Tuesday, April 19, 2022
I beieve the world is about to shift
Because, it seems to me that human dominance won't really prevail. That is, I believe that we soon come to an evolutionare period without sense-ensured development. Today, we have that kind of dominance, which suots humans. But in the future it might not be there. It may be replaced by predominance of that dodgy intuition might come to be an all-ruling prevalance. ... This period, I believe will be rather pieceful. Even so, there will perhaps be at the severe prevalance of psychopath and sociopath dominance.
Monday, March 23, 2020
Fundamental Memes of Cultures and Languages
Now and then, some one emphasizes a successful meme, witch earns this
person and/or the culture that he or she represents success and power.
If such a meme thus becomes well rooted in that person's society (or
already is it), then the culture might thrive and prevail. What those
memes are is perhaps difficult to define. But, perhaps I can relate my
number-based psychology.
Behind for example Russian, French and Moslem powers, there seems to me be some memes that I can manage to define in numbers, at least one for each. I also have defined some memes behind British culture and success. Also, about most Baltic states, I have figured out at least one essential meme in numbers. ...
Perhaps a bit surprisingly, the French and Muslim fundamental memes (that I've figured out about them) are both about the same number: 127.
... I intend to get back to all of this this later. ...
Such fundamental memes more or less always contain tricks for achieving virtue. Very often - but indeed not always - the enhancement is symbiotic with emphasizing that whatever the virtue is should be of actual quality, yielding, at least in a sense, some moral worth to it.
Their neighboring country Estonia, which has a fairly closely related language, also has a fundamental meme that enhances targeting of fourteen - but not with fifty-three. Instead they use twenty-three, which targets seven. using that seven, in turn, targets two, the Estonians, I believe, can combine the direct targeting of seven with indict targeting of two, focusing on these two as co-factors of fourteen. This is done in a way that can emphasize and be clear about what there might be of targeting done to the advantage of fourteen, as part of forty-one, which targets eleven.
The Estonian ways of doing this is sort of unfocused compared to the Finnish one, since its targeting is done in parts. Even so, it is sort of more effective, since a twenty-three is can be about more easily than a fifty-three - because it's a simpler quality.
That is, just like the number fifty-three actually contains a twenty-three (23+30=53), the quality that I see defined by fifty-three must sort contain the qualities that twenty-three stands for. But the twenty-three is in usual contexts passive in a fifty-three, as anything else than part of the higher number. This is so about most other numbers lower than fifty-three, but it is not true about seventeen, which preludes fifty-three. Because, there is in the finish fifty-three, and emphasis on morals that say that the support of fifty-three for its prelude, which is seventeen, is to be seen as quite important. Similarly, the Estonian twenty-three emphasizes its prelude ten. To the extent the ten is war like (which tens can tend to be) the Estonian support for it tends to be restrained. Seventeen is more of virtue, and thereby, the Finnish emphasis does not as often need to be restrained. ...
With fifty,three, as with twenty-three, there is also a target seven, which can be used similarly, for example to change the total target. I believe the Sami people of northern Finland and the areas nearby (northern Norway, northern Sweden and north-eastern Russia), do this. That is they use a fifty-three and the seven of its targeted fourteen, to create a total target of twenty-eight.
Another country close by, just a bit south of Estonia, is Latvia. Just like those, they, have, I believe, a fundamental meme of twenty-three, too. but they tend to focus directly on seven. This, like the two above - and probably most fundamental virtues, is a focus of virtue with actual quality. Indeed, the Latvian emphasis on ten is, as far as I can say, very similar to the Latvian one.
One more step to the south, there's Lithuania. These, I believe, then, instead to focus on targeting ten with thirty-seven, emphasizing thirteen in a way similar to Finnish emphasis of seventeen. But while seventeen stands for feeling - that tend to affect ones personalty, thirteen stands for personal memory and so.
One large country that I've overseen until now is Russia (which is, due to it's huge size, very far from only a Baltic-region country). They too have an emphasis of a similar kind. But this one involves targeting seventeen. Thereby, I think, they sort of try to get at the Finns, which much support seventeen. But the Finns are firstly smartly enough moral not to be targeted very easily, secondly some of them have one more trick up their sleeve. Because, which involves its counterpart of its targeted fourteen, i.e. thirty-nine - especially its factor of thirteen. Having it active can mean being able to target a four, which can synchronize with a seventeen's targeting of five, to focus on the product of four and five, twenty, whch is the prelude of sixty-seven. Had the Finns not had these advantages, I believe they could not have been able to stay independent from Russian dominance. ...
