Ewww, I love a good controversy

Philosophy
21

What are you asking?
Power/money corrupts, and absolute power/money corrupts absolutely.

What do you mean?
I point out that our western codification and glorification of Self-Absorbed thinking and Self-Serving actions is an outgrowth of our biological nature.

What more are you expecting?

This isn’t about asking people anything, this is about soberly facing the reality we have created upon this Earth.

But I know, most people think it’s all about the stories we tell each other and our selves. That returns us to the “trapped within our human mindscapes” thing.

What?
Are you suggesting massaging and misleading folks on the scope of our physical situation (the science) is some sort of solution?
Seems to me it’s only a green light to continue our mistakes.

So your position is . . .
How dare anyone suggest people need to learn to do with less?

But when our cornucopia has been battered into a life raft - what then?? Any suggestions?

Right because I’m an Earth Centrist - I fail to think of humanity as the end all and do all of everything.

And that’s the thing that apparently makes me rather unique - I do appreciate the reality that is beyond my own mind.

I think humanity is another animal, an incredibly intelligent one, but inflicted with an imbecilic stupidity when it comes to wisdom and mature forward thinking skills.

Well that would bring us right back to today’s sociopathic billionaires - but you reject having that discussion.

So I won’t mention our glorious disparity between the ultra rich consuming everything in sight, and the poor reduced boiling soil to make a soup for their starving children, because it just isn’t the billionaire’s concern.

What???
Why then, am I about the only one posting on the politics board?

I care very much about people’s sanity, and given the trajectory of the reality upon this Earth, that includes offering a solid intellectual/spiritual foundation that only something like Earth Centrism offers, since it accepts (and remains within) ALL of scientific/physical reality, for what it is.

These days wishful thinking isn’t our friend the way it used to be, back when the world was a cornucopia and we could always run away over the next horizon, after we finished plundering the natives, animals and landscapes, we always had new horizons to go and do it all over again.

That era has ended - pretending it ain’t so, isn’t to anyone’s advantage.

No? Who shared the article about how many people don’t have clean drinking water???

What about whose fault it is that they are in that position?

Remember all the forms of violence Pinker doesn’t recognize? Rich nations with their rich leader’s & citizen’s greed did this to them!

But, more importantly - can you explain to me how that reality of all those hungry people, right now - changes the reality of the current destructive trajectories humanity has imposed upon Earth’s physical systems?

22

The human nature that leads to that thinking.

??? You’re not asking, but you’re asking???

No.

That includes you. Posting about it doesn’t change that you are.

23

Haven’t I acknowledge the collective we in this rich society have blood on our hands. We’re all guilty to one degree or other.

That’s what Pinker does.

That, you’re doing to yourself.

Well, . . . that brings us right back to the Self-Absorption & Self-Serving thing
and the need for appreciating our Physical Reality ~ Human Mindscape divide -
before anything of substance - that is taking Earth’s systems can creatures into account - and develop and flourish.

Doesn’t it?

24

No. Not us. Just you.

A non-response

What? Doesn’t respond to something he didn’t say? Doesn’t explain for the 15th time something he’s explained 14 times before?

Not enough. Why are we like that? How did we get here? Going back Reagan is only the beginning. At least the Kennedys, come on. Not to mention the failures of the youth movement of the 1960s. Then start applying all this new neuroscience you mention. Mentioning is not enough. It’s about as affective as clutching your pearls and saying, “oh how awaful”.

25

That’s the wrong question. There isn’t something called “destructive trajectory” and something else called “hungry people”. The two are intertwined. Around 1492 slavery was still normal in much of the world. Shipping and weapons industrialized it. Demands for freedom, and yes, sorry, improvements in education and philosophies of what it is to be a human, spread along with that. But the culture of having someone else do your work for you and calling yourself superior in the eyes of your made-up-god was not that easily broken. Progress doesn’t flow in some kind of arrow. People were declared free, but the expense of dealing with them was weighed against maintaining the status quo.

