Nature in and of itself is competition. The theory of evolution depends on it. The strong survive and the weak perish because of natural selection. The strong multiply and become our future generation.
It can be smart to keep the weak around. Like a weak animal in a big herd. Sometimes a sacrificial lamb is useful when it’s time to ride or die. Your kids though, they HAVE to survive, right? Two kids are about to get killed and you can choose to save only one. It’s always yours, right? This example only works if you’re a parent but I don’t think you’d find many parents who would put a stranger’s child over their own.
Sure, maybe tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago we decided as a society to eliminate people who put their family and friends above others’ a different human imperative could have emerged, but like it or not this one is the dominant one. Ignoring the competitors just takes you out of the running and statistically means you will not be moving up the ladder very much if at all.
Nature is not just competition! It’s also cooperation and companionship and symbiosis. Cultivating a different human nature is entirely possible if we decide we want to - a world where no one puts their own children ahead of anyone else’s is not unimaginable.
The concept of parenthood isn’t even universal! Some human societies view all children as the collective children of the tribe. The nuclear family is actually fairly new.
Your choice of companion is part of how you compete.
People generally pick friends based on what their friends do for them and how their reputation (e.g. influence) is, whether or not they actually realize that. So much of this is done subconsciously.
Nobody wants to keep the friend around who is always asking for help… everybody wants the friend who asks for little and is always there for them.
I do agree that the social construct of nuclear families is not natural in any way. You see this with divorce rates quite clearly. It’s quite common to find the rich, powerful, influential and attractive having many sexual partners and many followers. Without things like child support I suspect there would be many MANY more bastards out there than there already are.
Anyway, you are looking at things through an idealist lens. I’m pointing things out in a blunt narcissistic lens. People are shades of gray, not black and white. If you ignore the competition and pretend everyone will be nice you’ll quickly find this doesn’t work when scaled out past a small community. It just doesn’t. It never has. It never will.
People are competitive within a competitive framework because human nature is contingent on the material conditions. I’m not some fucking idealist, I understand competition exists lol
In fact, I literally said “nature is not just competition” - that necessarily means that it is also competition. It’s just more than competition. Get it?
Nature in and of itself is competition. The theory of evolution depends on it. The strong survive and the weak perish because of natural selection. The strong multiply and become our future generation.
It can be smart to keep the weak around. Like a weak animal in a big herd. Sometimes a sacrificial lamb is useful when it’s time to ride or die. Your kids though, they HAVE to survive, right? Two kids are about to get killed and you can choose to save only one. It’s always yours, right? This example only works if you’re a parent but I don’t think you’d find many parents who would put a stranger’s child over their own.
Sure, maybe tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago we decided as a society to eliminate people who put their family and friends above others’ a different human imperative could have emerged, but like it or not this one is the dominant one. Ignoring the competitors just takes you out of the running and statistically means you will not be moving up the ladder very much if at all.
Nature is not just competition! It’s also cooperation and companionship and symbiosis. Cultivating a different human nature is entirely possible if we decide we want to - a world where no one puts their own children ahead of anyone else’s is not unimaginable.
The concept of parenthood isn’t even universal! Some human societies view all children as the collective children of the tribe. The nuclear family is actually fairly new.
Human nature is a choice we all make together.
Your choice of companion is part of how you compete.
People generally pick friends based on what their friends do for them and how their reputation (e.g. influence) is, whether or not they actually realize that. So much of this is done subconsciously.
Nobody wants to keep the friend around who is always asking for help… everybody wants the friend who asks for little and is always there for them.
I do agree that the social construct of nuclear families is not natural in any way. You see this with divorce rates quite clearly. It’s quite common to find the rich, powerful, influential and attractive having many sexual partners and many followers. Without things like child support I suspect there would be many MANY more bastards out there than there already are.
Anyway, you are looking at things through an idealist lens. I’m pointing things out in a blunt narcissistic lens. People are shades of gray, not black and white. If you ignore the competition and pretend everyone will be nice you’ll quickly find this doesn’t work when scaled out past a small community. It just doesn’t. It never has. It never will.
People are competitive within a competitive framework because human nature is contingent on the material conditions. I’m not some fucking idealist, I understand competition exists lol
In fact, I literally said “nature is not just competition” - that necessarily means that it is also competition. It’s just more than competition. Get it?