Scam Alert

Mark Torres14 said:Great.
I want to talk about fraud without getting all bogged down in "good vs. evil" nonsense.

But honestly, deception is inherently "not good" from the jump... I mean, we all have it hardwired into our DNA, if you want to put it that way, because otherwise the very concept of a lie wouldn't even exist in our heads... 🤷 So, you can't really talk about it outside of that framework.

They paint Robin Hood as this thief who steals from the rich, which somehow makes him some kind of hero, but come on... who else was he supposed to steal from if not the wealthy? 🤷

Mark Torres14 said:Mark Torres14. My starting point is that deception grew out of an evolutionary need. If you don't have any serious weapons besides a big brain, then that brain has to find another way to protect the body it lives in.
Deception probably started with hunting animals, and later, due to complex primate social structures, it became a tool for group survival.
Nobody likes being conned, especially if you're a man and you realize you've been played. That's why some people, refusing to admit how easily they're fooled, insist they haven't been, even when they know they were, or knew it was coming.
Getting conned means losing your status in society, doesn't it?😉

So, what you're actually suggesting is that evolution can only really move forward if we use cheating as a tool? 😕
I find that hard to swallow, honestly, especially when you look at the mess the human race has ended up in because of it...☕

.. your whole argument boils down to this one point: that deception is somehow necessary—even inevitable.

.. so you’re essentially grouping it in with monkeys .. and celebrating the little primate's antics.
.. you probably see it in a pack of wolves, too—with some small wolf who used trickery to become the alpha, just like some cartoon character.

.. but you don't mention the beehive .. or the ants .. where you'd actually find brotherhood and unity acting as the foundation of the group.

.. and I'll be blunt .. you started with deception. It was your idea from the jump. You picked up this toxic ideology and now you're desperately trying to justify it—scouring every corner of the earth just to find a single comparison that holds water.
.. and I'll tell you one more thing .. you're wasting your time. You aren't going to pull this off.

So if we’re all agreeing that a scam is inherently wrong from the jump, does that mean there’s such a thing as a "justified" deception—one where a bad act somehow spirals into something good? Take a scenario where Joe swindles Mark, then Pero swindles Joe just to snatch Mark’s money back and return it... does Pero actually view his own betrayal as a righteous act, or is it something else entirely, and how would some neutral observer even begin to judge that mess...
I mean, honestly, it probably just depends on who you ask
I get that the word "scam" carries this built-in negativity right out of the gate, but sometimes the bad stuff is woven into the good, and vice versa... you can't just look at everything through a black-and-white lens
I guess...

.. No.. you can't just see everything in black and white.. though that’s a whole other discussion—and a good one at that..
.. And my answer to that second topic.. well.. if you truly want to live in a world driven by ego and power, then sure, taking everything as purely relative is a great way to go..
.. But in that kind of.. relative mindset.. anything goes—including absolute atrocities. For instance.. even something like a mass genocide in a concentration camp could be framed as "relative" compared to this or that or some other grievance.. which is just wrong..

I don't know what you're trying to say. Get to the point. Mark Torres14 says:
Look, fraud is fundamentally wrong. It’s baked into our DNA—if that’s how you want to put it. Otherwise, the whole concept of cheating wouldn't even exist. 🤷 So you can't even talk about her outside of that? Fine.

And why exactly would it be a bad thing?
Maybe our sense of right and wrong is just something civilization cooked up, rather than some biological hardwiring. Or do you think there’s a universal truth to good and evil—this fundamental light versus dark—where certain things are just inherently one or the other?

They paint Robin Hood like this legendary hero who just happened to rob the rich, making him look like some kind of saint. Give me a break. Who else was he supposed to steal from? The poor? It’s a total scam. 🤷

Honestly, I’m more of a Superman guy.
At least he’s got style.😁

redtinker36 said:.. your whole argument boils down to this one point: that deception is somehow necessary—even inevitable.

.. so you’re essentially grouping it in with monkeys .. and celebrating the little primate's antics.
.. you probably see it in a pack of wolves, too—with some small wolf who used trickery to become the alpha, just like some cartoon character.

.. but you don't mention the beehive .. or the ants .. where you'd actually find brotherhood and unity acting as the foundation of the group.

.. and I'll be blunt .. you started with deception. It was your idea from the jump. You picked up this toxic ideology and now you're desperately trying to justify it—scouring every corner of the earth just to find a single comparison that holds water.
.. and I'll tell you one more thing .. you're wasting your time. You aren't going to pull this off.

👍Spot on.

