Re: one's fly is unzipped
- Original Message - From: Victor Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >On this thread I'll have to agree with Eva against Jay's contention that a >mind is predisposed [by evolution] to reproduce the genes that created it. > >A human being is predisposed to get laid, which in bygone ages usually had >the effect of reproducing the genes. Patriarchy, emphasizing reproduction >and transmission of property to the offspring, has been admittedly the most >widespread form of social organization, and it does articulate the supposehere are social >structures enough with other assumptions for us tod >evolutionary imperative of reproduction. However, t doubt that the >reproductive urge (as opposed to the sexual urge) is an evolutionary given: Predisposed means before socialiazion. 1. a. To make (someone) inclined to something in advance. Jay
Re: one's fly is unzipped
On this thread I'll have to agree with Eva against Jay's contention that a mind is predisposed [by evolution] to reproduce the genes that created it. A human being is predisposed to get laid, which in bygone ages usually had the effect of reproducing the genes. Patriarchy, emphasizing reproduction and transmission of property to the offspring, has been admittedly the most widespread form of social organization, and it does articulate the supposed evolutionary imperative of reproduction. However, there are social structures enough with other assumptions for us to doubt that the reproductive urge (as opposed to the sexual urge) is an evolutionary given: societies in which the relationship with one's nephews and nieces is much more important than the relationship with one's biological children, even societies where the link between sex and children is not guessed at, which is presumably also the case for the animals. So isn't it the other way around? Isn't the theory of an urge to reproduce a pseudo-scientific reformulation of patriarchal beliefs rather than patriarchy being a consequence of evolution in action? Patriarchy was unquestionably one of the most effective forms of organization for a social group to survive at a certain technological level. It would not have been so widespread if this were not so. However, it is a learned behaviour. We see that as a system of belief commanding allegiance, it started crumbling fairly rapidly once humanity moved on to a higher technological level. The practical relevance of the question is this: If Jay is right about the problem--an urge to reproduce that is an innate biological imperative--then he is likely right about the solution--that the only slim hope is a few enlightened leaders imposing their superior understanding on others. (And he's probably kidding himself about that, as these "enlightened leaders" could equally well be self-deceived by their evolutionary urges.) If Eva and I are right--that only the urge to pleasure is innate and that people can learn to live quite happily without reproducing themselves--then we have to look elsewhere for the problem menacing the biosphere and the solution to it. The ultimate problem to my way of thinking is the economic order of the world which places most power in the hands of aberrant individuals who value nothing so much as counting dollar signs--personally I'd rather get laid or read a book. More precisely, the social order has now been so restructured in terms of the dominant institution, the trans-national corporation, that even those who are not inherently aberrant are co-opted into the service of the system. The problem is one of overconsumption; the economic world order demands new markets--new mouths--to keep itself expanding. The immediate problem then is the re-education of the masses, bearing in mind that the corporations control the media. As a displaced academic, now working for many years in a factory, I can say that a surprisingly large number of ordinary people do see through the system that is ruining us, but a larger number still swallow the lies and oversimplifications fed to them in their pro-business newspaper which (here in Ontario) comes with a SunShine Girl to provide an incentive for buying it. Live long and prosper Victor Milne FIGHT THE BASTARDS! An anti-neoconservative website at http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/pat-vic/ LONESOME ACRES RIDING STABLE at http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/
Re: one's fly is unzipped
