Introduction
The
dual faced god Yanus, is a good representation of human behavior.
Every person has a mixture of unique individual behavior, and a quit
different behavior which can be called a 'social behavior'.
In
this article I wish to establish two claims:
A
society, like any other autonomous body, has a natural life cycle.
It is born, live for some centuries, competing other societies with
different cultures, and finally dies.
Darwin's
theory of evolution explains how the human body (and all other flora
and fauna) has evolved, but has no adequate answer regarding the
behavior of people in a crowd nor the evolution of societies and
culture. True, there is little research concerning insects societies
like ants and bees, but there is no real research of cultures as
autonomous bodies in their own right.
Here
I try to explore these two issues:
1.
Development of societies.
2.
Behavior of people as cells, building the greater entity - society.
The
tendency to accept Darwin's theory of evolution as a doctrine that
provides a complete answer to how species evolved, caused many to
ignore the obvious. There are times in which the individual is
functioning only as a cell beside many other cells of the society.
Any
person familiar with the phenomenon of the wish to 'be like everyone
else'. It is expressed in uniform stylish dress, Groupies
chasing pop singers, Mob
Incited in the mosques shouting in unison. They are all examples of
how individuals change their behavior in certain circumstances. How
individuals are cast to form a unique identity called society or
culture.
The
exact roots for this duality of human behavior was not subject of
research thus is not fully understood. I think that this is just a
good solution evolution found for the survival and strength of the
human race.
Those
big identities' the cultures behave themselves very much like
individuals: New cultures are born, fighting with other cultures for
dominance on the same resources, grow old and eventually die. Hence
we can apply the principles of evolution for these identities.
Proper
assessment of how a particular culture or an individual person thinks
and acts, can be understood only if the dual nature of the human race
is understood.
This
article tries to use the logic of evolutionary theory and principles
to investigate the phenomenon of social evolution and culture.
Philosophy
of Culture
' face
of the other are always " what is not I " and
therefore , are always a mystery and a question .
" says the philosopher Emmanuel Levinas . philosophers
have recognized that the reality is different from person to person
and difficult to understand what another person sees when they look
the same reality .
Modern
studies have found that the brain distorts the picture of reality
that comes recognition . " human brain has a mind
of its own , " explains psychologist Cordelia Fine in
her book . The human brain has evolved Baboltzih many years
to create a world image that helps human beings to survive . For
various reasons , such as the need to make decisions
quickly , the brain filters the information coming to him
from the senses and builds on the basis of facts are filtered on the
basis primary data - set stereotypes learned cultural
environment and his personal experiences , a picture that
allows him to draw conclusions . Such a system is called
for short ' world view ' based culture .
The
trouble is that people from different cultures , a data
base is different , and filtration system changed their
minds .
to
understand the ' other ' must recognize the
cultural environment set by the picture of reality that he sees and
values by which it operates .
on
this site I try to present a theory of cultural philosophy when I'm
using different forms of expression .
assuming
that the person is really mind , theory is based on the
evolution of the human brain .
claim
Mine is that there is a duality in man : He is an
independent individual ,but he is also an organ belonging to a
large body which has many details - the society . This
duality is also quite a few other animals - is a prominent example in
ants .
So
you can not understand human behavior when considering it as an
individual Single only .
people
behave differently and in a uniform way of being in a group , so
there was the ' group ' as an organic one . It's
not so important whether that change in behavior from the effects of
psychological or is embedded in the gardens . It is
important to understand the cultural group of ' other ' to
how it determines the behavior.
Philosophy,
cultural displays the books feature films on the site.
The
book "The
man who refused to be
a
sheep " describes
in allegorical form how a person becomes disconnected from the
environment of its cultural and built a worldview by force
independent thought of his .
books
on "
Torah of
the culture " describe
a story of cultural evolution would be to my taste , and
are based on personalities of historical figures from the past and
the future .
collection
of essays, culture articles that examine various aspects of
culture .
all
other means of expression are artistic cultural
experiences .
Thoughts
on Evolution
Evolutionary
theory rely on the idea ' that best survive , and
therefore has the appropriate sporting a larger breed and bequeath to
their descendants the traits that helped them survive . so
perfected features survive each generation .and because it is
more than one way to survive , sort of turning off one gets
better in a different direction of another kind . When some
of the details of the same sex are in a different setting for the
rest of the species , are evolving to accommodate the new
environment and can over time be different enough to be thought a
different species . theory of evolution also explains
change in environment can be to include the other species that allows
it to eat ( or run mad in the case of prey species
included ) better and forces the prey become more
sophisticated , and created ' arms race ' between
predator prey .
