I’m interested for a while so that my book Sems can provide insight into questions I’ve been interested in for a while. A way of doing “opposing human nature” and distinguishing between doing it against human nature in an empirical and beneficial way, and against human nature and it is performed in a certain way. Can’t you accept it?
Recently, Wade was a guest and talked about his book on Michael Shermer’s podcast, so I listened to it. They discovered, among other things, the Kibbutz movement, a subgroup among Jews who are trying to live in small and community arrangements. As part of this project, the Kibbutz movement sought to induce joint activities for children. Children do not stay with their parents – they live in a communal home for their children, sleep and are raised, and collectively care for them rather than ESIR parents. This was a future accidental conflict with human nature, Wade argues – in reality, parents are willing to give up their children and show equal care and concern for other children.
As part of the discussion, other observations were made about the strange effect that was raised in kibbutz. According to Wade, there are applications that are genetically driven to avoid romantic involvement with siblings for obvious reasons. And we find that people who grew up in kibbutz rarely get married or get married within their own community. Wade argued that this showed that avoidance of marriage within the community was genetically driven. As Kibbutz members were raised alongside each other, basic level programming marked their peers as Sibles. And Wade said there was never an explicit rule that Kibutz members could not marry another. This lack of explicit rules directing their actions indicates that their actions were genetically driven, Wade said.
Wade may or may not be correct that members of Kibbutz have genetically established their instincts to avoid dating within Esir Kibbutz due to their sibling dislike. I felt that I was not a genericist, but rather violently pretending to be dishonest and pretending to have a valuable opinion here. Still, I think Wade is working falsely. Wade says that if the behavior is not the result of an explicit rule, it is the result of genertic programming. However, there are options that are missing here.
The explicit rules are, of course, for some of the social order, but to a greater extent, our actions are government by implicit rules. These rules are never explicitly written down or declared, but they still learn and still implement them in our lives. Even if you can’t actually say what the rules are or where they came from, these are easily collected if the rules are broken. Simply collect that you don’t do it. Different societies have different implicit rules, and these implicit rules can change over time so that genetic changes are too slow to account for.
This is one of the unspoken rules that I can easily think of. No one has ever told me that this rule exists, but never explicitly formulated before this post.
Most high school classrooms do not have seating. Classrooms are open as far as office rules are concerned. But this official rule is the real rule of n. The implicit rules of reality are different. There are open seats, but there are only one at first. There is a window of time where students can go ahead and sit wherever they like – but only for a short time. Two weeks at most 3. After that, “officially” classrooms have seats open, but no longer. Everyone picked a “their” desk and came back to that desk for all their classes. Events know to stick to Shat Desk to remind you of your course. Billy sits at the second desk back in row 2 of all rows of class, but in week 10, when he arrives in the classroom before him and sits there, I broke the rules. When Billy walks into the classroom and sees me in “his” seat he is amazed and justified.
Wade declared that the rules had to be driven in general as they were not explicitly stated. To be clear, I’m not saying Wade’s conclusion was wrong. It is not clear whether Kibbutz members are genetically established to avoid marriage within the Esir community. That may be true. But that could be an implicit rule. By framing human behavior as if explicit rules were the only option of genetically driven instinct, Wade misses as much as written rules, and perhaps the entire category of rules that guide our actions.
