Learning to seeLets assume here for the sake of an happy ending that the cave girl and her friend succeeds in exceeding the positive feedback threshold and they thus can move around freely with their horses. It will not be commonly accepted at first, but now that the new knowledge is out there and new “dare devils” can have a test ride on a horse without any not-horse related danger, the new SG will eventually replace the old one simply because tribes that use horses is more efficient than tribes that don’t and thus will reproduce more than the not so daring tribes. In this way can a new SG be tested and, if it proves its worth, replace old ones.
It will probably turn out that other people in the tribe, also had the horse knowledge, and hence will more than welcome the new initiative and start coming with ideas of how to make good saddles, stables etc. But many people in the tribe will be shocked at first, since they don’t know how to tell the difference between a horse and a mammut.
They lack the SG that tells them that ‘a big hairy animal with shiny teeth and a funny stretched head’ is friendly. The signs like horse sounds, the way a horse looks etc.. triggers the SG that is true for mammuts. The more specific horse SG doesn’t exist.
The tribe will have to learn how to see the difference between a horse and e.g. a mammut, to them they look exactly alike. All the things that indicates that the animal in front of you is a horse, tickles the SG of a horse. If you’re highly trained, like e.g. a horse breeder, small changes that are invisible to others, tickles another more specific less abstract SG, saying that the horse is e.g. a Newfoundlander. The tribe is starting from scratch, and may thus rely on the girl and any (hiding) allies, as observers and trainers for a while.
The new situation for the tribe causes confusion and uncertainty. Some of the tribe members will, with their heart shaking of fear for the 30 sec. it takes, stick their hand out to a horse, and then relieved, watch it eat the grass and not their hand when its done. Other tribe member will go to their grave without ever building up the courage to do it.
Love and evilnessAccording to [1] the three most powerful SG’s is love, religion and money. I would like to add a fourth to these three: The SG of evilness. In fact I will assume that the two most powerful SG’s are love and evilness, and other SG’s are subsequent to these.
The only principal difference between the SG of love and the one of e.g. a helicopter is the strength of that SG. Now this may take a little time to realize. Surely love is something more than a convenient agreement among people! We get all these warm emotions6 when seeing two people obviously in love7, when seeing and being with the ‘one and only’ and also when thinking of our kids. But people really interested in helicopters also gets emotional when talking of helicopters or sitting in a helicopter. The reason we get emotional is simply because the SG is so powerful. Some people would get emotional, when reading the description of the football game in the beginning, others would get zero emotions. It all depends on the strength of the specific SG, which is chosen as a presumed good basis for further actions/ communication.
Hypotheses: The strength of the SG of love and the SG of evilness, is modified by:
If, for (unfiltered) actions based on love, the (unfiltered) reaction is based on love: The SG of love becomes stronger (reward) evilness: The SG of love becomes weaker (punishment)
If, for (unfiltered) actions based on evilness, the (unfiltered) reaction is based on: evilness: The SG of evilness becomes stronger (reward) love: The SG of evilness becomes weaker (punishment)
By unfiltered is meant that the (re)action is by the will of your God.
At some point back in time there were some areas were the SG of love was dominant and some areas were the SG of evilness was dominant.
Now because the action of killing a baby is based on the SG of evilness, areas dominated by the SG of love would reproduce faster than areas dominated by the SG of evilness.
The explanation for this statement is that in areas dominated by the SG of love, humans that killed other babys, and thus based their actions on evilness, would be punished (in general) by getting reactions based on love. This would make the SG of evilness weaker and weaker, until it faded and died in the area. Thereby there would be no killing of babies in that area, ensuring optimal reproduction.
On the other hand, in areas dominated by the SG of evilness, humans that killed other babys, and thus based their action on evilness, would be rewarded (in general) by getting reactions based on evilness. This would make the SG of evilness stronger and stronger. Thereby baby killers would flourish and thus the reproduction in that area would be smaller, than in areas dominated by the SG of love.
