[U184]

The human race has been and still is, subdivided by small packs, hierarchy is built-in.

[AdvancingForms]

Before i join in this discussion i would just once like to hear someone give a definition to the concept upon which we are arguing. What is natural? Can you find a single unit of it somewhere, or is it just a rhetorical wildcard for making absurd moral thesis's?

I will gladly discuss the matter but its really pointless to argue over a concept with no agreed meaning to it. If we were to discuss nutrition, it would help to know the difference between apples and oranges and when arguing about the relation of X to health, wheter X indeed stands for an apple, an orange or something else.

[QatzelOk]

What is natural?

That which occurs instinctively.

That which helps maintain ecosystems.

It's a common trick of Modern Industrial Man to pretend not to understand the difference between what is natural and real, and all the fakeness he has been tricked into working himself to death for.

It's like he erects an eruv around every cancer he has created by saying "everything is natural" or "natural doesn't exits."

[onemalehuman]

Notice the physical differences between the castes of ant

Hierarchy

The modern industrial society is made up of thousands of different roles and specialties.

Many modern organizations - like the military and large factories - require a rigid social hierarchy in order to thrive. Likewise, many economic institutions and other institutions imitate and modify the hierarchy that can be found in battle, and on the shop floor.

But is this natural? Or is it a huge source of alienation?

Was mankind hardwired to take orders and perform tasks in a ritual and mindless way?

If I may ask why the ant analogy and not a pride of lions or pack wolves relative to sheep and cattle in a lead follow democracy of relative ideologies?

Now besides that question I see a fatal flaw in using it. A hive of any colonial insects exists only by the reproduction means of the queen as sole provider of replacement at any level of governance within that specific hive or collective ideology.

Second, natural blaancing functions aren't directly related to nature of the results. Balancing what remains present in a constant separation of was and is going on in compounding fashion of contracting results expanding the continuation of what remains present should ring instinctive alarm bells within each sole result of the process that placed every result in this moment as conceived specifically by natural balances.

These simple principles of action and reaction are the core of economic theory. The physical form is ancestry. Compare specifics with specifics, not theory relative to theology of might be vs maybe.

That only developos in social engineering of self justification character matters most and to hell with survival of the whole species in general. That is where reality becomes a self endangerment to real people playing roles of social identitiy.

Balance is key for any ideology to function naturally within now's results always here, always now while details never stay as conceived, i.e. aging within a self contained, self maintaining moment each phsical result is self evident as part of the whole to everything going on now.

It is the heart of ssdd physically.

[Daktoria]

Yes, hierarchy is natural.

No, something being natural does not necessarily make it good. We aren't just emotional animals. We're rational people too.

If you insist on anti-rationalism from chaos theory, then there's no reason to believe anyone's words are genuine in having this very conversation.

[onemalehuman]

If you insist on anti-rationalism from chaos theory, then there's no reason to believe anyone's words are genuine in having this very conversation.

but to ration thinking into reciting other people's collective opinion doesn't really allow self thought to enter common thought in a debate where only published facts are permitted as arugments for or against traditional beliefs the suffix "ity" behind real and human is all anyone needs to learn to follow orders as given by societal engineers casting the characters of self made realities to the world being but staged events.


What was a quote given credit to King Henry the 8th? "There is more than one way to skin a cat."

That in turn corrupts natural curiousity and that as told by wise men is what killed the cat the 9th time. Yes I just made that up.

[Daktoria]

Then make your own words, and design your own ideas...

...like suffixity. :-P

Your sig is perfect btw. The passage of time is ontological. The present is metaphysical. The ontological is internal. The metaphysical is external.

The same goes for what you said about societal engineers and staged events.

[onemalehuman]

Then make your own words, and design your own ideas...

...like suffixity. :-P

Your sig is perfect btw. The passage of time is ontological. The present is metaphysical. The ontological is internal. The metaphysical is external.

The same goes for what you said about societal engineers and staged events.

I am told I have made up my own language because everyone tells me I do not speak English. I have designed my ideas with the multitasking origami that creates 4 dimensional ideas and since I am not copying forms shaped with words I have captured the means gravity contains results permanently here changing all the details now in physically application of compounding molecular migration of 120 elements in three states of existing as results in their total sum composition here.

And while here on Earth works the same throughout the universe in the same transition period relativity can be called metaphysics it is still conjecture of theory and theology discussing the possibility now isn't physically the home of eternity's results so far because the facts compiled by humanity aren't completely answering what a few know for sure as societal chains of command operate in symbolic code defined on a need to know basis coming from the top down the existential avenues of societal evolution in directing career character roles of reality.

