A man is wandering in a desert starving for what seems to him like an eternity. He comes upon a vendor that carries some preserved meats and other morsels. The man checks his pockets but is lacking in any currency. The vendor begins to walk away, and the man desperately asks the vendor to wait. The vendor is impatient, but pauses a moment, and the man begins courting the vendor and attempting to start a friendship. The vendor reconsiders their position and warms up slightly to the starving man, almost out of pity. The starving man follows the vendor on their travels for a couple of days. During the travels with the vendor, the man observes as many people get sustenance from the vendor, most of the time free of charge to the man's surprise. The vendor has many apparent friends. The friends of the vendor all appear jovial and lighthearted in their pursuits, the starving man by contrast is simply focused on sating his hunger. In the end, the vendor decides that they are tired of the starving man, that the starving man was not jovial enough and is too concerned with obtaining sustenance. The vendor tells the starving man to stop following them. The starving man wanders for a day or so, eventually collapsing in the midst of nowhere and dying.
How dare that starving bastard be so concerned with following his biological imperative. The mention of hunger was to draw a parallel between the desire for intimate human relations and other biological imperatives that act on humans.
>allowing your biological imperatives to control you
>not forsaking food and normalslime in one blow, instead opting to lay in the sand and watch your life fade as you gaze at the sun
But the vendor has many friends who get products for free, and the man is attempting to achieve the same sort of friendship. Only the man is so desperate that the vendor won't have it. Because that's a thing for some reason.
Why didn't the man follow the vendor out of the desert, or follow one of the vendor's customers?
Why do any of us exist? I agree that none of it adds up.
One is a man, I am a man. Both have intrinsic worth, in some schools of thought at least.
Nobody said the vendor leaves the desert. What would following a random customer do for you anyway? The vendor is the one with the seemingly unlimited supply.
Everyone leaves the desert at some time. Don't these people have homes? Why is the man dead set on getting food from the vendor? He could just as easily follow someone else who is more compassionate.
What if the planet is one big desert? You may enter a city, but you're still in a desert. Everybody is starving and thirsty. They have homes, but homes alone do not feed you or quench your thirst. The vendor is merely one who happened to be closest, but the starving man has tried many vendors in his journeys and all have acted with similarly constrained compassion.
What if the vendor is say, a person born with the magical gift of being able to sate your hunger without any cost to themselves? Perhaps this vendor can summon food, like Jesus or some equivalent mythological figure. If you have a (seemingly) infinite supply of a certain good that people need for sustenance, what is the moral reasoning for withholding that because someone seems "too desperate"?
>being lonely is the same as dying in a desert HELP ME THESE NORMIES ARE KILLING ME BY NOT BEING MY FRIENDS
IT'S PUSSY! THE VENDOR IS A CHICK AND SHE'S GIVING PUSSY AWAY FOR FREE AND IF THE "STARVING" GUY ONLY CARES ABOUT GETTING THAT PUSSY AND NOT SAY TRYING TO DO OTHER STUFF WITH HER THAN HE WONT GET ANY! IN OTHER WORDS TRY TO ENJOY LIFE AND OTHERS COMPANY WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT GETTING SOMETHING IN RETURN (PUSSY).
Thanks, I know it's not the most subtle story ever. But who am I anyway, fucking Frank Herbert or some shit? I'm not an author or even talented at writing. Fuck off with your obvious ass.
I'm not reading that word wall faggot.