> Or, maybe, the selfish gene wants *my * DNA to go forward. Maybe we have no > 'program' for the human species. Coming from a wide open world (the hunter > gatherer saga) there is nothing in our internal makeup to cause us to > cooperate at the level of survival of the human species. This latter > behaviour is all learned behaviour. > Ever since we became social beings - a very long time ago indeed - the individual "program" was secondary, soldiers, sacrifice victims, (or even volunteers) priest etc, etc, were not allowed to breed even if they were prime specimen. The tendency of more and more ethnic + national + global integration - even before capitalism - is one of the best observable social fact: cooperation works, outcasts perish. Some of the social features - such as language - is indeed hardwired and evolved since the first humanoids. Eva > Who knows? Time for more coffee. (but after reading Harrell's posts-- no > more berries from abroad!!!) > > arthur > -- > From: Eva Durant > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: one's fly is unzipped > Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 4:13AM > > > >>but not a good enough point in respons the one I made; > >>humans are motivated more for pleasure/happiness > >>than reproduction. That's why babies have to look cute > >>and toy-like at least in our culturaly freer society > >> Even than quite a sizable number decide > >>not to bother. Where is the selfish gene? > > > >If it wasn't there, we wouldn't be here. > > > > But our quantity turned into quality; our social/ > economical environment influences our choices more > than the biological one. Otherwise how could we explain > the suicidal tendecy of the present system?? Surely > the selfish gene wants the human species to survive... > > > Eva > > > >Jay > > > > > -- > ** Beispiel-Signatur ** >
Re: one's fly is unzipped
It was raspberries Arthur, as for hunter-gatherers, the only one's I know are descendants of the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria and are addicted to H/G on the Stock Market. REH Cordell, Arthur: DPP wrote: > Or, maybe, the selfish gene wants *my * DNA to go forward. Maybe we have no > 'program' for the human species. Coming from a wide open world (the hunter > gatherer saga) there is nothing in our internal makeup to cause us to > cooperate at the level of survival of the human species. This latter > behaviour is all learned behaviour. > > Who knows? Time for more coffee. (but after reading Harrell's posts-- no > more berries from abroad!!!) > > arthur > -- > From: Eva Durant > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: one's fly is unzipped > Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 4:13AM > > >>but not a good enough point in respons the one I made; > >>humans are motivated more for pleasure/happiness > >>than reproduction. That's why babies have to look cute > >>and toy-like at least in our culturaly freer society > >> Even than quite a sizable number decide > >>not to bother. Where is the selfish gene? > > > >If it wasn't there, we wouldn't be here. > > > > But our quantity turned into quality; our social/ > economical environment influences our choices more > than the biological one. Otherwise how could we explain > the suicidal tendecy of the present system?? Surely > the selfish gene wants the human species to survive... > > Eva > > >Jay > > > > > -- > ** Beispiel-Signatur **
Re: one's fly is unzipped
Or, maybe, the selfish gene wants *my * DNA to go forward. Maybe we have no 'program' for the human species. Coming from a wide open world (the hunter gatherer saga) there is nothing in our internal makeup to cause us to cooperate at the level of survival of the human species. This latter behaviour is all learned behaviour. Who knows? Time for more coffee. (but after reading Harrell's posts-- no more berries from abroad!!!) arthur -- From: Eva Durant To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: one's fly is unzipped Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 4:13AM >>but not a good enough point in respons the one I made; >>humans are motivated more for pleasure/happiness >>than reproduction. That's why babies have to look cute >>and toy-like at least in our culturaly freer society >> Even than quite a sizable number decide >>not to bother. Where is the selfish gene? > >If it wasn't there, we wouldn't be here. > But our quantity turned into quality; our social/ economical environment influences our choices more than the biological one. Otherwise how could we explain the suicidal tendecy of the present system?? Surely the selfish gene wants the human species to survive... Eva >Jay > > -- ** Beispiel-Signatur **
Re: one's fly is unzipped
>>but not a good enough point in respons the one I made; >>humans are motivated more for pleasure/happiness >>than reproduction. That's why babies have to look cute >>and toy-like at least in our culturaly freer society >> Even than quite a sizable number decide >>not to bother. Where is the selfish gene? > >If it wasn't there, we wouldn't be here. > But our quantity turned into quality; our social/ economical environment influences our choices more than the biological one. Otherwise how could we explain the suicidal tendecy of the present system?? Surely the selfish gene wants the human species to survive... Eva >Jay > > -- ** Beispiel-Signatur **
Re: one's fly is unzipped
