Abstract

This paper will try to present an evolutionary linkage to the current circumstances and will attempt to attend some of the questions which whoever is presuming to be “sapience” should ask itself:

How it came to be that a certain primate is jeopardizing its own population existence and the survival of its lineage by investing significant portion of its metabolic energy and cognitive function in destructive or counterproductive behavioral activities on the account of its own well being and on the expense of natural habitats to the extent of facing imminent annihilation of the biosphere on which it depends for its survival on the only planet where it exist.

How it came to be that an animal is focusing all of its evolutionary strategies on specific methodologies and technics meant for dominating and indoctrinating other specimens of its population to collectively share the same ambitions centered around two main premises: the exploitation of other living creatures and the disregard of the living conditions of others in a shared habitat and to achieve such absolute domination by all means of violence and aggression over other biological specimens and over populations of specimens identical to them.

How it came to be that specimens of the human primates are voluntary participating and performing such individualistic and collectively coordinated behaviors which supporting, maintaining developing and advancing the annihilation of other human primate specimens as well as all other life forms sharing their habitat.

Is a socially engineered culturally incentivized rewording system can explain such behavioral expression? What is the perceptual and cognitive engine which motivates the enthusiastic participation of specimens in such counterproductive functioning on personal level which drive them for partaking in coordinated participation in such activities as collectives in local communal and entire population scales .

How it came to be that the majority of the specimens of the blue plant’s primates are either conforming to perform or are voluntarily preforming such daily behavioral activities which include sets of predefined tasks fanatically executed which intended to directly (e.g. logging, drilling rigs, building, refining fuels, commercially farming etc.) or consequently (e.g. squire property, buying cars, consuming etc.) contributing to an escalation in the pace and magnitude of the destruction of their habitat’s biological systems, the declining in the fitness of others of their kind and the distortion of planetary ecologic and abiotic conditions which supporting their own life and the life of their progeny.

How it came to be that almost all human primate’s specimens comply with biased cultural narratives and social ordering which are based on certain ideological principals which promotes societal elevation of individual specimens and collectives of specimens according to their contribution (proportional, significance or relative) for the domination efforts of the top classes, subsequently contributing to the destruction of their biosphere and the annihilation of their kind, doe’s the human primates incentives to comply and partake in activities of destructive nature are its ambitions to achieve or obtain upgraded hierarchical position regardless of the consequences, and the fact that individual’s status will be correlated to the levels of systematic damage their ideological theories, methodologies or actions inflicts or can potentially inflict on the natural systems, by either participating, designing, developing or enhancing means or methods of mass destruction (i.e. production) and the higher is the magnitude (i.e. yield) of their contribution for the destruction (i.e. resource acquisition) and disruption of life and ecosystems (i.e. resources), and the higher they stand in the Parthenon of glorified demigods and contributes the higher they negatively  impacted their environment.

How it came to be that most human primates embrace and subordinate to such ideologies (i.e. worshipers and followers) originated in well recognizable higher classes consist of individual human primates who are developing and spreading nomenclature narratives that glorify the utilization of means of mass destruction that can further the exploitation and accelerate the depletion of their planet finite natural resources and to advance the killing and domination of other specimens identical to them.

Is the condition is a result of denial of observations or inability to perceive the reality of things:

  • Can the human primate specimens perceive empirical reality?
  • Can it understand causality and compute logic expressions containing wide array of dynamic interactions?
  • Can it process complex causation of occurrences and follow the thread of processes and identify trends in order to predict the points of conversion threatening it or it progeny, and if it can will it denial the resulting conclusions if subsequently he is the factor holding the responsibility for such occurrences?

Or is the human condition is a result of an inability to attend, perceive or process external occurrences:

  • Maybe the human primate specimens do not possess the cognitive properties that would render its brain sophisticated enough to process a collection of long term trends in order to compute logical near terms predictions?
  • Maybe there is no denial of reality rather a lack of cognitive abilities for processing multiple layers of data with multiple data sets in each?
  • Is it beyond the cognitive abilities of the human primate to process and connect multiple linear process of observed occurrences that signaling a future destruction of its environment?
  • Can the human primate brain perceive the exponential nature of linear processes and their tipping points in order to compute the resulting consequences of such process of occurrences to the future existence of its progeny and itself?

Maybe there are other forces in work that shaped the human cognitive perception and function and by exploring them one can form a better understanding of how things came to be rather than why things are the way they are.

There are two observable trends enforcing each other which are in effect directly responsible for the current manifestation of the predicament of near future annihilation of the human primate’s lineage and maybe even their plant biosphere:

Population overshoot and population consumption over-reach

And there is only one reason for it:

The dominating mindset inhabits the skulls of the majority of the population of the human primate, the animal that is currently dominating the landscape of the lithosphere of the blue planet

Understanding how our cognition was shaped is the key for understanding the human condition

We are a temporary biological being with a computation system existing in a temporary oasis of equilibrium in the midst of chaotic processes on the grandest scale of all – the scale of the entire universe that constantly manufacturing and destroying matter and systems of matter releasing unperceivable magnitudes of energy and vice versa, mater and energy act and interact with each other over periodic process observed as stages defining spaces and perceived relativity, causing changes in elemental structure on scales large enough to create environmental specifications that can produce the organization of matter into life via trends of processes that includes periods of transition, development and stable stages which defining the concept of time in temporary computation systems inhabit the biological tissue of a conscious being horrified by the insignificant of its non-equilibrium short living existence.

We are the result of long processes producing simple single systems evolving into multiple systems with increasing complexity in incremental steps of matter created by energy and collapsing back into energy exploding again into new forms of matter producing nuclear fusion and fission conditions manufacturing and changing elements and defining spaces according to conditional laws governing processes of physical transformation of elements and matter to planets of which some can obtain environments and conditions for chemical formation of biochemical and biological structures made from the same matter that can be found anywhere in the universe, the matter that construct all living creatures which are subjected to the same forces of destructive chaotic elements and deteriorating energy that circumstantially can be constructive for the emergence and for the temporarily maintenance of life.

We temporarily exist as living being the product of a lineage of certain blueprint organizing matter into a specific variation of a biological designs, we are grounded by a force we called gravity to a surface of a rounded pile of elements organized in different structure and surface formations in physical states abstracted into a single nomenclature object with commonly recognized symbol labeled as “planet” (in general) and “planet earth” in particular:  One planet out of ~1024 (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) planets in the universe, a planet in which a collusion of past conditions and circumstances enabled the emergence of carbon based biological life and on which more recent development created a biosphere enabling the maintaining of a certain planetary and atmospheric conditions which support a continuum for carbon based life.

