Theme: Cooperation

  • Disease Gradients Impede Cooperation

    (Via Francesco Principi)

    “The xenophobia expressed in environments with high pathogen severity creates barriers to intergroup cooperation. These barriers cause greater poverty in environments with increased pathogen severity, in addition to the direct effects of disease on the human capital that is essential to economic growth. Xenophobic groups in competition for resources are unwilling to resolve this competition through cooperative means, and they are more likely to resort to violent conflict.”

    This idea has legs.

  • Disease Gradients Impede Cooperation

    (Via Francesco Principi)

    “The xenophobia expressed in environments with high pathogen severity creates barriers to intergroup cooperation. These barriers cause greater poverty in environments with increased pathogen severity, in addition to the direct effects of disease on the human capital that is essential to economic growth. Xenophobic groups in competition for resources are unwilling to resolve this competition through cooperative means, and they are more likely to resort to violent conflict.”

    This idea has legs.

  • Eli on Love (Great Post)

    [I] think that love (noun) refers to the condition in which one’s happiness depends on another’s. And therefore to love (verb) must mean to act in a manner consistent with this condition prevailing. If we adopt these as our definitions, then it becomes obvious, upon cursory examination, that we can never accurately describe actual “love” (either the noun or the verb) as either universal or unconditional for long. For example, unrequited love would tend to consume, either its host, or its host’s willingness to continue entertaining it; for it entails costs with certainty, but holds out no sure promise of benefits, and would be easy to take advantage of. But reciprocal love may prove (under some conditions) sustainable or even (under others) productive. Curt Doolittle made a status the other day, or perhaps a comment, wherein he opined that the statement “I love you” must resolve operationally to something like “I promise that if you test the hypothesis that ‘I love you’ you will not find it untrue.” So we can resolve this still further to say that “I love you” means “I promise that if you test the hypothesis that my happiness depends on your own against my actions, you will not find it untrue.” —Eli Harman

  • Eli on Love (Great Post)

    [I] think that love (noun) refers to the condition in which one’s happiness depends on another’s. And therefore to love (verb) must mean to act in a manner consistent with this condition prevailing. If we adopt these as our definitions, then it becomes obvious, upon cursory examination, that we can never accurately describe actual “love” (either the noun or the verb) as either universal or unconditional for long. For example, unrequited love would tend to consume, either its host, or its host’s willingness to continue entertaining it; for it entails costs with certainty, but holds out no sure promise of benefits, and would be easy to take advantage of. But reciprocal love may prove (under some conditions) sustainable or even (under others) productive. Curt Doolittle made a status the other day, or perhaps a comment, wherein he opined that the statement “I love you” must resolve operationally to something like “I promise that if you test the hypothesis that ‘I love you’ you will not find it untrue.” So we can resolve this still further to say that “I love you” means “I promise that if you test the hypothesis that my happiness depends on your own against my actions, you will not find it untrue.” —Eli Harman

  • Naturalism, Aristotelianism, Christianity, Stoicism and now Buddhism

    [H]ere is the thing about Christianity: the extension of kinship love to non-kin and the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. Our people have lower sensitivity to (disgust for) out-groups anyway. But between our genetic bias as cold weather folk, christianity, chivalry, and the prohibition on cousin marriage, the west has evolved rapidly a high trust civilization – even if it has become partly to its detriment. Yes our mediterranean, hanseatic and nordic trade routes were helpful as well, since commercial cultures without out-group competition tend to have less reason to be mistrustful. Yes, our lack of genetic diversity helped quite a bit. Yes, as we’ve learned recently (to my excitement) it appears that the lower incidence of disease in the cold climate means lower barriers to association and trade. But our primary talent – martial epistemology – or truthfulness – would not be as useful without this christian openness. This preference for ‘error on the side of trust’. What christianity achieves through extension of kinship love, buddhism achieves through introspection, stoicism achieved through planning, focus, action, and review. These are three different methods of training the unquiet mind to quietly interact with the world, without fear. Westerners practice many religions: The nurturer (buddhism), the craftsman(stoicism), the merchant and politician (christianity), the warrior (the military), the scientist (Aristotle), the aesthete (Pagan nature worship). (and unfortunately, over the past century, the pseudoscientific state worshipper) We have always been a poly-spiritual people. We have always been and will likely remain pagans. Religions are tools. I know the value of a quiet mind: the absence of anxiety and fear. I know the (lost) value of the worship of nature: care of the commons. I know the importance of membership in the tribe: ceremonies and rituals. I know the value of spirituality (invoking the feeling of the safety of the pack). I know the value of solace in fear, hopelessness, suffering and death. But I also know that love, truth, and trust create prosperity. Because fear, deceit, and mistrust generate poverty. How do we distinguish a religion from a political system? Law rather than wisdom (advice). How do we distinguish a religion from a military system? conquest. How do we distinguish a good religion from a bad anything else? The relative economic status of its adherents. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine.

