Jump to content

What's on your mind?


Apoc

Recommended Posts

Like what?
For example, evolution taught us the creatures most adapted to their environment had bigger chances of survival and evolved further. I have always believed every living creature always has an unchangable 'prime psychological core', I don't know how to put it well. You could call it instinct, I guess? Well, what I was wondering was for example whether the instinct would evolve with them, or whether it stays the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example' date=' evolution taught us the creatures most adapted to their environment had bigger chances of survival and evolved further. I have always believed every living creature always has an unchangable 'prime psychological core', I don't know how to put it well. You could call it instinct, I guess? Well, what I was wondering was for example whether the instinct would evolve with them, or whether it stays the same.[/quote'] Wow... sounds like essentialism. I'm not surprised you've always believed that, seeing how influential Plato was. I don't think evolution precludes there being something like that, but it certainly doesn't require it and doesn't suggest it in any way. In my view, it argues against that notion; life is in a state of constant flux, in response to a constantly changing environment, as well as through sexual recombination (some would call the whirlwind of sexual recombination a constantly changing "environment" for our genes). In the case of instincts, they're evolved behaviors, and they certainly do change. Beavers evolved from things that didn't build dams, bees evolved from things that didn't make honeycombs, and we evolved from things that didn't talk or walk upright. More fundamentally, in the case of bees, beavers, and us, we all evolved from the same thing, at some point in our history, which is one of the most important lessons of evolution in my opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow... sounds like essentialism. I'm not surprised you've always believed that' date=' seeing how influential Plato was. I don't think evolution precludes there being something like that, but it certainly doesn't require it and doesn't suggest it in any way. In my view, it argues against that notion; life is in a state of constant flux, in response to a constantly changing environment, as well as through sexual recombination (some would call the whirlwind of sexual recombination a constantly changing "environment" for our genes). In the case of instincts, they're evolved behaviors, and they certainly do change. Beavers evolved from things that didn't build dams, bees evolved from things that didn't make honeycombs, and we evolved from things that didn't talk or walk upright. More fundamentally, in the case of bees, beavers, and us, we all evolved from the same thing, at some point in our history, which is one of the most fundamental lessons of evolution in my opinion.[/quote'] First of all, thanks! Now I recall I should finally ask my copy of Plato's book back... I haven't really read Plato yet though... I don't know whether instincts are evolved behaviors. I would call 'instinct' the reflex that triggers behaviors. In my view 'instinct' would be a comprehensive term which would include behavior and basically everything
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As if there weren't already enough of great bands touring Europe these fall' date=' Ulcerate confirmed also a show in the Netherlands (well not one, but four, altough one is pretty close to me).[/quote'] In my view instinct is learned. I support FA's view that evolution is constant and not predicated by any one factor. I also believe that evolution is not manifested in a purely physiological form. The evolution of the mind is also constant as we grow from infant to adult. That is why I feel instinct is learned as opposed to simply being ever present from birth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, thanks! Now I recall I should finally ask my copy of Plato's book back... I haven't really read Plato yet though... I don't know whether instincts are evolved behaviors. I would call 'instinct' the reflex that triggers behaviors. In my view 'instinct' would be a comprehensive term which would include behavior and basically everything
You can't have it all ways at once... :D (and this goes out to Relentless, too). An instinct is an innate response to a stimulus, like blinking, for instance - what I'd consider an evolved behavior by definition. I'm using "instinct" to differentiate from learned behavior - styles of tool use among primates, or speaking French instead of Greek, are examples of learned behaviors. I just read parts of a study on Galapagos woodpecker finches that concluded that, while they were more likely to develop tool use if sticks were made available to them during a certain developmental period, they weren't more likely to develop it based on exposure to a role model, and they showed no tendency towards learning specific alternate methods. In other words, their development of the ability to use sticks wasn't cultural; it was a genetic predisposition towards acquiring skills within a certain timeframe (adults didn't pick up the skill), kind of like our much-noted difficulty in learning foreign languages after childhood, or the way our brain will ignore input from a functional eye if it's covered during a crucial period (which I recall isn't the case with some other animals, whose visual development isn't affected in that way). Their learning was a process of refinement by trial and error; their ability to learn, within a certain developmental period, was natural. I'm bringing this up to define "instinct" and to help illustrate that the term includes more behaviors than is typically thought. You (Midi) seem to be talking about the motivations underlying our behaviors, while Relentless is talking about learned behaviors. Different instincts (for instance, sexual readiness, or my protectiveness towards my child) may manifest as behaviors at different times in our development; but just because they weren't behaviorally apparent when we were toddlers, that doesn't automatically mean they're "learned" behaviors. As far as the motivations underlying our behaviors ("goals", we say in English :D), it's a great question and it's been the subject of a lot of speculation. Avoid the temptation to be reductive here; our social and physical environments are very complex, and it's not always clear what constitutes "fitness" within those environments - appearance, strength, choice of pursuits, reputation, skill, amiability, wealth, etc. The fact that our genes build bodies which "should" mimic, and capitalize on, the reproductive successes of our ancestors doesn't mean that our "basic nature" is to go out and breed indiscriminately, Iceni's anecdotal observations to the contrary [insert appropriate smiley]. If "fitness" - the ability to have a successful mating and raise your offspring to mating age - has meant that your ancestors were able to navigate their social environment well enough to attract a mate and form a stable relationship, then the ability (and desire) to learn those behaviors is part of your "basic nature" as well. The existence of love between human mates (and attachments that look suspiciously like love in other animals) is strong evidence that family structure has been a good strategy for long-term reproductive success. I favor the view that the biological function of emotions is to provide goals, as opposed to the tired dichotomy between "emotion" and "reason" - basically, the "reason" that we have emotions is to have reasons for doing things. I'd point you towards books by Stephen Pinker and Daniel Dennett. The guy I really want to read is E.O. Wilson, I haven't gotten to his books yet. But applying evolutionary theory to various features of our consciousness has been a productive endeavor for a while, in any case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm, are you saying creatures, such as the Galapagos woodpecker finches, humans and probably much more if not all creatures, have an inherent ability to acquire certain skills through practice and that those skills are natural since the ability to learn them has always been present? The motivations underlying our behaviors... This is a concept I've thought quite a bit about. It's interesting to say emotions are the trigger element in achieving or making goals, I hadn't thought of that yet. My view on this probably contradicts a lot of known factors, but it's something I came to after thinking about it and I've been believing for quite some time now. I believe the mind on itself is without any flaws and in perfect unity. However, by external factors (the body, the environment, etc.) it's brought out of balance and searches to restore that balance as well as possible. I believe all emotions and all actions, which occur on a conscious level, are a result of an attempt to restore that balance as well as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Join Metal Forum