We exist on a planet with a biosphere that was maintained long enough for enabling living systems to emerge and to evolve for generations, for chemical reactions to form structures and to integrate into different modules of chemical and electrical reactors molded into a system of biological life. Our planet biosphere maintained long enough for supporting the evolution of life form utilizing biological code to preserve a blueprint for manufacturing the structural design and functional operating system of living being and for easily replicate biological matter producing a continuum of replications and mutations changing every generation subsequently creating specimens more capable of surviving that can be observed as evolving and adapting over generations with growing code lines for each accidental improvement in the structural or functional design over its predecessors, an aftermath learning system evolved utilizing “experimental” reproduction mechanism mixing two strains of code into one, which causes generational changes due to random mutations and errors in replication and over generations adjusting or failing the survivability of a linage of a certain strain of code and consequently improving or deteriorating the fitness of each generation over the previous ones until it achieve a temporary equilibrium of existence or parish.

We as a collective of individual animals got to this point at time and space as a result of multiple processes evolving over large geological periods, our story didn’t started 200,000 years ago with the emergence of the modern features in our lineage but billions of years ago with the creation of a universe made of atomic particles governed by forces and laws which are currently defined in our collective knowledge database as disciplines of theoretical physics, thermodynamics and chemistry, our story and the journey of life on earth started with subatomic partials constricting atomic elements defining spaces by presuming energetic equilibrium  in a stable state which we define as mass and matter emerged from a universe of chaotic energy attempted to be described by the discipline of quantum mechanics.

Life is a system of unconscious organization of matter in biological system of certain function and purpose evolved and exist under the governing laws of chemical reactions organized in organelles and organs of biological mechanisms operated by a central information system choreographing and synchronizing biomechanical functions, utilizing the properties and tendencies of natural chemical to acquire, produce and use metabolic energy for supporting such functions, constructing and reconstructing physical designs with evolving features and intensifying information system all based on code of data containing all the genetic specification for building, maintaining and operating biological system. The specification code of a certain strain of genetic data changes through steps of reproduction and mutations continuously adjusting the biological structure and the genetic blueprint creating new lineages of which success can be only measured in multi-generational retrospection (i.e. number of generations, population size and distribution, fitness of population etc.) and in many cases after the lineage is already extinct. The achievement of a continuum of a long-term existence of lineage is the result of its certain strains of genetic data, its evolutionary state is measured by the level in which the development of its genetic code contributed to the maximization of individuals fitness subsequently leading to its generational survivability for the maximum possible length of  a continuum of the supporting environmental conditions that are relative to the maximum continuation of life itself on the planet (e.g. a shark lineage is more successful than the primate lineage in term of overall generational existence on the planet).

In order to achieve understanding of the world one needs to be able to capture and conceptualize in its mind an accurate representation of the occurrences happening outside of its mind, to achieve that one need to established strong foundations for an empirical perceptual framework convening all the main principals of the different systems of nature that facilitating the formation and governing the dynamics that produce and predict natural phenomena’s.

The human primate experience the external occurrences through a prism of consciousness that is determine by its cognitive specifications: in order for understanding how nature works one first need to understand how the cognitive systems that interfaces with the external universe works and for that one need to understand how it was evolved. Today we have all the data to understand the human primate cognitive conciseness and to place it in the larger context of the grand scheme of things, we can follow the thread of our cognitive evolution from the beginning of our ancestry lineage until today but certain conditions are preventing it from happen.The cognition of human primates is the product of evolutionary processes of adaptation to different environments and overcoming certain shortcoming arising from environmental conditions and societal arrangements, the evolutionary stockpiling of code in DNA includes the chronological logs for each adaptation for new living arrangement which signify the correlating conditions (which imply the causation) that shaped the human primate cognition during each stage of evolution.

We have sufficient data for tracking the changes and charting the stages of cognitive properties and expressions at each cognitive milestone in the apparatus of historical conditions; we can follow the thread of our cognitive evolution in our ancestry lineage from the first cell until today, but from some reason this is not the case and the current statuesque regarding the cognitive evolution and states is missing data that is crucial for doing so.

Cognition and social organization

I watched the ants when I was a kid: I saw a line of ants coming out from one hole, they all had the same coloration and body modules but they differ in sizes and proportions, they all walked together in crowded paths breaking into smaller groups following narrowing lanes until they reached a place where resources such as grains were presented, and then they picked up the resource and started returning back all the way using the same pathways until they return to their nest and disappeared inside the hole, and when a group of ants coming from one hole cross a path with individuals of another group coming from a different hole they killed each other, and some ants were raiding other ants colony stealing their gathered resources or using other ants as their food resource, then I looked at the structures and paths that makes our neighborhoods and looked at my parents, at the people in other places on the television and at everybody around me walking the same paths, living in similar arrangements and behaving in similar ways to an insect.

As a kid I wondered what makes the ants do what they do, what made them what they are and how they are integrated into the surfaces and object around them such as trees that at that time were abstract objects to me as I only knew their name and could visualize their appearance but I didn’t know a thing about them, but as I tied the relations between organisms and the roles that type of objects interacting with other type of objects plays in the formation and function of organisms and their habitat, I learned that the ants need the seeds and the grain made by the trees, bushes and grass and that plants needs the ants to pollinates, spread and plant their seeds and they are all part of a system of relationships and by themselves outside of such system, they have no ability to survive, and the birds and the rats and the snakes and the earthworms and all of the rest of living creatures are dependent on each other for maintaining their existence.

I observed the present forms and designs of the different living creatures and their interactions with other living creatures and with their environment and I learned from other documented scientific observations about the gradual rise of such living organisms from the elemental structures of their habitat, how their design morphed over long processes of adaptation evolving  from the small isolated natural mechanisms of chemical and energetic systems arising from chaotic interactions of sub-particles, particles and forces and circumstantial occurrences that by chance and perseverance over eons organized into biochemical and biomechanical modules making the biological unit of cells joining other cells into symbiosis organs operating as one by centralized command system, evolving into complex entities of which some exhibit motility incorporating more or less complexity in their functionality and biological designs that produce more or less sophisticated sets of motile behaviors intended for sustaining their existence and fulfilling their reproductive purposes.