Even as basic needs were met and bright spots of equality appeared, overall inequality remained. It seemed the world might come together after a couple wars to defeat the worst of the worst, and we even saved millions from starvation in Mexico. But even that was used to promote world domination, and we (The USA) exported the green revolution to countries close to the China and Russia, possibly fending off the Communist threat, but creating internal conflict in those border countries. Africa was just sort of forgotten as consumerism took over and everyone had enough with the whole “saving the hungry children” thing.

Fortunately, some never stopped and the ideas of appropriate technology have supplanted much of the “one-size-fits-all industrial” solutions. But it’s not war, and it’s not easy, so it’s not on the news, and not in the standard curriculum. It’s easier to hate billionaires and say we can’t do anything, or look at our neighbors who have more than us and blame them. Someday we’ll realize there can’t be billionaires if we stop paying them.

26

No my friend that is not the wrong question, that is the Reality of the harsh future that is knocking on our door.

Again an example of the inability to appreciate the Human Mind ~ Physical Reality divide, thereby being trapped within our Human Egos and incapable of recognizing and appreciating the actual factual physical reality that has always ruled life on Earth. Just because we chose to ignore the warning, isn’t going to buy us a redo.

The collective crowd, the Faith set, (you say you escaped religion yet it seem you still wrap yourself in its words and philosophies) believing because it’s what we need to get through - deny facts we shouldn’t be denying. Our collective inability to seriously face the question Earth’s needs or her inability to provide all we lust for - is the proof positive, not daring to look at it, doesn’t make it go away.

To hear the rich intelligencia crying out we need more progress to save the starving masses makes me want to puke. The utter phoniness! We’ve gone through our most fecund century & decades. When changes were easy and our weather system predictable. Still we found ourselves incapable of considering doing away with the ideology that Too much Is never Enough, and starting to CARE about Earth’s needs. We are the one that created those starving masses by plundering and despoiling their lands. That’s not 100% of the story, but it is way to much of the story too many times - to justify the amount of time we spend spent patting ourself on back for what little we managed - the trickle down.

Hearing a money maker like the Intellectual Entertainer Millionaire like Stephen Pinker who’s never studied climate science, preach about science and the need for method and data, and statistical evidence - yet, when it comes to climate science he seems to spend most of his time referring to some vague “left” that has invaded climate science, yet where are the facts?
And what’s with that leftie politicization, in same breath he bemoans politicization?

How about some reference to where Pinker actually makes specific claims regarding the problems with climate science?

Because I haven’t found much of enough substance to actually work with.

At this point your constant support and waving Pinker in my face has gotten me really irritated (not because of you, but because I feel forced to deal with this totally distasteful phony self proclaimed climate expert, and cheerleader for those misunderstood billionaires.)
When I get back home perhaps I’ll have to check out his book from the library - because unless there are interesting deviation and improvement from the Pinker snow job I’ve found available on YouTube, it going to be hateful task.

So far what I’ve been able to track down is hand waving, a disingenuous/inconsistent dedication to the fidelity of Earth Sciences, and treating “Progress” as another substitute for God. Another example of philosophy being mired within its Abrahamic religious past.

To me Stephen Pinker has a lot in common with a certain Australian politician.

Aug 7, 2024 - Australian Senator Gerard Rennick
In estimates I asked the Chief Scientist how heat was transferred from CO2 to N2 and O2, the two molecules that make up around 99% of the atmosphere.

I asked this, because this is the basis on which billions (if not trillions before it’s ended) are being spent to justify tearing down our home made base load energy grid in favour of foreign made renewables.

I got a word salad in reply and I’m afraid to say the answer to the Question on Notice was also a word salad, that did not answer how CO2 transfers heat.

Climate alarmists argue that the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere has increased the temperature by at least a degree resulting in climate change that will cause global boiling. …

YouTube’s Potholer54

Helps to unpack that, since the scientist was slightly blindsides by the display of Willful Ignorance.

27

I don’t wave anything. I post things. If you don’t like them, say so, say why, but your feelings that I am somehow doing this to upset you personally is not my problem.

