I used to write Noam Chomsky a few years back and he was nice enough to respond which was nice as he's a busy man. I would drop my theories on mind and how corruption occurs in the human mind and also flaws in economic theory, an observation I made that, modern economics was a niche system that was slightly beneficial in a nascent industrial nation but once technology allowed industry to meet the staples, then for economics to continue it would be forced to create markets based on luxury or waste, and reduce quality, and so once a system reached a point in technological advancement, economics becomes malevolent. that we have to evolve how we see ourselves and go through collective cultural change.
What was most interesting was a comment he made that "I cannot lean to much on basic human behavior as we know little about it". that got me interested and I looked into the problem and read the theories we have.
There are a number of studies, one, the most sensible was initially unnerving as it seemed correct, initially, then the others, all of them were studies backed by corporations and nations, or the war department on how to get workers or people to reach maximum productivity in the work place. Methods used by the armed forces and also in places like dollar store, a corporation that takes advantage of people in desperate times and is virtually indentured servitude.
But in the best of the theories, after a cursory look, I found that, it's hierarchy of human psychological and physiological needs did not account for an infinite of singularities. After looking deeper I found the author made the mistake of mistaking western culture, for human behavior. Rather he looked at the general disposition of the evolved mental concepts of western society. Thus Chomsky's remark was authentic.
I set about after that to find what was actually basic human behavior.
One important term to explain before we get into the model is that of Intelligence, which will imply, action that is conservative by nature, taking the nature of constituents or a part of a system or ecosystem, that it will act in a way that uses the least amount of energy, based on the nature of pieces involved, towards an end, which is usually balance or resolution or homeostasis.
It also relates to direct relationship or "responsiveness" to environment, or reality; what is actual. Thus we can make it similar to insight and favors the organ of perception.
In such a way we can include natural law under intelligence, as responsiveness, and when we get to the human mind or more developed living organisms, that can sense and retain experience and form Images and build concepts from images, and thus, reason and logic and thus arises the concept of individuality and personality from what is the Universe, which is a continuity of energy or a singular operation or system.
The answer to basic human behavior was that, the human organism is wired to favor the mental body of beliefs, which is built from experience, and that human intelligence in a series of stratum of intelligence, from natural law, where the body interacts with its environment, physical intelligence, which does not serve survival but rather homeostasis of the body as past/future are concepts within the mental body to order experience, but that, the mind is designed to favor the unconscious mental body of learning over reality, in order that, man can survive in almost any ecosystem, and so that primariality in the first 3 years but till puberty, when the mind rebels to forms its own identity, as before that its identity is pulled from it's elders; it is said that around 3 the concept of self separate from environment developes, but so the mind will tend to favor the mental body of learning, over reality, so it can quickly adapt to an environment and this information be passed on from generation to generation, and its learned via insight, and mimicking, when trust is absolute. But so, when humans makes mistakes or act "unintelligently", actually, they are obeying the laws of intelligence when we see that they are responding and acting on a system of beliefs that is reality to them. then we can say that mental suffering is, short of genetic malfunction, due to conflict with reality with the mental body of beliefs.
As we then look at philosophies and the methodologies of religions, which if seen with an skeptical mind are merely, methods of purifying the mind, and learning to stay in reality, the here now and access and interact with reality over the mental body of beliefs.
In a way, it repels the idea of Kant, which may have dismantled subjective experience, it's importance, and by purifying the mind of pain/pleasure or good and evil, as good and evil[which comes from ufel, meaning bad], are just tools to maintain the body and shape or forge the mental body assignment of values to events or images and related concepts. That a mind can and does, when it removes conflict, and gain attention or focus, there is a death of sorts where subject/object distinction is removed and one exists in a state of pure responsiveness and or intelligence or insight.
So, this would show that, the mind obeys the laws of intelligence, as does natural law, which assigns itself to inert materials, and that the human mind does the same, taken that it is wired to favor the mental body of concepts over reality unless trained to do otherwise and we can thus override and do the need to survive, which is the main hierarchy of the old theory.
Thus the singularities the old theory did not deal with are dealt with. As we can die for anthing and even the concept of self can be dilated or constricted, to concepts of family, nationalism, religion, caste, career or profession and thus we get collectives or groups based on common consensus and when w identify with such we include it in our self concept and our autonomic and sympathetic actions, will compensate and we can die for ideas, people, or anything, starve ourselves, or just do self destructive things.
At the same time, we can recognize as did the ancient greeks that, as I believe a tale was told that, Socrates was asked, what was one plus one, [or some other sum, this is not verbaitum], he answered the answer was one. The idea we are part of a larger living system, that is a continuity. By doing so we include all that is within our self concept, and this effects how we see, and how we act and interpret our reality.
But, this is part of my thesis, I felt I'd start to write down to redact modern models of mind.
I have revamped the model of the human mind, but that is for another time, this serves to address the flaws in basic human behavior working to show their is no basic human behavior, that there is one behavior to which the universe obeys and that can be called intelligence, and at inert levels, we call it natural law. But we can now tie the two together if this is correct.
I am a die hard skeptic, so I concede this is a opinion and observation I have come to find works. As I am a autodidact, I figured I'd share it in the way I can at this time.
thank you, R.T.P. Friday, May 24, 2013.