Theory
of evolution is accepted as the truth can not be disputed after all
visible (for example the missing links in evolution ) reinforces
it . so who dares question her or in part is considered a
primitive man washed prejudices - in short religious . but
it really possible to explain all this in turn biological
phenomenon? Perhaps , you could According to this
theory to explain many , but it locked some questions can
not be explained using the principles of evolutionary theory outlined
above .
If
this is the mechanism based on priority survivors increase the number
of offspring , why there is a limit over a lifetime ? sense
was not to develop a mechanism of aging cells ( pacemaker
the number of times they can divide and multiply ). but it
will develop such a mechanism ( as well as mechanisms to
inhibit many other ) survives as one that has no mechanism
for such limits .
There
is of course the problem of altruism - behavior details are dropping
their survival for the survival of others . The most
striking is of course the love of mother who is willing to die to
protect the offspring.
Widespread
as is a waiver of personal survival for society / culture (see the
Islamic culture) .
These
effects ( at least the phenomenon of ' maternal
love ') are explained with a kind of bargain religious
desire to ' spread the gene ' that makes no
sense 'survivability appropriate , the individual
gives up on the survivability of course survives less and therefore
his feature will be less dominant in sex-specific .
Callout
evolution of the species at the base only topic survivability can not
explain the refinements little exist within the body not associated
with survival, but this issue is not dealt with here (see article on
the mechanism of evolution ).
All
these lead me to think that evolutionary theory is incomplete and can
continue to refine it.
One
of the directions we should explore is the subject possibility
of duality - the existence of an individual on the
one hand and holding as part of a larger entity - the society /
culture in which they live .
aging , as
well as altruism are elaborate mechanisms that allow survival better
of the big person (containing many entities smaller -
details) exactly the same way that a cell single body waives
survival to some extent to the whole body will function
properly . individual ( the individual person -
individuality in this discussion ) gives a degree of
personal benefit, and in extreme cases even the survival and ability
to continue his seed, for the benefit of society. Thus allowing
the society to strengthen the information society for all .
Level
of a human body , a cancer cell shows no feature of cell
aging potential.The fact that this was less common in normal aging
proves that surviving is the dominant feature of the aging cell
survival for the entire body (dying of cancer!) My point is similar
to the society will not survive if the information in it will not
die.
Why
it is necessary to investigate the evolution of the societies
Trying
to explain the evolution of the species and evolution rules are
basically:
Natural
selection - the competition
between individuals of each species and between species, most
appropriate survive.
Heredity -
each generation become mutations (mistakes accurate replication
ofDNA ) and individuals with the most
appropriate mutations survive longer and therefore reproducing at
greater than the others and left to the features Hmstcllot offspring
survival.
That
species become more sophisticated as new species are created.
If
we apply these principles to modern man looks white discrepancy.
According
to the theory of evolution, the most qualified people in terms of
environment properties are those that survive better and their
offspring inherited these qualities will breed greater rate than
others. The facts show that it was inappropriate (poor and
ignorant) reproducing at larger.
So
we have to examine the evolution of humanity are as integration into
the individual person around other people in society, and because the
development of societies in competition with other societies
.- Evolution of the societies . There are many
examples of other species survive better when they live in a society
even though they are less suitable Scfrtim crazy trying them, several
types of fish, ants, bees are a few examples of such societies. So
kind of environment matching research is incomplete if you count
organizing groups.
I
am interested especially in cultural studies of human groups. One
of the main questions have to explore is what cooperation mechanism
between individuals to create a large body that unites them. This
collaboration is defined by evolutionists as 'altruism' - the
individual willingness to waive his rights in order to strengthen
the community.
Can
distinguish three levels of 'information' relating to their
cooperation.
·
the level of individual cells that formed body, and renounce their independence even though each one has all the information necessary to create a whole body, but only the sperm and egg cells that are multiplying.
· the level of the individual body gives up some independence to the society.
· level of membership (family, community) that create a living country and the rest into some independence.
There's
even cooperation between different species (all levels), not only
between individuals of the same sex, formed a symbiotic relationship
for all parties.
The
question is a natural conflict between the "selfish gene" -
the individual will to survive and reproduce, and altruism - the
phenomena of giving up personal survival for the society, (also in
different species [1] ).
Hamilton
Law, and indeed also by common sense, altruism as hard as that much
closer to the individual and the community. It can be explained
fortified extended survival - immediate family -> Community --->
----> culture people (usually the same as with religion). The
very existence indicates the existence of society altruism because it
is impossible to live in society without giving up some independence
personal.
