>The definition of the true savage is that he laughs when

>>8853944

i posted this in the last thread and some illiterate said it's "not meant to be taken literally," but i think that he's alluding through "howl" to wolves, implying that savages call for help when hurt, as well as implying that the civilized men suffer alone.

>>8853944
How is the savage wrong?

>>8853967
Retard

>>8854413
I think Gilbert is describing moral myopia. The savage has no self-awareness so when he hurts someone else, he will take pleasure in it or gloat but when having the exact same thing happen to him, he will express moral outrage.

>>8854417
Dumb fuck

>>8854417
What makes you think his outrage is moral?
And what does this have to do with self-awareness? Don't you mean other-awareness?

>>8854428
The definition of Self-Awareness is conscious knowledge of one's own character, feelings, motives, and desires.

>>8854444
Where does he lack this?

>>8854428
>>8854444
Therefore, a savage as Gilbert described would not notice that he has done the exact same thing as his opponent, thinking it's okay or even righteous when he does action A but claiming it's wicked and villainous when someone else does action A.

>>8854453
But it's not the same thing. Once it was done to him, the other time he did it to the other.

Sounds like the savage isn't limiting his own potential with constructed ideas of fairness and equality

>>8854417
More or less. A savage realizes his actions cause pain, but it does not occur to him that if he refrained from hurting others for his pleasure, they might refrain from hurting him (or he's not ready to make that trade), and that's essentially the beginning of community or civilization: denying your own immediate base impulses for the sake of a greater shared goal.

>>8854417
>gilbert
are you his buddy?
respect the man ffs.

>>8854480
It's certainly different from the way most describe being a savage which is usually used to describe a society that is more primitive than the society the describer comes from.

>>8854497
Definitely, and Chesterton sees most everything through a Christian apologist framework. However, the quote comes from a specific and interesting essay condemning Prussians military actions, so it's worth considering context. He's not speaking of all savages, he's lambasting the fuck out of Prussians.

"the Prussian is a spiritual Barbarian, because he is not bound by his
own past, any more than a man in a dream. He avows that when he promised to
respect a frontier on Monday, he did not foresee what he calls "the
necessity" of not respecting it on Tuesday. In short, he is like a child,
who at the end of all reasonable explanations and reminders of admitted
arrangements, has no answer except "But I _want_ to."

http://www.online-literature.com/chesterton/appetite-of-tyranny/2/

>>8854686
aka Christians

>>8854417
>>8854444
in this sense, a savage would be someone that is incapable of developing or represses character developments that appear when you're still a baby.

So basically what he's saying is that a savage is an overgrown toddler

>>8853944
sounds like "savage" is the old-timey word for autistic

>>8853944
based land-whale

>>8854712


kekked

>>8853944
is that really proper use of a semicolon?

>>8854413
hes not
now come here with me, i want to laugh a little bit