Hacker News Reader

Comment by dpndencekultur | Hacker News Reader

Indoctrination into a dependency mindset fits the "buy a solution" model that our societies run on. We are already primed for this indoctrination from the moment mother puts a pacifier in our mouths. Then constantly looking up at her approval, that constitutes the beginning of our need of approval from the women in our lives. We are programmed and primed from day 0.

View on HN

We're just missing a cigar and a dream about trains here.

What's the reference here? I thought Pink Floyd at first.

Quoth the AI:

> According to Freud, dreaming about trains often symbolizes the journey of life, with the train representing the progression of time and the destination representing death, and the act of riding a train can be linked to unconscious sexual desires due to the sensation of movement and confinement, particularly when experiencing anxiety about missing a train or being trapped on one.

Yes, Freud was who I was referencing; the references to the mother, pacifier, and constantly looking for approval from women made me think of Freud's fringe theories about the Oedipus complex. He was also big into the symbolism of dreams, and thought that one explanation for trains in your dreams were the phallic representations of your repressed sexual desires.

Any exceptions for when you had train wallpaper as a kid? Asking for a friend.

A human baby is helpless and "primed" for dependency on others - there is simply no other way they could be (without a drastically different evolutionary path). This whole thread is about the modern difficulties of teaching children to become independent in spite of that beginning and the corporate machine that wishes to keep us there ("commoditize your complements"). So uh, welcome to the conversation and try not to be so fatalistic.

That kind of misogyny sounds like some deeply rooted trauma you have there, buddy.

Have you ever considered that humans are simply social creatures, that the only thing really separating us from other animals is our ability to socialize and organise in groups?

There is no programming, it’s our nature.

So if babies are ignored and raised in isolation they still grow up with normal social skills? I think it’s fairly clear that socialization is learned (a term which I think is equivalent to programmed in this context) and not something as innate (or “in our nature”) as breathing.

That’s a fallacy. Human babies don’t grow up in isolation; if they do, it’s in contrived experiments, and drawing conclusions from that is about as helpful as watching birds in a cage.

Humans in their natural environment will interact with other humans socially, mirror their display of emotion, and have a desire for affection.

Of course they will. But that’s is programming. Nurturing, socializing, teaching… all of it is programming. I’m not placing any negative connotations on the word. I’m not sure why you don’t view those things as programming?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com