Wishful thinking also plays a role. A universe where bad things happen because bad people make them to happen is appealing. Getting rid of bad people, even very bad people, is easy compared to all the different things one has to do to make sure bad things don’t happen in a universe that dosen’t care about us and where really bad things are allowed to happen.
I don’t think that’s quite it. Huge progress has been made against infectious diseases in spite of the lack of a sentient enemy.
I think that, whether or not it’s easier to succeed against human or non-human problems, that for many people it’s more fun to think about people who deserve to be punished than to think about the specific details needed to solve a problem that’s the result of an uncaring universe.
Hiding in rough terrain (unsterilized objects) where it’s more cost-effective to wipe them out with fire or poison, attacking targets of opportunity within the body, scattering when opposed rather than taking the harder road to proactively pursue a strategy. Honey can be used as a disinfectant because bacteria gorge themselves on simple sugars until they literally burst, just like an armed encampment can be put off their guard with an oversupply of food and wine.
More generally, I think people can do just fine at modeling living creatures with intelligence equal to or less than their own. The breakdown is with modeling creatures of greater intelligence, who pursue goals that only make sense in hindsight, and cosmic forces which cannot be outwitted or negotiated with because they do not pursue goals at all.
Honey can be used as a disinfectant because bacteria gorge themselves on simple sugars until they literally burst, just like an armed encampment can be put off their guard with an oversupply of food and wine.
Hm… When I asked on Wikipedia, I was told it was in part due to the hygroscopicness of honey: not enough water to support bacterial life.
Honey can be used as a disinfectant because bacteria gorge themselves on simple sugars until they literally burst, just like an armed encampment can be put off their guard with an oversupply of food and wine.
Hm… When I asked on Wikipedia, I was told it was in part due to the hygroscopicness of honey: not enough water to support bacterial life.
These experimental findings on How honey kills bacteria attribute the bulk of the antibacterial action to a specific protein defensin-1 that the bees put into the honey.
And yet, someone who applied honey (or distilled alcohol!) to a festering wound thinking that it would disorient the encamped pathogens and thereby give the body’s defenders an opportunity to rally, without understanding the actual mechanism, could still be successful.
Sorry, but why are these being upvoted? It’s a cute analogy—but this is far from a “model” as was claimed. Try making some predictions from these explanations and see how horribly awry they go: why just honey? I should be shoving waffles into my wounds whenever I get a scratch, since everyone knows waffles are incredibly tasty. This analogy might work to convince an uncooperative child to take his antibiotics or get a shot, but it’s not going to cut it as a useful model. The only reason this is working is that you already know the answers!
I think that, whether or not it’s easier to succeed against human or non-human problems, that for many people it’s more fun to think about people who deserve to be punished than to think about the specific details needed to solve a problem that’s the result of an uncaring universe.
That then boils down to wanting an interesting story doesn’t it?
Getting rid of bad people, even very bad people, is easy compared to all the different things one has to do to make sure bad things don’t happen in a universe that dosen’t care about us and where really bad things are allowed to happen.
This is the bit I was arguing with.
I was interpreting it as meaning “some bad things” and it’s possible that you meant “all bad things”.
Oh I do think that overall you are probably right that bad people problems can in real life be as challenging or more challenging than non-human ones.
I should have said that getting “rid of bad people” seems easy. In the context I was talking about an appealing world-view I didn’t mean to say I share it. I was trying to describe what it feels like from the inside.
I don’t think that’s quite it. Huge progress has been made against infectious diseases in spite of the lack of a sentient enemy.
I think that, whether or not it’s easier to succeed against human or non-human problems, that for many people it’s more fun to think about people who deserve to be punished than to think about the specific details needed to solve a problem that’s the result of an uncaring universe.
Pathogens can be modeled as a miniaturized, undisciplined army to useful effect.
Details?
Hiding in rough terrain (unsterilized objects) where it’s more cost-effective to wipe them out with fire or poison, attacking targets of opportunity within the body, scattering when opposed rather than taking the harder road to proactively pursue a strategy. Honey can be used as a disinfectant because bacteria gorge themselves on simple sugars until they literally burst, just like an armed encampment can be put off their guard with an oversupply of food and wine.
More generally, I think people can do just fine at modeling living creatures with intelligence equal to or less than their own. The breakdown is with modeling creatures of greater intelligence, who pursue goals that only make sense in hindsight, and cosmic forces which cannot be outwitted or negotiated with because they do not pursue goals at all.
Hm… When I asked on Wikipedia, I was told it was in part due to the hygroscopicness of honey: not enough water to support bacterial life.
These experimental findings on How honey kills bacteria attribute the bulk of the antibacterial action to a specific protein defensin-1 that the bees put into the honey.
And yet, someone who applied honey (or distilled alcohol!) to a festering wound thinking that it would disorient the encamped pathogens and thereby give the body’s defenders an opportunity to rally, without understanding the actual mechanism, could still be successful.
Sorry, but why are these being upvoted? It’s a cute analogy—but this is far from a “model” as was claimed. Try making some predictions from these explanations and see how horribly awry they go: why just honey? I should be shoving waffles into my wounds whenever I get a scratch, since everyone knows waffles are incredibly tasty. This analogy might work to convince an uncooperative child to take his antibiotics or get a shot, but it’s not going to cut it as a useful model. The only reason this is working is that you already know the answers!
That then boils down to wanting an interesting story doesn’t it?
This is the bit I was arguing with.
I was interpreting it as meaning “some bad things” and it’s possible that you meant “all bad things”.
Oh I do think that overall you are probably right that bad people problems can in real life be as challenging or more challenging than non-human ones.
I should have said that getting “rid of bad people” seems easy. In the context I was talking about an appealing world-view I didn’t mean to say I share it. I was trying to describe what it feels like from the inside.