Tribalism to Universalism
What are the steps that humankind can take to evolve from tribalism to universalism? How does the family encourage tribalism & discourage universalism? Will the concept of family evolve from mere blood tribalism to a greater universalism? Will humankind go towards a true universalism in which people will befriend & care for each other?I prefer the term humanism to universalism.
We are all humans.
As I discovered when I was speaking to someone a few months back on hubpages, tribalism is not universally understood.
It is seen as something that primitive people belong to.
Tribalism is any group of people that protect their own culture, interests, and habits, often at the expense of others.
So families can be tribal when they consider their own interests at the expense of other families.
Communities can be tribal when they consider their own interests at the expense of other communities.
Nations can be tribal when they consider their own interests at the expense of other nations.
The way to move from tribalism to humanism is to understand that others are not entitled to less than one's own community/family is. Others are also human. Others are also entitled to everything that we are entitled to.
The difficulty here is that human beings, for a while now, have been taught that competition is good. It's not. It's coooperation that is gains the most. That's proven. The more complex the outcome, the more cooperation trumps competition. So says the research.
At this point, if we cannot learn to live together and step from tribalism to humanism, then we will face starvation, misery, war, and everything else as we all kill each other and eventually die.LOL I trust you are making arrangements to ship anything you have and I don't to me? As a humanist, of course.
You are truly obsessed with materialism and your possessions.
I feel sorry for you.
You seem to have the most amazing fear that other people will take what you have. Your entire world seems to be focused on this.
This is called paranoia.
Are you on medication?
I think we're done. As I can't block you, I will simply have to ignore you.Good luck with that. I hope you don't suffer from the same angst that has plagued me.
GAAnother one.
Good luck with what?
Ignoring him?
You, too.
There are many perspectives. But people in small ponds don't see what is happening in the big ocean.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/america-a … ld/5585507
https://mondoweiss.net/2019/07/american … -coverage/
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-colu … king-a-war
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p … la-850712/
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/379994-bully-a … on-war-us/
“Luke, you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.” / “The truth is often what we make of it; you heard what you wanted to hear, believed what you wanted to believe.”
“If you define yourself by the power to take life, the desire to dominate, to possess…then you have nothing.”
Obi-Wan KenobiTess, Ga and Wild are not the two to hashtag all those billionaire's destructive results to.
They are more the Maintenance Worker or fit-it guys within a bubble that is going to burst. Or in a broken system that can't be fixed by American politics or Military.
I am always open to anyone because even guys like wilderness who has many disagreeable challenges can come across an important flaw or fault within my inventional ideas, or my pioneering new ways of thinking which I have done my entire life.
GA, we agree upon one thing. We both don't regret the World's Greatest genocide, of the American Natives. I also don't regret any pass guns murderers or salvery on which they may call self defense or productive.
Don't even regret any wars murderers, the rest of the world is already on to them.
I can only regret all these non-creative and destructions methods, if I don't discourage them in the future.
The world will change itself, and the world is my family. It's just not understandable for those two, if they refuse to see from the other side. Or don't try on the larger world majority families shoes that surrounds them outside their tall boarders.Oh, I got that.
When I was looking through Wilderness's articles, I realized he was a tradesman.
Basically a bluecollar worker who has done well for himself, and has no idea whatsover how things operate above his head.
GA, I just find somewhat aggressive."Basically a bluecollar worker who has done well for himself, and has no idea whatsover how things operate above his head."
Basically an object of derision...as I and others like me make possible not only your lifestyle but your very life itself. A very typical reaction from ego ridden people incapable of doing for themselves what must be done to survive, from growing food to providing shelter or clothing.
I have seen this many times in my career...and laughed every time as my knowledge of solutions to their problems was far superior not only to theirs but to the project management and even engineering staff that were being tasked to find those solutions. It can be truly comical to see what ego does to people that put themselves on a pedestal far above those that actually build and accomplish something with their efforts.
And it surely explains the disdain for work ethic; the high and mighty don't even know what work is, let alone appreciate it's necessity in this world. They live in a world of philosophical imagination, a made up utopia, where the world of reality is allowed in only when they require that worthless bluecollar worker to provide what they are incapable of providing themselves.Wilderness, I think there is truth in what both you and Tess are saying. Once again though, to me, it all comes down to individuals as opposed to "bluecollar worker" or "the high and mighty."
I've seen ego, from people of all backgrounds, result in a Dunning Kruger type effect. I've seen a Biologist ,who knows nothing about mechanics, tell a guy who I call auto-Macgyver, how to fix his VW beetle. It seems the Biologist recently changed his own oil or something and thought it made him an expert. I also hear local hunters, who know absolutely nothing about wildlife management, tell DNR guys how to do their jobs.
It's best to be neither..and understand we can all learn from one another. Of course, every field, or trade, has some who simply don't know what they are doing as much as they should. This doesn't make all Chemists, or all carpenters, a bunch of numb skulls.No argument there! Most of us are ignorant in most things, while some are educated in some things and very nearly everyone is educated in something. Whether that education comes from book learning or from experience is irrelevant.
Yeah. There's no good reason for biases about certain groups of people, based upon their type of education, to fragment people. Americans have enough wedges being driven between us. We would all be a little less ignorant, as a people, if more people could recognize this IMO.
