> > Steve, >> > I have been working at this response for days. You will probably be completely over this conversation by the time you get it.
> *When I recently (weeks before Dave's offering here and years since >> reading it in Wilson's original context/voice) encountered the >> "paleolithic/medeival/godlike" quote, I found it inspiring,at least on the >> surface.* > > > *Paleolithic emotions: To whatever extent our emotions arise out of are > are somewhat rooted in our neurophysiology, our neurochemistry, there is no > indication that we could have had enough generations of reproduction and > natural selection to move that much? Is it unreasonable to believe that > our limbic system, our neurochemistry is adapted to anything but the > previous hundreds of thousands or even millions of years of the conditions > of our predecessors? * > > Well, yes, of course. Our hox genes come down to us from horseshoe crabs, for goodnness sake. And, lo and behold, we do a lot of things that horsehoe crabs do, like flee from predators, for instance. Not sure that that fact makes useful talking how our horshoecrab brains don't prepare us for aggressive drivers. > *Medieval Institutions: I can't make a strong argument that our > institutions don't evolve/modify/adapt faster than a half-millenia but I do > believe that change in this domain requires multiple lifetimes (change at > the rate of funerals at best)? I don't know exactly when Nation States > formed (out of growing/merging?) City States, or when what we recognize as > modern Republics and Democracies (USA, France, ???) emerged but I would > suggest that while our technological advances (modern > communication/computation) have facilitated the same fundamental methods > (Mary's son edits bills for the TX legislature, so watches the sausage get > made there) but if they don't seem to have changed significantly in decades > if not centuries (Comstock act anyone?)* > > Some things change some things don't. Look, let me try to steel-man for a minute. I am interested in the phenonemon of charisma. Why do we so easily fall prey to people like trump. Why does the belief in evident falsehoods seem to be so central to charismatic organizations. It feels to me that suspension of judgement is the key to the whole thing. Ok, so we might go looking for situations in which submission of individual judgement to produces so much of some good that its evident perils might be overcome. Military situations. Genetics suggests that modern humans come through an extremely narrow population bottleneck early in our history. We got whittled down to just a very few small groups. Hmmm! Is it the case that those groups that were capable of submitting to the unquestioned leadership of a single leader where less likely to be picked off one by one and there for come through the bottleneck as GROUPS. That kind of musing does lead to some specific experimenta/comparativel hunches to explore. Like, is there any relation between the emergence of charasmatic movements and population crises? > > *Technology of Gods: DaveW's "indistinguishable from Magic" may be no > more than another aphorism, but it carries the spirit. As we know from > my regular Luddite postings here, I am hypervigilant about the unintended > consequences of technology. My fundamental metaphorical/analogical source > domain for technology is "the lever" . While it's primary/intended > function is to multiply force and allow an individual to move something > that would be normally out of scale (strength). The obvious unintended > side-effects include: break the lever; break the thing you are trying to > move; break the fulcrum; start something moving you can't stop. A little > more subtle is that the force multiplication is achieved at a cost of > sensitivity and control division... sometimes that is a feature (like > when I used to use my heavy boot soles to kick the tongue-hitch of my > trailer onto the not-quite-aligned ball of my hitch-ball) sometimes it is a > bug (when I overdo it and the tongue of the trailer slides into my bumper > and creases my license plate, leading to an unpleasant stop by LEO years > later for a "modified license plate"). Elon Musk throws rockets and > satellites into orbit all the time, every once in a while they punch holes > in the Ozone layer or drop debris on people's houses or interfere with > amateur and professional astronomy with "1000 brilliant pebbles"? Before > Musk's aluminum oxide dispersal in the stratosphere, our refrigerants (and > other chloroflourocarbons) leaked out and lead to folks (including me in > 2000) on the beach in NZ getting sunburned at sea level with a 5 minute > exposure (least of the biosphere's worries, just a good canary-coalmine > indicator)... or let's consider PFAS and microplastics or ... or ... or > ... every damn one of those things "seemed like a good idea at the time".* > > > *So, never ending anecdotes aside, what I find "useful" about Wilson's > observation (aphorism) is that it helps me organize my thoughts about > different scales of things (in time and consequence) just a little better > than if I treat human emotional responses, institutional mechanisms and > technological capabilities/consequences as if they are all roughly on the > same scale? And it might facilitate a conversation? Or not (apparently).* > > Any metaphor is worthy of explanation if one takes seriously its empirical implications and is prepared to set about testing them. I don't think Wilson was intent on a program like that. A brilliant empircal scientist in his youth, like Donald Griffin Ithink he felt he had grown beyond all of that and had earned the right to say out sage aphorisms. > > *Glen sometimes suggests that "communication doesn't happen" (poor > paraphrase I'm sure, re-enforcing his point?) and that "what passes for > communication is more about social grooming" (same caveat) but I've of > late come to suspect that "conversation" is the exchange of information > between subsystems which are part of "nearly decomposable" systems which > are simultaneously adapting at their own level of organization/structure > and adapting *to* the larger system they are "nearly decomposable" from > (bad grammar I'm sure). * > > *If human limbic/neurochemical systems are evolving, their coupling to the > institutional contexts we have developed and live in would seem to be a > constrainer/driver of those adaptations, as both would be responding to the > (much faster?) evolving/adapting technosphere?