.. but you aren't looking at it in a beehive .. or an anthill .. where you'd actually find .. brotherhood and unity .. acting as the bedrock of the organization ..

That's an interesting point. Can a bee or an ant even lie?
Every time I think about them, they remind me of computer code or robotics. It's closed-loop system logic that doesn't allow for surprises.
Is an ant just a gear in some machine that might one day evolve into intelligence, or is their world just a closed loop of endless, repeating patterns that only adapt as a collective to new situations?
How? Who knows.🤷

... you won't pull it off ..

Watch me.🙂

Bradley Hayes36 said:So if we’re all agreeing that a scam is inherently wrong from the jump, does that mean there’s such a thing as a "justified" deception—one where a bad act somehow spirals into something good? Take a scenario where Joe swindles Mark, then Pero swindles Joe just to snatch Mark’s money back and return it... does Pero actually view his own betrayal as a righteous act, or is it something else entirely, and how would some neutral observer even begin to judge that mess...
I mean, honestly, it probably just depends on who you ask
I get that the word "scam" carries this built-in negativity right out of the gate, but sometimes the bad stuff is woven into the good, and vice versa... you can't just look at everything through a black-and-white lens
I guess...

Sharp observation.
Is there such a thing as a justified deception?
I've always been fascinated by how complex deception can be, even on the smallest scale. Nature does it constantly. Animals and plants use mimicry all the time—imitating other species to look more dangerous or using colors to hide what they actually are. The human brain (and primate brains in general) isn't an exception here. We just operate on a different level. We use deception to predict a series of future events.

.. so, what do you do for a living?

.. does your profession .. have anything to do with this topic ..?

redtinker36 said:.. No.. you can't just see everything in black and white.. though that’s a whole other discussion—and a good one at that..
.. And my answer to that second topic.. well.. if you truly want to live in a world driven by ego and power, then sure, taking everything as purely relative is a great way to go..
.. But in that kind of.. relative mindset.. anything goes—including absolute atrocities. For instance.. even something like a mass genocide in a concentration camp could be framed as "relative" compared to this or that or some other grievance.. which is just wrong..

No. Relativism doesn't mean a damn thing here, unless you're trying to play philosopher without facing any consequences. Fraud is concrete. It’s a specific act that requires real effort from anyone trying to pull it off.

redtinker36 said:.. so, what do you do for a living?

.. does your profession .. have anything to do with this topic ..?

I'm not talking about that. We need to keep some anonymity here.
If you're that curious, go ask BlackRock.😁

.. given what you do for a living .. it's a pretty interesting perspective .. for this topic ..?

I suppose you might be giving that baboon way too much credit when it comes to actual foresight or strategic planning. If we look back at my point about Zdravko Mamić regarding emotionality and spirituality, it's a better comparison, I think. You have Zdravko, cornered by reporters, just screaming like a primate. He projects his internal mess onto the world, trying to paint himself as some sort of victim of a massive conspiracy—you know, the whole anti-American, anti-Catholic, anti-football, anti-military, anti-big-city-glory cabal. The journalists eventually walk away without getting any real answers, even if they mock him in the next headline for acting like an animal. Then, Mamić makes a public apology, maybe goes to a couple hours of therapy, and honestly? He just keeps right on lying just like before. The scam works, because the media still didn't get what they actually asked.

It’s just like the baboon. He sees a female digging around, feels insulted that he wasn't the one to think of it first, and lashes out with this emotional outburst, calling for his mother. Once she chases the other little female away, he’s happy again.

I guess you could see the same pattern in how some people on this forum argue, or when they try to get rid of a moderator they don't like, or provoke someone just to get them banned... though, I suppose there's a much higher level of calculated control and cold planning involved there. In those cases, the person who reacts like a primate is usually the one who gets banned or removed first. So, I guess my conclusion is that humans have evolved socially compared to baboons. We've just become more sophisticated at being corrupt. 😁

Mark Torres14 said:

I don't know what you're trying to say. Get to the point. Mark Torres14 says:
Look, fraud is fundamentally wrong. It’s baked into our DNA—if that’s how you want to put it. Otherwise, the whole concept of cheating wouldn't even exist. 🤷 So you can't even talk about her outside of that? Fine.

And why exactly would it be a bad thing?
Maybe our sense of right and wrong is just something civilization cooked up, rather than some biological hardwiring. Or do you think there’s a universal truth to good and evil—this fundamental light versus dark—where certain things are just inherently one or the other?

