What is the purpose of nostalgia?

  • Thread starter misgfool
  • Start date
Why does it have to serve a function? Seems to me that it could easily be an unintentional product of other inherant (human) capabilities.
I was inclined to agree with this until I noticed that the whole 'what is the purpose of' in this sentence is effectively retroactive guessing at whim without any real basis to do so. The majority of these 'scientific theories' of 'why people have nostalgia', 'why "men" look at "women's" breasts' et cetera are just largely guessing at whim, ask yourself, is there any way to truly verify your own hypothesis on such questions.

A: The purpose of nostalgia is intrinsicly linked to the desire of man to create social inertia once it has found a working society.
B: Pfah! Nonsense, the purpose of nostalgia is all an experiment planted into us by Aliens from he planet No'rth-Kh'orea to observe us for scientific testing how we respond when one of us asks the question what it is for, can you not see this?

And there really isn't a way to falsify one or the other.

Hey, I'm gonna toss out this little paradox:

What if evolution is true, but it's an evolutionary advantage not to believe it?
Then it's an evolutionary advantage not to believe it. There are more things which are 'true' which are an 'evolutionary advantage' to not believe. In fact, they are quite common, this is because ignorance is an evolutionary advantage 'ignorance is bliss', the mistake people often make with these things like 'the human genome is becoming weak' is that they fail to realize that their own opinion about 'good people' needn't concord with that of evolution. This is because evolution—of course—cares about one thing, ability to reproduce offspring that can again reproduce. I'm not sure about you but that's not really my own definite criterion on how much I value another man. The whole futuristic idea that man will evolve to startling intelligence is only fit for fiction, evolution does not lead to species who are 'advanced', it leads to species which are able to procreate in the environment they are put it. It's an evolutionary disadvantage to know a thing or two about physics it seems, physicists don't have that many children, I know few that even have a child wish.
 
Last edited:
6,171
1,275
The whole futuristic idea that man will evolve to startling intelligence is only fit for fiction, evolution does not lead to species who are 'advanced', it leads to species which are able to procreate in the environment they are put it.
Amen.
 
31
0
Then it's an evolutionary advantage not to believe it. There are more things which are 'true' which are an 'evolutionary advantage' to not believe. In fact, they are quite common, this is because ignorance is an evolutionary advantage 'ignorance is bliss', the mistake people often make with these things like 'the human genome is becoming weak' is that they fail to realize that their own opinion about 'good people' needn't concord with that of evolution. This is because evolution—of course—cares about one thing, ability to reproduce offspring that can again reproduce. I'm not sure about you but that's not really my own definite criterion on how much I value another man. The whole futuristic idea that man will evolve to startling intelligence is only fit for fiction, evolution does not lead to species who are 'advanced', it leads to species which are able to procreate in the environment they are put it. It's an evolutionary disadvantage to know a thing or two about physics it seems, physicists don't have that many children, I know few that even have a child wish.
Good points but what is evolving that is deemed important? These physicists do leave behind more advanced information which you can kind of see us as. We evolve to carry down our code. They, as we all do, transfer code and carry it to others. We learn, we find code which is advantageous for this code to survive. I kind of see it as code adding to code. Any way, in some altruistic sense, without children, they are still playing a part in human evolution.
 
Good points but what is evolving that is deemed important? These physicists do leave behind more advanced information which you can kind of see us as. We evolve to carry down our code. They, as we all do, transfer code and carry it to others. We learn, we find code which is advantageous for this code to survive. I kind of see it as code adding to code. Any way, in some altruistic sense, without children, they are still playing a part in human evolution.
Well, another common mistake about evolution is that people often fail to realize it has nihil præcognition whatsoever, it doesn't plan ahead. Hence the vast litter of rudimentary organs and in time life will become extinct solely because evolution cannot really cope any more with all the rudimentary organs it has acquired down its path.

The wonderful thing of humans having cognitive language is its diesel function. It was probably only evolved to warn more effectively for prædators and battle tactics discussion in Leeroy Jenkins style. The point about it is that it enables us to pass on our ideas to others, in other species, every time a new infant is born it starts again to discover all things, not in our case, we learn what our parents know and teach what we know to our children. Even studying physics is still building on knowledge some cro magnon invented 50 000 years back. This is kind of becoming explosively lately, atomic bombs and all. LaTeX and the lot which will probably one day lead to our and a lot of other species extinction.

They play part in human evolution all right, but no matter how beneficial the knowledge they create may be for other humans to procreate, their genes still do not procreate so it shan't lead to more physicists in the genepool.
 
S_Happens
Gold Member
300
3
"Necessity" is the problematic part of it, you see? Why not just say "evolutionary advantage"?
I see your point and agree with you, although we'd have to know the purpose of nostalgia to determine whether it was a neccessity or advantage, if it is resultant of evolution. I believe the strong, confident language used (must, have, etc) in the argument for it being a result of evolution prompted me to use neccessity over advantage.
 
1,120
7
Do you remember the good ole' days before nostalgia?

Garth
Yes Garth, I do.
 
I see your point and agree with you, although we'd have to know the purpose of nostalgia to determine whether it was a neccessity or advantage, if it is resultant of evolution. I believe the strong, confident language used (must, have, etc) in the argument for it being a result of evolution prompted me to use neccessity over advantage.
I think it's a flawed approach to even speak of 'purpose' when debating evolutionary progression. The traits gained don't really have a 'purpose' to a specific goal. They simply get there by randomness and if the individual that has them gets more children than others, then they persist. They don't really have a 'purpose' to work for a certain goal. A lot of traits we have are also simply by-products of other traits that only in the modern society begin to surface. Like the fact that our teeth rot away without dental care before we turn ten, one can imagine that cavemen had no dental care, this is because this is due to our recent habit of sugar-overconsumption because we tend to like things sweet, even though it's advised against to eat it?

The answer is that sweet stuff used to be hard to come by and the brain works on it, having über-strøng teeth when we evolved would result into less offspring because it costs energy which was costly.

As a last cryptic note, ask yourself why a lot of people with a chronic chemical depression have said the feeling is akin to nostalgia and in no small terms is it known that 'cured' people often express a strange ambivalent state of the desire to go back to the feeling they describe as unbearable but also strangely beautiful and nostalgic?
 
3,073
3
For us to forget how bad things really were.
 
6,171
1,275
I see your point and agree with you, although we'd have to know the purpose of nostalgia to determine whether it was a neccessity or advantage, if it is resultant of evolution. I believe the strong, confident language used (must, have, etc) in the argument for it being a result of evolution prompted me to use neccessity over advantage.
Clearly you're more conversant with the subject and terminology than me. Is there ever a case where a trait is properly spoken of as an "evolutionary necessity"?
 
12
0
That's it! From this point forward, I'm referring to human traits as "evolutionary coincidences", and there is nothing anyone can do to stop me!!

MuahahahahahahahahHAHAHAHAHAHA.
 
Redbelly98
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
12,038
128
That's it! From this point forward, I'm referring to human traits as "evolutionary coincidences", and there is nothing anyone can do to stop me!!

Why, that's . . .
Guiness-Brilliant-1.jpg
 
12
0
That's exactly the way I was hoping people would hear my name in their head. :smile:
 

Related Threads for: What is the purpose of nostalgia?

  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Last Post
6
Replies
139
Views
21K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
68
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
83
Views
12K
Replies
9
Views
709
Top