Is every human interaction a type of power struggle? I am throwing this around in my head (To maybe figure out how to express this mathematically). Think about one of the most common practices today: gossip. Why do people gossip (or "talk shit")? I think it is so that when the person being gossiped about enters the immediate environment that the gossiper and their cohorts will laugh at/ scoff at/ despise that person with the gossiper. This is the gossiper's attempt to gain a type of power, or a type of following.
Think about this on a larger scale. Talk shit about an entire group of people, get many to agree with you on what you say. You get people like Hitler, Pat Robertson, and the like.
This whole idea is based on "the one who is the enemy of my enemy is my friend". This is a very basic, and i think, primal idea. Probably because it is the easiest way to create a following, team or "tribe".
It is interesting how it works too, because as soon as you gain power over someone or a group, the more likely you are to have a following. This of course stems from the non-alphas fear of becoming a victim of your "gossip". They don't want to be made fun of by all their peers. So they join you in hopes of being the beta male/female or in hopes of overthrowing you and becoming the new alpha.
Evidence of this is apparent. Look at any social setting. You can easily pick out who is the alpha simply by observing how many interactions there are per person per direction. What I mean is that more people will be interacting with the alpha than anyone else in the group. The way they will talk is in such a manner as to be talking to the whole group but have the focus of their attention on the alpha to gain their approval. If the alpha approves, the team will approve(in most cases). This is to gain ranking in the heirarchy of social interaction. It is the desire to be number one.
This also leads into the reason why there is such thing as "group think", which is basically not thinking for yourself, but letting a group or the leader of group tell you how to think. Religions, political parties, gangs, groups of friends, families, all fall into this catagory.
Showing posts with label society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label society. Show all posts
Monday, April 21, 2008
Social Optimization
I have established that the only kind of plausible deity that could exist would be that of the pantheistic philosophy. Basically, if a god exists, it is equivalent to the universe, and isn't personal in any way. It probably has no feelings towards us at all, really.
I have also established that the universe works quanto-deterministically. This means there is underlying randomness to causality, but when viewed from our level of awareness, things are deterministic in nature. [What we do is completely based on causality or total randomness, both are outside of an "ultimate control" that we may have in a "freewill" universe].
Also, I figure that all human action is ultimately self-serving. Altruism is just a ruse. One performing a charitable act does so to calm any sympathy they may feel. You want to know those you are helping are in a tolerable state of being. You will do what it takes to destroy any potential guilt by "doing the right thing".
No matter what we do, it is caused ultimately by the initial conditions of the universe. So if some deity was responsible for the generation of this reality, then that deity is responsible for what we are doing right now.
Every little electric discharge and molecular process in your brain in ultimately caused by the big bang, or any causal chain that preceded it. This means no matter what you do, you can never be wrong in the eyes of any creator, unless they are willing to punish themselves and even care. Does that fact that we have the ability to care mean anything?
Any kind of apparent "karma" is artificial. "Karma" isn't spiritual or supernatural. It is just a causal/behavior consequence of humans living together. If you are an asshole then people will hate you, if you are nice then people will like you. [DUH!] Ultimately, if we are part of the universe, can we say that any "karma" witnessed is the universe (or god) acting on our behavior? I don't think so. To presume that may be a cop-out. However, there may be something to the basic idea behind this.
Some type of objective morality????....But the morality may have some type of relativity dependent on the form of society that forms it. There would be an equation that would have the type of society as input and morality its output. Even if there is no deity, could the universe itself hold some type of objective morality for any self-aware beings? Of course, we create it ourselves, but since we are part of the universe....holy shit, subjectivity and objectivity have a GRAY AREA!!!
This can't be. This would be a contradiction in definitions. [True can't be false.] Maybe morals are objective in a way. If you take into consideration everything that is occurring and plug it into the afore mentioned equation you will come up with the most efficient option. Is this morality, or just self-serving optimization...or are they equivalent?
I think for all intents and purposes, "optimization" can be used to describe these desires to be "good".
BLAM!
-Chax
I have also established that the universe works quanto-deterministically. This means there is underlying randomness to causality, but when viewed from our level of awareness, things are deterministic in nature. [What we do is completely based on causality or total randomness, both are outside of an "ultimate control" that we may have in a "freewill" universe].
Also, I figure that all human action is ultimately self-serving. Altruism is just a ruse. One performing a charitable act does so to calm any sympathy they may feel. You want to know those you are helping are in a tolerable state of being. You will do what it takes to destroy any potential guilt by "doing the right thing".
No matter what we do, it is caused ultimately by the initial conditions of the universe. So if some deity was responsible for the generation of this reality, then that deity is responsible for what we are doing right now.
Every little electric discharge and molecular process in your brain in ultimately caused by the big bang, or any causal chain that preceded it. This means no matter what you do, you can never be wrong in the eyes of any creator, unless they are willing to punish themselves and even care. Does that fact that we have the ability to care mean anything?
Any kind of apparent "karma" is artificial. "Karma" isn't spiritual or supernatural. It is just a causal/behavior consequence of humans living together. If you are an asshole then people will hate you, if you are nice then people will like you. [DUH!] Ultimately, if we are part of the universe, can we say that any "karma" witnessed is the universe (or god) acting on our behavior? I don't think so. To presume that may be a cop-out. However, there may be something to the basic idea behind this.
Some type of objective morality????....But the morality may have some type of relativity dependent on the form of society that forms it. There would be an equation that would have the type of society as input and morality its output. Even if there is no deity, could the universe itself hold some type of objective morality for any self-aware beings? Of course, we create it ourselves, but since we are part of the universe....holy shit, subjectivity and objectivity have a GRAY AREA!!!
This can't be. This would be a contradiction in definitions. [True can't be false.] Maybe morals are objective in a way. If you take into consideration everything that is occurring and plug it into the afore mentioned equation you will come up with the most efficient option. Is this morality, or just self-serving optimization...or are they equivalent?
I think for all intents and purposes, "optimization" can be used to describe these desires to be "good".
BLAM!
-Chax
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