No one person is going to heal our divisions overnight. And, divisions, to some extent, aren't all bad. But, moving forward as a nation, America needs a uniter as President...now more than ever.In a way, divisions in knowledge are a good thing, for we would not have specialists and as a species be a lot more ignorant without that specialization. If we all knew how to farm for subsistence we wouldn't have walked on the moon.
But I have to add that a lot of what I see being taught is worthless in the real world. When someone spends 4 years getting an "education" to further their life and then can't find a job it says something. Interest is one thing, but practicality counts for quite a bit!Divisions in knowledge are great. Not understanding the value of a well-rounded education is not. A conservative business writer recently wrote a great piece in our local paper about how we need to get off this..educate only for a job type of mentality for several reasons.
"Above all things I hope the education of the common people will be attended to, convinced that on their good sense we may rely with the most security for the preservation of a due degree of liberty." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1
Educating the common people ONLY to be electricians and plumbers isn't going to help preserve our liberties. We will be enslaved and left behind without a well educated middle class. The "real world" is complicated stuff..where we need a State Department and all that nonsense they teach at four-year institutions.This, too, is quite true. A country of only people educated in the hands on of construction will not do, for we need philosophers as well.
But at the same time, philosophers that have no handle on how things work, what is physically possible and what we can actually do...well, we end up with the Green plan to immediately remove all energy sources from the planet, leaving billions to starve. When the philosophers proclaim that utopia is possible if we only do this or will only do that...when the "this" and "that" is contrary to what makes people up we don't get very far.
So we need it all. The philosophers to suggest a path and the peons of the nation to either construct that path or decide it cannot be done.Here you are just arguing a particular opinion, on how things can, and should be done. One thing I know about this, from being part of a university environmental science department, is that social scientists do often get with the engineers and field experts to help understand what is feasible. If politicians are not consulting with people in the know, then that's on them. It seems some politicians, simply state, "I know best, and you should listen to me." They hire unqualified yes men around them so they can carry out this damaging philosophy.
It was not meant that way, although I can understand how you come to that conclusion. I see people with grandiose plans, plans that will make a utopia out of earth...if only people weren't people at all but some alien race with different attitudes, wants and needs. It isn't so much about the path to get there; it's about the end result not matching reality. It's about the Green Deal, with energy usage cut to a tiny fraction of what we use...and need for survival.
I've been on both sides of this fence; the "educated" college graduate and the blue collar worker with decades of experience and knowledge. And I've seen both sides express disgust at the other: the construction worker that has exactly zero use for the "suit" that thinks it knows everything and the "educated" academician that looks with total disdain at the worker in the factory or field...while being totally and completely dependent on the knowledge buried within that worker for everything the academician needs to live and function.
I find it comical, and sad, to see people so dependent on others, others that they disdain to even speak to, but that contain within them the necessities we all require to survive. The man that doesn't know how to change a tire when it's flat 50 miles from the nearest town and may well die if he can't find shelter. The woman that reported a propane smell in an RV...and put her two small children to sleep in the bedroom before stepping outside to call for help. And it goes both ways; the plumber that cuts a main support beam of a building because it's in his way and he has no concept of the engineering work that designed that beam.
Specialization is fine and good, but when it proceeds to the point that even simple actions are beyond most people it has progressed too far." It isn't so much about the path to get there; it's about the end result not matching reality."
When you put it like this, I don't have a disagreement. The laid plans going astray saying comes to mind. You make a good point about the Green Deal. Programs just never work exactly as planned, and this is magnified when they are so broad...such as the Green Deal. I think one reason is that humans are a hard-headed species that is not as predictable as some like to think, especially when it comes to groups, which so often behave irrationally.
I too have been on both sides of that fence, to an extreme really. You summed up that sad, and comical, situation very well. There really is a lack of respect coming from both directions. I've found myself defending both groups in conversations with professors and factory workers. I try to be as well-rounded as I can these days. I grew tired of always relying on my uneducated brother to fix my cars, so I now get a Chilton manual for every car and just go to work...with some good advice. But, I'm always going to need an electrician, plumber, or mechanic now and then..Just chiming in to say that I think the lack of respect is being way overstated by wilderness. The few arrogant snots do not represent the views of most people. I will also add that some people seem to be looking to be offended, sometimes taking factual information presented for discussion as a personal affront rather than information to be evaluated and processed. This works both ways.
The degree of this is definitely hard to measure. I can think of a couple professors who fit right in on the educated side of this lack of respect. But, yeah, most of the educated people I know do understand the value of skilled labor and respect the individuals who perform it, as long as they get that respect in return.
And yet, in a small way, your statement says the same thing by insinuating that skilled labor is not "educated". We say it by insisting our children to go college, even though skilled labor earns as much or more than many college degrees. We see it in statements like "Education includes speaking several languages, extensive travel internationally (living and working in other countries), university level knowledge in several fields with science as one of the most important, etc)." (https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/345 … ost4104564). We see it in jokes about "rednecks" and "hillbillies" (which I have been known to repeat
). It is at least as prevalent as the quiet, unintended and hidden racism and discrimination we hear so much about. Humanity will always have a propensity to degrade others while putting themselves on a pedestal; the need to be superior and stroke our own egos is almost overwhelming in the species.Really my use of "educated" here was more just out of a way to label the groups for simplicity and expediency. If I were taking more time, or were less lazy about my response, I would have defined the skilled labor differently, as I almost did.
