"The strong have always preyed upon the weak"

[Willikers]

Of course, sometimes no one is preying on anyone.

[DrummerBoy]

There's no debate here, in my opinion. The human animal has innate aggresiveness hardwired into their DNA; it's simply a by-product of evolution. A passive, timid homo sapien could never have evolved and survived, let alon flourished.
However, having said that, I would amend the quote to read that, "the strong will always prey upon the weak IF left to their own devices and primal instincts"--since many people are disuaded by aggressive tactics--be it in business or physically or emotionally--by existing laws and societal mores.
Also, women also prey upon ther weak many times, but they do it through manipulation and passive-aggressive behavior, or emotional blackmail, rather than via physical or intimidation methods as do the male species.

[GloryB]

This sort of reminds me of an old southern saying:
If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch.

Not everyone comes out on top....but you can't blame the people on top for being willing to do whatever they have to do to get there. I would rather be a nice person than an uber-achiever, but that is my choice. I can't begrudge someone with more ambition.

[Bluefox]

"The stong have always preyed upon the weak"

Well, that just about sums up the entire history of human beings on earth in my opinion.

Since the agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago, we have been on a relentless mission to propograte the world and destroy biodiversity by killing off the competition and everything else. We are just now beginning to realize the gravity of what we have been doing. We use culture as a rational-- "It's what God wants us to do. Why can't we have 6, 8, 12 children? We'll just raze a few more acres of rainforest"-- but those who can see past the farce of Mother Culture know that we are on a slippery slope.

So yes, the strong have always preyed upon the weak. Humans (with the exceptions of tribal cultures -- i.e. pre-Columbian Native Americans, Amazon tribes, Aborigines, basically 0.001% of the population) presume the world is their's for the taking. Daniel Quinn questioned that presumption in his book Ishmael. I also question that presumption.

[poletop1]

Originally Posted by GloryB

This sort of reminds me of an old southern saying:
If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch.

Not everyone comes out on top....but you can't blame the people on top for being willing to do whatever they have to do to get there. I would rather be a nice person than an uber-achiever, but that is my choice. I can't begrudge someone with more ambition.

I certainly can blame predators for exploiting other people. That's my choice and preference.

[GregW]

When I went to Jr. HS I was prey. When I got to HS I baited the predators from Jr. HS. They fell for it and payback time insued. They never hurt me or my friends again. There is a difference between being a predator and a protector.

[crisan]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

It's easy to say that after the fact in any conflict....labeling the victor as "strong" and the vanquished as "weak".

I personally just think it is a trite saying with no depth and boiling the myriad causes of conflicts down to a simplistic saying is worthless.

Very good observation.

"Strong" people in my book don't prey on the "weak." Controlling people do.

[Willikers]

Originally Posted by GloryB

This sort of reminds me of an old southern saying:
If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch.

Not everyone comes out on top....but you can't blame the people on top for being willing to do whatever they have to do to get there. I would rather be a nice person than an uber-achiever, but that is my choice. I can't begrudge someone with more ambition.

Dear Me, GloryB!!! I so disagree that nice people are not ambitious. I think that people who have something to contribute to the marketplace or the community will always be valued. I think people who try to throw a broomstick into the spokes of their competition are like Snidely Whiplash, the bad guy in the Dudley DooRight cartoons.

It's not true to say that business leaders are required to behave as predators. "Make a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door."

Though, GloryB, you do have a point: in recent times people have begun including trying to cripple your competition as a legitimate business practice. When the best product doesn't make it to market because of predatory business practices, the consumer loses, free enterprise loses, and the market economy loses.

Working harder than your competition isn't the same thing as trying to prevent them from bringing their product to market. And working harder is not predatory.

[Thepastpresentandfuture]

First of all, the concept for “The strong have always preyed on the weak.” has to be clarified extensively for what that exactly indicates and where certain people would be categorized. That is because there can be so many misconceptions about that and so much that is not accurate in objective reality for where certain people would be categorized.

Either way, that concept is quite a destructive mentality and is most likely not good for society. Some people think that mindset and conflict is natural and pervasive in society. I don’t think it is natural and it should not be pervasive. It is something that should be reduced as much as possible and can prevent a lot of conflict in the world from happening.

People can strive to be strong mentally/spiritually/and physically without ever having to “prey on the weak.”

[Frankums]

Or the weak become the tool of the strong and appear to be what they are not.


The strong prey off of the weak as the weak need to survive off of the strong who need the strength the weak possess.

Interesting to see how technology may change this with automation.