[FRIAM] are we how we behave?

[Marcus Daniels]

Steve writes:

<   Taking my best guess, I think my answer would be that culture (whatever
    that is) as encoded/presented in natural language is a kind of fascia
    that does in fact connect people thoroughly and deeply.   It might be
    arguable what/when/how that is "useful" but the fact that it (rich,
    shared natural language, with lots of embedded knowledge about relevant
    humans/nature) seems to exist across many (all?) cultures and a great
    deal of time (thousands of years minimum?)  suggests it is adaptive to
    *something*, like living/working/(playing) in large groups while
    navigating/negotiating/exploiting novel/harsh environments. >

My view is that progress occurs in spite of culture and not because of it.
The fascia is too restrictive, and the need for it has passed.  What we now need are tools to collectively function in a large dense, but well-resourced population.   Telecommunication, mass transit, health care, fair access to jobs and credit.

A culture is just one of a huge set of local minima in a high dimensional space.   The more one culture becomes dominant, the more minorities are subjugated and the more today is just like yesterday.    The formation of culture proceeds as a sort of energy minimization.  Once the system gets cold enough, it no longer is possible to find a lower (better) energy state.   Multi-culturalism is a metaphorical heat source.
Ideally each milieu would constantly be destroying and reforming itself.   A preference for sovereignty is a preference to lower the temperature.   

What are billions of people for, if not to explore high-dimensional spaces?   Why cluster around the same fire?

Marcus