I'm a well-educated redneck... I often refer to myself this way; so I don't think my motivation, in this case, has anything to do with feeling superior. Not that I'm above stroking my own ego now and then.
I can say that being educated in academia is a different experience than being trained in a skill. And, that, as far as comparing the forms of education, by definition the academic gets a more well-rounded education. Of course, this doesn't say include education we may get from other sources (family, jobs, the street, prisons, etc.)I know that (word "educated"). But it remains that the word does not typically refer to the education of the laborer.
I, too, am a redneck and so proclaim now and then. Again, this does not change that the jokes are often an indication of the feelings of the speaker.
Yes, it is different, and yes it is often more well-rounded...until the remainder of the laborers education, conducted in the real world, takes place. At that point the laborer quite often has a wider "education" than what is received in a university. For instance, I studied chemistry, physics and math, along with a smattering of a dozen more subjects in college (biology, anthropology, various sports, English, etc.). But when it came time for the education of a skilled trade, 20 years later, that education included electrical theory, legal requirements of electrical systems in my state, business practices, how to purchase intelligently, 3D thinking, time and money efficiencies, safety and OSHA regulations, the psychology of being both a teacher and a boss, dealing with obnoxious customers, operation of a backhoe and various man-lifts, simple surveying, blueprint reading, and many more. All part of the "education" to be an electrician and all in addition to actually wiring buildings.
As I am actually arrogant on occasion, I'm not quite sure if you're referring to me.
At this point in my life - with 18 months to go before I'm 70 - I actually dont' care.
I will say what I have to say, and I will point out that some have neither the intelligence nor the education to make the kind of statements that they do.
They also appear to lack compassion and insight.No, I was not referring to you as an arrogant snot, Tess. This is not the first time wilderness has negatively stereotyped well educated people as helpless fools who would die without the help of the noble tradesman, and he is not the only one here who does it.
I have been taken to task for using the term"uneducated " just like hard sun was in this thread. A more accurate term might be "non-college-educated," but my point is that wilderness both seems to see this term as an insult even if it is simply a descriptor of education level. That is an example of him and others taking personal affront to a term even though it was not meant that way.
I have a son with Asperger's and I know that life does not go easy on you and I commend you for your many accomplishments.Thank you.
It's ironic that some should take offence to being called uneducated when they actually deem educated people to be ignorant, stupid, and unethical (lazy, guilty of thieving other people's taxes, etc.)
While I would definitely say that college educated people are far more educated than school leavers and tradesmen, it is also true that people who travel and work in other countries, read a lot (at least a book a week), and who speak many languages, tend to be more highly educated than those who don't.
When one is educated, one learns compassions and acceptance for and of all.+1000000000000000000. Tess, there are some people who are envious of those who have more education which is sad. I also applaud you. You are a highly intelligent as well as educated person.
Education gives people perspectives on life. It broadens their horizons. Education makes people more analytical & more humane. For example, educated parents are more likely to use constructive correction as opposed to less educated parents who resort to harsher forms of correction. It is good, even great to be educated.
My daughter was told something by a psychologist.
The psychologist said she was a growing person, and that was rare.
Apparently, a growing person, when presented with a piece of data, will go and explore more of that data. So, for instance, if one is told that there is neurological evidence that conservatives and liberals have different brain structures, a growing person will go and google it and read everything about it.
A non growing person may refute it without examining it, may deny it, may ignore it, but they certainly will not expand their awareness or grow with the input of new information.
Apparently most people aren't growing people.
So, technically speaking, while college educated and reading and all these things are tools for education, the biggest tool is just the drive to learn more and more, and to be willing to go against one's own world view in order to become more informed.
It's a hard thing to do.So someone, is not a "growing person" if they choose not to read research that you suggest they read? Of course, this could have nothing to do with our conversation, but I'll pretend it does either way.
I, for one, have plenty of learning to do, and a finite amount of time. For one, I have to learn how to go change a voltage regulator in my truck as I think it may have blew out the new alternator I just put in. I must do this so I can get wood and survive through the winter. I can do all this, and graduate as student of the year two years straight from a physical science department. Am I liberal..am I conservative..is my amygdala over-functioning?
In fairness, Wilderness had acknowledged that skilled laborers would be lost without the ones who are more traditionally educated in universities:
"I've been on both sides of this fence; the "educated" college graduate and the blue collar worker with decades of experience and knowledge. And I've seen both sides express disgust at the other: the construction worker that has exactly zero use for the "suit" that thinks it knows everything and the "educated" academician that looks with total disdain at the worker in the factory or field...while being totally and completely dependent on the knowledge buried within that worker for everything the academician needs to live and function."
However, I won't argue that Wilderness has a need to paint the skilled laborers in a better light compared to their counterparts, even if most of everything we use on a daily basis began with theorists, and people educated in universities.
I would prefer that everyone simply understand that all of these people are needed and leave it at that.Most of what we use on a daily basis began with people educated in universities. As in:
The Wright Bros, who gave us flight, from single seater airplanes to the space shuttle, but never had a formal education.
Henry Ford, who never learned to spell and could write only the simplest sentences, but gave us the assembly line used in nearly every manufacturing facility in the world today?
Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot, who made the first self propelled carriage (automobile) and has no record of higher education?
Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak who dropped out of college soon after beginning, but gave us Apple and all that it has produced?
