Has Human Evolution run it's course?

 

Has the evolutionary process, by creating an organism that is expert at adapting to a changing environment and has the capability to bring about a rapidly changing environment, on a global scale, run its course? As this organism has a distinct adaptive advantage over other slowly adapting life forms,  it will out compete them and survive in greater numbers, but, because it  relies on those other life forms for food etc,   will it ultimately bring about its own destruction? 

Well,  humanity, which is the only organism to which this could possibly apply, is no longer competing with other organisms, (for now, we even have virus' and bacterial disease under control ) but is still competing within it own population ie  fighting wars and ideological clashes. Now, Human evolutionary pressures are competition between groups, and perhaps, as the effects of climate change get more serious, we will start to split into those who can adapt to climate change with stable or improved food sources and also stable reproduction rates, and those who can't,. ie the rich, technologically advanced and philosophically flexible will prosper and the poor, or ideologically entrenched will not. However, ultimately those rich, tech advanced societies will undermine their own success,. as the other planetary species, upon which they rely, will also not be able to adapt. and  so even the rich societies will ultimately be deselected by the evolutionary process that gives them the advantage within their population. This might appear to be total speculation, , but think about who is coping with climate change and who is not? Who is calling for climate change controls the most and who is not? Who will benefit from climate change and who will not?

If we don't use our knowledge of man made climate change and act wisely, will the evolutionary process of who is best adapted, and hence prospers, drive us to  a very large population followed by a population crash? Is climate change being weaponized? Will us smart human beings end up living on a barren rock of a planet having killed off all the competitors, but surviving because we have invented tech to make our own food and atmosphere direct from inorganic ingredients?

The evidence that sustainable policies are, thankfully, slowly becoming more prevalent means the above is probably not applicable to the world in which we live. But, I think it would make a great science fiction story!

Freedom of Speech is not freedom to lie or freedom to cause harm.

 I wrote to my member of parliament (a member of the opposition party) , complaining that the Government was proposing to reducing freedom of speech in the UK. She wrote back staying that she didn't believe in an absolute right to freedom of speech and asked should someone be able to stand up in a crowded theater and shout "fire" thus causing a panic? 

Ignoring to debate her assumption that panic would ensue (not in Britain, surely?), I pointed out, that if there really was a fire, I would be very grateful to the person giving early warning of this dangerous situation, so if she is thinking of banning people shouting in theater she should refrain.  The difference between her scenario and mine,  is that in one instance the shout of fire is true and in the other, it is a malicious lie. We should all have freedom of speech, but not a freedom to knowingly lie or cause harm.

Eon Musk, who has bought twitter, believes in an absolute freedom of speech and is considering allowing any one to say anything they want, regardless of whether it is knowingly true or not, constructive or harmful. If he does, he will completely devalue his asset. Who will know the difference between truth, lies, beliefs, facts, jokes  or harmful posts put up by bored people wanting to entertain themselves. If some one can post hate on twitter, which is illegal to say in the streets or print on paper in the UK, is this acceptable? No. It may be extremely expensive , or currently unfeasible to vet billions of tweets but not to start weeding out the worst ones is irresponsible. 

When I send a letter to a newspaper, the editor reads it and decides if it is worth printing. If my letter is factually incorrect, or harmful to others, or just plain daft, he will chuck it in the bin. This is not censorship, but a process that maintains the high quality of his newspaper. The editor also knows that if he prints lies, hate or factually incorrect letters, he will be up before the regulator, loose credibility and probably sales. Why should twitter be any different? Perhaps if post were not anonymous, and  fines imposed on users who had to submit a deposit or credit card details each year as a bond, things would improve.

Does the right to bear arms give you the right to shot someone - obviously not. Does the right to freedom of speech give you the right to talk rubbish and cause harm - obviously not. Rights come with responsibilities and responsibilities apply to everyone. Continual abuse these responsibilities by a small minority and politicians use it as an excuse to take away all of our freedoms, that could ultimately lead to a dictator abusing their powers.

 

 

 

Why you should never invite Socrates to your diner party

 As humour makes the world a better place,  I wrote the following-.

“Diners ready” you cry out to your guests.

“Ah, but what do you mean by ‘ready?” pipes up Socrates, who is standing by himself.

“Oh, here we go” mutter the other guests to themselves.

“Well,  I’ve cooked it the same as last time and it was fine then” you reply.

“ But are you sure that the oven was the same temperature?” inquires your philosophical guest.

“er, I’m pretty sure I set it at same temperature.The oven is working fine, and I don‘t think anyone messed about with the settings so I've no reason to think there's a problem” you say, hoping it will satisfy the wisest man of all time.

However,

“So you assume the temperature setting is exactly the same, but do you know that the ingredients are the same, to require the same temperature as before? Furthermore, Is there the same number of people at this party as before? How can you be certain that the different quantity of the ingredients used today, has had the correct temperature for the correct duration of time in order for the meal to defined as ‘’ready?”

