1.6.2 Humanity

In animal, the dominance indicator (or the so called dominance KPI of the previous post) is different from the human one. For the sake of brevity, animals usually fight each other and the winner of all these combats is the dominant which get access to reproduction. Dominance, as a self-amplifier, is still there behind the scene. In animals, it expresses itself always in the same violent and aggressive way. In some species, effective violence is inhibited by complex instinctual processes called ritualization which is one of Konrad Lorenz favorite topic. The fight becomes more of a drama play than an actual fight. No blows are dealt only deterrent muscles are shown. It can be noted that aggressiveness and self-esteem seems to share the same phylogeny. The manic self-esteem sounds strangely the same as aggressiveness which is the animal way of asserting: I’m confident in myself and I will kick your ass to demonstrate just that. Females succumb to the most violent or aggressive individuals, that is, if they are in an evolutionary position to make a choice. Violent showdown and their result is the basis for calculation of the ranking males. For instance, every ethologist knows the famous “peck order” which shape the dominance hierarchy according to beak strike given and received. It is a confrontation indicator: the most aggressive wins provided he’s got the necessary DNA outfit to sustain it.

Human happiness is radically different. From evolution perspective, It is modern indicator in that it does not need an effective confrontation. You could argue that happiness (or elation) also exist in animal. However it is more a performance reward than an external indicator. Elation is more perceived as a reward in animals whereas, in humans, it indicates the way up to the subject AND also the dominance state vis-à-vis the community. I would like to stress that this reward/indicator thing is not black and white. Evolution never does thing abruptly. Let’s say that in human the emphasis has been more laid on the indicator side.

The synthetic feature of happiness is demonstrated by the vastness of its sources. It is still possible to be happy from being aggressive and violent. From a human perspective let’s call it a very stupid way to be happy. However other sources of happiness have appeared in so far the measurement of objective beak strike was not an obsession any more. Intelligence, creativity, craftsmanship, knowledge are combined capacities that can provide escape from danger, that can make resources collection more efficient and access to sex easier. If you package this into a synthetic indicator like happiness then natural selection is going to do a very much more efficient job. We can live happy (and by the way much more happy) without violence. Our civilizations do not reward violence anymore and we continue to be happy. This demonstrates that violence is outmoded in terms of evolution. You could argue that society promotes sport and violence in movies. However, to me, these are the more sophisticated ritualization of violence.

My daring theory is that happiness as a synthetic dominance indicator has permitted the emergence of intelligence. This has made the job easier for female to select the best sexual partner. Happiness is a good predictor of being able to bring resources necessary to raise child as well as the best evaluation of the rank in the dominance hierarchy. If they had gone on assessing the fight capacity of males, only the fittest for this activity would have been selected. It does not take a PhD to knock out your fellow community member. They trusted happiness in male as the best indicator of fitness. They could not detect upfront Intelligence as it did not exist. So happiness as a cumulative memory of victory against the environment has doubtless contributed to the human IQ increase among other things. Of course, the aggressiveness based dominance has not disappeared. Look at all this magazine that would like to make us look like Arnold Schwarzenegger. I don’t know if this is supposed to turn on women. Only she knows.

Intelligence is doubtless a result from happiness, understood as a dominance indicator, which allows women to select the best sexual partner. That is, to select the genes capable of spawning a dominant and happy subject. Our humanity expresses itself here: our ability to be selected on criteria which are not only aggressiveness based. The human dominance hierarchy seems to have banned violence from its root behavior. Other criteria are occupying the free space. Unfortunately, violence prevents other criteria from prevailing. It is the easiest way to get resources from the environment but the most expensive in terms of overall happiness depletion.

There’s no point in being naïve. The archaic violent form of dominance is still there. Look at the news. It is mostly perpetrated by young low status male who wants easy access to resource and sex. Fortunately it is not legal. Society has opted, maybe unconsciously, for the “happy” natural selection. Don’t get me wrong, it means that society have suppressed violence as a legitimate source of happiness.