- Original Message - From: Cordell, Arthur: DPP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Or, maybe, the selfish gene wants *my * DNA to go forward. Maybe we have no >'program' for the human species. Coming from a wide open world (the hunter >gatherer saga) there is nothing in our internal makeup to cause us to >cooperate at the level of survival of the human species. This latter Exactly! We cooperate because it contributed to "inclusive fitness" in hunter-gatherer communities. Apparently, the basic human cooperation model between strangers is called "tit for tat". Upon meeting a stranger we give them the benefit of the doubt and cooperate. We remember his face and if he later stranger cooperates back, we cooperate again. But if he stiffs us, we stiff him back. It's pretty simple and works well in small communities. People who didn't cooperate, didn't pass their genes on to the next generation. Here is an utterly fantastic page on these subjects http://mitpress.mit.edu/MITECS/culture.html Evolutionary theory identifies three ways in which cooperation can evolve which differ in the delay before the "debt" incurred by cooperating is repaid (see Bertram 1982). (1) Mutualism defines the condition when both individuals gain an immediate advantage from cooperating. This may be an appropriate explanation for many cases of group living where individuals gain mutually and simultaneously from living together (e.g. through increased protection from predators, group defense of a territory, etc). (2) Reciprocal Altruism defines the case in which the debt is repaid at some future time, providing this is during the lifetime of the altruist. This may be an appropriate explanation for cases where individuals who are unrelated to each other form a coalition for mutual protection: the ally will come to the aid of a beleagured partner even though it is itself in no immediate danger, but it does so on the implicit assumption that the partner will come to its aid on some future occasion. (3) Kin Selection is defined as the case where the debt is repaid after the death of the altruist because the extra fitness that accrues to the recipient contributes to the altruist's inclusive fitness. (Inclusive fitness is the technical term for the genetic quantity that evolution seeks to maximize; it is the number of copies of a given gene contributed to the species' future gene pool by an individual as a result of his or her own reproductive output plus the number contributed by his or her relatives as a direct result of that individual helping each relative to breed more successfully). Kin selection can only work where the two individuals are genetically related. It may provide an explanation for assistance freely given to relatives without prior demands for reciprocation. Jay GIF image
Re: one's fly is unzipped
but not a good enough point in respons the one I made; humans are motivated more for pleasure/happiness than reproduction. That's why babies have to look cute and toy-like at least in our culturaly freer society Even than quite a sizable number decide not to bother. Where is the selfish gene? Eva > >> The ultimate goal of a mind is to reproduce the genes that created it. > > >wrong, and there are plenty of human (they are the ones with the mind) > > Good point! I am working on my next paper. It's changed to: > "A mind is predisposed to reproduce the genes that created it." > > Jay > - > predisposed > 1 a. To make (someone) inclined to something in advance: His good manners > predispose people in his favor. See synonyms at incline. b. To make > susceptible or liable: conditions that predispose miners to lung disease. > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: one's fly is unzipped
> It's an empirical fact that democracy is on the way out. In 1981, 35% of > the world's population lived under "free" political systems, by 1996 the > number fallen to 19%. [1] > Well, with democracies only in name, such statistics doesn't make much sense. > Why? Even if democracy weren't run by the rich, it STILL can't "solve" > problems because it's "process" politics instead of "systems" politics. > > "As the name implies, process politics emphasizes the adequacy and fairness > of the rules governing the process of politics. If the process is fair, > then, as in a trial conducted according to due process, the outcome is > assumed to be just -- or at least the best the system can achieve. By > contrast, systems politics is concerned primarily with desired outcomes; > means are subordinated to predetermined ends." [2] > How do you know what's it like when it is not run by the rich? The primaly desired outcome is to satisfy first the basic than other needs. Democracy assures than the outome is always just, or as just as possible, all there is for the democratic process to do is to find the best possible way. I cannot see the distiction Eva > But in a world of Limits to Growth, a civilization either "solves" its > problems or the day must come when it "collapses": > > "Energy has always been the basis of cultural complexity and it always will > be. . the past clarifies potential paths to the future. One often-discussed > path