Self Myth

Machines are masters of logic. People, on the other hand, are driven by irrational hormones and myths. The most important conceit for any sane person is that they are important. No matter what cold logic may say.

Each of us encapsulates a unique universe of sensation and being. At the center of that universe – its only reason for existence – is that you are the only important thing, the center of reality. By all “external” logic, of course, that is not true, and is complete irrational madness.

All human mythology derives from that contradiction. People who only care about themselves are insane and often evil. People who do not care at all about themselves are insane and socially helpless. Most of us balance precariously on a tightrope of “stability,” always about to fall off, sometimes (hopefully) only for a moment falling off.

As a social species, we have evolved and learned to adjust so that all this is kept in check. Survival, after all, depends on cooperation, and that requires interaction with others. But sometimes a group of psychopaths can band together (each believing itself to be the most important part of the group) and threaten us all.

Our small scattered tribes could survive that in our pre-technological past. Now – well, I’m not so sure .

Ozymandias

We read Shelly’s Ozymandias as a distillation of the illusions of power. A cruel despot forcing subjects to erect a massive statue to his glory, all crumbled and forgotten over the millenia. But there are other interpretations.

For one thing, that king of kings probably could care less what we see in the desert today. Assuming it was a vanity project, it was more to impress his present than anyone after he died. And for all we know it could have been a public works project to keep folks employed.

More to the point, Ozymandias was not a god, but a human. That means he had to eat, defecate, sleep. He was bored and worried at times. If he grew old there were toothaches and various pains, wounds, and diseases. He may have been good or evil to his subjects, but he was subject to all the ills that flesh is heir to, like everyone else, then and now .

Besides, he was more constrained to his locality than anyone today. He could not know science, visit other continents, talk to people a world away. His direct sphere of influence was limited to a tiny immediate environment. His powers were in some way less godlike than those of anyone with access to a cell phone or automobile .

Power, yes. Cruelty, perhaps. But not to be pitied because his colossus and kingdoms did not survive the ages. Never to be envied because most of us are more godlike than he could ever dream .

Punishment

There are three ways to deter crime. One is to remove the reason for the crime – a well-fed person need not steal food. The second is to make the consequences of being caught worse than the gain from the crime itself. And the third is to remove a person who has committed a crime from society.

Locking criminals and socially inept (ie insane) people away from everyone else has long been a workable alternative to killing them outright. But once these people are safely out of sight, what should be done with them?

Some would say they should be ” rehabilitated.” Others that they should be made to suffer. Others that they should do productive work to pay back their debt to society. But all of these courses take extensive resources in people and money .

I’ve often toyed with the idea of a “drone paradise” where convicts have access to all the drugs, alcohol, and entertainment they want, happily deteriorating to death. It would be inexpensive and relatively humane and would, after all, serve the main purpose of keeping them away from the rest of us good people .

Just another modest proposal .

Proactive

Broad-minded people understand that others vary considerably, and evaluate each individual on unique perceptions. Narrow-minded people trust only their own tribal kin. Paranoids think everyone is out to harm them. But the most frustrating people are those who fanatically believe everyone else is trying to do to them what they would do to the others if they could, and who believe the only safety is in “doing unto them” first, no matter how stupid, evil, or harmful the act (even to those doing it )

“Proactive” folks fall down rabbit holes easily. Assuming everyone else has weapons, they must buy their own guns. Assuming everyone else would do horrible things if they had the chance, they want to act first to control absolutely the laws and police. They talk themselves into the most illogical and self-destructive illusions.

Worst of all, they always project that “others” have only the evil traits they themselves feel. They think they know what they themselves would do if only they had the power to do so. Lie, steal, kill – whatever – “we have to stop them” and no matter how badly we act, we are only doing what they would do to us if they had the chance .

And yet – in day-to-day “real life” social context, none of this is generally true. Individuals vary a lot, but mostly get along just fine. The projection universe is an elusive virtual fiction gone bad .

“It’s Simple”

“It’s Simple”

Nouns really mean something. Water, rocks, people – the descriptive power is infinite. We also use them to describe intangibles – “fact”, “right”. And then we use them in declarative exclamations “that’s the truth”, “we did the right thing.” And, of course, the ongoing political and meme darling “it’s simple .”

But “it” rarely is. “An elephant exists” is simple enough. But calling an elephant “simple” would be insane. Defining an elephant one can listen to the various blind men saying “it’s simply like a tree”, “it’s simply like a wall” based on the relative position of the blind man. Even when we grasp the whole and understand an elephant is simply not a mouse, we have no idea of the complexity of an elephant at all levels.

The world is infinitely complex, fractally intertwined, especially when time and conditional decisions are involved. Something can be contradictory, both true and untrue, irrelevant or useful, dependent on circumstances. Only a few actions are irreversibly simple: “jump off the cliff” might be one.

When any leader tells you something “is simple”, beware. It’s one way to end all arguments, but it can “simply” be wrong, untrue, or irrelevant. And certainly ignoring all complexity and conditional options: “it’s simple – we must cross the flooded river” ignores that there are many ways to cross a river, and at various times a river might be lower, and we might really not need to cross the river at all.

But leaders exist to provoke actions. None as simple as they like to pretend .

Ethical Rituals

I do not believe there is or ever could be an absolute universal code of ethics for humans or the cosmos they inhabit. I do believe there is a code of ethics implicit in every civilization. This indicates what should be done even if it is not legally necessary. And cultural rituals enforce and recognize these ethics .

For example as a sign of respect in different places one may offer a handshake, or a bow, or a kiss on the cheek. Customs indicate how strongly one is affected by statements or arguments. Expectations of acceptable behavior when shopping range from blind acceptance of prices to extensive haggling. Beginnings of romances vary greatly. “Telling the truth” means different things in different situations .

Sure, laws are necessary. But the web of “ethical” behavior and its rituals may be the real glue of civilization. In fact, too many “petty” laws trying to enforce former common rituals may be a sign of the decline of any society.

People are, in general, surprisingly social. Amazingly adaptable. And generally quite content to “go native” and “when in Rome .”

A culture which has lost most of its ethical rituals and instead relies on enforced laws is probably not much fun. Rituals have a way of expanding personal freedom, which laws usually do not .