[QatzelOk]

why the ant analogy and not a pride of lions

Because the hierarchy of lions is determined by skill in battle, and is only used to determine who gets to mate with whom. And hierarchy is predetermined at birth (just like social class in human societies), and is much broader in how it affects social participation.

Now besides that question I see a fatal flaw in using it. A hive of any colonial insects exists only by the reproduction means of the queen as sole provider of replacement at any level of governance within that specific hive or collective ideology.

The fact that the lives and labor of the soldier/worker ants is entirely submissive to the needs of the queen, means that the ant hierarchy is totalitarian. Just like human societies are - for the most part - entirely submissive to the banks. Like the queen ant, the banks can determine who lives and who dies, who has how many babies, and what their opinions and values are. Totalitarian.

The Elites of many societies have been "engineering" a meek, human pet for many centuries. The ant-like character of human social hierarchy is fairly obvious. Of course, like ants, this social hierarchy makes this kind of social organization dominant: no society of independent thinkers and free actors can defend itself against ant-like soldiers taking orders.

Likewise, bicycles can't defend themselves from SUVs. And children can't defend themselves against nicotine addiction.

Does this mean that SUVs and cigarettes are a form of "progress?"

[Beren]

The fact that the lives and labor of the soldier/worker ants is entirely submissive to the needs of the queen, means that the ant hierarchy is totalitarian.

She's the mother of all other ants in the colony, so the colony is actually a big family.

However, if you asked me, then I would say North Korea, in which the citizens are supposed to be the big family of or to be very related to the Kim dynasty, is more similar to an ant colony than the West. And it's really a military junta, in which there is the royal family (queen and males) and there are the workers and the soldiers.

[CounterChaos]

Hierarchies are not a bad thing. It allowed the rapid expansion of human societies ever since the introduction of agriculture. Also, much of our arts are based on hierarchies (of concepts, principles, laws, rules, etc).

Some would argue that this expansion was not a good thing.

The Elites of many societies have been "engineering" a meek, human pet for many centuries. The ant-like character of human social hierarchy is fairly obvious. Of course, like ants, this social hierarchy makes this kind of social organization dominant: no society of independent thinkers and free actors can defend itself against ant-like soldiers taking orders.

One of the first things I noticed when I moved to Asia, was how much more free I felt than I ever did in America. One can barely go a day in the good ole USA without breaking some kind of law. There are laws for everything you do. Yes, we are being engineered to be meek and afraid.

In a recent survey about who was the most happiest people on Earth - the Philippines ranked very high - the US was close to the bottom of the list. So here we have this third world country - dirt poor, with some of the happiest people on Earth. There is a noticeable hierarchy here with great respect given to elders - the opposite is true toward their political and military leaders. Even in this semi-feudal country where political leaders are assassinated almost monthly - the Filipino is still not meek or fully afraid. The reason for this is that they have not yet been fully propagandized like the rest of us. We live a world of lies and half truths - they live in a world of fishing and gathering on the farm for their next meal.

Modern industrial society needs to come down - if we are to ever find truth, let alone happiness. Modern industrial society is not the real world folks - it is a theme park. A theme park is where you go - to temporarily escape the truth.................

[onemalehuman]

Truth of reality is everything defined is intentionally incomplete but close enough to real nobody can fine the omitted details of calculated rounded off statistics.

So here is a clue to where I discovered the lost statistics.

Why is the standardize piece of copy paper 11" x 8.5"? The self evident is in plain sight.

With less than twelve sheets I can fold the entire history of humanity's governance's of Now's results so far.

OH! the mathematics, square off one sheet without a ruler. Then compare the portions and find the percentages of each without using a calculator or rounding off each equation.

Then compare the relative digits to quotients and remainders.

For those that believe in fate and destiny and nothing happens by accident, this gets interesting and exponentially compounding to the point it unravels the orchestrated tapestry of syllables in any tongue or sciences used to co-oridinate the production of staged event politically, economically, and religiously through the arts of educating literal and figurative truths of theory and theology making time relativity the center of attention.

[Typhoon]

I am told I have made up my own language because everyone tells me I do not speak English.

Oh you speak English! Its just the punctuation, sentence structure and unessasarily complicated way of going about your point that makes it seem like another language and what would make the plain English people dislike you. Its a shame as you seem to have some really interesting things to say and im sure that it would be an enlightening experiance to share a pint. However most people dont have the time to go about translating what your saying into plain english.

