You can comment on this topic here: signs-not-astrological or use the forum.
/**
Work in progress
*/
I will start by saying that the evolution of signs because is an observed evolution proves that the features that are evolving are true.
Those are some higher goals that are changing.
Then I will say that this points to the conclusion that humans have an order of needs set at an initial moment. This statement brings a new factor into the definition of personality - the order of needs set at an initial moment.
(At this point the whole thing is pretty shaky.)
But then because the first argument is based on some astrological signs legend we will go back and try to analyze it a little - using only logic - given the fact that nobody will do serious research on it or even want to hear about it.
Coincidentally being involved in some AI research hobby I realized that if you want to make some robots and those robots to do something you must set them some goals - needs and to set a priority order for those needs.
This doesn't absolutely prove that things are the same in humans because building robots that want to do something (even if we set them the need to live?) could not be the same as humans - humans still could be different - creation of some god that we cannot recreate.
So it doesn't prove that humans are the same but in the actual context it seem pretty probable and is another weak prove that is making the whole concept of ordered needs a little more plausible.
Now lets see what else can we find around.
Lets forget that we discovered that the order of needs is set in relation with time and lets try to find another system for that.
We still keep the concept of order of needs in mind.
Our system will have to obey those rules:
we want to make the personality not inherited.
we want to fluctuate that order of needs just a little - in a controllable manner so is not random and
we want those fluctuations to be spread proportionally equal in population.
Well another surprise here: there is no other way of imagining this system except to relate it with time.
If the order of needs are set at an initial moment in relation with time, personality inheritance is eliminated, the order of needs fluctuates in very precise ranges - no need to call on randomness and the changes are proportionally equal in population.
This is another weak prove because it relates on the assumption that the order of needs exist.
The order of needs for humans is SET at conception/birth moment in relation with time.
By order of needs I mean that some needs are more important that others and this order is different for every people.
The order of needs is determining the personality.
This means that personality is set by a mechanism - a very precise one - not known or ignored by scientific world.
By order of needs I mean that some needs are more important that others and this order is different for every people.
The order of needs is determining the personality.
This means that personality is set by a mechanism - a very precise one - not known or ignored by scientific world.
I have 2 main arguments for that:
The first is that there cant be imagined a mechanism to set the order of needs other than related with time and the second one is that
Signs evolve one from another.
I will talk here about the first while for the second I have created a separate page.
Time - the only variable that can be used to create controlled diversity in humans.
I discovered that the only possible way to create controlled diversity in human behavior was to relate to time.
I reached this conclusion when I was thinking about an AI (Artificial intelligence ) design.
I am a programmer and I am developing (more in theory by now) an AI project.
Assumptions:
- Human needs are SET somewhere at conception / birth moment - at some initial moment.
- Then the needs dont just sit there in no order - there is an order for them - a pretty strict one.
About the fact that the needs are set already when the man is born I will make a comparison with some robots.
Actually the comparison with robots will be allover the place and I hope you will understand and appreciate it.
I use it because it simplifies the equation - it allows me talk about humans and to reduce all the variables thus making facts more visible.
So this is a first robot parallel I use to prove that needs are set already before humans (or robots in this case) start functioning.
You can make a robot, put in it a perfectly functionality software that will give the robot all the capabilities to navigate into environment, to recognize chargers, to communicate BUT it wont act unless you will set him a need.
You can make the robot and place it near a charger but he wont recharge.
He is on and he understands that he will die if he dont recharge but he wont act to recharge because there is no purpose in that. He dont want anything yet. You must set externally that he want something in order to act.
So lets try to imagine a mechanism to see how this order of needs can be set and at what time.
The simplest way will be to have this order set at conception inherited from parents. But this is not true as we all know and it doesn't need much investigation.
If this would be true will lead to some very strange situations.
A man want money. He will get money. He will work hard, step on some principles maybe, make some economies and there he is - at the end of his life he has some money.
Now his son is inheriting the same order of needs so his biggest need is the same to have more money. He has a financial base, he has the will so he will be even more successful.
Now a painter trains himself to paint beautiful paintings and his sons will inherit his talent and knowledge and teachings. They will became better and better painters.
