culture evolution

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:

• Social behavior has roots in million years of evolutionary development.

• 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.