is cultural and economic simplicity and lower energy costs. This could > come about through the "crash" that many fear - a genuine collapse over a > period of one or two generations, with much violence, starvation, and loss > of population. The alternative is the "soft landing" that many people hope > for - a voluntary change to solar energy and green fuels, energy-conserving > technologies, and less overall consumption. This is a utopian alternative > that, as suggested above, will come about only if severe, prolonged hardship > in industrial nations makes it attractive, and if economic growth and > consumerism can be removed from the realm of ideology." [3] > > We are now feeling Limits to Growth, and democracies are collapsing into > authoritarian systems. This then is the political problem imposed on > democracies by immutable biophysical laws: solve or collapse. > > Jay > --- > [1] p. 43, DARWINISM, DOMINANCE, AND DEMOCRACY: The Biological Bases of > Authoritarianism, by Albert Somit and Steven A. Peterson; Review at > http://info.greenwood.com/books/0275958/0275958175.html > > [2] p. 242, ECOLOGY AND THE POLITICS OF SCARCITY REVISITED; Ophuls, 1992. > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0716723131 > > [3] COMPLEXITY, PROBLEM SOLVING, AND SUSTAINABLE SOCIETIES, by Joseph A. > Tainter, 1996; http://dieoff.com/page134.htm > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: one's fly is unzipped
- Original Message - From: Durant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >but not a good enough point in respons the one I made; >humans are motivated more for pleasure/happiness >than reproduction. That's why babies have to look cute >and toy-like at least in our culturaly freer society > Even than quite a sizable number decide >not to bother. Where is the selfish gene? If it wasn't there, we wouldn't be here. Jay
Re: one's fly is unzipped
- Original Message - From: Durant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> The ultimate goal of a mind is to reproduce the genes that created it. >wrong, and there are plenty of human (they are the ones with the mind) Good point! I am working on my next paper. It's changed to: "A mind is predisposed to reproduce the genes that created it." Jay - predisposed 1 a. To make (someone) inclined to something in advance: His good manners predispose people in his favor. See synonyms at incline. b. To make susceptible or liable: conditions that predispose miners to lung disease.
Re: one's fly is unzipped
- Original Message - From: Durant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Even the best of the present nominal democracy won't work >if the power is not in fact in the hand of those elected by dubious >means. Which doesn't mean that democracy cannot work, It's an empirical fact that democracy is on the way out. In 1981, 35% of the world's population lived under "free" political systems, by 1996 the number fallen to 19%. [1] Why? Even if democracy weren't run by the rich, it STILL can't "solve" problems because it's "process" politics instead of "systems" politics. "As the name implies, process politics emphasizes the adequacy and fairness of the rules governing the process of politics. If the process is fair, then, as in a trial conducted according to due process, the outcome is assumed to be just -- or at least the best the system can achieve. By contrast, systems politics is concerned primarily with desired outcomes; means are subordinated to predetermined ends." [2] But in a world of Limits to Growth, a civilization either "solves" its problems or the day must come when it "collapses": "Energy has always been the basis of cultural complexity and it always will be. . the past clarifies potential paths to the future. One often-discussed path is cultural and economic simplicity and lower energy costs. This could come about through the "crash" that many fear - a genuine collapse over a period of one or two generations, with much violence, starvation, and loss of population. The alternative is the "soft landing" that many people hope for - a voluntary change to solar energy and green fuels, energy-conserving technologies, and less overall consumption. This is a utopian alternative that, as suggested above, will come about only if severe, prolonged hardship in industrial nations makes it attractive, and if economic growth and consumerism can be removed from the realm of ideology." [3] We are now feeling Limits to Growth, and democracies are collapsing into authoritarian systems. This then is the political problem imposed on democracies by immutable biophysical laws: solve or collapse. Jay --- [1] p. 43, DARWINISM, DOMINANCE, AND DEMOCRACY: The Biological Bases of Authoritarianism, by Albert Somit and Steven A. Peterson; Review at http://info.greenwood.com/books/0275958/0275958175.html [2] p. 242, ECOLOGY AND THE POLITICS OF SCARCITY REVISITED; Ophuls, 1992. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0716723131 [3] COMPLEXITY, PROBLEM SOLVING, AND SUSTAINABLE SOCIETIES, by Joseph A. Tainter, 1996; http://dieoff.com/page134.htm