“Well I have to admit I did go to the cheaper supermarket, there are a lot of people to feed at this party, and it can get expensive you know” you confess guiltily.

“So, you didn’t check the temperature of the oven, you have used ingredients from a completely untested source, which, due to their cheapness will be of different and no doubt inferior quality, and you have given no explanation as to your decision making process to determine the duration of the cooking time at your 'assumed' temperature.. Based on these facts, the only rational conclusion I can arrive at, is that you have no idea if the diner is ready is not”

Despite being perplexed,  you suddenly remember that phial of hemlock at the back of the cupboard and rush off to get Socrates his diner. Upon presenting his diner to him you declare -

“Perhaps you should just try your diner and tell me if it’s ready, but my dear Socrates, how certain can you be sure, that my definition of diner is the same as yours?”
 

Your other guests start asking for their coats.

Natural Selection trends towards an improved understanding of Reality

 

Philosophers love to worry us that we can't trust our senses or instincts as we can never be sure that what we perceive via our senses is correct. However I’ve never worried about this. If two organisms are competing to survive in the world, then the one that sees reality clearer or has a better understanding of reality, will be naturally selected over the one that doesn’t. If two organisms are looking for food, who will survive? The one with the better eye sight or the one with fuzzy vision of reality? Who is better adapted, the wild cat who avoids humans or the ones who knows humans love feeding cats. Who will get the best mate, the one who knows scare food is easier to find if you work as a team or the one that hunts alone?   So I concluded the evolutionary process will always trend towards a clearer understanding of reality. So keep learning and you will find it easier to survive.

Some might say that evolution only provides what is required to survive, and so we cannot be sure our perception is merely adequate and not accurate. I cannot see ultra violet light because I do not need to, where as bees have evolved with flowers so have the eyes to see UV. But this merely adequate view comes from taking a static view of the world and does not consider the dynamics of the evolutionary process. Mutations always occur that may give a lucky individual an advantage over others of the same species making it easier to live and reproduce. How else could the eye evolve? Also the environment changes, and the organism that recognizes the change and adapts first, is less likely to be deselected.   

Scientists have been telling us that the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a key factor that determines the temperature of our planet. They also have shown that levels today are increasing at an alarming rate and because we keep dumping more CO2 into the atmosphere, will continue to do so. Will the majority of us see this reality and change our ways, or will we choose to ignore the new clearer understanding of reality? If we ignore it, will we be better adapted to our environment or will natural selection kick in and we will be naturally deselected?  The future of our species and many others, depends on it.

Unlimited associative learning is discussed in the book “The Evolution of the Sensitive Soul” by Simona Ginsburg and Eva Jablonka. Here, they propose that the brain works by taking the inputs (facts) from the senses and then skillfully linking them together (or disregarding irrelevant ones) to come up with a clearer understanding of reality ie it learns and so updates its internal model of the world, increasing it’s understanding of reality.

Ginsburg and Jablonka’s ideas about the brain demystifies what consciousness is.
They propose that the brain works by having an internal model of the world (reality) which is constantly updated by unlimited associative learning. This makes sense to me. For example when I’m out bird spotting with my partner, and she cries out “look at that bird” and points, at first I can’t see what she is seeing even though I’m looking in the correct location. Then suddenly I can see it and from then on the bird is obvious. Is this because my model of the world initially has no bird in it, but then gets updated so I can see the bird.  If I was a hunter, I would make sure I went with my partner as she would help increase the catch. Hopefully she would want to go with me as I can throw straight and get us back home with out getting lost!! As we would be both better off when working together, social team working arises and persists.

Sub topic - Driver-less cars

 
This internal model of the world may also explains why driver-less cars are proving so hard to develop. Human drivers just have to watch out for the exceptions to the anticipated reality of the road ahead and have a vast unlimited data base of previous knowledge to associate with sensory updates.
Can driverless cars deal with every situation that could possibly arise on the road, including totally new situations? Humans can do this relatively easily, because they only have to update their internal model of the road ahead with the new exceptions, ie we anticipate the future  and use a lower routine level of the brain system until something extraordinary occurs. (this explains why when making a (now illegal) phone call whilst driving, you wouldn‘t be able to remember  what had happened on the road for the duration of the call. (don’t try  this its dangerous = if something totally unexpected happens you need to react quickly by having all your senses  focused on the road)  I don‘t know how driverless cars are programmed but I suspect they work by continually scanning and interpreting every piece of data in an equally similar way, which is very inefficient.   

I wouldn’t get in a driverless car. However, I would travel on a driverless train. The environment for the train is a lot simpler and easier to  manage. They wouldn‘t go on strike either.

Rationality and the Crisis in Democracy

In his latest book Steven Pinker calls on us to be more rational. If only we thought about things and ditched our swift emotional responses, the world would be a better place. Underlying this cry, is the intellectual perplexity  that democracy resulted in the election of  Trump, and here in the UK, Brexit. Unfortunately, Pinker is barking up the wrong tree. He should have more faith in democracy and emotional irrational humans.

