The highest form of the human.

[henry quirk]

Think of Lynx. People work for the community.

You mean linux? You think the folks who developed it, who write applications for it, aren't profiting?

In a socialism linux wouldn't exist.


Think of Windows. People work for the self-interest.

Indeed. This is a good thing.


One is free. The other one you pay for it.

You'll pay for both, in different ways (after the fact with linux, upfront with windows).


People just failed socialism.

Nope. Socialism fails cuz it's not in keeping with how human beings work.


I mean to evolve more in order to be able to easier adopt with socialism.

To adopt socialism, man would have to become less.


Failure.

Care to offer specific examples of capitalistic failure?

[TheVisionofEr]

The construction and enrichment of the human ability to think is the highest. The goals of the current American propaganda civilization towards economic competitiveness is correspondingly lacking and belongs to the lower stratum of human possibility.

Socialism is needed to get rid of competitions.

If you wanna end individual self-direction and end innovation, let socialism take root.

America fails to the degree (state) capitalism is adulterated by (state) socialism.

Self making with the idea of success in economics is a low form of inovation and is equivillant to failure. Destruction of the individual for the sake of pretending to win a game. The myth of of bourgiouse technology. Thoughtfulness however has little to do with empty substnless references to socialism, whatever that may be imagined to mean.

[henry quirk]

Self making with the idea of success in economics is a low form of inovation and is equivillant to failure.

Nope. Self-direction, autonomy, is good living.


Destruction of the individual for the sake of pretending to win a game.

Being free isn't a game.


The myth of of bourgiouse technology.

The reality of ownness.


Thoughtfulness however has little to do with empty substnless references to socialism, whatever that may be imagined to mean.

Socialism is slavery.

[Veritas Aequitas]

What is the relationship or distinction between the neocortex and the pre-frontal cortex?

The pre-frontal cortex is a more specific part of the neocortex.

Here is the difference from Quora:

The cerebral cortex is the entire outer top part of the brain (the part that looks wrinkled).

The neocortex is that part of the cerebral cortex (maybe 90% of it) that is the modern, most newly ("neo") evolved part. The neocortex is basically everything except the regions at the edges (the hippocampus, and parts of the cingulate cortex). It is distinguished by having exactly 6 neural layers, whereas the older non-neocortex regions have 5, 4, or 3 layers.

The prefrontal cortex (also called the PFC) is that part of the neocortex at the very front of the brain. It is involved in "executive functions" such as planning, goals, and actions.

My point still stand;

As such in general humans are being-more-animal than being-more-human.

Capital respects no boarders, and so is the reverse of nationalistic. Trump's mercantilism is an obstruction to the free market (pro-business, not pro-market whether understood as American or world market), but a very weak one. In the smaller countries I suppose what happens is the destruction of quality work as happened in the colonial countries so that craftsmen instead make primarily garbage aimed at world markets and cease to be craftsmen becoming factory workers. Everyone comes under the cybernetic control of the military requirements of the Americana order which produces cash on computer accounts, but few material products (outside the leading sectors of tech).

As a non-American I see the previous US Governments [Republican and Democrats] seemingly altruistic acts to gain favor or bragging rights as 'alpha' as very stupid which is taken advantage by most countries.

Trump's approach to 'America First' is a corrective step to the above stupidity. Trump's economic moves has more net-positive gains to the USA than any negative to the world's economy. Point is the other countries are not that stupid, they will adapt to gain optimality in other ways.

The human is traditionally distinguished from the animal through reason or a specific account of we are doing now with "speech." That interpretation no longer holds. The human is instead said to have a "subjective" essence. This is the tacit view of everyone visible in our daily thoughts, we speak of the "objective" as something holy. A bounded office of the understanding.

Usually the claim that we are a animals is linked to the social/instinctual reseption of this view (fact/value distinction, 1900circa Simmel et al) it is elucidated through noticing that there is a second form of the claim to be "animal" stemming from the break in mores of Enlightenment French rationalism and sexual liberation.

Both claims to be animal have a polemical significance. Both give orders from the past. Both have s vauge dreamy notion of the distinction, if any at all, between animal and human.

To clarify. With almost absurdity, but not really. Why is the sense centered being, the animal, not more vegatative (digestion like and low consous activity) or more inanimate (subject to basic physical partical laws)?

In order to think through the difficulties close investigation must break from these generalizations.

It is not based on generalization that humans are more animal than being more human but rather based on similarities in terms of genes and brain structure.

It is noted humans are >95% the same genetically as primates [animals].
Humans has the same instincts as other animals that are still inherent within the human brain and the average person is not often in good control of his instinctual impulses.

From what is observed within the human brain, there is a great potential for all humans to be exponentially more advanced than the primates in the future but at present the average human has not realized that potential yet.

This is why it is at present we need to recognize the average human is being more animal than being more human, thus triggering the need for improvements.

[bahman]

Think of Lynx. People work for the community.

You mean linux? You think the folks who developed it, who write applications for it, aren't profiting?

How they are supposed to live? They, of course, need money to survive.

In a socialism linux wouldn't exist.

How do you know?

Think of Windows. People work for the self-interest.

Indeed. This is a good thing.

Yes, even screw the life of other individuals for self-interest.

One is free. The other one you pay for it.

You'll pay for both, in different ways (after the fact with linux, upfront with windows).

I don't pay. They gain from the service that they provide.

People just failed socialism.

Nope. Socialism fails cuz it's not in keeping with how human beings work.

Socialism is about what humans should be. Equal.

I mean to evolve more in order to be able to easier adopt with socialism.

To adopt socialism, man would have to become less.

No.

Failure.

Care to offer specific examples of capitalistic failure?

Oh yeah, they screw each other for self-interest.

[TheVisionofEr]

The pre-frontal cortex is a more specific part of the neocortex.

Here is the difference from Quora:



My point still stand;

As such in general humans are being-more-animal than being-more-human.


As a non-American I see the previous US Governments [Republican and Democrats] seemingly altruistic acts to gain favor or bragging rights as 'alpha' as very stupid which is taken advantage by most countries.

Trump's approach to 'America First' is a corrective step to the above stupidity. Trump's economic moves has more net-positive gains to the USA than any negative to the world's economy. Point is the other countries are not that stupid, they will adapt to gain optimality in other ways.

The human is traditionally distinguished from the animal through reason or a specific account of we are doing now with "speech." That interpretation no longer holds. The human is instead said to have a "subjective" essence. This is the tacit view of everyone visible in our daily thoughts, we speak of the "objective" as something holy. A bounded office of the understanding.

Usually the claim that we are a animals is linked to the social/instinctual reseption of this view (fact/value distinction, 1900circa Simmel et al) it is elucidated through noticing that there is a second form of the claim to be "animal" stemming from the break in mores of Enlightenment French rationalism and sexual liberation.

Both claims to be animal have a polemical significance. Both give orders from the past. Both have s vauge dreamy notion of the distinction, if any at all, between animal and human.

To clarify. With almost absurdity, but not really. Why is the sense centered being, the animal, not more vegatative (digestion like and low consous activity) or more inanimate (subject to basic physical partical laws)?

In order to think through the difficulties close investigation must break from these generalizations.

It is not based on generalization that humans are more animal than being more human but rather based on similarities in terms of genes and brain structure.

It is noted humans are >95% the same genetically as primates [animals].
Humans has the same instincts as other animals that are still inherent within the human brain and the average person is not often in good control of his instinctual impulses.

From what is observed within the human brain, there is a great potential for all humans to be exponentially more advanced than the primates in the future but at present the average human has not realized that potential yet.

This is why it is at present we need to recognize the average human is being more animal than being more human, thus triggering the need for improvements.

The " control" would name the specifically human and tacitly more "elevated." What is an example of it? Control for the sake of what?

I mention just in passing or to touch the surounding difficulties and obscurity that the method of judging by DNA similarity must itself br demonstraited to be cogent by some standard. The knowledge of genes seems only to concern human drives and appetites ,and concerrns which seek to use it.

Why the biological technical account? Amidst all others should command the agenda of political technical beings who if they became more feeble or tame would likely cease to breed and go extinct.

[Veritas Aequitas]

It is not based on generalization that humans are more animal than being more human but rather based on similarities in terms of genes and brain structure.

It is noted humans are >95% the same genetically as primates [animals].
Humans has the same instincts as other animals that are still inherent within the human brain and the average person is not often in good control of his instinctual impulses.

From what is observed within the human brain, there is a great potential for all humans to be exponentially more advanced than the primates in the future but at present the average human has not realized that potential yet.

This is why it is at present we need to recognize the average human is being more animal than being more human, thus triggering the need for improvements.

The " control" would name the specifically human and tacitly more "elevated." What is an example of it? Control for the sake of what?

I mention just in passing or to touch the surounding difficulties and obscurity that the method of judging by DNA similarity must itself br demonstraited to be cogent by some standard. The knowledge of genes seems only to concern human drives and appetites ,and concerrns which seek to use it.

Why the biological technical account? Amidst all others should command the agenda of political technical beings who if they became more feeble or tame would likely cease to breed and go extinct.

I am not sure of your point.

My point is,
we need to recognize the average human is being more animal at present than being more human, thus triggering the need for improvements for a greater propensity for higher moral conduct.

Thus if our present moral quotient [MQ - assume to be measurable] is 100 as being more animal, then we need to increase [assume it is possible] the average MQ to 1000 or > as being more human, i.e. the highest form of being human.

Thus I am aiming for something positive which is objective, incremental and measurable which should be a good thing.
You object to the above?

[henry quirk]

Think of Lynx. People work for the community.

You mean linux? You think the folks who developed it, who write applications for it, aren't profiting?

How they are supposed to live? They, of course, need money to survive.

In a socialism linux wouldn't exist.

How do you know?

Think of Windows. People work for the self-interest.

Indeed. This is a good thing.

Yes, even screw the life of other individuals for self-interest.

One is free. The other one you pay for it.

You'll pay for both, in different ways (after the fact with linux, upfront with windows).

I don't pay. They gain from the service that they provide.

People just failed socialism.

Nope. Socialism fails cuz it's not in keeping with how human beings work.

Socialism is about what humans should be. Equal.

I mean to evolve more in order to be able to easier adopt with socialism.

To adopt socialism, man would have to become less.

No.

Failure.

Care to offer specific examples of capitalistic failure?

Oh yeah, they screw each other for self-interest.

With capitalism, the screwee has a measure of say-so about when and if he's gonna be screwed.

With socialism: if you ain't in the politburo, you're screwed up, down, left, right, inside, and out.

[bahman]

Think of Lynx. People work for the community.

You mean linux? You think the folks who developed it, who write applications for it, aren't profiting?

How they are supposed to live? They, of course, need money to survive.

In a socialism linux wouldn't exist.

How do you know?

Think of Windows. People work for the self-interest.

Indeed. This is a good thing.

Yes, even screw the life of other individuals for self-interest.

One is free. The other one you pay for it.

You'll pay for both, in different ways (after the fact with linux, upfront with windows).

I don't pay. They gain from the service that they provide.

People just failed socialism.

Nope. Socialism fails cuz it's not in keeping with how human beings work.

Socialism is about what humans should be. Equal.

I mean to evolve more in order to be able to easier adopt with socialism.

To adopt socialism, man would have to become less.

No.

Failure.

Care to offer specific examples of capitalistic failure?

Oh yeah, they screw each other for self-interest.

With capitalism, the screwee has a measure of say-so about when and if he's gonna be screwed.

With socialism: if you ain't in the politburo, you're screwed up, down, left, right, inside, and out.

The idea of socialism is perfect. It is a state of peace and balance. You work for the community that you are part of it. That ensures a secure life that everybody. That requires proper education. The approach to reach socialism in the past was wrong.

[Impenitent]

...
The idea of socialism is perfect. It is a state of peace and balance. You work for the community that you are part of it. That ensures a secure life that everybody. That requires proper education. The approach to reach socialism in the past was wrong.

if only it wasn't run by and for imperfect humans

utopia!!!! you gotta believe!!!!

you first.

-Imp

[henry quirk]

You work for the community that you are part of it

See, that there is just wrong-headed.

I work to support me and mine.

I contribute to the community as long as I'm benefiting from community-based (municipal, regional, national) services.

The primary way I contribute is by way of taxes, which should (but do not) rise and fall ass I use more or less of those services.

Also: I should have to request services instead of look for ways to opt out of them.


The idea of socialism is perfect.

Sure, for bees.


It is a state of peace and balance.

You're describing a potted plant. I'm not a potted plant. I don't fancy the idea of becoming potted plant-like.


a secure life that everybody.

I also don't fancy a cookie cutter approach. My notions of a good life might be at odds with your secure life.


That requires proper education.

Education or indoctrination? I'm suspicious when told learning will bring me around. What if I learn and still remain atavistic, still remain dedicated to my own agendas? Will I be lobotomized?


The approach to reach socialism in the past was wrong.

Indeed. It was, is, forced on folks. If socialism is good, then folks will adopt it voluntarily.

[TheVisionofEr]

It is not based on generalization that humans are more animal than being more human but rather based on similarities in terms of genes and brain structure.