* > > Notice how you put the answer to the question beyond any hope of any >> answer by physiologizing it. Before we get to any physiologial or genetic >> or even historical/cultural explanations, we have to examine the purported >> failure in our behavioral systems. What is that failure, what information >> blockages are preventing the response to the hazard, and in what sense is >> the response bad? These charasmatic groups my be surviving bottlenecks >> when the rest of us aren't. >> > Ach! Sorry, Steve, I am just being cranky here. There are two things that I thought were eliminated forever before I started my career: fascism and evolutionary determinism. And now they are both back. Mumble, NIck > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 11:55 AM steve smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: > Nick - > > I will try to answer what I think was the core of your question/response > to DaveW's offering of Wilson's aphorism with a nod perhaps to what might > also have been your reaction to my (attempted) witticism comparing > aphorisms to models, with all being wrong, some being useful. > > When I recently (weeks before Dave's offering here and years since reading > it in Wilson's original context/voice) encountered the > "paleolithic/medeival/godlike" quote, I found it inspiring,at least on the > surface. > > Paleolithic emotions: To whatever extent our emotions arise out of are > are somewhat rooted in our neurophysiology, our neurochemistry, there is no > indication that we could have had enough generations of reproduction and > natural selection to move that much? Is it unreasonable to believe that > our limbic system, our neurochemistry is adapted to anything but the > previous hundreds of thousands or even millions of years of the conditions > of our predecessors? > > Medieval Institutions: I can't make a strong argument that our > institutions don't evolve/modify/adapt faster than a half-millenia but I do > believe that change in this domain requires multiple lifetimes (change at > the rate of funerals at best)? I don't know exactly when Nation States > formed (out of growing/merging?) City States, or when what we recognize as > modern Republics and Democracies (USA, France, ???) emerged but I would > suggest that while our technological advances (modern > communication/computation) have facilitated the same fundamental methods > (Mary's son edits bills for the TX legislature, so watches the sausage get > made there) but if they don't seem to have changed significantly in decades > if not centuries (Comstock act anyone?) > > Technology of Gods: DaveW's "indistinguishable from Magic" may be no more > than another aphorism, but it carries the spirit. As we know from my > regular Luddite postings here, I am hypervigilant about the unintended > consequences of technology. My fundamental metaphorical/analogical source > domain for technology is "the lever" . While it's primary/intended > function is to multiply force and allow an individual to move something > that would be normally out of scale (strength). The obvious unintended > side-effects include: break the lever; break the thing you are trying to > move; break the fulcrum; start something moving you can't stop. A little > more subtle is that the force multiplication is achieved at a cost of > sensitivity and control division... sometimes that is a feature (like > when I used to use my heavy boot soles to kick the tongue-hitch of my > trailer onto the not-quite-aligned ball of my hitch-ball) sometimes it is a > bug (when I overdo it and the tongue of the trailer slides into my bumper > and creases my license plate, leading to an unpleasant stop by LEO years > later for a "modified license plate"). Elon Musk throws rockets and > satellites into orbit all the time, every once in a while they punch holes > in the Ozone layer or drop debris on people's houses or interfere with > amateur and professional astronomy with "1000 brilliant pebbles"? Before > Musk's aluminum oxide dispersal in the stratosphere, our refrigerants (and > other chloroflourocarbons) leaked out and lead to folks (including me in > 2000) on the beach in NZ getting sunburned at sea level with a 5 minute > exposure (least of the biosphere's worries, just a good canary-coalmine > indicator)... or let's consider PFAS and microplastics or ... or ... or > ... every damn one of those things "seemed like a good idea at the time". > > So, never ending anecdotes aside, what I find "useful" about Wilson's > observation (aphorism) is that it helps me organize my thoughts about > different scales of things (in time and consequence) just a little better > than if I treat human emotional responses, institutional mechanisms and > technological capabilities/consequences as if they are all roughly on the > same scale? And it might facilitate a conversation? Or not (apparently). > > Glen sometimes suggests that "communication doesn't happen" (poor > paraphrase I'm sure, re-enforcing his point?) and that "what passes for > communication is more about social grooming" (same caveat) but I've of > late come to suspect that "conversation" is the exchange of information > between subsystems which are part of "nearly decomposable" systems which > are simultaneously adapting at their own level of organization/structure > and adapting *to* the larger system they are "nearly decomposable" from > (bad grammar I'm sure). > > If human limbic/neurochemical systems are evolving, their coupling to the > institutional contexts we have developed and live in would seem to be a > constrainer/driver of those adaptations, as both would be responding to the > (much faster?) evolving/adapting technosphere? > > Mumble, > > - Steve > > > On 10/6/24 8:12 