The  reason why Trump was elected, Brexit happened, and for that matter, why people voted for Hitler or Putin, is because we are still fundamentally tribal. The world is constantly changing and today is changing so fast that it’s hard to keep up. The world is getting smaller, people are moving around more and the internet gives voice to anyone. Based on limited and uncertain information  how do people decide between candidates? Should our leaders be someone similar to me or someone from another tribe? In the UK should the foreign leaders in Europe make the decisions or people from my British tribe? Should we vote for someone who will restore honour and respect to our tribe by economic or military strength (so compensating for  past humiliations)  or someone who accepts that the other tribes may have a better way of doing things, and in this interconnected world, knows we can‘t be strong with out them. Faced with such problems, the human default position ingrained in our evolutionary roots, is to stick together and back the tribe.

 In the modern world we need to learn that tribalism is no longer helpful. We need to vote for the people who realise that the world must work together to solve global problems not tribal ones. Today, what tribe our leaders come from is increasingly irrelevant,  it is more important that they want to make the world better for everyone. Fear of outsiders fails, if we know that they want the same things as us and want everyone to succeed and be happy. Democracy may have made short term mistakes in electing Trump and bringing about Brexit, but autocracies make bigger mistakes, such as invading Ukraine, pursuing Zero Covid or suppressing human nature such as freedom of expression.

If we can accept this, move on from our tribal roots and the fear of outsiders,  maybe it will be a better place.

Well that's my irrational view based on very little data, unless of course you consider a life time of unlimited associative learning and creativity as data!


 

Letter to Ukraine

 I am a nobody from Sheffield, I know nothing of war, but I stand with Ukraine.  I have never punched anyone, let alone held a gun, so I fight with words, as they are all I have. They say the pen is mightier than the sword, but are my internet posts mightier than the Himar?  Probably not, but the following is the best I can do.  

I have no idea what you are going through, it looks horrendous, but from what I have read of history, many before have endured as you do and emerged in a better world.  I stand with Ukraine in support of your fight for a free and independent Ukraine, but wish there was an easier way. I don’t like this war, any war, the suffering human beings face, which ever side they are on, pains me. And all because of selfish, loveless leaders who haven’t got a clue what they are doing.

Please remember to always fight because of your love of your families, your love of your country and your love of freedom. Although it is hard, don’t fight because of your hatred of Russians. Without love we are lost. And with love (and modern weapons) your soldiers are each worth hundreds of those who fight for money, power or just because they are forced to do so by others.

I believe the vast majority of people in Russia also love freedom, but are trapped in a country of lies, created by a psychopathic coward who has lost the capacity to love. When did you last see Putin standing with his wife or children? Who are his friends? Does he ever go and meet the people or show up at the front, to stand shoulder to shoulder with his troops? No, he loves no one, and no one loves him. His is the heart of darkness. His is the Horror. He is destroying himself. Pity him, he hasn’t even got a dog that loves him.

Do not hold the lines on maps as scared. There will come a time when the price of protecting what you believe to be scared will be too high. Always search for peace, even when you do not trust the enemy. Remember the art of war - you can fight the enemy, by not fighting.

Unfortunately, I cannot celebrate victory - to me, all war is tragedy. War is a primitive, backward and base activity that is promoted by people who are unintelligent and follow out of date philosophies. Those who start wars are people who do not have the skills  to solve their problems by normal political means, ie respectful negotiation and compromise. They can only achieve their goals by conning others to commit violence with threats and lies and so are not fit to lead. War only spreads, destruction, desolation, misery and pain. It is no solution to problems. Everyone has a selfless duty, not to hide from the horrors of our past, but to stand together against such cowards and fools. We should all unite to consign war to the history books, to keep war out of our present and humanity’s future.

I wish the west was fighting by your side, but that would strengthen Putin’s lie, that we want to destroy Russia. So be strong Ukraine, fight smart as you have been doing. With truth, freedom and love on your side, you cannot lose.

Effective Financial Investment

What is the most effective altruistic act that you and I can make? This is an important question and after a few months of thought I have decided to do the following.

I will drastically reduce and  then eliminate all fossil fuel and meat consumption from my life. I don’t want to do this, I have enjoyed a life of cheap energy based on fossil fuels, but I now know that I can no longer live this way. Because of the harm it does to those less well off, future others and all life on this planet, I must stop.

Socrates said that wisdom is knowledge and we now have the knowledge that climate change is “widespread, rapid and intensifying and the world must quickly and completely curtail greenhouse gas emissions to avert catastrophe” (Economist Magazine‘s stark summary of the IPCC’s most recent report). If you read the  IPCC’s freely available 6th Assessment Report (or for something less heavy The Climate Book compiled by Greta Thunberg), or just watched the news, or the weather in your local area, you cannot fail to know this, that the effects of global warming are true  and immensely damaging. We have to stop dumping green house gases into atmosphere or the planet will get hotter and hotter and hotter until our civilization collapses. So will you and the rest of humanity act wisely? Socrates thought that with knowledge you couldn‘t do anything but, however I‘m not so sure.    

