Genetics, Elitism, and Spirituality

What if there were a belief - a faith, and a fantasy - that interprets a persons experience of strength - confidence, self-esteem, and capacity to dominate others - in terms of an elected status; a status, in turn, which emerges as a function of being "naturally selected" by Nature (sic) as an "improvement" upon the normal Human gene-pool?

What are the desired traits of this "superior breed"? Well, aggression. The masculine qualities of the Hero - like Gilgamesh - or the founders of imperialist kingdoms, like Elim, Sumer, Egypt, Greece and Rome. Myths like the "amazon" sought to apply this logic to the existence of females; after all, females were just as intelligent as males, and so no doubt presented the unusual problem of "what does their existence mean in a masculine world"?

What is emphasized within this way of thinking is subterfuge: undermine and exploit their emotional weaknesses and trusting naivete to gain control and power over them - of course, to your advantage. Thus, what is being emphasized is a vicious anti-humanity - or the opposite of what society in general has emphasized throughout most of Human history.

Circles

The Human mind arises as a function of the dynamical relationships between our body's estimated 40 trillion cells. These cells, in turn, organize the motions of an estimed 10 octillion atoms. What is the basis of this marvelous vortex of energy transformation? There is a mystery - a beauty - in the interactions, the selfless motions of atoms, composed in the life of the cell, to come together to produce the tissues, organs and shape of the body.



This simplified figure above expresses the general logic of self organization in nature. When the nervous system arises in the evolution of beings, it is about a feedback loop between a "motor" direction - coming from the impulse of the whole organism against the environment - and a "sensory" direction, with sensory organs streamlining the flow of the relevant external "reality" in the form of images and affects, sounds, tastes, smell, etc.

This is the general foundation for all subsequent neurological evolution: complexity of functions are intertwined, with the perceptual guiding the cognitive, and the cognitive informing the perceptual - bidirectionally occurring, and in the process, generating a "mental flow" - as a being experiencing the life of its elements.

When people emerge, something called a "self" is constructed out of intersubjective tidbts of relational knowledge. Symbols are formed and concepts are hatched - and consciousness i.e. the proliferation of neurons - are constructed into the complexity of the organisms mind. What is the basis of this? Surprisingly, this intuitively recognizable fact is strongly occluded by the practices, feelings, culture and values of the societies we co-create. Obviously, and as with everything else that exists in a solid form, is symmetry.

Humans and all animals are symmetrical. Our left side mirrors our right side, in dog, fish, and all animals. The only other (to my knowledge) sttuctural variant in the nature world is radial - or a circle. The first creatures in fact assumed such forms: cells.

What is symmetry for the human mind, but the concept of self-other equivalence? The evolution of consciousness was constantly happening through a circle - a circle that widened when a stable state emerged, thereby enlarging the circle, and deepening the consciousness within it. The circle was fed by problems and solutions - interpersonal conflicts and interpersonal solutions. The solutions, of course, deepened feeling relations. And with deepened feeling relations i.e. inducements - came more complex representational powers i.e. conceptualization. Abstraction emerged from feeling - and so feeling, particularly the feelings of joy (as in laughter, play) care (as in being touched by a mother, or looked at with a face of love and care, or a friendly and compassionate glance from another when you're feeling insecure) and awe (as in looking upon the image of the world and becoming inspired by the order and symmetry of it; the way in which geometry functions to hold everything in a delicate and wondrous balance - as if by magic) are all relational phenomena - fundamentally "emergent" upon the construction of a brain that has become a better and better "sensor" of a deeper, integrative reality.

Think about this and marvel at its epistemological significance: One brain and another brain, mutually enlivening one another because the experience of being "known" excites us into continued interpersonal activity. Wondrous! Its a chiefly subjective phenomena! As if the Self were being "goaded" out by the process of recognition - one Self seeing another Self - and knowing one another along different dimensions, from play, to care, to awe.

These emotions even have a clear difference in their significance: play is "superficial", because it is only about self. Care, on the other hand, moves from the self, to the other self: it represents a progression into a deeper knowing. The Self knows the Other, a reflection, indeed, of the self.

