those of a mentalistic outlook generally pay little attention to physical appearance, fashion, clothing , gait , voice (excluding emotional tone), accent etc. words and symbols are far more important. the NT sums this up best : “In the beginning was the word” – a word is a unit of information

Crucial to this is the difference between similar and compatable.

A lot of the strongest marriages and friendships are not actually between the genetically , circumstantially or intellectually similar. It is between “saw partners” – the phrase comes from the timber industry and means a person who will “push” when the other “pulls”

Ironically, genetics tends to support this very much – the more diverse the individuals of the same species (and there is only one human species) the healthier the offspring is likely to be, as a faulty gene must be carried by both parents in most cases to be passed on..

Something worth mentioning is the issue of IQ. IQ does not necessarily measure “spritual” intelligence. Whilst I’m quite academic myself I much prefered comprehensive to selective eduction as I found the comprehensive group to be more concerned about friendship rather than objects and looks. Since the 11-plus , A-Levels (uk quals) etc are essentially IQ tests , you would think that those scoring higher would be more “intelligent”. I have not found this to be the case- more they are better able to cope with petty social mores and rules – sadly essential for manipulative behaviour – but not actually “smarter”.

An interesting difference between the mentalistic and materialistic outlook is the concept of love and fear. Materialists are more likely to be influenced by threats or bribes than mentalists, on the ground that long term this is futile – why do materialists have no trouble with newtons law of reaction but not karma which is the identical principle applied to human nature. And happiness is not actually about confomation but about being true to yourself. The materialist elite sadly don’t like this because – they can’t control us!!!

It’s not a left/right thing either. Consider competion. It could be argued that the scores in any sport are actually completely irrelavent. Why do we compete? To learn , to raise human standards , to have fun , to make friends – this is win / win competition , whereas the “dog eat dog” variety is lose / lose

Let Love Lead The Way – and love is the natural attraction between opposites!!

You can find a description of these games on the Wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strategy

Segregation is a simple evolutionary fallout of a game in which the existence of racism results in a lower score for a mixed interaction and a higher score for interaction with a person of the same color.

I believe that this same type of game caused segregation of caste in Indian society and is equally applicable to segregation of Muslims into pockets of Muslim dominated areas from which non Muslims are squeezed out.