[MD] What is SOM?

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Ham]
I don't know what what "sounds genetic" about consciousness.

[Arlo]
You don't attribute "consciousness" to social participation, I am 
wondering, then, where it comes from? So far, it sounded as if it 
develops from a genetic "quirk" that appeared in the chain of man's evolution.

[Ham]
man is unique in his capacity to discriminate aesthetic, moral, and 
utilitarian values

[Arlo]
And where does this ability come from? This is what I am curious 
about. Did the primitive creatures from which man descends/evolves 
possess this unique capacity? If not, then something, somewhere 
"changed" that allowed man to acquire this ability. What changed? A 
genetic adaptation? Somewhere, it is quite evident, the branch of 
primates that would become "man" did indeed (I am agreeing) acquire 
an ability that set "him" apart from the other primate species. Or, 
are you saying that this evolutionary branch always possessed a 
"capacity to discriminate aesthetic, moral, and utilitarian values"? 
If so, we'll need to back up even further into prehistory to the 
even-more primitive creatures these primates descended from. Did 
there even-earlier pre-primates possess this ability?

[Ham]
I'm not really concerned with the origin of man as a species, or the 
particular era in anthropological history when intellection was first 
exhibited.  That's the kind of specious information we expect from 
scientists and historians.

[Arlo]
And yet you dismiss outright the theories that propose social 
participation as the root of the uniqueness of man's particular 
awareness and intellectual abilities. Into this void you must propose 
some alternative, or is it enough just to dismiss what we do not find 
appealing but retreat from seeking alternatives? Up until now you've 
really only offered some form of genetic basis for consciousness? If 
not genetic, and if not social, then what? What appears, and when, in 
the evolutionary path of man that accounts for the appearance of 
"consciousness" or for the "unique abilities" you describe?

I submit that the genetic explanation alone is ridiculous when 
examined (one reason perhaps you shy from this?), and that 
socialization made possible by the unintended consequences of certain 
genetic-neural mutations, is the root of man's consciousness and the 
"unique abilities" you describe, and I can outline a logical 
explanation based on the known evolutionary time-line. If you dismiss 
socialization, can you do the same?