Ian you wrote,
----- Original Message -----
From: Ian J Greely <Ian@tirnanog.org>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 8:45 PM
Subject: Re: MD Re: Walking is a social skill/ introduction- post
> Interesting. What is the social model of the species of Monkey. Might
> height be a key to social status within the groups. ie The strongest
> is, often, the tallest. By standing and walking at full height the
> child might then be seen to be challenging the social hierarchy of the
> group without the physical mass to actually "win" any contest. One
> could easily envisage a situation where the behavior of standing at
> full height might be conditioned out...
<< The social model of the species of Monkey could be alined along
the picking- order system. Like you said the strongest is often the tallest.
In animal groups, like lions, the strongest male eats first (remerber he don
't
exactly take part in the hunting proces, what 's prooves your point).
Enhance the difference in human social groups, the tallest may be the
strongest but that is not always the case. Our human social model is based
no longer on physical strenght (althought that would be open to discussion)
but more on understanding, learning- processes, faith, law and order (what
implies sorts of physical power).
We have one major difference with animals and that is the size of our brain.
We have ' learned ' ( along Quality Events/ Memeplexes) to surpress in some
way our instincts. Social status we compel along lines of achievements,
professional carriers, by building our far more to great houses and by
riding
our far to fast cars...
In the case of the child, I would answer your thought like this,
Like I side I am a memetisist, I ' believe ' that units of information are
controlling parts of me, of my brain, my actions, the culture where I live
in
and the work I do... maby a surprise to you, but it helps me in
understanding
myself, the others, my culture and humankind a little bit better.
But anyway, a human is not born as a plain white cheat of paper, there are
pre- genetic impressions, somatic imprints and inherited neural pathways.
In order to get the ' child going ' those pre- systems ( as the very bias
of
the child ) have to ' see ' / ' feel ' / ' taste '/ ...in what kind of
environment
the child is born in. In order to ' know ' which direction those pre-
system have to take they have what you should call pre- social models,
like that of the Monkeys. That is the first step, the second one is
challinging
the social hierarchy of the group (the family) along those pre- social model
lines. The contest is one not to ' win ' a battle, but to get the child on
its
feet...In other words, the brain, memeplexes, neural pathways...have
innanted Social Quality Events which are started up at the childs birth.
Clapping a child for something it did wrong is ' showing' to those Events
that they are following the ' wrong lines '.
And the behavior of standing at full height can 't in my view not be con-
tioned out. Standing at full height is not only a neural process but also a
biological one. The tendency to walk straight up is innated in our genes,
strenghten up by the will of our quality events/ our memes to do so.
In the case of Jonathan 's Tarzan boy, the will to start up the human social
quality model was repressed by lacking the need for a such an action.,
there were no humans, only monkeys, where an other social model is
at work.
Hope this clears up the dark skies a little bit,
Many regards,
Kenneth
( I am, because we are)
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:48 BST