Hi Arlo, so many things in there I didn't say ...

And I know already, eg:
"But social patterns are NOT biological patterns, and cannot be
reduced to biological patterns."
Basic stuff, agreed.

But basically, I still don't agree with the rest ... the example
evidence is I believe being misinterpreted ... ironically, in too
reductionist a way.

No time to elaborate today .... but at least we have it in a separate
thread now.
Ian

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Arlo Bensinger <[email protected]> wrote:
> [Ian]
> In the same way as biological patterns can be fossilized in the physical.
> Social (and intellectual) patterns can be "fossilized" in the biological.
>
> [Arlo]
> I have no doubt that intellectual activity shapes the trajectory of social
> evolution, and social activity shapes the trajectory of biological
> evolution, and that biological activity shapes the trajectory of inorganic
> evolution, in similar form the foundations shaping the trajectory of
> subsequent emergent levels.
>
> But social patterns are NOT biological patterns, and cannot be reduced to
> biological patterns. You can encode, say, an intellectual pattern in the
> inorganic electrical signals of a computer, but that computer will not
> spontaneously write a book. For the encoding to have meaning, it takes (in
> addition to the encoder) and decoder capable of understanding and
> interacting with patterns on that level.
>
> While the data is slim (who wants to apply for an IRB release to drop a
> newborn child onto a deserted island?), the data we do have categorically
> denies your position, the "feral children" we have witnessed (who even WERE
> socialized for several years) exhibited no greater behavior or agency than a
> wild animal. Helen Keller described her pre-language time as a wave that
> never grounded, she had no thoughts, no social behavior, and was until the
> point she, through the shared attention with another human, learned "water",
> she was an animal. She had no spontaneous language or intellect that emerged
> in her head because of some biological fossilization.
>
> And to say that a socialized adult is dropped onto a deserted island
> demonstrates that we don't need others to form social or intellectual
> patterns is inane, of course we have the capacity for memory. But even the
> little data we have on adults being kept in isolation indicates that there
> is a rapid loss of social and intellectual capacity when the social and
> intellectual surround is removed.
>
>
> 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
>
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