From: BigBooster (fm1@amug.org)
Date: Tue May 01 2001 - 23:48:59 MDT
At 09:08 PM 05/01/2001 -0700, "John Marlow" <johnmarlow@gmx.net> wrote:
>Brief comments...
>
>#
Thanks for some insightful comments!
>On 1 May 2001, at 13:21, BigBooster wrote:
> >...
> > If primitive man mistakes a bear for a tree stump, he tends to
> > die for his mistake. However, if he mistakes a tree stump for
> > a bear, he suffers few (if any) negative consequences, and he
> > survives.
>
>#Third man likes bear meat, spears everything that looks like a tree
>stump OR a bear, lives long and prospers, dies fat and happy. We did
>not ascend by being timid. I suggest the overly cautious are almost
>always (sonner or later) doomed--as are the overly incautious
>(usually sooner). Trick is finding the balance.
I agree that there are better strategies than the only two I
mentioned. I tried to point out that one kind of error had
disastrous potential, while the other didn't.
I also agree with you that in our modern world there are many
situations in which being overly cautious is bad strategy.
> > John F. Shumaker has propounded the theory that certain aspects
> > of nature (random accidents, brutality, death) are too frightening
> > for most humans to confront. By distorting reality with myths, they
> > enjoy "greater peace of mind and body" and tend to live longer.
>
>#Naaah; they're just trying to make sense of what they don't
>understand. Once they have it figured, they're less stressed and live
>longer.
I suspect that many people, when they reject religious superstition,
experience some kind of "intellectual or existential void" from
which they don't recover, and hence on average die sooner than
the religious believers. I also expect that because of the values
and beliefs I now hold (including extropian principles), and my
practices related to personal health, I'm likely to live longer (even
in the absence of technological life-extension advances) than
even Mormons who wear "protective underwear!"
> > There may also be biological origins of human error. The "triune
> > brain theory" claims that the human brain evolved in such a way
> > that the modern human brain actually consists of "three brains":
> > a primitive reptilian brain, a more evolved but still primitive
> > mammalian/emotional limbic system, and a modern neocortex
> > or thinking brain. Under certain conditions of stress and/or real
> > or perceived threat, the more primitive brain structures tend to
> > take over control, sometimes resulting in irrational behavior.
>
>#Whatever the cause, this can of course be overcome through training
>and discipline. OTOH, lizard brain has its uses...
There may be times when the limbic system needs to take
over control to initiate rapid action before the neocortex has
time to think about it. There are also times when the lizard
brain is ideal for initiating "fight or flight!"
Problems can arise when people (who lack the necessary
training and discipline), for example, become overly emotional
when it would serve them better to be rational.
> > Conformity is also a factor. In primitive tribes, if you didn't
> > conform so as to be "like everybody else," you risked being
> > kicked out, most likely leading to an early death. The conformists
> > tended to survive and the nonconformists tended to die off.
>
>#Strictly interpreted, this would have led to perpetual stagnation.
>Therefore, it's not entirely accurate. The conformists are still
>swinging through the trees.
Correct. There have probably always been "clever nonconfirmists"
who pretended to be conformists most of the time and didn't
rock the boat more than could be tolerated. (At the risk of
seeming paternalistic, I must confess that so far on this
topic I've written at a fairly high level of abstraction and
generality, to avoid mentioning some specific human errors
that might result in my being perceived as a crackpot!)
> > Certain "professionals" (such as medical doctors and lawyers)
> > command a great deal of power, money, and respect to the extent
> > that their customers are ignorant and error-prone. The economic
> > interest of many "professionals" is for their clients to be so ignorant
> > and error-prone that they often need "expert" assistance, but not
> > so ignorant and error-prone that they die too soon! -- the longer
> > the victims can be "milked," the better!
>
>#Look at applying this logic to government; the Nanny State.
This is done comprehensively in 'The Anatomy of Slavespeak'
<http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl07a.shtml> and related reports.
> > Philosophers such as Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, and Rand have indicated
> > that most animals automatically develop to achieve their full potential.
> > Humans are different in that we need to make a deliberate effort to
> > develop our minds and bodies correctly. Lazy conformists who don't
> > make this special, deliberate, continuous effort to develop their minds
> > and bodies tend to stagnate in errors of relative mediocrity.
>
>#Seems to conflict with earlier--conformists survive; nonconformists
>die out.
For best results, nonconformists need to operate intelligently,
that is, pretend to be conformists much of the time -- "When in
Rome, do as the Romans!"
Frederick Mann
> > * Education -- To the extent that the powerful (who seek to acquire the
> > wherewithal to survive with least effort) control education, they are
> > likely to "shape" education to produce relatively helpless, ignorant, weak,
> > error-prone, obedient workers and worshippers who suffer from their
> > errors and often need "professional services" and "welfare assistance."
> >
>#Yes; the Nanny State.
>
>John Marlow
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:26 MST