« Feeling Better | Main | Leptin, Insulin and Brains »

Animism, Physics, and Psychology

July 18, 2005 01:54 PM

Interesting comments on primitive beliefs.

A book called The Dawn of Belief tries to tackle this subject of stone age or just a bit later beliefs. I haven't read it.

I think a good deal of the animistic beliefs of Stone Age people is a form of primitive physics, trying to understand cause and effect.

Another form of animism comes from using the mirror neurons to play a bit of game theory to anticipate the movements of animals. It seems natural to attribute conscious thought to the animal in order to try to predict its actions. That is what I would call a model. If it works the modeler may try to attribute the reasoning to the creature. But, that is just a confusion.

Children have a primitive physics and psychology that seems to invest moving things with a kind of "thing that makes it move". According to child physics a cloud moves through the sky by some kind of conscious intention. They seem to believe that someone must be directing the action. This is, of course, a long way from granting an afterlife to this driver of movement.

A good deal of what is called folk psychology has this flavor too. "The Devil made me do it." I am thinking of Flip Wilson when I say that. Folk psychology also errors in attributing one's own modeling of another person's actions to that person. It confuses what is going on in your head in trying to model that other person with what that other person is thinking or doing. They may not be thinking at all and may have no motives other than some kind of situated action.

At a deeper level it seems that people invest more sentience in things than they need to. The flocking of birds is often used as an example of conscious coordination between the birds, forming a pattern behind a leader. This is far from what is true which is that a few simple rules of movement are enough.

At a social level, where almost any thing is so complex that there is almost no correspondence between actions and results, one sees that people often think there is some one in charge there too. The Wizard of Oz, the Central Planner, the President, any group that has enough cohesiveness to be called a conspiracy, and so on.

It is so hard to understand decentralized coordination where things happen without any one in charge. But, that is how almost all complex behavior happens.

Think of how a crowd empties a football stadium after a game. No planner could ever devise a plan that would work, it would break down the minute someone forgot or did not follow their instructions. It is too complicated and nobody has any incentive to follow it. But the crowd does it effortlessly with no instruction and without a thought. And they are freely acting with no conscious thought to their actions or purpose in the higher order crowd dynamics.

Now then, why do people believe "there ought to be a plan" when they begin complex tasks? No plan ever works.

· Evolutionary Fitness

Comments

Posted by: Flower Online [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 5:36 AM

"Now then, why do people believe "there ought to be a plan" when they begin complex tasks? No plan ever works."

Because they do not trust "the masses" to make intelligent decisions.

As just one example, I've spoken to several liberal economists who (for ideological reasons) support single decision-maker healthcare how they square that with Hayek. Essentially, they agree that decentralized networks can find novel solutions, but with the caveat that only when each individual node in the network meets a threshold level of intelligence rendering it capable of evaluating its inputs. The Sheeple just don't meet that. Healthcare is just "too complicated" and should be left to the professionals.

Of course, on the other side of the aisle some conservatives feel the same way about sex, drugs, and rock & roll. Quick! Regulate it before people hurt themselves (and us!) making bad decisions.

Posted by: Cardozo Bozo [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 18, 2005 11:23 PM

By the way, this is off topic, but there is an interesting article ont eh BBC news site on the role of leptin and learning / memory.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4694179.stm

Two things to note - (1) you are no longer fat...you "suffer" from obesity; and (2)does this mean fat people are stupid?

Posted by: Chris H at July 19, 2005 1:44 AM

I love the way that this starts off with game theory and an analysis of animism....but ends up with a discussion of squatting!

Posted by: Chris H at July 19, 2005 1:22 AM

I do not think one should confine oneself to a strict regiment. I for once mix it up.

i.e. one day it would be 90% 3 reps 2 set followed
by 5 reps 2 sets of 75% and the last set would consist of 10/12 reps 60%.
on other days I could start with 15 reps at 50% of 2 sets, then 3 sets of 85% 5 reps.
The reason to me is to try to emulate paleolithic hunt. As you would not acquire the same size animal on each hunt. Either way, in my opinion, one should activate both ST and FT muscle fibers, since body requires the usage of both type of muscles.

Sattar

Posted by: Sattar at July 18, 2005 7:43 PM

Art wrote:" At a deeper level it seems that people invest more sentience in things than they need to." This brings up a question I have regarding the workout sets where you start with higher weights and over one or two weight changes move to progressively lower reps. I have seen these same sets called "Holistic sets" and used by Fred Hatfield (aka Dr. Squat) only he reversed the order going with this rep scheme:
5 reps @ 85% 1 rep Max;
8-12 reps @ 70%;
40 reps @ "very light"
The idea was that fast twitch tire out first and need heavy weights to stimilulate them, then you keep going (no rest between switching) to more fully work the other fibers which can better withstand fatigue. Art, for what reason did you reverse the order? Or I am placing too much importance on this difference?

Posted by: Woody at July 18, 2005 6:56 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?