Behind for example Russian, French and Moslem powers, there seems to me be some memes that I can manage to define in numbers, at least one for each. I also have defined some memes behind British culture and success. Also, about most Baltic states, I have figured out at least one essential meme in numbers. ...
Perhaps a bit surprisingly, the French and Muslim fundamental memes (that I've figured out about them) are both about the same number: 127.
... I intend to get back to all of this this later. ...
Such fundamental memes more or less always contain tricks for achieving virtue. Very often - but indeed not always - the enhancement is symbiotic with emphasizing that whatever the virtue is should be of actual quality, yielding, at least in a sense, some moral worth to it.
Example: Baltic East Coast
Behind and in Finnish culture I think there is a fundamental meme that in my numbers can be defined as an enhancement of how to apply properties of fifty-three. This number is the about the third series of properties to adaption level two. It targets fourteen (by means of specification), which the Finns in general tend much to be into that one should do to the extent there can be found actual virtue in doing so.Their neighboring country Estonia, which has a fairly closely related language, also has a fundamental meme that enhances targeting of fourteen - but not with fifty-three. Instead they use twenty-three, which targets seven. using that seven, in turn, targets two, the Estonians, I believe, can combine the direct targeting of seven with indict targeting of two, focusing on these two as co-factors of fourteen. This is done in a way that can emphasize and be clear about what there might be of targeting done to the advantage of fourteen, as part of forty-one, which targets eleven.
The Estonian ways of doing this is sort of unfocused compared to the Finnish one, since its targeting is done in parts. Even so, it is sort of more effective, since a twenty-three is can be about more easily than a fifty-three - because it's a simpler quality.
That is, just like the number fifty-three actually contains a twenty-three (23+30=53), the quality that I see defined by fifty-three must sort contain the qualities that twenty-three stands for. But the twenty-three is in usual contexts passive in a fifty-three, as anything else than part of the higher number. This is so about most other numbers lower than fifty-three, but it is not true about seventeen, which preludes fifty-three. Because, there is in the finish fifty-three, and emphasis on morals that say that the support of fifty-three for its prelude, which is seventeen, is to be seen as quite important. Similarly, the Estonian twenty-three emphasizes its prelude ten. To the extent the ten is war like (which tens can tend to be) the Estonian support for it tends to be restrained. Seventeen is more of virtue, and thereby, the Finnish emphasis does not as often need to be restrained. ...
With fifty,three, as with twenty-three, there is also a target seven, which can be used similarly, for example to change the total target. I believe the Sami people of northern Finland and the areas nearby (northern Norway, northern Sweden and north-eastern Russia), do this. That is they use a fifty-three and the seven of its targeted fourteen, to create a total target of twenty-eight.
Another country close by, just a bit south of Estonia, is Latvia. Just like those, they, have, I believe, a fundamental meme of twenty-three, too. but they tend to focus directly on seven. This, like the two above - and probably most fundamental virtues, is a focus of virtue with actual quality. Indeed, the Latvian emphasis on ten is, as far as I can say, very similar to the Latvian one.
One more step to the south, there's Lithuania. These, I believe, then, instead to focus on targeting ten with thirty-seven, emphasizing thirteen in a way similar to Finnish emphasis of seventeen. But while seventeen stands for feeling - that tend to affect ones personalty, thirteen stands for personal memory and so.
One large country that I've overseen until now is Russia (which is, due to it's huge size, very far from only a Baltic-region country). They too have an emphasis of a similar kind. But this one involves targeting seventeen. Thereby, I think, they sort of try to get at the Finns, which much support seventeen. But the Finns are firstly smartly enough moral not to be targeted very easily, secondly some of them have one more trick up their sleeve. Because, which involves its counterpart of its targeted fourteen, i.e. thirty-nine - especially its factor of thirteen. Having it active can mean being able to target a four, which can synchronize with a seventeen's targeting of five, to focus on the product of four and five, twenty, whch is the prelude of sixty-seven. Had the Finns not had these advantages, I believe they could not have been able to stay independent from Russian dominance. ...
The social skills described above area all about targeting skillfully about virtue, much so that it cannot be faked by whatever the target quality is. But none of them target anything that is usually wrong. Even though what they do targets can be evil at times, neither seven, nor fourteen, nor seventeen nor twenty-eight usually is, at least not when they are into virtue in the first place. Seven in itself is about humility, when it's into virtue it can care to let four to be targeted, creating a thirteen, meaning tendencies of self-critique and personal memory. A fourteen targets eleven, which is much about creating illusions, is usually dangerous and can be quite evil. Seventeen is (as described above) about feelings. Twenty-eight is basically about being into an honest behavior. Targeting virtue by means of invoking virtue is good in general, but there is reason to believe that targeting evils is more crucial.
