[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 136 KB, 402x600, anonymous-hive@Jan_21_03.34.57_2013.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3379303 No.3379303[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Is a hierarchical society inevitable, /lit/?

>> No.3379310

yes, the best possible society would be one that allows as much mobility as possible, but in my opinion, a true classless world is an idealistic dream

>> No.3379312

yes

>> No.3379320

>>3379310
>>3379312
But why?

>> No.3379347

>>3379320
Think of it this way; some people like homemade tacos and sometimes dogs only have three legs. If society wants to shift up or down the class heirarchial ladder, an extension cord is required. Utopias require constant math, dystopias don't. Period.

>> No.3379356

>>3379347
thanks for this anon

you must be a natural treasure

>> No.3379361

>>3379347
>/lit/ being /lit/
You still haven't given a very good reason for why hierarchical society develops. Surely you can indicate why this happens?

>> No.3379364

Yes. Seems Like a no-fucking-brainer to me.

>> No.3379371

>>3379361
uneven distribution of resources. Is this really that hard?

>> No.3379383

>>3379371
it is when you're trying to find a definitive proof. I'm not particularly against what you're saying, but it stinks of oversimplification. Surely you have a more comprehensive argument for why uneven distribution of resources exists? Etc etc

>> No.3379411

>>3379383
Should I also prove that the sun exists? After all we've never BEEN there, have we?

For all we know, it's just a light bulb a hundred feet above our heads! And you know, I've never SEEN President Obama. How do we know he exists? It's probably just some actor on TV talking about all that stuff.

And what about China? I mean, have you ever BEEN there? It's like in 1984, where they said Eastasia and Eurasia were always at war, except neither nation even existed!

In fact, I bet YOU don't exist. I mean, sure, I've read your posts, but how do I know it's not your little sister typing that stuff out? The burden of proof is on you, pal.

>> No.3379421

>>3379411
The problem I have with your explanation is it simply assumes current distribution of resources is inevitable rather than giving any comprehensive drivers for why it is the case. Quit being childish and work with me here

>> No.3379552

>>3379383
Uneven distribution of genes that prove useful to gaining resources.

>> No.3379566

>>3379552
it's more of the same and doesn't explain why an unequal distribution exists or maintains itself

>> No.3379576

>>3379566
Why are there trees along the Amazon but not at the North Pole?

I see no reason why there should ever be a circumstance that allows for hierarchy between Brazilians and Eskimos.

>> No.3379609

>>3379576
if you're not willing to put forward a model of interactions for how inequality perpetuates itself and how it came to be, you're just throwing around red herrings
>this is what passes as informed political discussion

>> No.3379618

>>3379566
I think you should consult a physicist. They might be able to tell you why not all physical objects check their privilege and merge into a single amorphous mass. Maybe the answer will help you organise an awareness campaign to end big bang related violence and social division.

>> No.3379633

>>3379609
Why would anyone waste their time making models when we can just make fun of you?

>> No.3379635

>>3379618
The only agenda here is understanding why a hierarchical system exists. Surely you can provide a reasonable model and understanding for why this is so?

>> No.3379637

>>3379633
>>/b/
have fun

>> No.3379650

>>3379637

>> No.3379654

>>3379635
...Oh dear. I should have noticed. Your humility, your piety, your mild manners, your insistent and probing questions that effectively dismiss all physical evidence and pare the issue down to personal mysticism... You're a christian. I'm sorry if I offended you. I was going to suggest you look up Darwin, but that would have been a dire faux pas... I'll leave before I wind you up any further, dear; I know you mean well.

>> No.3379664

>>3379654
Ad hominem because you can't answer the question now? Really /lit/, this is embarrassing

>> No.3379682

>>3379664
I know you love it. The warmth of Faith blazes in your Heart, but you're too humble to recognise your purity. It's adorable. God bless ^_~

>> No.3379722

Hierarchical societies must develop, because mankind on a whole enjoys the feeling of being better than somebody else. A hierarchical society simply provides this feeling on a broader level, and makes it acceptable in social convention. Without some form of ranking or hierarchy, society as I understand it would cease to exist. That's assuming you can force people to stop making the hierarchical rankings we constantly make subconsciously, however.

>> No.3382259

>>3379722
I feel more inclined to single out division of labor and specialization, personally. Simply saying "all human beings desire power" seems a little exaggerated and all-encompassing

>> No.3382315
File: 677 KB, 965x1425, WhatGodHasJoinedLetManNotSeparate.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3382315

Hierarchy is has an ambiguous meaning.

Society is best when each is in His right place. This may mean some must till the soil, and some may be barred from tilling the soil, and some must lead while others must not.

>> No.3382347

All societies are and were hierarchical, and non-hierarchical attemps were all huge failure. Therefore, a society has to be hierarchical to exists.

>> No.3382352
File: 158 KB, 1000x682, 1358209383722.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3382352

Equality can only exist among equals.

>> No.3382371

Hierarchy exists because some people are better at doing things than others. It might be inventing, curing, teaching, fixing or any number of things. In all endeavors there will be some who excell and these will be given more 'trust' with decisions about how to allocate resources. I explained this in similar terms to a group of nine-year-olds this morning. Dumb questions require dumb answers...
(really it's the questioner who should be send /b/wards)

>> No.3382381

>>3382371
*sent, sorry

>> No.3382389

>>3382352
If I am human, and all other humans are humans, are we equal?

>> No.3382396

>>3382259
All men desire to avoid humiliation. Except certain sexual fetishists, who don't carry it into everyday life. This is basically a lazy, common, half-hearted, passive-aggressive lust for power, because power is nothing other than being a subject instead of an object, unimpeded and acting with impunity. For most people, the best they can do is to get out from under other people feet, hence the constant straining and whining of leftism against the oldest and wealthiest families, sometimes as petty as banning fox-hunting or docking funds from opera houses, sometimes as vicious as the public execution of a king.

>> No.3382397

>>3382389
Equal at what? There will always be people better at certain things, and people worse.

>> No.3382415

>>3382397
But, you concede the point that all humans are humans?

You're assessing equality in terms of worth and value; assuming that equality can only be understood in such a fashion.

If humans did not exist, to define the worth of any one member according to another assuming they are of the same class, then are the rocks equal?

>> No.3382437

>>3382352

The continuing popularity of Rand and objectivism in american pop-philosophy can be taken as an inidicator of one fucked up nasty country and culture.

Try harder to justify your obscene and probably inherited wealth. twat.

>> No.3382447

>>3382415
All humans are equally entitled to be human. Those humans that work harder are entitled to greater reward as the effort isn't equal.

>> No.3382456

>>3382415
And who decides the yardsticks and criteria for measuring an individual's worth and value?

Not the followers of a psychopath's nonsense pseudo-philosophy I hope.

>> No.3382464

>>3382447
So, by action, the value of each Human may gain or diminish.
>Those that work harder.

If value is determined by action, and action is a necessity of man's being, then worth and value of each man accordingly differs.

If equality means the same in value, and we consider the understanding of humanity in this light, and acknowledge the fact that man must act according to the relative value of worth can humanity ever be equal?

>> No.3382471

>>3382415
Things that are equal are identical. Apples and oranges are not equal/identical. Jim and Joe are not equal/identical. 'Humanity' refers to certain broad physical commonalities - we don't seem to consider the severely disabled to be animals - and thus humans are not equal, just somewhat similar, in the same way that 'fruit' are somewhat similar, but apples and oranges are not equal.

Of course, this is a logical answer. What you're looking for is emotional reassurance that nobody's the boss o' you. Well, don't worry, we're "equals," in that I'm not the boss o' you and you're not the boss o' me. Buddy.

>> No.3382474

>>3382471
I'm actually demonstrating that humanity will never understand equality, due to the term being a contradiction of its definition.

>> No.3382482

I don't know who are the most retarded: objectivists, or anti-objectivists?

>> No.3382492

>>3382482
Welcome to the problems of induction and justified true belief. (The answer is simple, if we posit that the external universe exists and is continuous and operates according to hypothesised laws: the objectivists.)

>> No.3382523

>>3379303
A beta minus shouldn't be concerned with such thoughts OP. Let that alphas worry about that.

>> No.3382580

>>3382492
>Implying

>> No.3382948

Yes.

Lots of reasons, mostly becaus some humans are MUCH more intelligent than other humans, and a chain of command works for organizing better than anything else.

>> No.3382978
File: 5 KB, 548x253, normal distribution.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3382978

A hierarchy allows us to move our decision making to the right side of an IQ bell curve instead of the middle.

It will exist as the model of efficiency until we have some kind of technological singularity or another similar unforeseeable event.

>> No.3382987
File: 32 KB, 323x500, The_Blank_Slate.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3382987

OP, do you still believe in Tabula Rasa?

>> No.3382990

>>3382987

mah nigga.

I read "The Bellcurve" a while back and it completely changed my political leanings. It also made the state of the world make a whole lot more sense.

>> No.3382994

>>3382978
>hierarchy
>IQ bell curve

Uh, what? Please rationally argue (in 250 words or less) how these two things are related

>> No.3383007

>>3382994

Just think about it. They are completely related.

>> No.3383013

>>3383007
Just think about history. They are completely unrelated

>> No.3383036

>>3383013

hmm okay im thinking about history.

>every military ever is based on a hierarchy to maximize its effectiveness, decision making, and strategy
>every human population ever has a bell curve of intelligence

Seems like a correlation.

>> No.3383043

>>3383013
Not the same guy - are you seriously confused by this?

>> No.3383047

>>3382990
But... it didn't make you feel hopeless and depressed?

>> No.3383048

>>3382987
oh wow, look everybody! a pop-scientific book that everyone should read and treat it as the universal truth!

>> No.3383055

>>3383048

I have already been wondering when the first blank slaters would show up.

>> No.3383071
File: 14 KB, 610x403, IQ facts white americans.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3383071

>>3383047

Yeah, maybe a little bit. The real depressing part is that there are people who still deny the truth in those pages. And we are currently practicing some pretty powerful dysgenics on ourselves.

I think the truth will arise eventually. And the problems are all correctable once that happens.

>> No.3383080

>>3383071
> iq >125
> high school drop-out

.4% reporting in :cool:

>> No.3383087

>>3383080

Your IQ probably isnt really that high, you probably just took an online test, dumbass

>> No.3383091

>>3383071
I way too scared to take an IQ test, it would probably just confirm that I'm an idiot.

>> No.3383094

>>3383055
oh look, a baby behaviorist! have fun regurgitating Pinker's brain farts, while not taken seriously by the academia; leave the philosophizing up to professionals, sport.

when are you going to start reading?

>> No.3383106

>>3383091

Statistically we can tell more about how successful a person will be by their childhood IQ scores, than by how many years they went to college.

Pretty scary deterministic shit right there. I dont blame you and I kind of feel the same way. Better not to know.

>> No.3383145

>>3383094
Still smarting from being compared to a christian? Don't worry, you're nothing like your dad.

>> No.3383149
File: 26 KB, 2000x1333, 2000px-Flag_of_the_EZLN.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3383149

>> No.3383159

>>3383145

Not the guy you are talking to, but what do you make of adoption studies and twin studies that disprove your school of thought utterly and completely? Do you just make sure to ignore them, or do you just throw even more bullshit unproveable sociological theories out there?

>> No.3383173

>>3383145
well played. it's getting pretty darn difficult to detect a legitimate troll these days; even the discreet ones.

i'll give you a solid 7/10; you got me.