Hi there,
So just looking at a hypothetical, here: if two identically evolved suitor seek the same mate, they can only be chosen on the basis of emotion. This means that a better emotional tenor for Evolution, will out evolved a less emotional one.
Reconciling this, can only lead to a stronger emotional resilience, in principle.
Knowing this in advance, less onerously burdened evolution, is able to be emotional resolute with greater ease. In other words, the further you stray from a genuine emotional presence - back through other species' resonance, for example - the less likely you will be able to vie for the emotion in the current context. Old emotion, will be beaten by new emotion, every time.
I'm not saying you can't try really hard to be chosen, I'm just saying you are flying in the face of the lighter way. That's natural order, not science. I'm not trying to suggest what will develop scientifically, I'm saying first principles philosophically, would suggest there is a greater ease and light in simple deference to the nearest solution. A tiger could argue that it has emotional tenor having been an elephant, but a tiger that suggests it has greater emotional tenor having been from a long line of simple tigers will win every time.
I don't want to mislead you, if two tigers have the exact same lineage of simple ancestors, the tiger that says "I was also an Elephant in a past life" has an advantage, that the line of simple ancestors can't give. The point is, is that the weight of comparison, is on the tiger lineage first.
Ask yourself, does a royal lineage of humankind serve better or worse than a lineage of animals? If you are the underdog would you promise to be more of an animal in future, or more royal of the kind you already had?
Again, I don't want to mislead you, maybe if you have a perfect sense of humour, you could make a joke of having been a blind rhinoceros in a past life - but you wouldn't be credited with entirely grasping the point.
So just looking at a hypothetical, here: if two identically evolved suitor seek the same mate, they can only be chosen on the basis of emotion. This means that a better emotional tenor for Evolution, will out evolved a less emotional one.
Reconciling this, can only lead to a stronger emotional resilience, in principle.
Knowing this in advance, less onerously burdened evolution, is able to be emotional resolute with greater ease. In other words, the further you stray from a genuine emotional presence - back through other species' resonance, for example - the less likely you will be able to vie for the emotion in the current context. Old emotion, will be beaten by new emotion, every time.
I'm not saying you can't try really hard to be chosen, I'm just saying you are flying in the face of the lighter way. That's natural order, not science. I'm not trying to suggest what will develop scientifically, I'm saying first principles philosophically, would suggest there is a greater ease and light in simple deference to the nearest solution. A tiger could argue that it has emotional tenor having been an elephant, but a tiger that suggests it has greater emotional tenor having been from a long line of simple tigers will win every time.
I don't want to mislead you, if two tigers have the exact same lineage of simple ancestors, the tiger that says "I was also an Elephant in a past life" has an advantage, that the line of simple ancestors can't give. The point is, is that the weight of comparison, is on the tiger lineage first.
Ask yourself, does a royal lineage of humankind serve better or worse than a lineage of animals? If you are the underdog would you promise to be more of an animal in future, or more royal of the kind you already had?
Again, I don't want to mislead you, maybe if you have a perfect sense of humour, you could make a joke of having been a blind rhinoceros in a past life - but you wouldn't be credited with entirely grasping the point.
Last edited:
