"Education has failed in a very serious way to convey the most important lesson science can teach: "skepticism."

-David Suzuki-

 

Why we are Stupid

 

Site Map

Most humans are not what I call criminally stupid. They are stupid because that's the outcome that evolution delivered.

Make no mistake evolution does not have a “grand plan” for human beings. The code for the universe is random numbers and infinite variables. Accordingly there is no predictable outcome, there simply is.....

How do I know I am on a winning bet that human will not avert this hiccup [Human Induced Climate Change Ultimately Perilous). How can I be so sure that human beings will not reverse the unfolding climate change scenario in order to preserve their species for only a few more millennia?

Well read on.

I am not an advocate of using the wake of a vessel to predict its destination but I am a keen subscriber to the “recipe theory”.

The recipe theory for those of you who are new to the concept, (which is reasonably well understood and is the basis for success of Anthony Robbins) is that if you follow a prescribed recipe exactly, you will get exactly the same outcome - every time.

So with this in mind let’s look at human history, not in terms of the “wake” model but in terms of this recipe theory.

For as long as human beings have been able to competently record information (for the last 3000 years) those records have  provided evidence of abundant access to the wisdom of great philosophers. The wisdom of these individuals was relevant, at any point in this 3000 year history, and the adoption of the advice by the human species as a whole, would have resulted in a situation where human beings in this, the 30th century of written records, would not be looking down the barrel of their own extinction.

Please don't dismiss my message so easily by simply citing inconsequential exceptions.

Remember I acknowledged right up front that there are exceptions within the class - (humans), that are not stupid and in my own opinion such exceptions represents a number somewhere between 11% for certain subgroups and down to 1% for others.

However the politics of human social behaviour is the determinants that predicts that, the influence of this miniscule minority will not dominates the behaviour pattern of the species.

Even given that there have been examples where communities have adopted some material from this wise advice given by certain historic individuals, from Aristotle and his mates through Mahatma Ghandi and on to David Suzuki the observation to note is that, collectively for humans even when there was an induced behaviour in society, it could not be successfully sustained without intergenerationally modification or successfully transferred interculturally.

The explanation for why this is so, can be found in the works of Schopenhauer a 17th-century philosopher little known or recognised but who actually cracked the code behind the design of evolutionary reproduction.

I know, I can hear you screaming now that it was Darwin, but ¬†Charles Darwin only cracked the code for the “how” bit, Schopenhauer cracked the code for the “why” part.

In essence, Schopenhauer discovered that the selection process by humans for the purpose of reproduction is based upon the model of bland mediocrity.

Interestingly enough, seeing that I have already used poor Anthony Robbins (see above) as an example of the recipe theory, his divorce is a perfect example of Schopenism in action.

By constantly reproducing the majority of organism in a species whose capabilities contained the most diversity (generalist-average capability) as opposed to a species whose reproduction is focused on speciality (exceptionally specialised) evolution delivers to a species the highest potential to survive environmental diversification and the capacity to optimise the widest geographical distribution.

The outcome of this in practical terms means that for the purposes of evolutionary DNA sharing, the human species will overwhelmingly, select for procreation a mate who does not possess similar characteristics (you know the old opposites attract theory) and from a sociological DNA perspective, the human group will actively seek to sublimate or eliminate misfits at either end of the Bell Curve in order to maintain the integrity of mediocrity. (i.e.- the tall poppy syndrome)

In practical terms we see the operation of this principal in play in the two most powerful influences in the world today.

So given these two hugely powerful forces (the greed gene and mediocrity) I am confident that I have picked a winner and our great amorphous mass of mediocrity will stupidously fiddle, while the intellectually supporting, historically accurate, HICCUP- burns.

 

 

Like to:-