5 ms·

Interesting though experiment: Let S be the set of all humans. Remove any human from S who had at least one pair of ancestors (no matter how far in the past) th

Interesting though experiment: Let S be the set of all humans. Remove any human from S who had at least one pair of ancestors (no matter how far in the past) that had a boss/subordinate relationship that is now deemed 'inappropriate' in large western countries. How many humans would be left in S? Conjecture: Zero. Does that say anything interesting about humans?

emiliobumachar 8y ago
Interesting indeed. In a hunter-gatherer tribe with a clear chief, do we consider the chief everyone else's boss?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
cozzyd 8y ago
I think that says more about large numbers than humans.
inscionent 8y ago
Interesting though experiment: Let S be the set of all humans. Remove any human from S who had at least one pair of ancestors (no matter how far in the past) that had an abusive relationship that is now deemed 'inappropriate' in large western countries. How many humans would be left in S? Conjecture: Zero. Does that say anything interesting about humans?
- YorkshireSeason 8y ago
  This is a very good reply, and it can be used to refine the analysis, and bring out the difference between both: - abusive relationship was typically considered problematic by at least one participant even at the time. - Boss / subordinate relationship was typically not considered problematic by both participants at the time. Classic examples doctor/nurse, pilot/stewardess, professor/PhD student, lawyer/secretary. I could introduce you to several such couplings among my acquintances, and relatives.
  - lovich 8y ago
    I mean, I get what you're saying but there have been plenty of people in relationships that would be criminally abusive who didn't have a problem with the relationship. Just because someone thought the situation was fine doesn't mean that it was good for society, and unless we become a libertarian paradise those questions are going to be asked when the situation has the heuristics that point to there being a problem
    - jl2718 8y ago
      I think the point is that it limits the motivations for somebody to seek a position of power. Hopefully to ones that are good for the company. It’s hard to find a trustworthy executive. That’s probably the #1 trait for effectiveness. Not saying that we do a good job of finding them.
sotojuan 8y ago
Most of us are probably have an ancestor that was born due to rape after tribe/army X beat tribe/army Y, so yeah, zero. Not sure what point you are trying to make, but it's probably not as clever as you hope it is.
krapp 8y ago
>Does that say anything interesting about humans? No.
JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> Does that say anything interesting about humans? That we are an unusually genetically homogenous species. You could do the same thing with practically any activity between two people, desirable or undesirable, because the human population collapsed to practically nothing in the last Ice Age.
ForRealsies 8y ago
Men compete in dominance hierarchies. Women depend on these hierarchies to choose mates. Throughout human history, men and women did not compete in the same dominance hierarchy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eATDp2e-3k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eATDp2e-3k
Symmetry 8y ago
You could say the same thing about ancestors who are murderers, as a reductio ad absurdum. Obviously just because our forebears did something doesn't mean that that is good.
sorokod 8y ago
Societies redefine norms all the time, this is normal.

emiliobumachar 8y ago

Interesting indeed. In a hunter-gatherer tribe with a clear chief, do we consider the chief everyone else's boss?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

cozzyd 8y ago

I think that says more about large numbers than humans.

inscionent 8y ago

Interesting though experiment: Let S be the set of all humans. Remove any human from S who had at least one pair of ancestors (no matter how far in the past) that had an abusive relationship that is now deemed 'inappropriate' in large western countries. How many humans would be left in S? Conjecture: Zero. Does that say anything interesting about humans?

YorkshireSeason 8y ago
This is a very good reply, and it can be used to refine the analysis, and bring out the difference between both: - abusive relationship was typically considered problematic by at least one participant even at the time. - Boss / subordinate relationship was typically not considered problematic by both participants at the time. Classic examples doctor/nurse, pilot/stewardess, professor/PhD student, lawyer/secretary. I could introduce you to several such couplings among my acquintances, and relatives.
- lovich 8y ago
  I mean, I get what you're saying but there have been plenty of people in relationships that would be criminally abusive who didn't have a problem with the relationship. Just because someone thought the situation was fine doesn't mean that it was good for society, and unless we become a libertarian paradise those questions are going to be asked when the situation has the heuristics that point to there being a problem
  - jl2718 8y ago
    I think the point is that it limits the motivations for somebody to seek a position of power. Hopefully to ones that are good for the company. It’s hard to find a trustworthy executive. That’s probably the #1 trait for effectiveness. Not saying that we do a good job of finding them.

sotojuan 8y ago

Most of us are probably have an ancestor that was born due to rape after tribe/army X beat tribe/army Y, so yeah, zero. Not sure what point you are trying to make, but it's probably not as clever as you hope it is.

krapp 8y ago

>Does that say anything interesting about humans? No.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago

> Does that say anything interesting about humans? That we are an unusually genetically homogenous species. You could do the same thing with practically any activity between two people, desirable or undesirable, because the human population collapsed to practically nothing in the last Ice Age.

ForRealsies 8y ago

Men compete in dominance hierarchies. Women depend on these hierarchies to choose mates. Throughout human history, men and women did not compete in the same dominance hierarchy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eATDp2e-3k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eATDp2e-3k

Symmetry 8y ago

You could say the same thing about ancestors who are murderers, as a reductio ad absurdum. Obviously just because our forebears did something doesn't mean that that is good.

sorokod 8y ago

Societies redefine norms all the time, this is normal.