Virtues of Targeting Evil
Specifying evils, at least if it's done with virtue, tends to amount to more trustworthiness than just, as with the example's above, just targeting something, even if that's done in a virtuous way. It is in Jewish ways to specify very basic evil as a virtue per se. It is probably pre-religion Jewish to do so, I think. In my personal view, their religious add-on (even though it's sort of a virtue) has rendered the results of that fundamental meme of theirs a bit shallow - or seemingly so, whilst, however, also intensifying it.
It is by no means automatically shallow against to be of religion, in itself, though. A basic religious meme for Hinduism targets similarly as the pre-religious Jewish meme. That is they both target six, which one might call the basis of contaminating karma ( reciprocity) with prejudice so that it doesn't work. There is also for it to be referred to as a basic root of very many evils. But while ancient Hebrew targeting was done as a virtue of certainty of caring for what is worth it, ancient Hindu targeting was done for a reaching an atmosphere of divine virtue. This also means that it is in Hindu virtue to have it enthusiasm aught to be into targeting the mentioned root of many evils.
The eleven is about so to speak virtue of impurity (i.e. it's about evil's ingratiation, one might say). It, eleven is targeted by fourteens step of virtue to forty-one. This exists as a pragmatic virtue in Greece and in Sweden. Their ways of doing it differ slightly from each other, but neither one is into religion per se. Probably there exists some religious targetting of eleven, but I'm not sure about where; it might be some district of Africa.
Targeting twenty-nine is religiously done by Muslims and pragmatically done by Parisian French. Targeting twenty-nine is very virtuous and might tend to excuse some atrocities. There also do exist other ways of doing it. Either way, it is a bit into evil itself, specify with thirty-two's step to 127, which is what most easily targets twenty-nine, which is in itself a very evil tendency.
The rest of the evils in the evil series of ingratiation (see link of the word evil, above), I don't know much about where they are well-targeted. I am not aware of many complex enough basic memes for doing so.
Saturday, December 16, 2017
Evolutionary Periods of Illusions and Disillusionment
Researchers seem to have found evidence for that homo erectus has appeared both in China and Africa at around the same time, but not in the areas in-between. This can perhaps be explained by some hidden migration, after an evolutionary change. This issue is discussed a bit in a video that can be found here (the time it takes for propagation is discussed a bit in this video, at around 1:05, I think). It seems more likely for me that they came to be at the same time because of an evolutionary change, with a partially postponed effect, that took place long ago in some mutual ancestor of both populations. ...
I have a personal view on evolution (see also here), which involves changes that can be in stages . That is, I believe that traits can be learned from individuals of other species and/or of the same species. Probably some types of trait cunning can only be learned from individuals the same (or, perhaps, very similar) species. But most learning is simple enough to be transmitted even from other species - and some simply from situations, i.e. one can formulate one's own impression of that situation and/or one or more individual(s) one relates it to. In this sense my view is even Lamarckian, though only partly. Mostly I believe that traits are transmitted by impressions of how others can pride themselves in being able to handle circumstances.
If you happened to be curious, I have written about my beliefs here, too. Or you can keep on reading what's below (or possibly you could do both). Here I'll try to sum up something of my beliefs about it:
When someone has been impressive so that someone else takes an impression from that person, then the second person - even immediately - has something of a trait that is new for him, her - or it. The second person can from then on use that new trait for his, her or its purposes. This will very often (I believe) result in a fairly surprising new cunning in the individual. If this were not at least fairly often so, why would there ever be talk of such a thing as beginners luck? ... At least I think there wold really not be any.
After a beginner's luck period there can be a disillusionment stage. In a sense, even every actual beginners-luck period is followed by a disillusionment stage. When so, this second stage usually, I think, lasts for at least as long as the stage of beginners luck. It is also in those changes that I can call Lamarckian (that can be inherited) that such disillusionment periods can occur. A break between such periods might thereby occur for many individuals at the same time, I believe. Because I believe one can expect there to be the same length of the beginners-luck period for all who inherit the same trait. This in turn can help explain some issues of convergent evolution, I think.
Upon this, the disillusionment period too comes to an end. If inherited, that stage too is can be equally long for all who inherited it. Upon this comes a (at least theoretically) potentially eternal period of understanding and really being able to use the (by then hardly so new) trait.
