Patrik Bagge <pab at neramd.no> wrote in message
news:Ew8_3.2340$QA6.180839936 at news.telia.no...
> mmm.. something like that, yes, the theoretical physicians are
> now using 'words' like 'god' and 'consciousness' .. things
> are melting together.
Isn't this delightful. But there are still many diehards who seem to
believe that tinkering with paradigms is the work of Satan.
> >> huu, now we begin to swim in dangerous waters, when relating
> >> genetic origins to behaviour .... actually i agree.
> >> what i meant to ask was, do you consider the stoneage
> >> human less creative than present human, in any greater degree?
> >I would suspect that the discipline to maintain a group during the
> >Age was higher than now. Regimentation to fight off dangerous animals
> >could easily squelch creativity, which always seems to have
> >individualistic elements associated with it. So, yes, I would expect
> >cavemen to be less creative, on average, than we are today. And the
> >outliers in creativity would have either ended up being the leader or
> >dead at an early age.
>>> yes, stupid of me, if one beleives in the 'natural selection' thing
> it's obvious, intelligence, including creativity has been favoured
> and selected, we might be a living proof of that.
I assume from this that you have little doubt that "natural selection"
is "perfect" and "efficient" like the stock market? Maybe things were
better in 1620.
> >> aren't we all 'rebels' in the separation process from our parents.
> >> if i understand you correctly,
> >I don't believe this is true in every culture--I did look at this in
> >graduate work a little. Some cultures don't individuate through
> >rebellion--they tend to be the "older civilizations." But I think the
> >"management" may have discovered additional tricks to keep their
> >offspring under control in these cultures. :-(
>>> ok, sounds interesting, if we should take south america / peru
> as an example of a society with strong 'family values'
> , i personally have noticed the same separation rebellion. in
> western countries it might be a more obvious behaviour, in
> 'poor' countries, the family values seems stronger in the purpose
> of 'helping each other out'
>> >'management' might be old verified
> >> truths, that enables society as a whole to function better, of
> >> these truths must be subject to the rebels questionmark
> >In my case, they are questioned on a daily basis--it is not
> >where just "getting along" is the goal.
>>> ok, sounds energy consuming, do you experience a lot of 'heat'
> when questioning management?
> we might disagree a bit on this one, my motto, in a wider sense
> is to 'get along', with a high degree of sensibility for 'evil'
I've been fired more than once. It's not just questioning management
that can be a problem--it's the current perception that Political
Correctness is more important than the work being done (and that
team-playing is more important than the product ending up with more than
passable quality--this is espoused openly in the software
industry--quality is somewhere far down the list). The workers have been
brain-washed into squelching anyone who won't "play the game."
I was attracted to Ayn Rand's description of how mediocrity rules
when I was in college--I may pick up a copy of Fountainhead again. It
turns out that individualism and excellence are increasingly under
attack--she was just a little ahead of her time.
What do you do about "evil" if your management permits or promotes it?
The usual advice from friends: "When all else fails lower your
standards." Seems like that's just caving in.
My Best too,