tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3334391160365031546.post3969596062782908174..comments2023-10-10T05:17:55.737-07:00Comments on Crushed By Ingsoc: Power- The Strange Engine of The SpeciesCrushedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02479751225625007588noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3334391160365031546.post-14761661663080291262008-01-22T20:14:00.000-08:002008-01-22T20:14:00.000-08:00(1) 30 years isn't anywhere close to middle age.(...(1) 30 years isn't anywhere close to middle age.<br><br>(2) If your genes are annoying you, you can always get a bigger size.<br><br>(3) I would caution against ascribing to biological determinism. It's an intellectual trap. Some traits are obviously inherited (looks, skin color, eye color). Others take a combination of genetic and environmental factors (height, laterality). Many are learned behaviors.<br><br>Genes, or more precisely DNA, can help form predispositions, or slight tendencies. That doesn't mean much, however. There's a lot of things a parent can do that her children cannot, and vice versa. <br><br>Sure, we can see families maintaining certain facility with occupations over a span of generations. For example, there's been a Barrymore on stage or screen for over a century now. But then too, you're talking about a family where acting is discussed, known about, exemplified, and most likely taught from a very early age. There wouldn't be anything necessarily advantageous in their genetic code that would make them great actors.<br><br>Then too, since everyone's DNA is passed down from generation to generation, the only way to really kill off someone's physical progeny would be through genocide. Thus, just as the alpha males have reproduced, sometimes in great numbers (often not), so have followers.<br><br>In Western history too, you have the case where people married within established families. After a few generations, it's not difficult to see a bit of inbreeding going on. Yes, these families still weld power, but it isn't through genetic strength, for there genes have become quite damaged over the centuries (the Hapsbourgs are excellent examples of this).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3334391160365031546.post-24024678037691355202008-01-23T01:15:00.000-08:002008-01-23T01:15:00.000-08:00"And this is why the key to the whole thing, to li..."And this is why the key to the whole thing, to life, the universe, EVERYTHING, is power." Possibly the most depressing sentence I've ever read. In fact, it's so depressing that I don't even care if it's true or not. Reductionism, another unfortunate consequence of Social Darwinism, a philosophy so ugly it's truth value is irrelevant and which only explains your history of power, not my history of art, all though I am sure you will attempt to find a way,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3334391160365031546.post-29893775415707399942008-01-23T06:24:00.000-08:002008-01-23T06:24:00.000-08:00I like this concept of survival of the fittest. I ...I like this concept of survival of the fittest. I subscribe to it too; wouldn't want to breed with inferior genes *and by extension, thus mave to marry a mate with good genes*Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3334391160365031546.post-79090823895137234402008-01-23T15:11:00.000-08:002008-01-23T15:11:00.000-08:00(Evolution) favours the intelligent, the charming,...<i>(Evolution) favours the intelligent, the charming, the forceful, it favours those who seize centre stage.<br><br>These people will always be with us, because they will always breed more, leaving behind a generation who's members will strive just that little bit harder to seize the great prize of controlling those around them.</i><br><br>I just don't see that this is true anymore because in this modern age those at the top of the power tree and the intelligence tree, etc.,the "dominant apes" are breeding less while those at the bottom are breeding more. Now I know evolutionary trends are over very long periods but it seems to me we are at a plateau here.<br>I'm sure you'll put me right here but I see this as being the historic past, not necessarily the future.<br><br>Nope, not middleaged yet, maturing nicely, right into the peak years, which will last for a goodly time to come.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3334391160365031546.post-74125498201483264872008-01-24T07:57:00.000-08:002008-01-24T07:57:00.000-08:00Very interesting post but I would agree with the f...Very interesting post but I would agree with the first commenter here about environmental factors. And I agree withy everybody that you are nowhere near middle age!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3334391160365031546.post-23539194406443472762008-01-24T12:19:00.000-08:002008-01-24T12:19:00.000-08:00X.dell- Well, probably close to MY middle age.I th...X.dell- Well, probably close to MY middle age.<br><br>I think it does follow to a certain degree that the tendancy to seek doiminance does get stronger, because it is favoured, in much the same way as ability to understand symbols, is favoured. I do actually think that the average human today learns reading and writing with greater ease than Cro-Magnon man would have done, because human society has favoured the literate.<br><br>The Habsburgs are an interesting point.<br>One of the interesting points about monarchy was that the fate of nations really did depend on good genes, one of which, crucially was, the ability to father sons. It is actually genetic. Men tend to father either sons or daughters. My own family is a clear illustratiion of this. You have to go back to the ninettenth century to find a female born in to the family.<br><br>Some royal families do stand out as producing certain character types.<br>The Plantagenets must stand out as being a family of generaly gifted members, most were great kings, and the bad ones weren't so bad.<br>Compare that to the Capets, and one can see why the Plantagenets conquered France over time (Though it only took one royal minority to lose all that).<br>The Bourbons on the other hand, hard as nails most of them, almost all with a tendancy to despotism.<br><br>The Habsburgs are often maligned, but I think they had a strange creative genius, which made them either dazzling, or mad.<br>Joseph II was a late Habsburg, but probably was the finest European rler of the day.<br><br>Paul- There's a lot about the Universe that seems depressing, if you look at it from our point of view. Nematode worms, for example aren't overly glorious creatures.<br><br>Depressing as the mechanism might appear, we should look at it's acheivements.<br>Evolution DOES mean survival of the fittest. Beings that understand the world around them survive better.<br>Beings that can communicate their thoughts to others survive better.<br><br>Art is the crown of communication, it is the conceptualisation of our psyche.<br>Through it, we express what drives us, and it helps us understand it.<br><br>Ozymandias? :)<br><br>jmb- Because the system is no longer working.<br><br>In any new system, those who lead it's construction, will be the dominant apes. The system, as designed, will facilitate the rise of the best to the top.<br>As the system progresses, that changes. The system starts to facilitate the rise of the obedient to the top, the followers, the yes men.<br>John Major is not a dominant ape. Gordon Brown is not a dominant ape. Dominant apes control these people, behind the scenes of course.<br><br>But in practice, most dominant apes were too bust engaged in dominant ape activities whilst teenagers and students to gain easy access to the top jobs. <br>Our society is largely run today, by the plodders.<br><br>Welshcakes- Partly. Environmental factors cause switches to be flicked, I think. But the switch has to be there. It is partly a temperament thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com