28

You just don’t see it.
That up there is hand waving, because it fundamentally ignores the independence of Earth’s physical systems from human needs & desires. Instead presenting some vague notion that our collective mental health (& survival) is of concern to Earth systems.

But, my challenge here to see if you can find me something where Pinker substantively discusses specific failures/short comings of modern climate science? Because I can’t, but am rather limited with my free time, still all I’ve found is vague (dare I say rather biased handwaving) and his own brand of politization with this vague “Left” he love’s taking swipes at.

An important bonus: Can you show me if Pinker has ever discussed the millions, adding up to billions of corporate dollars spent on campaigns to demonize and harass respectable experts, and to deliberately misrepresent, and muddle up their finding with strategically and maliciously misrepresenting their finding?

29

Not interested. Maybe if football is boring today. I’m too busy to argue with people who aren’t listening. I don’t care as much about Pinker as you think I do.

30

I’m listening to you, but I have the feeling you aren’t reading your own words.

It does matter that Pinker feels comfortable slamming real climate scientists without ever engaging in serious academic study of the topic. (so far, I still haven’t found him actually discussing specifics, but he sure is good with cynicism towards it/them.)

It does matter that Pinker preaches fidelity to science and the important of data collection and processing - then constantly uses the “left” as some ill defined whatever to indict the science. That’s political showmanship !

I’ve been watching that Climate Science Crazy Making Show for over a half century, while you’ve been busy with the Bible and focused on the things people think and write and talk about. The realm of the mindscape - not to be mistaken with what is physically happening upon this planet.

You’ll have to excuse me for letting that nonsense you’ve fallen for get underway skin.

31

I’ve sent food to people in Haiti, started a community garden, protested Line 3, and developed new leaders. I don’t need to explain anything to you, especially not myself.

32

CC, you have yet to address the OP. You first tried to recoup the pre-history argument, but quickly dropped it, then switched to arguing a different kind of violence, against the planet. I didn’t address that because, duh, we don’t do trench warfare now we do The War on Terrorism and Anti-Immigration. I know the way leaders inflict violence has changed. I never said that’s good.

I can’t figure out what you want from me. We might finally be getting democracy back on track, but the fight goes on, so now what?. If you gave me some goals, some real pragmatic programs you support, something other than “stop being greedy”, maybe we could have a conversation. Or even if greed is the focus, some way we can address it, some steps to get others to understand the body/mindscape divide.

33

This is why my repetition that you just aren’t getting it.
I’ve never been in doubt of your intelligence, or ethics or sincerity, you are a quality individual, you have helped take care of people, and I never forget about the elderly mom you are are caring for. I in no way diminish any of that. I appreciate that you are a positive asset to your community and when it’s time for you to leave this stage, you will live in the hearts of your people, more than you can imagine I bet. I say this with a sincere heart, which currently is in midst of humanity at the other end, 1/2 yr old, 3 year old, 5 years old, Nana wife and parents giving it all they have and doing a pretty good job (when viewed when within their environment. Unfortunately I also know that values and expectations of this middle class America, are absolutely unsustainable - could go into pages of details. In the middle of this all American family, one of millions. It’s tragic and quite a spiritual exercise in itself, being at peace with it, when in Rome, go along.

I’m talking about something totally different and since reminiscing on my recent trip to onetime home, Silverton couple weeks ago, I think I might have a story that can help you look at all this a little differently. Though that will demand a bit of good faith and metaphorical imagination.

ack in Silverton, during my first week and in total amazement at the scene I’d just I landed in the middle of and been excepted into.
This happening in my mid-twenties, it twas a moment of full vigor*, blah, blah.*

So here I am (a low lander) healthy in body and happy in living. Though I never was a regular runner, I was a young man of passionate feelings and sometimes nothing better than a good exhausting run.

So I took off running once in this new town of mine and felt good, so picked it up to a sprint to see what I could do, and gave it all, then finished and in the slow down I realized I was almost suffocating. Quite literally, physically and scared close to that edge. Trying to suck in air, but there was nothing there, (so dear what have I done).

