For example, this article [1] speaks to the potential fragility of cultural evolution. Wouldn't it make sense to loosen the mind/cognition coupling if it is possible to do so? What is uniquely useful about human animals as an adaptive vehicle?
[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/ -----Original Message----- From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of glen Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 11:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Selective cultural processes generate adaptive heuristics Well, I'd argue that cultural evolution is a higher order language like chemistry to physics, biology to chemistry, sociology to biology, etc. We can use the higher order language agnostically, leaving the metaphysics for the philosophers (until/unless practical demands force us to solve some cross-trophic relation). On 4/12/22 11:39, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Or to put it another way, what good is cultural evolution? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of glen > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 11:36 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Selective cultural processes generate adaptive heuristics > > But going back to less memorable/intuitive communicated heuristics, *if* our > minds/cognitions are loosely coupled to our bodies (I'm thinking more > polyphenism and robustness, not dualism), then we should be able to see the > memorability/intuitiveness increase. But if there's a large portion of > mind/cognition embedded/embodied in our flesh, then > memorability/intuitiveness of new ideas will remain unrelated through > generations of dead/replaced bodies. > > My claims that communication is illusory and all thought is tightly coupled > to one's body reject the former. I.e. I don't think > memorability/intuitiveness increases as ideas age. Rather, as bodies die, the > new bodies are slightly restructured to better fit those ideas. It's a > fake-it-till-you-make-it. The only reason we have young kids that understand > quantum coherence (or Instagram) better than the old farts did is because the > young kids grew into the idea. > > No dead bodies ⇒ no cultural evolution. > > On 4/12/22 11:19, Marcus Daniels wrote: >> The contrast between fewer replication cycles of vampires that live >> thousands of years vs. many generations of short-lived mortals seems >> related.. >> Is the walk deep and informative, or is the key thing to stay away from >> attractors? >> If there are truly billions of individuals, then short trips can explore a >> large space -- if there is communication between individuals and across >> generations. >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of glen >> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 11:05 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Selective cultural processes generate adaptive >> heuristics >> >> What always seems to be missing in these discussions is the (my?) always >> present ability to [re]parse the world at will. Yes, there are gravity wells >> or attractors where if you start insisting on a security detail everywhere >> you go, you'll end up like Trump, Romney, or Sanders, surrounded by a nearly >> impermeable membrane that disallows authentic "go with the flow" >> non-consciousness/non-deliberation. But my tendency to (or ability to) >> prefer writing a script/macro over doing some computation manually doesn't >> interfere in a substantial way with my ability to do the manual labor in any >> given iteration. The size of the computation can interfere, but not the >> attractor. >> >> That's what makes me episodic, the lack of stickiness to whatever >> professionalization I've engaged in before. On a humble day, I claim it's >> because I'm just too stupid and lazy to really invest in building the >> attractor. On an arrogant day, I claim those who build and get stuck in such >> attractors are mindless automatons who can't think their way out of a paper >> bag. >8^D >> >> On 4/12/22 10:42, Marcus Daniels wrote: >>> Vitalik Buterin remarked, “An emotional part of me says that once you start >>> going down that way, /professionalizing/ is just another word for losing >>> your soul” [1] >>> >>> That sounds plausible. However, I have long thought that an important part >>> of productivity is to find consciousness-lowering habits. Just attach to >>> whatever is front of you and forget about the motivations and the big >>> picture. For one thing, it is rare that one can really change the big >>> picture. For two it is necessary to get in the critical path of a process >>> to disrupt it. The nihilistic episodic personality doesn’t have to impose >>> a narrative before going on excursion. Too much evaluation and reflection >>> and one’s action as a virion cannot move forward! There is plenty of time >>> to wake up a judgmental brain process once embedded. But what are >>> judgements really informed by if sampling is based on an outsiders’ view? >>> This kind of ties into Glen’s local reset idea. >>> >>> [1] https://time.com/6158182/vitalik-buterin-ethereum-profile/ >>> <https://time.com/6158182/vitalik-buterin-ethereum-profile/> >>> >>> *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Steve Smith >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 12, 2022 10:19 AM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Selective cultural processes generate adaptive >>> heuristics >>> >>> Marcus - >>> >>> Steve writes: >>> >>> < Arguments for generational rather than Individual/personal >>> growth and transformation... >>> >>> “I don’t think we should try to have people live for a really >>> long time,” Musk recently told Insider. “It would cause asphyxiation of >>> society because the truth is, most people don’t change their mind. They >>> just die. So if they don’t die, we will be stuck with old ideas and society >>> wouldn’t advance.” > >>> >>> >>> >>> Maybe not? >>> >>> >>> >>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01769-4 >>> <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01769-4> >>> >>> I do think there is plenty of room for individual growth/transformation in >>> one lifetime and perhaps Psi research will (continue to) provide yet-more >>> tools for facilitating that. >>> >>> It isn't clear to me that merely loosening up neural pathways so that they >>> can be re-created yields healthy growth as such. I'd like to think it can >>> be, but as the neo-luddite that I tend toward, I can't help but seeing the >>> myriad ways it can go wrong as well. This negative ideation is probably a >>> self-referential example of the topic itself. >>> >>> Following RECs original subject: I'm interested I suppose in understanding >>> more-better the myriad scales and dimensions of adaptivity of "Life >>> Itself", with the human (individual as well as cultural) experience being >>> the one most relevant to my own life, but not exclusively. >> >> > -- Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam 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 Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam 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/
