[MD] Consciousness

[ml]

Bo,

Great reply, much food for thought..

My reaction is that I may have a variance
in understanding the MoQ from what  you
have.  As I read Lila, the picture that arose,
and lead to hours of diagramming on my
part, may have led me to some implications
differently weighted than what others may
have taken away.

Within any level there is "less dynamic" and
"more dynamic,"  and between levels there is
the sense of increasing dynamic as a point-
of-view moves from physical, to biological,
to social, to intellectual.

At times in my descriptions I used the word
"dynamic" unqualified and possibly wrongly-
may-have-assumed the reader would pick out
the sense of which use, within level or between,
that I was meaning.

Some of your responses seem to indicate I
should have done a better job of this separation.

One comment.  I suspect that we humans may
underestimate the existence of some animal
social behaviors.  Wolves, apes, and cetaceans
are what I have in mind.   It seems that  many
biologists who spend enough time with any of
those are apt to see just a degree of difference
rather than a difference in kind.

Early last spring I spent time in Yellowstone
and listened to the "wolf watchers" describe
their observations.  A similar trip six years ago
to BC and contact with people working at the
whale lab also left the distinct impression that
there is a lot happening that humans just don't
understand, but from what is observed it seems
impossible to dismiss family-band-tribe types of
apparent social behavior.

I realize that the build up of "cultural debris" in
humans is unmatched in animals, but  in terms
of "standing waves" that slowly morph, a level
of responsive behavior that shows type variance
leads me to believe there is simple social
"flickering on" in some of those non-human
groups.

I am no expert on biology, but I am an accumulator
of stories.

Thanks for your help in allowing me to build
another sand castle atop the clouds.

thanks--mel



----- Original Message -----
From: <skutvik at online.no>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 2:13 AM
Subject: [MD] Consciousness


> Hi Mel
>
> 13 Dec. you wrote: (about "consciousness")
>
> > Going on the principle that the way in which one structures a problem
> > opens or restricts the domain of the solution, I'd say that the SOM
> > binary off/on postulate fails to take into account the way
> > consciousness is observed to work--it causes the observer of
> > consciousness to 'throw away" data, to ignore what doesn't fit the
hypothesis.
>
> SOM's subject/object dualism isn't primarily  off/on, but let's see how
> this develops.
><snip>