Thomas Edison, who is responsible for the electrification of the world more than any else with his light bulb. He also gave us the phonograph and many other useful inventions, but attended school for only a few months and was taught the 3 R's by his mother?
But, notwithstanding Jobs and Wozniak, those days are ending, I think, for you are correct that the majority of discoveries/inventions today require a far deeper understanding of nature than was possible in the past. Instead of someone tinkering in their garage we find massive laboratories with dozens of researchers working to find solutions. I wonder, though if that deeper understanding is not also producing the end of that "well rounded" education, for the physicist attempting to unravel the universe simply does not have time to look into geology, political science, psychology or anything else.
We're also seeing a change in that discoveries require huge amounts of funding - capital - to come about, and that generally means a higher education. Can you see a couple of bike shop owners with no education applying to Uncle Sam for a billion dollar grant to see if they could fly like a bird today?Come on now. I can just as easily come up with a quick, and more relevant to today, list: -- note that these educated inventors go back to the 1830s... Not all physicists are astrophysicists by the way.
Nick Holyonak Jr: invented the laser diode that used in CDs, DVDs and cell phones; In 1962 he invented the first visible Light emitting diode and thus all the products that come with it, including LED TVs--Holonyak earned his bachelor's (1950), master's (1951), and doctoral (1954) degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Col. John Stevens, III (June 26, 1749 – March 6, 1838) was an American lawyer, engineer, and inventor who constructed the first U.S. steam locomotive, first steam-powered ferry, He graduated King's College (which became Columbia University) in May 1768.
Grace Hopper: One of the first programmers of the Harvard Mark I computer, she was a pioneer of computer programming who invented one of the first linkers. She earned a Ph.D. in mathematics from Yale University and was a professor of mathematics at Vassar College.
I could go on, and on, and on. Why can't we leave it at, people should respect the skills and knowledge of others no matter how they came about that education? I thought that's what we agreed upon. Why then this need to disparage universities and formal education?
Edit: And even the physicists must generally take at least a couple semesters of English, history, psychology, etc. in order to get that degree. That's all part of the well-rounded education that helps keep people free from oppression as Jefferson spoke of.Of course you can find people with formal education that have contributed hugely to our success. That was kind of the point - that we have benefited greatly from both.
"Why then this need to disparage universities and formal education?"
?? I haven't disparaged either universities OR formal education (although I could, given what I see happening at some of the more liberal campuses). On the contrary, I fully agree with you that both "styles" of education are necessary - that we couldn't do without either of them.
At worst I have disparaged those people - from both sides of the fence - that find the other side useless. I thought I had made that clear. I have been the "suit" on the job, looked down on by the person doing the work as not understanding anything outside a laboratory, and I have been the worker, looked down on by the educated elite that doesn't think a mere laborer knows anything or is more than minimally intelligent.
Which is exactly my point.
There is a difference between an education and a qualification.
And liberals, in general, are better educated than conservatives. One cannot hold the kind of opinions that Wildnerness and some others have and be educated.
Education includes speaking several languages, extensive travel internationally (living and working in other countries), university level knowledge in several fields with science as one of the most important, etc).Agreed. Education creates a broadening of perspectives if used correctly. The average educated person is universal in scope & outlook. Yes, liberals, progressives, & other evolved people lean towards education. They realize that education makes them better people. Conservatives tend to be suspicious of areas outside their particular paradigm. They prefer a more narrow perspective on life & philosophical outlook. This explains why Conservatives tend to be more religious, have more children, adhere to more outmoded philosophies, etc.
I was never stating I thought you were wrong..only that concepts like Dunning Kruger can apply in all directions between those with well-rounded educations and those skilled workers who don't have so much of that education. I also feel like the flames of division, along these lines, are fanned way too much nowadays and both the left and right are guilty on this front.
I should add that some of this is simply an individual's ability, and willingness, to see past their own situations...no matter their level of education. I remember seeing this when I was in high school.Not really.
Dunning Kruger states that those who are highly intelligent and highly skilled have less confidence in their conclusions than those who are less intelligent and less skilled.
So I beg to differ.
It's not the same on both sides of the fence at all.
Most people cannot see past their own situations, and that has a lot to do with their brain chemistry - nature, not nurture.
As a result of the divides that are currently our world to a very sticky place in terms of divisions, scientists are now trying to find out why liberals and conservatives differ so much.
It really does have to do with neurology - not psychology."Dunning Kruger states that those who are highly intelligent and highly skilled have less confidence in their conclusions than those who are less intelligent and less skilled."
I think most people tend to think of this definition of Dunning Kruger when they reference it:
"In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people mistakenly assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is."
I've personally witnessed this happening, as I described before.
"Most people cannot see past their own situations, and that has a lot to do with their brain chemistry - nature, not nurture."
Doesn't this, at least to an extent, contradict your statement on education:
"There is a difference between an education and a qualification. And liberals, in general, are better educated than conservatives. One cannot hold the kind of opinions that Wildnerness and some others have and be educated"
Now, let's go back to the characteristic of Dunning Kruger that you brought up:
"...those who are highly intelligent and highly skilled have less confidence in their conclusions than those who are less intelligent and less skilled."
It seems to me that you are one of the most confident participants in this discussion, even going so far as to put your wisdom in the same category as Obi-Wan Kenobi. This confidence is also reflected in the wording of statements such as, "I always make sense." Really...always, to everyone?
