Josh Walker

So this is an interesting result (both inquiries) and Claude gives a more extensive list than grok because of course it does. But (imo) this isn’t what I’d look at. We’re mammals. And we share many characteristics with them. But we have one big difference: consciousness. And our consciousness and examination of the world allows us to see nature, and work it towards our advantage. It may be true that the overwhelming majority of mammals and human society organized around physical dominance. That doesn’t mean it’s optimal. Chimps didn’t make computers. They didn’t create medicine. They didn’t put a person on the moon. They didn’t create nuclear bombs. Those were all “unnatural”. They were not biological, they were cultural (memetic) and they led to the advancement of worldwide wellbeing. Biological evolution has a lot of lessons to teach us (outside of this convo). But humans have advanced by continually working with nature to advance our interests (hopefully extending to animals someday). And whether most societies and hierarchies favor physical dominance (not men by birthright) is irrelevant. We’re fuckin humans. Our purpose is literally hacking nature to make the world better. And data will support that physical dominance is a dumb way of organizing society. It is ineffective on a number of accounts.

@xjoshwalker @BallsFetching Consider all the species that have equal or greater size dimorphism but are female dominated. @grok please list examples

Men only, do you believe humans are evolved biologically to be a male dominated species or do you think this is a BS perversion that followed agriculture and scaling?

@pxue I’ve been hella curious about this one too. I mean I’ve definitely seen it in regular writing before but not so commonly that it should show up every paragraph

can someone explain to me why AI writing LOVE "It's not <abc>, It's <xyz>" sentence structure?

@BallsFetching @jess_ann_pin But maybe I’m playing semantics with necessary. What do you think that means for society today though? Is it still structured in an optimal way?

@BallsFetching @jess_ann_pin Got it - thanks for clarifying. IMO, it was likely not necessity but rather that men are physically more domineering (on average) than women. The threat of violence mixed with the need for physical dominance in a pre industrial world set the stage. If that was necessary idk

@BallsFetching @jess_ann_pin But if it’s memetic it means that we still have discovery, learning, and creativity to apply. One assumes a static societal structure, the other doesn’t. That’s why the distinction matters.

@BallsFetching @jess_ann_pin Last point, here’s why it matters. Biology is biology. To some extent we can change it, but largely it’s locked in. Memetic evolution changes via creativity and discovery all the time. If society is biologically man dominated, that suggests it’s just the way things are

@normal_brandon1 @jess_ann_pin I’m entering a flight. I’m happy to have this further discussion, but I disagree that the inversion you’ve done is accurate.

@normal_brandon1 @jess_ann_pin That’s a fair point re: definition. From here we have a lot of nuance to dive into, largely around that definition and who is actually making the rules and benefitting from them. And this needs to be evaluated not just current day, but across civilizations and history ⬇️

@normal_brandon1 @jess_ann_pin Currently yes, not when the laws were made. Also 1/3 is not a majority and thus not dominant. Respectfully I think this is a semantic attempt to redefine dominance

@xjoshwalker @jess_ann_pin Women make up 1/3 of our legislature. But even if that wasn't the case; even if it were 100% men, they are clearly doing it to favor women. Meaning women are calling the shots even if they aren't signing the bills.

@normal_brandon1 @jess_ann_pin But all of these laws had to be passed and approved by men no?

There are many ways to expand. So for example in humans the women are the selective sex when it comes to procreation. This is untrue in the majority of other primates (but is often true in birds). You could also look at, for example, our system of laws. You can generally break them down into three categories: - laws that apply to everyone (no murder) - laws that provide additional carve outs or extra protections or allowances for women specifically (violence against women act) - laws that specifically oppressed or add additional obligations to men (the draft) You do not see laws that solely benefit men. When the law specifically favors women, I would suggest that means women are the dominant sex.

@BallsFetching @jess_ann_pin Changing societies to match the environment is not the same as biological evolution. Biological evolution changes the physicality and psychology physically of a species. Societal evolution is memetic - meaning passed down mentally from generation to generation

@jess_ann_pin How are they any different? Biology evolves and adapts to the environment. Agriculture and industrialization are a changing landscape. The habitat was drastically altered so we adapted. We didn’t just land on the patriarchy. The most dominant society destroyed all the others.

@normal_brandon1 @jess_ann_pin Expand, this is an intriguing take

@jess_ann_pin You're starting with the premise the species is male dominated. I disagree.

@jess_ann_pin @jjoosshhuuaab lol love comments that don’t expand when someone is genuinely curious

@jjoosshhuuaab Like what

@jess_ann_pin Nuanced question. Yes from the perspective that it’s likely male physical violence that generated male dominated societies. No, in that it’s not a psychologically built in natural state.

@drgurner @giveashitnature Precisely - many of those countries even get an exact breakdown of where the taxes went too - it wasn’t a black box that money just disappeared in. There wasn’t a trillion dollars of missing pentagon funds

@giveashitnature I find that if you ask the citizens of the happiest countries "What do you get for all those taxes you pay?" they have answers that make sense. They have a higher tax burden than we do, but seem to feel they get a good citizen return.

Have you ever noticed how the happiest countries have a strong commitment to protecting nature, the social safety net, and education? Makes you think.

Anarcho-capitalists and Anarcho-communists will equally hate me. I look forward to it.

@dexterslizard @RealAngelaMc If you think government regulation to prevent monopoly is bad for small business, wait until you find out what monopolies look like. It’s all over the historical record. Good day to you.

@dexterslizard @RealAngelaMc Any ideological system taken to its extreme will eat itself. It caused millions of deaths via communism in Europe and Asia. It will cause millions of deaths in the US if we allow Austrian economics to purely run its course. It will eat itself.

Economically illiterate.