Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Fuck the extremist election deniers. What’s money for if not for keeping them out of office?

It’s time for the GOP to dust off that post-2012 autopsy, completely ignore it, and light the party on fire again.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

They traffic in fear. it is their only currency. if we are fearful, they are winning.

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

Wow, I can’t imagine what it was like to comment in morse code.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Damn right I heard that as a threat.

Is it negotiation when the other party actually wants to shoot the hostage?

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

… pundit janitors mopping up after the GOP

We are aware of all internet traditions.

Despite his magical powers, I don’t think Trump is thinking this through, to be honest.

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

An almost top 10,000 blog!

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

You are here: Home / A comment I liked

A comment I liked

by | 68 Comments

This post is in: 

Maybe not up everyone’s alley but it’s a good summation of my feelings about human civilization:

I imagine 500 years ago, the Aztec ruler-to-be assured his subjects “I believe in Tlaloc. I have always believed in Tlaloc. I believe in motherhood, Tlaloc, and infant sacrifice, all the traditional values. When we get a drought, tradition teaches us that we must flay a ritual sacrificial victim alive and perform a sacred dance in his bleeding skin, and I believe in those traditional family values…”

Humans are murderous primates, Doug. The human brain is a tiny little blob of frontal cortex on top of a great big mountain of lizard brain. 99% of human behaviour and beliefs are wildly irrational, and always will be.

Robin Hanson said it best in his essay What is reasoning for?

Human rationality did not evolve in order to solve differential equations. That’s an epiphenomenon of little consequence. Human rationality evolved in order to invent ingenious ways of justifying crazy primate behavior to the rest of the tribe of murderous primates.

Reader Interactions

68Comments

  1. 1.

    arguingwithsignposts

    99 percent seems a little high. But it’s mclaren, so hyperbole is par for the course.

  2. 2.

    Raven (formerly stuckinred)

    He came dancing across the water
    With his galleons and guns
    Looking for the new world
    In that palace in the sun.

  5. 5.

    sherifffruitfly

    Further confirmation that progressives are every bit as dumb as teabaggers.

    Evolution isn’t goal-oriented. Any turns of phrase you might here from a genuine biologist suggesting to the contrary are nothing more than paraphrases, or glibness-for-convenience.

    About as far as one can meaningfully go would be to ask a question along the lines of “what is this feature well-designed to accomplish?”. It is, of course, perfectly possible – expected, even – that there be multiple answers to that question. And they don’t compete with each other.

  7. 7.

    srv

    How is it that glibertarians believe that “man” is always a rational actor, but somehow a bunch of “irrational” democrats keep getting elected?

    Their model, somewhere, is broken.

  8. 8.

    John O

    Looked at over the long run, you’d have to say the reason-tribes were winning.

    Which is not to say there haven’t been times of setbacks, like, I don’t know, these times.

  9. 9.

    jeffreyw

    @sherifffruitfly: Yup, when you start asking what something is for you concede that there is purpose. That there is a design, and thus a designer. There is nothing, nothing but rolling dice, all the fucking way down.

  10. 10.

    MikeBoyScout

    FEARS WORLD-WIDE RUIN – Lansdowne Wants Allies to Restate Aims as Step Toward Ending Conflict (NYT .pdf)

    Friday, Nov. 30, 1917.–The Marquis of Lansdowne has written a letter to The Daily Telegraph, “….just as this war has been more dreadful than any war in history, so, we may be sure, would the next war be more dreadful than this. The prostitution of science for purposes of pure destruction is not likely to stop short.“

    We’ve been doomed for a long time and only forever race towards self destruction.
    That humans have survived is not a credit to our intelligence, but our skills of survival in spite of our clear stupidity.

    We will survive, but your individual survival is a matter of chance.

  11. 11.

    Raven (formerly stuckinred)

    @jeffreyw:

    Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it’s an ethos

  12. 12.

    Raven (formerly stuckinred)

    @jeffreyw: Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of “NATSO”, Dude, at least it’s an ethos

  13. 13.

    Violet

    OT —

    (CNN) — U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina has been hospitalized with what appears to be a “chronic viral-type infection,” according to a statement from his office Thursday.

    Link. Mr. You Lie sure is lucky he’s got that sweet, sweet Congressional health insurance.

  17. 17.

    BGinCHI

    Title:

    A comment I liked Although there are so many smart and funny comments on this blog that make me wonder how there can be so many smart people in the the world let alone America especially at a time when it’s going wildly down the shitter I thought this one was particularly good and I can’t think of a song that would summarize it

    /Fixed.