Human primates like ants can have different appearances (phenotypic expressions) but their exhibit behaviors are similar whatever hole or colony they are originated from, ants lifestyle and social structure is governed by rudimentary system of neurological tissue (ants whole nervous system contain ~250,000 neurons) producing an instinctual reactionary system of motility mechanized and mobilized the ant by triggering certain type of behaviors corresponding to certain type of stimuli, in the ants case the organizer of the colony was the consolidation of nomenclature based operating system that unified specific responses to a catalog of classified stimuli triggers that produce identical behaviors in individuals that organically organizes multiple number of individuals in a cooperative units in which each ant performing identical or complementary  functions synchronizing them and focusing them on activity of specific nature at a time (forging, defending, nursing etc.). The ant organization is driven by an operating system based on basal neurological and endocrinal mechanisms incorporating an ideological methodology that is built around obedience to a nomenclature of deterministic triggers (symbols) that produce compliance in individuals to execute motile decisions that will be considered as irrational behaviors from individualistic stand point but when examined in the context of the bigger picture these behaviors proven to be very rational for achieving the type of evolutionary success as ants did.

Like ants the human primates coming out from a hole and crowding in the same paths leading to a locations where they perform their daily tasks that are related to resources acquisition for personal use, which they bring back and gather in their personal chamber in their colony’s nest (city).

The human primates seems to function in the same way as ants although the human primate’s brain is glorified as the most sophisticated of all other organisms (the human primate brain and nerve system contains  from 10 billion to over 100 billion neurons and the average number of neocortical neurons is ~19 billion in female and ~23 billion in male).

But unlike the ants that are collectively and logically utilizing the gathered resources to benefit the group, the most exhibit phenomena in the human primate’s behavior is the inequality in the distribution of the resources in the group and the unbeneficial outcomes that this kind of behavior imposed on the group: In ant colony resources are distributed in accordance to hierarchies that are based on prioritization of the utilization of resources for the more urgent or important functions that supports the survivability of the colony’s reproduction core and progeny (eggs, larva and pupas) and in which the energetic needs and the safety of individuals of more important purpose or functions are being prioritized accordingly, and one of the most observed behavior in ants is the protection and prioritization of the energetic needs of the reproductive females and the progeny, in the human primates’ colonies the distribution of resources and the portion that is available for individuals differ not according to their functional virtues and skills or their reproductive virtues (phenotypic expressions which are the indicators of the quality of their genetic assets), but according to a class that they are ascribed to, and individuals of different classes have access to different portions of the collectively gathered resources as well as to different quarters and chambers in their colony’s nests .

Human primates and ants using similar methods of communal effort for resource acquisition and protection that although utilizes the same methods, are being facilitated by different approaches:
In ants consumption quotas are prioritize by function and per need to benefit the colony while in human primates consumption is unequal and quotas are not prioritize by the function nor by the needs of individuals but by an entitlement provisions assigned to classes of individuals, the distribution of resources in human primates’ colonies benefit few individuals at the top of the hierarchy on the accounts of all others and does not benefiting the progeny and long-term survivability of the lineage.

The strategy driving the organization of the more rudimentary biological system referred to as ants serving the objectives involved in the daily tasks of maintaining the present, short-term and midterm survivability of their colony’s genetics in order to achieve the goal of ensuring the survivability of their linage in the future, and these short terms objectives which supports the long-term goal is successfully executed for over 100 million years by an entity producing complicated motile behaviors utilizing basal operating system based on a instinctual mechanism’s responding to certain inputs and producing certain outputs in which the outputs are triggered by inputs of certain origin intercepted by sensory modules attended for collecting certain types of data from external sources of natural or cultural origin.

The ants utilizes a simple neuroendocrine (compare to more advanced animals) system that interact with external stimuli in order to react to external occurrences, it rely on electrical and chemical reaction arising from sensors and receptors capturing external signals such as certain molecules, photons, mechanic pressure of objects, pressure waves, surface vibration etc. the ant neuroendocrine system constantly monitoring changes in external and internal signals to recognize and identify the presence of other organisms, resources and abiotic phenomena’s which signaling a certain class of interaction (food, enemy, friend, task order etc.) with external agents it also monitoring  the urgency and the severity of the signal in terms of the ETA of an encounter and the level of the positive or negative outcome it will produce.

The interception of recognizable signals initiating a certain stimuli that activates a certain mechanism producing a certain mode (mood) of operation generated by chemicals (endocrine signaling) that secrete directly into the circulatory system producing biochemical processes that initiates and support prolonged reactionary responses and behaviors, for example the identification of ants from another colony will not produce one bite and then back to foraging but a longer term aggressive mode incorporating a library of aggressive behaviors and tactics.  
The ants’ basal system of functions utilizes a nomenclature library of behaviors organized in department of rudimentary modes of operation (e.g. foraging, nursing, defending/attacking etc.) when a mode is triggered by a stimulus it will activate the corresponding department that will initiate sequences of motile behaviors from a fixed arsenal of behaviors that are associated with each mode of operation. The nomenclature system bundling together under distinctive departments of modes an array of motile functions that are sequenced into complex sets of tactical behaviors.  The bundling of input stimuli and its corresponding output functions into one category of mode (i.e. symbol) optimizing the motoric performances by automating the responses resulting in shorter reaction time and more efficient operation of complicated tasks, it’s also produces persistent behaviors that are easily assembled by a collection of short sequences of behaviors, but more importantly the utilization of categorical nomenclature symbols is the accessory for synchronizing and orchestrating the performance of complicated tactics of cooperation by unifying and equalizing the operating modes in a collective of individuals.

Ants from a low cast needs to perform multiple types of tasks that are activated by multiple types of triggers it needs to accommodate large number of catalogs containing multiple libraries of variations of motile sequences correlated to multiple categories of behaviors that are associated with certain classes of modes.
Ant from a low cast (workers) need to perform multiple types of tasks and to attend multiple number of triggers associated with modes and behaviors of operation and cooperation, the catalogs of modes and behaviors in a low cast ant holds many social related triggers, modes and behaviors which producing larger database of nomenclature symbols demanding larger neurological storage space than a solitary insect as it mostly attend to environmental triggers ant its tasks are performed according to individualistic urgencies (somewhat free will..) without social ordering, the more diverse the tasks triggered by the social ordering the larger the nomenclature matrix will be due to the biological method of storing hierarchal reactionary mechanisms for motile sequencing of trigger based behaviors corresponding to different modes of operations of individualistic and social nature, it produces nomenclature catalogs made of duplication of data in paralleling directories dealing with same functions but in different modes of operations for personal interests and for the collective.

The ant have extended brain tissue dedicated for social related behaviors called the “mushroom bodies” which is the part of the ants brain responsible for the most sophisticated computations occurring in the insect brain it makes 50% of the worker ant brain (compare with 20% in the bee) the mushroom bodies are more developed in social insects and are associated with social behaviors, the mushroom bodies are also involved in learning and it include a mechanism for transferring data from short-term memory (STM) into long-term memory (LTM).

