How Dogs Eat- And Why It Matters

Dogs eat quickly and are very defensive of their food even when no one is competing with them for it. What does this have to do with politics? Well, it is a perfect metaphor for the one and only major problem- the cause of nearly all other problems- that humankind faces. Why are there needless wars? Human beings are paranoid about protecting their resources. Why do wealthy societies need coercion to provide for the poor- and even then have trouble doing it? Human beings, even when wealthy, cling to their resources as if their survival were at stake. Furthermore, just as dogs base their eating habits on outdated instincts that served them when they lived in packs, humans base their competition for resources on outdated instincts that were appropriate for prehistory.

However, this is not to state that nothing can be done to improve the human condition. The real issue behind every other issue is excessive fear. When an imbalance develops in human society, close examination will always reveal that the false perception of some person or group that his, her or their survival is in danger is at the root of it. We cannot force our own evolution forward, so we must work within our genetic confines.

In terms of policy, what actions by the government contribute or could contribute the most to alleviating this unnecessary fear and what actions worsen it? It seems to me that human health, affecting the mind as it does, should be central to government policy, but I could be mistaken. What is your opinion? What could lessen paranoia about the loss of vital resources, something that, ironically, leads to actual dangers? Thank you. (In a side note to moderators, I think of this as a cultural discussion, but if I put this thread in the wrong forum I apologize.)

 

...

Force! I see you too are now diversifying your forum portfolio.

The Newsweek article I posted that you responded to but I couldn't read the response because of some bug in the system, I think, puts it in perspective...
For the rest of the people on this forum it's found here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19389351/site/newsweek/

Altruism and tolerance are opposite paranoid behavior and unsurprisingly nourished by an environment that promotes an emotionally secure mental state. This is also true for raising people's propensity to take positive risks... investments, business ventures, etc.
A strong safety net is important... but moreso a faith in the very society that offers it. People are so insecure these days, often over stupid things. The media are a major factor in that sensationalism and scares are more profitable than useful information.

 

Hello!

Hello, JavaBlack! I was bored out of my skull waiting for ****************** to work again and I noticed that you post here, so I knew that I could learn something here in the meantime.

Lately I've been thinking that providing universal health care and cleaning up environmental toxins would lessen our collective neuroses. Physical illnesses, some of them yet to be discovered by scientists, play a major role in making people insecure. A safety net and more harmonious international relations are also valuable, but lately I've been thinking that the underlying problems in society could be lessened only if we were generally healthier. Is that plausible? Could the modern breakdown of the belief in "taking care of ones own" combined with pollution from industry be responsible for our current problems?

That is true, but I don't know what can be done about it. It seems that nearly all media are driven either by profit (with the accompanying sensationalism) or owned by the government (with the accompanying praise of the glorious leader).

 

...

It's unfortunate because the media should remain free... and as long as it is, sensationalism will be the primary holding thread.
And safety nets, while they do help to an extent, are not the primary issue.
Really it's our cultural mentality. We have scorn for those who can't take care of themselves, sometimes sympathy... but we never want to be them. We are deluded into thinking that we actually do accomplish everything on our own. We ignore the ways in which everything we do has the fingerprints of other individuals, living and dead, rich and poor, on it.
We also have a culture with morbid fear of death. We see it as failure in a way. It all seems connected to a civil religion that promotes hoarding and making our best attempt at immortality.

Thankfully paranoia is not universal in our culture. But it would be nice if it were minimal.
I think another problem is the corruption, real and perceived, in governmment... and the population numbers that make a single person seem insignificant.
The cure to all this, I think, is some way to make people feel like part of their community in a constantly growing world... but to do so in such a way as to bring communities themselves together. This was at one time the problem federalism solved.
Maybe states are just too big and the focus sghould be on smaller regions.

 

While not so much in society, but certainly prevalent in our system of government, and not just our government but the far majority of governments around the world, from the national levels to local issues.

 

.

That's true. In fact, by our very nature we are interdependent in that we owe our accomplishments to the genetic potential given to us by our parents.

As someone who still clings to the security blanket of religion, I think it has more to do with a search for identity. I don't see myself as having an identity in this world (not even as a Christian, since I see social religion as corrupt and I seldom get along with fellow Christians), so I can create a self only with reference to a hypothetical next world.

Unfortunately, because of the economies of scale, smaller groups of people cannot compete and so larger and inevitably looser unions of peoples have formed. The problem really is that competition itself is needlessly fierce.

 

Well there ya have it. If you can filter out greed from our genetics much of the human condition will be cured.

-Castle

 

.

But what causes greed? Greed is the desire for things one does not need, and it would not be so pervasive if people didn't perceive need where there was none. It is irrational fear of loss that creates greed. Without irrational fear, competition would calm to a level appropriate for modern society.

 

You've got to be the tenth person I've recommended this too, but...I think you should read Don DeLillo's White Noise. It's all about how fear of loss feeds rampant, mind-numbing consumerism. It's also rather amusing, in a cynical, stream-of-consciousness kind of way.

 

I'm a bit confused. If greed is the desire for things one does not need, one assumes these are items that have not yet been acquired. How then does one fear the loss of things they do not yet possess?

I agree that an ever growing perception of need feeds our insatiable appetite and that a readjustment of that perception would benefit us all. However, this solution requires logic to overcome unrestrained desire. A tall order to say the least. Try talking to an oversexed teenager about abstinence using logic.

-Castle