  19. 19.

    Anoniminous

    @srv:

    Because glibertarians have a understanding of human neuro-psychology firmly grounded in 18th science-like-but-not-really speculation, a determination not to let facts sully their adolescent power fantasies, and an inability to distinguish between mature adult behavior and sociopathy.

  23. 23.

    hitchhiker

    Human rationality did not evolve in order to solve differential equations. That’s an epiphenomenon of little consequence. Human rationality evolved in order to invent ingenious ways of justifying crazy primate behavior to the rest of the tribe of murderous primates

    .

    That right there.

    Also too, I learned to solve differential equations from a right-wing a-hole who enjoyed reading his Playboy mag during our final exams. Upper Michigan. 1976. What can I say. As the only penis-less person in the room, it was quite the trip to look up from the blue book and see him holding the spread close to his face.

  25. 25.

    Lojasmo

    @General Stuck:

    Once Lyme is chronic, it is no longer treated like a bacterial infection, bur rather like some other process (chronic inflammatory disease or some such)

    Also YOU LIE!

  31. 31.

    Mark S.

    Doug, you might like the first chapter of Beyond Good and Evil, On the Prejudices of Philosophers:

    Having kept a sharp eye on philosophers, and having read between their lines long enough, I now say to myself that the greater part of conscious thinking must be counted among the instinctive functions, and it is so even in the case of philosophical thinking; one has here to learn anew, as one learned anew about heredity and “innateness.” As little as the act of birth comes into consideration in the whole process and procedure of heredity, just as little is “being-conscious” OPPOSED to the instinctive in any decisive sense; the greater part of the conscious thinking of a philosopher is secretly influenced by his instincts, and forced into definite channels. And behind all logic and its seeming sovereignty of movement, there are valuations, or to speak more plainly, physiological demands, for the maintenance of a definite mode of life For example, that the certain is worth more than the uncertain, that illusion is less valuable than “truth” such valuations, in spite of their regulative importance for US, might notwithstanding be only superficial valuations, special kinds of maiserie, such as may be necessary for the maintenance of beings such as ourselves. Supposing, in effect, that man is not just the “measure of things.”

    The original Mustache of Understanding.

  33. 33.

    Hunter Gathers

    I’m reminded of an old George Carlin bit:

    I realized some time ago that I’m not separate from nature just because I have a primate brain – an upper brain – because underneath the primate brain, there’s a mammalian brain, and beneath the mammalian brain, there’s a reptilian brain; and it’s those two lower brains that made the upper brain possible in the first place. Here’s the way it works: The primate brain says, “Give peace a chance.” The mammalian brain says, “Give peace a chance, but first let’s kill this motherfucker.” And the reptilian brain says, “Let’s just kill the motherfucker, go to the peace rally and get laid.”

  34. 34.

    schrodinger's cat

    @jeffreyw: Did it work? Little Bitsy is a little masked bandit, she is adorable. Homer looks so big. I still remember when he was a helpless kitten with his leg in red cast. How are the other critters reacting to Bitsy?

  37. 37.

    burritoboy

    No, I don’t think an Aztec king would ever give such as speech, and, in fact, I think he would have regarded that as downright extremely heretical.

    1. An ancient pagan religion does not particularly value belief. Believing really hard in the gods is not more useful than only somewhat believing in the gods. What IS important is that the rituals which please the gods are performed correctly, more often, on a larger scale, etc.

    2. The strange thing is that tradition is not a compelling argument at all. The Aztec people don’t care about their traditions because those are their traditions. They care about the rituals that they do because they view as facts their account of the gods. Aztecs would assert that all people, everywhere, should adopt the Aztec gods. Why? Not because the Aztec religion is traditional everywhere, because it isn’t, as the Aztecs were very well aware of. The Aztecs think their gods are actually, factually, the gods. The Aztecs would view themselves as rational people whose sciences tell them about the gods – look at how much we Aztecs have conquered, for instance. Clearly, we Aztecs have the right gods. You should adopt our gods and then you too will kick much ass. Look at all this technology we Aztecs have. Clearly, we understand nature and we understand nature better than you do because you have the wrong gods. Aztecs don’t care about your tradition – your traditions are nonsense because we Aztecs worship the true gods and you don’t.

