Settling a dispute
-
You are taking what I've said far to literally. I wasn't writing my dissertation, I was making observations. I also did not infer that being tribalistic makes you hate outgroups, but in the sense of "tribes" yes they have always had violence inherent to them, because we live in a violent world. Bears can kill you, moose can kill you, other tribes can kill you. It comes from protectionism more than hate, but that notion gets compromised by bad actors pushing an agenda.
There have always been things to fight for. The good hunting grounds, the good fishing grounds, the safest places to camp, etc... violence isn't always a bad thing either, it is a necessary part of living in a diverse world. You can't reason with a fire, or a bear. You can avoid them, but that's just protectionism again. I never implied tribalism is bad, I implied it's a part of our nature. Humans are pack animals that have always lived in family groups and fought to protect the sanctity of that group from outside forces. Civilization is the act of forgetting the past to damn the future. It's not what it is supposed to be, but that's what it has become. We use our "civility" as a cudgel to beat those who think/live differently.
You are taking what I’ve said far to literally.
Perhaps. This particular topic has been a lifelong interest of mine, so if I went into far to great of detail in my answer I apologize. Honestly I tried to hold back and stay on topic, but I failed to be concise for sure.
I wasn’t writing my dissertation, I was making observations.
Fair enough
I also did not infer that being tribalistic makes you hate outgroups.
Eh, you may not have been intending to imply that, but with the statement "Tribalism involves violent intent about outgroups that don’t conform to our “tribe” (read: pack)." you can probably see how someone could easily infer that's what you meant.
in the sense of “tribes” yes they have always had violence inherent to them, because we live in a violent world.
This may seem pedantic and forgive me if you aren't interested in the distinction, but a group of people organizing themselves into "Tribes" is no more and in a lot of ways less violent than other ways of organizing yourself, so to associate the two does a disservice to both the method of organization, and the people who have been and still are members of tribes. That was the point of my rant about how 'Civilization' was when you really start to see 'Tribalism' in the bad sense take off. It's not your fault that they named the word after the wrong group- I guess I just want to highlight the distinction for the people who are interested. I'm not trying to attack you personally.
Bears can kill you, moose can kill you, other tribes can kill you. It comes from protectionism more than hate
Of course, and please don't mistake me, I'm not putting forth some sort of 'Noble Savage' argument. Tribal people were people and had all of the faults people do. My overall point is one of generalities and not hard and fast rules, it's still an important thing to consider imo.
but that notion gets compromised by bad actors pushing an agenda.
Exactly. One of those agendas has traditionally been that 'Civilization' is an unmitigated good and nothing of value was lost, while 'Tribalism' was when humans were at our most animalistic and violent. I would just like to see the narrative more closely fit the reality of the situation
There have always been things to fight for. The good hunting grounds, the good fishing grounds, the safest places to camp, etc…
Eh, kinda but not really. In our modern view we can recognize that other people live in areas that have resources we would like to have, but we don't advocate for fighting those people to get the resources. We trade for them. Prehistoric and tribal people were likewise capable of trading for resources, and did so frequently. Fighting for it (endangering everyone involved) was likely the the last resort in most cases. We tend to overlook the fact that in our abundant society we always have 'spare' young men we can send of to war for territory or resources. People living a subsistence lifestyle typically valued such young men who could go and hunt dangerous prey much more highly than we seem to value our young men.
Only a madman in 2025 would advocate annexing another sovereign nation to get their oil, trees, or minerals. It was likely just as rare for tribal people to fight over such things when 'sane' alternatives existed.
Humans are pack animals that have always lived in family groups and fought to protect the sanctity of that group from outside forces.
As you can probably guess because of my username, I am not personally bothered by being called a 'pack animal', because I have a deep understanding of what those things mean. There are (perhaps subtle but important) differences between a 'pack' and a 'tribe', that I won't go into (unless you are interested), but my point is in light of the way tribal people have been traditionally portrayed by western culture, equating a group of human beings with wild animals has all sorts of icky connotations that perhaps you don't mean but are present nonetheless. If you wouldn't refer to a group of black folks as "Monkeys" or "Apes", you might think twice about making such comparisons, that's all I'm saying. After all it is a fact that as human beings we are all Monkeys and Apes, but thanks to racist douchebags- it can be hurtful to people not in our 'in groups' to go around saying that if you don't clarify exactly what you mean.
Civilization is the act of forgetting the past to damn the future..
I like that. It's poetic and there is a lot of truth in that. I may steal that for future conversations.
