-one generation after religious practice descends under a certain threshold (if I remember correctly 50% of the population attending religious services) societies tend to go into a hysterical phase (ex: french revolution/bolcheviks/fascism/ns…US wokism???) I find worth noting that wokism doesn t seem to really catch in France compared to the US and Canada.
-empires last usually around 10 generations (250 years) (Rome got two cycles by switching from the Republic to the Empire) so 1776-2026.
-the west went from 90% farmers and factory workers to mostly office and retail employees. Those professionals categories share vastly divergent views regarding the world.
"The low self-consciousness person has a problem with self-identification."
"So how does the low self-consciousness person develop self-identity or a sense of self? Well, he relies on others to do it in the first place (usually as a child), and then he relies on others to provide the reevaluation throughout his life."
It would seem that this mechanism is not just a factor in how narcissism develops in an individual, but also in a number of other 'phenomena' that we are currently witnessing in ever growing magnitude in western societies, and in the Anglo-Saxon nations in particular, where '(self-)identity' and 'victimhood' have taken on an ideological meaning rather than being a descriptive tool of objective reality.
But I suspect that's not news to you, as I'm sure you've seen where your logic takes us if applied beyond mere narcissism. And it would make sense if the two, narcissism and the other 'phenomena', actually overlap to a significant degree.
May I suggest that you consider including some discussion of evolution and environment in your presentation of the origin of biological traits. Specifically, in our species (Homo sapiens sapiens), we are unique in that we evolved complex language skill approximately 100,000 years ago, and that trait became a game-changer. Prior to this development, most behavioral traits were passed between generations via genetic coding (innate behaviors). What persisted was what "worked" in that sense that it enhanced the survive and thrive imperatives of species persistence. However, after the adaptation of complex language skill, post-partum "programming" of children became a viable method of transferring "wisdom" to each succeeding generation via inculcated habits introduced via verbal instruction, repetition, and reinforcement. This "hard-wiring" was accomplished during the formative years with infant brain size more than doubled. This practice is now called "nurturing" and the associated "wisdom" was often environment-specific. IOW, what was wise in Scandinavia was not necessarily the same as what was wise in sub-Saharan Africa.
The key point here is that upper latitude environments with associated extreme seasonal variation (short moderate summers and long harsh winters) likely resulted in different behavioral habits necessary to survive long winter deprivations of food source availability. In this type of environment, cooperative social behaviors probably are more prevalent than individualistic behaviors, because cooperation can help a community to better survive these periods of deprivation.
And then irrigation comes in and blows everything before it to bits.
Although I think it's still unsettled if people first developed states (to better wage warfare?) and then started irrigation or the other way around. Personally, I'll bet states came first because if "centralized organization of labor" is a prerequisite for a large irrigation network then you can't have a large irrigation network before you have a centralized organization.
Thank you, your argument is well defended, to my benefit.
“It is very likely that this trait (self-blindness) is the reason for the misjudgment of self. If we assume that it is normally distributed, an unscientific rule of thumb might indicate that 30-40% of people have noticeable problems with “self-identification.”
If I had this sort of a thing back in school and university when I was learning basics of psychology (I studied something else, but we did also learn bits of psych), I might have actually internalized the knowledge! As it stands, what I learned there has always been a kind of voodoo and I never gained the ability to predict anything with that knowledge.
Gauis, would you consider writing a book on psychology? :)
Thank you. Great piece.
Also on the US collapse:
-one generation after religious practice descends under a certain threshold (if I remember correctly 50% of the population attending religious services) societies tend to go into a hysterical phase (ex: french revolution/bolcheviks/fascism/ns…US wokism???) I find worth noting that wokism doesn t seem to really catch in France compared to the US and Canada.
-empires last usually around 10 generations (250 years) (Rome got two cycles by switching from the Republic to the Empire) so 1776-2026.
-the west went from 90% farmers and factory workers to mostly office and retail employees. Those professionals categories share vastly divergent views regarding the world.
Thanks, worth the wait.
"The low self-consciousness person has a problem with self-identification."
"So how does the low self-consciousness person develop self-identity or a sense of self? Well, he relies on others to do it in the first place (usually as a child), and then he relies on others to provide the reevaluation throughout his life."
It would seem that this mechanism is not just a factor in how narcissism develops in an individual, but also in a number of other 'phenomena' that we are currently witnessing in ever growing magnitude in western societies, and in the Anglo-Saxon nations in particular, where '(self-)identity' and 'victimhood' have taken on an ideological meaning rather than being a descriptive tool of objective reality.
But I suspect that's not news to you, as I'm sure you've seen where your logic takes us if applied beyond mere narcissism. And it would make sense if the two, narcissism and the other 'phenomena', actually overlap to a significant degree.
May I suggest that you consider including some discussion of evolution and environment in your presentation of the origin of biological traits. Specifically, in our species (Homo sapiens sapiens), we are unique in that we evolved complex language skill approximately 100,000 years ago, and that trait became a game-changer. Prior to this development, most behavioral traits were passed between generations via genetic coding (innate behaviors). What persisted was what "worked" in that sense that it enhanced the survive and thrive imperatives of species persistence. However, after the adaptation of complex language skill, post-partum "programming" of children became a viable method of transferring "wisdom" to each succeeding generation via inculcated habits introduced via verbal instruction, repetition, and reinforcement. This "hard-wiring" was accomplished during the formative years with infant brain size more than doubled. This practice is now called "nurturing" and the associated "wisdom" was often environment-specific. IOW, what was wise in Scandinavia was not necessarily the same as what was wise in sub-Saharan Africa.
The key point here is that upper latitude environments with associated extreme seasonal variation (short moderate summers and long harsh winters) likely resulted in different behavioral habits necessary to survive long winter deprivations of food source availability. In this type of environment, cooperative social behaviors probably are more prevalent than individualistic behaviors, because cooperation can help a community to better survive these periods of deprivation.
Just some thoughts to consider.
And then irrigation comes in and blows everything before it to bits.
Although I think it's still unsettled if people first developed states (to better wage warfare?) and then started irrigation or the other way around. Personally, I'll bet states came first because if "centralized organization of labor" is a prerequisite for a large irrigation network then you can't have a large irrigation network before you have a centralized organization.
Thank you, your argument is well defended, to my benefit.
“It is very likely that this trait (self-blindness) is the reason for the misjudgment of self. If we assume that it is normally distributed, an unscientific rule of thumb might indicate that 30-40% of people have noticeable problems with “self-identification.”
Very, very scary!
Thanks man. It's a great read. Could you recommend some books about parenting which you find valuable?
If I had this sort of a thing back in school and university when I was learning basics of psychology (I studied something else, but we did also learn bits of psych), I might have actually internalized the knowledge! As it stands, what I learned there has always been a kind of voodoo and I never gained the ability to predict anything with that knowledge.
Gauis, would you consider writing a book on psychology? :)