the crudity of primitive brains

[franksolich]

I'm really up to the ears, or rather, where there would be ears if I had ears, with income tax work, and haven't been able to get out the boat and row over to Skins's island to observe the primitives.

I could, but every time I go over there, I spend several hours, and making a living's more important than being entertained and amused.

Anyway.

I'm.....still.....working on a new version of DU for guests (posted in the DUmping Ground here), a longer, and one hopes a more illuminating edition, and one of the things I'm trying to describe is the functioning of the average primitive brain.

Primitives have a peculiar way of thinking about things, and I KNOW Sigmund Freud described the phenomenon, but it was a while back that I read about it, and I'm not up to ploughing through 20+ more books, none of them short ones, to find the term.

It goes something like this; primitive brains are apparently unable to grasp the notion of what one might call "multi-purpose" uses of one thing.

This is close to, but not quite the same thing, as when primitives think that when something is done, it has only the intended consequences, and no allowances are made for the possibly--in fact, damned near 100% certainty--that something might have unintended consequences.

Close to, but not quite the same thing.

If one gets my drift.

Which one might, or might not.

A good example of this is with the primitives in the cooking and baking forum on Skins's island.  They use one specific kitchen utensil for one specific use, and that use only. 

Even if cooking only one item, they use one 2-quart pot for boiling corn, a second 2-quart pot for boiling peas, a third 2-quart pot for boiling beans, a fourth 2-quart pot for boiling rice, a fifth 2-quart pot for boiling chicken noodle soup, a sixth 2-quart pot for boiling carrots, and so on.

One gets the impression primitives have kitchens with acres of shelves, on which to put all of these cooking implements.

Even if flipping only one item, they use one spatula for turning eggs, a second spatula for turning pancakes, a third spatula for turning hash browns, a fourth spatula for turning for turning french toast, and so on.

Or if baking only one set of cookies, they use one cookie-sheet only for chocolate-chip cookies, a second cookie-sheet for sugar cookies, a third cookie-sheet for lemon cookies, a fourth cookie-sheet for Dutch windmill cookies, a fifth cookie-sheet for springerle cookies, and so on.

It never seems to occur to the primitives that one pot, one spatula, one cookie-sheet, can serve more than one function.  The concept of "multi-use" is apparently too difficult for the crude brain of a primitive to grasp.

While doing income taxes, I think about this singular phenomenon often, but I can't put my finger on what it's called.

[BlueStateSaint]

I'm really up to the ears, or rather, where there would be ears if I had ears, with income tax work, and haven't been able to get out the boat and row over to Skins's island to observe the primitives.

I could, but every time I go over there, I spend several hours, and making a living's more important than being entertained and amused.

Anyway.

I'm.....still.....working on a new version of DU for guests (posted in the DUmping Ground here), a longer, and one hopes a more illuminating edition, and one of the things I'm trying to describe is the functioning of the average primitive brain.

Primitives have a peculiar way of thinking about things, and I KNOW Sigmund Freud described the phenomenon, but it was a while back that I read about it, and I'm not up to ploughing through 20+ more books, none of them short ones, to find the term.

It goes something like this; primitive brains are apparently unable to grasp the notion of what one might call "multi-purpose" uses of one thing.

This is close to, but not quite the same thing, as when primitives think that when something is done, it has only the intended consequences, and no allowances are made for the possibly--in fact, damned near 100% certainty--that something might have unintended consequences.

Close to, but not quite the same thing.

If one gets my drift.

Which one might, or might not.

A good example of this is with the primitives in the cooking and baking forum on Skins's island.  They use one specific kitchen utensil for one specific use, and that use only. 

Even if cooking only one item, they use one 2-quart pot for boiling corn, a second 2-quart pot for boiling peas, a third 2-quart pot for boiling beans, a fourth 2-quart pot for boiling rice, a fifth 2-quart pot for boiling chicken noodle soup, a sixth 2-quart pot for boiling carrots, and so on.

One gets the impression primitives have kitchens with acres of shelves, on which to put all of these cooking implements.

Even if flipping only one item, they use one spatula for turning eggs, a second spatula for turning pancakes, a third spatula for turning hash browns, a fourth spatula for turning for turning french toast, and so on.

Or if baking only one set of cookies, they use one cookie-sheet only for chocolate-chip cookies, a second cookie-sheet for sugar cookies, a third cookie-sheet for lemon cookies, a fourth cookie-sheet for Dutch windmill cookies, a fifth cookie-sheet for springerle cookies, and so on.

It never seems to occur to the primitives that one pot, one spatula, one cookie-sheet, can serve more than one function.  The concept of "multi-use" is apparently too difficult for the crude brain of a primitive to grasp.

While doing income taxes, I think about this singular phenomenon often, but I can't put my finger on what it's called.

Tunnel vision?

[JohnnyReb]

Tunnel vision?

Maybe more like funnel vision?

[Karin]

Wouldn't you need 100's of pots and implements?  No wonder they're always talking poor!  Where does bobbolink keep all of hers? 

Yes, funnel vision is a good word for it.  And, it's a univeral phenomenon, that they NEVER think of unintended consequences.  This goes for those considered "smart" or "genius" like Obama as well. 

[Carl]

Maybe it is too fine a point to make but I would say instead of "intended" consequences I would characterize them as "imagined" consequences.

That you can raise taxes to a punitive level on business and they will just pay them without passing them on or reducing expenses (jobs ..etc).
Perhaps that is a distinction without a difference.

[franksolich]

Maybe more like funnel vision?

Now, that's good, sir, and if I can't find the proper Freudian term, I'm going to use yours.

It drives me nuts, the inability of the primitives to think creatively, imaginatively.

For a real life example, I have a 1-3/8" S/K adjustable wrench.

It's a tool, and primitives would think of it as being used only as a tool for tightening and untightening nuts.

Decent and civilized people think rather more expansively; me, for example, it's not only a tool, but a weapon if need be.

That idea would never occur to a primitive.