[MD] MOQ/BOC

[Magnus Berg]

Hi

"David Thomas" <combinedefforts at earthlink.net> wrote:

>Yeah I did put that badly. My take on social is, is what groups teach each
>other by observation and communication. A lioness teaching her cub how to
>hunt for example. This does not mean individuals cannot create a new social
>patterns. Just for it to latch it must spread and be adopted by the group.
>Even if it is for the silliest of reasons like this year's fashion.

The key word there was "teach". I think that implies intellect in the first place. I'm not saying it's *not* a social pattern if a lioness teaches her cubs to behave in certain ways. But if we are to really find the basis for the social level, we should try to find social patterns that do not rely on intellectual patterns.

>I'm not advocating the reversal of these levels just tweaking them slightly
>by merging animal social and human social and moving the emergence date on
>the intellectual level back about 58,000 years. Because the human animal is
>just one current evolutionary pattern in a whole series of interconnected
>past and present animal evolutions.

58,000 years? That was very precise! Not sure where my version would put us, but probably in the kambrian explosion, I think it was around 500 million years ago.

>I don't deny that other stacks can be useful but unfortunately they are all
>trapped in some form of human invented language be it mathematics or
>Swahili.

Actually they're not. The intellectual level of the universal stack I'm mostly interested in, the one supporting our human individual intellect of our brains. That intellectual level is supported, not by a human invented language but by the language used by our nerve synapses, it's the language of our dreams, literally.

    Magnus