This will lead to an unprecedented situations like clans of people. The rich people, the scientists tribe and so on.
This way some tribes might not survive as all the wealth might be own by some ruthless conqueror clan.
And we see this is not happening in real life. Children look like parents, have almost the same IQ but they want different things.
So we have our order of needs and this is NOT INHERITED.
Another way to imagine how this order of needs is set is to have a random factor in the equation at conception.
Well... we know that there are no random things in universe but lets assume it will be almost random created at conception by the combination of a very large amount of information from the two parents.
If this order of needs will be created random there will be no control. People would be very very different. They will want food on the last position so they will die.
So there is a mechanism of controlling this order not to vary too much but to keep people in competition.
If the variation will be too big that individual is out of competition and will die.
So the order of needs is not random - but is set by a pretty equitable well balanced and precise mechanism I would say.
Now lets imagine a precise mechanism to set the order of needs that is not random and is not inherited by parents.
I could only find one mechanism that follows those rules: the needs order is set at birth moment (as astrological signs theory somehow says) - in relation with time.
It could also be set at conception if we think that it usually takes 9 months to birth so the astrological signs observation could just be inaccurate. Although at the first look seems more probably to be set at conception, if now we couple our observations with astrological signs - the people that are born earlier or later than 9 months still hold the sign of the birth moment not conception. This matter will be sorted out when scientist will look at it.
This mechanism ensures all that we are searching for: a precise system
- needs only fluctuate in well defined boundaries,
- needs order are independent from parents and another important thing:
- need orders are grouped and those groups are spread proportionally equal in the population (because birth moment is equally split across an year).
Still not convinced?
Here is a parallel with some robots that hopefully simplify the equation:
Lets assume somebody will be ale to create humanoid robots.
Or lets even more simplify - lets say they are small robots traveling on wheels.
We implement in them few needs like:
1 - need to search a power supply and recharge when the battery is low,
2 - need to observe and analyze the surrounding environment and came up with solutions - some kind of engineering curiosity,
3 - need to make humans happy
4 - this implies the need of trying to study and understand humans and other.
5 - and lets say something not very scientific - the need to gather small rocks.
so we have 5 needs implemented in our small robots.
Now those robots will start running around.
What we do if a robot has the chance to fulfill 2 needs in the same moment but he only must choose one?
We must set up an order for those needs.
So if he is low on batteries and he has the opportunity to gather a nice rock, he will have to choose to go for the batteries.
Now if we have in our robots exactly the same software, they will behave exactly the same. We will only be able to distinguish them by they numbers painted on their back.
If we want to add a little diversity what can we do?
We will change a little the order of needs.
All of them will have the need for the batteries first but we can play with the others putting them in different orders.
This will result of course in a different behavior.
Another thing that will make them different will be the fact that they have a different processor and memory.
To go even further here is an AI problem that if you can solve the solution could possibly be migrated to humans:
PROBLEM:
We have a robots population.
We want to set them one of just ... 12 psychical behaviors at birth.
We want that behavior not to be transmitted by parents (assuming robots have parents... :) )
We want those 12 (lets say we set 12) behaviors to be statistically almost equal in proportion between robots population.
You have no control over the population. Once you started the process it must procreate independently. There is no master control of the system.
The robots dont communicate instantaneously via radio waves or whatever else. They can only communicate by voice.
The decision has nothing to do with the parents. they cant do anything to influence the outcome. The decision is made inside small baby robot by your algorithm.
Question: find a system to do this.
The easiest will be just to have one of 12 by random and thus statistically the proportion will be kept. But this dont apply because we like to have systems - things to happen from a reason. We like to be in control.
So what do I claim? What is my theory?
Humans have their needs set at birth moment (or conception - to be researched - I favor birth) so this is done in relation with time.
This will result in groups of people having similar needs order according with birth moment.
A strange feature of this mechanism is that the groups are not random. They seem to evolve pretty smooth one from another.
It would have been a very normal feature to have an evolution mechanism and this to be seen. The strange thing is that the groups evolve in relation with the need itself. The main behavior line of the next group is set as if the previous group has fulfilled its most important need and now it want something else.
What can we do to find out if this is true or not?
We can make a psychological test.
