[FRIAM] do animals psychologize?

[Marcus Daniels]

Glen writes:



< As for Harris' argument, he's relying on a common trope amongst people like him (including Pinker's recent book, Shermer's standard presentation, etc.).  As horrific as the local 7-Eleven parking lot might be, it doesn't compare to what's happening in places like Yemen or Syria.  >



Maybe.   I think you could make the case that ISIS terrorists are terrorists because it has given them something to believe-in and something to do with their lives.

It is only with the application of a prevalent value system that we equate terrorists with badness.   Many junkies outside 7-Elevens are lost souls and will have abbreviated lives.    They are unable to thrive.   In contrast, a military commander in Hamas living in the Gaza Strip may have miserable conditions to cope with, but they are respected by a group of people and aren't depressed.    This was sort of Ted Kaczynski's point that technology raises the bar to the point many people can't function any more.

Another example are the stories<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/opinion/911-lessons-veteran.html> of (U.S.) soldiers who live in terrible conditions but bond tightly with their peers, people they might never be close to in civilian life.

Objectively they are in danger every day, but psychologically they crave the bond and the engagement in the fight.



Either moral relativists or full-on nihilists see that threads of subjective reality can and sometimes should be independent.   I would argue that is useful on average at a universal level because it expands understanding rather than being prescriptive.    Peterson’s own arguments about how men rise to greatness in organizations admits that things can take care of themselves.



Marcus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20180914/f6ffe28b/attachment.html>