Venting Modern man is no different from cavemen, literally

[KillingPain267]

Most of us live in stone like enclosures where we light fires for light and cooking. Some of us are so anxious about the outside world that we prefer to constantly stay inside our caves, I know I do.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

Hey, we are NOT cavemen!

We have technology…

 

[Downdraft]

People are really visceral these days, the tribe sentiment, and the need to be in conflict with each other, haven't changed. Most people are very savage about their desires against other people they just disagree with.

 

[KillingPain267]

Hey, we are NOT cavemen!

We have technology…

Cavemen had spears too. That's technology

They didn't prefer to stay inside they had to go and hunt, also there weren't rule back then.

They did prefer to stay inside. Key word, they "had" to hunt

 

[lacrimosa]

also there weren't rule back then.

Archeological evidence disagrees with this sentiment. There were rules and social norms, and... they were nomadic, as you suggested, meaning, they would follow their food sources, not by choice, they were forced to or they would starve.

They found skeletons of young adults with Down syndrome, suggesting that they weren't abandoned and left to die by their tribe or group. This has led scientists to suggest there were moral qualities in these groups.

I'm sure you're aware of 'cavemen' paintings as well. This suggests a higher level of thinking than what is commonly stereotypically associated with 'cavemen'.

If there weren't any rules, we would have died out because of not cooperating to survive.

 

[DarkRange55]

Paleolithic vs neolithic

Upper Paleolithic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Unless you're referring to extinct cousins of humans like denisovans, homo floresiensis, luzonensis, ect.

Evolution is a very slow process…

 

[lacrimosa]

By rules, I meant the contemporary rules dictated by the utilitarian regime, The difference today is that we have complex systems of governance and law enforcement to uphold rules, while hunter-gatherer societies relied more on social pressure and consensus. It's possible hunter-gatherer societies had more individual freedom in some ways. With smaller, more localized groups, there was less bureaucracy and less enforcement of rules.

That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

I understand utilitarianism as a basic philosophical framework, but in what way is it a regime? Would be curious to hear your thoughts on this... I know it is found in many forms of government as well, but Machiavellianism is more commonplace in most contemporary governments IMHO. When you are considering how they function as a regime in both a political and military sense.

 

[AmericanMary]

Bring back trepanning!! Amanda fielding is my queen!!

 

[KillingPain267]

This includes efforts to avoid civilian casualties, reduce collateral damage, Decisions are made based on a calculation of the greatest good for the greatest number, Ensuring humane treatment of war prisoners and the adherence to international laws...

And then none of them follow the calculations and laws in practice

 

[KuriGohan&Kamehameha]

Technology has moved way faster than evolution. A lot of instincts and behaviours that humans do to this day are rooted in the environments we used to live in, and despite things being so different in the modern day, we haven't really adapted at a molecular level yet.

Birds and other small critters started adapting to industrialization, quickly evolving to the point where some species actually started having different colored feathers to blend in with the black ash and soot, but birds reproduce quickly and have much shorter lifespans, as we all know. So getting rid of traits that didn't fit/mesh with their environment happened relatively quickly.

In a millennium, you'll probably have 3-4 generations of humans max being born. That's not very much time to adapt genetically to an ever changing environment, especially because we "cheat" biology all the time with modern medicine and technology like IVF which allows people to reproduce who historically would not be able to. A lot of those hard-coded lizard brain instincts like fear of spiders or other phobias don't really make much sense to have nowadays, especially for those of us living in concrete jungles.

But the biological clock ticks on very slowly and is not evolving fast enough to discern that most insects are harmless, they're still being encoded as fatal scorpion like anthropods by our brains it seems like: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8593055/

Old habits die hard, literally, for our species. Biologically we are still quite similar to our ancestors but are now bumbling around in a man-made world that nature hasn't caught up to yet.

 

[DarkRange55]

"We are now gods but for the wisdom."

- Eric Weinstein

Technology has moved way faster than evolution. A lot of instincts and behaviours that humans do to this day are rooted in the environments we used to live in, and despite things being so different in the modern day, we haven't really adapted at a molecular level yet.

Birds and other small critters started adapting to industrialization, quickly evolving to the point where some species actually started having different colored feathers to blend in with the black ash and soot, but birds reproduce quickly and have much shorter lifespans, as we all know. So getting rid of traits that didn't fit/mesh with their environment happened relatively quickly.

In a millennium, you'll probably have 3-4 generations of humans max being born. That's not very much time to adapt genetically to an ever changing environment, especially because we "cheat" biology all the time with modern medicine and technology like IVF which allows people to reproduce who historically would not be able to. A lot of those hard-coded lizard brain instincts like fear of spiders or other phobias don't really make much sense to have nowadays, especially for those of us living in concrete jungles.

But the biological clock ticks on very slowly and is not evolving fast enough to discern that most insects are harmless, they're still being encoded as fatal scorpion like anthropods by our brains it seems like: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8593055/

Old habits die hard, literally, for our species. Biologically we are still quite similar to our ancestors but are now bumbling around in a man-made world that nature hasn't caught up to yet.