If this process continued, the SG of evilness would eventually fade out and die. However, as we all know evilness is alive and well, still a strong opponent to love. Why is that?
Love vs. evilnessIt’s the Jets vs. the Giants game all over again, in this case evilness is the Jets and the Giants is love. Love started with a substantial lead, but suddenly evilness made a come back. Evilness developed a tool: Consciousness.
Consciousness enabled people to observe themselves instead of just ‘being’. And when they started observing themselves they started identifying with creatures around them that looked like them, thereby enabling thoughts like: “If I kill his baby while he is sleeping, maybe he will kill my baby when I’m sleeping. Therefore I’d better walk away although I’m hungry”8.
Love got caught by total surprise with this new tool! And through evolution, consciousness did not only help environments where evilness was dominating to reproduce more, it also enabled imposters! Human beings dominated by the SG of evilness could sneak into environments dominated by love, and pretend that they were not evil. Thereby they didn’t get punished (i.e. making their SG of evilness weaker) by the environment; they could hide the evil action they intended and instead choose, by using their own will, to make an alternative action that seemed based on love, but was in fact a lie.
It is argued in [2] that consciousness evolved late in the twentieth millennium b.c., but when ever the exact period was, consciousness spread like a disease and today we must assume that it is present in virtually all people.
Consciousness gives people the ability to veto themselves, whenever they find it appropriate, i.e. use their own will instead of the will of their God. It is important to emphasize that today probably all people have the SG of love and the SG of evilness inside them, meaning that with no vetoes, action based on evilness will occur.
Is it then better to use your own will, in order to be able to make a veto when your action is based on evilness? No, it is not.
The two reasons for this is found in the way the strength for the SG of love and the SG of evilness is modified.
The first one is that only by using the will of your God, can the strength of the SG that is chosen as a basis for your action be modified.
The second reason is that, only reactions that are the will of your God, modifies the strength of the SG used as the basis for the action (by some other person), which your action is a reaction to.
Setting the stage for great games
How can we make the imposters in the football stadium show who they are really cheering for and thereby make the game so much more exciting to watch for everyone?
How can we make people feel safe, such that they are willing to ‘let go’ of consciousness and show their true selves?
The first step is to stop judging people when their action is based on love and to stop judging them when their action is based on evilness.
This first step is only relevant if you haven’t let go yourself and still uses your own will. At some point you should let go your self (the second step) and show who you really are, as a person that sometimes make actions based on love, sometimes actions based on evilness. These actions serves as the true feedback to other persons who follows the will of their God, in terms of modifying the strength of love or the strength of evilness.
In order for the snow ball to start rolling there is a positive feedback threshold to pass, a certain number of people must start living by these rules in order for more people to get the courage to show their true fan colors, causing more people ...and so on.
Once the snow ball has started rolling the real game begins, (hopefully!) starting with a lead for the SG of love which then inevitable will cause the SG of evilness to get weaker and weaker, fade out and die.
Consequences
What would it be like if everybody was working, making love, walking their dog, playing with their kids and partying with their friends9 using the will of their God and not their own will?
It all depends on how strong the SG of love is compared to the SG of evilness. In the beginning there will inevitable be actions based on evilness, but assuming (hoping!) that the SG of love is stronger than the SG of evilness, these actions will be punished by reactions based on love, thus making evilness based actions more and more sporadic...until at last love can make that final touch down and show the SG of evilness the exit sign!
Now that would be a GREAT game!
References: [1] Niklas Luhmann, Social Systems [2] Julian Jaynes, The Origin of Consciousness [3] Robert M. Axelrod, The Complexity of Cooperation |
![Tekstboks: Note 8
The underlying principle here, has similarity to ‘The Prisoners Dilemma’ [3]](image1078.gif)
|
Copyleft. This article may be duplicated or quoted without asking the author. Johan Tino Frederiksen |