Whilst knowledge is wisdom, we now know it is not enough. Humans have the capacity for delusion, disbelief and selfishness, so that we can dismiss knowledge as untrue or “fake news” or think we are already doing enough, or it is pointless an individual acting, or its up to Governments to act. We can invent countless excuses for our own convenience and inaction. We can create a reality that suits ourselves to give us short term pleasure (and maybe pleasure that will last until we die). However, eventually the true reality comes crashing in and we are forced to acknowledge the unavoidable truth. But, by then it will be too late and the planet will be unable to recover.

When you look at the cosmic, geological and evolutionary events that have resulted in the advanced life forms on this planet, how can you not be amazed by the world? For all we know, we may be the most complex life form in the Universe - but we are currently on a path to destroy ourselves by swiftly and radically altering the planet. Do we not have a moral duty to prevent harm to others, future others and other life forms?

So, the most altruistic the most effective act you can do is to stop dumping your pollution on those least able to cope with the consequences, namely those in less wealthy countries, future others who have no voice and other life forms who have an equal right to live. You will be helping billions and billions, not to mention saving the future of our planet.

Also, at the next election, vote for the political party with the greenest agenda,            

Letter to the Russian Ambassador to the UK

 Dear Ambassador Kelin


What is the Point of continuing the Ukrainian War?


As one of the roles of an Ambassador is to increase understanding between nations, please would you answer the following simple question - What is the point of continuing the Ukrainian War? I can no longer see any advantages to Russia, Ukraine or Putin himself in continuing what has become completely pointless. What is being achieved? How is anyone benefiting from it?

The initial stated aim was to denazify Ukraine. But is Ukraine being denazified? Do they want to be denazified? Has Russia found any Nazi’s in Ukraine?

Is the Russian Empire being enlarged? Is the “shame” of the collapse of the Soviet Union being rectified? Is Russia more respected now than before the war? Has Russia more friends and allies in 2023 than in 2022? Are migrants flocking to Russia for a better life?

As for Putin, is he now stronger or weaker as President? Are the Russian people more supportive of  him now than before? Has he shown that his philosophy of world order is right and others are wrong? Is might right or has it been shown that the most powerful weapons ever created are useless in changing peoples ideas and what they think is worth dying for?

When Putin is dead, what will Russia and the World think of him? How will History remember Putin? Who will come to his funeral?

So Mr Ambassador, the representative of the Russian State and Russian People, please explain to me as I do understand - What is the Point of continuing this war? How does it make the World a better place?


Yours Sincerely

The Climate Crisis Challenge - Ban The Burn

 I’ve just finished reading Greta Thunberg’s Climate Book. As I progressed through the pages my reactions started as

“ A world changing book - as important as Origin of Species ”,

But as the problems discussed piled higher and higher, ended as

“This is just fantasy, people aren’t going to change as fast as required -  it’s just not sexy being green.”

You see, if I change my life style to a cycling, ticket holding, flatulent lentil eating bloke, who wears worn out clothes, never travels very far, lives in a small flat, (that I share with others), don’t buy anything, have a local job (with low wages), no pet, moans all the time about the “business as usual” establishment, loses sleep over the collapse of civilization, gives all my savings to the developing world as compensation for what my ancestors did and spends my spare time campaigning or volunteering on local do good schemes - will a really wonderful girl settle down with me to raise lots of kids?. Or will she settle down with the bloke with the big car, loads of money, big house, second home in Spain, and goes out consuming all the time with well dressed, well traveled, interesting people?

Sorry Greta, you can’t change the laws of physics, and neither can you change the fundamentals of biology and human nature. The human population will crash, we can’t say when, but only then will emissions come down. It's so sad, but as usual the rich will do just fine and the poor will suffer. (Noah must have been rich to pay for that ark!)

Perhaps it's time give up and go down with one last big party, BUT.............

When I found myself on a rock climb that was way too hard for me, immobile,  running out of strength and about to fall a very very long way, that's when I realised there is really only one option - I'm going to die, so I may as well just fully commit and climb as I've never climbed before. And then something truly amazing and mysterious happens, I would relax and with out thinking, pull on the next holds and somehow, in a blur, arrive at the top. I would have no idea how I had done the climb, but I had. It's unexplainable.

Maybe the Climate Crisis Challenge is like a rock climb. The climb is hard, the top out of sight and the drop frightening. But if you don't worry too much, just pull on the holds in front of you, and then on the next  and the next, and keep doing it again and again, you will arrive at the top. You don't have to believe in success, you just have to start the climb.

