The Survival of the Smartest

Has anyone here read books by Mike Hockey or Thomas Stark? Having read a bit from each, I can't shake the feeling that both of them seem profoundly involved with an implicit other - a not otherwise named enemy which "deserves something" vis-a-vis those who realize that reality is all about 'intelligence' and 'logic'. Of course, it ultimately comes down to affect regulation and therefore morality. Some of us believe we are 'beyond good and evil', while others believe there is a definite good and a definite bad in every situation we encounter in our living. The latter group believes that the mind is organized around social processes, whereas the former group insists that the individual is more real than the social.



I have shown this diagram before, which deserves to be mentioned here to explain the hierarchical logic of the human body - in terms of brain evolution through vertebrates, as well as brain development from birth onwards (the brain is only 1/3rd its adult weight at birth; its almost entirely neuronal; almost no glia; therefore, no cortical connections).

The brain stem of the human brain is correlated to the level of 'interacting cells' which, being fundamentally cellular, is totally integrated with the thermodynamically synced patterns of the natural environment around it.

The brainstem is a part of our brain that 'lies beyond' cognition. The human being cannot consciously interfere with the patterns of its bodily homeostasis. Of course, it can screw them up; it can stay up late, eat bad foods, mistreat other people (sado-), mistreat the self (masochism), engage in dangerous activity (crime)...But it cannot do these things and, more or less, shift itself back into a coherent, regulated state. The mind is an affect of the way cellular energy is dissipated throughout the system of the human body.

What the brainstem always does is provide the basic inputs for the midbrain to translated and represent the body's homeostasis as 'feeling' states. Feelings represent 'situations' - both of the body in its general functioning, and the social environment and the significance 'others' have come to take on for you.

Feelings emerge from bodily patterns of energy processing. We cannot be alive - have a body which thermodynamically 'works' to keep us going - and yet imagine (let alone claim) that you 'don't have feelings'. Being calm and relaxed, or 'feeling muted' in the feeling sense, may give one the superficial impression that there are no feelings there; but of course, the very motivation for directing attention is itself a subtle form of feeling; albeit, it is not embodied, and exists more as an 'intellectual interest' which, being mediated by subcortical mechanisms, is itself tied in to homeostasis processes and hence, is functioning as part of a higher level cognitive regulation of the bodily self-in-the-world.

So, when you get that your feelings are a second-level representation of the 'object' of your body in interaction with other objects, you realize you have no choice but to accept reality as it is, which is to say, accept the moral structure built into our organism by the dynamical synergies between organisms, and in humans, the way this synergy become 'embodied' as our minds and the ways that it functions.

Psycholinguistic narratives exist to bridge the gap between our bodies. They are the third level representation of our self-consciously reflective, social minds. It is from up here, in language, that Descartes and others with minds like Descartes hide from their conscience. The existential 'I' emerges from the socially self-conscious I. The self which thinks and thinks it exists by virtue of its thinking (I think therefore I am) is subsequent to the self which thinks because it is made to feel something caused by an Other.

The self has been made to feel as if it were something 'extraneous' to the body. Connections within the cingulate (smaller; for attachment), the amygdala (smaller; threat detection) the hippocampus (smaller, for memory) and corpus collosum (smaller; communication between the hemispheres) are different in people with sociopathy. In cognitively developed (highly educated) psychopaths, the brain is slightly larger in the dorsolateral areas, and, since they also share deficiencies in the above stated areas, slightly smaller orbitofrontal, midbrain and interhemispheric connections.

Now, ontogenetically speaking (how development occurs) the formation of the sociopath would appear to be a sub-category of the avoidant-insecure attachment style. The basis of this 'personality style' derives from early-life relational interactions with emotionally avoidant caregivers i.e. caregivers which dissociate cues which imply feeling needs; by two years, the brain of an avoidant-personality will tend to come to self-organize in ways that are 'contiguous' with the phenotypical shaping of their early nervous system; following this, chance and random 'shifts' in context will either afford or deprive the personality of what it needs to progress in its development. If lucky, it'll meet certain people which can mediate the formation of certain capacities - either neurological/personality-based (which is assimilated simply through social interaction) or 'professional' i.e. in social status and positioning within the social hierarchy.

Fairly specific endpoints, or 'attractors' can emerge for the 'super' lucky types. Mysticism and occultism can exist side by side with a determinative biopsychosocial metaphysics which, nevertheless, allows for the self-righting of love and compassion to 'fix' the self if it happens to decouple itself from a coherent relationship with reality. If this fact means anything, it means that the self is very much a function of the 'biology of love', and using the self for selfish i.e. careless, punitive, cruel, ends, is itself a likely prelude to what you will one day have to know yourself - whether that be via some 'reincarnation', or some afterlife hell, the logic of neurogenesis in humans, in situations where they are dysregulated and needing to self-right, is always based in love - implying some superior power to this energy.

My feeling is, this universe is remarkably large and, very likely, completely beyond our capacity to completely comprehend. Buddhism, a region which emerged at the highest altitude to which humans have settled, seems also to possess the sort of epistemological pragmatism needed to liberate human beings from the various religious views which allow the mind to abstract from real life situations on the false premise that it 'derives' from some 'external' dimension and that its self is 'beyond' this world.

Without 'this world', there is no self. Without the situations and contexts which systematically construct us and give us a reason for living, there is emptiness and nothingness. There is no room for incoherent utterances that 'sound nice' and 'feel good'. Vanity really exists; it really disturbs cognitions, feelings and body. Fetishizing 'falsity', and yet experiencing a 'good affect', is most likely an emergent property of socializing. Such antinomianism doesn't exist independently of social interactions and the fundamentally vitalistic character of their effect on the mind. We feel good NOT because of some 'deity' that exists independently of us; we feel good because a particular value AFFIRMS a feeling relationship I share with other human beings.

In other words, there is no value without another person. There is first the other person, and then afterwards the 'value' can operate as a shorthand abstraction for the feeling relationship it represents.

Something tells me your internal sub vocalization is very active.

Start to workout and observe how is impact on brainprocesses is less than without workout.

Maybe Internal sub vocalization is influenced by more factors than the physical alone. To have conscious control on the thought processes that precede linguistic processes in the brain may give insight into the true nature of human.

I feel the way is true in and about the thing itself..which is eternal life...all the things in existence..makes one smart..and that is therefore intelligence..but what without the coming into being..and to be brought there..God forbid..we can become like him..? All the way home is the name of Allah..in English..Numerology #559..549..Which means just above 50% means the 50 was nined...and the 40 was nined.

The planet is about to re-set in 2021....have you figured this out yet....yes the smartest will survive...nature has no rules.

nature has a set of rules..

Growing..sharing, eating etc..

Yes the smartest will survive. And this has nothing to do with IQ.

It has to do with learned skills

a reply to: ANNED


The IQ of countries reflect their standard of living, since the Army cant use people with an iQ of 83 or less. It simply reflects the facts. The tools of the modern world require more intelligence to use. Some countries average IQ is down around 65.They are failed states by modern standards, to give them a higher standard you have to take over. If you don't you are condemning them to a miserable existence. But this is immoral colonization. What's more immoral doing something or doing nothing? Nature will always favor the more intelligent.

a reply to: ANNED


The IQ of countries reflect their standard of living, since the Army cant use people with an iQ of 83 or less. It simply reflects the facts. The tools of the modern world require more intelligence to use. Some countries average IQ is down around 65.They are failed states by modern standards, to give them a higher standard you have to take over. If you don't you are condemning them to a miserable existence. But this is immoral colonization. What's more immoral doing something or doing nothing? Nature will always favor the more intelligent.