[John]
I don't agree with your "inter-nodal neural nets" analogy,
Arlo. Sounds reductionistic to me and in truth it's easy to see
examples of such neural relationships in other animals with no
intellect at all.
[Arlo]
Its no more "reductionist" to say the human body rests on carbon.
Upper levels always use the lower levels for their support. In the
case of intellect, it rests upon social patterns, which rest upon the
biology of the human brain.
In Magnus' example, he asked why a human could be removed from a
social web and still contain thoughts. Although the evidence clearly
indicates decay of cognition in cases of extreme isolation, the
patterns of thought persist because the node can survive by virtue of
its own "social echo" (if you will) for a short time absent
connection to other nodes (as I said, in the same way a fish can
survive outside of water for a short time before dying).
As for neural relations in other animals that aren't "intellectual",
well John I agree (this is where I disagree with Pirsig), and I would
call these the rudimentary social patterns that are able to rest upon
sufficiently complex neural nets (less complex than those of human
physiology). In fact, I think the research into non-human species
symbolic sharing shows the MOQ's hierarchy as being correct: out ot
sufficiently complex biological patterns, social patterns are able to
emerge. They do not discriminate based on "is this thing human or
not" (as Platt may suggest), their only restriction is the
neuro-biology from which they emerge.
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
