Author Topic: Discordianism and Morality  (Read 21950 times)

Elder Iptuous

  • Professional Discordian and Physiognomist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5667
  • terribly tedious
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #135 on: December 11, 2008, 04:39:02 pm »
I'm saying you can't separate the two. 
the social evolution of a group has a direct bearing on its survival...
But that's confusing the cause in effect.  In this case social evolution is changing biological evolution.

By the way, human society has existed for ~10,000 years, that is not nearly enough time for anything significant to happen in human evolution.
[/quote]
We're essentially in agreement, it seems, so now i'm just blustering for fun. (ie. i'm not trying to be combative, and am not firmly stating things, if i was in the first place...)

re: cause/effect in evolution, wouldn't you say that the cause is the effect is the cause is the effect etc... ?  i.e. if some group adopts some behavioral pattern (morals) that allows for self destructive actions, then they would have less likelihood of surviving as a group, and thus passing on that pattern, right?  Although that is not the biology of the individual organism affecting the behavioral patterns, it certainly shows the behavioral patterns affecting the biological makeup by selecting against a group, and it points out that you cannot separate the hardware from the software in your analysis, as i see it.

re: 10,000 years.... if you select against a group that has some behavioral pattern (morals) then any biological differences that that group has accumulated will be lost. isn't that significant? and can't/hasn't that happen(ed) in fairly short order? like a bonsai...



Vene

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2863
  • Screaming Primate
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #136 on: December 11, 2008, 05:26:34 pm »
We're essentially in agreement, it seems, so now i'm just blustering for fun. (ie. i'm not trying to be combative, and am not firmly stating things, if i was in the first place...)

re: cause/effect in evolution, wouldn't you say that the cause is the effect is the cause is the effect etc... ?  i.e. if some group adopts some behavioral pattern (morals) that allows for self destructive actions, then they would have less likelihood of surviving as a group, and thus passing on that pattern, right?  Although that is not the biology of the individual organism affecting the behavioral patterns, it certainly shows the behavioral patterns affecting the biological makeup by selecting against a group, and it points out that you cannot separate the hardware from the software in your analysis, as i see it.
This assumes that the anatomy between the different groups is significantly different (actually genes that control anatomy, but whatever).  And even then it would have to assume the two groups are reproductively separated (not that they can't breed, but that they don't).

To use the software/hardware analysis:  A specific piece of hardware could run multiple software programs, and one software program could run on different pieces of hardware.  As long as the hardware and software match, there's no problem and no need to upgrade the hardware.

To use a more human-centric train of thought: as individuals we can follow many different worldviews throughout our lives.  After all, look at the number of people who convert between different religions, change political parties, and so forth.  The physical structure of the brain doesn't change, but the societal construct entertained does.  To go back to my 10k year point; society has changed a lot in that period, but we have barely evolved.  Certainly our brain structure hasn't done anything significant.

Just so we're clear at what level of evolution humans can experience in this short time I'll bring up something that has changed.  That something is lactose tolerance.  The enzyme required appeared ~3000 years ago (link).  It's enough time for minor tweaking of biochemical processes, but not enough to alter brain structure.

Quote
re: 10,000 years.... if you select against a group that has some behavioral pattern (morals) then any biological differences that that group has accumulated will be lost. isn't that significant? and can't/hasn't that happen(ed) in fairly short order? like a bonsai...
There is nothing that can be selected for as far as specific moral codes go.  Something that can be selected is how morality is constructed.  Easy example, the way our brains have evolved the sections that make decisions are largely emotion driven, but the sections that are more rational have a lot less influence.  This can lead to a shitload of different moral ideals (and it has), but if some moral code is selected for (social evolution) any effect on brain evolution would be due to genetic drift and not selection.

Template

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 877
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #137 on: December 12, 2008, 10:32:19 pm »
We're essentially in agreement, it seems, so now i'm just blustering for fun. (ie. i'm not trying to be combative, and am not firmly stating things, if i was in the first place...)

re: cause/effect in evolution, wouldn't you say that the cause is the effect is the cause is the effect etc... ?  i.e. if some group adopts some behavioral pattern (morals) that allows for self destructive actions, then they would have less likelihood of surviving as a group, and thus passing on that pattern, right?  Although that is not the biology of the individual organism affecting the behavioral patterns, it certainly shows the behavioral patterns affecting the biological makeup by selecting against a group, and it points out that you cannot separate the hardware from the software in your analysis, as i see it.
This assumes that the anatomy between the different groups is significantly different (actually genes that control anatomy, but whatever).  And even then it would have to assume the two groups are reproductively separated (not that they can't breed, but that they don't).

To use the software/hardware analysis:  A specific piece of hardware could run multiple software programs, and one software program could run on different pieces of hardware.  As long as the hardware and software match, there's no problem and no need to upgrade the hardware.

