Re: virus: Is learning valuable?
Tony Hindle (t.hindle@joney.demon.co.uk)
Fri, 4 Apr 1997 12:04:59 +0100
In message <199704032259.OAA20488@orb.direct.ca>, Tadeusz Niwinski
<tad@teta.ai> writes
>It's not a refutation, but a question. How do we know that learning is
>valuable? Does it have a survival value?
I believe it is valuable for the individual. Perhaps more
profoundly I believe it is valuable for humankind collectively because
learning also shapes (and improves) our sense of morality.
>
>Studies show (Prof. Csikszentmihalyi at U of Chicago) that conquering
>reality is pleasurable. It is a built in mechanism of "flow". We like
>learning and understanding new things. We like doing challenging things and
>conquering the unknown.
>
>A society does not need everybody to understand reality. If many people
>spend time thinking rather than hunting, the group may not survive. It's
>better for the group if only a few will "do the thinking" and the rest will
>"work". A social mechanism has developed: keep the majority in the dark and
>allow only a few to think for the group. Learning may be not "valuable" for
>the group if too many get involved in it (in that sense learning is *not*
>valuable).
>
>There are many memes designed to stop the majority from independent
>learning. They were "designed" by evolution, but now experts in memetical
>engineering are trying human-designed memes. One of them is to spread a
>belief that objective reality does not exist.
Tad. I believe in objective reality and I think it is the last
thing I will ever give up as my brain deteriorates into oblivion. (by
the way have you ever taken halucinogens? You can answer me off list if
you prefer but I would be fascinated to hear your thoughts)
>There is a set of beliefs which stimulates independent learning. The
>intellectual elite -- who knows the set -- is divided into two groups: (1)
>those who want to make the set of beliefs public (causing more people to
>loose interest in "hunting" and other hard work needed for the survival of
>the group), (2) those who want to keep the set secret. Of course the first
>group is spreading the set of beliefs, so what does the second group do?
>Ridicules this particular set of beliefs. This way more people can be kept
>in the dark and serve as mental slaves to the society. Who is doing a
>better job for the society?
The first group. I am with the first group.
Tony Hindle.
I see objective reality as the omnipresent radio station,
to which all creatures of the cosmos can Tune into, so we have
something in common that we can talk to one another about when we meet.
...The Reverend C. Darwin.