As Bruce Lee says "Don't think - do". Maybe something unbelievable will happen.

Perhaps all that's required is we stop burning things and polluting our air, - simple really.

The Mess the World is in and what to do about it

 Professor Robert Sapolsky, author of “Behave” ( highly recommended but a very long read) is currently writing a book about why the world is in such a mess. Well, if he's been listening to the news, it shouldn’t take the good Professor very long.  To assist, with some hopefully constructive comments, here is my summary of world mess and what needs to happen to make the world a better place.

1) We are not as clever as we think we are

The world is increasingly complex, interconnected and interdependent. Billions of people take actions that unavoidably affect others. The environment and weather continually change, as does our information flows and knowledge. Does anyone understand what the outcomes will be? Scientists, philosophers and economists study the world and make predictions, but in making those predictions, they change behaviors with many unintended consequences. So their predictions appear to be wrong, even though the original prediction was right at the time. And someone always pops up to say, 'look I told you so, they don't know what they are talking about......'

 It seems the more we learn the less we understand, but  everyone has a duty to commit to a life of continual learning and self improvement. In my opinion too few do, and remain closed to new ideas and possibilities. 

2) Natural selection hasn't given us the behaviour or skills to solve problems at the Global/Species level. (or "On the Demise of Species")

Our evolutionary advantage, that has made us the most complex, dominant species on earth, was formed by the process of natural selection. If we survived and reproduced, our genes and social behaviors were transferred to the next generation. This all works at  the level of the individual, and because humans live in tribes or communities, also at the level of the group. Its survival of the fittest, or more correctly, best adapted, and the 'best' characteristics are determined by reproduction rates. So we end up with people, tribes and counties competing to be selected for the next generation. The trouble is, this is of no use when it comes to solving global or species level problems such as climate change, resource and food shortages, economic inequality. (This is why the UN and COP meetings achieve very little - too much competition between self interested groups).

In order to solve these problems, we need to rise above our biology and instincts, and increase our intelligence to work as one social group that co operates, respects and tolerates each other rather than competes. Hopefully this will get us through this century without civilization collapse, but perhaps natural selection is just too powerful and we will be de-selected from planet earth. On some days, when listening to the news, I can't help thinking this may not be such a bad thing, as the next civilization wouldn't  have readily available fossil fuels (we would have used up all the easily accessible sources), so would have to start and continue with sustainable energy sources. However, in the process of being naturally deselected, we will take millions of other species down with us - is that acceptable?.   

 
3) Too many people causing too much environmental damage.

At the start of the industrial revolution, burning coal didn’t matter and gave us cheap copious energy. It  made a small number of people rich and the environmental damage was small and local. Now, everyone in the world wants to be rich and the spread of technology means the consequences are large and world wide. The result is climate change and  landscapes transformed, all of which is extremely damaging to the living planet.

Humanity, wants it all, wants it now and isn't going to give it up. We aren't intelligent enough to see, or care about, the damage and long term irreversible consequences of our actions.  We could stop using fossil fuels tomorrow if we wanted, but the vast majority are unwilling to take the cut in wealth and degree of resource sharing need to prevent the collapse of our civilization. 

If we realized the cut would be temporary, whilst we adjusted to a zero carbon world, the future would be so much brighter in the 22nd Century.

4) Too many highly differing tribes being forced together by globalisation and global communications  

For the first time in history, within hours, people can cheaply and easily travel the globe. Likewise, it's a simple task to send anywhere, in a matter of seconds, messages, videos, recordings and money, translated or converted for local use. The world is a much smaller place than the one I grew up in.

This means different cultures, ideologies and political systems are being forced together and can no longer ignore each other. When considering other peoples, human nature dictates that it is us who are correct, not them. Therefore conflict is on the increases as ideas and cultures battle it out for ultimate victory. Not that anyone can win.

Respect, toleration. compromise and recognition that we are all one tribe would help. Why is it so hard?

5) Globalisation means increased spread of disease and alien species.

Many species are taking advantage of humans global trade and travel to spread their genes in a very rapid but unnatural way. Thus ecosystems are thrown out of delicate equilibrium, never to be the same again. 

6) The rate of change is too fast for humans, animals and the planet to cope

50 Million years ago CO2 levels were much higher than they were today, the poles were ice free., trees grew in Antarctica and the British Isles were tropical. Today temperatures are far lower, but because the rate of increase of CO2 levels is so fast, human civilization and ecosystems will be unable to cope and will, ultimately, experience collapse. By the weathering of rocks, the planet will eventually remove CO2 but this takes millions of years, not the decades needed of counter act man made CO2

Likewise the rate of increase in knowledge and technology is changing so fast, that people can no longer keep up, and because our political leaders are old and our education stops early in life, by the time a person reaches a position where they can make a difference, they no longer understand (or even see) the world they live in, So the wrong decisions, based on out dated knowledge and ideas, are made. 

