SCA-Removed Conclusion

Removed Conclusion

The following was a short conclusion I wrote for Sequencing, Comparison, and Assignment. I removed the conclusion from the article because it did not really advance any of the ideas in the article. The conclusions of the article are made within each section and this short conclusion was a noncomprehensive advancement of ideas related to utility. The few points made are still relevant.

Sequencing, Comparison, and Assignment identify the base processes of detail that produce all thoughts, feelings, and decisions.  Order, truth, morality, and value, which are assignments of cause or effect, true or false, imposing or unimposing, and priority of value in feelings and quantity (materially).  These are the subconscious assignments applied to recorded detail.  

I’ve written much more about SCA in application, but have included the few behavior functions I’ve included because these two functions (bias reinforcement, and image promotion) represent the most fundamental problems in this species behavior.  We are supposed to be subjective beings living in a common objective reality.  Unfortunately we are subjective beings, living subjective reality, where people’s perspectives are deluded by their refusal to acknowledge things as fact that they do not want to be true.  They don’t want them to be true because it takes away the ability of objects whose value is based on false ideas to produce the feelings that give them value, as well as potentially lowers self worth and creates uncertainty.  

SCA provides the why to what research reveals.  For example, the Social Norms Theory states that an individual’s propensity to engage in negative behavior depends on whether he believes the behavior is prevalent among the public.  Psychology is satisfied to observe the function, and even more so to create behavioral changes through the function.  Most people will change their behavior if they can be convinced that the behavior is not common or accepted by the broader public.  

SCA recognizes this as image promoting behavior, where representing a value that runs contrary to the values of the public decreases his value to others, impacting his self worth, potentially decreasing opportunities for social interaction and advancing other material purposes.  More importantly, instead of seeing this as a function to be exploited to create behavioral changes, the function reveals a problem in human understanding, morality, and behavior.  Whether an individual proceeds with an act should not be based on whether the act is perceived as socially acceptable or not.  The merit of the act to the individual and the impact it has on others should be the basis for the decision, not whether the act is socially acceptable.  History and even present day is filled with examples of acts that are socially acceptable among different factions that are objectively harmful or wrong.

The illusion of control states that people believe they can affect outcomes through acts that have no influence on those outcomes.  Why?  Because progress towards a desired outcome feels good.  There are many objectives we complete that have no inherent value but derive value from other objectives where we feel good from drawing nearer to that objective.  Whether a person is praying to their poorly conceived deity or not saying a probable positive outcome (jinx) for fear that the outcome will not happen the illusion of control is a product of positive feelings associated with progress.

The illusion of control also derives value from experience. For example, if a person prays for something and it happens, the result is attributed to the deity and serves as evidence of the deities ability to influence outcomes, and the feelings associated with the outcome are associated with and add value to the deity and illusion that they can influence outcomes through the deity.   

I’m not only saying people do it because it feels good, it feels good because of the confidence in the illusion to control, a belief in the superstition’s ability to affect an outcome.  In religion, prayer is one of many points of value contributing to the deity’s overall value, where information is avoided and ignored that challenges the belief because many of the things that make them feel good, like prayer, will no longer give way to those pleasures.  

I’m not from the field of psychology, these were terms I came across one in the critique of research and another in an abstract I was viewing from a journal I was considering submitting this article to.  When I do come across psychology material I recognize the functions.  I’m not impressed with the structure of the field, the categorization of behavioral tendencies, false and subjective causation for feelings and behavior, a failure to recognize the role of the environment in the production of disorder and dissatisfaction, and efforts to have dissatisfied individual’s adopt common values to increase satisfaction, these among other criticisms I have generally that I won’t go into here.  The points being, 1: SCA provides insight into research, theory, and concepts past, present and future.  2: My process and motivation is much different from people who claim to be involved in the study of the human mind.  

I was confronted with a problem.  Despite being able to clearly and definitively explain functions in other subjects to people they refused to acknowledge these functions that invalidated their opinions.  I had to understand why and I was already deep into understanding the functions of my own mind to understand and apply morality as well as to understand and change my own behavior and emotional reactions.  Everything I do I do for practical purposes.  I didn’t set out to create a theory of the mind, I needed to understand denial and why creatures who are capable of understanding and assembling basic detail were unable or unwilling to understand the assembly of basic detail related to subjects they claimed to be interested in, and are subjects that affect their interests.  Consideration of why I asked the questions I asked and why I thought what I thought led to the discovery of SCA.  All thoughts reduced to these purposes of assignment and  there is no other purpose for which a thought can come into being.