I have seen a curly black line on a white background explain more interesting points on the nature of existance and in considerably less time than it has taken me to translate one of your posts, perhaps you should try to be more like the black line? Then again it would rob you of your novelty which is what made me write this ....

[onemalehuman]

Before i join in this discussion i would just once like to hear someone give a definition to the concept upon which we are arguing. What is natural? Can you find a single unit of it somewhere, or is it just a rhetorical wildcard for making absurd moral thesis's?

Be careful what you ask for because once you have it, the self evident never goes away.

Natural and nature is two separate perimeters, Social justification whether it is done through theology or theoreticals works the same way in four physical dimensions of psychological warfare of converting real into reality that character has legal rights taking prededence over gender liberty to understand themselves inside out personally in personalities developed within the same instinctive qualties within each male and female results representing the specific ancestry that survived this same moment being compounded as always now each generation here.

Those 4 physical state of mind the rule of law ideologue's ideology, disciples of the ideology, devoted groupies that will do anything to not be just another pawn in social engineering, and the pawns of social justification in staging a reality to notions of national identiy.

Either church or state doesn't change anything really going on. Taxes are designed to implode economic good intentions. Just compare yield rates of compounding interest regulationsand whom receives the greatest benefit of governance over governments. Does character really have it's own matter beyond words and believed recited vernaculars of for societal evolution or humans evolving into spiritual beings?



Existential logic psychologically says think out of the box, which box above reflects 8 counteracting pyramids of social engineering operating three sides agains the middle from the center of the moment out to the idea anything is possible in an ever expanding universe of tunnel vision separated by academia edcuating church, state, and economic governments and comparing each against each other so nothing is ever considered exponentially from 6 degrees of separation contracting 8 corners of triangulating forces making everything exactly as it arrive now all the time every generation lifetimes are never duplicated twice in personality while each male and female result uses the same instincts and emotions?

Merry Christmas and here is the second coming of understanding Eternity remains within now's results all the time.

[QatzelOk]

There is a noticeable hierarchy here with great respect given to elders

Respect for elders is not the same thing as hierarchy. It's close to the opposite.

In most mammal species, and among pre-neolithic humans (99% of human existence), the only things that determined division-of-labor were/are physical strength, and age.

Human pyramid-building schemes have elaborate hierarchies that don't respect age or physical strength at all. Often, what leads to a "controlling" position on the pyramid is... being in the same club as other higher-ups.

This is very far from the function-related social order (which was very unobtrusive) of the cavemen.

When I pick up a baby who's crying, it's not hierarchy. That baby - if he was an adult - would pick me up if I was a baby. This are natural animal roles. Hierarchy is something else altogether.

Hierarchy can make a handful of rich men incredibly powerful and dangerous, by crushing the existences of the vast majority into an undignified combination of ass-kissing and workaholism.

[Smertios]

Defining wat is natural and what isn't is not an easy task. An old definition is that that says that everything that is not created or influenced by humans is natural. That would include mathematics, the entire physical universe and all biological systems. Society itself would be considered unnatural, though. And seriously, why would the human society be non-natural but non-human societies (a pack of wolves, for example), be considered a purely natural phenomenon?

So a better definition is needed, and that is the one I support: everything that has not been modified by the human intelligence is natural. A car is not natural, though it is composed merely of modified natural elements, such as energy, chemical components, torque, force, power etc. A horse, on the other hand, is completely natural, even if we use them for riding. The relationship between humans and other animals is completely natural.

For example, everyone knows that dogs are pretty much domesticated wolves, that became a distinct subspecies with time. And yes, that was caused by mankind. But it wasn't designed like that. It wasn't like a guy, one day, though "hey, I'll domesticate this wolf and it will become a distinct subspecies a few thousand years from now". It happened naturally, by having wolves interact and become part of the human society, despite the human influence.

All social relations are, therefore, natural. Friendship is natural. Love and marriage are natural. Mourning a relative is natural. The relationship between worker and client is natural. And hierarchy has to be natural as well. If it wasn't, then we would have examples of hierarch-less societies, which we simply do not. Humans are social animals. And the human society is defined by a set of very well-defined interactions and relationships that are completely natural. Like I said, friendship is natural. It has existed in the same form pretty much since the beginning of our species/subspecies. An example I used in another thread was the economy. The economy, as we understand it, is a perfectly natural characteristic of the human society. Human beings are able to produce work, and use that to acquire assets for himself. Goods are produces, exchanged and commercialized, naturally. That is part of what makes us different from ants. We can control what we produce. But there is nothing unnatural about it. Currency, on the other hand, is completely artificial. It was simply a way the human intelligence found to quantize the value of their work, in order to make our society more organized (and, therefore, more efficient).