Then we have..it's "hard science." As someone with a physical science background, I could argue that there's no way any of this is "hard science." How does each and every study even define liberal vs conservative? You see, my minor in psychology is enough for me to know that making inferences about brain structure based on political leaning is messy business. And, I'd be willing to bet that it doesn't even take a Psych minor to understand this.
Ultimately, I see such arguments as damaging to the cause of fostering cooperation and progressive ideals.And the next paragraph in wiki says, "As described by social psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger, the cognitive bias of illusory superiority results from an internal illusion in people of low ability and from an external misperception in people of high ability; that is, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."
So people who are stupid think think they are clever and people who are clever think other people are more intelligent than they are.
So, no, all people do not think they are more clever/educated than they are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E … ger_effect
And the first paragraph of the wiki entry needs to be removed. It directly contradicts the second paragraph, and it is not not what either Dunning or Kruger said.
No, it does not contradict my statement on education.
The neurological chemistry of liberals means that they are more likely to educate themselves as their grey matter is larger than that of conservatives. Conservatives have a larger amigdala. I posted the links to that research somewhere here on this stream.
http://bestebookstories.blogspot.com/20 … words.html
If you contact me and send me your email address, I would be happy to send you an assessment by a doctor on my ability to assess accurately. Your minor in psychology is not on the same level. And neurology is not the same as psychology.
I posted the links for the NEUROLOGICAL evidence that liberals and conservatives have different brain structures. Liberals have greater grey matter and conservatives have greater areas of amigdala. The grey matter is the thinking/knowledge area of the brain while the amigdala is the fear section of the brain. Neurologists have corolated them to liberals and conservatives.
That's called hard science.
Too lazy to go find the links for your again, but you're welcome to do a search. Here's wiki.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_a … rientation
I'm 68. For most of my life I struggled trying to understand why people kept telling me I was wrong when no matter how hard I researched and worked out the same thing over and over again, I came to the same conclusion.
Then a Dr. Prinsloo gave me 5 hours of tests. Actually she gave me 9 hours of tests, but I completed the first 5 hour test (an IQ test designed at Harvard) in 90 minutes. She told me I was off the graph, that people like me were very clever, and that I would always see what others would never see.
So, forgive me if you think I'm full of myself. I'm tired of redoing the math and fighting with the math department (and, yes, the math department at college always conceded I was right), I don't care.
Please feel free to do the reseaerch and check everything I say - thoroughly. And read more of wiki than just the first paragraph. Then check the neurological research. Psychology is a soft science. Neurology is a hard scienc.e
And check that out as well.
Oh, yes, and I do concede that I'm probably over hopeful and romantic and idealistic that humankind can work it all out and we will not become extinct in 80 years due to many different road converging - climate change, biological warfare, malice, etc.No, without a "hard" definition of liberals vs conservative...I still don't see hard science. The rest of what you write, either misses my point, or is not of that much interest to me, as highlighting, and exaggerating differences is just not something I like to partake in, as I stated before. We sure as are not going to work anything out by labeling a group of people, which is not even easy to define, as smarter and less fearful than others. This seems more like a task taken up by someone attempting to divide rather than unit. Your arrogance gets in the way to the point where it affects your ability to understand and communicate.
I wish you all the best.Wow. Try reading the scientific abstracts. I'm not making it up. Read how these conclusion were reached - using instrumentation, etc.
Yes, exactly, you want to sit on the fence.I understand that. You don't like conflict. You want to believe everybody is a good guy.
Good luck with that.
I don't need your approval either.I'm glad you don't need my approval, and the research is just not something I think is productive, even if it is valid. Everyone is a good guy? lol. We are talking about labor and education. I've been extensively involved in both, and no most people are selfish not "good" whatever that means.
I am not so busy this morning, so here is a response for you.;-)
GA
Very interesting.
And as America diminishes on the global scene, who steps in to fill the vacuum?
Seems like China is doing everything possible to be that nation.
We will never get to Humanism, not in our lifetimes, just because some 'enlightened' westerners believe in achieving this, or achieving globalism, does not mean nations like China or Russia believe in it.
When America no longer controls the global dialogue, someone else will, most likely China, which will only have China's best interests in mind, and the rest of the world will be subservient to it.
Tribalism will continue.Always my faith is in the the power of the people and small grass roots people. As it always has brought the best positive change to the people throughout human history.
Chinese saying.
The snake in the grass can defeat the firey dragon in the sky.
You're the one make a huge deal out of everyone having whatever their neighbor does, not me! I was poking fun at the idea, the concept that seems so central to your philosophy...until it means that YOU must give up your possessions rather than taking from someone else.
You don't like it and promptly descend once more into insults. Applause.I once lived in somewhere near your area. I had just one case of gun threat at home wail in Canada. It was between the RCMP police and a shot gun marijuana grower. RCMP threaten me to give me a Federal criminal code record if I didn't help them bust a grow opp. They didn't realize I grew hemp for my structure house. The shotgun marijuana threatened me leave town or be killed because over my hemp. I left my home because a police guns plus prison, and a shot gun on my other side.
Just accepting me growing hemp in a safe green house was one solution. A few bad cops with guns was not worth my life and far secondary my things. Weed legal now, I could of kept my lifestyle and home.
