Hettinger (hettingr@iglou.com)
Tue, 30 Sep 1997 03:50:26 +0100
What a great suggestion! Define the four levels. It should be simple. I always
say the concepts are simple. Somehow, it's not.
I wish I had the time to make more personal reference to the ideas of the
group, for I've found many insights and much grist for thought, and I can't
tell you how gratifying it is to read your responses to my posts. I want to
reply in kind, but I can't do it right now. Not enough time. Not enough time
to thoughtfully read the threads until I understand each point of view, either,
but I am reacting to your ideas.
What fun!
Back to the levels. Here is what I think I think:
Inorganic
Inorganic patterns of value are matter, energy, physical and chemical
reactions. Loose energy, ie radiant or somesuch freed energy might have once
been DQ at the time when the inorganic level was all that existed. Change,
within the inorganic level, is accomplished how? [My ignorance is showing.
I've been skimming your discussions on this with interest, if without much
comprehension. Your writing is good, but my brain is slow, and there's not
enough time to digest thoroughly! I need to go back to Lila, as well.]
Biological
Biological patterns of value are the large set of patterns characterized by
systems of inorganic compounds escaping the processes and confines of the
inorganic level. (Note: there may be or may have been other patterns of value
(besides the ones we call biological) that also managed to escape from the
confines of the inorganic set of patterns, but the ones we call biological have
"filled every niche" and probably overwhelm any newcomers.)
Biological patterns of value are stored in the inorganic level as systems of
chemical reactions and compounds that can replicate and change themselves.
These new inorganic patterns were mediated by biological patterns. Change
(within the "pure" biological level) is accomplished primarily through DNA
recombination. Biological characteristics include a high value for strength,
physical dominance, sexual dominance.
Since the emergence of the biological level, the substance of the "original"
inorganic level no longer exists, (at least here on Earth) as it has been
mediated by the existence of the biological patterns (The Gaia hypothesis).
The processes of the original inorganic level--gravity, chemical bonding, etc.
DO still exist and function.
Social
Social patterns of value depend on biological systems for their existence. They
have, however, found something other than DNA recombination to give them
control (advantage?) over the biological and inorganic levels. Social
processes are those like the interactions of apes, ants, other interacting
groups of biological entities. They accounted for the progress of mankind for
hundreds of thousands of years. No thoughts or ideas are involved here. Change
is accomplished through intermingling of groups or by forced adaptation to
change in the inorganic or biological environment.
I have looked for "pure" social patterns within myself and others--the ones
that exist independently of the intellectual level--and find them few and far
between. Here are some candidates:
* Smiling--not the caring, emotional, knowing smile of friendship, but the
impulse to make a certain facial expression that is triggered upon seeing
another human face.
* Yawning? One person does it, and everyone in the group wants to do it too.
* Once, on a backpacking trip, when I was really tired and my mind was
probably disconnected, I noticed that I had a tendency to place my foot exactly
in the same place as the person hiking in front of me. I realized that in this
particular case, it had nothing to do with evaluation that she had found the
best spot, and I could follow her and not have to think. This was not difficult
terrain where you would expect that following someone's lead would give some
advantage. My (body, self, whatever) simply had a tendency to put my foot in
that same spot. This kind of social interaction, if it is what I think it is,
would have allowed pre-intellectual humans to pass on the habits of successful
groups to their progeny.
DQ at the social stage, before the intellectual level formed, might have been
something that later became "ideas", but since there was no concept of
thinking, and no thoughts or language to think with, what was it?
Current human social patterns, the things people pass on to their progeny in
the same kind of unconscious way, include behavior that has been mediated by
intellectual patterns. Intellectual patterns of value that have been stored
(within? by?) social interactions are called "knowledge" or "culture".
Although, as I said above, "pure" social patterns are few and far between,
social processes seem to me to dominate human choices.
Examples of intellectually-mediated social patterns:
* A child begins to say "bye-bye" when someone says "bye-bye" to him. (The
reaction is social, the word is derived from some intellectual concept--not the
child's intellect, but someone way back in the culture)
* A person says "Excuse me, I didn't mean to do that," after bumping into
another person.
* An employee interprets a glance from a superior as an indication that he is
somehow sub-dominant, and fishes in his repertoire of strategies to find
something to say that will put him at a better advantage.
* Someone writes "s/he" instead of "he" because of an awareness that it matters
to readers how this concept is presented, and this is an acceptable option
within the group.
* In her new house, a woman puts cooking utensils in the top drawer to the
right of her stove because that's where her mother (and probably her
grandmother) put them. If there's no drawer there, she will have to do
something different--in which case she has other static social or intellectual
patterns of value to draw from, or even DQ to (create? sense?) a new way of
storing them.
Social characteristics (human and otherwise) include rank (ie. Awareness of the
pecking order), loyalty, group conformity, communication between members.
Pirsig says "fame and fortune" are social Quality. I believe him. How does this
fit here? [Fame = being known, identified by the group. Maybe it is the
tendency of other people to imitate famous people that makes them so powerful.
Ergo, fame = high degree of social reproduction. Fortune = high level of
control over biological and inorganic resources?]
Since the emergence of the social level, the substance of the "original"
biological level no longer exists, as almost the entire makeup of modern
biological species and systems have been mediated by the existence of the
social patterns, especially human. The processes of the original biological
level DO still exist and function.
Intellectual
Intellectual patterns of value are found between (in the interactions of?)
social patterns. They depend on social patterns for their existence and
storage. They are valued by social entities because they allow the social
entities to have more control over their environment (social, biological and
inorganic) and themselves.
Examples of intellectual patterns:
* The concept of similarity, difference. (Maybe this was the original DQ of the
social level.)
* Squareness.
* Algebra.
* Names.
Intellectual patterns are only accessible to humans, and this is what sets
human social entities apart from animal social entities. Since the emergence
of the intellectual level, the substance of the "original" human social level
no longer exists, as almost the entire makeup of human social patterns have
been mediated by the existence of the intellectual patterns. The processes of
the original social level DO still exist and function.
Now I've got more questions than answers. I'll probably read back through the
group email and find the answers staring at me.
How do intellectual patterns propagate? Do they?
Does change within the intellectual level come from the combining of
intellectual patterns? With social forces as arbiters? Destructive change
happens as a result of the social support of an intellectual pattern
disappearing.
Is intellectual quality evaluation? (This would seem to indicate a static
Intellectual Quality) Or is it inspiration (defined as "the act or power of
moving the intellect or emotions")? Is this Dynamic Quality or static?
It seems that there are some patterns here (in this writing) that lead to the
concept of a meta-intellectual level, which I know the group has been
considering. I can't follow it through today, though.
My intent had been to pick a simple piece of the conversation and answer it
simply. That's not what happened. The length of this makes Platt's high
school curriculum example very appealing.
I'm going to close this monster with a thought.
Even though it seems hard to define the levels, it IS easy to center at the
social level and determine whether a social entity or process is being
intellectually mediated or biologically mediated. This seems like a useful
concept to explore next.
Maggie Hettinger
PS. I said before that I thought "mediation" happened only when a lower level
was affected by a higher level. Thinking about societal changes that happened
unconsciously, where the difference between the processes of one society and
another may have been originally formed by natural events, ie. living in a
place where stone could be chipped easily would allow them to find sharp-edged
stone, I don't know about that. Maybe there are two different interactions
between levels, one being "mediation", which could be interaction between any
of the levels, and "breakage" the destructive change that happens when support
from below disappears.
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:41:56 CEST