Sometimes a beginners-luck period can be used more than usually. Because there may be easy triumphs about them. Some who may notice this can put into affect to overuse the tendencies that I here call "beginners luck." I call it that because it is basically about an intuition that is significant very much because the notion of it can inspire those who have it into self-secure attitudes that tend to provide more or less of a self-fulfilling positive expectations. This type of success some may glutton in. Doing so I say is hyping about their beginners-luck period.
I believe that, the shift into a disillusionment period usually - perhaps always - hits harder against those who are hyped up on beginners luck. But things get complicated because there are sometimes those who can blame their hypes on others who are not as hyped. This hardly can work forever, though. ...
Either way, I believe there is something of intelligent design in this: That is I believe destiny has beginnings of new disillusionment periods tend to be matched with ends of other, until then ongoing ones. If this were not so, I believe, there wouldn't really be feeling of security about what there was to history - neither in a conscious or (actually more important for a species' survival) a subconscious way.
Thanks to this, one can also be a winner at the change as a whole. This is so especially to the extent one hasn't been hyped about the trait that at the time passes into a disillusionment period. I believe we humans had such a change to our benefit, probably in the seventeenth (or perhaps sixteenth) century; some time before the start of the age of reason. But humanity is not without hypes, I think, most of which have, however not yet passed into disillusionment periods.
One human - though hardly pan-human - beginners-luck stage, which fairly many, I think, people hyped with, is likely, I think to be one that ended before the bronze-age collapse, where some mighty Mediterranean peoples lost their power. I mean that for example the ancient Greeks, as well as their neighboring Hittites and Egyptians had built empires upon hypes, which were not shared by all people. It's not too unlikely that it was somewhat exclusive to their upper classes to be able to use the hype very much to its advantage. There might be yet another hype that pertained to our own aristocracy, who nowadays have clearly less power than before. Indeed, their power seems to be built upon their remnants of earlier might.
That this can be so might mean that hyping up on beginners-luck periods far from always causes intimidate collapse - and not quite simultaneous for all those who hyped about it. This is likely to apply also what I have described further down of one or more possible pan-human human hype(-s) that is/are about to burst with transfer from beginners-luck to disillusionment stage of evolution. But now to another, though probably less severe hype that even so might be pan-human:
I believe there was more or less for humanity in general, up until somewhere in the nineteenth century a beginners-luck stage of a trait about having moral seem immediate, natural and self-evident, in a way that suited humanity well. It was, I believe matched by the end of a disillusionment period of a similar trait that was less about intelligence than the first one, but still as trustworthy as the first one. In that our ancestors used that first trait efficiently, the disillusionment from it pertains to the extent the moral thus achieved was of vanity or more genuine than that it should be considered to be such.
But there are of course also other animals that have had hypes. Likely are the mammoths (the disappearance of which seems to bring about more cause for concern; see here) as well as those dinosaurs that did not evolve into birds and also trilobites, examples of passed-time creatures that can have been hyped and then crushed by disillusionment periods. Inherited hype might not apply to all of a group (of a species, a clade, even a kingdom - whatever). But, all descendants do not at all necessarily inherit it. Thereby, there are for example birds, I think. Sometimes there might be survivors for long time that perhaps eventually might return after an extinction event.
The theories about the dinosaurs' disappearance are fairly many, and there has been asteroid impacts which do seem explanatory. But perhaps the large beasts among them would have survived had they not also been weakened by having had an evolutionary-hype bobble that burst.
As for us humans, you just might want to be aware that - at least in some perspectives - we seem likely to be into at least one hype, considering our population growth, up until now. I feel that many many of us are quite optimistic us, about going for some qualities that seem virtuous in ways that can be due simply to some evolutionary beginners luck. ... Therefore I expect that there will be a fallback - or several - perhaps soon. A severe time for human disillusionment might about to begin.
If so, it most likely means, I say, that humanly sophisticated attitudes will become less and less reliable. I suspect this to be about more than only one disillusionment era that begins around these - basically, for humanity as a whole, thriving - times. Very many human beings will to lack clear-mindedness about responsibility for society. Those who do will very often deceptively seem trustworthy. Thereby it's likely to become extremely risky, I think, to keep relying upon human attitudes - even for inspiration, probably.