Guns are extremely uncivilized way to protect anything and too scary to have a decent discussion over .
I agree that basic needs are the right of all living. However, what are basic needs? People disagree. I think if you asked an indigenous native in the Amazon what a basic need is it would be vastly different from your answer.
You also comment that you are entitled to no more than another. Exactly. You should be guaranteed the same opportunity. I just find your comments to be surface feel good thoughts. Which don't really mean a lot. Too many variables have to be agreed upon. I'm not entitled to a yacht, For instance. Someone poorer than I am isn't entitled to a 2500 SF house. Someone poorer than the next person isn't entitled to a new model phone every year. Without competition, that's where your thought process lands. Whatever you have, whatever you have chosen to spend the money you've earned on, you are not entitled to unless others are guaranteed possession of the same.
I get your point but humanity will never resemble a giant ant farm where everyone cheerfully plays their part to ensure the common good.The selfish human did learn from ants on how to collect taxes and fight wars.
How often do you interact with animals in your daily life? Not just your dogs or cats, but a myriad of wildlife? Chances are, not very often. As a society, human's have separated ourselves from the animal world, building houses and fences to keep wildlife away. We’ve developed a culture that predominantly views humans as “superior” to animals and we associate their wild qualities and instincts with being “uncivilized.” humans are by far the most uncivilized with acts like letting up to 200 species go extinct everyday.
More lessons than we can imagine we could be learning from all lifeforms. Especially considering how far we’ve separated ourselves from them
Humans can more compassion and patience. How to Live in the now and how we’re all Connected. Ecosystems only thrive when there is balance we mainly collasps them. Humans aren’t as different as we thought. Animals respect their elders and take Responsibility. They listen carefully and many animal’s hearing abilities far surpass that of humans. Human only diverse eye and brain is supreme, if we use it decently. While we might have evolved away from using our hearing to survive on the day to day, we tend to overlook the importance of this ability. Animals sit and listen before they react to situations, something we could surely all stand to do.
We must live lightly and must stick Together"I just find your comments to be surface feel good thoughts."
Please feel free to read my many responses on Quora (miladytess or Tessa Schlesinger) or come join me on facebook.
Do you seriously expect me to provide you with 60 years of information in 4 words on hubpages?I expect commentsto make sense. That's all.
And how did my comments not make sense?
If anything, I read through your profile and find it to be nothing but purple prose.
The fact that you do not have a sufficient background in science and world affairs probably makes you think I don't make sense. Perhaps you should read more?LOL. You do realize using a position of ignorance to insult, in order to attempt to bolster the validity of your opinion, drastically undermines the validity of your opinion?
I realize you feel pretty good about what you think but my point was simply that it means absolutely nothing in a real conversation. It's a feel good statement which would do absolutely nothing to alleviate real world problems. Primarily because it defines nothing, while claiming everything.
I think, instead of attempting to bully those who disagree, a better use of your time would be a mental exercise where you attempt to follow your own logic, taking into account how those with vastly different opinions define things they might feel 'entitled' to.
I live in the real world. Even in a small community it is difficult to agree on what expectations of entitlement are reasonable, and what the collective can reasonably afford in an attempt to accommodate. It becomes harder at the state level and apparently virtually impossible at a national level.
Any attempt to view entitlement from an international level creates war. Any attempt to enforce our ideals,on the world stage, of what the individual is entitled to props up and enriches despots and tyrants. It creates massive social burdens on societies already deeply in debt by attempting to ensure basic entitlements for the citizens of those societies when those in power, or the social structure of that society, view things differently.
Bully for you for a compassionate outlook. Live it. Breath it. Be that person. Share everything you can to ensure your actions reflect the values you espouse. I doubt you will. Because most of us who believe in basic entitlements only mouth the words. We don't put our money or our personal resources where our mouths are.
Your views serve little purpose outside the confines of your mind without more clarity and a reasonable definition of the parameters. Parameters that are actually workable on a larger stage, parameters you should show have been implemented successfully on your personal stage.I didnt bother to read most of this.
None of your comments take issue with what I have said. You haven't in any way taken my points and disproven them.
Instead you've made stupid remarks.
I'm accustomed to proper debate - not ad hominems. And my point about your writing purpose prose was relevant because hardly make sense yourself.
I do make sense.
I always make sense.
And I'm accustomed to debate on a lot larger platforms than hubpages.
http://bestebookstories.blogspot.com/20 … words.html
For example.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-European-i … chlesinger
You know absolutely nothing about me. You're making a lot of assumptions. And you are dead wrong.I think you've made clear that conversing with you is just giving you the opportunity to believe you've successfully fed your own ego.
Cheers.
It is truly odd how your "stupid remarks" make so much sense...
What do you mean by universalism. I googled it and it looks to me a theological term.
As you take tribalism vs universalism it's like saying, group behaviour vs Christianity... It does not make sense.
Could you rephrase the question.
Just putting this out there.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
To quote: We found that greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala.
In other words, liberals have a greater capability towards analysis of complex information while conservatives run scared of every little thing.
Conservatives keep saying things can't work because they genuinely don't have the genes and the brain chemistry to be able to do the math.
You can google this further.This is really commonsense, Tess. The more one is open to many perspectives, the more one grows intellectually. The more closed minded one is, the less h/she grows intellectually. In fact, closed minded people stagnate mentally. There was a study done regarding Alzheimer's- people who continuously try & do new things are less likely to develop Alzheimer's than those who don't try new things.
