i’m hearing culture this culture that a lot, systemic this and that, but what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

where’s it all going

transition said:

i’m hearing culture this culture that a lot, systemic this and that, but what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

where’s it all going

Your question is vague to the point of meaninlessness.

>where’s it all going

Hopefully to nicer ways, happier days.

Hard to be more specific, given the nature of the question.

must be talking to a pathologist

dv said:

transition said:

i’m hearing culture this culture that a lot, systemic this and that, but what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

where’s it all going

Your question is vague to the point of meaninlessness.

I agree, not entirely unlike most of the natural world is meaningless, and vague that way, and I doubt the meaninglessness is limited to the natural world

transition said:

i’m hearing culture this culture that a lot, systemic this and that, but what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

where’s it all going

> Your question is vague to the point of meaninlessness.

I agree, not entirely unlike most of the natural world is meaningless, and vague that way, and I doubt the meaninglessness is limited to the natural world

The previous thread about ancientness of aboriginal “culture” made me think of this.

It put me in mind of a much more ancient culture, that of the naked mole-rat.

In order to make any sense of the word “culture” one first has to define it. And to definine it one first has to analyse it.

I see it as analogous to trying to define any vague concept, or any firm concept (such as a chair) for that matter. And the starting point is to get three bins labled “culture”, “not culture” and “don’t know”. Come up with ideas, and toss each idea into each bin as it occurs. Each person will have different items in the “culture” bin depending on their upbringing. Only once each bin has a sufficient number of items in it can we start to define “culture”.

So lets start with culture. Items in the “human culture” bin include:

• technology, agriculture, building, civilisation, language, art, sexual taboos, food taboos, violence taboos, breaking of contract taboos, disease taboos, tax, warfare, healing, parenting, education, persistance of history, clothing, etc.

> what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

Well, let’s see what sociology is and where it’s going. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology
“Sociology is the study of human behavior. Sociology refers to social behavior, society, patterns of social relationships, social interaction, and culture that surrounds everyday life”

You can see already that there’s a tension between “culture” and “sociology”. “Sociology” more closely resembles what you term “human nature study”. Although they mostly overlap, there are differences. Let’s sweep those differences under the carpet and look at where sociology is heading and what use it is.

“Traditional focuses of sociology include social stratification, social class, social mobility, religion, secularization, law, sexuality, gender, and deviance.”

> where’s it all going

“As all spheres of human activity are affected by the interplay between social structure and individual agency, sociology has gradually expanded its focus to other subjects and institutions, such as health and the institution of medicine; economy; military; punishment and systems of control; the Internet; education; social capital; and the role of social activity in the development of scientific knowledge. “

> what use is it?

“Social research has influence throughout various industries and sectors of life, such as among politicians, policy makers, and legislators; educators; planners; administrators; developers; business magnates and managers; social workers; non-governmental organizations; and non-profit organizations, as well as individuals interested in resolving social issues in general. As such, there is often a great deal of crossover between social research, market research, and other statistical fields.”

transition said:

dv said:

transition said:

i’m hearing culture this culture that a lot, systemic this and that, but what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

where’s it all going

Your question is vague to the point of meaninlessness.

I agree, not entirely unlike most of the natural world is meaningless, and vague that way, and I doubt the meaninglessness is limited to the natural world

What is the meaning of “meaningless” in that statement?

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

dv said:

Your question is vague to the point of meaninlessness.

I agree, not entirely unlike most of the natural world is meaningless, and vague that way, and I doubt the meaninglessness is limited to the natural world

What is the meaning of “meaningless” in that statement?

The meaning

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

I agree, not entirely unlike most of the natural world is meaningless, and vague that way, and I doubt the meaninglessness is limited to the natural world

What is the meaning of “meaningless” in that statement?

The meaning

That album cover is still pretty appropriate.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

What is the meaning of “meaningless” in that statement?

The meaning

That album cover is still pretty appropriate.

Sure is.

transition said:

i’m hearing culture this culture that a lot, systemic this and that, but what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

where’s it all going

Perhaps what you need is a good lot of cancel culture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture

we prefer agriculture

SCIENCE said:

we prefer agriculture

You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.

Woodie said:

SCIENCE said:

we prefer agriculture

You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.

Dear, oh dear, oh dear…

Woodie said:

SCIENCE said:

we prefer agriculture

You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.

Suppresses politically incorrect smile.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Woodie said:

SCIENCE said:

we prefer agriculture

You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.

Suppresses politically incorrect smile.

did the same.

Woodie said:

transition said:

i’m hearing culture this culture that a lot, systemic this and that, but what sort of useful human nature studies comes from it

where’s it all going

Perhaps what you need is a good lot of cancel culture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture

Thanks for that link.

I can think of a lot of things I could say that would result in me being part of the cancel culture.

Don’t ever think that there’s such a thing as freedom of speech. ;-(

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

dv said:

Your question is vague to the point of meaninlessness.

I agree, not entirely unlike most of the natural world is meaningless, and vague that way, and I doubt the meaninglessness is limited to the natural world

What is the meaning of “meaningless” in that statement?

chuckle

well, I guess, to get down to it, most of the natural world doesn’t value knowledge, could be a way of getting to the essence of it, a starting point, if I was to make it a technical proposition that could be argued

transition said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

I agree, not entirely unlike most of the natural world is meaningless, and vague that way, and I doubt the meaninglessness is limited to the natural world

What is the meaning of “meaningless” in that statement?

chuckle

well, I guess, to get down to it, most of the natural world doesn’t value knowledge, could be a way of getting to the essence of it, a starting point, if I was to make it a technical proposition that could be argued

OK, I’ll have a think about that.

Michael V said:

Woodie said:

SCIENCE said:

we prefer agriculture

You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.

Dear, oh dear, oh dear…

Possibly W. C. Fields.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Woodie said:

You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.

Suppresses politically incorrect smile.

did the same.

He also said: No one who hates children and small dogs can be all bad.

>You can see already that there’s a tension between “culture” and “sociology”. “Sociology” more closely resembles what you term “human nature study”. Although they mostly overlap, there are differences. Let’s sweep those differences under the carpet and look at where sociology is heading and what use it is

if I borrowed an old idea, which isn’t without potential problems (shortcomings), but still it works for a starter idea, you could say culture involves ways for the satisfaction of human nature

of sociology, the formalism, you couldn’t say that

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Suppresses politically incorrect smile.

did the same.

He also said: No one who hates children and small dogs can be all bad.

W C Fields also said, when asked if he liked children “I do. Just so long as they’re properly cooked”.

Woodie said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

did the same.

He also said: No one who hates children and small dogs can be all bad.

W C Fields also said, when asked if he liked children “I do. Just so long as they’re properly cooked”.

LOL

I think culture is a powerful force for good, no question, certainly can be

preserves the space people operate in, the operating space, also preserved the larger space, which includes the larger world, other life etc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anathema

my reading^, quite an interesting concept in it, if dig around for an essence in the idea, apply it to subterranean tasks or ways of the wetware, how perceptions, conceptions, thoughts and whatever mental state commitments preclude other possibilities

not a word ever used much, never had an inclination really

transition said:

I think culture is a powerful force for good, no question, certainly can be

preserves the space people operate in, the operating space, also preserved the larger space, which includes the larger world, other life etc

Depends on the culture.
Who cultured Craig Kelly and his ilk?

roughbarked said:

transition said:

I think culture is a powerful force for good, no question, certainly can be

preserves the space people operate in, the operating space, also preserved the larger space, which includes the larger world, other life etc

Depends on the culture.
Who cultured Craig Kelly and his ilk?

Wolves.