7) Old people.should be allowed to die (I know I will be hated for this one, but from personal experience I think we have to be brutally honest with ourselves)
 
All animals have evolved to live, reproduce and die. We die because natural selection does not weed out defects after reproductive age and so mutations in cell DNA are not corrected. Cells become programmed to get cancer or stop working in old age. 

Humans hang about a bit as grand parents to help raise their genetic descendants, but after that they become weaker and so naturally they die. However, today, modern health care can keep people alive far longer than is natural and in fact so long that frequently  the old people being cared for are no longer living happy lives, or bringing happiness to others or having any sort of life at all, What’s the point? Shouldn’t we be focusing on the newly born and young people who are the hope of the world rather than just running away from difficult decisions concerning those at the end of life? Death is as much a part of life as birth is.  We put down suffering animals and say we are acting humanely, but we don't allow people to die when they have had enough of life.

8) Social media gives positive feed back to our prejudices, biases and ignorance.

Whatever you think, there's someone out there who thinks like you, and social media will put you in touch with them. In order to keep you clicking and so they get rich, the tech firms put similar people together and the advertising money rolls in. The problem is, that as the algorithms controlling social media will never promote contact with someone of opposing views,  your negative and false views will just be reinforced rather than challenged. Result - more extreme views and more conviction that you are correct even if your views cause harm. 

And if you do make contact with people of differing views, the lack of social controls due to anonymity  means people get very nasty. 

9) A generation brought up on violent computer games, porn films and extreme TV can now go and buy real guns and strangle real women.

When I was a kid, the end of the second world war was only 20 years before and whilst war stories, books and TV programmes were common, it was all presented as what happened to other people. Then came shoot em up computer games in which you could kill people to your hearts content. They were very popular. Extreme violence was made personal and harmless. Similarly films and TV programmes have become extremely violent and age classifications can easily be bypassed on the net. Violence has been normalised to such an extent that it is seen to be cool to carry a weapon and it is normal to strangle a girl whilst kissing.

On the radio today I hear that the possibility of civil war in America is worrying many experts. Is it  surprising, if violence has been normalised.

Likewise, who is calling for a cease fire in Ukraine? Its not a game and most people who are living on the front line just want the shelling to stop.

10) It’s easy to turn a democracy into a dictatorship, but very hard to turn a dictatorship into a democracy,

I hope you can agree that democracy has a better record concerning human rights and so is the least worst system of organising a society. Global migration patterns indicate that when people vote with their feet they tend to leave Authoritarian countries and head for democratic ones. However, democratic countries are very hard to create without violence and sacrifice, and it is very easy for democratic rights to ebb away, for of course, very good, but in the long term wrong, reasons.. Then one day you wake up and someone like Putin is in charge and if you object, you are locked up or dead.

11) Out of date Philosophies and Religions

I've read a few books on philosophy and religion and most of it is in need of a serious update. Religion contains lots of wisdom, but the superstitions about God is embarrassing. Confucius - sexist and if he knew my parents would have changed his mind about ancestor worship. Budda - what would happen if every one sat around selfishly doing nothing. Rights of man - what about slaves, future others and animals? Voltaire concluded that the world was absurd, but suggested we should go and sit it out in our gardens. Communism - failed, Capitalism - failing. I could go on but I hope you get my point. 

Perhaps there should be a big review and all the good bits put into one modern philosophy. But I'm think the idea of a single philosophy is out of date, all ideas should be examined in the context of the circumstances and knowledge of the time and used or put aside as appropriate.

12) Uncooperative political systems dominated by a few rather than the many  

In the UK after each election, the lucky winner always says they are going to unite the country. And then the mud slinging really begins. Why don't political parties work together? Co operation could achieve so much more, but our political systems are out of date and in desperate need of reform. Surely with all this new tec and modern communications, people voting on the diverse issues of the day (which it is impossible for just two parties to represent) could be expanded and used more frequently.

Even in democracies it is still only a small minority of people who dominate the decision making process and most of them are only expert in appearing competent rather than being competent. I wrote to my MP and asked, if all her constituents wanted her to vote against her own party what would she do? I still await the answer. Perhaps we should be more like ants. They have been getting along just fine in their societies for millions of years without leaders. When a job needs doing, they just all muck in and do it.

13) Greedy, selfish, lazy, uneducated voters and ignorant politicians

Democracy seems to be the best political system to me, but it's far from perfect. People usually vote in their own self interest rather than the common good. Here in the UK, the party that normally wins is the one that can offer the biggest tax cuts, greatest spending on free health care, the most on educating (and now feeding) our children and who will provide the most free care for our elderly so they aren't a burden on our own lives. If a politician said voters are just being greedy and we should take responsibility for our own lives, would they get elected? No chance. So the state gets bigger and the national debt gets bigger, until one day the currency collapses and the voters all have a riot because our politicians  are so useless. But they just gave us voters what we wanted.