To the lighter side of things, we seem also to be right now in a period where several fairly evil attitudes have more or less recently passed into disillusionment stages. On the other hand, some such attitudes have finished their disillusionment stage.I have a hunch that at least one of those is related to an ended beginners-luck period that there was a human hype about.It ended quite recently, you might even say very; within the last few decades. This means that .human some attitudes that one used to associate with (for very many humans in a hyped way) trying to feel good about caring about depth, can tend more and more to be dependent on being arrogant and seeming stuck up and/or trickily seeming worthwhile by claiming such arrogance and so be something that should be seen as worthwhile. But before this shift happened there was an end to something that caused idealizing of arrogance about being evil enough, sort of, I think.Thereby, I guess things even out fairly well, because we already had a time period that was much into democracy and so, probably much because other evil beginners-luck periods had ended.
Also, as with other species, I think, at least fairly many of us humans do not quite tend to be quite hyped up about the mentioned very pan-human qualities, which I believe to be set for a disillusionment period soon. There is, however, a fallback, I think, in that human society relies upon having sophisticated measures for seeming certain about the way things should work. Thereby almost every human has in his or her society a hype that is reliant on the evolutionary beginner's luck. To some extent most religions pose an exception to this, since their hype is on a spiritual basis. Such hype usually does not, however, usually beat all the none-religious ones.
So there will most likely, I think, be an era of disillusionment for humanity in general. But this does not as much pertain to those who are into having enough of a spirit of safeguard interest of its own. I mentioned earlier that Asian Indians have been into a morality issue, which I think makes them inclined to still find morality to be very natural. It is not only they who can do this, although I, for example, can't do it as well as they, though, as i I have found it to be it, a bit better than most people.
About as well as me, I have found, Muslims seem able to find morality to be natural. This means only that they pertain to knowing that it's real in a sense that does not disqualify them from showing actual potential for responsibility that naturally shows how moral can be real. I believe that their religion is so hyped about their own discipline that they can influence almost any other issue, and thus compete with almost any hype, including those that soon go into disillusionment periods for most of humanity.
It is not safe, thereby, to assume that they will not sooner or later tend to be the ones who turned out as winners. ... It is hardly safe to assume that they will not thereby conquer, dangerously much. But it is very likely even more dangerous to trust those who go into their disillusionment stages, and who thereby will be into desperate tricks. It is however essential to note that every little aspect of the coming centuries will rely on much else than Islam alone. Even so, I believe, Islam will dominate sooner or later - just as we can expect if we choose to believe in the prophecies of Michelle de Nostradame. Those can however be interpreted in various ways.
Either way, I do not propose that we should expect reliance upon prophesies to show us a lot about what we aught to do, nor even very much about what to expect. Instead, our societies need to be good for supporting diverse cares of diverse people!
I have a personal view on evolution (see also here), which involves changes that can be in stages . That is, I believe that traits can be learned from individuals of other species and/or of the same species. Probably some types of trait cunning can only be learned from individuals the same (or, perhaps, very similar) species. But most learning is simple enough to be transmitted even from other species - and some simply from situations, i.e. one can formulate one's own impression of that situation and/or one or more individual(s) one relates it to. In this sense my view is even Lamarckian, though only partly. Mostly I believe that traits are transmitted by impressions of how others can pride themselves in being able to handle circumstances.
If you happened to be curious, I have written about my beliefs here, too. Or you can keep on reading what's below (or possibly you could do both). Here I'll try to sum up something of my beliefs about it:
When someone has been impressive so that someone else takes an impression from that person, then the second person - even immediately - has something of a trait that is new for him, her - or it. The second person can from then on use that new trait for his, her or its purposes. This will very often (I believe) result in a fairly surprising new cunning in the individual. If this were not at least fairly often so, why would there ever be talk of such a thing as beginners luck? ... At least I think there wold really not be any.
After a beginner's luck period there can be a disillusionment stage. In a sense, even every actual beginners-luck period is followed by a disillusionment stage. When so, this second stage usually, I think, lasts for at least as long as the stage of beginners luck. It is also in those changes that I can call Lamarckian (that can be inherited) that such disillusionment periods can occur. A break between such periods might thereby occur for many individuals at the same time, I believe. Because I believe one can expect there to be the same length of the beginners-luck period for all who inherit the same trait. This in turn can help explain some issues of convergent evolution, I think.
Upon this, the disillusionment period too comes to an end. If inherited, that stage too is can be equally long for all who inherited it. Upon this comes a (at least theoretically) potentially eternal period of understanding and really being able to use the (by then hardly so new) trait.