Yes! Evolutionary mismatch

Evolutionary mismatch - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

I understand utilitarianism as a basic philosophical framework, but in what way is it a regime? Would be curious to hear your thoughts on this... I know it is found in many forms of government as well, but Machiavellianism is more commonplace in most contemporary governments IMHO. When you are considering how they function as a regime in both a political and military sense.

Modern money is a standardized utility. Gold and silver (and chickens) were only semi-standardized.
I would not say that utility comes out of game theory and decision theory – utility existed long before game theory was developed. And while maximizing utility is good, it is not necessary. The monetary economy is mostly rational, but the rationality is punctuated by bubbles of irrationality that sometimes grow to dominate the monetary system.

 

[DarkRange55]

At the dawn of anatomically modern humanity we inherited toolmaking from our hominid precursors very likely through teaching as the species diverged.

Technology has moved way faster than evolution. A lot of instincts and behaviours that humans do to this day are rooted in the environments we used to live in, and despite things being so different in the modern day, we haven't really adapted at a molecular level yet.

Birds and other small critters started adapting to industrialization, quickly evolving to the point where some species actually started having different colored feathers to blend in with the black ash and soot, but birds reproduce quickly and have much shorter lifespans, as we all know. So getting rid of traits that didn't fit/mesh with their environment happened relatively quickly.

In a millennium, you'll probably have 3-4 generations of humans max being born. That's not very much time to adapt genetically to an ever changing environment, especially because we "cheat" biology all the time with modern medicine and technology like IVF which allows people to reproduce who historically would not be able to. A lot of those hard-coded lizard brain instincts like fear of spiders or other phobias don't really make much sense to have nowadays, especially for those of us living in concrete jungles.

But the biological clock ticks on very slowly and is not evolving fast enough to discern that most insects are harmless, they're still being encoded as fatal scorpion like anthropods by our brains it seems like: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8593055/

Old habits die hard, literally, for our species. Biologically we are still quite similar to our ancestors but are now bumbling around in a man-made world that nature hasn't caught up to yet.

I've said all of this on here multiple times:

The next steps will be to master replacing mitochondria, and then reverse engineering what our original embryonic stem cells were and replicating them to replace defective cells in our bodies.
That will set the foundation for editing our own genomes as well as for immortality.

My guess is that we will soon be able to do a mitochondrial replacement, where we sequenced a few dozen mitochondria from scattered sites around the body and reconducted construct what the original mitochondrial sequence was and then re-create it, and then use stem cells to learn the "young" mitochondria around the body. Not long after that will be able to do the same thing with stem cells - recreate the initial genome of a person, including epigenetic markers, and then partially differentiate to stem cells inject them into cure very much anything that's wrong with a person, including regrowing organs and limbs. But I do think that prosthetics will eventually get better than organic limbs, so I think a cyborg-like hybrid will become part of our future.

Very likely we will upload our consciousness, but an alternative is that we will keep embedding hardware in our bodies until our bodies are no longer dominated by biology.

I personally favor the merger scenario – our primate brain did not get rid of our mammalian brain, which didn't get rid of our reptilian brain, which in turn did not get rid of our chordate reflexes, which in turn did not get rid of our genetic intelligence in the individual cells, so why would we expect our electronic intelligence to get rid of our current intelligence rather than becoming another layer?

 

[Pluto]

 

[DarkRange55]

At the dawn of anatomically modern humanity we inherited toolmaking from our hominid precursors very likely through teaching as the species diverged.

I've said all of this on here multiple times:

The next steps will be to master replacing mitochondria, and then reverse engineering what our original embryonic stem cells were and replicating them to replace defective cells in our bodies.
That will set the foundation for editing our own genomes as well as for immortality.

My guess is that we will soon be able to do a mitochondrial replacement, where we sequenced a few dozen mitochondria from scattered sites around the body and reconducted construct what the original mitochondrial sequence was and then re-create it, and then use stem cells to learn the "young" mitochondria around the body. Not long after that will be able to do the same thing with stem cells - recreate the initial genome of a person, including epigenetic markers, and then partially differentiate to stem cells inject them into cure very much anything that's wrong with a person, including regrowing organs and limbs. But I do think that prosthetics will eventually get better than organic limbs, so I think a cyborg-like hybrid will become part of our future.

Very likely we will upload our consciousness, but an alternative is that we will keep embedding hardware in our bodies until our bodies are no longer dominated by biology.

I personally favor the merger scenario – our primate brain did not get rid of our mammalian brain, which didn't get rid of our reptilian brain, which in turn did not get rid of our chordate reflexes, which in turn did not get rid of our genetic intelligence in the individual cells, so why would we expect our electronic intelligence to get rid of our current intelligence rather than becoming another layer?

If you copied the connectivity between all cells in the brain, including the strength of the synapses, you would get something that was close enough to "you" that it would argue that it was you. The only advantage of moving the neurons is that it solves the problem of what to do with the original to avoid having two entities claiming to be the same person.

One thing to note, however, is that even if it starts as you, if the hardware is different it will learn very differently in the future from the way your current wetware would learn.

 

[TakeMeToHeaven]

technology evolved, but our minds are slow to adapt