On 10 Aug, 12:17, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > Cultural evolution is merely a bi-product of environmental > circumstance whether contemporary or prehistorically. To suggest that > ancient ancestral people were lacking syllogistic capability is > inaccurate. Cultural evolution in prehistoric era was based on the > same principles as today, that being communal assimilation and > adaptation to new environments. People seek growth with similar > beings and therefore cultural evolution can be differentiated by > varying cultures. We process more information today because our > environment has expanded thereby affording us more information to > process. While on the surface it seems much progression has taken > place I don't see all of it as being based on individual conscious > choice but rather initiated by social dictates by select groups. > Pointing out freedoms of women, children and minorities is not enough > to establish an evolution when there are other groups that are non > conforming and in violation of the supposed evolution. This is > evidenced, as Lee points out, by the numerous contradictions in social > behavior especially on a global level. We are no more socially > integrated today that we were as cave men; they had clubs and we have > bombs. We are still territorial and oppressive to outside groups. We > use terms like "it is illegal" to enforce bias and discriminate, we > create laws that allow for the use of "deadly force" upon a suspected > threat and more jargon to initiate war. This purported cultural > evolution is rife with flaw and fallacy. I call it the "Disney > Effect" which essentially creates a facade to conceal the horror > behind the pretty picture. Disney has for many years presented > animations of cute little animals playing in the forest and created > this image of loving and caring about nature while the reality is > this: Bulldozers come in and raze the land while killing and > displacing thousands of animals so that Disney can build their theme > park. This is primarily what we have today; a facade giving the > impression we have progressed socially when the fact is the world is > full of horror, horrendous acts of violence, genocide and egregious > violations of human rights. Aside from the subjective view and the > microcosms of change apparent here and there we haven't changed much > at all; we just have new tools. >
Don't be too hard on Molly. When I read this, I though, yep, that about sums it up, as you really haven't left that much to say; it's all spot on. If you want solutions, well...what is that you think all humans can agree to? The only thing I can think of is "that there is no one thing that all humans will agree to." Which leaves us stuffed. Perhaps we humans need the old 'Alien Invasion' concept to give us a common enemy to act as a rallying point for us all. Right now, we are, as we have always been, our OWN enemy. And, as you've rightly stated, that's never changed, only the methodologies and machinery OF that enmity have changed. Brotherhood of Man?? Yeah, well, United We Stand was a cheesy pop song, albeit a noble vision. But we (humans) need a common factor that we ALL believe in. > On Aug 3, 7:46 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > All aspects of human civilization—language, art, aesthetics, > > technology, architecture, organizations, governments—depend upon > > essential human relationships for their evolution and expression. > > > * Question: What is actually evolving? > > > * Answer: The quality and quantity of relationships between people, > > assuming the form of shared meanings, agreements, relationships and > > groups of relationships. The cultural domain is inter-subjective, > > because it exists between subjects, yet is often not objectively > > identifiable. But the fact that these shared spaces of meaning are not > > objectively identifiable does not hinder us from experiencing them as > > being real. As such, the subjective world includes not only individual > > consciousness but the inter-subjective domain of relationships as > > well, making the interior universe much more substantial. These > > relationships are real, yet they exist in the internal universe. The > > evolution of this internal universe accounts for the fact that women, > > children, and minorities now experience and possess more freedoms than > > in any time in written history. > > > What do YOU think? > > > For more: > > http://www.i-awake.net/2010/08/spiral-dynamics-introduction.html- Hide > > quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