To use a more human-centric train of thought: as individuals we can follow many different worldviews throughout our lives.  After all, look at the number of people who convert between different religions, change political parties, and so forth.  The physical structure of the brain doesn't change, but the societal construct entertained does.  To go back to my 10k year point; society has changed a lot in that period, but we have barely evolved.  Certainly our brain structure hasn't done anything significant.

Just so we're clear at what level of evolution humans can experience in this short time I'll bring up something that has changed.  That something is lactose tolerance.  The enzyme required appeared ~3000 years ago (link).  It's enough time for minor tweaking of biochemical processes, but not enough to alter brain structure.

Quote
re: 10,000 years.... if you select against a group that has some behavioral pattern (morals) then any biological differences that that group has accumulated will be lost. isn't that significant? and can't/hasn't that happen(ed) in fairly short order? like a bonsai...
There is nothing that can be selected for as far as specific moral codes go.  Something that can be selected is how morality is constructed.  Easy example, the way our brains have evolved the sections that make decisions are largely emotion driven, but the sections that are more rational have a lot less influence.  This can lead to a shitload of different moral ideals (and it has), but if some moral code is selected for (social evolution) any effect on brain evolution would be due to genetic drift and not selection.

I disagree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tame_Silver_Fox

Vene

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2863
  • Screaming Primate
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #138 on: December 12, 2008, 11:45:01 pm »
Natural Selection =/= Artificial Selection

The biggest difference: Artificial selection can have a goal.  Natural selection, not so much.

Golden Applesauce

  • Token Apologist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2429
  • Where does this text go?
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #139 on: December 13, 2008, 12:15:47 am »
Remember, groups don't reproduce biologically, individuals do.

And usually, it's in the individual's interest for everyone else to play by the rules while he breaks them.
Q: How regularly do you hire 8th graders?
A: We have hired a number of FORMER 8th graders.

Template

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 877
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #140 on: December 13, 2008, 12:26:27 am »
Natural Selection =/= Artificial Selection

The biggest difference: Artificial selection can have a goal.  Natural selection, not so much.
Imposition of order=escalation of disorder.  The unexpected pops up, like easier-to-breed, but more loveable foxes.

Remember, groups don't reproduce biologically, individuals do.

And usually, it's in the individual's interest for everyone else to play by the rules while he breaks them.
Thus, moral rule zero: don't get caught.

Requia ☣

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5842
  • Delicate and pretty shark of impending doom.
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #141 on: December 19, 2008, 04:04:41 am »
Quote
It's enough time for minor tweaking of biochemical processes, but not enough to alter brain structure.

A single generation can have just as big an effect on brain structure as anything else.  For a data point, there are less than 60 known differences between humans and chimpanzees.  One generation can produce a radical difference.

What really matters is how fast a mutation can spread, any real speed usually requires mass extinction of anything in the population who doesn't have it.
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

Golden Applesauce

  • Token Apologist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2429
  • Where does this text go?
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #142 on: December 19, 2008, 06:44:23 am »
Quote
It's enough time for minor tweaking of biochemical processes, but not enough to alter brain structure.

A single generation can have just as big an effect on brain structure as anything else.  For a data point, there are less than 60 known differences between humans and chimpanzees.  One generation can produce a radical difference.

What really matters is how fast a mutation can spread, any real speed usually requires mass extinction of anything in the population who doesn't have it.

You don't need a genetic difference to alter brain structure.  Learn any novel skill and your brain changes slightly - people who are good at a task use their brain in a different way than those who aren't.
Q: How regularly do you hire 8th graders?
A: We have hired a number of FORMER 8th graders.

Telarus

  • Fictional Ego
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 6574
  • Ratcheting Metallic Sex Doll of The End Times
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #143 on: December 19, 2008, 09:10:30 am »
Oh, the rabbit whole goes deeper than that.  :lulz:

Once trained by repeated practice, it is not your brain that remembers how to catch a football, it's your arm ("muscle memory"). The brain just works out relative positions, the act of catching and pulling to the body happens faster than the brain can react. Basically, the brain just "points and yells GO!"


 :lulz:
Telarus, KSC,
.__.  Keeper of the Contradictory Cephalopod, Zenarchist Swordsman,
(0o)  Tender to the Edible Zen Garden, Ratcheting Metallic Sex Doll of The End Times,
/||\   Episkopos of the Amorphous Dreams Cabal

Join the Doll Underground! Experience the Phantasmagorical Safari!

Bu☆ns

  • █ ▀█ ▀ █ ▀█▄ ▀█
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 4705
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #144 on: December 20, 2008, 08:14:07 am »
my wife and i were talking about this in terms of serving.  we put it in the context of wu-wei (non-interfearance) and pointed out a difference between servers that play the role of serving vs. just serving.  when someone give a script it becomes contrived but if someone comes in and is simply natural it feels more sincere to those around him. She mentioned that really frusterated servers tend to just piss and moan all the time instead of simply being.  it's like an effort to be spontaneous which, of course, isn't.  after a while (hopefully) the poor server learns to give up and be himself as it makes more money.  you just drop the training wheels.  i'd call that an altered brain structure.