Re: MD Intellect as Consciousness (formerly Collective Consciousness)

From: Michael Hamilton (thethemichael@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Jul 22 2005 - 13:10:50 BST

  • Next message: Arlo J. Bensinger: "Re: MD Intellect as Consciousness (formerly Collective Consciousness)"

    Hi everyone,

    Platt wrote:
    > It does amaze me, as I'm sure it does you, that so many contributors to
    > this site seem mesmerized by social pattern values, or as you put it, "the
    > social/cultural reservoir." To many it appears we're all helpless captives
    > of this reservoir, unable to have a single unique thought of our own and
    > dependent for guidance on those with superior intellects (usually self-
    > selected). Of course, the fact that all human evolution depended on
    > unique thoughts by individuals apparently escapes them, including the guy
    > who came up with the idea of the "collective consciousness" in the first
    > place.

    Christ on a stick, not this one again. Let me repeat my response to
    the "Primary Reality" thread a few weeks back, before you once again
    try to turn a mere difference in emphasis into a substantial
    disagreement:

    -------------------------------------------------------
    Just a quick comment on this exchange: if we'd only put BOTH elements,
    that is to say, BOTH dynamic innovation and the static latches that
    preserve said innovation, ON THE SAME FOOTING, then you could have
    saved a lot of words and debate by realising that you're both correct.
    Without the individual response to DQ [or in the current thread,
    "unique thoughts by individuals"] advocated by Platt and Ham (and
    Rand), there would be no innovation. Without the public/social network
    of shared ideas and concepts [or in the current thread, "the
    social/cultural reservoir"] advocated by Paul and JoVo, these
    innovations could not be preserved, and moreover, could not be used as
    a springboard for further innovation in response to DQ.

    What Paul and JoVo are stressing is that springboard effect, i.e. that
    an individual is very poorly equipped to innovate in response to DQ
    without the network of socially inherited patterns gained from the
    surrounding cultural environment.

    But, taking Platt and Ham's protests into account, it becomes clear
    that EVERY part of that network of socially inherited patterns was
    once a dynamic innovation by an individual or group of individuals.
    Hence, the network cannot exist without the efforts of individuals
    throughout history, but conversely, these indivdual efforts were make
    possible by the network. That's DQ/SQ interaction, that magical thing
    we call evolution.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    Funnily enough, no-one ever saw fit to respond to that post...

    Regards,
    Mike

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 22 2005 - 14:54:28 BST