Sometimes a beginners-luck period can be used more than usually. Because there may be easy triumphs about them. Some who may notice this can put into affect to overuse the tendencies that I here call "beginners luck." I call it that because it is basically about an intuition that is significant very much because the notion of it can inspire those who have it into self-secure attitudes that tend to provide more or less of a self-fulfilling positive expectations. This type of success some may glutton in. Doing so I say is hyping about their beginners-luck period.
I believe that, the shift into a disillusionment period usually - perhaps always - hits harder against those who are hyped up on beginners luck. But things get complicated because there are sometimes those who can blame their hypes on others who are not as hyped. This hardly can work forever, though. ...
Either way, I believe there is something of intelligent design in this: That is I believe destiny has beginnings of new disillusionment periods tend to be matched with ends of other, until then ongoing ones. If this were not so, I believe, there wouldn't really be feeling of security about what there was to history - neither in a conscious or (actually more important for a species' survival) a subconscious way.
Thanks to this, one can also be a winner at the change as a whole. This is so especially to the extent one hasn't been hyped about the trait that at the time passes into a disillusionment period. I believe we humans had such a change to our benefit, probably in the seventeenth (or perhaps sixteenth) century; some time before the start of the age of reason. But humanity is not without hypes, I think, most of which have, however not yet passed into disillusionment periods.
One human - though hardly pan-human - beginners-luck stage, which fairly many, I think, people hyped with, is likely, I think to be one that ended before the bronze-age collapse, where some mighty Mediterranean peoples lost their power. I mean that for example the ancient Greeks, as well as their neighboring Hittites and Egyptians had built empires upon hypes, which were not shared by all people. It's not too unlikely that it was somewhat exclusive to their upper classes to be able to use the hype very much to its advantage. There might be yet another hype that pertained to our own aristocracy, who nowadays have clearly less power than before. Indeed, their power seems to be built upon their remnants of earlier might.
That this can be so might mean that hyping up on beginners-luck periods far from always causes intimidate collapse - and not quite simultaneous for all those who hyped about it. This is likely to apply also what I have described further down of one or more possible pan-human human hype(-s) that is/are about to burst with transfer from beginners-luck to disillusionment stage of evolution. But now to another, though probably less severe hype that even so might be pan-human:
I believe there was more or less for humanity in general, up until somewhere in the nineteenth century a beginners-luck stage of a trait about having moral seem immediate, natural and self-evident, in a way that suited humanity well. It was, I believe matched by the end of a disillusionment period of a similar trait that was less about intelligence than the first one, but still as trustworthy as the first one. In that our ancestors used that first trait efficiently, the disillusionment from it pertains to the extent the moral thus achieved was of vanity or more genuine than that it should be considered to be such.
But there are of course also other animals that have had hypes. Likely are the mammoths (the disappearance of which seems to bring about more cause for concern; see here) as well as those dinosaurs that did not evolve into birds and also trilobites, examples of passed-time creatures that can have been hyped and then crushed by disillusionment periods. Inherited hype might not apply to all of a group (of a species, a clade, even a kingdom - whatever). But, all descendants do not at all necessarily inherit it. Thereby, there are for example birds, I think. Sometimes there might be survivors for long time that perhaps eventually might return after an extinction event.
The theories about the dinosaurs' disappearance are fairly many, and there has been asteroid impacts which do seem explanatory. But perhaps the large beasts among them would have survived had they not also been weakened by having had an evolutionary-hype bobble that burst.
As for us humans, you just might want to be aware that - at least in some perspectives - we seem likely to be into at least one hype, considering our population growth, up until now. I feel that many many of us are quite optimistic us, about going for some qualities that seem virtuous in ways that can be due simply to some evolutionary beginners luck. ... Therefore I expect that there will be a fallback - or several - perhaps soon. A severe time for human disillusionment might about to begin.
If so, it most likely means, I say, that humanly sophisticated attitudes will become less and less reliable. I suspect this to be about more than only one disillusionment era that begins around these - basically, for humanity as a whole, thriving - times. Very many human beings will to lack clear-mindedness about responsibility for society. Those who do will very often deceptively seem trustworthy. Thereby it's likely to become extremely risky, I think, to keep relying upon human attitudes - even for inspiration, probably.
To the lighter side of things, we seem also to be right now in a period where several fairly evil attitudes have more or less recently passed into disillusionment stages. On the other hand, some such attitudes have finished their disillusionment stage.I have a hunch that at least one of those is related to an ended beginners-luck period that there was a human hype about.It ended quite recently, you might even say very; within the last few decades. This means that .human some attitudes that one used to associate with (for very many humans in a hyped way) trying to feel good about caring about depth, can tend more and more to be dependent on being arrogant and seeming stuck up and/or trickily seeming worthwhile by claiming such arrogance and so be something that should be seen as worthwhile. But before this shift happened there was an end to something that caused idealizing of arrogance about being evil enough, sort of, I think.Thereby, I guess things even out fairly well, because we already had a time period that was much into democracy and so, probably much because other evil beginners-luck periods had ended.
