This is a result of Darwinian selection insofar as I can understand, so I agree with that but I would not say it is *only* that.
I see your point. My sense is that the more evolved the analytical mind becomes the further it diverges from the experiential mind...
-
-
... therefore causing an evolutionary "maladaption" which does not benefit its selection and propagation in the gene pool.
-
I agree with both points. I'd add that such misadaptation is actually beneficial in the short term, but also fragile; experiential is anti-f
-
I.e. in your first sentence, instead of "evolved", "optimized".
-
Very good point, and it is more accurate to say "optimized" instead of "evolved". How do you reconcile this though?
-
It appears to me that is often what is fit for the individual consciousness runs contrary to what is fit for evolutionary fitness.
-
Very interesting. I'd say that's because consciousness is analytical, and evolutionary fitness is more closely linked to the intuitive.
-
Ultimately the path of consciousness transcends, and includes, both. We are both of the lower, and the higher dimension. We are humans.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.