Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Consanguinity as a major predictor of levels of democracy: A study of 70 nations

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • wolfhnd
    replied
    Cataract surgery has left me with a temporary vision deficit but I will respond briefly.

    Ahhh…. the old bug-bear of blaming 'Marxist leaning' universities for producing "the dominant intelligentsia" which has so bedeviled 'true' critical thinking for so long​.
    The popularity of Marx may lie in a kind of underlying cultural miasma in which Christianity and a preference for a distorted slow life history plays a part. I'm not sure anyone knows. In any case Marx is a convenient stand it for egalitarian strains of thought in Western Civilization. In reality Marx was not all that original. The ideas of which Marx wrote were already widely circulated by the time of the French Revolution. I think he even saw himself as the prophet who would tie them all together.

    As this is at least in part a biology thread Marx also serves as a stand in for "spiteful mutant" as seen in the "mouse utopia" experiments.

    This new diagnosis has the importance of and beyond historical correctitude: the skin is an organ of communication12and its disorders produce much psychological distress; it produces loathing and disgust, depression of self-image, mood and well-being. These adversive effects have been found to be particularly severe in patients with hidradenitis suppura-tiva,
    The nature and consequence of Karl Marx’s skin disease http://www.afrh.fr/web-content/docum...so/Marx&HS.pdf

    Marx is in this sense is a stand in for the accumulation in the population of mutations due to the relaxing of selection in the 18th and 19th century. Especially among the middle class that Marx belonged to. This is a historical pattern not unrelated to luxus in other earlier cultures.

    It is even possible that the insanity of equity, diversity and inclusion that has overtaken our world of late is tied to this accumulation of mutations. It is interesting that the insanity seems to be resisted by the "working class" which could be explained by that group being under selection until more recently.

    You may see the above as highly speculative but common sense dictates that there is always a cost for relaxed selection. Culture and biology has a complex relationship that will be difficult to unravel.

    The point of the OP was not to imply that biology is an ultimate explanation but to simply include it in historical analysis. It is a part of the puzzle that has been ignored for reasons I have outlined.

    Until yesterday everyone knew that biology played a rule in social interactions. Perhaps it was the Nazis that drove a nail in the coffin in which discussions of biology's impact on culture have been buried. I certainly take the possible misuses of biological determination seriously. That said with the emergence of genetic data that is easy to access and is of considerable breath and scope it is time to reopen the discussion. The very simplistic explanations offered by progressives as to the nature of cultural evolution are in need of being challenged at all levels not just biological but biological evolution is of interest to me personally.

    While works such as the Blank Slate by Steven Pinker are a start and some aspects of evolution have been popularized by individuals such as Richard Dawkins I feel their work as been distorted by political correctness in the case of Pinker and the rejection of group selection by Dawkins. It's time to take the next step and abandon a lot of 20th century misconceptions.


    Leave a comment:


  • lodestar
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
    For example Jared Diamonds "Guns, Germs and Steel" has been thoroughly "debunked" but remains insightful. If you are interested in such things I recommend Why the West Rules - For Now by Ian Morris. Morris's book has of course also been criticized for relying on "brute, material forces".

    The explanation for the severity of the criticism is undoubtedly linked to the predominance of quasi "Marxist" thinking in universities. Anything that challenges the social constructionist view of human development will be routinely dismissed by the dominant intelligentsia oddly enough on both the left and the right.
    Ahhh…. the old bug-bear of blaming 'Marxist leaning' universities for producing "the dominant intelligentsia" which has so bedeviled 'true' critical thinking for so long.

    Must have been 18 years old when I first heard that wail from the Right - the tune and the scapegoat never changes it seems.

    Well if you want to work yourself up into a 'Righteous' lather may I suggest you have a look at:
    "Traces of History - Elementary Structures of Race' by Patrick Wolfe (Verso Books 2016)

    Saw a copy in bookshop (in the discount/bargain bin no less!) last week and remembered looking at it when it came out a few years ago.

    Might give you a very different 'take' on the issue of colonialism and race etc. from Diamond and Morris.

    A brief review summary concludes:

    "Widely known for his pioneering work in the field of settler colonial studies, Patrick Wolfe advanced the theory that settler colonialism was, “a structure, not an event.” In early 2016, Wolfe deepened this analysis through his most recent book, Traces of History: Elementary Structures of Race (Verso Books, 2016) which takes a comparative approach to five cases in: Australia, Brazil, Europe, North America, and Palestine/Israel.

    Just as settler colonialism grew through institutionalized structures of Indigenous elimination, categorical notions of race grew through purpose-driven (and context-specific) exploitation, classification and separation. In Traces of History, the machinery and genealogy of race are as present in land relations as they are in legal precedents.

    Wolfe ties together a transnational pattern of labor substitution and slavery, Indigenous land dispossession, and the inception of racial categories which continue to normalize these historical processes into the present. While the Indigenous/settler relationship is binary across societies,

    Wolfe posits, the seemingly fixed concepts of race it produces are, actually, widely varied. Bearing strong threads of influence by Said, DuBois, Marx, and countless Indigenous and Aboriginal scholars, Wolfe lays down a model for drawing connections across these cases, while simultaneously acknowledging that as with any ongoing process, there remain pathways for optimism and change."


    Love it when 'we' (The West) are to blame for everything..

    Got some marvelous tutorial discussions out of that approach. Surprising how incredibly sensitive some people are to criticism of 'their' civilization.

    Great stuff.
    If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. - Noam Chomsky


    Regards lodestar







    Leave a comment:


  • wolfhnd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Hmm...wolfh0und is strangely silent on the issue of the actual definition of "consanguinity" and how it could relate to his theory.
    It's not my theory, you can explore the authors work as easily as I can.