    3. Aztecs don’t believe in “values”. There is good and evil. That some non-Aztec people regard something highly (i.e. value it highly) is irrelevant. We Aztecs know what good and evil are. The rest of the world’s gods are non-existant. It doesn’t matter whether those Mayans really, really value their Mayan gods. In fact, we Aztecs know that those Mayans are very fanatical about the Mayan gods. We don’t care – the Mayans are factually wrong about the universe and worship the wrong gods (or worship the correct gods in a wrong manner).

  38. 38.

    moonbat

    I think Baby Doug has steeped himself in the teabagger mentality just a little too long if he finds this an adequate descriptor for all human thought. What you describe I think I read in a James Herbert novel, The Dark or The Fog.

  39. 39.

    jeffreyw

    @Linda Featheringill: I agree, she has some nice coloration and a great purr motor. She still is suffering from respiratory ailments of some sort, watery eyes, sneezing. A step ahead of the pneumonia she came in with. She came with a good supply of antibiotics and veterinary advice. She should be OK in the long run.

  41. 41.

    Baud

    Comment says that human rationality evolved to justify crazy primate behavior. So what crazy primate behavior is this comment justifying? Hmmmm.

  42. 42.

    Amanda in the South Bay

    I thought evolutionary psychology was meant to be mocked and ridiculed on all sorta of reason is kewl progressive blogs?

  43. 43.

    gbear

    @Southern Beale:
    I was behind a pickup truck this evening that had a bumper sticker that said ‘It’s time for a real president again’ on one side of his bumper, and a Ron Paul bumper sticker on the other side. I wanted to pull up along side him and let him know that he was the definition of the word ‘moron’.

    The ‘real president’ bumper sticker had a picture of Reagan.

  44. 44.

    DonkeyKong

    This is the way the fucking world ends! Look at this fucking shit we’re in, man! Not with a bang, but with a whimper. And with a whimper, I’m fucking splitting, Jack.

  45. 45.

    JR

    Chronic viral infection, like maybe HIV?

    Or whole body shingles? Painful, no cure! I’m liking that!

  46. 46.

    NobodySpecial

    Evolution isn’t goal-oriented.

    Bullshit it ain’t. It’s entirely goal-oriented, and that goal is to make as many copies of itself as possible. Since man isn’t the quickest or strongest animal out there, the ones with bigger brains survived and made many many many copies.

    The problem isn’t that people have large lizard brains and small cortexes. The problem is that people aren’t needing to use those cortexes all the time for survival, and therefore they get lazy.

  49. 49.

    VidaLoca

    @burritoboy: If this is really how Aztecs think, then it turns out that most of my neighbors must be Aztecs. In fact, I’m surrounded by Aztecs. Now isn’t that a fucking cheery thought.

  51. 51.

    Samara Morgan

    thats the difference between me and mclaren.
    its all about the maths dude.
    its EGT and SNT and SBH and reciprocal-altruism and the calculus of selfishness and Tegmarkian q-physics..

    mclaren is all squishy and emo-nasty.
    praps she thinks in emotions–she argues in emotions– i think in glorious maffs.
    ;)

  52. 52.

    harlana

    jeffreyw: that is always a tentative moment, first meeting, glad it went so well, i loved the post and the pics are priceless ,,, dawwww!

  53. 53.

    stormhit

    @Amanda in the South Bay:

    Your misplaced sarcasm aside, that’s a good point. This entire post was basically just excuse making for anti-intellectualism, and the argument presented is most definitely typical evo-psych nonsense.

  55. 55.

    burritoboy

    I’d be astonished if your neighbors think like that. Almost no one belonging to an Abrahamic religion does think like that. I suppose a Jewish person who was heavily influenced by Maimonides might think like that. Or a very very Thomist Catholic, perhaps. But exceedingly unlikely. An ancient Roman pagan might regard modern Protestant Christians as nihilists.

  56. 56.

    Evolved Deep Southerner

    Maybe not up everyone’s alley

    Yeah. It’s definitely not up my alley, and I do disagree, but I’m not in a position to defend my disagreement with any articulation whatsoever. So, check back with me later, when I’ve had a chance to marshal my thoughts.

  57. 57.

    PIGL

    @NobodySpecial: that is silly. Selection works by differential reproductive success; this can lead individual organisms to adopt or even chose behaviours that maximize reproductive success; they could be said to have that outcome as a “goal”. Evolution as such has no goals, only outcomes.