And our society is naturally hierarchical as well. A good example to understand this is the following: imagine a classroom, 30 students and 1 teacher. the teacher assigns a project to be realized in groups of 5. He does not indicate a leader to the project or to each group (though he could). And the students themselves do not elect one either. I can guarantee you that leaders will arise in every group! And completely naturally. There will be one student who will take the lead, organize the project, distribute chores, make phone calls, yell at group members who are not productive etc. And, if the project of all groups is connected into one meta-project, both a primary group and a global leader will arise as well. If that didn't happen, the assignment itself would be disorganized. Leaders only do not appear if all members of the group become indifferent towards the project. If nobody cares about it, they will simply write some crappy dissertation and deliver it. So I can guarantee that the level of hierarchical sophistication is directly proportional to the quality of group work there.

To understand what hierarchy is, one has to understand what the core-periphery model is. Hierarchy in a group is simply a natural form of organization of a social network, in which the nodes can be divided into core, periphery and semi-periphery ones. The social activity of all periphery and semi-periphery nodes happens in accordance to the wishes/guidances/rules of core nodes, with semi-periphery nodes being able to exert some influence over the periphery, but not as much as the core.

History shows us that this model happens naturally in every human group. Nations can be divided into core, semi-periphery and periphery, based on their economic, political and military power. If you go to a secondary school (anywhere in the world), you will find a huge level of social stratification, with popular kids setting rules for fashion, etiquette, lifestyle etc, non-popular, yet still acceptable people serving as their "lieutenants", and a lot of normal kids that try to be like the popular ones but don't receive any attention from them. And obviously, there are social outcasts too, which are rejected by the periphery itself (the "periphery of the periphery"). Tribal groups normally have councils of elders and/or warriors to rule the people, as well as a chieftain, normally. A family is highly hierarchical as well. Normally one of the parents exerts more influence, depending on their condition to sustain the rest of the family, with kids and spouses being submissive. Older siblings normally take responsibility for younger ones, when parents are not around. Etc.

Long story short: there is nothing unnatural about hierarchies...

[Cartertonian]

That was a thoughtful and intelligent post, Smertios. However, it serves as a fine example of the fact that Qatz isn't actually interested in the questions he poses. He has one agenda and one agenda only...to find different, literary and artistic ways of highlighting that - in his view - the whole world is subordinated to a shadowy and malignant elite.

In this regard he deviates from the classic 'stuck record', because he at least plays a different tune every time. It's just the message in the song that remains the same.

[The Clockwork Rat]

So a better definition is needed, and that is the one I support: everything that has not been modified by the human intelligence is natural.

All social relations are, therefore, natural. Friendship is natural. Love and marriage are natural. Mourning a relative is natural. The relationship between worker and client is natural.

You're saying that social relations have not been modified by 'human intelligence'?

If we take your last example - the worker and client - then their relation and simultaneous interactions are very much modified by human intelligence. There is a generalised set of behaviours which each much stick to in order to maintain the validity of their transaction. These have developed in such a way as to increase efficiency in the action which the worker is to do, and even the means of exchange is - as you later point out using your own definition - unnatural. The entire reason that they are there in the first place as worker and client depends on the socio-economic relations of the time and place. There isn't anything else involved in their interaction.

Your claim is contradictory.

[CounterChaos]

That was a thoughtful and intelligent post, Smertios. However, it serves as a fine example of the fact that Qatz isn't actually interested in the questions he poses. He has one agenda and one agenda only...to find different, literary and artistic ways of highlighting that - in his view - the whole world is subordinated to a shadowy and malignant elite.

In this regard he deviates from the classic 'stuck record', because he at least plays a different tune every time. It's just the message in the song that remains the same.

In review of this, Qatz is correct. What I failed to realize is - that the Philippines is not an example of modern industrial society - as millions here are still hunter gatherer. His definition of hierarchy then as it applies to modern industrial society - is correct.

I would not go so far as to say that "the whole world is subordinated to a shadowy and malignant elite", I would say the whole world is subordinated to a silver spoon fed elite. We have no control where we are born - or the place where we begin this adventure. This is why I am a socialist - I want all of us born - with a stainless steel spoon in our mouths and begin the adventure on an equal basis.

As easy as it is for me to see this, to want this and to espouse this - it is just as easy for the silver spoon fed - to feel the need to protect their exclusive position. This is what we see, this is what they fear - that we see.