    If you don't like their choice of words you can send them a nasty letter.

    That said they explain the definition of consanguinity to my satisfaction. Perhaps I just don't live up to your standards.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Hmm...wolfh0und is strangely silent on the issue of the actual definition of "consanguinity" and how it could relate to his theory.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

    Turkey withdraw symptoms go away after a few hours, besides I had what's good for you: beef.
    And I didn't eat any turkey at all, since we did not have Thanksgiving dinner due to travel delays of family. Still haven't had it and probably won't.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

    Since we are being personal I have sympathy for what I have come to believe is your overall philosophy. Something similar to kiss my ass :-) or "keep it simple stupid" . Knowing that you are from a medical background I understand the similarity with engineering in that practicality is job one. That proven practices not theories dominate the art.

    If we were here to solve anything that would be ok by me. The primary function of this format however is entertainment. Even in the military section the complexity tends to overwhelm the facts. It comes down to personality and what you find entertaining.

    I read scientific papers for entertainment. I really don't care how well written they are. This undoubtedly reflects my deficiency in art appreciation. Perhaps an even more serious condition related to autistic personality traits.
    Of course we medical types are empiricists. Would you like to be my patient/guinea pig for testing wild theories, folk remedies and crystal healing, or do you actually expect serious treatments based upon proven, viable and reproducible results obtained through decades of research, vigorous testing, skill and experience? Want a real doctor or a witch doctor? You're comparing watermelons and guinea pigs. (Although I do have a terrific anecdote about a colleague and a malingerer!)

    Meanwhile, I see no connection in your post to the actual definition of consanguinity as in-breeding, and the subsequent rise of democracies. How that is supposed to be entertaining...I have no clue, but it does nicely explain the origin of politicians.

    Reading anything for entertainment is commendable, but not as a source of serious discussion. You might consider making use of some of the available emoticons to insure that the rest of us poor savages better understand your intent, because your often lengthy and highly pendantic posts do not come across in any way as "funny" or "entertaining"; they come across as serious statements of fact.

    Or come up with a more humorous writing style.

    Leave a comment:


  • wolfhnd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    As should you.
    Since we are being personal I have sympathy for what I have come to believe is your overall philosophy. Something similar to kiss my ass :-) or "keep it simple stupid" . Knowing that you are from a medical background I understand the similarity with engineering in that practicality is job one. That proven practices not theories dominate the art.

    If we were here to solve anything that would be ok by me. The primary function of this format however is entertainment. Even in the military section the complexity tends to overwhelm the facts. It comes down to personality and what you find entertaining.

    I read scientific papers for entertainment. I really don't care how well written they are. This undoubtedly reflects my deficiency in art appreciation. Perhaps an even more serious condition related to autistic personality traits.
    Last edited by wolfhnd; 29 Nov 19, 11:23.

    Leave a comment:


  • wolfhnd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    As should you.
    Turkey withdraw symptoms go away after a few hours, besides I had what's good for you: beef.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

    You should be too full of Turkey to be posting
    As should you.

    Leave a comment:


  • wolfhnd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    You do realize that the definition of consanguinity is incest and inbreeding, correct?

    You should be too full of Turkey to be posting

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile...70-Nations.pdf

    Interesting study, I'm a little sceptical of the degree to which the conclusions rely on biological determinism but even that is good for thought.
    You do realize that the definition of consanguinity is incest and inbreeding, correct?


    NOUN
    the fact of being descended from the same ancestor.
    "the marriage was annulled on grounds of consanguinity"

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

    like I said if you have serious questions address them to the authors. I'm not an expert.

    That said I am unhappy you elected to call me a liar. You fail to understand my philosophy in which there are only trivial absolute truths. It isn't so much shades of grey as humility. I'm not so insecure as to be easily offended but what would be the point of talking to a liar.
    None of us think that you are lying.....I would recommend reading Paul TILLICH- my Quest for absolutes.

    \btw- since our last discussion I did some research; Dr. Brinkley's establishment was flooded by the Milford reservoir in 1968- and Milford town was moved to higher ground. Strangely, nothing in the town seems to have ben named after him.
    Milford is now a lakeside resort, and it's nudie beach is rated 'best in Kansas'https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=milford+kansas+nudie+beach&qpvt=milford+k ansas+nudie+beach&form=IGRE&first=1&cw=1129&ch=511
    Last edited by marktwain; 20 Nov 19, 19:11.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

    Right now we are ants but earlier we were not. You can reject it all you want but complex social organization in an agrarian society such as Sumerian society requires abstract reasoning. You have to follow along and fill in the missing bits because I'm typing on a phone.
    And good morning to you, too. You can make an argument for highly complex social organization...until you end up in New York City where "consanguinity" becomes something of a joke in the midst of one of the most complex social organizations in the world.

    I'm not really fan of one-size-fits-all as an answer to much of anything.

    Maybe you should buy a phone with more keys?

    Leave a comment:


  • wolfhnd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    Sorry, wolf, but I have to reject this one as well. Ants and bees are extremely socialized but not "intelligent". The same is true of dolphins and whales, who might be more intelligent than we are.

    Socializing is nothing more than banding together to make the best of things and deciding where one;s place in within that group. We now know that Neanderthals, long thought to be very primitive and low on the intelligence scale were, in fact, socially quite advanced.

    Maybe the problem is redefining "intelligence"?
    Right now we are ants but earlier we were not. You can reject it all you want but complex social organization in an agrarian society such as Sumerian society requires abstract reasoning. You have to follow along and fill in the missing bits because I'm typing on a phone.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Marmat View Post

    Personally, I don't think anyone looks all that good in a diaper.
    Interestingly, he shows obvious signs of feminization - gynecomastia and a female pelvic shape with a pelvis wider than his upper body.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X