We use our “civility” as a cudgel to beat those who think/live differently.
100%
-
Fuck you too pal
Scientist just discovered how to upload a picture to a bird. Non-drone theory isn't looking so good.
-
Fuck you too pal
a bit absent are we?
-
Scientist just discovered how to upload a picture to a bird. Non-drone theory isn't looking so good.
non-drone theory? what is this nonsense?
it's the 20last century.. fucking drones be everywhere..
and they talk to each other just like birbs.how you defeat a patriot system or any other air defense? lots and lots of drones.
they're like the plague that is online bots, but they fly.
add a little AI to the mix and baby you got a stew going -
I think the most crazy thing we could potentially encounter atomically (that we theorize about but haven't seen) is material from the possible "Island of stability" that could be (much) farther along in the periodic table from things we've created.
For the uninformed, the island of stability is a range on the periodic table with atomic numbers in the ~170's (currently the element with the highest atomic number - how many protons in the nucleus - that humans have synthesized is Oganesson, with an atomic number of 118) where it is believed that nuclei will remain (more?) stable, rather than breaking down in microseconds after we slam other elements into each other with devices such as the Large Hadron Collider.
There are SO many challenges with even getting to 118. Getting higher than that is theoretically possible but so far we haven't worked it out. A super advanced civilization might have the means and/or dedicated the resources, and be the beneficiary of whatever properties exist in the advanced/exotic matter that we know nothing about.
That being said, we would still be able to analyze the materials and understand what we're looking at, even if our WTF meters are breaking from the overload because we don't know how they managed to achieve it.
I, for one, love me some copernicium... truly magical stuff.
-
You would NOT believe-… ok honestly everybody reading this already knows.
But there are SO many people that will offer confident unprompted incorrect advice on so many subjects while they have the sum of human knowledge in their pocket. Or they will ask some dummy for the answer while having that same access.
And the best part is that many of them use their literal human knowledgebase portal to send the wrong information!
well yeh, because everyone knows Wikipedia is only 99.9901% accurate.
-
I have a friend who works for a library. They still offer this service. I don't think anyone under the age of 70 has used it in some time.
my first job ever was at a library. dewey decimal system anyone?
-
Is it a tale? It thought stopping would basically overclock the heart after too long. I saw one land the other day (possibly the first time I've ever seen that) and it kept flapping while hanging onto a twig.
I've seen 4 hummingbirbs on a feeder at once yet they are usually very territorial.
and yes they do sit if your feeder has leg rests. -
You are taking what I’ve said far to literally.
Perhaps. This particular topic has been a lifelong interest of mine, so if I went into far to great of detail in my answer I apologize. Honestly I tried to hold back and stay on topic, but I failed to be concise for sure.
I wasn’t writing my dissertation, I was making observations.
Fair enough
I also did not infer that being tribalistic makes you hate outgroups.
Eh, you may not have been intending to imply that, but with the statement "Tribalism involves violent intent about outgroups that don’t conform to our “tribe” (read: pack)." you can probably see how someone could easily infer that's what you meant.
in the sense of “tribes” yes they have always had violence inherent to them, because we live in a violent world.
This may seem pedantic and forgive me if you aren't interested in the distinction, but a group of people organizing themselves into "Tribes" is no more and in a lot of ways less violent than other ways of organizing yourself, so to associate the two does a disservice to both the method of organization, and the people who have been and still are members of tribes. That was the point of my rant about how 'Civilization' was when you really start to see 'Tribalism' in the bad sense take off. It's not your fault that they named the word after the wrong group- I guess I just want to highlight the distinction for the people who are interested. I'm not trying to attack you personally.
Bears can kill you, moose can kill you, other tribes can kill you. It comes from protectionism more than hate
Of course, and please don't mistake me, I'm not putting forth some sort of 'Noble Savage' argument. Tribal people were people and had all of the faults people do. My overall point is one of generalities and not hard and fast rules, it's still an important thing to consider imo.
but that notion gets compromised by bad actors pushing an agenda.
