Mary,

>  [Mary Replies]
> It is one thing to differ by degree and another to differ in kind.  As I
> see
> it, "ego" is fundamentally the recognition of distinctness combined with a
> "valuing" of that distinction.  At its most basic, the ego is the
> assignment
> of value to the uniqueness of the entity which possesses it.  A fancy way
> of
> saying, "I value my own existence".
>
>
I agree completely.  Perhaps there is even some sort of incomprehensible
self-identity on the part of inorganic rocks.  Surely there must be on the
part of plants, which make decisions to turn toward the sun as separate
beings.

But caring about being puts us in a whole new realm.  Where the exact lines
can be drawn are probably impossible to say, but the general patterns of
mammals to exhibit persistent and unique patterns of emotional response to
their environment, is what leads me to believe that what we call social
patterning is created by infant nurture and socialization.  Ego development
arises with mammals.

By this formulation, Artificial Consciousness can never be created by
machine-like programming.



> As we advance up the evolutionary ladder the ego takes on greater and
> greater complexity.  A fruit fly does value its own unique existence and
> will try mightily to escape a fly swatter, but it does not equate its
> self-worth with its fruit fly bank account.  We do - or some of us do,
> anyway.  That doesn't change the fact that both the fruit fly and the
> banker
> are exhibiting behaviors motivated by ego.  Being a mammal is not a
> prerequisite.  A fruit fly floating alone in space divorced from its fruit
> fly friends in its little bitty fruit fly space suit still values its own
> existence.  But maybe not - since its facial expression never changes. :)
>
>
I don't look at ego as simply self-determining patterns, but rather as a
persistent pattern of patterns.  Some mice are lazy, some bold, some shy and
timid.  These patterns persist through various interactions with environment
and social others.

Whereas fruitflies just fly around fruit.  Hovering like mindless bankers
over the wealth at their disposal.



> Did you know that scientists are using fruit flies to study addictive
> behavior?  Apparently the neural pathways involved in the addiction process
> are the same as for humans.
>
>
If they can demonstrate fruitfly individuality, you'll have my attention.
 But I'd say addictive behavior is humans behaving more like mechanistic
flies, rather that flies acting like DQ sensing humans.


> I could be wrong about this, but as far as I know, Inorganic Level rocks do
> not have an ego, but Biological Level fruit flies do.  Now, instead of
> moving downward from the Biological Level we move upward.  I do not believe
> Pirsig intends for fruit fly society to reside in the Social Level.  If
> both
> these things are true (the rocks thing and the fruit flies thing) then tell
> me again where you would put ego?
>
>
I agree fruit flies don't exhibit true social behavior, nor do ants and
bees, even though they have complicated "societies".  What they don't have
are true individualism - or ego - those patterns of self which persist
through life or evolve in a logical but individual fashion.  That's the
first perequisite of social patterning.



> So much "buzzing around" in my head,
> Mary
>


Thanks Mary, for the buzz.  I needed one.  Too much angst in my life.


>
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/md/archives.html

Reply via email to