    joinus-home.jpg

  • Our picks

    • Whichever tier of thrash metal you consigned Sacred Reich back in the 80's/90's they still had their moments.  "Ignorance" & "Surf Nicaragura" did a great job of establishing the band, whereas "The American Way" just got a little to comfortable and accessible (the title track grates nowadays) for my ears.  A couple more records better left forgotten about and then nothing for twenty three years.  2019 alone has now seen three releases from Phil Rind and co.  A live EP, a split EP with Iron Reagan and now a full length.

      Notable addition to the ranks for the current throng of releases is former Machine Head sticksman, Dave McClean.  Love or hate Machine Head, McClean is a more than capable drummer and his presence here is felt from the off with the opening and title track kicking things off with some real gusto.  'Divide & Conquer' and 'Salvation' muddle along nicely, never quite reaching any quality that would make my balls tingle but comfortable enough.  The looming build to 'Manifest Reality' delivers a real punch when the song starts proper.  Frenzied riffs and drums with shots of lead work to hold the interest.


      There's a problem already though (I know, I am such a fucking mood hoover).  I don't like Phil's vocals.  I never had if I am being honest.  The aggression to them seems a little forced even when they are at their best on tracks like 'Manifest Reality'.  When he tries to sing it just feels weak though ('Salvation') and tracks lose real punch.  Give him a riffy number such as 'Killing Machine' and he is fine with the Reich engine (probably a poor choice of phrase) up in sixth gear.  For every thrashy riff there's a fair share of rock edged, local bar act rhythm aplenty too.

      Let's not poo-poo proceedings though, because overall I actually enjoy "Awakening".  It is stacked full of catchy riffs that are sticky on the old ears.  Whilst not as raw as perhaps the - brilliant - artwork suggests with its black and white, tattoo flash sheet style design it is enjoyable enough.  Yes, 'Death Valley' & 'Something to Believe' have no place here, saved only by Arnett and Radziwill's lead work but 'Revolution' is a fucking 80's thrash heyday throwback to the extent that if you turn the TV on during it you might catch a new episode of Cheers!

      3/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 10 replies
    • I
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/52-vltimas-something-wicked-marches-in/
      • Reputation Points

      • 3 replies

    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/48-candlemass-the-door-to-doom/
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • Full length number 19 from overkill certainly makes a splash in the energy stakes, I mean there's some modern thrash bands that are a good two decades younger than Overkill who can only hope to achieve the levels of spunk that New Jersey's finest produce here.  That in itself is an achievement, for a band of Overkill's stature and reputation to be able to still sound relevant four decades into their career is no mean feat.  Even in the albums weaker moments it never gets redundant and the energy levels remain high.  There's a real sense of a band in a state of some renewed vigour, helped in no small part by the addition of Jason Bittner on drums.  The former Flotsam & Jetsam skinsman is nothing short of superb throughout "The Wings of War" and seems to have squeezed a little extra out of the rest of his peers.

      The album kicks of with a great build to opening track "Last Man Standing" and for the first 4 tracks of the album the Overkill crew stomp, bash and groove their way to a solid level of consistency.  The lead work is of particular note and Blitz sounds as sneery and scathing as ever.  The album is well produced and mixed too with all parts of the thrash machine audible as the five piece hammer away at your skull with the usual blend of chugging riffs and infectious anthems.  


      There are weak moments as mentioned but they are more a victim of how good the strong tracks are.  In it's own right "Distortion" is a solid enough - if not slightly varied a journey from the last offering - but it just doesn't stand up well against a "Bat Shit Crazy" or a "Head of a Pin".  As the album draws to a close you get the increasing impression that the last few tracks are rescued really by some great solos and stomping skin work which is a shame because trimming of a couple of tracks may have made this less obvious. 

      4/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...