The
human race greater achievements as having settled in large
societies.Communication (language, writing, etc.) allows for others
to contribute and receive knowledge base of society. Code of
Conduct (culture and laws) are essential to enable coexistence. In
large societies. Enough small societies such as poor
communication flows, and symbols, and a few basic rules.
Studying
human integration into society we need to examine the conflict
between the desire of each individual to develop in competition with
the other details - egoism, and the willingness of an individual to
strengthen the society in which he lives - altruism.
Analysis
of societies we need to examine the properties of the entire society
in competition with other societies. Factors affecting the
development of society and its ability to compete with other
societies are its size, and the media in it. Must examine the
level of balance in society between the individual receives benefits
from the society (egoism), and what he contributes to it (altruism).
For
example, in our society in Israel, the left represents the egoism
attempts to increase the benefits to individuals, and the right
represents the altruism that emphasizes the individual debts to
strengthen the community. In the past left and right were
viewed, paradoxically opposite effect, right characterized by
capitalism driven by egoism of the individual, and the Left Socialist
/ Communist flag of altruism (at least in theory). 'Pioneers'
and the great volunteers were kibbutz in combat units left. Kibbutz
itself was an example of altruism in which the individual member is
required to give up the rights for the community.
No
more.
Effective
size of the society
Size
of the society to assess its development, measured, not by the number
of individuals in society but by the number of
individuals participating in contributing to the development
of society . The society's strength is caused by a
cumulative contribution of individuals. All this of course only
during the regime that controls the society encourages (or at least
suffer) changes. A closed society like a dictatorship in which a
small layer active and contributing and the rest are just incompetent
workforce poor contribution, a small society that creates an open
democratic society, where wide layer of people who participate in its
development. This vision of Israel is not a small society from
all Arab countries together.
Communication
in terms of society size
Accumulation
of human knowledge and development, made possible by the means
of communication between human beings greatly increased, effectively,
the number of people participating in promoting the society. This
evidence allows to see Israel as part of the Great Western
society. What continues to build the society in front of Muslim
society. Of course there are also contradictory trends isolated
us from Western society and weaken us, as well as weak trends of
Western society as a whole are also reflected here. Major
weakness of Western culture, I think, are the society's being selfish
nature cause of reluctance on the individuals composing the society
to contribute to the mass. The most prominent measure of a
survivability capability is, as far as there is a willingness of
individuals that make up the society to die for (extreme
altruism). Western society on the whole it is very backward
compared to Muslim society.
Such
a trend contradicts weakness, no doubt from the standpoint of the
size of a society affects the prosperity, we are on hold. Specially
developed media in western society is, indeed all cultures, but still
more details in Western society use media to promote the
society than in Muslim society.
This
media is important. Is a factor which enhances the society's
size and therefore also its strength. Media developed first
using language that allows the transfer of knowledge between people
who are together in the same place and same time. Later, there
was a quantum leap by the use of writing enabled knowledge transfer
to people distant place and time, and greatly increased the number of
people contributing to society by creating a broad information base
conservation. However access to knowledge was limited ability to
read books within reach.
Finally,
our day we are, another leap forward in humanity's link to the
Internet, enabling rapid Delia, immediate and easy access of
information we need, from mountains of accumulated knowledge anywhere
in the world and at any time, so that human society has grown
tenfold.
Balance
between what an individual receives from its contribution to society
Creation
of large societies is made possible only by details in the plan are
permitted personal benefits with other information, to cope better
together. The difference between ideologies is largely the
question of how the individual must contribute to the whole, and how
he can get back. In my opinion, must be a balance between what
one may expect to receive from society - individual rights, and what
the society requires him to invest - the individual debts to
society. It should be remembered that the investment of the
individual in front of all citizens including that item.
Smart
strategy is to invest in citizen even while giving particular the
rights to it will flourish and he with her. This is similar to a
factory owner to the investor part of its profits to purchase new
machinery will increase production and profits with the future.
Simplistic
understanding of the theory of evolution claims that human activities
(dictated by generations of evolution) are those that contribute
Lsridoto and continued his seed. Know who think that way, a
person naturally wants to contribute as little as possible and get as
much. If it were the whole story would not be born people and
societies in the human race was evolving as indeed evolved. There
are probably other mechanisms with a reverse trend in which a person
wants to contribute to society (other people) even if it hurts
Bsridoto or spreading seed. These factors strengthen the
mechanisms of society and you are also the details of life within it.