By the way, don’t think that civilization has suppressed natural selection. Of course we help the poorest and the weakest. This does not affect natural selection in the sense that this help don’t turn them suddenly into happy mating possibility. Happiness selection is carried out surreptitiously and unconsciously. In addition, it is a statistical game. The happier you are, the more chance you have to meet a woman who corresponds to your happiness level. But that does not happen always. All what is needed for natural selection it that it happens in average more often than it does not. During a “happy” confrontation, two individuals will estimate their dominance by trying to assess their level of happiness. It is not innocent that in our western cultures the first thing we ask is the state of the others: “Ca va ?”, “How are you doing ?”, “Wie geht es dir ?”, “Come estai?”, “Come esta”, “Come stai”… The semantic uniformity reveals a powerful confrontational instinct. Our reptilian brain is going to determine our rank in the dominance hierarchy. If you are a strong guy, then you will draw confidence and happiness from it because you know that you impress. Appearance is nothing, the way you perceive yourself is everything. If you’re strong and depressed you’ll be the loser because we, humans, are affective creatures.

This confrontation looks strange. You would expect that the loser is going to be hurt in some way, losing a chunk of his happiness. This is not the case. The loser is going to gain more happiness. Intuitively, it is reasonable to observe that a happy person does some good to an unhappy one. Human dominance establishes itself softly, without violence in a win/win relationship. The happiest increase the dominance of the less happy. In essence, the French philosopher Alain was right: “Good mood is something generous, it gives more than it takes”.

However it “receives” because natural selection does not operate in beautiful naïve la la land. The old dominant/submissive relationship story is still on. Don’t forget that all is done to grant differential access to reproduction. On top of it, the submissiveness will bring additional value to the dominant. The submitted will grant some time and resource to for his beloved dominant which can be considered as a sort of rewarding pavlovian soma. You think I’m kidding, just wait for the next posts, we’ll go more practical. But remember that if you consider happiness as a natural selection tool, you should see it as neither good nor bad like a river flowing from a mountain. Machiavelli did not live in la la land when it gave this piece of advice to his prince: “People will like you more for what they have done for you than for the things you did for them”.

The conceptual power of happiness lies in its viral capacity to be transmitted. Physical dominant traits are fixed, static. Visual communication is restricted only to present people whereas happiness can still be communicated to others. You don’t believe it? It is scientifically proved though. We’ll see that in a next post. Happiness should be a good candidate to support a social game theory. It establishes a universal dominance hierarchy. All other tangible traits like strength or intelligence only establish local dominance hierarchy meant to…generate happiness used in the universal dominance hierarchy. Athletes are going to use their body for competition. Intellectuals are going to confront their ideas. Philosophers of antiquity are going to play their eloquence game. Bakers are going to make the best possible bread and the winegrower is going to produce the best possible wine. They will do it to which end? For money? No, primarily for happiness, for dominance or for the will to power as would put it Nietzsche. Happiness is the glue that makes all of us stay together in what I will call from now on the dominance structure. It is the particular dominance hierarchy that rests on happiness. Tribes or civilizations were built on this phenomenon. How can you mix so different people in one group if there isn’t a common language? It is not innocent that the most powerful country in the world promotes diversity and happiness, the latter being written in the constitution as a legitimate goal to pursue. Power and happiness are linked. The one is the cause of the other, and vice versa. And the more people are happy, the more you’re happy. French writer Boris Vian knew it: “My happiness is made up of everyone’s happiness”.

Once again, the confrontational process is mostly unconscious and peaceful. It is the main strength of this innovation of the evolution: no one gets hurt which is better for group survival, but it can still continue its merciless process of natural selection. It occurs in the limbic part of your brain which is the reward system involved in the happiness feeling. For some people, the process can be conscious. The frontier between conscious and unconscious is blurred and depend on people. For some people the confrontational happiness based process is conscious and this can lead to sufferings. French psychiatrist Christophe Andre describes a patient who is jealous of others’ happiness. She compares her happiness with the one of her “adversary” and finds herself always losing the game. This jealousy is a cause for happiness depletion which makes her less able to win the next “combats”. Being conscious might be the cause of this absence of win/win relationship. There is a more obvious cause that we will be discussed later on. All in all French writer Pierre Daninos is right in stating that: “People do not know if they’re happy, however they’re fully aware of others’ happiness!”.

Of course, the conscious brain (neocortex) can take over at all times to adjust the behavior according to the interests of the participants. However, instantly, your brain knows thanks to happiness whether there is a dominance relationship. The relationship can also be neutral. Intuitively, at same level of happiness, there are no dominance/submissive relationships. This is valid for 80% of the relationships as we are more or less all located on the same euthymic level. The equality concept that French are so fond of has a statistical validity. The distribution of dominance follows doubtless a normal law. The more your dominance is far from the average, the rarer it is. Bipolars type I are 1% of the population, overdominant population is indeed very rare. Then less dominant hyperthymic are more abundant but still rare. The reasoning is the same for subdominant (depressed) people.