Re: one's fly is unzipped
> The ultimate goal of a mind is to reproduce the genes that created it. > Among social primates, the ability to manipulate others is one of the most > important factors in getting one's genes into the next generation. The human > mind evolved primarily as a tool to manipulate others in complex social > hierarchies. [1] > wrong, and there are plenty of human (they are the ones with the mind) counter-examples, some zero or negative population growth, millions of healthy adults who choose a lifestyle without children. Even the best of the present nominal democracy won't work if the power is not in fact in the hand of those elected by dubious means. Which doesn't mean that democracy cannot work, there is no evidence that autocracy works. Some of your educated type with contempt against the rest of humanity is just so keen to go for some elitist system. Eva > Jay > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
one's fly is unzipped
The ultimate goal of a mind is to reproduce the genes that created it. Among social primates, the ability to manipulate others is one of the most important factors in getting one's genes into the next generation. The human mind evolved primarily as a tool to manipulate others in complex social hierarchies. [1] The sine qua non of politics is: "social manipulation" -- it's taking a fact out of context and twisting it around to improve one's "inclusive fitness". It's in our genes -- we all do it. Obviously, mental attributes that are optimized for politics can not sustain very long for the simple reason they can't actually solve problems in the real world. This is why even the "pseudo democracies" (money-based democracies, or democracies under capitalism) are historically rare and now on the way out: "[ Evolutionary scientists ] Somit and Peterson provide an informative account of the evolutionary basis for our historical (and current) opposition to democracy. For many, this will be an unwelcome message - like being told that one's fly is unzipped. But after a brief bout of anger, we tend to thank the messenger for sparing us further embarrassment." [2] As resources are depleted, the ruling classes are less-and-less able to allow the common herd animals the pretence of self government. It seems that democracy was only temporary luxury -- enjoy it while it lasts: "I submit that the democracy we are encouraging in many poor parts of the world is an integral part of a transformation toward new forms of authoritarianism; that democracy in the United States is at greater risk than ever before, and from obscure sources; and that many future regimes, ours especially, could resemble the oligarchies of ancient Athens and Sparta more than they do the current government in Washington." [3] "West Africa is becoming the symbol of worldwide demographic, environmental, and societal stress, in which criminal anarchy emerges as the real 'strategic' danger. Disease, overpopulation, unprovoked crime, scarcity of resources, refugee migrations, the increasing erosion of nation-states and international borders, and the empowerment of private armies, security firms, and international drug cartels are now most tellingly demonstrated through a West African prism. West Africa provides an appropriate introduction to the issues, often extremely unpleasant to discuss, that will soon confront our civilization." [4] Jay [1]"In fact, telling primates (human or otherwise) that their reasoning architectures evolved in large part to solve problems of dominance is a little like telling fish that their gills evolved in large part to solve the problem of oxygen intake from water. The struggle for survival through competition and cooperation with members of one's own species is as old as life itself. If the data on social norm and theory of mind reasoning show us anything, it is that the winners are most likely to be those with the capacity to exploit or route the constraints of the dominance hierarchy. If one were to guess at which problems cognition evolved to solve, one would be hard pressed to come up with a better candidate than dominance." [pp. 45-46, THE EVOLUTION OF MIND, Denise Dellarosa Cummings & Collin Allen; Oxford University Press, 1998 ] [2] Robert E. Lane, Professor Emeritus of Political Science, Yale University, and Past President, American Political Science Association, commenting on DARWINISM, DOMINANCE, AND DEMOCRACY: The Biological Bases of Authoritarianism, by Albert Somit and Steven A. Peterson; Review at http://info.greenwood.com/books/0275958/0275958175.html [3] WAS DEMOCRACY JUST A MOMENT? by Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly, December, 1997 http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/97dec/democ.htm [4] THE COMING ANARCHY, by Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly, February 1994 http://www.theatlantic.com/atlantic/election/connection/foreign/anarcf.htm
