Newsletter Subject

We’re Never as Smart as We Think We Are

From

substack.com

Email Address

culturcidal@substack.com

Sent On

Sat, Jun 1, 2024 07:01 PM

Email Preheader Text

The Sparrow Problem ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

The Sparrow Problem ͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­͏   ­ Forwarded this email? [Subscribe here]() for more [We’re Never as Smart as We Think We Are]( The Sparrow Problem [John Hawkins]( Jun 1   [READ IN APP](   In the late fifties, China was working very hard on improving its agriculture, but they were still having a problem growing enough food. Their tyrannical leader, Mao, studied the situation and thought he had found the problem. It was the sparrows. You see, the sparrows were cumulatively eating a lot of food. In fact, Mao had calculated that every dead sparrow would mean four more pounds of grain for the Chinese people. So, the Chinese government created a new law requiring the Chinese people to hunt, kill, and destroy every sparrow they could find. The campaign was very successful and hundreds of millions of sparrows were believed to have been killed. So, did that lead to a massive abundance of food for the Chinese people as expected? Not exactly. Because, you see, sparrows don’t just eat grain and rice. They also eat insects. Without all those sparrows around to keep them in check, hordes of insects, particularly locusts, started devouring Chinese crops. Estimates vary, but before it was all said and done, somewhere between 15-45 million Chinese people starved to death. Ironically, one of the keys to ending the famine turned out to be 250,000 sparrows the Chinese imported from the Soviet Union that helped get the locusts under control. That may seem like a bizarre story that led to great suffering, but it’s actually just another variation on the same story of what has gone wrong with the human race all over the world in general, but here in America over the last two decades or so in particular. Why? What do I mean by that? Well, let’s start from the bottom up. We humans have this tendency to believe that we’re brilliant and scientifically advanced. We think we’re smarter than our ancestors, we have it all figured out and we understand all of what’s going on. In some ways, this is true, but in most ways, it’s not and in a few ways, we’re getting progressively dumber by the second. Imagine going back in time to the most powerful Egyptian Pharaohs, Caesar, or the Spartans and telling them you were from the future. They might look at your clothes and your nifty cell phone and be fascinated by a few of your tales of the future. But then, imagine what would happen when they started trying to get practical information out of you: Not only do we not know how to create most of the things we use on a daily basis, every year there are new things we don’t know of being invented. Of course, this is hotly debated, but the last time a single brilliant human being supposedly had a strong working knowledge of ALL the current sciences was in the early 1800s. Meanwhile today, by some accounts, so many experiments and trials are being done that our medical knowledge is [doubling every 73 days](. In other words, it’s difficult to truly be an expert in even one field, which only represents a teeny, tiny fraction of our own knowledge. Meanwhile, even the smartest of us are ignorant of most things. On top of that, you have to remember that we still don’t fully understand some subjects that we’ve thought about and studied for thousands of years, like what the ideal diet is for a particular human being or how exactly our bodies most optimally build muscle. How does the placebo effect actually work? Where does our consciousness come from? Why do we dream? [Socrates quote: The more I learn, the less I realize I know.]( Don’t get me wrong, we know a lot about those subjects, but there’s a great deal that even the foremost experts in the fields don’t understand. There are many such subjects like that. Furthermore, all that’s just the tip of the complexity iceberg. Keep in mind that your humble author who is writing this column for you right now made an awful lot of his money in a career that didn’t exist when he was born (blogging). He is writing this on a device that wasn’t widely available when he was born (a computer) and is preparing to call a friend on a cell phone (a device that didn’t exist when he was born) before checking [his X account]( (which didn’t exist when he was born). He is also posting this column to Substack, which has been around for 7 years. In other words, we’re in an ever-shifting, ever-changing, increasingly complex world. We walk through life believing we have it all figured out when we actually have very little idea of what we’re doing or what’s going on. In other words, we’re all walking around thinking we understand the world around us, going, “If only we could kill those damn sparrows, everything would be great,” when we really know much less about the world than we believe we do. So, how can we fix that – well, best as it can be fixed? It starts by recognizing that we don’t know as much as we think we do and changing the way we approach the world both as individuals and as a society. 1) Copy what works: Despite all our complexity, we human beings tend to go down the same paths over and over again. The terminology, styles, and technology may change, but human nature doesn’t change that much. If you read a lot of history, you will see a lot of patterns. Follow the successful people, the successful civilizations, the things that have worked in your civilization in the past. What worked in the past is never a perfect roadmap to what will work in the future, but it’s infinitely more effective than just trying whatever sounds good or what the unsuccessful masses think will work. Copying Usain Bolt’s training may not make me a fast runner, but it’s a lot more likely to work than asking my cousin how to get faster or just guessing what might work. 2) Think in terms of probabilities, not absolutes: Nothing is guaranteed, but some things are more likely than others. Try to understand the possibilities of success and failure, make sure the juice is worth the squeeze, protect your downside, and then pick a direction with a good understanding of what things will look like if you succeed, if you fail, and what to do in either case. In other words, test, reassess and be adaptable. 3) Experiment: One of the many things that revealed the genius of the Founding Fathers was their emphasis on states' rights. As each state tries something, it can be evaluated by other states to see if it’s worth copying. The same goes for individuals. In a nation with 330 million people, people are living in almost every imaginable way. Which ones produce success? Happiness? Who’s getting ahead and who’s falling behind? Who’s winning and who’s losing? Why would you look at people who objectively seem to be unhappy, miserable, and failing, and then copy that way of living? Yet, people knowingly do exactly that every day of the week in America and unsurprisingly end up just as miserable, unhappy, and unsuccessful as the people they’re copying. Then, it’s like, “Duh! What else did you expect?” 4) Avoid One-size-fits-all centralization as a solution: The system of governance that works so well in America didn’t work when we tried to impose it in Afghanistan. A drug that might save your life might also kill your neighbor. The same guy who would make a world-class offensive tackle would be a terrible marathon runner. There is ALWAYS an exception to the rule and often, there are legions of exceptions to the rule, lots of unexpected consequences, and trade-offs that no one expects. There is no “legion of experts” that can tell you exactly what to do with your life or make decisions for 330 million people that are better than each of those people would make individually. The reason why this is such a critical mistake is that all across our society, from the individual level all the way up to the government level, there are people out there trying to adopt or push a one-size-fits-all solution on everyone. Someone doesn’t want to eat meat, so everyone needs to be a vegetarian. Someone is scared of guns, so they all need to be illegal. Someone has decided, usually based on lazy, specious thinking, that some “ism” is responsible for their failure, so they decide society has a big problem with that which needs to be addressed instead of fixing their own life. They don’t think about the trade-offs or the potential consequences, they just believe that they have the right idea, so everyone needs to be made to do it. This is a fundamental conceit of far too many human beings. They have decided that their idea is right for whatever reason, so they don’t see the need to bother with all those other pesky steps. This is where Mao truly went wrong. He was too sure of himself. He didn’t experiment. He didn’t test. Instead, he went forward with a one size fits all solution and killed millions of people. Hopefully, no one reading this will ever make a mistake that big, but we can all make the same kind of mistake when we think we know more than we do, when we get lazy, when we get too full of ourselves. Unsuccessful people and nations often just do whatever sounds good and hope it works out. They’re always so sure about their own personal “sparrows” that they don’t even see a need to test, debate, or prove their case. Then, when they almost inevitably fail because they didn’t know as much as they thought they did, there’s always an excuse. Meanwhile, the truth is very different: At the end of the day, none of us is ever as knowledgeable or smart as we think we are. That’s why all of us should be humble, accept that there’s a lot that we don’t know, learn from successful people and strategies, test our theories, and change course when needed. --------------------------------------------------------------- [Upgrade to paid]( [Share]( [Leave a comment]( [101 Things All Young Adults Should Know]( You're currently a free subscriber to [Culturcidal by John Hawkins](. For the full experience, [upgrade your subscription.]( [Upgrade to paid](   [Like]( [Comment]( [Restack](   © 2024 John Hawkins 548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104 [Unsubscribe]() [Get the app]( writing]()

