Transplanting a Seattleite

Weirdly, whereas your previous comment was screened, this time LJ decided you might be spam. I had already found your website; thank you for being clear about how you are. It's refreshing.

I don't worry about typos unless they introduce ambiguity in an important way.

I'm not Nella. That isn't my name. If you take a good look at where you found that and click through, it should become obvious Real Quick what my name actually is. It should _also_ be obvious from any looking around in this blog that I refer to people by initials, unless they are strangers in a public post I am referring to in the way they are referred to in the source.

I in no way proposed "revealing" future changes. I suggested pointing people at relevant evidence when asking them to make a prediction (viz. here is where you say you were 10 years ago. here is where you say you are now. where might you be 10 years from now, when you are x years of age in y calendar year?). I'm going to ignore the rest of the paragraph. I disagree with it.

I suspect you did not understand what I meant about social groups demanding change. Social groups expect 20 year olds, 30 year olds, 40 year olds, 50 year olds and so forth to behave in different ways. Having expectations about life trajectories for the group contributes to group cohesion. I have no idea what you mean by self-contained, but I'm pretty sure I'll disagree.

"Moreover, without predictability of social partners that you have contracts of various kinds with, it is difficult for individuals to formulate their own plans for advancement (lifetime fitness enhancement)."

This is wrong in a damaging and aggressive way. I assert that humans neither need nor want "predictability" of social partners. We need some certainty that people will fulfill on future commitments AND we need to be able to trust each other. I don't need to know a damn thing about what band my husband will want to spend money on ten years from now to figure out how many kids we would prefer to have. I _do_ need to know that we have a pattern of compatibility, so that if our plans to not materialize, I trust we can find a way to go forward. This study was looking at _music preferences_. NOBODY needs predictability there. (Except really rabid Rush fans.)

However much you may like thinking about this stuff, it'd be a whole lot less annoying to read if you didn't reify your opinions.

"the end of history illusion probably evolved in ancient periods of human evolution in which socioeconomic mobility was considerably less than in today’s western societies" just sounds like windbaggery. Also, since I started this by saying I thought the illusion was a bullshit explanation to begin with, speculating about why it might exist seems like going a bit far.