Science Finally Realizes Humans Are Hardwired To Work Together

in #philosophy2 months ago (edited)

Another scientific blunder made up by those supporting Darwinism... "That's in our genes" is a theory that has been proven erroneous.

Epigenetics gets it right. We are one and sole organism with the earth. And so is the earth within the solar system... and so on. The whole Universe is an organism!

What Rene Descartes and his followers also ignored as they proclaimed that human beings were above nature. This mindset still is prevalent in academic circles, though shifting very slowly. In the meantime, the "that's in your gene theory" has done a lot of damage as it has condoned the worse episode of greed in human history ever.

By the way, allopathy is Darwinism at the medical level if you look closer... it is all about competition against viruses, bacteria, and microbes... while all it takes is to take care of the terrain, understand the environment. Allopathy is based on a total lack of understanding of the inner workings of nature. Targeting the symptoms is why the rate of chronic diseases gets worse over time. Several studies agree: millennials are sick and getting sicker, increasing healthcare costs.

Humans aren’t inherently selfish – we’re actually hardwired to work together | August 20, 2020

This bleak view of human nature is closely associated with the science writer Richard Dawkins, whose book The Selfish Gene became popular because it fitted so well with (and helped to justify) the competitive and individualistic ethos of late 20th-century societies.

Collaboration and exploitation are not the same things. If a business wants to compete in the market place it has either to buy cheaper, pay lower wages, and/or if its profit margin is small, it has to sell more. That's the rule.

Richard Dawkins and the like should see their Ph.D. revoked. The same in politics, lawmakers making decisions that impact world populations can get away with a slap on the wrists. That's the only way to initiate the reformation of science and politics. We can no longer afford any type of (political) science that does not recognize that "life on earth" is an entity having its own laws.

And because people’s survival depended on access to resources – think rivers, forests and animals – there was bound to be competition and conflict between rival groups, which led to the development of traits like racism and warfare... Indeed, many anthropologists now agree that war is a late development in human history, arising with the first agricultural settlements.

What the author is basically saying here is that ownership of the land has damaged the societal fabric over time. Some might say that we've been relatively at peace since WW2, but even though our weapons have also evolved we could blow up the whole planet by just pushing a few buttons.

We call this fake peace. Blackmailing is not peace.

True history has been hidden from us. Why were we never taught this about the hunter-gatherer tribes? Because it does not fit the Hollywood scenarios that want us to believe that cavemen were violent creatures. If people could not regard competition as a necessary evil, the power scheme would unravel. This is basic mind control.

Remember our 20 min doc "Life vs The Patriarchy" establishing that property rights began to also define women and children's rights, who then became assets to further ownership and to protect the lineage (bloodlines)? Structural violence is deeply embedded in competition.

As the anthropologist Bruce Knauft has remarked, hunter-gatherers are characterised by “extreme political and sexual egalitarianism”. Individuals in such groups don’t accumulate their own property and possessions. They have a moral obligation to share everything.

Right but money didn't exist that far back. Though barter has always existed, we assume but exchanges were not based on "property". The sense of ownership truly developed with the emergence of money. Another article on the same website (link below) contends that Mesopotamian shekel – the first known form of currency – emerged nearly 5,000 years ago. Or 3000 B.C. The earliest known mints date to 650 and 600 B.C. in Asia Minor.

It makes more sense then to see traits such as cooperation, egalitarianism, altruism, and peacefulness as natural to human beings. These were the traits that have been prevalent in human life for tens of thousands of years. So presumably these traits are still strong in us now.

The words "egalitarianism and altruism" have caused so much abuse in our competitive society - and by the leftist ideologies - that we'll have to come up with new terminology. But saying that a world without money is collectivism doesn't make any sense. Such a concept is based on unbiased historical knowledge and the fact that competition does not work for the human species as a whole.

So now let's brace for a crisis while hoping that we'll be able to draw real conclusions this time

The guest speaker on the Keiser report explains in a simple jargon why bankers may soon join Occupy Wallstreet protesters. Because the central banks are bypassing banks and lending directly to the governments. And this means less revenues for the latter, not to mention the risk of going bankrupt if they can no longer take their commission out of the fractional banking scheme, all of which will also end up threatening millionaires' assets.

The free money game that we're seeing right now is really the road toward the end game. The US has borrowed more during the covid crisis than in 200 years. Businesses and consumers default on their debt at a pace unseen before... so the trick here is to print at a faster rate to avoid inflation/deflation. But how long can it last realistically, knowing that the velocity of money is an absolute? Only the top 1% is really protected because that is how the game is rigged.

In short central bankers are letting down bankers because there is no other choice. Some bank stocks already are at an all-time low, HSBC is one of them.

Keiser Report - Simon Dixon predicts bankers could soon riot in the streets


Yes, social animals have evolved to work together. Is this supposed to harm the theory of evolution?