Silverton is at 9,300’ (oxygen saturation ±15%, with sea level being 21%), it took me frighteningly long watching milliseconds ticking by, feeling my lungs burning desperate for air, before I got back to normal breath.

I bring it up because its a reality check - there limits that must be respected. After that I jogged a little, but my body never let me pull that stunt again. The moral: The elevation up there makes one more keenly aware of the breathing process. :wink:

Spend more time thinking about what I mean about being “**An Earth Centrist §” that isn’t some cheap prose. Nothing I write can make sense to you until you do recognize my framing.

It took decades of learning and experiencing for it to come together, and now over a half dozen years of fruitful harvest of ideas and my perspective on what I’ve experience.

§) I could give a class on the various details and interconnects and fractals within fractals. This Earth and the life on this Earth, and the various energies it infuses the whole with - and all the amazing Earth Sciences details we’re learning about.

All that is of a class in itself, beyond the world of human thought and sentiment. Who’s the human person I am. I am my thoughts and my body dancing through life’s stage, all elements requiring all the other elements.

The material world and our mental worlds are different entities operating within different frames of reference.

The problem is that Pinker ignores the utter unsustainability of current economic expectations. Demanding we can never go back because it will crash the global economic engine. Well that’s not our choice.

Our choice has been simple from first days of environmental awareness.

Earth was finite.

Like the law of stars, burn fast and hot, die young, burn slow and steady and you’ll live longer, then you die.

We chose and we continue to chose.

34

Much appreciated

That’s exactly what I just asked for. I called it pragmatic steps for explaining it, you call it framing.

Okay. Didn’t I comment on that 2 years ago?

Annnnd. We’re back to that.

35

Well yeah. I believe when it comes to climate science the man’s utterances are intellectually bankrupt, and I’ll use his words to demonstrate as much.

Since you aren’t interested in offering any Pinker quotes or citations, let’s ice this discussion for a few week until I have a chance to focus on trying to find substantive quote, that go beyond the usual handwaving I’ve found in his video talks.

You mean about his ad hoc definition of what is and isn’t “violence?”
That’s not at all true - you have simply chosen to dismiss what I shared with the same shrug of indifference that Pinker uses to dismiss everyone who’s criticized him.

See bottom half of #3
#7
#9
even #11
after that we drift and his disregard for climate science history takes center stage.

36

Try to set the violence part aside for a second and address the human nature. From the OP

37

a) that is the decline of certain well defined classes of violence".
b) simply because some refuse to acknowledge other forms of violence (some of which I’ve enunciated in past comments) against people and this Earth’s components, components that provide our very life support systems.

c) what’s with the “human nature” in going over my copy of the transcript of the video, it all gets overly convoluted but, in the end you basically talking human behavior. Correct.

Or can you say anything about this "human nature?

22:20
… consistent with human nature it doesn’t mean that we are blank slates and we’ve been reprogrammed but rather that human nature is complex that we are not blank slates and we evolution did equip us with some nasty traits like the inner demons that make us violent as I put it exploitation dominance revenge sadism and a susceptibility to ideologies that justify violence I think those are all built into human nature but on the other hand we also have better angels as Abraham Lincoln called them . . .

This one got me to thinking about Jung’s archetypes.

32:55
… morality must be informed by our best understanding of human nature from science which is not to say they can be reduced to science, but they can certainly be informed by science that beliefs about society are empirically testable they are not just a matter of the most the well engineers . . .

36.33
…if humans have nasty traits then social reform would be impossible because you can’t change human nature because social reform is a cause dear to our hearts it must not be true that human nature exists again this is a non sequitur in both directions and as I have already explained if in fact faculties such as our capacity for language our capacity for thought reason problem-solving are combinatorial productive systems that can think up new solutions new norms new institutions so it is not mystical or utopian or romantic to say that even though we are made of Crooked Timber, we are we have inherent flaws because of our evolutionary origins, nonetheless progress is possible a third class of moralized hypotheses is that what’s natural is good so nepotism and sex differences and aggression and revenge and so on . . . "

What is one to do with all that?

Why is it so difficult to expect an Occam’s razor introduction to the topic of Human Nature. We are biological animals whose body/brain interacting with the world produces consciousness, the reflection of our body communicating with itself. Everything else works out from that fundamental awareness.

38

Thanks for listening to it.

did you mean “accept”

That covers many animals. It’s what we have been for millions of years. It leaves out all the DNA we have added along the way, not to mention the culture.

reflection? that’s all? What does the body say when its communicating?

How do I apply this basic knowledge? How does it help me decide what to have for breakfast or who I should vote for?

You seem to answer this for yourself in the notes that follow. So, I’m not sure what you’re asking. Human nature is our understanding, based on scientifically gained information, of how we might react to situations, why some people are prone to violent reactions and some not, and anything else about how we should handle our own thoughts and respond to the actions of others.

Human behavior is what we observe. It’s important to gather that data, it tells us if we are progressing and if a given policy or treatment is effective. But there is so much more to know, hormones, epigenetics, nueral activity, primate behavior, affects of diet.

39

So, you mean you want to censor people?
Why?

Nope.
I wrote "Why is it so difficult to expect an Occam’s razor introduction to the topic of Human Nature.
You know, sort of like talking Cosmology, we start with talking about the Big Bang and then work out into today’s complexities from there.

I’d rather assume it covers all of them., or they couldn’t have survived their environments. Besides it’s what science is also showing us.

Why would you assume that. The DNA is the recipe that’s being handed down, generation after generations.

Culture, well here’s where it get important to understand the distinction between our thoughts, and the material matrix we are embedded within up this planet.

How you playing games.

It keeps up from walking off the cliff, or grabbing that frying pan that’s been in the fire, etc. Get serious about the various science and it become pretty straight forward to grasp. Some call it instinct.

I applies to better understanding your self and your behaviors and your option and the even some of the reasoning behind it.

It helps you decide to have breakfast, why are you expecting the impossible.
It helps you grasp your circumstances better,
it help you grasp why people behave as they do,
etc,
etc,.

Yes and with our fundamental frame works to guide us, it all a confusing melange, where one can read 15,000 words on Human Nature and come out more confused than one started.

You know this reminding of all people that expect their toilets to work properly, but who can’t be bothered to learn anything about what happened at the other end of you flush.
Or meat eaters that are grossed out at the killing and butchering required for that cut to appear on their plate.

Its the difference between superficiality and confusion,
and a sober organized internally consistent,

sorry miss B is getting mighty fidgety - …

40

Either way, I did my best to answer that. In a phrase; because it’s not enough.

Yes, and body/brain Occam’s Razor doesn’t mention that. You just said that almost all living creatures have that. All you have said is, “life exist”.

Exactly what I’m trying to do. To get off the island of “we are bodies with brains connected to the evolving planet”.

Didn’t mean to. I’m telling you that I hear that our consciousness is a reflection of our body talking to itself, and I don’t hear much more. How about, what does it say?

A more thorough understanding of our nature DOES help me decide what to have for breakfast. I had a breakfast croissant at Kwik Trip because I needed the protein, even though I knew I was contributing to a big corporation that probably produces a lot of waste, but also, it gives a lot of people jobs, more than the mom & pop places did, and there is time which I only have so much of. I think about people across the planet with every food decision I make because my nature tells me to care about the planet and living creatures on it and food decisions are a key to that. Your links don’t tell me that.

I’ve been holding off on saying this, but you just said it for me. Sure, the Sapolsky hierarchy of how we respond to a guy with a gun is confusing. He starts with what’s in the immediate environment, then if you just walked through a riot, then what you had for breakfast, then your general health, on down to your parents, your ancestors, including those on the Serengeti or in a deeper jungle, and he doesn’t stop there, back to the origin of life. You bet it’s confusing.

What’s weird is, you point to all that and say we have to “get it”, “viscerally”, but when I talk about it, it’s “useless philosophy” or “talking heads”. I’m just a retired old computer programmer, trying to not get fat. I don’t expect to have it all sorted out, but coming up with a paragraph that must be grasped is not going to get me anywhere.