Exactly. One of those agendas has traditionally been that 'Civilization' is an unmitigated good and nothing of value was lost, while 'Tribalism' was when humans were at our most animalistic and violent. I would just like to see the narrative more closely fit the reality of the situation
There have always been things to fight for. The good hunting grounds, the good fishing grounds, the safest places to camp, etc…
Eh, kinda but not really. In our modern view we can recognize that other people live in areas that have resources we would like to have, but we don't advocate for fighting those people to get the resources. We trade for them. Prehistoric and tribal people were likewise capable of trading for resources, and did so frequently. Fighting for it (endangering everyone involved) was likely the the last resort in most cases. We tend to overlook the fact that in our abundant society we always have 'spare' young men we can send of to war for territory or resources. People living a subsistence lifestyle typically valued such young men who could go and hunt dangerous prey much more highly than we seem to value our young men.
Only a madman in 2025 would advocate annexing another sovereign nation to get their oil, trees, or minerals. It was likely just as rare for tribal people to fight over such things when 'sane' alternatives existed.
Humans are pack animals that have always lived in family groups and fought to protect the sanctity of that group from outside forces.
As you can probably guess because of my username, I am not personally bothered by being called a 'pack animal', because I have a deep understanding of what those things mean. There are (perhaps subtle but important) differences between a 'pack' and a 'tribe', that I won't go into (unless you are interested), but my point is in light of the way tribal people have been traditionally portrayed by western culture, equating a group of human beings with wild animals has all sorts of icky connotations that perhaps you don't mean but are present nonetheless. If you wouldn't refer to a group of black folks as "Monkeys" or "Apes", you might think twice about making such comparisons, that's all I'm saying. After all it is a fact that as human beings we are all Monkeys and Apes, but thanks to racist douchebags- it can be hurtful to people not in our 'in groups' to go around saying that if you don't clarify exactly what you mean.
Civilization is the act of forgetting the past to damn the future..
I like that. It's poetic and there is a lot of truth in that. I may steal that for future conversations.
We use our “civility” as a cudgel to beat those who think/live differently.
100%
Fair enough. I was certainly using broad strokes but thought to say "humanity" should include all of "us". I get what you are saying and certainly did not choose my words too carefully. I often forget the nuances of speech do not translate to text very well.
I like that you say only a mad man would annex another country for its resources and yet you have Russia trying to rebuild the USSR, Israel annihilating the Palestinian people because of the land they are living on and Mango Mussolini is threatening to annex my nation of Canada for our resources because we have lots and he's a giant douche. Just saying...
Inherent human traits we like and even traits we don't like can be traced back to our animal nature and denying the connection has caused so many of the wrongs we in "society" have to suffer. That is the point I was trying to make in the first place anyways.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I have two trainees and when they come to me with complex questions they’ve clearly thought out and debated it makes me so happy.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Just goes to show this place is only one half step up from reddit.
This ancient repost keeps getting upvotes no matter how many times it comes up.
-
Fair enough. I was certainly using broad strokes but thought to say "humanity" should include all of "us". I get what you are saying and certainly did not choose my words too carefully. I often forget the nuances of speech do not translate to text very well.
I like that you say only a mad man would annex another country for its resources and yet you have Russia trying to rebuild the USSR, Israel annihilating the Palestinian people because of the land they are living on and Mango Mussolini is threatening to annex my nation of Canada for our resources because we have lots and he's a giant douche. Just saying...
Inherent human traits we like and even traits we don't like can be traced back to our animal nature and denying the connection has caused so many of the wrongs we in "society" have to suffer. That is the point I was trying to make in the first place anyways.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I like that you say only a mad man would annex another country for its resources and yet you have Russia trying to rebuild the USSR, Israel annihilating the Palestinian people because of the land they are living on and Mango Mussolini is threatening to annex my nation of Canada for our resources because we have lots and he’s a giant douche. Just saying…
Yeah, that was my little way of criticizing such people. It is madness imo. If it comes to that, a lot of Americans will be fighting on your side.
Inherent human traits we like and even traits we don’t like can be traced back to our animal nature and denying the connection has caused so many of the wrongs we in “society” have to suffer. That is the point I was trying to make in the first place anyways.
Agreed. Certainly there is a part of our nature that is fine with violence and a part that nurturing and loving. We are in a privileged position to be able to direct our own evolution, physically and culturally. Hopefully the better angels our our nature will prevail in the end
-
my first job ever was at a library. dewey decimal system anyone?
I worked in my college library, so no we didn’t use the Dewey decimal system.
-
Just goes to show this place is only one half step up from reddit.
This ancient repost keeps getting upvotes no matter how many times it comes up.
It may be ancient but has it stopped being good?
-
It may be ancient but has it stopped being good?
I read it several times every time because it's good.
I'm just saying.
-
well yeh it's fiction. because birds aren't real.
Must be why she's so good at it!
