Defining Humans, Good and Evil

This is a reference placeholder for future use, and hopefully it helps me to not have to repeat myself so much in other stories.

Human: An ape-like mammal (Primate) that builds a model of the universe in its overgrown nervous system and upon physical maturity, moves a model of itself inside that model and avoids reality (tigers) at all cost.

Net Future Usefulness: The amount that a species contributes to its offspring’s future environment over and above what it consumes (sometimes, this is just extra eggs for the bigger fish to eat). “The opposite of consumption is not frugality; it is generosity.” -Raj Patel #Good

Evil: An action taken based on an unquestioned belief.

“Crying ‘Overpopulation!’ is just another way of shifting blame from the rich to the poor.” -George Monbiot

Civilization (city-based society): A profit (prophet) based system of separating human animals from their natural environmental risks and resources.

The problem with defining good and evil by humanism is both the “human” part and the “ism” part. Believing in people should not be the first goal. Our best work is not done for us (alone). Believing isn’t the useful part: doing work that helps more than it hurts is the useful part. Doing things based on beliefs we don’t question is almost always the hurtful part.

The difference between Science and War is just a matter of patience. One waits for opponents to die of natural causes and the other thinks that killing people with kindness takes too long.

War and sexual reproduction both accelerate change. Humans imagine they choose the rate of change but really only choose the death rate: usually without agency and at a cash register.