[Smertios]

That was a thoughtful and intelligent post, Smertios. However, it serves as a fine example of the fact that Qatz isn't actually interested in the questions he poses. He has one agenda and one agenda only...to find different, literary and artistic ways of highlighting that - in his view - the whole world is subordinated to a shadowy and malignant elite.

In this regard he deviates from the classic 'stuck record', because he at least plays a different tune every time. It's just the message in the song that remains the same.

Every socialist I have met is not interested in the truth, but only fiction to support their unreal hypothesis

You're saying that social relations have not been modified by 'human intelligence'?

If we take your last example - the worker and client - then their relation and simultaneous interactions are very much modified by human intelligence. There is a generalised set of behaviours which each much stick to in order to maintain the validity of their transaction. These have developed in such a way as to increase efficiency in the action which the worker is to do, and even the means of exchange is - as you later point out using your own definition - unnatural. The entire reason that they are there in the first place as worker and client depends on the socio-economic relations of the time and place. There isn't anything else involved in their interaction.

Your claim is contradictory.

No, you got my point wrong. I am not saying that social relations cannot be modified by human intelligence. Everything that is natural can be modified, but the outcome (the "modified thing") can be completely natural as well.

For example, imagine a car. It is not a natural machine, since it was the product of the human intelligence working, in order to overcome a natural barrier (the speed of transportation). Traffic itself is non-natural. We have built roads, set rules, designed traffic lights for control etc. But, once the non-natural part has been designed, the system itself will function naturally. The flow of of cars in an urban environment obeys pretty much the same principles as any natural flow in closed spaces, such as electrical and hydraulic circuits, and can easily be analyzed by means of graph theory. That is completely natural to the artificial system designed intelligently by humanity.

Perhaps a better example would be a bipolar transistor. It doesn't exist naturally in the world. Humans have to take a semimetal, dope it with atoms of another semimetal, in order to create "net" charge. Then three different blocks of doped semimetals have to be aligned properly, in order to have the thing work. But the properties that make the transistor work are natural (like every other property, obviously), so the system itself will work naturally once designed.

Similarly, any social interaction has a non-natural component. Like you said yourself, there is a set of rules pre-established for both agents/actors to follow, in order to maximize efficiency. This set of rules was designed as a piece of economic technology. But there is nothing unnatural about the interaction itself. And, once the rules are set, in the first place, the behavior of each agent will be completely natural...

So no, my post is not contradictory at all...

In review of this, Qatz is correct. What I failed to realize is - that the Philippines is not an example of modern industrial society - as millions here are still hunter gatherer. His definition of hierarchy then as it applies to modern industrial society - is correct.

I would not go so far as to say that "the whole world is subordinated to a shadowy and malignant elite", I would say the whole world is subordinated to a silver spoon fed elite. We have no control where we are born - or the place where we begin this adventure. This is why I am a socialist - I want all of us born - with a stainless steel spoon in our mouths and begin the adventure on an equal basis.

As easy as it is for me to see this, to want this and to espouse this - it is just as easy for the silver spoon fed - to feel the need to protect their exclusive position. This is what we see, this is what they fear - that we see.

That is not being a socialist. You are being a liberal

Socialists want people to start the adventure on an equal basis, but they also want people to go through it and finish on an equal basis. The equality defended in liberalism is that of equal conditions. So, everybody would have the condition to begin the adventure equally, but whether they are successful in life or not is entirely dependent on them themselves.

Qatz's definition of hierarchy is wrong, and I wrote an extensive post explaining why (with examples )... It is a bad and emotional view of society, being completely non-rational, as it ignores basic biological mechanisms of the human species. Like I said, our species is social and our society is hierarchical, otherwise we would see lots of non-hierarchized human groups around. But every human group, small or big, develops a hierarchy naturally. Look at my example with groups for a school assignment, for example. Families, companies, clubs. Leaders always appear spontaneously, no matter how much one tries to avoid it. The action of trying to avoid it itself creates a hierarchy, since one person is trying to control the social relations.

If we can become a non-hierarchical society in the future? Certainly, but it will require a major evolutionary shift, that will get rid of the biological characteristic itself. We are social animals because, a long time ago, nature selected those individuals who were social, since they were better prepared than non-social ones. And our society is hierarchical simply because, at some point, nature selected those groups that were hierarchical, considering they had an advantage over the non-hierarchical ones. For that to change, the environment itself needs to change, so it becomes more advantageous not to have an hierarchy. I don't see that happening anytime soon...