It is noted humans are >95% the same genetically as primates [animals].
Humans has the same instincts as other animals that are still inherent within the human brain and the average person is not often in good control of his instinctual impulses.

From what is observed within the human brain, there is a great potential for all humans to be exponentially more advanced than the primates in the future but at present the average human has not realized that potential yet.

This is why it is at present we need to recognize the average human is being more animal than being more human, thus triggering the need for improvements.

The " control" would name the specifically human and tacitly more "elevated." What is an example of it? Control for the sake of what?

I mention just in passing or to touch the surounding difficulties and obscurity that the method of judging by DNA similarity must itself br demonstraited to be cogent by some standard. The knowledge of genes seems only to concern human drives and appetites ,and concerrns which seek to use it.

Why the biological technical account? Amidst all others should command the agenda of political technical beings who if they became more feeble or tame would likely cease to breed and go extinct.

I am not sure of your point.

My point is,
we need to recognize the average human is being more animal at present than being more human, thus triggering the need for improvements for a greater propensity for higher moral conduct.

Thus if our present moral quotient [MQ - assume to be measurable] is 100 as being more animal, then we need to increase [assume it is possible] the average MQ to 1000 or > as being more human, i.e. the highest form of being human.

Thus I am aiming for something positive which is objective, incremental and measurable which should be a good thing.
You object to the above?

Traditionally animal has been defined as a being with senses. Eyes and so on. You just have rhetoric with no account of what the beings you're referring to are. If we have no cogent account of what a human is it is empty piffle to speak of being more or less human.

[bahman]

You work for the community that you are part of it

See, that there is just wrong-headed.

I work to support me and mine.

I contribute to the community as long as I'm benefiting from community-based (municipal, regional, national) services.

The primary way I contribute is by way of taxes, which should (but do not) rise and fall ass I use more or less of those services.

Also: I should have to request services instead of look for ways to opt out of them.

Yeah. You try to secure yourself. The problem starts when there is a conflict of interest. Then you have to fight. The stronger wins. The law of jungle.

The idea of socialism is perfect.

Sure, for bees.

Sure, bees are better than us. No conflict of interest, no fight, save resources. Instead, we fight for interest, arms ourselves to screw, another person, another nation, etc. It is the laws of the jungle in the hands of intelligent beings.

It is a state of peace and balance.

You're describing a potted plant. I'm not a potted plant. I don't fancy the idea of becoming potted plant-like.

So you like to suffer?

a secure life that everybody.

I also don't fancy a cookie cutter approach. My notions of a good life might be at odds with your secure life.

Indeed there is.

That requires proper education.

Education or indoctrination? I'm suspicious when told learning will bring me around. What if I learn and still remain atavistic, still remain dedicated to my own agendas? Will I be lobotomized?

No. You become a member of minority. You, however, receive social service. Free everything.

The approach to reach socialism in the past was wrong.

Indeed. It was, is, forced on folks. If socialism is good, then folks will adopt it voluntarily.

They will when they are ready.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I am not sure of your point.

My point is,
we need to recognize the average human is being more animal at present than being more human, thus triggering the need for improvements for a greater propensity for higher moral conduct.

Thus if our present moral quotient [MQ - assume to be measurable] is 100 as being more animal, then we need to increase [assume it is possible] the average MQ to 1000 or > as being more human, i.e. the highest form of being human.

Thus I am aiming for something positive which is objective, incremental and measurable which should be a good thing.
You object to the above?

Traditionally animal has been defined as a being with senses. Eyes and so on. You just have rhetoric with no account of what the beings you're referring to are. If we have no cogent account of what a human is it is empty piffle to speak of being more or less human.

Note the fact;

The kingdom Animalia includes humans,
but in colloquial use the term animal often refers only to non-human animals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal

In this case I am referring to the neural and mental perspectives between humans and non-humans.

You should not imposed your ignorance of what is being-human onto me.

As to what is being-human we are speaking of the expansion of the potential within the human neo-cortex and prefrontal cortex.

Many authors have indicated an integral link between a person's will to live, personality, and the functions of the prefrontal cortex.[2]

This brain region has been implicated in planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making, moderating social behavior, and moderating certain aspects of speech and language.[3], [4]

The basic activity of this brain region is considered to be orchestration of thoughts and actions in accordance with internal goals.[5]

There are loads of articles and discussions differentiating what is to be more human in contrast to the animals [non-humans] based on the above potentials within the human brain.

[henry quirk]

bees are better than us

Brother, if you truly believe bees are the tops: we absolutely got no common ground.