And what about awe? Awe is the Self going beyond itself into the world: the World inspires the self? Yes. Epistemologically - and thus, ontologically - the perception of reality as conducted through the sensory system activates the affective processes of the midbrain - the anterior cingulate, and perhaps, even, mirror neurons, react with a sense of recognition: tat tvam asi - "you are that" the Indian sages say, and in terms of evolution, the science is clear: experiences such as this are neurogenic, which means it promotes an increase in metabolic action, and at the deepest levels, an extension of the geometrical latticework of the brain.

So this is how our brain grew. A simple analytical study of the phenomenology of the phenomena in question - the enlivenment of play, the enlivenment of caring relations, and the enlivenment in spiritual perception - yields an incontrovertible result: emotions of connection promote integration, and therefore bolster biophysical complexity. The process seems essentially "other oriented", yet always imply a "knower" who is enlivened - a Self which is growing more complex by appreciating the value of the process which enlivens it. The knower becomes connected to the "known" through a particular process of knowing. The Self gets lost when it loses context of how its "knowing" is formed; when it forgets that its knowing is a function of the way the knower relates to the known.

Trauma

Navy Seals are wondrous creatures - incredible at what they do, and able to endure physical hardships that strike me as almost super-human. Is it plausible that a genetic mutation makes these people so effective at what they do? Just think about it. These supermen (mostly men) are able to endure hours of lying on the beach with wave after wave coming upon their face, forcing them to consciously regulate their breathing, affectivity and relationship to the movements of the waves.

If you can imagine, these waves pass over them at very short intervals, which means that in order for them to maintain a lucid consciousness, they must be affectively relaxed to the progressions of the waves - again and again, with no other thought in the mind but the dynamics of the actions - moving upon them, again and again.

The military also knows that these sorts of feats work best in the context of interpersonal connection i.e. in doing it with other people. Friends – comrades – connections: these still remain the effective motivators – or vectors – of emotional acuity – powering the consciousness of the mind to experience a confidence in its doings.

The mental side, of course, comes with a neurological side: the mind that perceives and acts in a particular context – suffering, or not suffering, the roaring waves over your need to breathe. This particular action has a neurological correlate, which comes with an increased development of the dorsolateral regions – where consciousness is intelligently regulated through focusing or defocusing attention from various mental objects.
This is not an easy feat – and it is nor something every mind-brain has a natural facility for. It not only entails an enhanced capacity over your breathing and body state – that is, a powerful singular focus on a mental object – but also a particular relationship between your body and the environment – a reactivity that may have its basis in genetics rather than simple-hard wiring.

A low reactive mind is primed for being a navy seal. If it has the long-variant of an important dopamine gene, the gene will require more “activation” than someone who has the short-variant of the gene. Those with the short variant are more reactive to environmental stimuli, which means that it takes less of an informational input to activate an affective response – dopamine being the reward center of the brain – and the reward in the case of the feat performed by the navy seal, is the autonomic reaction that screams “I have to breathe!” and so triggers an anxiety response: living being the “reward” in the dangerous situation at hand.

Thus, the Navy seal expresses something of a superhuman power: a high tolerance for situations which most humans are easily affected by. In another context – and an altogether different profession, traits of low reactivity are strongly correlated with antisocial personality disorder, also known as sociopathy or psychopathy.

Does this mean the navy seal is a sociopath? Not necessarily. It has been said – for instance, as depicted in the TV show Dexter – that a person raised in a culture of righteousness, or a basic sense of care and regard for the wellbeing of others – would produce a mind with a commitment to a certain way of being. The paradox of this situation lies in affectivity: sociopaths are simply low-reactive: not recognizably deficient in their reactions (see autism for extreme examples) to most onlookers.

Yet, sociopathy can be detected by the way and manner a person speaks, simply as a function of the way heart-rate variability correlates with mood – which means respiratory sinus arrhythmia, or how we breathe – itself a function of what were thinking and feeling – and how this reveals itself in the hearts beat to beat variation. For those who understand the science, it becomes obvious that autonomic states cannot be hidden: a person with a sociopathic way of being encodes his mental state in the way and manner he breathes when he communicates. Is this logic sound?