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: > > Steve, > > You called on me to steelman the idea that our problems arise from having > antique emotional systems in a very ugly non antique world. Glen's stern > judgement looms over me. > > In a general way, the idea that adaptations persist beyond their sell-by > date is absolutely essential to evolution. How else could a trait be > selected-out if it did not occur where it shouldn't be, so to speak. There > are some interesting examples of such persistence from the research of > Richard Coss on prairie dog defensive adaptations against rattlesnakes. > There is a portion of the West (NE California, I think) where prairie dogs > still live ;but rattlesnakes no longer do. The prairie dogs have no > resistance to snake venom; however, they still have behavioral adaptations > against snakes, even though the population has not been exposed to them for > 100 thousand years. So, it's certainly possible. (I hope I haven't > garbled the facts too much here). > > But, returning to my strawmanning, notice how specific the example is, of > prairie dogs retaining a particular a particular response to a particular > set of circumstances that they only encounter when the experimenter > presents them. How much that contrasts with hand waving about lizard > brains and encapsulated emotion modules passed down through the > generations! > > Mind you, although you rightly sense my skepticism, I have not ruled the > idea out. I have only asked that somebody put some feathers on it so I can > see if it flies. > > Ever your friend, > > Nick > > > > On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 5:49 PM steve smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: > >> Nick - >> >> And here I thought *I* was being "pithy", then you call me out on my >> lithp?! ;^) >> >> The strawman arguments have started coming out, I wonder if anyone >> will gen up a steelman? >> >> - tinman Steve >> >> >> >> On 10/5/24 11:26 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: >> >> So in what sense and for what purposes is this pithy aphorism useful? >> What exactly is the pith? >> >> If a metaphor, what is truth in the metaphor, the positive analog. >> Nobody ever said that all metaphors are *entirely* wrong. >> >> and yes, I am being pissy. >> >> n >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 11:04 AM steve smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: >> >>> All *Pithy Aphorisms* are wrong, some are useful? >>> >>> On 10/5/24 9:06 AM, Prof David West wrote: >>> >>> my affection for the quote derives from a metaphorical reading, not a >>> literal one. Something akin to Steve's differential rates of evolution. I >>> also would have eschewed 'god like' in favor of 'magical' ala Clarke's >>> dictum about any sufficiently advanced technology. >>> >>> davew >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2024, at 8:46 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: >>> >>> I think that this way of talking about emotions precludes careful >>> thought. First of all, neurologizing emotions is just to hide the pea >>> under the wrong thimble. I don't think paleolithologizig helps much more. >>> Glen is correct that, whatever an emotion is, its inputs and outputs are >>> ontogenetically and culturally determined. So, fear, for instance, is a >>> relation between something that we take to be threatening and something >>> that we hope will be avoidance. Inputs and outputs are everything. The rest >>> is just arousal. >>> >>> N >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 7:01 PM steve smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: >>> >>> Emotions/Limbic systems evolve at genetic rates, institutions evolve at >>> social/cultural rates (maybe the fastest significant change can >>> happen/resolve is in multiple lifetimes?) but technology is advancing at >>> must faster rates? >>> >>> Or is this wrong(headed) also? >>> >>> On 10/4/24 3:43 PM, glen wrote: >>> > None of that is true, however romantic it might sound. Depending on >>> > how one defines "emotion", that smells the most true. But the >>> > mechanisms of emotion are as coupled to current reality as is every >>> > part of our bodies. To suggest that, say, the Space Force or methods >>> > like quantitative easing are medieval is just nonsense. Technology is >>> > more democratized than it has ever been. Granted, it takes (a lot) of >>> > work to familiarize oneself with something like how GPS works or how >>> > to NOT click on that phishing email. But to suggest that it's >>> > "godlike" says more about the person than it does about the state of >>> > technology. >>> > >>> > On 10/4/24 11:16, Prof David West wrote: >>> >> /"The real problem of humanity is the following: we have Paleolithic >>> >> emotions, medieval institutions, and godlike technology. And it is >>> >> terrifically dangerous."/ Edward O. Wilson. >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> >>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Nicholas S. Thompson >>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology >>> Clark University >>> nthomp...@clarku.edu >>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson >>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >> >> >> -- >> Nicholas S. Thompson >> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology >> Clark University >> nthomp...@clarku.edu >> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson >> >> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> archives: 5/2017 thru present >> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >> >> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> archives: 5/2017 thru present >> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >> > > > -- > Nicholas S. Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology > Clark University > nthomp...@clarku.edu > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson > > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > -- Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology Clark University nthomp...@clarku.edu https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
