The Nature Of Man (Human Evaluation)~ The UT Instinct ~Appexdix 2: The Two Babies Scenario
If this is your first visit to this site please read the Glossary
Introduction
Preparation
Part 1. Head off in the Time Machine of your choice to 10,000 years ago, making sure to remember to use your seat-belts for safety! Go into the nearest hut, or cave and find a woman who is just about to give birth - to a baby. Wait respectfully and quietly while she gives birth and then cut the umbilical cord with the sissors you brought. Neatly tie the umbilical cord. Gently smack the baby on the bottom to ensure a good supply of air to bes lungs. Thank the mother for her assistance. Put the baby in the bucket for easy carrying and head back to this time. Part 1 is a total success. Part 2. Head off to the nearest maternity hospital using the local bus transport - this is where the bus ticket comes in handy (make sure it is a return ticket). Go into the nearest ward and find a woman who is just about to give birth - to a baby. Wait respectfully and quietly while she gives birth and then cut the umbilical cord with the sissors you brought. Neatly tie the umbilical cord. Gently smack the baby on the bottom to ensure a good supply of air to bes lungs. Thank the mother for her assistance. Put the baby in the bucket for easy carrying and head back using the local bus transport system and your return ticket. Part 2 is a total success. Part 3. Put the 2 babies on a table. Put the upturned buckets over each of them. Revolve the buckets (and babies enclosed) around each other as many times as required to the point that you do not know which baby is from which time period. Remove the buckets. The experiment is a total success. Congratulations!
The way to check if there is a difference between the old baby and the new baby would be to conduct 2 experiments. Firstly imagine if the 2 babies were sent back 10,000 years to the past and grew up together. Would the new baby somehow demonstrate that it had evolved in some way so as to be seen to be different - substantially different, as regards bes human nature? I cannot think of any. Then we could leave the 2 babies in the present and see if the old baby somehow wasn't equal to the new baby - ie substantially different, as regards human nature. I cannot think of any. In other words, as far as I can imagine, there would be no obvious difference between the old baby and the new baby as regards their nature - their human nature. Though this can only ever be a thought experiment. (If you own a time machine please contact me!)
The importance of superficial, illogical, unrealistic, subjective thoughts will have to go before you are ever going to be able to understand the UT Instinct. In fact they will have to go in order for you to see that the pathetic explanations and justifications of Man's behaviour up to this point are nothing but that - pathetic. I could go on and on with the understanding one could gain from this experiment but you have to be a willing participent in understanding these theories. In simple terms, if you analyse this situation and what the beliefs, values, behaviour, morals, customs, etc of these 2 babies depending on where and when they were brought up you should be able to see the truth of this statement. To all intents and purposes one's religious beliefs and values are MEANINGLESS and WORTHLESS - in terms of objective worth. Whether you are a cannibal, a 'savage', a vegitarian, a believer on one god, in many gods, in no gods, is not, to a great degree, a reflection of YOU but merely of your tribal beliefs. They are subjective - they mean NOTHING as regards TRUTH. (I am not saying that you, in your everyday life should attempt to be 'philosophically' objective and rational - life isn't like that - you have a language, you have customs, you have a nationality, you have morals and laws etc). This UT Instinct is all about understanding Man's behaviour and use of 'moral' values in a theoretical manner and understanding that Man is a subjective biological entity - and thus can only be a subjective and irrational species). We use these meaningless beliefs and values to somehow demonstrate that Man is rational. Man is NOT rational.
There are 2 phrases, very similar but which I would advise you to learn off by heart. In other words if an explanation of Man's behaviour (an individual's, or a group's behaviour) can ONLY be explained by attempting to make them different from the rest of humanity then that explanation must be INCORRECT. It has to be incorrect. For example calling Osama bin Laden 'evil' is pathetic. That does NOT explain anything at all. It does not explain Osama bin Laden. Osama bin Laden is just like everyone, or anyone, else. The only true explanation of Osama bin Laden must be grounded on human terms. (This is similar to the rain is dry scenario - ie making a process seem to be unique rather than a result of a simple general principle). Osama bin Laden behaves like he does, and has the values that he has, BECAUSE HE IS HUMAN and not for any other obscure, or pathetic reason. Osama bin Laden is just another dumb stupid subjective bioent just like you and just like me. He thinks he is right - just like you think you are right.
Now YOU may say that killing a member of a different tribe IS a savage act but you are forgetting that you were brought up in the present and YOUR values are subjective. If YOU were brought up 10,000 years ago you would have a totally different set of values. So judging a person is a totally subjective process. It is useless as regards TRUTH. TRUTH was so 10,000 years ago, is in the present and will be in the future. TRUTH does not change. So when we are attempting to discover TRUTH we have to try and step back from our personal subjective unrealistic illogical meaningless viewpoint (and values) - which you now hold so dear. To call Osama bin Laden evil as if WE are good is only putting a veil over truth. Whether he is good or bad is not relevant as regards discovering TRUTH about human nature. In life he may be brought to answer for his crimes but in the search for TRUTH there is no place for subjectivity. If your explanation is only relevant within a particular point in history, or from a particular (cultural, religious, national, racial) viewpoint it is useless, it is stupid, it has no value - it is merely a personal bias.
Updated : 3rd October 2009
|
If you want to contact me if there is a specific point you want to make or you want to ask a question about an incident in life which you would like explained within the UT Instinct theory. If you intend to argue a point, or correct an error in the logic - if there are any ;0) PLEASE ONLY DO SO AFTER YOU HAVE CAREFULLY READ EVERYTHING IN THE RELEVANT SECTION. Use the form (if visible) on all the Chapters and Articles pages or email me (especially if it is a longish piece of text).
|