God, Aggression, Genes, and Superdeterminism

Quotes from Book:

“From an evolutionary standpoint, 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙘𝙞𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚 is nothing more than an evolved mechanism to protect us from the wrath of our fellow human beings. Conscience is the hard-wired, built-in mechanism that prevents us from angering other people and getting ourselves maimed or killed in an aggressive conflict.”

“So what is it then that really threatens Americans the most about communism? I said that consciously we don’t want to lose our property and that in general we don’t want to 𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭. But from an unconscious perspective, I believe for the American male, this loss of control is tantamount to becoming 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦, to becoming 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦—in short, to 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯.”

“What I am saying is that in Asian populations we have seen less sexual dimorphism and a more “collectivistic” philosophy. In contrast, in the United States we have a much more 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤 mindset and this is accompanied by greater sexual dimorphism, higher testosterone levels and larger testes by volume (specifically amongst Caucasians and Blacks).”

“If men have an innate, biological desire to mate with younger females, then why judge a man when he does so? Well, as I said before, there is this perception of “child abuse” or “incest” that makes the “correct” age difference between a man and a woman swing more the other way. So, in short, there is a sort of balance achieved between men’s attraction to younger females, and society’s perception of what is an 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘦 age.”

“By wearing long dresses and by generally repressing overt sexuality, the Pilgrims removed a danger that threatened their cohesiveness. And indeed from that small conservative cluster of individuals was bred a whole moral ground for a nation. Why is that America is so God-fearing and prudish about sex in general today? Why is it that I can go to Europe and see billboards with naked breasts? Or naked children at the beach or pool? Why is it that in America a woman can be severely chastised for breast-feeding in public? It’s because of these puritanical roots.”

“On the contrary we have the Conservatives. Because they believe in this power of Free Will—in the power of choice—they deem that their ancestors worked hard and made their family what it was—possibly affluent, or with status, or social power—they don’t believe in the “accidental” nature of their birth, but, rather, feel privileged and “deserving” of their status in life.  Likewise the Conservative will believe homosexuality is a sin of choice, not predilection by birth. They believe homosexuals simply choose their immoral path and are not compelled or constrained by their biology. If a person gets cancer, the Conservative  believes their “bad actions” caused them to get sick. And if such a man gets stricken with cancer himself, he may believe that by the power of his mind alone can he heal himself. Such a man believes that when he acts, it is his Free Will that shapes his destiny. Such a man believes that everything he does is a product of his Free Will.  In other words, the conservative believes that all that he acquires in life comes to him through the choices he makes—in short, through the exercise of his Free Will.”

“In fact, it was Richard Feynman’s path integral formulation that provides the best evidence to date of superdeterminism in the universe. In that formulation, Feynman points out that the summation of all potential paths from point A to point B effectively yield the probability that the subatomic particle takes that path. In short, even crazy paths that zigzag or go to the moon and back have to be considered. What he said was that ultimately most of these wild, or extreme paths cancel out from nearby paths and therefore don’t contribute to the final amplitude of the path you’re trying to calculate. But this is not purely a math trick. Experiments have been made with diffraction grating that effectively show that if you block the “classical” path and place this diffraction grating nearby, the lines in the grating will block some “destructively” interfering paths. And when these paths are blocked, that mean other paths that wouldn’t ordinarily contribute to the amplitude, docontribute to this final amplitude and hence also contribute to the probability of a photon taking a path from point A to B. In short, what it means, is that practically speaking, the entire universe—with all its mass and energy—may contribute to a photon’s path. And this is exactly the idea behind superdeterminism. Ultimately if everything is one big causal chain, then every event of the universe in the past contributes to the position or momentum of anything that exists now. And if the world is perhaps one big circular chain of causality—one where the end starts the beginning—then you might consider that not only the “past” contributes to the position or momentum of some thing, but the “future” contributes as well.”

Read it here! https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FJCMMKXG