[Ham]
I don't know what what "sounds genetic" about consciousness.
[Arlo]
You don't attribute "consciousness" to social participation, I am
wondering, then, where it comes from? So far, it sounded as if it
develops from a genetic "quirk" that appeared in the chain of man's evolution.
[Ham]
man is unique in his capacity to discriminate aesthetic, moral, and
utilitarian values
[Arlo]
And where does this ability come from? This is what I am curious
about. Did the primitive creatures from which man descends/evolves
possess this unique capacity? If not, then something, somewhere
"changed" that allowed man to acquire this ability. What changed? A
genetic adaptation? Somewhere, it is quite evident, the branch of
primates that would become "man" did indeed (I am agreeing) acquire
an ability that set "him" apart from the other primate species. Or,
are you saying that this evolutionary branch always possessed a
"capacity to discriminate aesthetic, moral, and utilitarian values"?
If so, we'll need to back up even further into prehistory to the
even-more primitive creatures these primates descended from. Did
there even-earlier pre-primates possess this ability?
[Ham]
I'm not really concerned with the origin of man as a species, or the
particular era in anthropological history when intellection was first
exhibited. That's the kind of specious information we expect from
scientists and historians.
[Arlo]
And yet you dismiss outright the theories that propose social
participation as the root of the uniqueness of man's particular
awareness and intellectual abilities. Into this void you must propose
some alternative, or is it enough just to dismiss what we do not find
appealing but retreat from seeking alternatives? Up until now you've
really only offered some form of genetic basis for consciousness? If
not genetic, and if not social, then what? What appears, and when, in
the evolutionary path of man that accounts for the appearance of
"consciousness" or for the "unique abilities" you describe?
I submit that the genetic explanation alone is ridiculous when
examined (one reason perhaps you shy from this?), and that
socialization made possible by the unintended consequences of certain
genetic-neural mutations, is the root of man's consciousness and the
"unique abilities" you describe, and I can outline a logical
explanation based on the known evolutionary time-line. If you dismiss
socialization, can you do the same?
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