To a certain extent, yet, but no doubt there is variation even amongst sociopaths. They come in different types. For example, the actors Kevin Spacey or Peter Saarsgaard (a son of a Monsanto executive) have a way of speaking and breathing that implies to a trained observer a sociopathic mental self-organization – a low reactivity which produces a mind that lives in a world that feels somewhat “above” the world of the environment it is immersed in. Consciousness, in a sense, is clearer in such a mind – even though it remains affectively and conceptually distant to the causal factors which organize its capacities of consciousness – i.e. play (fair), care (mutuality), and awe (spirituality).

Of course, I do not mean to suggest that Kevin Spacey or Peter Saarsgard are moral deviants. As I said earlier, there are plenty of people with anti-social personality disorder who become able to form lasting and affectively alive relationships with other people. But these relationships tend to converge along the “joy-play” pathway, with a sense of compassion, more difficult to sense, and awe – as in a certain spiritual relationship with the natural world beyond you – distant still.

Of course, again, I do not mean to suggest that people with this disorder can’t develop a spirituality – but spirituality is one of those things which relates to questions of life and death, fear and the feelings and states we value: spirituality is uniquely organized, I would say, by friendships and relationships with like-minded others, and so it seems plausible that such relationships, when forged, stimulate the birth of common beliefs – common justifications, or rationalizations, or narratives – for the way life experience is interpreted and made sense of.

If we were to imagine the emergence, selection, and distribution of humans in terms of the branching of a river into tributaries, it seems plausible that the hero myths of our ancient past – beginning around 6,000 years ago, circa the beginnings of cities with the city of Eridu, we can already make out a Nietzcheanesque fantasy held with faith, expressed so clearly in the epic of Gilgamesh. How can man achieve immorality and defeat death? Is this it, though? The epic begins with Gilgamesh sleeping with all towns wives – which says something about what Gilgamesh thinks about himself and his prowess: the “weakling others” must submit to the hero demi-god Gilgamesh, cream of the crop, whose pursuit of immortality knows no moral limitations.

What a strange myth indeed, given what is being propounded and tolerated by the deeds of Gilgamesh. Yet, this poem – and its significance – is not for the common folk, but for those who are like Gilgamesh: eager to overcome his finitude, Gilgamesh goes through the lands of primordial chaos to find the core of his selfhood.

Is Gilgamesh a Nietzcheaneqsue myth? Nietzsches himself used the Zoroastrian prophet Zoroaster, also known as Zarathustra, as the chief protagonist of his own philosophy. However, is Nietzsche an explicator, or describer? Is he propounding his own unique views, or expounding upon an ancient doctrine? For many, such as Nietzsches own sister, his views were experienced as morally contemptible. Essentially monstrous – and diabolical, undoing all the morality of the Church for the sake of a fascist pursuit of power. Indeed, with all that I’ve written above, does Nietzsches philosophy not go against the grain – literally, against the dynamical inclination of our mind-brains to produce symmetry i.e. a state of caring relations with others?

However, Nietzches excesses led to an unlucky interaction that led to his contraction of syphilis – producing an ungirded mind that inched closer and closer to clarity as he aged – sensing, and battling it seems, with the moral issues of his earlier writings in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, The Antichrist, and Twilight of the Idols. Nietzsches enthusiastic youth was waxing to the point of reflection, ultimately confusing the perceptive reader with his contradictions – inconsistencies, and ultimately revealing a mind that was struggling to find coherency, against the referent of an early life fascination with Wagnerian machismo.

Nietzsche, in his pursuit of becoming an ubermensch, ultimately became a casualty to the degeneration of his central nervous system, itself a function of syphilis’ destructive powers. Nietzsche, perhaps the most famous proponent of an elitist spirituality, later on expanded upon by an aristocrat turned writer like Julius Evola, was defeated by reality – rendered “unreal” and lost, as his body suspended all conscious animation – all knowledge of “Friedrich Nietzsche”; Evola too, in his pleasant strolls through Berlins city during a British bombing raid, became paraplegic after a building fell on him. The experience of need – needing others to do things for him – no doubt offered plenty of ‘world-feedback’ that contradicted the tenets of Evolas views. The weak – and the paraplegic is weak – deserve to be eliminated.

A further, and more modern contradiction of essentialist genetic views, is demonstrated by microbiological studies which show that cells trigger genetic mutations in their genetic sequences as a function of being subjected to environmental stresses like temperature (increased heat), radiation, and particular chemicals. The studies show that genetic states – or the organization of genes in double helixes in a humans 46 chromosomes, can change and literally mutate their structure as a function of intense psychological stress, for example, following an intense trauma or loss.