The nomenclature communication mechanism of ants utilizes unified perception and interpretation of the shared experiences, their modes and behaviors are triggered in the same way by same external occurrences and internal needs but the exchange of symbolic triggers with other individuals of their colony suppress other triggers and stimuli and produces identical common modes of operation and behaviors and focuses them as one unit on certain task. Their nomenclature based communication system utilizes sensory receptors and transmitters to exchange information for triggering or irritating a certain instinctual reactions at certain level and for certain period of time and ultimately producing unified behaviors that synchronizing multiple individuals for performing the same function and for mobilizing them as a collective operating as one unit.

We can observe two main operating modes in individual ants: the first is a mode of collective sentiment tuned to attend their colony needs and the second is a mode of self-sentiment to attend the occurrences in the external environment which affect them individually, in ants the mode of self-sentiment is suppressed by the mode of the collective sentiment and their individualistic behavior can be described by some as altruistic. The altruistic like behavior in ants is not a function of cognitive assessment but an instinctual act of functional activity ordering that is triggered into existence by a collective sentiment arise from collective metastability state that is ambivalent to individuals metastability outcome, we can say that individual ants wants to live but are unwillingly driven to sacrifice its wellbeing or to die for the greater cause.

But altruistic like behaviors in ants is mostly the virtue of the non-reproductive casts, the reproductive females are the direct beneficiaries from the altruistic like behavior of the non-reproductive casts and their behavior can be described by some as selfish.

The ants’ nomenclature system of communication and operation benefits the colony, the function of individual worker ants was adapted to produce an “altruistic” functionality that supports the collective tasks that composes their fitness strategy that effectually serves the survivability of their colony and their lineage, the ants type of operating system is the mechanism that produces their system of organization in which the individual is a function in a bigger system which in the short-term benefits others in its colony according to their importance and in the long-term serves the purpose of the survivability of the colony.

The operating mechanism of the individual ants incorporates a nomenclature based communication system that produces a shared culture; the ants’ mindset and not its brain capacity is the force that shapes the organization of the ants in complex colonies and it is the property that produces the observable behaviors of obedience to collective sentiment and order and for synchronizing cooperation.

Human primates’ and ants’ colonies are very similar in their appearance, function and structure but is that mean that the mindset that is the driving force of the individualistic and collective strategies of the human primates is similar to the one shaping the ant’s colonies?

Ant colonies and human primate colonies founded on similar premises producing very similar strategies that are driven by two extremes of cognitive capacities, functionality and complexity: both colonies produce a similar organization that is based on classes of function which supporting a collective corporation for the purpose of resources acquisition and utilization, and for the protection of the colony but the outcomes of such collective cooperation efforts in terms of resources distribution and utilization and the wellbeing and survivability of individuals and colonies are very different.

The colony strategy evolved in insects as a consequence of high number of casualties as a result of high volume and constant predatory attacks from entities of the same virtues (i.e. cognitive and physical properties). One of the main conditions that drove the organization of ants in colonies was that the biggest threat to the ants was other ants.

Insects such as the ants organized in colonies prior to developing more unique armories and weapons in a response to predation from other animals of higher virtues, insectivores belong to higher phylum will focus on larger concentration of insects mass to maximize it energetic return on energetic investment of energy and not on solitary insects, the distribution of individuals over large areas can work better against predation from larger insectivores. The colony evolved as a response to intraspecies competition and predation and the leading fitness strategy started as a method for supporting and protecting the progeny by not leaving them alone, which ignited a reproduction arm race for increasing the ranks to achieve numbers advantage when defending the progeny and when attacking other nests, the reproduction process was maximized for producing high replenishment rates broods for compensating the deficit of casualties and for increasing the number of the ranks with each generation to protect and support larger batches of progeny, the evolutionary arm race between colonies happened at a period of time when fewer types and numbers of insectivores roamed the earth and fewer variations of insects existed in the ancient landscape it was long before grains and many other more modern food sources exists and the resources where limited, scares and distributed over larger areas and as a result insects of the same species fiercely competed and cannibalized each other.

The pitfalls of the human primate cognition

One of the miseries of life is that everybody names things a little bit wrong and so it makes everything a little harder to understand in the world than it would be if it were named differently (Richard Feynman)

Information is the perceived data on which one can build an internal image of the external world

There are two methods to obtain information in the brain of an individual human primate:

  • Acquire information: Register in brain tissue data about occurrences which arise from own personal experience or observation.
  • Inquire information: Register in brain tissue data about occurrences broadcasted by a third party arises from its personal experience or observation.

There are two different methods for sharing experiences and observation between members of the human primate’s collective:

  • Literal communication of experience or observation: By impersonating another person experience in real situations (i.e. participation in shared activity e.g. throwing a spear at an animal), mimicking demonstration of experience by another person (i.e. training e.g. throwing a spear at a tree trunk representing an animal), suggestive or figurative gestures and simulation of experience (i.e. observing theatrical representation of an activity e.g. one primate representing the hunter chasing another representing an animal), graphic illustration of instructive data on visible medium (e.g. a drawing of primates shooting spears at an animal)
  • Abstract communication of data via nomenclature symbols: By receiving input of theoretical data from a third party via abstraction of cognitive ideas in the form of auditory symbols (i.e. spoken words) or visual transcribed symbols on visible medium (i.e. written words).

Today most of the human primates receiving information about the external occurrences via abstracted nomenclature communication from a third party database of conceptualized ideas that are based on experience of observation and indoctrination which represents a fundamental flaw in the validity of the database and the sources arises from the methods in which information is being obtained and shared.

Before one can determine if the knowledge it possess have a true value in representing the real properties of the occurrences in the external natural world one should ask few philosophical questions:

  • Is it matter what someone say or does if what was said or done was based on false premises due to systematic limitations in ones abilities for perceiving and processing data causing erroneous registration of data in one’s brain not because of a lack or unavailability of data but due to one’s inabilities for attending such data and for producing logical inquiries and accurate registration of observations arising  from pathological functionality (or malfunctioning) of its brain computation system?
  • What are the factors which validate or null someone’s output data in the form of its behavioral actions or the theoretical declaration of behavioral actions (in the form of verbalizing, demonstrating or inscribing nomenclature’s symbolic communication and memes) which are ultimately an expression of one’s brain computation processes and their resulting conclusions are a prove of their cognitive build?
  • Can one discuss external occurrences with arguments based on empirical data with another who is unable to process such data?
  • Can one discuss external occurrences with another who cannot perceive or who denial the existence of such occurrences who is unable to perceive and compute multiple factors of occurrences?