  58. 58.

    fuckwit

    Well, no. Our verbal and rational and reasoning abilities evolved because we were highly social beings living in highly social tribes.

    Best description of why we are the way we are, is in the book Sex at Dawn (http://www.sexatdawn.com). Another good one was Guns, Germs, and Steel, by Jared Diamond.

    If you ever wanted to explain crazy modern civilized human behavior, read Sex at Dawn and realize that “civilization” is only a very recent phenomenon, only 10k years or so ago, MUCH faster than most of evolution, whereas our current bodies, minds, and emotions are 100k years old, and that came out of evolution millions of years old…. suddenly modern humans become rather easily explained.

  59. 59.

    El Cid

    It’s possible, probably likely, that human reasoning and especially language did not “evolve” in the ordinary sense.

    A dramatic leap in, say, the development of the cortex or some other brain mechanism caused by a fairly minor mutation would cause the leap to what we know of as human.

  60. 60.

    Samara Morgan

    @El Cid: that is social brain hypothesis, that when big brains first evolved it made social communities and communication possible, which were selective fitmess advantages.

    and mclaren/dougj…. the neocortical layer is the outer layer of the cerebral hemispheres….in latin it means new bark or new rind. its not a “blob”, your grasp of brain morphology is as poor as your usual style of argument.

  62. 62.

    lou

    I read a fascinating article in the New Yorker about Neanderthals and how a scientist has discovered that Europeans and Asians have 1-6 percent of their genes, while New Guineans have 9 percent of another human species that disappeared. The scientist also noted that our close relatives that we could breed with always seemed to disappear when homo sapiens entered their turf.

  63. 63.

    Very Reverend Crimson Fire of Compassion

    @burritoboy: As somebody who’s had the opportunity to study Aztec belief systems under the tutelage of people who are descended from the original practitioners, I would like to point out that your analysis is a heaping pile of steaming projection. Other people’s religions (and “Pagan”, by the way, is a prejudicial cultural artifact that reveals a hell of a lot more about your own ignorance of religious history than it does about anyone else’s theology) are not somehow “the opposite” of yours, or just like yours, except for the names, and one non-Judeo/Christian/Islamic faith does not necessarily resemble another. Try learning something before you pontificate about it.

  66. 66.

    El Cid

    @Samara Morgan: That is not the social brain hypothesis. In no way does it suggest that the demands of social life prompted cognitive increase.

    It is the opposite. It is the notion that a genetic mutation resulted — as often happens — in a large change in brain capacity.

    It is the opposite of suggesting a selection for certain cognitive increases.

    It is the suggestion that no such selection and change in the biology of ancient humanity has any evidence, and that humankind apparently underwent an incredibly rapid change from pre-human groups.

    And therefore in such a dramatic jump in such a short amount of time, an unrelated genetic mutation resulted in a massive increased cognitive capacity.

    For example, this is the hypothesis on how language might have come about, since it appears that there has never been any evidence whatsoever for a gradual development of language.

    It’s a hypothesis that suggests it was the fortuitous increase in cognitive capacity, which very likely is the formation of a hardwired part of the human brain which then became externally realized as “language”.

    It’s not the social brain hypothesis.

    It’s a suggestion that what happened was not a larger but contiguous increase in neuronal activity to what has been observed in many simian species, but something which almost impossibly leaped a quite inexplicable gap.

    I know you love to talk about “the social brain hypothesis,” just like you seem to believe that when you say “social network theory” then it means that all social network theorists have formed a scientific and statistical agreement upon whatever it is you want to declare as ‘proven by social network theory’.

    Social network theorists actually say lots of things; they don’t issue pronouncements on what “social network theory” says about any issue, although there are individual and team researchers who publish articles regarding various issues, just as any other social scientists do, and then there is a back and forth when some fellow social network theorists and other social scientists who have an interest in the issue give their reactions to the published article.

    The “social brain hypothesis” is not cleft in crystal, but it actually is a meaningful phrase, and cannot be universally applied to anything which sounds vaguely similar.

  68. 68.

    burritoboy

    Very Reverend,

    Nobody now believes in the old Aztec religion as they did. It’s quite irrelevant if the people claiming to do so now are those originals’ direct descendants. They can’t believe like they used to – the Aztec gods did not prevent the Aztec Empire from collapsing. That means that every potential adherent of the Aztec religion from that point on is an adherent of an effectively different religion. A religion that might superficially look the same, but is in fact quite different.

Comments are closed.