[FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

Right, I think I got that you meant society being in the zone.  You expressed doubt and I disagree with you -- meaning only that I have less doubt. 8^)  I think society can (and does, often) get into a zone/groove/flow.  Some symptoms that are often complained about are "mob behavior", "groupthink", etc.  Some symptoms that are lauded are "wisdom of crowds", "negative freedoms" (freedom to _not_ be mugged, etc.), low unemployment, etc.

My reference to my individual state of mind when I'm engaged in social activity was probably misleading, however.  What I should have referred to is something like stigmergy or the co-constructed landscape, infrastructure.  Some of us complain about the entitlement of the younger generations.  But really it's a good thing that they feel entitled ... entitled to walk down dark alleys without being killed ... entitled to buy a state of the art automobile for only $25k ... entitled to drive that automobile and experience the (waning) culture of Route 66.  Etc.

These are "society in a groove".  And it's a good thing for the most part.  There are risks, e.g. populism, riots, the absence of critical thinking ... not knowing how to start a fire without a lighter, etc.

Anyway, so I disagree with the idea that society, as a group, can't be "in the zone".  But I believe that the thoughts inside the members of the society are not really _shared_ thoughts.  The societal groove does not depend on isomorphic relationships between the insides of the members' heads. (holography again)  And the extent to which individuals' grooves map to societal grooves is unclear (and probably complex).


On 02/22/2017 12:18 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
>> As for being in the zone socially, I disagree, though I don't particularly
>> care about any jargonal co-option of the term.  During hearty arguments,
>> mostly with religious people, I definitely lose myself in exactly the same
>> way I lose myself after that 3rd mile when running.  I have no illusions
>> that my zone is in any way shared by the people I'm arguing with, though
>> ... no more than I think you and I share internal constructs mediated by
>> the word "blue"
> 
> 
> To be clear, Glen, I was referring to a society being "in the zone" as a
> whole. Maybe this could mean an alignment of symbolic references.  Not
> sure, but, like you, somewhat dubious that this could happen. Within my
> philosophy group, we have discussed the idea of *conscious
> evolution*--becoming,
> say, wiser, by being "in the zone" so to speak--*with respect to the
> individua*l.  And I do see this as kind of a Csikszentmihalyi-est "being in
> the zone," a period of selfless awareness of a task or challenge. It's a
> neurological phenomenon. The objective is to make the period last as long
> as possible. Society is not very good at being selfless, even for a moment.
> 
> Perhaps with the assistance of Hebbian learning, say, over time this is
> possible for individuals who work at it to remain in this state longer than
> is typical.  It becomes a skill or practice.  But bubbling this up to the
> level of a society does not seem possible.  Religion hasn't and won't do it
> because that's a model that requires blind credulity to the provided
> surreal symbols.  Even in the context of Hebbian learning, where are the
> "societal neurons" that need to be rewired from their inculcated states?
> They tend to be imbued in the laws and in the prevailing morality memes.
> But these are just things to be gamed to ensure a *face validity* with our
> self-full life simulations.
> 
> The key component to any smart system is feedback.  But, we live in a
> society that is running open loop.  Another form of loopiness or delusion,
> I guess ... believing that everything will work out in the long run.  We
> are exceptional. We have democratic elections ... Hmmm,  I think the
> awakening is happening.  Maybe there is hope?  Is that a drone I hear above
> ... Oh, it's just an Amazone delivery ... or is it?  :-)



-- 
☣ glen