All of these declarations have to be examined in an empirical method and with a holistic scientific approach by examining the principles of such differences in individuals’ brain capacities in data input, processing and output in what claimed to be by many as identical computation systems which are sharing the same environment but for some reason experiencing and perceiving the external occurrences in very different ways.

The differences in the computation systems of brain of different functions can be defined as a “mindset”.

To approach such topic one should consider a new methodology that will be used for examine the differences between mindsets in a bias-free environment rather than reexamine it again in its current cultural paradigm, and to disregarding the current commonly accepted set of tools for analysis which were inherited and approved for use by cult-determined disciplines utilizing measuring and analysis tools which are the derivatives of deterministic monolithic ideologies. The measurement of any processes of biological system and its evolution, including the analysis of our mindset should be examine in a cultural-free and ideology sterile environment utilizing only biological processes and procedures in the context of the driving physical and chemical factors and abiotic conditions which determine ecological states and trends, and place in this context organisms’ intraspecies organization and interspecies relationships with other organisms in their communities which are sharing their habitat relative to their previous generations states and the historical states of their ecosystems.
In order to determine the states and trends in the development of a mindset, it must be factored in a matrix of data that includes timeline of historic evolutionary states and environmental trends in which we can factor the energetic exchange between the inhabitants of ecosystems of habitats at every step of development.

Ideology is dealing with the philosophical question of “why things are the way they are?” after determining what are these things, while a scientific methodology “investigating how things came to be” to understand how they work:

Few premises are needed to be established when developing holistic framework intended for examining behavioral output of individuals and populations:

First premise is to clear from the conversation cultural and ideological definitions and terms and not using quantifying and classifications methods that are culturally and ideologically determined and not using methods of classifications of properties and behaviors that are intended for differentiating populations and populous. Most of the current systems of classification are infected by ideology and agenda that were established for the purpose of gaining and maintaining hierarchical order and for facilitating the domination of one group over another and acknowledge that all the current disciplines are relative and relevant for the current system of organization of the human primate. We must ignore the currently accepted method of taxonomic classifications as they are all based on biased ideologies and false methodologies such as the definition of the human primates as a species and not as a sister group to the lineage, differentiating human primates by certain common variations of physical phenotypic expressions and calling it races and not breeds, the classification of populations and populous of human primates as cultural groups according to the exhibits of certain behavioral properties  We must ignore all ideological disciplines and their corresponding classification systems that are built around predetermine definitions of behavioral outputs and phenotypic properties which are based on ranking of societal virtues and norms implemented in compliance to authoritarian agenda.

The second premise is to define an accepted set of nomenclature codes for a scientific framework and to define an absolute nomenclator terminology that will be used in such framework and may or may not disagree with current disciplinary and common lingual interpretations and definitions of such terms, that will include defining and redefining current lingual symbols of quantities and measurement as well as methods of calculus.

The third premise is to form a guideline of accepted scientific methodologies established on sets of empirical categories, factors, laws and rules for a non-disciplinary dataflow matrix correlating to the flow of energy in systems.

Complex abstraction of reality via nomenclature

The system of complex abstraction of reality via nomenclature was created and maintained for the purpose of controlled and enforced disciplinary classification of the members of the general primate population in manageable groups.The main factor driving the inevitable decimation the human primate is not the current system of organization defined as “civilization” but the cognitive system which formed such organization and its weapon of mass destruction: the complex system of lingual abstraction utilizing a nomenclature utilizing a matrix of symbols representing ideological dogmas meant to trigger collective behaviors in individuals of the population that are intended to advance individuals ambitions of domination over other individuals of their own kind. The core problem of the human primate is the abstract nature of semantic definitions and inflated system of provisional interpretations and translation of terms, unlike math, language has mostly failed in defining factual realities and occurrences as a consequence of its abstract nature which was intentionally designed and developing and is tenaciously maintained and protected. Abstract linguistic definitions are shifting dialogs from constructive dealing with scientific inquirers meant to deal with existential issues and to answer general curiosity about occurrences in the natural world which may or may not be affecting our experiences, into time-consuming and exhausting discussions about the semantics and interrelationships of words, phrases, and sentences which render obsolete the arguments that are used in such discussions.

Abstraction of symbols (i.e. words) and strings of symbols (i.e. sentences) are causing disagreement for the interpretations of the meaning of symbols which constructing the strings that form the lingual statements that are used in arguments about existential dilemmas. Such abstraction is degrading the abilities of the portion of the population of human primates from recognizing and for dealing with real existential issues which are jeopardizing the continuation of the entire human primate linage and other life form sharing their ecologic community.

How to achieve common literature and methodology for studying the external occurrences

To achieve common empirical nomenclature one needs first to define a framework of nomenclature (i.e. a system of names or terms) that is based on absolution of terminology and expressions in which one can use to analyze the data in arguments in a way that will distinguish empirical analysis from ideological reasoning in order to enable the separation of rational thinking and that incorporates logical arguments from argument based on commonly accepted ideas that are originated or influenced by deterministic ideologies which transform technical dialog into ideology-contradicting and supporting exchange triggering emotionally driven conflicts of Pavlovian whim.
Utilizing an unbiased nomenclature as a framework can capture the true relationship between specific events and objects of interest to describe the dynamic causality of systems so in order to predict plausible consequences of empirical interactions.

First element for achieving a commonly accepted and undisputed dictionary of nomenclature will be to use only legit terminology with absolute definition of the words that are used to describe empirical events. The second element is the logical qualifications of the contributors to the scientific database in order to have productive discussions and productive resolutions. The third element is an empirical validation for the information that will be considerate in the discussion to determine the coherence of the data presented via scientific analysis.
But the common human primate brain does not function in a way that support empirical based dialogs.

Empirical understanding of the dynamics of natural systems is the only thinking tool for stripping the abstract fog from the nomenclature complexity which associates names and memes to objects and functions not in accordance to their properties, behaviors or functions, but as an abstract symbol that have little or nothing to do at all with the object or phenomena they are representing.

The nomenclature of civilizations today are made of immense dictionary of terms that are mostly based on irrelevant words and terms originated or evolved from a languages that were commonly used in the past (Latin, ancient Greek etc.) which only few can understand today other names are made by the geographic location of the discovery or existence of an object or phenomena, minuscule dialect from remote geographical area where an object or phenomena exists and many more. But especially disturbing to me is the use of science as ideological discipline for classifying individual’s conformity levels and societal utilization ranking implemented in the common practice in the scientific world for associating a certain natural object or phenomena with the name of specific individual that happened to be the one that pointed it out.