EDM Keywords (233)

wrong writing would worth world works working worked work words winning well week ways way want walk use us unsuccessful understand trying truth truly true tried trials top tip time thousands thought think things theories terms tendency telling tell tales system sure supposedly successful success succeed substack subjects studied story still states starts start spartans sparrows solution society smartest smarter smart situation see scared said rule right rice revealed responsible represents remember recognizing reason realize read push prove problem probabilities preparing pounds possibilities pick people paths past particular often never neighbor needs need nation much money mistake mind millions mean many make made lot losing look locusts living likely life less legions legion led learn lead knowledgeable know kind killed keys keep juice ism invented infinitely individuals improving impose imagine ignorant idea hundreds humans hope history hard guy guns guessing guaranteed great grain governance going goes go get genius general future furthermore full friend found food fixing fixed fix figured fields fascinated far failure failing fail experts expert experiment expected exist exceptions exception exactly ever even evaluated ending end emphasis else effective drug downside done direction difficult different device decided currently culturcidal create cousin course copying copy control computer complexity column clothes civilization checking changing change centralization case career campaign call calculated brilliant bottom bother born bodies big better believed believe asking around approach app ancestors america always agriculture afghanistan adopt actually across accounts

Marketing emails from substack.com

View More
Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2025 SimilarMail.