  • Naturalism, Aristotelianism, Christianity, Stoicism and now Buddhism

    [H]ere is the thing about Christianity: the extension of kinship love to non-kin and the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. Our people have lower sensitivity to (disgust for) out-groups anyway. But between our genetic bias as cold weather folk, christianity, chivalry, and the prohibition on cousin marriage, the west has evolved rapidly a high trust civilization – even if it has become partly to its detriment. Yes our mediterranean, hanseatic and nordic trade routes were helpful as well, since commercial cultures without out-group competition tend to have less reason to be mistrustful. Yes, our lack of genetic diversity helped quite a bit. Yes, as we’ve learned recently (to my excitement) it appears that the lower incidence of disease in the cold climate means lower barriers to association and trade. But our primary talent – martial epistemology – or truthfulness – would not be as useful without this christian openness. This preference for ‘error on the side of trust’. What christianity achieves through extension of kinship love, buddhism achieves through introspection, stoicism achieved through planning, focus, action, and review. These are three different methods of training the unquiet mind to quietly interact with the world, without fear. Westerners practice many religions: The nurturer (buddhism), the craftsman(stoicism), the merchant and politician (christianity), the warrior (the military), the scientist (Aristotle), the aesthete (Pagan nature worship). (and unfortunately, over the past century, the pseudoscientific state worshipper) We have always been a poly-spiritual people. We have always been and will likely remain pagans. Religions are tools. I know the value of a quiet mind: the absence of anxiety and fear. I know the (lost) value of the worship of nature: care of the commons. I know the importance of membership in the tribe: ceremonies and rituals. I know the value of spirituality (invoking the feeling of the safety of the pack). I know the value of solace in fear, hopelessness, suffering and death. But I also know that love, truth, and trust create prosperity. Because fear, deceit, and mistrust generate poverty. How do we distinguish a religion from a political system? Law rather than wisdom (advice). How do we distinguish a religion from a military system? conquest. How do we distinguish a good religion from a bad anything else? The relative economic status of its adherents. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine.

  • “Everyone fights. No one quits. If you run, I’ll kill you myself.”— —“men fi

    —“Everyone fights. No one quits. If you run, I’ll kill you myself.”—

    —“men fight for the men next to them”—


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-13 10:35:00 UTC

  • CHRISTIANITY, STOICISM, BUDDHISM Here is the thing about Christianity: the exten

    CHRISTIANITY, STOICISM, BUDDHISM

    Here is the thing about Christianity: the extension of kinship love to non-kin and the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. Our people have lower sensitivity to (disgust for) out-groups anyway. But between our genetic bias as cold weather folk, christianity, chivalry, and the prohibition on cousin marriage, the west has evolved rapidly a high trust civilization – even if it has become partly to its detriment.

    Yes our mediterranean, hanseatic and nordic trade routes were helpful as well, since commercial cultures without out-group competition tend to have less reason to be mistrustful.

    Yes, our lack of genetic diversity helped quite a bit.

    Yes, as we’ve learned recently (to my excitement) it appears that the lower incidence of disease in the cold climate means lower barriers to association and trade.

    But our primary talent – martial epistemology – or truthfulness – would not be as useful without this christian openness. This preference for ‘error on the side of trust’.

    What christianity achieves through extension of kinship love, buddhism achieves through introspection, stoicism achieved through planning, focus, action, and review. These are three different methods of training the unquiet mind to quietly interact with the world, without fear.

    Westerners practice many religions: The nurturer (buddhism), the craftsman(stoicism), the merchant and politician (christianity), the warrior (the military), the scientist (Aristotle), the aesthete (Pagan nature worship). (and unfortunately, over the past century, the pseudoscientific state worshipper)

    We have always been a poly-spiritual people. We have always been and will likely remain pagans. Religions are tools.

    I know the value of a quiet mind: the absence of anxiety and fear.

    I know the (lost) value of the worship of nature: care of the commons.

    I know the importance of membership in the tribe: ceremonies and rituals.

    I know the value of spirituality (invoking the feeling of the safety of the pack).

    I know the value of solace in fear, hopelessness, suffering and death.

    But I also know that love, truth, and trust create prosperity.

    Because fear, deceit, and mistrust generate poverty.

    How do we distinguish a religion from a political system? Law rather than wisdom (advice). How do we distinguish a religion from a military system? conquest. How do we distinguish a good religion from a bad anything else? The relative economic status of its adherents.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-12 14:52:00 UTC

  • Santagata: Love and Understanding

    [L]ove;

    I love my family… Which doesn’t mean I hate yours. It means I understand why you love yours. I love my nation… Which doesn’t mean I hate yours. It means I understand why you love yours. I love my DNA, my genes, my race… Which doesn’t mean I hate yours. It means I understand why you love yours. Love cannot create hate. But hate and haters can and always do blame love and lovers for problems of the world.

  • Santagata: Love and Understanding

    [L]ove;

    I love my family… Which doesn’t mean I hate yours. It means I understand why you love yours. I love my nation… Which doesn’t mean I hate yours. It means I understand why you love yours. I love my DNA, my genes, my race… Which doesn’t mean I hate yours. It means I understand why you love yours. Love cannot create hate. But hate and haters can and always do blame love and lovers for problems of the world.