Beauty and the human perspective; A-symmetry most highly correlates with statements of ugliness. If A-symmetry is a symptom of high mutational load this would make sense of the evolutionary selection for beauty.

it's just prediction/ survivability maximisation.

but the analogy works nonetheless

I refute *utilitarianism* on the basis that humans do not seek to "maximise pleasure". Endorphin release is a mechanism which facilitates optimal learning. Humans survive, and increase their survivability not by attempting to maximise pleasure, but by attempting to maximise their predictive capability... humans are, after all, expert pattern recognition systems.

@Wan6Saber yes it works. It is still superfluous, that was my actual point.

Yeah but still

anway

I think different humans use different strategies to increase survivability and its not always predictive capability

can you give an example of a non-predictive survival strategy?

only, it's possible I'm hung up on this one dimension of humans at the mo, and can't see further than my nose.

I guess its a matter of definition. I think humans strive for a balance between predictability and novelty

If you stay at home things can be very predictable, but it might not be as productive as going in the wilderness and bringing back food

lol. I don't think many humans strive for any kind of balance.

high productivity= high predictability, how is this not so?

we strive for plenty of balance. Getting enough sleep but not too much, eating enough food but not too much

because there are high rewards for exploring the unknown

have you seen *humans* lately? they look as balanced as weebles.

Weebles wobble but they won't fall down

I think most of human psychology has roots that date far before modern times.

I agree

So I don't think saying like. "dude x in modern times has a problem, therefore being like dude x is ideal"

if anything, dude x having a problem is a sign he's not living an optimal lifestyle

he's off balance

he's out of his element

his body is seeking a balance that it is not recieving

in other words, someone being out of balance and suffering for it is not proof that we don't need balance

I might suggest that *imbalance* has been increasing since the Industrial Revolution; prior to this point imbalanced individuals would likely not have succeeded in passing on their genes.

yeah, and this causes a malaise because as balance seeking animals not finding out balance is causing us problems

but we clearly aren't seeking balance.

otherwise the trend would be in the opposite direction.

Balance is not innate, all forms of life are maximisers.

our balance seeking mechanisms have likely been functioning for millions of years, its not adapted to the radical changes that have been happening in the last centuries.

life does not seek balance, it exploits every niche it can, why would humans be exceptional?

because that statement is false?

it is?

ok, we'll take one factor

try to survive without seeking balance of temperature

we'll maximise temperature, get it hotter and hotter, see how well you survive lol

I could take off my clothes? jump in a pool?

wait

some humans actually live in deserts.