Monday, January 30, 2012
The Symmetry of Behavior and Purpose
The Symmetry of Behavior and Purpose The Pe Sla L. Edgar Otto Jan. 29, 2012 written day after the last grand finalie post on the possibilities of these ideas for future technology (which of course risk those who are on similar paths by the exactness of experiments- I thought of this in relation to other dark matter theorists where we could, if falsified, rise or fall with our fortunes together. I am glad I do not find a link today on Kea's blog - not that she owes any explanation but I mention this due to the nature of possible censorship and obsessive interest in her blog, evidently. But for me it means I am more free to not adjust my titles to read more formally scientific and generally understandable. Again, in our human nature, the inspiration being Pinker for this last post out of the chronology of the writing is this general and foundational question and as such could be just considered philosophy. In any case I do not speak for anyone about their theories- still, I as a poet may refer from time to time to Kea's Theorem. I quite imagine that now I can devote some time to the lyrics and music projects, what time is left.
This morning in the observation of my oil drop floating in water and alcohol simple experiment I concluded that where the smaller ones are adsorbed is the the condensing of these as if singularities on the ring and at the large spheres equator where such singularities merge. Of course this is but one observation. Still it may have influenced me to think about the next (previous written) post on possible new technologies.
Pinker in a sense in this book on human nature is an alternative view to the work in the 70's of Dawkins et al in which I took part in the debate- for it also involved the "instruction" rather than Dawkins term "meme" by F. T. Cloak Jr. whom is mentioned in the text of the "Selfish Gene" and in my less educated attempts wrote extensively about in my large book "Instruction and Being" if the manuscript still exists. The Dawkins view is of course a more materialist one- in fact Dawkins makes the leap to see religion as a bad and superstitious influence on humanity. Yet, his observation of how rapidly things can evolve mechanically from chaos, as if the response of ants to stimuli, is high science.
Pinker has a new book out by the way and if it is anything like his previous ones it will be worth reading, a popular view that has substance in many areas with very extensive research of the documentation of concepts presented.
I include in the lead photo a page from that book where he cites Newt Gingrich in this time that Gingrich is in the Florida primary for the republican nominations for president. Can this question of the (Human) Nature code make our political climate any more sensible? I mean, at what level of community or personal standards is there a zero point of sorts, conservative being the mainstream, the old balances between the individual and state, the outsiders and the tribe, man and woman, the compromise in this view of the blank slate or not as the issue of what is family? So it may not be just a politics as the nature of culture wars and ideology in the issue at least of altruism, for that is recently observed evolved in primates. The issue of altruism and sacrifice, and the brittle bonds of trust between friend and family, is more that we should qualify altruism as "meaningful sacrifice".
Opposed in the front running is the Mormon, Mitt Romney, this of course should have no bearing, once the appeal to votes in a democracy is achieved as to the leadership for all the people, for the office of president. Gingrich is repentant (although seen as an unpredictable individualist now Catholic.) The Mormon church, its distinct separation of the godhead, is more materialist in the hereafter than the protestants in general- Catholics acknowledge some mysteries as their model for heaven... but what I mean by this is the relevance of the nature-nurture issues and as Pinker points out, the hidden grounds and content of our genes is also the enduring stuff of great dramas of the scope of those possible and recognizable, universals from ancient Greece on the nature of Tragedy and so on among kin.
But such dialectics of opposing sides and interplay of symmetries, and foundational reason and physics, is much more in its fortunes than a one way or two way deal.
* * * * *