as hole is bastard, but given chance humans are not bastards.

Maybe it's all about perspective. For example:

Say there's a war going on in another country. Are you a bastard if you have the resources, but don't help out? To some people, maybe, but think about it from the perspective of the country with the resources:

• 1.They might lose their resources trying to help the other country, and there's no guarantee they will get helped in return.
• 2.They might have just enough for themselves, and you can't help someone if you're not doing all that well yourself.
• 3.The other country might not want them to intervene and may view them as bastards for intervening because it undermines their autonomy, or something to that effect.
• 4.The richer country's intervention might make things worse for the war-ridden country, if the war-ridden country cannot maintain the changes.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Many people might think it's best just to cut their losses and move on.

Edit: That sounded callous. I don't mean to say that this is the ideal or that it should be, I'm just saying this might be the thought process involved with this "bastardly behavior."

edited 22nd Oct '11 2:57:33 PM by BlackElephant

If we're bastards, then all other species are Complete Monsters.

We at least try to be moral, unlike the murderous rapist ducks and dolphins (and horses, chimpanzees, wolves, woodlice...)

Other species cannot be held responsible for their actions, because they cannot know better. They are not moral agents

Blue and Orange Morality, basicly. Our morals do not work well with Wild Animals.

This one doubts that it can be called even Blue and Orange. Animals are ruled by their instincts and reflexes and literally cannot do anything else. There are some variations in behaviour, but none of it can be called fully intentional

edited 23rd Oct '11 1:53:18 AM by Beholderess

I'm a pretty strong believe in Rousseau Was Right, although tempered with pragmatism (humans would be nice to each other if we everyone had the right things, but there'll probably never be enough of those things for everybody), so I dislike this trope immensely. The real-life implications are that we have to be self-interested to some extent to survive, so we're all kind of neurotic about that - no different from any other animal, except we have the capability to be neurotic.

edited 23rd Oct '11 2:09:11 AM by AirofMystery

Monochromatic is already taken. So, moral blindness?

Pretty much. Although blindness often implies lack of sight where it should have been, which is not the case with animals. They are not "morally blind" as in "unable to discern which is moral and which is not". They are not moral agents to begin with

In my opinion, stuff like the Kitty Genovese incident and a lot of experiments that incited bastard-y wasn't out of apathy or malice. No one in the Kitty Genovese incident wanted to go out late at night in 1980's New York (suffering a LOT of violent crime) to face someone who was armed, and a lot of people make the mistake that "someone's already called it in" (this happens a lot in emergencies that would incite less bastard-y actions, like, say, building fires).

You can push humans to do good or to do evil. It takes the right push. Humans, by default, aren't either or try to strive for either unless their brain goes off the rails, like it usually does.

we have always been bastards.

all of you can say this or that but the fact is that %80 of the world lives in a shitty place, and like %60 is in poverty.

Despite the developed nations, most of the rest of the world sucks.

though we are improving i guess, but history cycles. just enjoy the ride is all i can say.

And that is what makes humans bastards. They don't even need malice for it. Also, this one would be no different, and she knows it

I don't believe that you can count the whole species as "bastards". Maybe "majority", but whole?