They paint Robin Hood like this legendary hero who just happened to rob the rich, making him look like some kind of saint. Give me a break. Who else was he supposed to steal from? The poor? It’s a total scam. 🤷

Honestly, I’m more of a Superman guy.
At least he’s got style.😁

Distinguishing between good and non-good—or what you call evil—is essentially a prerequisite for free will. (Think back to the Biblical story of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and why Adam and Eve were granted free will in the first place, even after they ate from that tree...)
And yeah, I tend to lean toward the idea that good and evil are universal constants, even if different civilizations throughout history have labeled different things as good or bad, though they always seem to align with some sort of underlying universal concept. (Which isn't surprising, considering how relative our reality is, since everyone perceives things differently, making it necessary to establish certain general standards...) But still, somehow on a "biological" level we know what is right and what isn't. (Probably thanks to our non-material nature. 😉)
That’s why we have free will; it’s based on this perception of universal good and evil, and it’s through that very capacity that we actually define ourselves in life.
That is why the Holocaust was evil, regardless of the fact that it was carried out as an official state policy. That is why it is evil when politicians force our fellow citizens to scavenge through trash bins just to survive, no matter how much they claim they are following the letter of the law. Theft is theft, whether it involves $33 or millions of dollars.
The thing is, people (for whatever reason) have just accepted deception and wrongdoing as something common and perfectly normal... almost as if someone clouded their collective consciousness. 🤷

Mark Torres14 said:Great.
I want to talk about fraud without getting all bogged down in "good vs. evil" nonsense.

We can look at it as an evolutionary mechanism. In that light, cheating evolved as a way to survive and secure a mate, while simultaneously driving the evolution of systems designed to detect and punish dishonesty.

The math behind deception is pretty basic: it's all about the cost-benefit ratio. Cheating lowers the cost while keeping the payoff steady or even increasing it. Of course, once you factor in detection methods, the risk of loss goes up. You see this in any society built on social contracts where those agreements can be broken. It’s even visible in nature—think of organisms that puff themselves up to look bigger to scare off predators, or species that mimic the bright colors of toxic animals when they aren't actually poisonous.

.. you get what I'm getting at.. ? .. tell me you finished law school and now serve as a judge.. and politically.. that you're an advocate.. for the biological basis of infidelity..
(.. the thought of it.. amuses me.. and I suspect.. that thought.. might actually be true..)

dustyskipper3 said:I suppose you might be giving that baboon way too much credit when it comes to actual foresight or strategic planning. If we look back at my point about Zdravko Mamić regarding emotionality and spirituality, it's a better comparison, I think. You have Zdravko, cornered by reporters, just screaming like a primate. He projects his internal mess onto the world, trying to paint himself as some sort of victim of a massive conspiracy—you know, the whole anti-American, anti-Catholic, anti-football, anti-military, anti-big-city-glory cabal. The journalists eventually walk away without getting any real answers, even if they mock him in the next headline for acting like an animal. Then, Mamić makes a public apology, maybe goes to a couple hours of therapy, and honestly? He just keeps right on lying just like before. The scam works, because the media still didn't get what they actually asked.

It’s just like the baboon. He sees a female digging around, feels insulted that he wasn't the one to think of it first, and lashes out with this emotional outburst, calling for his mother. Once she chases the other little female away, he’s happy again.

I guess you could see the same pattern in how some people on this forum argue, or when they try to get rid of a moderator they don't like, or provoke someone just to get them banned... though, I suppose there's a much higher level of calculated control and cold planning involved there. In those cases, the person who reacts like a primate is usually the one who gets banned or removed first. So, I guess my conclusion is that humans have evolved socially compared to baboons. We've just become more sophisticated at being corrupt. 😁

That kind of behavior actually takes a decent amount of cognitive skill—you need foresight and planning to pull that off.

Gary James88 said:We can look at it as an evolutionary mechanism. In that light, cheating evolved as a way to survive and secure a mate, while simultaneously driving the evolution of systems designed to detect and punish dishonesty.

The math behind deception is pretty basic: it's all about the cost-benefit ratio. Cheating lowers the cost while keeping the payoff steady or even increasing it. Of course, once you factor in detection methods, the risk of loss goes up. You see this in any society built on social contracts where those agreements can be broken. It’s even visible in nature—think of organisms that puff themselves up to look bigger to scare off predators, or species that mimic the bright colors of toxic animals when they aren't actually poisonous.

Hold on a second—the phenomena you're describing aren't really "fraud" in the way humans define it. To us, fraud requires anticipation; it involves an awareness of gain, a conscious intent, and a deliberate decision to deceive.

Those species that "evolved" to look like toxic animals didn't do so through a conscious choice to reap benefits. That adaptation happened purely by accident through mutation. It just so happens that those specific mutations gave those individuals and their offspring a much better shot at survival compared to those that didn't mutate.

