2013/11/27 Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Alberto G. Corona <agocor...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > All of this demonstrate how little we know about what we are. > > Yes, I think most societies underestimate how much they don't know. > It's easy to spot this looking back in History, but it's more rare to > be able to see the pattern and realise that this is probably still the > case. Future generations will probably find most of our current > beliefs naive, the same way that we find ancient believes naive. > > > I have some interesting hints about all of this I think. And I have to > > formally demonstrate that, and sorry for the pedantry but, as I said > > frequently, according with evolutionary game theory, the collective > > sacrifices are needed for the coordination of societies that are not > formed > > by clones, like the human society. > > I have little doubt about this. There is the empirical evidence from > social insects, for example. Female ants are super-sisters (closer > than us to being clones), meaning that they share more DNA than mammal > sisters. This, in turn, translates into more altruistic behaviours and > an almost clockwork-like society. > > I think an important point here is that we are wired to be > sufficiently altruistic for a tribal society. The agricultural > revolution was only 12K years ago, which is very recently at an > evolutionary time scale. The level of altruism that we are evolved for > doesn't feel like a sacrifice. Most people won't feel that sharing > food with friends is a sacrifice. In fact, it is even a pleasure. > > But then, with the agricultural revolution, social complexity started > increasing much faster than biological evolution can keep up with. > This is why almost nobody finds pleasure in paying taxes. It's a too > abstract form of altruism. > > > Such sacrifices can be in the course of > > informal (celebrations) or formally recognized as sacrifices in > religious > > rites. > > > > That is in our instincts and we naturally arrange our behavior to do so. > It > > is very interesting what happens we invite friends to a celebration. We > > sacrifice our time and money and dedicate out attention to the others > > mutually. Even the mutual perception of happiness being together assures > > everyone that the others prefer to be with us and invest their effort > with > > us. > > > > Probably, the less formal the sacrifices are, the less efficient are, and > > the sacrifice higher. I suspect that in really bad times and when the > > traditional rites have been forgotten, and people does not trust the > formal > > institutions, the only alternative are human sacrifices. That happens in > > marginal groups of modern societies. We have to investigate these matters > > urgently. > > This is an interesting point. Formality allows us to make sacrifices > that are recognised by others, thus creating some safety for > ourselves. You make a sacrifice, but if you find yourself in need > later, the formal rituals created a context where people feel the need > to reciprocate. I think churches play this role very well. Mormons, > for example, have a very formal society. In certain mormon areas, > everyone feels responsible for all the kids, people will help new > families and so on. This is interestingly similar to tribal behaviours > pre-agriculture. > > At our current gigantic scales this breaks. You hear the complain all > the time: "I pay my taxes, who can they do this to me?". But there's > no one listening. Not because most people are evil, but just because > there is literally no one listening. Of course the Internet is > creating non-geographical locality (or post-geographical, as William > Gibson likes to put it). I bet most people in this list see it like a > tribe to some degree. There's a lot of conflict, but we would probably > be genuinely sad if one of us died. That stuff is wired in us from > pre-agriculture. >
Paying taxes I do not find to fit with an intuitive notion of sacrifice, I mean it is not experienced as sacrifice because the money is not a natural (i.e. ancestral) possession towards we have a natural way to evaluate the gain of loss of it. Moreover it can not be made evident to the other people in a public event, that is the essence of the rite or celebration, in which mutual trust is created. Probably the sacrifice of a marathon in a public event is much more fulfilling for this purpose than money. When, In a celebration, I spend money to make my friends happy, it is my time and my effort what constitutes my sacrifice, not the money. Women usually do not appreciate the amount of money spent by the husband in a gift, but the overall continuous personal effort invested on her. The sons of parents that do not spend time with them have the same psychological problems, no matter the amount of money the parent spend in material goods for them or either if they are rich or poor. Probably this is because the evaluation of sacrifice of the other is hardwired to consider some kind of goods that actually were present in the ancestral environment: personal effort, and personal pain mainly. or some goods that were a product of personal effort: the blood of hunted animals or other basic posessions like the own blood, or some symbols that represent them, wit decreasing levels of realism. For