The majority in the UK voted for Brexit. Did they know what they were really voting for or what its implications would be? Most people I have spoken to, voted for brexit as a protest vote or voted emotionally for a dream of an independent country in an interdependent world, which is absurd. Now we have a shortage of workers as lazy unfit Bits won't or cant do the jobs the hard working immigrants used to do. At least in ancient Greece, voters had to sit through the debates in order to vote, where as today you get a vote and can be totally ignorant of how the real world works. In 2002 in Hartlypool UK a monkey mascot was elected mayor and today all the clever people have high paid proper jobs or are running internet scams. So you could say we are voting for which ever Monkey hands out the most bananas!

 14) Our definitions of Wealth, health and happiness are out of date

We all want to pursue wealth, health and happiness, but this is a very  selfish why a living. Wouldn't the world be a much better place if we all helped each other, including future generations and animals, to pursue wealth, health and and happiness? Or as Winston Churchill said, would this just "share the misery"?. Well maybe we need to take a new look at what wealth, health (especially mental health) and happiness really are. Are any of us truly  happy in the current world?  

Likewise, counties use Gross Domestic Product as a measure of success regardless of their peoples happiness. Is life only about GDP?  Isn't the number of food banks or suicides also important?

15) Too few people do what is best for the common good, as we usually do what is of most benefit or least discomfort  for ourselves

Most people know that burning  fossil fuels is wrecking the planet. But how many of us have cut off the gas supply, got rid of the internal combustion powered car, vowed never to fly again and fully switched to renewables? This is the correct thing to do, but I haven’t. Whilst I have reduced my CO2 foot print, I’m not prepared to reduce my standard of living. There is always an excuse at hand to justify inaction, like my partner will throw me out of the house!

When Russian men are called up to fight in Ukraine, hopefully most of them see this war as wrong. However it is easier to join the army and hope for the best, rather than stand up to Putins regime and go to prison for certain. So the war continues and more die …… for what?

It takes courage and sacrifice to get the world out of the mess it’s in. And too few of us are prepared to stand up and do what is right, even when it is very clear that the group is wrong. It would be easier if we all stood together, rather than as individuals, and demanded change, but at the moment it doesn’t seem to be happening. It's easier to carry on as normal.

16) We should all recognise that there is no such thing as an evil person, but there are too many evil acts.

Human behaviour is governed by biology and context and we are all capable of bad and evil acts. Would you murder someone? Well I would murder Putin if he was standing next to me. Read Sapolsky's "behave" and Rabecca Myers "Inside the Criminal Mind" and overcome your bad behivours.

17 Too much policy is based on history and not the possibilities of better futures

Churchill said that the longer you can look back into history, then the further you can look into the future. If you think this is true then your possible futures will be extremely limited. Thinking with this mindset limits human progress to a better world. It makes the past into a self forefilling prophecy meaning prejudices, ignorance and irrelevances will become  entrenched in peoples plans and actions and historical differences between peoples will continue rather than diminish. 

If there is to be any hope for the world, then we must acknowledge that the past has happened and cannot be changed. However, the future is ours to make if only past boundaries, divisions and feuds can be consigned to the history books.  If we are wise enough to not let the past constrain us and choose to co operate and work together despite what our ancestors did or wrote, we would all be better for it.

 
18) The world is absurd because people do absurd things and we all stand by and allow it to continue

I say enough is enough, the mess, absurdity, chaos, what ever you want to call it, must end. We are all stuck on this planet together, with no one coming to help and we have to learn to live together and make it work. We have no choice, no alternative.  There is no planet B. Firstly we must recognise that we all, by our nature, are tribal social animals but this nature cannot help us at a species level. We must rise above it and swiftly recognise that the differences between us are joyous but irrelevant, when it comes to solving our many problems.

Only by living and working together with tolerance, respect and new found wisdom, will humans survive on planet Earth without our civilization collapsing. What happens next starts with you and I.

However.......

Despite all of the above, I've never been more happy than when I'm on the correct path with success within sight. Today I'm reasonably happy that humanity is on the correct path - it just needs pushing along as fast as possible.


 

Women Rule the World - They just don't realise it.

 It was the Rabbi Lionel Blue, who, in his warm friendly manner, said “women rule the world - they just don’t realise it”. He was referring to the influence of his mother on his life, but I totally agree with him.

“If you vote Tory, you can forget about sex!” was the ultimatum I received just before the last general election. So, even though I was totally fed up with the brexit dead lock, I swiftly decided to vote green, even though Boris was promising to get the deal done. Sex is far more important than politics.

Growing up on the south coast of England, school trips to France were common, and the principal lessons were not speaking French but smuggling. Fireworks and flick knives were our favourite contraband, but when a low status lad started waving a flick knife in front of our faces at school, the girls turned on him, calling him stupid, unmanly and pathetic. He sulked off and we never saw another knife in school again. If they didn’t impress the girls, what was the point?