The maniac (overdominant) doesn’t care how to get happiness because it is not dependent any more on the relationships with other or on the victory against the milieu (Environment and local dominance hierarchy). He’s ecstatic beyond human recognition and the fact that he’s keen on establishing new social interaction should not be a surprise. He’s urged to do so like a dominant animal wants to fight to establish its dominance.

Once again, happiness is not the unique dominance trait. But it is the direct one. All others are meant to generate happiness. They are indirect. Female will try to derive dominance/happiness from all other traits which are visible. If you’re not happy because of dominant trait, it means that these traits do not provide any benefit in the struggle for life. A trait is static and Nature is not stupid. It has invented happiness to check the usage of the trait in its environment. In some ways, happiness reflects the environment within the male’s brain. Women are then able to check the environment judgment in the very heart of males. Nature is clever, did you ever doubt so? Happiness is a synthetic reflection of the relationship that tangible dominant traits like intelligence, strength, creativity establish with the milieu. It is also based on a history of interactions with the environment. Some brain chemistry is involved in the retention of theses info. The sentiment of this brain chemistry is happiness.

Have you ever doubt that happiness was THE dominance trait? Intuitively, we all think that a love relationship will make us happy. Maybe, but this is not the main point. The main point is that happiness is the pre-condition to meet (and have sex with) someone. Women are attracted by happy man because they know that they will make her happy (and not only in bed). For woman, I can’t say but surely happiness will make you more Jolie. Not convinced? Let’s listen to the professionals!:

Source : lefigaro.fr. “La séduction, ça ne rigole pas”, Yes seduction matters!
Here’s the seduction expert package you get for 1790 EUR per week: coach PDT (Personal development techniques), sexologist, psychologist, image counseling, and stylists. In order to be ready to meet someone, you need to learn how to be happy when you are alone” explains Coach Elodie Puech.

The love academy and French writer Paul Claudel do agree: “Happiness is not the end, it is the mean of life”. To the contrary, depressed people are not happy and have no mating opportunity. This sad post found on the internet is revealing:

Source: Post on the internet.
Hi, This post is meant for people aged 25,26 who did not have any affective relationship with the other sex, who are always alone and no hope to get out of this situation. Do you think often to suicide? I do every day. Do you feel inferior vis-à-vis the others? How do you explain the fact that others manage to communicate with the other sex, and not you? Do you have a thing that gives you a little pleasure in this life? Or like me, the affective relationship absence prevents you from finding happiness? I know what I write is a little bit sad, but I need to speak about it from time to time. Those who have made their way through life do not understand me. Thanks for your participations.

The only thing that this person does not understand is that he must find what makes him happy before he has a chance to meet someone. Local dominance hierarchies are meant for that. Find something that you like and then go for it. We call that passion. There is a variety of thing here to be happy from. That’s what makes us human. The variety of way to be happy, which hides the variety of local dominance hierarchy, was spawned by happiness. Happiness was first what made you happy from the environment and soon became also what made happy from the happiness of the others. This post is also sad verification of steve moxon’s thesis that dominance hierarchies are meant to suppress male from reproductive access (« Dominance hierarchy as integral to reproductive suppression, an adaptation consequent to the evolution of male »).

We have defined happiness like a synthetic variable that estimates the level of dominance. However, there’s a theoretical problem. How can a feeling be perceived by the outside world like the tangible dominance traits (Strength, eloquence, intelligence…)? Happiness is indeed an internal psychological state. I like to be dominant, but how this gets reflected in the outside world? This will be solved in the next post.

Portishead / Glory box
Give me a reason to love you
Give me a reason to be a woman
I just wanna be a woman
From this time, unchained
We’re all looking at a different picture
Through this new frame of mind
A thousand flowers could bloom
Move over and give us some room
Give me a reason to love you
Give me a reason to be a woman
I just wanna be a woman
So don’t you stop being a man
Just take a little look from outside when you can
Show a little tenderness
No matter if you cry
Give me a reason to love you
Give me a reason to be a woman
It’s all I wanna be is all woman
For this is the beginning of forever and ever
It’s time to move over…

Magic system / la danse des magiciens :
Le Zouglou est une danse, qui met l’ambiance
qui fait bouger, qui met la joie dans tous les cœurs
Joie de vivre, Faut draguer
Joie de vivre, Partager

(Zouglou is a dance good for the atmosphere
Makes you move, put joy in the hearts
Happy to live, let’s flirt
Happy to live, let’s share)

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s