Also, as with other species, I think, at least fairly many of us humans do not quite tend to be quite hyped up about the mentioned very pan-human qualities, which I believe to be set for a disillusionment period soon. There is, however, a fallback, I think, in that human society relies upon having sophisticated measures for seeming certain about the way things should work. Thereby almost every human has in his or her society a hype that is reliant on the evolutionary beginner's luck. To some extent most religions pose an exception to this, since their hype is on a spiritual basis. Such hype usually does not, however, usually beat all the none-religious ones.
So there will most likely, I think, be an era of disillusionment for humanity in general. But this does not as much pertain to those who are into having enough of a spirit of safeguard interest of its own. I mentioned earlier that Asian Indians have been into a morality issue, which I think makes them inclined to still find morality to be very natural. It is not only they who can do this, although I, for example, can't do it as well as they, though, as i I have found it to be it, a bit better than most people.
About as well as me, I have found, Muslims seem able to find morality to be natural. This means only that they pertain to knowing that it's real in a sense that does not disqualify them from showing actual potential for responsibility that naturally shows how moral can be real. I believe that their religion is so hyped about their own discipline that they can influence almost any other issue, and thus compete with almost any hype, including those that soon go into disillusionment periods for most of humanity.
It is not safe, thereby, to assume that they will not sooner or later tend to be the ones who turned out as winners. ... It is hardly safe to assume that they will not thereby conquer, dangerously much. But it is very likely even more dangerous to trust those who go into their disillusionment stages, and who thereby will be into desperate tricks. It is however essential to note that every little aspect of the coming centuries will rely on much else than Islam alone. Even so, I believe, Islam will dominate sooner or later - just as we can expect if we choose to believe in the prophecies of Michelle de Nostradame. Those can however be interpreted in various ways.
Either way, I do not propose that we should expect reliance upon prophesies to show us a lot about what we aught to do, nor even very much about what to expect. Instead, our societies need to be good for supporting diverse cares of diverse people!
Friday, December 30, 2016
Virtues of Groups or Individuals
There are often, it seems to me, problems with trying to relate to what anything, such as a virtue that pertains more to one group than another, in the way that it could become an excuse for blatant and often evil forms of racism. It can even be problematic without the race issue coming up, since comparisons might cause hasty conclusion and thereby prejudice against individuals. If that also relates to race - or actually, with humans, what very often called 'race', but which pertains to rather small distinctions; that is with humans what one has are basically social races, one might say.
An area of importance when it comes to these types of problems of discrimination is the one of intelligence, something which I think is discussed rather well in this video. It relates to the problem as a quite important issue, which I also think it is. The problems presented in it may perhaps become easier to relate to in a good way to the extent there is capability to view race as something that relates to biology as well as social and even spiritual reasons for both virtue and vices. This is just about what my main reason for writing this blog has been.
An area of importance when it comes to these types of problems of discrimination is the one of intelligence, something which I think is discussed rather well in this video. It relates to the problem as a quite important issue, which I also think it is. The problems presented in it may perhaps become easier to relate to in a good way to the extent there is capability to view race as something that relates to biology as well as social and even spiritual reasons for both virtue and vices. This is just about what my main reason for writing this blog has been.
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
Cultural, Genetic and Spiritual Variation and Vicariance
People different cultural heritages have many different aspects to them. Two of those aspects can be said to be spiritual heritage, for one, and cultural heritage, for another one. But either one of these is too complex to be viewed very much as simply an aspect of culture, I think.
I believe that the three types of heritage tend quite strongly to naturally interact. But they clearly are distinct, all three of them, even so - at least as I see it. There can oftentimes be spiritual and/or genetic, I think, dispositions for cultural tendencies. But such disposition might also spring from a culture itself, I think. Either way, when an attitude or tradition or so sticks a bit exclusively to only one people, even if those people emigrate or travel, then there is, I feel, vicariance to that culture. but if there's a similar vicariance that seems to depend (more or less exclusively) upon the geographical area where that people lives, rather than on the people itself, then one has - of course - a geographical vicariance to that culture. Usually, I think, such a vicariance comes to be mostly due to that spirits of ancients (not necessarily human beings) still dwell in that area and influence it. Possibly that can to some extent be true also about people that move, but then those spirits seem, I think, likely to be exactly their ancestors, and, perhaps at least, exclusively their ancestors of the same species as they. This I have written more about in my previous post (below).