example an animal bough for a certain amoun of money(but not the same amount of money as such) To understand the mechanism by which sacrifices work for social coordination is the key: By making a clear and evident personal sacrifice in a public celebration is a sign of proclamation of commitment to the comunity because, if the individual does not reciprocate because it is too much burden, it has to change to other comunity and he have to perform a second sacrifice for the other comunity. So he will have no incentives to do defect. It is like the insurance companies (or by the way, the state run taxation and services system): There is an initial payment, a periodic payment and a payment if you want to leave. You can not receive the services of your insurance company immediately. You either have to pay more at the beginning or you have to pay a number of times before using the services. If you leave, depending on the services you demanded, you have to pay a penalty. Religious celebrations and sacrifices are the same, but at the instinctive (emotional) level. It is regulated by unconscious coordination mechanisms, while the insurance companies uses the same game theoretical logic (I can bet that insurance companies use game theory a lot), but it is perfectly conscious and rational. not instinctive. I have no emotional attachment to the other clients of my insurance company. A country is something in the middle. But the emotional attachment for your country is not a consequence of the money you pay in taxes for the education system. It is because your cellebrations and memorials and the history books, you read and all the things that you find easy to do with the people of your country and not so well with other people. The dynamic of religion and sacrifice becomes clear when compared with an insurance company: when trust grows and the people don´t lie to the insurance company the payments become lesser and lesser. When the distrust increase, and the demand of payment grows by liars or wrongdoers, the payments grows until the payment is comparable to the service. That is, if the clients have a false accident of total loss every year,, the company will demand the price of a car every year. if you kill people and expect that the group will help you with their lifes from the probable vengeance, it is expected that your group demand for you to kill one of your children in public or to kill two enemies or to take prisioners for killing them in the altar or some equaly horrendous. Otherwise the game theoretical equilibrium will not work to stabilize the group cooperation. That`s what happens in ancient and modern tribes. > > Telmo. > > > 2013/11/25 Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com> > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Alberto G. Corona < > agocor...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > 2013/11/24 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 24 Nov 2013, at 10:06, LizR wrote: > >> >> > >> >> To be exact it's the belief that no gods exist, i.e. that "theism" is > >> >> wrong. But otherwise it does seem to echo Aristotle and Plato, at > least > >> >> as > >> >> far as I understand them. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Atheism is also the belief in NO afterlife, which is close to not > >> >> making > >> >> much sense to me (even without comp). This is well illustrated by the > >> >> french > >> >> philosophers like La Mettrie and Sade, defending the right to do what > >> >> you > >> >> want in your life (including torturing children and women), as you > have > >> >> only > >> >> one life to profit on. It is part of the origin of the political > >> >> materialism, implemented in both communism and capitalism, and indeed > >> >> both > >> >> are aggressive with any form of spiritualism, and confuse a rich life > >> >> with a > >> >> life of rich. > >> > > >> > > >> > Both branches of nihilistic economicism , yes > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> The big conceptual difference between Aristotle and Plato is that in > >> >> Aristotle there is a belief in a primitive material universe, where > for > >> >> Plato, the material universe is a shadow (an emanation, a border, a > >> >> reflection, a projection,...) of something else (the one, God, the > >> >> universal > >> >> dream, etc.). > >> > > >> > > >> > Interesting declaration of Gnosticism. > >> > But that platonic idea of the world does is not match very well with > >> > what > >> > plato says in the Timaeus. Allthough the gnosticists have drawn a lot > >> > from > >> > Plato. > >> > > >> > In the other way, the conception of Aristotle was the traditional idea > >> > of > >> > the greeks. the greek goods, by the way, where intramundane, not > >> > beyond-material, that is sobrenatural, authough "almost" inmortals. So > >> > you > >> > can accuse the ancient greeks of being aristotelians. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> It is the opposition between naturalism (materialism, physicalism), > and > >> >> the other conceptions of reality (which can still be rational, like > >> >> with the > >> >> antic greeks and Indians). > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Atheists and Christians are alike. They have the same conception of > the > >> >> creator (the first to deny it, the second to believe in it), and the > >> >> same > >> >> conception of the creation (a material universe). > >> >> > >> >> The real "religious" debate is about the primitive or not existence > of > >> >> the > >> >> physical reality. > >> > > >> > > >> > Not only that. Between primitive and not existence, theere are a lot > of > >> > possiblities > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Should we search, or not, for a reason behind the physical reality? > >> > > >> > > >> > We have no option once our personal survival problems are solved and > we > >> > have > >> > to plan beyond tomorrow. > >> > We have teleological minds that need to discover a course of history > to > >> > follow. Otherwise, probably like in any social organism, we will be > >> > victims > >> > of out own mechanism of sanity-checking and the social apoptosis will > >> > prescribe an useful suicide to our disoriented body, in order to avoid > >> > being > >> > a burden for the other gene-vehicles of the society. > >> > > >> > That´s why many disoriented people, specially young ones, risk their > >> > lifes > >> > in extreme sports (or terrorism): it is the only way to avoid asking > >> > oneself > >> > for some meaning for their lifes. > >> > >> Yes, and I also suspect that this is why pop culture is so loud. > >> People of all ages feel this need to be distracted from the abyss. Not > >> that I find anything wrong in pop culture per se, but making a big > >> deal about some celebrity wearing a skimpy outfit is one of the many > >> ways to distract ourselves from the nausea that can come when one > >> contemplates naked reality. Another impression I have is that Europe > >> is mostly a post-nausea culture, while the US is a pre-nausea one. > >> This makes communication hard, despite the fact that we have so much > >> in common at a more superficial level. > >> > >> > The spectacle of people running to the > >> > extenuation in massive marathons with "solidary" purposes as a modern > >> > form > >> > of primitive sacrifice is one of the most bizarre but enlightening > >> > things in > >> > this "rationalist" modern world. > >> > >> I agree, it's funny. Obviously people could just donate the money > >> directly to charity, so there is some fundamental need for the > >> puritanical public display of sacrifice. It also promotes jogging and > >> healthy living, which is a replacement for conventional religious > >> notions of purity. It is acceptable under the new dogmas because it is > >> science-based, but the underlaying religious needs are still the same. > >> > >> Then you have some funny moments, like when science finds out that > >> stretching before exercise is actually counter-productive. It's a > >> bummer, because stretching before a jog is such a wonderful display of > >> piety, so similar to genuflexion before some altar. I wonder what > >> they'll replace it with. > >> > >> Telmo. > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Bruno > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 24 November 2013 04:56, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On 23 Nov 2013, at 14:05, Roger Clough wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Atheism is wish fulfillment. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Yes. Notably. I agree. > >> >>> > >> >>> It is the fuzzy belief that the Christian God does not exist, > together > >> >>> with the belief in the Christian "Matter". > >> >>> > >> >>> The debate between Atheists and Christians hides the deeper debate > >> >>> between Aristotle and Plato. > >> >>> > >> >>> Bruno > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >> >>> Groups > >> >>> "Everything List" group. > >> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send > >> >>> an > >> >>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > >> >>> To post to this group, send email to > everything-list@googlegroups.com. > >> >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > >> >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >> >> Groups > >> >> "Everything List" group. > >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send > >> >> an > >> >> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > >> >> To post to this group, send email to > everything-list@googlegroups.com. > >> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >> >> Groups > >> >> "Everything List" group. > >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send > >> >> an > >> >> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > >> >> To post to this group, send email to > everything-list@googlegroups.com. > >> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Alberto. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >> > Groups > >> > "Everything List" group. > >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > >> > an > >> > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > >> > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com > . > >> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > >> > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > >> "Everything List" group. > >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an > >> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > >> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Alberto. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Everything List" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
