Glad to hear that, Andrew.  The book I mentioned is *The Participatory Mind*
.

On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 1:10 PM Andrew Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> Thank you for sharing that Bruce. I found MHC through Hanzi and had read
> SES but did not know that history. Truly helpful.
>
>
>
> *From:* theory of knowledge society discussion <
> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *Bruce Alderman
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 20, 2022 3:27 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: ToK Complexity Metrics?
>
>
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> The same year Wilber published SES, Henryk Skolimowski published a book
> arguing that we are at a time between worldviews -- represented as a 'dip'
> and 'chaotic tangle' between plateaus of dominant worldviews/paradigms --
> and proposed the next emergent view will be holistic, participatory, and
> evolutionary (whatever we name it; some of his prior worldview names are
> 'Theos' and 'Mechanos').  One of his arguments in the book is that
> evolution reveals a long trajectory of gradually increasing sensitivity --
> of evolving modes, degrees, etc, of prehension, awareness, and
> 'participation' that entities use to interface with the rest of reality.
> And a key idea, somewhat anticipating Wilber's "W-5" turn, is that we need
> to view this evolution of sensitivity in enactive terms, that evolution
> demonstrates a wandering but not directionless unfolding of greater, more
> complex ways that entities participatorily 'enact' their worlds.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:05 PM Nicholas Lattanzio <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> I think Major Histocompatability Complex, which from my understanding are
> proteins that help the immune system adapt. I believe they measure it in
> making vaccines, and use a great deal of statistical information to
> generate probabilistic outcomes. But that's all self-education from
> articles I read like 2 years ago. I could be totally wrong amd/or they
> could be talking about something else.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 1:56 PM Zachary Stein <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> Jim Rutt Show: On Hierarchical Complexity:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.jimruttshow.com_zak-2Dstein-2D4_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=j598i5dNXSmmPJnS_N0b6aGznFcieFUqT7leFY7xoyg&s=MJiuWDyewV650AGGpWzJyxVOL3q5DlJ9FPlqh2TgeOA&e= 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.jimruttshow.com_zak-2Dstein-2D4_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=BSIrUggjECTX-3WpD1Z3Vjp1ZiEmIyCXt4lCrxXC4UI&s=So2Gj7XP4B3GguSgm4qBYOvUcuunJSnScYrLptGDVRA&e=>
>
>
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Model-5Fof-5Fhierarchical-5Fcomplexity&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=j598i5dNXSmmPJnS_N0b6aGznFcieFUqT7leFY7xoyg&s=3Lh_5kopN6nbN98qcCSIpJEszuHzgVPsARFrAFt3t08&e= 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Model-5Fof-5Fhierarchical-5Fcomplexity&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=BSIrUggjECTX-3WpD1Z3Vjp1ZiEmIyCXt4lCrxXC4UI&s=e6QCTgwuwT3HO9mehFDk5SQQ_cciahi9xJWQYVvMEP0&e=>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 2:27 PM Waldemar Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> Someone, please clarify (for me) what MHC means.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 20, 2022, at 9:42 AM, Zachary Stein <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> You're on you something Brendan,
>
>
>
> Many thinkers
>
>   have been on the same scent.
>
>
>
> Aside from e.g., Wilber's
>
>  use of Laszlo et al
>
>  in *Sex, Ecology Spirtuality;*
>
>  See also, for example,
>
>   less well known works
>
>   like Elliot Jaques'
>
>   *The Life and Behavior
>
>     of Living Organisms.*
>
>
>
> Everyone has been asking:
>
>  Can the whole of evolution
>
>   be placed along
>
>   a single objective axis
>
>   of directionality?
>
>
>
> Multiple, level-specific "measures,"
>
>   yes, ok, *and*
>
>    there are deep structural isomorphisms
>
>    across/between levels.
>
>
>
> Piaget & Co.
>
>   can be read as suggesting
>
>   that what we call MHC
>
>   (Fischer's Skill Levels)
>
>   are a local manifestation
>
>   of a cosmic evolutionary process
>
>   occuring at all levels:
>
>   matter, life, and mind.
>
>
>
> Quite a claim.
>
>
>
> Problematic,
>
>   but also illuminating
>
>   and insightful.
>
>
>
> It is to say,
>
>   aside from space, time, etc
>
>   there is another universally measurable
>
>   dimension involving (forgive the jargon)
>
>    *non-abirtary iterations
>
>     of complex emergence
>
>     and hierarchical integration*
>
>
>
> "The many become one,
>
>  and are increased by one."
>
>   As Whitehead would say.
>
>
>
> This is the many stepped
>
>  "stairway" of evolution
>
>   giving a sense
>
>   that things are "going somewhere"
>
>     rather than just meandering and
>
>     arbitrarily enduring through time.
>
>
>
> But, of course,
>
>   even if we accept all that
>
>   what does it buy us?
>
>
>
> Does it buy us what we want?
>
>
>
> I think it buys a great deal,
>
>   some of it we want
>
>  (some of it we don't know what to do with);
>
>   But this second step
>
>   of "who cares/so what?"
>
>   is not trivial.
>
>
>
> zak
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 10:45 AM Brendan Graham Dempsey <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Have been considering the ToK through the complexification lens and
> wondering what the specific quantitative metrics might be in each domain of
> complexification. Each new information system would complexify along its
> own trajectory, meaning the specific metric used to measure it would be
> different than the one before. Moreover, each metric would be dependent
> upon and relate to the ones on which it rests. Here's what I was playing
> with:
>
>
> *MATTER*: Cosmic evolution – energy (metric: free energy rate density, Øm)
> *LIFE*: Biological evolution – genetic information (metric: “physical
> [genomic] complexity”, C)
> *MIND*: Consciousness evolution – nervous system integration (metric:
> integrated information, Ø)
> *CULTURE*: Cultural evolution – linguistic justification systems (metric:
> hierarchical task complexity, MHC)
>
>
>
> At the level of *matter*, I think the work of Eric Chaisson on cosmic
> evolution is helpful, and he uses the free energy rate density (Øm) as his
> metric.
>
> At the level of *life*, some preliminary searches yielded genomic
> complexity (C) as a potential metric, as according to the work of Adami,
> Ofria, and Collier (2003), but I suspect there is better/more recent work
> on measuring biological complexity.
>
> At the level of *mind*, I was wondering whether IIT would be the best
> fit, which uses the metric of Ø of increasing sentience.
>
> Finally, at the level of *culture*, I'm intrigued by the potential for
> the Model of Hierarchical Complexity to measure justification systems and
> other cultural phenomena.
>
>
>
> Again, each new metric would map onto the other, such that Øm would
> increase as C increased as Ø increased as MHC increased. That's a
> hypothesis, anyway.
>
>
>
> Perhaps I'm re-inventing the wheel here, so let me know if there's already
> work that's done this. But I wanted to hear people's perspectives on the
> prospect of identifying different complexity metrics for each unique level
> of the stack.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brendan
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Zachary Stein, Ed.D.
>
> www.zakstein.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.zakstein.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=YdRLNMaydS8BjgIdh3dHs8piU-A007PURV8gr6ghKCg&s=-RgOZ82hnT70JsA8h7l5kS4HpqFxbNXeDHQcBLt2VNc&e=>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Zachary Stein, Ed.D.
>
> www.zakstein.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.zakstein.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=BSIrUggjECTX-3WpD1Z3Vjp1ZiEmIyCXt4lCrxXC4UI&s=hrMDanBRLvtThATSswHjSE9xtL_v4JVvLwLNuvNfXD0&e=>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1