It seems likely to me that such a vicariance about ancestry is manifested genetically in each and every individual. It is hardly possible, I guess, that this type of manifestation is only in the genes, though. More likely the genes interact with spirits of a person's ancestry.
As everyone knows, however, culture spreads in other ways than only through cross-breeding. This can perhaps be a sign of that a person can oftentimes be inspired by people he or she meets to take similar - or perhaps exactly the same - spiritual contacts. These contacts might possibly, I feel, even manifest, or at least begin to manifest, in the newly inspired persons heritage, including this person's genetic disposition. This I have written more about here, where I've been into periods of learning. Actually, though, I believe that sometimes one can manifest in oneself an attitude or so, even without that time to it. I mean that it seems probable that when things are clear-cut about what that attitude is about, then one can have an instantaneous spiritual contact about it, a tendency of which, even so, I believe, manifests even genetically.
I believe that the three types of heritage tend quite strongly to naturally interact. But they clearly are distinct, all three of them, even so - at least as I see it. There can oftentimes be spiritual and/or genetic, I think, dispositions for cultural tendencies. But such disposition might also spring from a culture itself, I think. Either way, when an attitude or tradition or so sticks a bit exclusively to only one people, even if those people emigrate or travel, then there is, I feel, vicariance to that culture. but if there's a similar vicariance that seems to depend (more or less exclusively) upon the geographical area where that people lives, rather than on the people itself, then one has - of course - a geographical vicariance to that culture. Usually, I think, such a vicariance comes to be mostly due to that spirits of ancients (not necessarily human beings) still dwell in that area and influence it. Possibly that can to some extent be true also about people that move, but then those spirits seem, I think, likely to be exactly their ancestors, and, perhaps at least, exclusively their ancestors of the same species as they. This I have written more about in my previous post (below).
It seems likely to me that such a vicariance about ancestry is manifested genetically in each and every individual. It is hardly possible, I guess, that this type of manifestation is only in the genes, though. More likely the genes interact with spirits of a person's ancestry.
As everyone knows, however, culture spreads in other ways than only through cross-breeding. This can perhaps be a sign of that a person can oftentimes be inspired by people he or she meets to take similar - or perhaps exactly the same - spiritual contacts. These contacts might possibly, I feel, even manifest, or at least begin to manifest, in the newly inspired persons heritage, including this person's genetic disposition. This I have written more about here, where I've been into periods of learning. Actually, though, I believe that sometimes one can manifest in oneself an attitude or so, even without that time to it. I mean that it seems probable that when things are clear-cut about what that attitude is about, then one can have an instantaneous spiritual contact about it, a tendency of which, even so, I believe, manifests even genetically.
Saturday, March 21, 2015
Spiritual Vicariance
There are spirits in every continent, due, at least partly, I think,
to what kinds of life there were there in earlier times. These spirits
do have in their issues that they are reincarnated, but that is into a
new spirit for every reincarnation. It is the soul that they have in
common, I believe.
It is due much to spirits from old times that there are certain moods
in certain places and areas, and continents tend to be very important
such areas, since life forms could spread over them a lot more than
between them.But as the continents shifted, for example as seen to the left, new splits were created and others were eliminated.
Thereby variations in both biological and spiritual life thrived. Also this seems to have resulted in, at times very unexpected, relationships between the regions. Many regions thereby have biologically and spiritually alike, without them now necessarily being close, and the vice versa also holds true; many areas that now are on the same continent have different airs about them.
Spiritual vicariance sometimes seems manifest in the population of some, many, or even all, species of an area. Moreover, it seems that this manifestation can be brought along by members of this species when they visit or even move to other areas where. Such a manifestation can be called a trait.As such it is relevant for this discussion of mine too, I think.
Thereby variations in both biological and spiritual life thrived. Also this seems to have resulted in, at times very unexpected, relationships between the regions. Many regions thereby have biologically and spiritually alike, without them now necessarily being close, and the vice versa also holds true; many areas that now are on the same continent have different airs about them.
Spiritual vicariance sometimes seems manifest in the population of some, many, or even all, species of an area. Moreover, it seems that this manifestation can be brought along by members of this species when they visit or even move to other areas where. Such a manifestation can be called a trait.As such it is relevant for this discussion of mine too, I think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)