Just taking aim at one thing you said:
You misunderstand evolution, from a biological perspective. We are not evolved to more rational or intelligent state. Rather the reverse. I expect you haven't made the experiment of living on the land, in a state of nature, and this is why you grossly underestimate the superlative skills necessary to produce stuff as seemingly rudimentary as chipped rocks and pointy sticks in such conditions.
No where in my argument did I make the claim that through evolutions, simple acts like "chipped rocks" and "pointy sticks" are easy nor worthless by design. Living off the land is tough, it takes a certain type of intelligence for sure. Never made any sort of hint suggesting otherwise.
However, your claims about evolution are incorrect. We have in fact evolved to be semi-more rational [ and by some extension more intelligent / at the very least, better equipped to access higher-function logical paths ] than our ape ancestors. To suggest otherwise is to hold the current societal trend of dumbing down the customer to more easily withdraw the resources that you want from them to a higher royalship than that trend deserves.
It is true, at least in my opinion, that a lot of companies, products, and general trends are purely designed to dumb down and patronize people. It is a very common way to get what you need from them. T.V., for instance, thrives on this. Funny, relatable, stail humor -> lulls you into a close to brainwashed state where you are comfortable sitting through 15 minutes of ads for shit that you just don't need. Ads on T.V. mainly exist to instill the name brand of a certain product into your soft gooey mind so the next time you're looking for car insurance you have images of a tiny green gecko jumping around in your head.
I get it.
But, to suggest that, therefore, we are dumber as a species:
We are not evolved to more rational or intelligent state. Rather the reverse.
Is to suggest that those who are intelligent enough to enact smart plays like the one mentioned above, are somehow not evolved beyond monkeys. Monkeys would never have an advertisement model in their society [ insert joke about how this makes them smarter than us lol ].
No, it's not. I am not stating that there are no intelligent people, so I suggest no such thing. I am stating, as a professional experimental biologist formerly employed by a state government for the purpose, that extant environmental conditions are specifically favoring lower intelligence.
This is not something that happens on an individual basis. You cannot evolve. It's a species wide event, and occurs as non-preferred stock fails to breed successfully at higher rates.
You do not grasp my point regarding the superlative skills necessary to produce what seems to be rude implements in a state of nature, and how such environment produced a high degree of selection pressure for intelligence, particularly relative to extant conditions.
It does not require intelligence to breed successfully today. It did - and does - in the wild. See 'Idiocracy'. You may not be able to completely understand what I mean, but you will grasp the gist of my statement.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I do understand what you mean, I fully grasp your argument. It's not a difficult one. I have seen Idiocracy, it's a funny parody taking shots at what the world could turn into with our current norms and ideologies.
The difference between our opinions is your assertion that breeding in the wild takes intelligence. No, not necessarily. We have a long history of forming tribes. As long as a few in the tribe protected and provided for us, the rest were able to breed. And dumbly, at that.
Compared to today? Yes, of course it's easier to breed. It's also easier to stay alive. Hence overpopulation. But that is so far removed from the point of the original debate that I honestly can't help but feel you're not just moving the goal post, but you are burning it down and gas lighting the idea that it never existed in the first place.
This whole thing is still about taxes... no?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So, if you scroll up you will see that this segue was begun by yourself, to dispute my contention that evolutionary pressure in a state of nature selected for intelligence far more strongly than our nanny-state, which actively selects against it.
Don't wanna discuss it further? I reckon that is a good idea, since you've just agreed with the main points I have made supporting my contention, yet still refuse to acknowledge that the absurd belief that humanity is more intelligent now has been proven to depend on nothing more than faith, since the evidence is that the opposite is true.
Also, since you have zero conception of what it takes to live in a state of nature, your opinion about how difficult it is to successfully breed in those conditions has no merit whatsoever.
If you're not going to be reasonable, and change your mind when you discover you are wrong, I'd prefer if you just quit too. I've got shit to do besides beating a brick wall with facts that cannot penetrate it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Haha, woah. Calm down a little bit. I'm just stating that this was veering far off course from taxes. I did start with pointing out the evolution thing, because it was still relevant to the overall narrative.
But, I honestly can't let what you said get by, since it is wrong on most fronts.
I'm not agreeing with you on much. Don't know where you are gathering that from. Yes, I still believe humanity is more intelligent now. If you think this is due to some sort of "faith" on my part, ok... But where is your stated evidence of the opposite? You have yet to provide anything more sustainable than I have, merely repeating "Breeding was tough to do. We are stupid now." Do you have studies supporting this thesis? Do you have any numbers whatsoever? I think providing them would help your argument a lot. Thank you.
An odd opinion that you attempt to throw in as fact. Please elaborate on why you are so confident I have "zero conception" on this matter. Did you imply my past life to fit your agenda? Assumed my experiences so you can throw out my statements as being "without merit"? Or did I say something that made this implication? I'm curious where you got this notion from.
This is where my "woah calm down" vibe came in. I thought we were having a pretty healthy debate, but calling me not reasonable for simply sticking to my argument [ since you have yet to provide any factual evidence suggesting otherwise ]. And now I'm a brick wall? And you have been providing facts? What the fuck is that my dude?
Look, if this topic is getting a little too heated, that's fine. We can cool off and leave it at that. But suggesting I am not listening to you [ when I have been responding to every point you've brought up ], and suggesting that I'm just some thick-skulled retard who needs "facts" pummeled into my smooth brain [ when you have yet to actually provide any facts at all, just you're opinions and thoughts on this matter, same as me ], all seems really defensive. And out of nowhere as well.
We can continue this civilly, no? After all, we are just 1's and 0's on the web right now. No need to act like anything we say here is going to set lasting implications worldwide ;)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If you present reasonable points I will agree with them. If you do the same, we are having a conversation. However, you have brushed off the points I make and instead use tactics to deflect our debate. I have no interest in such tactics, as they serve only to obfuscate facts, rather than attain to them.
It's also a direct logical statement of my thesis, which you here brushed aside as funny, and discounted by saying 'what it could' instead of acknowledging that these forces are extant, and of evolutionary impact.
You end your prior comment with projecting on me your own diversion of our discussion.
So, shit or get off the pot. Either acknowledge such facts and logic, and use them to prove your assertions, or agree that your mind has changed. Dismissing me as irrelevant, projecting your own faults on me, and using disinfo tactics instead of reason and logic is abusive and I am uninterested in such drivel.
You may not like my tone, but it will result as you use disingenuous tactics rather than engage in reasoned debate.
Personally, I'd prefer the latter, but that depends on you.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit