[ 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.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 4 KB, 225x225, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3451363 No.3451363 [Reply] [Original]

So

www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2009/12/08_survival_of_kindest.shtml

Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, are challenging long-held beliefs that human beings are wired to be selfish. In a wide range of studies, social scientists are amassing a growing body of evidence to show we are evolving to become more compassionate and collaborative in our quest to survive and thrive.

Another reason showing that socialism is the next evolutionary step of socioeconomics from capitalism.

>> No.3451370

And yes, this is a scientific debate and must be sustained by observable phenomena of socioeconomics thru history. Save your sages.

>> No.3451385

Very rigorous 'reasearch' (not really)
Altruism is selfish.
Is-ought problem
etc

>> No.3451388

nope.avi

>> No.3451397

I think, if you believe that humans are compassionate and care about each other, and arent brutally selfish, then that would be true regardless of whether we live in a capitalist or communist society.

In other words, you cant say "We are compassionate, therefore communism."

>> No.3451399

Ok first of all I don't necessarily think that socialism is a bad thing

but...

it does not follow that as humans get more selfless that socialism will inevitably follow. There are plenty of selfish people who lean socialist (see: student protests in Europe) and plenty of selfless people who lean capitalist (many conservative evangelical folks I know, even though they are misguided, are very selfless)

>> No.3451401

>socialism is the next evolutionary step of socioeconomics from capitalism.
This was the point all along...However, the sheer anti-corporation sentiment trashes the entire thing. A socialist paradise is the government become 1 all reaching vertically integrated corporation. However, everyone seems to forget that there's no reason to toss out smaller organization, they can be functional managers of their respective functions. You can maintain a monopoly while sustaining competitive forces if it's regulated properly.

>> No.3451402

>>3451397
I can totally say "We are naturally gifted to cooperation and kindless therefor communism" because that's what comunism is about, corruption isn't inherently natural, kindless is.

>> No.3451407
File: 44 KB, 296x295, sage.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3451407

>search for 'communism'
>closest match is 'communication'
>OP automatically equates compassion and collaboration with communism, thus clearly bad

Stay classy /sci/

>> No.3451417

>>3451402

Well I mean, we have families. People make and live in families, and I think thats an act of compassion and love and they do it not because anyone told them to. They didnt need a legal frame work.

Im just saying...

>> No.3451419

>>3451401
But it's not like we all should be racing and look for individual success disregard the others, it's a lot more productive cooperating and also makes inequity, poverty and crime non-existent (well maybe except passional crimes).

>> No.3451437

If evolution is true, then why help the "less fit to survive" poor?

>> No.3451438

>>3451417
What? Elaborate.

>> No.3451444

>>3451437
Because that's what differs us from animals, we can work together and emphatize (well, actually, a couple animals can do that to).

>> No.3451451
File: 14 KB, 400x299, warren-buffett-richest-man-in-america.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3451451

Hey guys!

>> No.3451454

>>3451438
What I think he's getting at is that humanity should essentially function like a massive family.

>> No.3451467

>>3451454
I can agree with that.

>> No.3451525
File: 106 KB, 407x546, shut_up_hippy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3451525

>>3451438
>>3451454
>>3451467

Haha... no...

What I mean is. If people are compassionate and selfless, that should suggest people will behave selflessly on their own.

Like, communism would say to some preschoolers, you must share your juice and cookies. Communism by regulation forces people to act compassionately. But if we have free market preschoolers who act compassionately on their own, then they will naturally share.

I am not saying we shouldnt have any liberal, of socialistic policies. I am just saying just because humans are compassionate, doesnt mean we should have regulations that force people to be compassionate (communistic policies).

I also want to say I believe in a lot of liberal ideas, so I am not saying this as an argument to support capitalistic pig dogs.

>> No.3451545

people are both competitive and cooperative.

enough with the false dichotomy in science and politics. fucking retards abound it seems.

>> No.3451551

>>3451525
I understand you, but I think you are getting it wrong.
If we are naturally compassionate that would mean that a proper way to run society is by cooperation, it's not like some people are going to opress other people like capitalism does, i'm going to be happy to get to eat the same quality and amount of food of every human, because I can emphatize with them all.

>> No.3451562

>>3451363
>selflessness in small tribes led to more successful tribes in human evolutionary history
>clearly, this means that state sponsored theft is the most superior economic model for millions of people

derp

>> No.3451567

>>3451562
Tribes? Are you fucking retarder? We are a much more advance civlization, not just tribes.

>> No.3451573

>>3451551

I dont know what to say. I dont feel like I exactly disagree. I just dont feel that entails communism. To introduce regulation opens us up to corruption and inefficiency.

Laws and policy should only exist to protect people from a modern society they cant fight against alone.

>> No.3451583
File: 34 KB, 263x400, The-Price-of-Altruism-9780393067781.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3451583

Read this book.

>> No.3451584

>>3451567
are you arguing against the fact that the overwhelming majority of human evolutionary history has taken place while living in small tribes or extended families?

do you really think significant evolution has taken place in the last ~6000 years when large populations started grouping together?

shit, do you even know how genetics or evolution works?

>> No.3451590

>>3451573
Why would regulation lead to corruption if there is no physicall way to corrupt the state, because it's basically non-existent.

>> No.3451599

>>3451584
Haven't you hear of primitive communism don't you?

>> No.3451601

>>3451590

Well, for instance, you have the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the air waves. And you are centralizing rights and licensing to a single central agency, who inevitably makes decisions, like you cant say certain words on TV, which violates the constitution.

Thats one example.

>> No.3451605
File: 25 KB, 350x400, 4045.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3451605

>>3451363

This isn't fucking new. Many different scientists over the last 100 years have tried to answer this question.

Huxley(darwins bulldog) Vs Kropotkin(the founder of socialism)

Fisher, Haldane, Neumann, Clyde Allee, Manard Smith, and Hamilton

Price found an answer, dawkings wrote the selfish gene. All altruistic sacrifice is a play to spread our genes. How is this new in any way?

>> No.3451610
File: 245 KB, 350x400, johntravolta.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3451610

>>3451605

I dont think anyone claimed it was a new idea.

>> No.3451613

>>3451599
do you not see the difference between a group of less than 100 sharing and working together effectively (when they can oust members that do not pull their own weight at will) and nation states with tens or hundreds of millions of people with zero incentive to produce at capacity?

also, english motherfucker, do you speak it?

>> No.3451620

Good for them, OP.

Do us all a favor and provide some good, hard statistical evidence that it works by going and starting your own country.

Let us know how it goes.

Step 1: Stop voting in this country.

YOU CAN DO IT!

>> No.3451622

>>3451599
yes, i seem to recall that the numerous, decentralized bodies were pit against each other and defeated by a small band of stinking, arrogant europeans who hoped to make a living by selling the natives their trash.

>> No.3451651

>>3451613
I'm not native, but I can work it out...
I don't really get what we are discusing anymore.

>> No.3451701

Who would ever have thought something this progressive would come out of the Berkeley Humanities department?

>> No.3451752

I don't get the logical leap from "humans should work together" to "the government should force people to work together under the force of law." Compulsory compassion isn't really compassion.

>> No.3451756

Humans are easy to abuse and make into something.
just create a society which creates altruism and compassion, not a society like ours which creates greed, narcissism, sociopaths, extreme selfishness, etc.

>> No.3451760

>>3451752
>government
>communism
No.

If you have a government, you don't have communism. The two are mutually exclusive. Soviet Russia and "Communist" China? Both fascist, not communist.

>> No.3451770

>>3451760
I'll agree that Soviet Russia probably wasn't "true communist," but I don't think you know what fascism means either.

>> No.3451773

>>3451760
Don't be such a fucking faggot. In colloquial language, the soviet bloc, Cuba and China were communist countries during the cold war. What some marxist scholar thinks communism means has nothing to do with what people mean when they say it.

>> No.3451788

>>3451363
>Implying the study shows that humans are sufficiently cooperative for communism.
>Implying that the "next step" of socioeconomics has anything to do with evolution by natural selection

>> No.3451795

communism failed to live up to socialist ideals and degenerated into an exploitative society controlled by the state instead of by private individuals.

We need to end exploitation and inequality, not just swap one tyrant for another.

>> No.3451798

>>3451795
Alert! Alert! Anarchist detected! All chances of rational communication have been lost!

>> No.3451804 [DELETED] 

mfw people in this thread thinking socialism requires people to stop being selfish

the aim of socialism is to eliminate the capitalist mode of production and replace it with a fairer one, one with less *incentives* to be selfish

>> No.3451809

>>3451798
>implying politics can be discussed rationally, period
0/10.

>> No.3451829

>>3451798

Okay let me get this straight.

According to you, either people believe in capitalism, love the eastern bloc or believe that government should be abolished.

I think neither. Decentralized socialism yes. But a de-facto government has always been a necessity and its tough to see a situation in which one would not be required. Particularly it is needed to fund unprofitable but vital projects in infrastructure, research, health etc and to maintain a monopoly on the use of force to prevent warlords taking power.

Fuck you and your categorizations. Debates are more than just building a mass produced strawman and tearing it down. It gets very repetitive and boring.

>> No.3451840

>>3451829
Ok, nevermind. I guess I misread you.

You're still likely retarded, but I would need more details on exactly what voting systems, and what laws concerning the economy, you want.

>> No.3451887

>>3451840

As far as politics goes the main problem in the West (where corruption is the exception rather than the norm) is control of the media by an oligopoly. This places much political power in the hands of people with interests in common.

Public broadcasting has problems too, such as when an incumbent government tries to interfere with it.

But that's the main thing I would change in the political sphere. I think transferrable votes and proportional representation might be improvements also.

In economics, establishing laws requiring ultimate economic power in the firm derive from the employees, just as ultimate political power derives from citizens. Profit sharing on a large scale, elected management and giving employees opportunities to try new positions, etc. would greatly enhance the psychological motivations to work and in general improve the material well-being and life satisfaction of the working classes in general.

Furthermore a higher income to the poorer segments of society boosts aggregate demand, allowing for a decrease in unemployment.

>> No.3451905

>>3451887
Most of that sounds decently good.

You lost me around here:
>In economics, establishing laws requiring ultimate economic power in the firm derive from the employees, just as ultimate political power derives from citizens.
What does this mean? No more stock market? No more IPOs? I need more details, please.

>> No.3451917

>long-held beliefs that human beings are wired to be selfish

wait what?
is this more misunderstanding of the phrase "selfish gene"?