The abstracts naming system of empirical terminologies associated with certain disciplines created two cognitive entities: The first is an abstract symbol and the other is an actual object or a phenomena which enabling the distortion of meanings by disassociating of symbols of an object or phenomena from their true properties that divorcing the symbol name from a real meaning and re-associating it with ideological ides for serving the purpose of the implemented system of social order, the symbols and their meaning are controlled by the current narratives of social norms of behaviors that are ordered from the top of the hierarchy, serving the implementation of complicity to dominance by higher classes of individuals over lower classes and is the driving force which creating the nomenclature complexity nightmare where terms are elastic and can represent many meanings and symbols.
There are many ways to name things but the abstract naming of natural phenomena’s is maliciously destructive for the ability of individuals with cognitive potential for system thinking to build inside their heads a model that representing empirically the world outside their heads.

The complexity of disciplinary languages reorganizing the classes in system of segregation and increases the efficiency of the domination of upper classes, the corresponding nomenclature increases the segregation between individuals by creating classes of different meanings for the data communicated between individuals and the knowledge about the external world is becoming more and more uncertain and unclear.
Lingual uniformity is necessary for productive communication between individuals especially when it’s the only mean for assessing others intentions in a species with strong natural tendency to not trust each other. Symbols and meanings can be intentionally or mistakenly associated with other symbols or other abstract names of a symbol creating confusion in the population about the meanings of things; escalating disputes, mistrust and conflicts due to misinterpretations of the intentions of others.

The confusion in interpreting the intentions behind the communicated words by implementing and enforcing the correct use of communication standards was done on purpose and implemented over centuries by the ones that at that time occupied the top of the pyramid of the classes who defined the nomenclature at each era and made languages and lingo’s the tools of gaining power and dominance. The manipulation of the communication standards is executed by a methodology that narrativized the association of symbols with another meaning to trigger emotional reaction that can mobilize groups of individual of the same class of utilization, and by swindle the truth from the masses they can implement an ideological agenda deriving from an enforced compliance of the collective to “commonly accepted truth” which enable them to utilize masses of individuals for their sole interests.

The fallacy that is shaping the phenotypic mindset and the common social moods is the result of the utilization of nomenclature system that is facilitated on abstract symbols that represent ideas correlated to emotional triggers and not to the essence of the things and which is constantly being euphemized further into the abstract, one can notice that the focus of most human primates is on memorizing symbols without knowing what are the function and properties of the objects and phenomena’s they are supposed to represent, this type knowledge acquisition demands from the trainee to read specific literature or to attend indoctrinating sessions with authorized indoctrination agent/officer transferring to them the real or the alleged data in the context of the social order ideologies and in accordance to the trainee designated class. As the trainee is advancing in its indoctrination sessions they are demanded to memorize more and more symbols of unique jargon’s which demands further learning and memorizing of increasing amount of symbols with decreasing amount of details about them.

The most intriguing observation is of those human primates holding authoritarian certificates of references from the most complicit indoctrination institutes of which their opinions are embraced and endorsed by the top classes which knighted them as “experts” of certain disciplinary ideology or methodology, those glorified geniuses and experts are clearly exhibiting a fundamental inabilities to identify observe or understand and ultimately, to communicate information about the true nature of occurrences outside their heads, and when facing them with such information they fail miserably to form logical arguments utilizing their learned means of thinking and communication and their complex nomenclature of abstract symbols representing abstract ideas that they memorized, their arguments tend to branch by associations, referenced by analogies, emphasized by disciplinary meanings and adjusted to authoritarian nuances, this rich jargon’s and mythological storyteller like presentation which for the simple minded human primates who have no such knowledge these knights seems as intelligent and their opinions are accepted as empirical facts.

In today’s societal system the laws of classifications, categorization and grouping of symbols into disciplines and ideologies are based on a biased perception of, living creatures as objects and non-living objects and spaces as property and territories, nothing in the biosphere of the blue planet is measured by the value of the role it plays in the biological existence of the planet ecosystems, but by a societal related classification method quantifying perceived values and cons in the utilization and interactions measured according to a subjective relation to us personally and in relation to our social organization. The social nomenclature bounding the human primate perception to the contexts of its civilization and vice versa, it is founded on implementation of abstract symbols that are intended to support the complicity of the population to instinctive obedience to orders from higher casts facilitated in dogmatic narratives unifying the nomenclature and the corresponding functions and behaviors in groups molding them into classes that are triggered as a collective and are mobilized for performing labor that serves the dominance interest of the ones controlling the civil systems of the human primates colonies.

Societal confusion

The primate known as “human” reached an evolutionary threshold: it regressed into a more rudimentary animal which convey a mindset that is more comparable in behavioral methodologies expression to ants, bees and wasps then to a an entity with a superior cognitive capacity that producing thoughts and actions in a methodology incorporating logical analysis of empirical properties producing trends and context for occurrences.

The regularities of the human primate’s daily activities are corresponded to its short and long-term societal arrangements within its group and like ants human primates are functioning as a colony of casts, the daily regularities performed by the human primate intended to support its existential necessities all intended for maintaining a continuum of short term metastability and survivability which include nutrition, dealing with personal safety by obtaining access to structures sheltering them from abiotic conditions and threats from other human primates, and most important they need to obtain a status for gaining accessibility to the breeding “scene”, all the daily necessities are ultimately supposed to be serving the prospect for achieving genetic continuousness.

The daily regularities of individual human primates are predetermined by the social order it was born into which include the societal laws, regulations and their enforcement, the state of its colony and the trend in relation to environmental conditions, availability and distribution of resources, various intergroup and intragroup circumstances, the type of cast system dominating its culture and its designated roles, gender, phenotypic expression of appearance and many other factors.

The lifestyle of individual human primate that includes the cast and the type of its day to day tasks and functions, are determined by a carefully crafted instruction manual that list sets of definite behavioral tendencies and circumstantial phenotypic properties and their corresponding opportunities of cast and functions potential.

The societal instruction manual is classifying and segregating individuals in classes of social utilization with corresponding entitlements, privileges, rules for engagement with other individuals and groups of same or different classes, restrictions on utilization, consumption and possession of natural resources that are in the colony’s territory which includes access to land and travel through land, restrictions on access and utilization of shelters and protected spaces, restrictions on self-sustaining activities, restrictions on sexual selection and access to breeding partners and many more with increasingly growing nuances of restrictions which regulating the human primates living conditions, lifestyle and well being.