You are right Tess- conservative people have fearful personalities. They are fearful of the new. They are of the school that if it isn't broke, don't fix it & other kinds of nonsense. The mind is to be used & exercised. The more mental exercise, the better for one's overall well-being. Yes, liberals & other progressives are more analytical. It is liberals/progressives who are responsible for the evolvement of societies. Conservatives were never responsible for the evolvement of societies-in fact, they are against every type of progress.Actually it's not psychological - it is physiological. The actual brain of conservatives is not capable of analysing complex information.
So conservatives keep coming up with things like:
1. It won't work - you don't know how things work. The real reason is that conservatives lack the ability to innovate and find a way to make things work. There's a reason academics tend to be liberal. It's not that universities make people liberal. It's that people who go to universities tend to have the brains.
2. You're right about 'if it isn't broke, don't fix it.' More than that, however, they mostly don't realize it is broke, and they don't have the complex reasoning to determine outcomes and see the end result of their policies. They genuinely don't have the brains. That's actually why it's a lost cause to argue with them. Their brains don't have the capacity to deal with more than what is in front of them.
That is hard science - not my opinion.Grace, I also wanted to say something else.
The differences in the physiological brains between liberals and conservatives might be very different, but evolution would not have kept both kinds of people if they weren't both needed.
Conservatives think quickly and clearly on the battle ground. They see what needs to be done immediately. Liberals tend to take the long view. You don't generally want them to spend 5 hours on the battlefield figuring out what to do when a bomb is about to hit ground zero. On the other hand, you don't want conservatives figuring out what to do with a threat that is ten years down the road. They don't have the complex reasoning skills.
QUOTE: And we know that dopamine activity isn’t purely situational. Some people are born with genes that naturally make their dopamine circuits more active. These people are more likely than others to pursue creative endeavors. Often, they end up as actors, academics, entrepreneurs and writers.
QUOTE: Consider how this might extend to politics. Progressivism, the pursuit of progress, is, by definition, the pursuit of change, of new things. So, we might expect to see progressive ideology in people with more active dopamine circuits. And that’s just what we do find. Researchers from the University of California discovered that people who inherit particularly active dopamine receptor genes are more likely to subscribe to a liberal ideology. (They also tend to get bored easily and seek novelty, and can be impulsive, exploratory, excitable, quick-tempered and extravagant.) It’s no surprise that so many actors, artists, academics and writers tend to be liberal: Dopamine may be driving both their creativity and their politics.
QUOTE: Similarly, people with lower levels of dopamine and higher levels of the “Here & Now” brain chemicals are more likely to take their enjoyment from the appreciation of things they already have. They value tradition. They take more satisfaction from the here and now enjoyment of, say, watching a football game with friends rather than the future-focused promises of a presidential debate. Not surprisingly, genes that code for a less active dopamine system have been linked to people who identify as conservative politically, who tend to prize tradition and see safety in the status quo. A study of 1,771 students in Singapore found that conservative attitudes were more common among those who had a receptor gene that was less reactive to dopamine.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story … rms-222186
QUOTE Recent converging studies are showing that liberals tend to have a larger and/or more active anterior cingulate cortex, or ACC—useful in detecting and judging conflict and error—and conservatives are more likely to have an enlarged amygdala, where the development and storage of emotional memories takes place. More than one study has shown these same results.
QUOTE: The idea of a genetic or a neurological difference between liberals and conservatives is a hot topic of debate. Some of these correlations between brain function/anatomy and specific political party are consistent across multiple studies, of varying design and methodology, over years of research.
QUOTE: So, when faced with an ambiguous situation, conservatives would tend to process the information initially with a strong emotional response. This would make them less likely to lean towards change, and more likely to prefer stability. Stability means more predictability, which means more expected outcomes, and less of a trigger for anxiety.
QUOTE: Liberals, though, tend toward unpredictability. They don’t mind change, and in fact, they prefer it. They seek it out. This personality type would likely choose “change” over “stability” just because they tend to be more novelty-seeking by nature. The fact that they have a more prominent ACC helps them to deal with radically changing situations, still find the salient points, all without the emotion getting in the way. These individuals are the compartmentalizers, the logic-driven ones, while the conservatives are the ones driven by emotion and empathy.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/inter … clIk1czbIU
From personal experience, while I don't tend to agree with conservatives much as I find them limited when it comes to being able to predict consequences accurately, I think the empathy part is spot on. I was overwhelmed with generosity and kindness while living in Houston (Texas) by conservatives. Not something I've seen from liberals.
The bottom line is that each side brings something, and both kinds of people evolved to bring something to the table.
The problem now is that we live in a time that doesn't need the amigdala so much as it needs the frontal cortex.
QUOTE:
It upsets me terribly each time I have to read the condemnation that liberals and progressives are guilty of theft, laziness, stupidity, etc.
It diminishes me and others who work hard, and who are measured as being highly intelligent and educated by doctors and educationists.
In addition, having Aspergers and having had to face the harsh judgements and abuse of society for a lifetime, I really cannot continue to be part of a society and community which consists of people who are relatively uninfomred and uneducated, and who consider themselves superior by virtue of their relative financial independence.
I'm giving the forums a miss from now on.
