[MD] Social Imposition ?

[Case]

> [Platt]
> In short, evolution occurs through a process of "Dynamic invention," 
> not some magical "emergence" from increasing collectivization.
> 
> [Case]
> As long people were confined to talking amongst themselves and repeating
> tales around the campfire culture remained in a relatively primitive
state.
> Culture really only became a significant force with the advent of writing.

[Platt]
The "advent of writing" -- like magical emergence? Or a Dynamic invention by
a human individual, like Gutenberg Dynamically invented printing with
movable type.

[Case]
Guttenberg represents the next great exponential shift in this process. But
writing itself was not invented by any one person. It developed over
thousands of years. Cave painting from 30,000 years. Summerian, Babylonian
and Egyptian go back 5,000 years. The oldest Chinese is around 3,500 years
old. There were markings on bones carried by the 7000 year old ice man dug
up a while back. So if you want to pick an "inventor" it will have to a be
multicultural party.

But here it is the invention itself and its cultural impact that are
important not the Who was on first thingy.

> [Case]
> But more to the point "Dynamic invention"; "magical emergence"? You say
> potato I say potatoe. Evolution is about how systems maintain equilibrium
> in the face of change. The extension of individual human memory in the
> form of written language is a change that originated not in the
> environment but in within the species. It is an example of an intellectual
> pattern causing disequilibrium at the social level. As Prigione indicates
> when a system is pushed into a far from equilibrium state in can either
> reorganize into a higher state of energy or a lower one. In this instance
> it was a higher one and the results are... well History.

[Platt]
Your description of evolution and Pirsig's are at odds. I'll go with
Pirsig's.

[Case]
And in what specific way do you think my account is at odds with Pirsig's?