Hacker News Reader

Comment by agumonkey | Hacker News Reader

> There is an amazing calculus in old age. As much is taken away, we find more to love and appreciate. We experience bliss on a regular basis. As one friend said: “When I was young I needed sexual ecstasy or a hike to the top of a mountain to experience bliss. Now I can feel it when I look at a caterpillar on my garden path.”

This makes me wonder how much teenage/adulthood is a layer of stress onto our brains. A very high load of impatience and craving for intensity that clouds a lot of things and even hooks many of us (refusing to quit this chase and to ~settle). And then as it fades off, you get back to childlike perception of the world (and when bad times people do regress a bit chaotically in that state partly)

View on HN

Gazing at caterpillars on a garden path does not generally lead to passing along your genes. Impatience and a craving for intensity does often lead to passing along your genes, I think the calculus is pretty straight forward.

Who says arranging for reproductive partners has to involve intensity? If everyone was equally relaxed...

Then they'd get out-reproduced by the occasional mutant, until the current state of affairs would reappear.

Yes, presumably this is only a result of conditions that cause reproductive competitiveness. So a better phrasing could be “Impatience and a craving for intensity leads to a higher rate of reproduction”. Presumably, because that impatience is impatience for sex. If it was impatience for say, graduation, or craving for the intensity of a cocaine high or physical violence, that would not lead to reproduction.

So it’s basically saying that having a high sex drive leads young people to reproduce. Okay.

Would they though? I'm sure everyone has met someone at some point who has come on far too strong (or observed it) and it can be quite a turnoff. That "high intensity" mutant could have a very hard time finding partners.

Right, if everyone is relaxed, it’s not clear that someone who is high intensity has an advantage in personal interaction.

It depends on how you define "relaxed", if you mean low CNS arousal as a base state but can easily move into a highly aroused state when needed then maybe.

But if you mean low CNS arousal generally then I completely disagree, someone that pushes to 100% will out compete you if you never breach 50% assuming equal ability. If you and I both have the same capacity for strength but you are an intense person and I am not you will be the stronger one in the short and long term. Same goes for the intelligence question as well.

However modern society short circuits part this general behavior though and all bets are off though I still think it holds true. It is often not the best political or business idea that wins, it is the one someone is willing to push through. Human relationships are similar, an activation energy must be reached in order for mating to happen and someone with a higher intensity is more likely to reach that activation energy more often.

I don’t understand - do you mean basic alertness or persistence?

I think the concept was that someone overly driven might overshoot the ‘activation energy’. However, this conversation has grown insane in the mixture of vagueness and specificity.

The selfish gene argument is nice, but this implementation is far the only option. Or maybe it was tailored for harsh wild life and not comfy "school until 23" modern times.

I think you are probably approximately correct (although a relaxed outlook might lead to helping your grandchildren thrive, thus passing on your genes).

However, your comment could be actionable in a number of ways, for example:

1. "You should embrace the intensity to make sure you reproduce."

2. "You should understand the source of that intensity as something that might oppose your goal of happiness."

3. "You should accept the biological inevitability of that intensity."

I'm partial to number 2. Even if the calculus of reproduction is straight forward, how that should inform your life choices is not.

FWIW, I've found that viewing bringing children into this world as a kind of higher calling has done a pretty good job of counteracting the daily stresses of raising children.

Based on countless examples in history, the same thing seems to be true for basically anything… Murder, rape, genocide, withstanding or inflicting abuse or torture are all much easier for people to bear mentally if they believe it is part of a greater goal.

There’s a pretty big difference between justifying something you want to do and making yourself feel better about something that you don’t want to do.

What are you saying the difference is?

It's the difference between good and evil.

Are you commenting on the effect on the person who is withstanding the distressing situation through rationalization, or just mentioning that?

I'm partial to number 2 as well, though I would add that having children is widely reported to increase "happiness" or "fulfillment" with the caveat that those concepts and self-report are very wishy/washy.

On the flip side, elderly folks who slow down and take care of their families, and give them advice on slowing down and appreciating their surroundings once in a while? They probably help to ensure their children pass on their genes. So maybe the effect is still beneficial from an evolutionary standpoint.

Maybe they have just become a little senile, so they revel in caterpillar watching.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com