Throughout history, men have controlled the power that women have over them (ie the power to create their offspring) through physical (ie violence, ownership of property) and cultural (ie marriage, religious) means, but today, women around the world are demanding equality, which is fantastic. The world will be a better, less violent, more co operative place for it. Men have nothing to fear from this, women will still want to have male friends and to form a partnership to bring up the kids, its just that men will have to co operate and compromise rather than dominate.  

Women in Iran have had enough of being told what to do and punished by men in the name of religion. The men, who usually use violence against dissenters, don’t know what to do as even they can’t justify the beating up of school girls and women as Gods work. If they do, even more women will join the protests. They have no answer to being shamed by women when the truth is, that the whole point of society is to provide an excellent environment in which to bring up the kids, not a preparation for the next world.  

As I’ve argued in “How to prevent Wars”, the sole point of life is survival, followed by reproduction, and so sex is a fundamental driving force of human behaviour.  If a behaviour leads to less reproduction, natural or cultural selection will suppress it*. So if women around the world all say they want a different world, and shun violent, uncaring men, men will be powerless to stop it.  All it takes is for women to realise their potential, act together and human nature will change.

Gorbachev said It was the Soviet mothers of sons returning in body bags who ended the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Likewise, Russian women could stop the war in Ukraine tomorrow if they sent a clear message to their men that war is no longer acceptable.

If only they realised, it is they who rule the world, not men like Putin. 

 

*I acknowledge that it has not been scientifically proven that behaviours are passed on via our genes. However, if a behaviour is successful, it will be copied by the next generation and thus passed on culturally into the future.

PS Why don't men cover their heads and faces to prevent women having sinful thoughts? My partner has very sinful thoughts when ever Brad Pit is on the screen.

Letter to the Russian Ambassador - All War is Tragedy

 Dear Ambassador Kelin

I Cannot Celebrate Victory - all War is Tragedy

When the Berlin wall came down, and the Eastern European Countries left the Soviet Empire, there is one miracle that is over looked. There was little if any violence, there was no civil war. This shows to me that Russians are a peace loving people, despite all the news being reported.

I sense that people in Russia are beginning to realise that Putin is not the leader they thought he was. It is time for him to retire and  a new leader be found. However, once again, this brings the threat of Civil War and it is time for the Russian people to show their true peace loving colours. I’m sure that there are wise people in Russia who know this, but to assist I have written the following anti violence statement, with which I trust you can agree and perhaps put to good use.

“Do not celebrate victory or defeat - all war is Tragedy. Everyone must understand that war is a primitive, backward and base activity that is promoted by people who are unintelligent and following out of date philosophies. Those who start wars are people who do not have the skills  to solve their problems by normal political means, ie respectful negotiation and compromise. They can only achieve their goals by conning others to commit violence with threats and lies and so are not fit to lead. War only spreads, destruction, desolation, misery and pain. It is no solution to problems. All citizens have a selfless duty, not to hide from the horrors of our past, but to stand together against such cowards and fools. We should all unite to consign war to the history books, to keep war out of our present and humanity’s future.”


Yours Sincerely.

Armour for a Real World Mission

Mission  

CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ, the Prussian general and theorist of war, is much-quoted and his most famous dictum is—“war is the continuation of politics with other means”.

If war is politics by other means, then the deeper cause of war is politicians doing what they do, which is attempting to  increase popularity and then stay in power. As power ultimately comes from the people, either as voters or supporting armies, citizens are the fundamental cause of wars, by their approval or passiveness of their leaders actions.

 If an anti war culture could be promoted and embraced by all the peoples of the world, then leaders would lose popularity when promoting conflict. Thus, war would  fizzle out and be consigned to history. To this end I have written the statement below, which I think should be promoted as much as possible -

 “I cannot celebrate victory, all war is tragedy. Everyone must understand that war is a primitive, backward, base activity that is carried out by people who are unintelligent and using out of date philosophies. War mongers are people who do not have the skills to solve their problems respectfully by normal political means ie negotiation and compromise. They can only achieve their goals by conning others to use violence by threats and lies and so are not fit to lead. War only spreads destruction, desolation; pain and misery. All citizens of the world, have a selfless duty, not to hide from the horrors of our past, but to stand together against such cowards and fools. We should all unite to consign war to the history books and keep war out of our present and humanity’s future”.   

 

 Armour

 Yesterday, I went for an enjoyable walk in the Peak District which was enlivened by a mid day heavy down pour. Shortly after the rain, I saw a group of people, who despite the  glorious beauty around them, were paying more attention to their smart phones, which were, no doubt,  the latest models. They weren’t talking to each other, but seemed happy staring at their small, colourful, flickering screens. However, they were drenched,  soaked to the skin, even though they had more computing power in their hands, than existed in the world 50 years ago. 

 It would appear you can’t get smart umbrellas.

I wish they would look up from their phones, see the real world and start thinking about what they could do to improve it.   Smart phones are nothing without smart brains.