Human primate have a societal face value that is measured by a scale of virtues and vices considering the usability and viability of individuals in classes of utilization in the context of the agenda which driving the societal organization and the order of its colony.

Individual’s day to day regularities acts on long term opportunities which are determine by an entitlement scale that is based on face value defining the quotas of access to necessities and luxuries and the restrictions on such access it is produced by factoring into a matrix the sets of skills, virtues, heritage, indoctrination compliance level and other phenotypic expression of traits which compute a spectrum of potential classes and societal arrangements that are available and attainable by such individual.

In today’s societal arrangements the members of the human primates are measured by very different sets of virtues and vices than when human primates lived in smaller family groups of up to 200 individuals made of kin and close relatives and the set of skills each individual sustained must have being inclusive for performing multifunctional tasks in variety of day to day activities (hunting, making tools and devices, building shelter, foraging etc.) with differences in tasks and performance were based on physiological capabilities and biological roles in accordance to gender and life histories stage.

Human primate individuals during long periods of their latest evolution, especially after they learned the use of fire, have relied on adaption for a certain mindset emphasizing a comprehensive multifunctional capacity where each individual devised the ability to perform every possible daily task, accomplished in accordance to urgency and necessity. At certain point in time the evolution of the human primate reached a state of equilibrium and peaked in terms of individual capabilities and intellectual properties which drove the development of cultural database that included technologies for utilization of fire, individualistic tools and tactics that rendered each human primate as a “Swiss army knife” that for some degrees could enable adults or small families to survive by themselves in nature.
(From wiki): “The control of fire by human primates was a turning point in the cultural aspect of human primate evolution. Fire provided a source of warmth, protection, and a method for cooking food which allowed geographic dispersal, cultural innovations, and changes to diet and behavior. Additionally, creating fire allowed the expansion of human primate activity to proceed into the dark and colder hours of the night.

Claims for the earliest definitive evidence of control of fire by a member of Homo range from 0.2 to 1.7 Mya), evidence for the controlled use of fire by Homo erectus, beginning some 600,000 years ago, has wide scholarly support. Evidence of widespread control of fire by anatomically modern human primate’s dates to approximately 125,000 years ago.”

But at certain point human primate’s societies started to organized in very large colonies and a process of evolutionary adaptation for casts and hierarchical compliance made a comeback, the large colony organized individuals and communities in trophic casts incorporated around a department of specific sets of tasks that were based on exclusiveness and specialization in narrow range of functional activities such as casts of farmers, mercenaries or shelter builders in lower casts and niche’s tasks of administration and exploitation of the lower casts by the higher casts. In a larger group the value of the individual is measured by the perceived effort and not by results as the surplus in larger groups is much higher which reducing the amount of energy and time investment required by each individual. The consequence of living in large colonies was the rapid evolution of classes of expedient skills that determined the role of the individuals by their heritage.

The evolution of lineages of individualistic genotypic classes in the human primate societies is determined by the societal ordering, and in the human primate the evolution was driven by classes of compliance and participation in the group order. The organization of animals in groups is the consequences of many factors but the most important are the safety of the individuals and the assurance of their next generation.

Depending on the level of threats for individual adults and for their reproduction process, different strategies of organization can evolve; the evolutionary adaptation will be determined by the level of the threats and the type of genetic assets and phenotypic expression at the time of an emerging threats.

The origin of the human condition

The threat that was driving the evolution of the social order in the human primates was intraspecies aggression by adolescents and adult males of the species toward other males, females and infants. In other mammals the group is organized around interspecies threats arising from aggression and predation by other species while chimpanzees and human primates social organization is based entirely on intraspecies aggression and predation by members of its own species.

The emergence of the gang

The principal ordering chimpanzees into group are defensive and offensive tactics against other members of their species and the methodology of organization is based on the rule of thumb that 2 males are at least twice as stronger than 1 and are more than 50% less likely to be subjected for fatal injuries.
The alliance between two unrelated males signal the rise of the gang and it occurred during the time of our last common ancestor with the chimpanzee and it endured as the force which is shaping the mindset of our lineages, our social organization and the distortion of the sexual selection.
Up to the CHLCA the sexual selection in our lineage was based on fitness virtues arises from phenotypic properties representing individualistic genetic qualities which were later replaced by culturally promoted and enforced norms of symbolic signaling of societal virtue of pretends supported by the tightening of cultural controlled and enforced sexual arrangements that privileges the most efficient deceivers and ruthless aggressors with access to premium females rewording the beta males which managed to join, form or rule the biggest gang around, overwhelming the single alpha males and eliminating their genetic data from the lineage.

All the individualistic virtues of alpha male became null facing the alliance and its defeat was certain against alliance of two beta males even if pound to pound they are inferior to him in their physics and cognition.

Our social organization evolution is established on an alliance between 2 or more males that otherwise would have being fierce rivals.

The alliance between rival males had an evolutionary trade-off with the traditional alpha properties of size, strength and virtues of courage and altruism which were rendered obsolete by the alliance, as the predominant factor in the success of passing genes, and was replaced with the genetics of individuals that have the tendency to conform to an unnatural alliance relaying on the accumulation of the muscle power of multiple individuals compensating for inferior physics or lack of courage.

The formation of the gang started a regression in the traditional individualistic virtues of alpha in the males of the human primate linage which were replaced by traits that benefit the alliance, the beta males have become more successful in passing genes and the most rewording fitness strategy for beta was based on selfish interests that  long term submission for authority of others producing instant safety and facilitating dreams of futuristic dominance, the reword for compliance was instant safety and permission for reproduction. The traditional roles dominating the process of sexual selection in the human primate lineage, that were previously conducted by females choosing a mate by its alpha qualities and virtues has shifted into a male driven sexual permission that is authorized and controlled by the gang which favor the genetics of the conformist betas and as result the previously preferred genetic of the alpha males which built around fearless and gender roles equality in the human primate replaced by the inferior genetics of the fearful beta males acting on their fear rather than on logic producing travesties rooted in societal norms and submitting the females to authoritarian sexual reproduction enforcement. In such social evolution the fertility of the males is decreasing as social traits of non-aggression signal lower levels of testosterone and the exclusive access to fertile females by beta male facilitated by enforcement of restrictions on alpha males via aggressive measures (facilitated by class of mercenaries) preventing alpha males from fertilizing females that under the protection of higher class by facilitating individual exclusivity of male over female.

Fear of others of our own species was the main factor in driving the evolution of the human primate into cast based societies, fear of others of your own kind was also the driver for the development of our particular TOM in the early members of our lineage and the current human condition is the result of long periods of adaptive cognitive strategies meant for dealing with others threatening you and for you threatening others.