And I seriously continue to believe that hubpages needs to provide a block button so that those of us who are intensely sensitive don't have to put up with the abuse of others. That allows us to interact with those of like compassion and derive pleasure from the forums.I think the movie Team America express it best for me. South Park detest Right or left politics and so do I. Left use more the right brain and right uses more of the left Brain. Wealthy has it way of making everyone fight each other, so they can walk away with our money and weaken us.
Tess I think your an intelligent women with a high IQ. Majority of people would agree with you as human liberal expansion of the mind and Universe as more important than contracting the mind into conservative box. Sacrifice our freedom for assume safety that turns out more dangerous and narrow minded for the majority.
Although I do suggest working more on your EQ, generalized labeling and deep personal insults wouldn't win friends and influence people that well on this thread. Say what you want, just use An unattached approach will work smoother.
Still, find much of the positive things you say are fascinating, don't leave us.I've just unfollowed this and other threads.
You know I read Daneil Goleman's book on Emotional Intelligence when it first came out. The funny thing is that there is a chapter on social intelligence, and he has recently written a book on social intelligence.
I actually have high emotional intelligence. What most people are confusing is social intelligence and emotional intelligence. I don't have high social intelligence - getting along with others.
For some reason, I have a lot of friends. Or rather, through the years, I've formed a lot of connections with people, and I'm okay with that.
I don't really want to be distressed by people who think that some people are superior to others. I don't consider myself superior or inferior to anybody - although some of my skills may be better than some of theirs. Having excellent skills doesn't make one a superior human being.
Anyway, thanks for your kind words.
See you around.Your welcomed back when ever your cool, I will miss your comments.
You only need a handful of good friends, which you already have. Highly intelligent people are often, not the happiest. No brain, no pain, kind of thing.
Doing standup comedy, likeable is one of the most important things. I play the fool, as you are the same as them, not superior or at least don't expose it, even in a bar.For what it's worth, I, for one, wasn't trying to be mean to her or anything. She seems like a very confident person that can handle a little disagreement. I just don't like feeling as though I'm upsetting women of a certain age I guess. But, she certainly seemed to come out guns blazing with insults on others' intelligence. I agree that she is intelligent though...it just hurts her case when she has to remind people of it so much. Ironically, it reminds me a lot of Trump with his, "very stable genius" type comments. Maybe she is just dealing with something right now that has her off her game a bit. I did wish her the best...and meant it.
You have a better sense of deplomcy than me.
I understand you got to call on someone who claims they are always making good sense all the time to everyone, when they disagree.
That's like claiming your very intelligent or very very, very honest. They are more likely not. She acknowledged she has a social problems and she no better or worse than anyone else, I hope. She will work it out, no doubt.
I know learn more from my critics with challenges, than I do with yes men. So I can not, lose.Yes, we can learn a lot form those who challenge our ideas, especially when they are challenged in good faith by people with some knowledge who've put some thought into the subject. From the very little I know of her, Im also sure Tess will be fine.
I'm not sure my sense of diplomacy is all that great. My deal, right now, is trying not to contribute to the "destruction of civil discourse" as I think Crankaliscious referred to it on another thread. It's not always easy, as I fall into the mud with those who seem not to care much about civil discourse (not that Tess is this). I tend to take that bait sometimes and feed it back to them. But, I feel like I'm doing pretty good if I converse with others in ways that I would want to be conversed with. There's a difference between heated debate and being personally insulting. We all know this, but seem to forget, or not care, from the comfort of a keyboard.
Related Discussions
- 13
Would the world be a better place without politics or vice versa?
by Cuttler 7 years ago
Would the world be a better place without politics or vice versa?In my opinion, Politics is such a dirty game...it is plagued with corruption, impunity, abuse of office, injustice, nepotism, tribalism, racism...and so on. So would the world be a better place without it?
- 176
To Foreign Hubbers - What are your opinions about President Trump?
by Scott Belford 6 years ago
Donald Trump has been President for 14 days now. In that time he has issued around 14 executive orders, most of which impact the world.The American polls show over 50% of America think Trump is doing a poor jobs.What is your opinion?
- 17
Immigration Reform...Is it another cruel joke on taxpayers?
by SealBeach 9 years ago
Suddenly, the idea hopelessly is setting-in on the American people. Americans are becoming more and more passive when it comes to constructive oversight over our political leaders. How can taxpayers now cope with a constant reminder of a $17 trillion deficit , war on demand by the political elite...
- 58
Oath Keepers Throw Trump Under the Bus in Sedition Trial
by Mike Russo 7 months ago
On the Jan. 6 insurrection, they thought they were following Trump's orders to storm the capitol. Here is the good, bad, and the ugly about Roger Stone's connection to these para military groups. Roger Stone was pardoned by Trump...how convenient that was.https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics …...
- 69
The future of evolution
by Captain Redbeard 11 years ago
I am having a hard time finding the right forum thread for evolution. I couldn't find a thread in the education area or the science area.Anywho, I got to thinking today about the fact that evolution is considered fact now and that there are evidences to prove where we come from. Then I got to...
- 70
Christians, could you ever love or even like an atheist?
by Kylyssa Shay 7 years ago
Christians, could you ever love or even like an atheist?I'm an atheist and at least 90% of the people I love are Christians. I only have a problem with Christians who use religion as a weapon to harm or control others. Obviously, I know Christians can love atheists because, well, all those people I...