4 ms·

I have thought about this as well and I think the problem is that this is a tautology. To be a dominant figure requires that you dominate. There could never be

I have thought about this as well and I think the problem is that this is a tautology. To be a dominant figure requires that you dominate. There could never be such a thing as a Good King because monarchic structure requires oppression. The question that we have for ourselves is Do we need kings?

api 8y ago
I really think I'm asking the last question. Historically we do seem to need "kings" of some form or another. This makes the requirement socially tautological. Kings have to be assholes because people need asshole kings. My depressing hypothesis is that because the average human is essentially depressed, un-driven, and anhedonic, we depend on being dominated by hyper-driven assholes to reach our full potential. What's weird about this is that in a way we are using or even enslaving the king. There's an anthropological hypothesis out there that monarchy evolved in part from the practice of human sacrifice, and when a king's company or country does not perform we still do sacrifice them at least in word if not in deed. I hypothesize that the conventional model of the "great man" has it wrong. It's not the genius of Steve Jobs or Elon Musk that is driving excellence. It's the drive itself. The actual work at SpaceX or Tesla is being done by the employees, but I question whether the employees could drive themselves to do that work given that we are naturally wired to sit around a campfire, eat, fuck, and occasionally go hunting or berry picking. My hypothesis is that without drive and charisma to emotionally mime, most people don't do much. I've wondered for a long time if the solution might not be superior stimulant medications. Could we have a king in pill form? Could a simple emotional or even metabolic tweak (again pun intended) eliminate much of the need for inspiring leaders to motivate us? Now I'm incubating this goofball speculation that the post-enlightenment-era rejection of monarchs was driven in part by importation of coffee reducing the need for kings, which is hilarious and utterly insane. I better get back to work. Edit: This whole line of thinking has a big question mark after it. I am speculating and philosophizing, not pronouncing dogma. I also do not intend anything I wrote as a personal insult against anyone. I've never met Steve Jobs or Elon Musk, and regardless of the circumstances I do think the things they're doing (or did in the former case) are making the world a better place. I'm just asking if we can find a better way to make the world a better place that is also more compassionate and pleasant at the immediate interpersonal level. You don't solve problems by denying unpleasant realities, so I'm exploring what I see as an unpleasant reality.
- WaddyJones 8y ago
  I’m loving your comment, and speaking of stimulants, you write like you’re on adderall lol :) We do need drive and charisma to emotionally mime. But the implication of what you’re writing is that the Kings among us manufacture that drive and charisma ourselves. I have a different hunch about the best way to produce this charisma than you: we don’t need stimulants. We just need placebos and placebo thoughts. The solution isn’t in “superior stimulant medications” because it seems like the main value people really stimulants is their value as placebos. The solution, IMO, is either in superior PLACEBO medications, or superior methods for people to simply trick themselves into becoming manic. Like dude just try it as an experiment. Wake up tomorrow and don’t drink coffee. You really think you’re going to crave a king to mimic? What if — just what if — you turn out to be the king ? And what if the only difference between the two outcomes was your willingness to ingest and embrace a “placebo thought” like “IM THE KING!” (Or Zuck’s “Im CEO, Bitch.”) rather than a “superior stimulant medication”? You don’t need coffee or adderall or “superior stimulants” bro, all stimulants are mostly placebos. All you need is superior “placebo thoughts” that allow you to go from a state of normality/anhedonia/“slight depression” to mania without chemical assistance, IMO. My 2¢ btw: maybe coffee actually increased the need for kings , because suddenly everyone’s adrenals were fried in the afternoon and they all craved naps and sedatives more. Equally plausible IMO but I like ur theory too.

api 8y ago

I really think I'm asking the last question. Historically we do seem to need "kings" of some form or another. This makes the requirement socially tautological. Kings have to be assholes because people need asshole kings. My depressing hypothesis is that because the average human is essentially depressed, un-driven, and anhedonic, we depend on being dominated by hyper-driven assholes to reach our full potential. What's weird about this is that in a way we are using or even enslaving the king. There's an anthropological hypothesis out there that monarchy evolved in part from the practice of human sacrifice, and when a king's company or country does not perform we still do sacrifice them at least in word if not in deed. I hypothesize that the conventional model of the "great man" has it wrong. It's not the genius of Steve Jobs or Elon Musk that is driving excellence. It's the drive itself. The actual work at SpaceX or Tesla is being done by the employees, but I question whether the employees could drive themselves to do that work given that we are naturally wired to sit around a campfire, eat, fuck, and occasionally go hunting or berry picking. My hypothesis is that without drive and charisma to emotionally mime, most people don't do much. I've wondered for a long time if the solution might not be superior stimulant medications. Could we have a king in pill form? Could a simple emotional or even metabolic tweak (again pun intended) eliminate much of the need for inspiring leaders to motivate us? Now I'm incubating this goofball speculation that the post-enlightenment-era rejection of monarchs was driven in part by importation of coffee reducing the need for kings, which is hilarious and utterly insane. I better get back to work. Edit: This whole line of thinking has a big question mark after it. I am speculating and philosophizing, not pronouncing dogma. I also do not intend anything I wrote as a personal insult against anyone. I've never met Steve Jobs or Elon Musk, and regardless of the circumstances I do think the things they're doing (or did in the former case) are making the world a better place. I'm just asking if we can find a better way to make the world a better place that is also more compassionate and pleasant at the immediate interpersonal level. You don't solve problems by denying unpleasant realities, so I'm exploring what I see as an unpleasant reality.

WaddyJones 8y ago
I’m loving your comment, and speaking of stimulants, you write like you’re on adderall lol :) We do need drive and charisma to emotionally mime. But the implication of what you’re writing is that the Kings among us manufacture that drive and charisma ourselves. I have a different hunch about the best way to produce this charisma than you: we don’t need stimulants. We just need placebos and placebo thoughts. The solution isn’t in “superior stimulant medications” because it seems like the main value people really stimulants is their value as placebos. The solution, IMO, is either in superior PLACEBO medications, or superior methods for people to simply trick themselves into becoming manic. Like dude just try it as an experiment. Wake up tomorrow and don’t drink coffee. You really think you’re going to crave a king to mimic? What if — just what if — you turn out to be the king ? And what if the only difference between the two outcomes was your willingness to ingest and embrace a “placebo thought” like “IM THE KING!” (Or Zuck’s “Im CEO, Bitch.”) rather than a “superior stimulant medication”? You don’t need coffee or adderall or “superior stimulants” bro, all stimulants are mostly placebos. All you need is superior “placebo thoughts” that allow you to go from a state of normality/anhedonia/“slight depression” to mania without chemical assistance, IMO. My 2¢ btw: maybe coffee actually increased the need for kings , because suddenly everyone’s adrenals were fried in the afternoon and they all craved naps and sedatives more. Equally plausible IMO but I like ur theory too.