The individuals with more fear for their life tend to form alliances more than ones with less fear, they submit for being abuses by their alliance partners and they gang together in order to submit others for their abuse.

Fearing your own kind is in the root of the human condition

It is the rooted fear and distrust of each other that shaped the most common mindset in the population of the human primates and it is the facilitator of the social order which organized our societies in ants like colonies which incubate and amplify the human condition.

Self-awareness in human primates was the result of intraspecies aggression and predation

We have learned to anticipate the thoughts and behaviors of others that are identical to us and by doing so we developed the perception of the self – the self-awareness.
The most formidable enemy is the one that know how you think, the constant fear of an enemy which shares the same cognitive capabilities as you, who know how you think and how you are operating, it knows your strengths and it knows your weaknesses. The intraspecies predation produces the need to outsmart others of equal physicality utilizing cognitive properties to come up with methods to outsmart your enemy which generated constant (obsessive) theoretical simulation of scenarios in our mind for countering the strategies of others of equal properties: this was the predominant factor in the development of TOM in our lineage, it was a result of the constant simulation of every small advantage you can exercise as a leverage in order to survive another day which stimulated an obsessive theoretical planning of strategies countering other’s strategies which include running simulation of scenarios and their counteraction and then memorizing them in your head.

Profiling of your enemy and inhabit its avatar in your mind for simulating plausible interactions between it and yourself produced obsessive attention for learning how to deal with others that are just like yourself, it was amplified by the sense of urgency during a period of extreme conditions were the only available energy for consumption was in the mass of others of your kind, the constant fear and anxiety triggered the amygdala which produces the type of  thinking which overtime developed to a sophisticated avatar of the enemy which was constantly presented in the simulation of threats as well as an avatar of yourself for simulating scenarios of encounters, this was the mechanism which developed a self-awareness in our lineage as the enemy which you were obsessed to learn about was you, we developed self-awareness as a result of the duality of the two entities that are antagonistic and identical at the same time, is the structure in two hemispheres of two simulation of the self and its identical alter ego of the other. The perception of the self in human primates is the result of dealing with the constant threat by another being identical to you, it’s the process that created a self-awareness that is different for each genders: the males strategy is to protect themselves against other males while the females relay on males to protect her offspring from other males, both needs to protect themselves from the same enemy – the male.

The belief mechanism in human primates developed earlier to the self-awareness, in a similar way to the belief mechanism exhibit by k-selection animals of inferior trophic classes, in which the threat of predation is part of every present moment.

The belief is a mechanism of automation for triggering the most extreme behaviors as a measure for dealing with extreme vulnerabilities due to inferior physicality, the automation of reactionary behavior for dealing with time sensitive survivability circumstances where a split of a second will determine if you live or die and it is in the base of the famous fight or flight mechanism in which flight will be adopted by animals with inferior physicality and fight will be adopted by animals with superior physicality. During long periods our lineage our physicality was inferior compared to other animals in our environment and compared to the gangs of our own species. The automated response was the surviving strategy in an age when time sensitive decisions for dealing with immediate existential threats from superior enemies, were imminent and could occur at any moment.

The obsession of learning the nuances of others’ behavior and yours counter strategies responses, developed a categorical thinking that was needed in order to classify and memorize the details of the behavior and it corresponding countermeasures, creating the symbolic classification nomenclature utilizing growing number symbols and the consolidation of symbols into methodologies for dealing with the developing strategies of the enemies which demanded larger information storage in brain tissue and longer periods of indoctrination in the discipline of social affairs.

In elephant a similar process of TOM (Theory Of the Mind) started due to the aggression of the males, the elephant large body size enabled them to develop and support large information storage for memorizing large amount of nomenclature nuances for dealing with male aggression and to structure social order to counter the males’ aggression. Perhaps the reason they never developed  self-awareness as we did was the lack of 3D perception that we developed when our ancestors performed parabolic trajectories in high speed utilizing the unique locomotion of ricochetal brachiation in 3D space of movement in the complex environment of the rainforest canopy (Dolphins could grow their brain tissue without the limitation of gravity and with many brain modules accumulated during their 3 evolutionary transitions between perceptual environments (ocean to land and back to ocean) they developed self-awareness as a result from dealing with their enemies which were all physically equal to them such as sharks and other cetaceans)

Memorizing details and utilizing symbolic shortcuts for instinctive responses was the strategy driving the growth in brain tissue in the human primate lineage, and logic had nothing to do with it: it was based on guessing the behavior of others based on theoretical simulations pushing the envelope of plausibility into the extremes and even beyond into the realm of implausibility, it produces a catalog of expected scenarios for which a reaction perceived as appropriate was chosen as a response. Each scenario was triggering a certain state of minds (fear, excitement etc.) and was answered by a certain response picked from a library of learned responses and if the response didn’t achieved it theoretical outcome it went through a process of reasoning to the aftermath and adjustment for a particular state of mind, it was a process of legitimizing an illogical process of thoughts in order to be able to remember them.

The methodology of the cognitive thinking process was focused on recognizing patterns of behavior that triggers emotional state of mind (i.e. fear) in which several variable fine-tune the assessment and computing a response according to metastability variables of positive or negative incomes and outcomes factored in scales of antagonistic variables calculating the levels intensity of the income and outcome ranging from worse to best (e.g. from negative outcomes of death and injuries, energetic exhaustion to a positive effects on the EROEI such as gain of energy and resources or access to female, etc.), urgency scale ranking variables of inevitability of event through levels of probabilities as well as the ETA of an event, the resulting calculation triggered a corresponding set of behaviors with a variety of instinctual reaction in the apparatus of the state of mind.

The process of cognitive automation of behaviors was made by categorizing external events which include interspecies and intraspecies encounters into sets of emotional states of mind corresponding to a scale of perceived intensity which in term triggered a certain reaction from a corresponding to catalogs of memorized responses.
The automation of scenarios based responses demanded categorical organization system of synaptic pathways and larger mass of brain tissue for higher capacity storage space for memorizing fine-tuned sets of responses.

Memories in other animals are organized by a metastability scale which factors in categories the outcomes of experienced events that falls somewhere between the two antagonistic extremes of energetic currencies and physical fitness of positive or negative effects corresponding to several emotional categories ranging from immediate gratification to traumatic displeasure. The metastability categories included responses and actions intended for maintaining life in the short term by avoiding threats and maintaining the supply of energetic material for metabolism and hydration and maintaining the continuation of your genes in the next generation of your lineage by obtaining the opportunity for reproduction and ensuring the survivability of your offspring.