Maxims, rules of thumb and other observations on human cognition and sociocultural affectations

This will be added to on an irregular basis...
  • What is said to humans directly is received with skepticism and considered with dubiousness while that which is heard in passing, especially that which most conforms to their mentality or prejudices, is readily believed.
  • Humans have a certain cognitive latency between exposure to new information or experiences and the ability to think dispassionately and intellectually about it.
  • Humans have a certain cognitive spectrum starting with the moment of exposure to new information or experiences and ending with some point at which the thing is effectively "in the past" for them.
  • This cognitive spectrum is linked to the emotional process often referred to as shock, anger, denial and acceptance.
  • The more and faster information or experiences are presented to people and the closer the quarters and the lesser the distance between people, the more their early reactions in the passionate emotional stage are reflected back to them in the manner of responses to those reactions from others in light of those responses.
  • The more outrages which are suffered without sufficient time to allow emotional bleed-off, the farther the bar for subsequent reaction and outrage are pushed, and the more further events must progress before reaction and outrage.
  • It is possible for serious detriments to eventually sit below this threshold for long enough for their damaging effects to build and multiply until their entire society undergoes some reactive convulsion.
Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Married‚ and the mob article on JPost

My response:

(...)but a secular and societal and cultural one as well, and the world over, human instinct has specifically singled out homosexuality between males as unworthy of recognition as anything like marriage even if monogamous.

The reason is a deep-seated understanding the human male's sexuality being the most promiscuous and even with the dominant-submissive dynamic, males typically do not require the same sort of seduction as females, which provides a natural braking effect on human sex, without which, we as a species see danger coming.

The refusal to see one's own species honestly is ludicrous.

That is the reason for the feelings against homosexuality in a nutshell. We inherently have a tacit understanding of the risks of unfettered male sexuality. It's the same reason for such controls on females among strict religious cultures such as Muslims and Orthodox Jews. And it happens to be a proper fear, even if the response doesn't always make sense as in burqas. However, if you want men to control themselves and not put the onus on women in the Muslim world, then gay men need to put some self-control into action. Castro Street and places like that don't show me any interest in anything but avoiding self control and responsibility.

If the gays can behave any way they like without self control, then none of them should open their mouth to utter a peep on behalf of feminists against patriarchal treatment of females like burqas and such. They have no leg to stand on.

Astronomy Picture of the Day