Is a baboon "aware" that screaming will help it attract a mate? It's entirely possible, in some rudimentary sense. We already know chimpanzees have the capacity to solve basic problems. Honestly, it’s a fascinating question: what exactly is missing in chimpanzees that prevents them from developing self-awareness and intelligence comparable to ours?

lonegardener said:Hold on a second—the phenomena you're describing aren't really "fraud" in the way humans define it. To us, fraud requires anticipation; it involves an awareness of gain, a conscious intent, and a deliberate decision to deceive.

Those species that "evolved" to look like toxic animals didn't do so through a conscious choice to reap benefits. That adaptation happened purely by accident through mutation. It just so happens that those specific mutations gave those individuals and their offspring a much better shot at survival compared to those that didn't mutate.

Is a baboon "aware" that screaming will help it attract a mate? It's entirely possible, in some rudimentary sense. We already know chimpanzees have the capacity to solve basic problems. Honestly, it’s a fascinating question: what exactly is missing in chimpanzees that prevents them from developing self-awareness and intelligence comparable to ours?

Who exactly is this "us" when you say how "we perceive" it? 🙂 I’m talking about deception in both the narrow and broad sense, not just the human one. The first part of my post was about people. Those colors that look toxic might have appeared by accident, but they didn't stick around by accident.

lonegardener said:Hold on a second—the phenomena you're describing aren't really "fraud" in the way humans define it. To us, fraud requires anticipation; it involves an awareness of gain, a conscious intent, and a deliberate decision to deceive.

Those species that "evolved" to look like toxic animals didn't do so through a conscious choice to reap benefits. That adaptation happened purely by accident through mutation. It just so happens that those specific mutations gave those individuals and their offspring a much better shot at survival compared to those that didn't mutate.

Is a baboon "aware" that screaming will help it attract a mate? It's entirely possible, in some rudimentary sense. We already know chimpanzees have the capacity to solve basic problems. Honestly, it’s a fascinating question: what exactly is missing in chimpanzees that prevents them from developing self-awareness and intelligence comparable to ours?

Probably just the associative centers in the cerebrum. Some might call it a soul, I don't know.

Gary James88 said:Who exactly is this "us" when you say how "we perceive" it? 🙂 I’m talking about deception in both the narrow and broad sense, not just the human one. The first part of my post was about people. Those colors that look toxic might have appeared by accident, but they didn't stick around by accident.

Probably just the associative centers in the cerebrum. Some might call it a soul, I don't know.

"We," meaning us humans. I'm referring to the "historical" baggage certain terms carry. The concept of "deception" existed long before modern science came along.

I didn't say they stayed around by accident; we all know how they stayed—because individuals with those specific colors had a much better shot at survival. It’s a pretty simple, obvious reason. There’s no "conscious anticipation," no deliberate "goal" or "plan" involved here. So, while this kind of "deception" (regarding skin color in those species) might share some "similarities" with what we mean when we say "Haso cheated Mujo at poker"—there are still massive differences. Wouldn't you agree?

Of course, this isn't the only case where the same word is used for two concepts that are similar in some ways but fundamentally different in others. For instance, "car theft" shares some DNA with "software piracy" or "stealing an idea"—but the differences are huge. Methinks.

Gary James88 said:Who exactly is this "us" when you say how "we perceive" it? 🙂 I’m talking about deception in both the narrow and broad sense, not just the human one. The first part of my post was about people. Those colors that look toxic might have appeared by accident, but they didn't stick around by accident.

Probably just the associative centers in the cerebrum. Some might call it a soul, I don't know.

"Soul" is, well, a non-scientific concept. 😍

It seems to me that a baboon's behavior shows quite advanced associations... perhaps it's just a lack of the ability to reflect and "step outside" of its own perspective? That capacity to experience oneself as an "object" rather than just a "subject"? Then again, for a few species, it's said they can "understand" that their reflection in a mirror isn't someone else, but themselves. That sounds pretty fuckin' amazing—what more would they need besides that to follow a path similar to a human child?

How does that experiment with children go... even after a kid can speak and clearly recognizes themselves in a mirror, there's still a gap for a while. For example, if you ask a 3-year-old girl who has two sisters, Ana and May, "How many sisters do you have?"—she'll say "two, Ana and May." But if you then ask her, "How many sisters does Ana have?"—she'll answer "one—May." 😍 This suggests that regardless of recognizing oneself in a mirror, the ability to "step out of one's own perspective" isn't fully developed yet. 🤔 Or something like that.