0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: alancalverd on 10/03/2017 23:34:10Thatcher, Meir, Bandarinaike, Indira Ghandi....in modern times it seems that, proportionately, women in presidential or prime minsterial positions are more likely to start wars, execute their rivals or preside over internal massacres than men. There just happens to be fewer women with the opportunity to do so. The line of warmongering queens stretches back via Victoria and Elizabeth I to Boudicca. Alan. that is mere sophistry. Wars have always been started and enthusiastically conducted by men. Not women.
Thatcher, Meir, Bandarinaike, Indira Ghandi....in modern times it seems that, proportionately, women in presidential or prime minsterial positions are more likely to start wars, execute their rivals or preside over internal massacres than men. There just happens to be fewer women with the opportunity to do so. The line of warmongering queens stretches back via Victoria and Elizabeth I to Boudicca.
Alan. that is mere sophistry. Wars have always been started and enthusiastically conducted by men. Not women.
Data doesn't bare that out.
Quote from: zx16 on 10/03/2017 20:43:19I think we'd be better off, if we were governed by women,. Because women don't start wars. Wars are always started by men. Its a nice idea but an assumption"New York University scholars Oeindrila Dube and S.P. Harish analyzed 28 European queenly reigns from 1480 to 1913 and found a 27 percent increase in wars when a queen was in power, as compared to the reign of a king." http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/01/european-queens-waged-more-wars-than-kings.html
I think we'd be better off, if we were governed by women,. Because women don't start wars. Wars are always started by men.
Politicians have a wider appeal than do scientists.
The reason is most people are emotional to some degree, while far fewer people are rational.
Therefore, wide spread appeal to logic and common sense is far less effective within a large population, than an appeal to emotion. Fake news appeals to emotion, since emotion can better deal with bad or wrong data, as long was it makes you feel good and/or tells you what you want to hear. There was no voter fraud therefore we will have no investigation and any suggesting otherwise will be banished. This does not appeals to reason but it will appeal to emotions. As far as the original topic of each group within the demographics being represented in proportion to its precent of the population, the problem I have with this, is it suggests if you were born a certain way, you will forever become socially defined that way, based on shallow criteria.
It pegs you by a superficial judgement and does not speak to the depths of the person.
Say a religious group,
full of people who define themselves by this, want to be represented, but there is a separation of church and state taboo.
Who decides who gets the "boot" , and who decides, which newly formed fringe group, are allowed to have representation?
This will not allow the best representation for the most people.
Would we need to boot the atheists, also, or should the deck remained stacked?
To many people religion is more important than cross dressing, yet crossing dressing will get representation. We need to first fix the system.
Politics, Science and the Creation of Cerebral Memory.In terms of politics and science, politics appeals to emotions,
which is why lying often works in the short term, is complained about, but nothing ever changes.
People of back to feed on the lies, again and again. Lying can benefit emotions but it harms reason, since lying fudges data so the wrong conclusions will be drawn.
This path can appeal to vanity and emotion. In the end, the fact that politicians continue to lie show emotions dominate with reason showing its face, but half hidden and around a corner.
When the brain creates memory, emotional tags from the core of the brain; limbic system, are added to sensory content when our memory is written to cerebral matter. Our memory has both content and emotional tagging. This is why our strongest memories have the strongest feelings attached; marriage, graduation, first child, first job, first kiss, etc.
Even one's most exciting area of science, has emotional tagging; strong attraction and excitement. This is useful to the natural animal since if they encounter something that triggers memory, they will act on the triggered feeling without having to think. If the food item triggers the feeling of "good" from their memory, they will eat.
In terms of tagging our memory with emotional tags, there are only a limited number of emotions and emotional tags.
Therefore the emotional tags are recycled and used for similar situations that express similar valence. For example, all our favorite food memories have the "taste good feeling " tag, even though each dish can be quite different in composition and content. One induced feeling can trigger a range of memories. If we get hungry at lunch, images of different foods may appear from which we may choose based on which take-out everyone uses. On the other hand, the content side approach to our memory is very specific and tailored to each dish. Depending on how one approaches their memory; either the emotional tag side or content side, will determine how you will interpret the original stimulus. The emotional person will use the feeling tag side; variety of content, while the rational person will use the content side; very specific. As an example, does anyone remember the collusion delusion hoax that was run. Very early on the lying politicians used this circumstance to induce fear and hate. It was only a matter of time before Hitler and Nuclear war would appear in the imagination of the boneheads, since these memories also have fear and hate tags. The perpetual fear induction from the hoax, expanded consciousness for parallel tagging until a cartoon reality was created. Even scientists got sucked in since they lacked the practicla knowledge and skills needed to control how their memory will be induced. The scientist, in their own field, tries to approach his/her memory from the content side, while trying to repress any induced emotions. The content side approach can still trigger the original attached feeling tag. If this tav was allowed to linger,
it can then induce parallel content. This detour can side track and even confuse reason. The good rationalist will sense the emotional tag and then control the feeling induction, so they can go back to the content side. This is harder to do and is why most people default to emotional thinking. Emotional thinking is easier since it is often do to you and for you. Emotional thinking is more common among the left than the right.
The reason is the push toward feminization and presumed importance of feelings.
One is supposed to think from what they feel and not reason it out, without feeling. This will trigger parallel content for confusion. This confusion allows the politicians to use the emotional tag inductions, which they know will cause parallel memory to appear to add even more confusion. Now the herd will need big brother to help focus the brain; give them what they think they need, based on parallel tagging, that will not bring that pinnacle feeling they desire. For example, cross dressors have more rights but they still have the highest suicide rates.
Feelings with nebulous content name lead to an irrational path. Now that you know how the memory works, it is the duty of science to point this out so people have more control over politicians and commercial feeling inductions. This does not occur mcc in culture, since most scientists appear to fall for the induction. Being called a scientist does not necessarily mean good at brain IT. They can get confused since they lack understanding on how the brain works. This results in them getting sucked in. When I made fun of herd thinking, I was addressing emotional thinking, since the herd will be integrated from the emotional side. This is possible since all humans have the same emotional tagging resources. The individual is more based on the content side. This content is specific to your unique place in space and time. One needs the ability to deal in each situation alone which requires reason. You ill not have the herd to regulate what you do and tell you what to think to achieve the "faux" feeling of nirvana; parallel memory induction .