These studies provide an important lesson for Humans: the human is intrinsically vulnerable – only differing in their degree of responsivity to environmental stimuli. Importantly, spiritual and meditative practices seem able to force substantial change in neurological organization, changing consciousness, and quite likely, changing the organization of genetic sequences as well. Right now, there is little experimental evidence to show this, but that may also be due to an absence of any studies into genetic mutations in Humans as a function of stress: how else could you prove that unless through traumatizing another human being?

In the end, the belief of being “genetically superior” is a fallacy that has no basis in scientific reality. If all people are plastic, than a particular organization is nothing more than an expression of the dynamics of a particular ancestry in a particular environment. Furthermore, if any state were to be considered robust and coherent, it would seem to be those more epistemically complex states like care (love) and awe, of course, with the general feeling of wellbeing – joy – coherently knowing the phenomenological nature of its own reality.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Break it down into smaller pieces for us genetically inferior plebes, please. How about five bullet points that start a debate, and you can trot out your research/theories in support of them as other members respond?

a reply to: Astrocyte

I'll spoil it down,

What are the desired traits of this "superior breed"? Well, aggression. The masculine qualities of the Hero -

The Nazis touted their master race crap. The man of brawn, the superman (not lost in the US either with DC comic heroes). Problem is in the NAZI hierarchy, those at the top were furthest from the archetype they lauded.

Really the hero fallacy and the super man is just conditioning to get others to fight wars for the elite; 'Super' men for super purposes, heroes decorated with medals for state sanctioned murder.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Until they erase our brains and then rewrite it all over again under the rule of the mysterious Georgia Stones.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Astrocyte

I'll spoil it down,

What are the desired traits of this "superior breed"? Well, aggression. The masculine qualities of the Hero -

The Nazis touted their master race crap. The man of brawn, the superman (not lost in the US either with DC comic heroes). Problem is in the NAZI hierarchy, those at the top were furthest from the archetype they lauded.

Really the hero fallacy and the super man is just conditioning to get others to fight wars for the elite; 'Super' men for super purposes, heroes decorated with medals for state sanctioned murder.

Exactly!
QFT!

originally posted by: Astrocyte
What are the desired traits of this "superior breed"? Well, aggression.

Only considered 'superior' to pathological violent insane people, which is, simply, more of the same!
We have had 130,000 years of such insanity.
The real quality of the 'superior person'?
Unconditional Love!
Anything less is insanity, Hell!
Just look around for the evidence!

a reply to: Astrocyte


Given life after death then life after death is life.

Like the other side to a coin what we are in death is integrated with what re currently relate to as life.

That there are people who are better a coping with society in the present does not mean that the same traits would be better at coping during some other time in history as well as in the future.

Consider the idea the Jesus Christ was the result of Punctuated Equilibrium in relation to Evolutionary Theory.

A point being that when it comes to Prophets in general that could be the next step in evolution.

There is no such thing as superior people and things we take for granted as appropriate today could very well be understood as Psychotic 200 years from now.

Navy seals have to know and remember a heck of a lot more than just how to train physically.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Quantum Wave Function:
The wave nature of the microscopic world makes the concept of `position' difficult for subatomic particles. Even a wave packet has some `fuzziness' associated with it.

An electron in orbit has no position to speak of, other than it is somewhere in its orbit.

To deal with this problem, quantum physics developed the tool of the quantum wave function as a mathematical description of the superposition's associated with a quantum entity at any particular moment.

abyss.uoregon.edu...

Something as fundamental was what makes us solid has no position to speak of but is somewhere within its orbit.

Its like asking where exactly is the photon in a wave of light.

And to be clear it does not mean the mass of a photon is not engaged in some other orbit.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Because reality is spiritual conception, the best genetically adapted to conceiving the Spirit, is the genetic elite?

Whoever has evolved to produce the best spiritual fruit is the genetic elite?

What's the measure we go by: the fruit of the Spirit or the fruit of any ole spirit? (You seem to be conflating emotional suppression, patience, or self-control, with "numbness", or hardheartedness, as if you're attributing patience, instead of hardheartedness, to sociopathy.)