I am requesting psychologists to imagine and create a test and to prove that this theory is true or false.
There were some attempts to look into astrological signs but very poorly designed in my opinion:
http://www.beyondweird.com/occult/astrolog.html
If you will look at what are they trying to find you will at least smile:
They refer to sun signs, houses, astrology, records of suicides, correlation between sun sign and personality traits, signs and houses of the moon, correlations between astrological factors and the Introversion/Extroversion index, correlation between marriage/divorce rate and sun sign combination, distribution of the house containing Saturn for successful individuals, and the house containing Mars for murderers.
Those are quite wrong things to check.
I am not asking for such a test.
I am asking for a test to detect if some needs (and which one) are set at birth and it their order can be related with birth moment.
How can this be done? Not very sure. Psychologists should know.
Could be a set of questions that will bring as result something like this:
Order of needs for subject x in descending order.
1. most important need identified.
2. second most important need identified...
3. ...
It will be pretty hard to detect those because of several factors:
- some needs or their importance might be hidden - we must take into account that we are talking about desires that humans learned to hide during their life. For example a man who has the most desire to be rich and only this, will learn that actually he dont have to tell this to anyone but to act in different ways and usually to hide this desire. If you will ask him if to have money is the most important thing in his life he will probably say no.
- IQ
An option to maximize chances to find something will be to take a look at the popular observation - astrological signs and somehow assume some of the observations are true and try to detect them.
We almost know what we are looking for so knowing this will help us. I think this will ease our work.
I am currently doing all that I can to request help from psychologists to design such a test (for the beginning) and later to put it in practice.
This includes starting threads on psychology forums and sending emails to various psychologists.
If you like this theory and can do something in this direction please help.
There are some pretty interesting aspects if this theory will prove to be correct.
- First of all it will take us one step closer to prove that humans are not unique and special.
It will make things even more clear towards the conclusion that humans are determinable and dont have free will. It will be a big step forward in philosophy.
For the moment this mechanism is missing from our knowledge: why are we the way we are?
If this theory is true we will have a very precise mechanism for that to study.
- Proving this theory is true, will open a new chapter in psychology.
From wiki:
Philosophical assumptions
Many of the ideas developed by historical and modern personality theorists stem from the basic philosophical assumptions they hold. The study of personality is not a purely empirical discipline, as it brings in elements of art, science, and philosophy to draw general conclusions. The following five categories are some of the most fundamental philosophical assumptions on which theorists disagree:
1. Freedom versus Determinism
2. Heredity versus Environment
3. Uniqueness versus Universality
4. Active versus Reactive
5. Optimistic versus Pessimistic It this theory will prove to be correct will solve almost all those problems.
1. is Determinism -
we have control over our own behavior and understand the motives behind it
but our control is causally determined by forces beyond our control
2. - Personality is determined by an absolutely new factor and the most important one - is determined mostly by order of needs set at birth moment.
3. Universality - are we unique or similar? very similar..
4. Reactive.
5. Pessimistic. Once set the order of needs cant be altered and this is the most important part of personality.
So as can be seen proving this theory will be a huge step forward in psychology.
- This will bring us closer to understand humans and life - and this will be beneficial for AI (Artificial Intelligence) development. For the moment there is a big fog over what people should do in order to create Artificial Intelligence and a big problem is that simply humans look mysterious and unique.
- There might be some social changes - companies will hire people from certain signs that better fit the job spec. This will be a form of discrimination but all true things have their effects. Sooner or later the true things will be discovered so better sooner. I am sure we will be able to address this matter
- Because of this parents might want to plan their babies to fall into a more successful sign.
We will sit and think if this is a good thing or bad and encourage it or discourage it.
- Another thing to consider is if animals have signs. Yes I know how it sounds.
First the whole story with the signs and now this...
Well I am just exploring possibilities with my mind... no harm done.
So the question is: if the groupings of orders of needs is set in humans by some hardcore natural phenomena (in relation with time), could those phenomena affect animals also?
Animals have only a few needs so it will be hard to variate them.
If you have food and reproduce as needs there is not much you can shuffle. But who knows... (in progress...)
You can comment on this topic here: signs-not-astrological or use the forum.
