On 10/26/11 1:12 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
“I wonder at what that means for the neural tissue... seems like all
of the "learning" we assume happens through neuron destruction and
growth is out of the question for these little buggers. What about that?”
They already know everything—not unlike human adolescents.
Which would include (adolescent know-it-alls?) too many of us who are
disguised as adults. I refer to Robert Bly's /Sibling Society/... with
the following quote from the Wikipedia entry on Bly and the book:
/In his bookThe Sibling Society
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sibling_Society>
(1997), Bly argues that a society formed mainly by half adults is
extremely problematic as it lacks in leadership, daring initiative,
creativity and a deep care about others./
I am fascinated with embryology and epigenetics as a *pattern* for other
(other than biological) systems.
For example (see Bly quote above), have we as a
society/culture/civilization, blunted the development of our
individuals, creating a neotenous population which is (conveniently,
pointedly?) easier for the powers that be (variously nobility, clergy,
"the state", "the church", various ideologically founded groups
(political parties?) etc.) to control and manipulate. I'm talking
about *us*, not just *them* FWIW.
<Political Rant> The recent comparisons of Occupy to Tea Party folks has
been a fun if silly ride. What I see superficially in common is the
adolescent faction or fraction of each. I would claim that a hallmark
of most, if not all of our popular political movements is Bly's "//lack
in leadership, daring initiative, creativity and a deep care about
others//", and tends to focus on reactionary and subversive tactics to
bring attention to narrow topics in pursuit of winning a public
argument. My line of questioning (of many popular movements) is as to
whether there is "/deep care about others/" in the movement. If there
is NOT, it is likely that the movement is either being run/manipulated
by others with more grounded (but nefarious) intentions, or it is
relatively empty and merely irresponsible venting.
This is not to say that I dont' think there is room for *adolescent
angst* providing the energy for an overdue movement. Remembering that
one does not have to be in their teens to have adolescent angst (and
other properties). I would say that a great deal of the Civil Rights,
Equal Rights and the Antiwar movements of the 60's drew their energy or
momentum from *adolescent angst* but at the same time there were (more)
mature voices providing some level of leadership and vision (e.g. MLK).
I'm more sympathetic with the Occupy movement than I am with the Tea
Party, on many principles, but I do see the parallels.
With a nod to the thread's original topic... I wonder if there is a
"right size" to social structures and if we have long since exceeded
that size? Blue Whales are (apparently) right sized in the milieu of
huge (bouyant) oceans with generous flux of plankton. Superpowers grew
up out of the age of Colonization or during the aftermath consolidation
(say post WWI/WWII) from colonization. City States, Nation States,
International Corporations, etc.. seem to be the megafauna in some
socio-ecological niche... can we survive? Empires have risen, held and
fallen for millenia... and perhaps our current sociopoliticaleconomic
behemoths are merely filling the same niches that were created or
discovered by such as the Minoan/Egyptian/Greek/Roman/etc. empires of old.
Geoff West's work on the dynamics of Urbanization would seem relevant...
</Political Rant>
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