The
existence of these mechanisms of cooperation in nature are level-cell
(only the sperm cells that continue to exist despite all the cells
that construct the human body has all the necessary code. Other cells
'sacrifice themselves' body building functions (each group of cells
as the organ of the body) similar to the country where there are
individuals who specialize in their profession and contribute to
everyone.
Behavior,
Hhbrtit' of cells expressed cell cooperation and communication
between them (eg by secreting specific protein that marks other
cells). A similar manner to any person the genes causing him to
be 'cell' within the society. An example is the communication
between the bunch of people clapping at a concert and go quickly in
unison, or uniformity of ovulation for women living in the same
building on campus.
But
the most obvious example is verbal and emotional communication of
many details of incoming ecstasy Following an enthusiastic sermon.
Social
rules that govern the relationship between the common good in favor
of the individual, between egoism to altruism I call culture.
Are
balanced culture can exist?
An
extreme example of an altruistic culture is Islamic culture. An
extreme example is a selfish culture of Western culture. Today
there is no culture that balances an example of altruism egoism. In
the past, cultures approached that situation for a short time.
The
ideal of the end times, including cultural balance and world peace,
remained an ideal not realized today 3000 years
after the apocalypse of Isaiah the prophet.
Maybe
too much to aspire to the ideal that contradicts human
nature.Therefore, altruistic societies like barbarians in the distant
past, recent past Communists and Muslims today, do not last long. Too
selfish societies like the Roman Empire in the distant past and the
American empire today will not survive over time. So what must
be balanced culture that will survive over time?
Human
nature does not change so fast, requires challenges to develop, so
equality and peace that sound like a lofty ideal, are not suitable
for a more balanced, because they both bring degeneration. Let's
look at what is suitable for balanced society.
In
the modern world no man almost a competition with other animals or
the elements. Only person left the competition only among his
own kind. That is why the features were good in the past (mainly
physical properties), not suitable for survival in modern life.
When
a country (or empire) powerful, in which the individual is unaware of
threats, wins the trend of people who prefer the good of themselves
on contributing to society. Their descendants will suffer in the
long run like the rest weakening society and delay prosperity.
However
weak state of the struggling society donation greater need and people
willing to invest more in debt to the state and settle for getting
less rights.Altruism increases.
The
basic reason for this is that in winning societies have no reason to
fear competition from other societies, violated the balance between
public good in favor of the individual. Danger to society by
being victorious is victorious. The danger gets accelerated when
technology allows to increase the gap between the ruling class
majority - those people who prefer the good of themselves to the
common good and therefore empower themselves at the expense of
others.Growing social gap, reduces the willingness and ability of the
weak layer (the majority) to contribute for the public, both in terms
of morale, both in terms of measures that require people to engage
more weak layer of self-survival, and because of the ability Tamaronm
by the ruling class. In the long run, when the ruling class,
more absorbed in obtaining personal benefits, and think less about
the survival rule, this leads to the downfall of society.
When
is a society whose members are willing to die for, with a society
whose members sacrifice their well-being to live better than the
inevitable result, only a more balanced you stand the 'barbarians'.
This
happened in the past when empires collapsed in front of 'barbarians',
and so will the Western society against 'barbarians' new outlined
today - Muslims, if she succeeds in turn balances not appropriate.
Autocracy
(like Muslim culture), which exploits the democratic rights give, won
the democratic dogma, in the name of tolerance, lose themselves
know. Culture war, as in many things, one can identify some
contradictory trends. Other examples can be contradictory
trends:
Just
as the difficulty in the Talmud, it says my whole which means my
half. The advantage is the extreme challenger willing to share
- Muslim culture on the edge of Western culture.
Contradictory
trend is a regime of freedom of man in Western culture that brings
prosperity in all areas and can affect some Muslims (those less
fanatical.)
History
has shown that people who are oppressive culture, rebel eventually
reach a minimum of rights and freedom.More cultures suppress
internal rebellion had fallen citizens of those defeated by free
cultures and stronger.
Culture
depressing end to stop the boom and will be weak in front of a free
culture is flourishing.
There's
no telling what a contradictory trends will prevail.
There
is a fundamental truth that sees danger theory class differences,
though not in the moral theories can be the basis for socialist, but
in terms of balanced culture of the society. Balanced culture
strive therefore, on the one hand to prevent a large gap between
people from the same society, and on the other hand to maintain a
degree of inequality would motivate people to try.
My
favorite culture, motivate people to contribute to society, yet keep
them freedom, as individuals who think independently, the society.
Jewish
culture is basically a cultural level, is an example of long-term
survival.