Edit: You're mixing arrogance and faithfulness, too? Now I'm not sure if you're being serious or not.

Myself, I think there is superiority, but it's not necessarily innate. Instead, I think it's something achieved through grace. (To walk with God.)

a reply to: Bleeeeep

The OP seems to deny the existence of a deity, viewing life and consciousness as an emergent physical phenomenon. In this conception, spirituality of any sort is just a meme, which may or may not have survival value for creatures that harbor it.

It would be nice if the OP clarified his thoughts for us in his own (smaller) words, though.

a reply to: DJW001

I think he knows better than that. What I think he is trying to say is that, although we are all the image of our forefathers conception [of the Spirit] (genetically speaking), no one is inherently better than anyone else because it is the breath that gives us value, and all life has the same breath (the same Spirit). More to his anecdote though: our conception is "plastic", or malleable, and because of that, no one's genetic line (conceptual inheritance) can be considered absolutely perfect or superior.

Basically, he's saying what Solomon said:

Ecclesiastes 3:
18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.

19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.

20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

22 Wherefore I perceive that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his own works; for that is his portion: for who shall bring him to see what shall be after him?

But then he basically stipulates an exemption by saying,:

Furthermore, if any state were to be considered robust and coherent, it would seem to be those more epistemically complex states like care (love) and awe, of course, with the general feeling of wellbeing – joy – coherently knowing the phenomenological nature of its own reality.

Translation: "if there were such a thing as genetic superiority, it would be genetics that best enable thine own spiritual conception or the fruit of the Spirit."

Galatians 5:
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Those are the qualities he sort of pointed to.



I googled meme and its wikipedia definition looks like a reflection of the Trinity.

"A meme is "an idea, behavior, or style that spreads from person to person within a culture"."

Idea = Conception = Father
Behavior = Will = Spirit
Style = Image = Son

I mean, I kind of knew what a meme was but I never saw the connection before. It's weird that it reflects the Trinity. The Trinity shows up everywhere, I guess.

a reply to: Bleeeeep

No, I'm pretty sure he thinks religion is a delusion. Pity he won't come back and explain himself.

We already have this happening now. Elysium has been here all along and we help support it.

It's called create unrest and inequality in the world and you create your reason to create further and further hierarchies that eventually are setup around you to safeguard your existence.

What better excuse is there than " terrorism "?

Just create terrorism at 1st by making it up, then make sure that vast sections of populations are " without " so that recruitment for these events aren't that hard and you have yourself the workings of a cog and gear system to create fear that you use to further create more structures and hierarchies of people around you.

This can be scaled on levels that would make space travel / colonizing nice and neat corrupt.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the old bloodlines haven't gone anywhere, their system has worked so good, in fact too good and could suggest other implications as well on just that.

a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined


What went wrong with the old bloodlines is also responsible for the Magna Carta, as well as the American, Russian, Chinese, South American, African Revolutions and need I go on.....


The system changed, the Kings and Queens while ceremoniously objectified no longer or were respected with the same legal authority. At the time those placed in power. were essentially those who ran the government otherwise, as they were pretty much those who understood what was going on in that context.


What has happened today is that the descendants of those individuals are for the most part are currently our leaders.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I have yet (as a scientist, or spiritual being) to find an acceptable definition of genetically "superior". Usually it is conformation biased dogma, from intellectually fragile individuals, with an agenda.

a reply to: Astrocyte


When it comes to the physical condition we are faced with an issue where what makes up molecules cannot be directly identified as solid in definition.

The situation Is actually akin to the mater of pixels in a photograph.

We literally reach a point fundamentally where the image becomes blurred no longer coherent insomuch as we generally accept it, in relation to perception with respect to the five senses.

it's like asking which is superior, the heart of the lungs...
both are needed to live...
the root or the rosebud...
without the root, the rosebud would not exist...
the flute or the violin....
the orchestra just wouldn't sound the same without either of them...
the universe creates it's own music (really it does, I was allowed to hear it once)...
but, that music would not be the same if you weren't a part of it, just as you are now.

there is no superior race, or type of person. no one thing or person is more important than the next, no one emotion purer than the next.. to have all happiness and love without the pain and sorrow would be like having an orchestra of just flutes and violins without the basses and percussion.