Gregg:
Interesting (no you didn't mention it) -- so how would you know that
this occurred . . . ??
Donald is a "follower" of Jaynes and, in fact, keynoted the last major
Jaynes conference. So, his *mythic* is Jaynes's "bicameral." Throw
out Jaynes and you also throw out Donald.
"Justification" (as I understand it) requires a *personality* which is
distinct from the mass of people with whom you live. That doesn't
happen to people under "mythic" conditions. It only shows up when
people have the presence-of-mind to begin to record their "own" views
of the world -- as opposed to simply following the "collective" (i.e.
mythic) view.
Without *literacy* (i.e. an audience of people who can read what
you've written), this just doesn't happen. If "justification" doesn't
require this separation of one person from another (and, crucially,
from their born-in-place absence of an "identity"), then how is this
concept applied to *radically* different people (i.e. us) who do have
this "third-stage" mentality?
And, what does "The tripartite model of human conscious, based on the
JH, is far superior, more generalizable and more integrative" mean in
this regard . . . ??
Mark
Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>:
> That is an area we disagree.
>
> Language, not literacy, resulted in the problem of justification and
> the development of justification systems. That is the fourth
> dimension. Literacy was important, but not the real game changer in
> my view. Of course, literacy does lay the ground work for ever more
> emerging technologies and was central to our current phase shift.
> But, language was far more important.
>
> As I think I mentioned to you on the phone, I don't buy Jayne's
> origin of consciousness narrative.
>
> The tripartite model of human conscious, based on the JH, is far
> superior, more generalizable and more integrative.
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tree of knowledge system discussion
> <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Mark Stahlman
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 8:34 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Humans and Language
>
> Gregg:
>
> Thanks! As you know, what was really the "game-changer" -- in terms
> of humans that we would recognize as such -- was *literacy* and not
> "language." That didn't happen until c. 500BC.
>
> This is the third-phase on Donald's schema and the "origin of
> consciosness" in Jaynes's. It was the "Axial Age" (so-called by
> Jaspers), from which the "Great Religions" and the civilizations
> based on them arose -- generating the world in which we now live.
>
> Obviously people can speculate as far back as they like but for what
> purpose? If the task-at-hand is understanding the world we live in
> today, what does it matter when you date early "language" . . . ??
>
> Mark
>
> Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> Hi Mark and Tim,
>>
>> Yes, my approach overlaps with Donald's significantly. My
>> "justification systems" are essentially his mythic culture period.
>> Full symbolic language into the development of justification systems.
>> Best guess is that full language is sometime between
>> 150,000 and 75,000. By 50,000 years we see an explosion of artefacts
>> suggestive of a mythology/justification system. Then technology shifts
>> things more, with agriculture and again with writing (earliest ~5K)
>> and philosophy 2500K ago and more recently science and digital
>> processing.
>>
>> Exactly when language and its various forms developed is much debated
>> and hard to know. Steve dropped off the list a few months back, so I
>> am not sure what he says about that exactly. The idea that language
>> could have been represent 500,000-600,000 k ago is possible, but not
>> much in the way of very convincing data. Some stuff on the evolution
>> of the throat and hyoid bone and other structures. The folks who look
>> at the evolution of speech (as opposed to language) tend to go deeper
>> in the evolutionary time than the evolution of language folks. (see,
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__web.archive.org_web_20070809073918_http-3A__www3.isrl.uiuc.edu_-7Ejunwang4_langev_localcopy_pdf_fitch00speech.pdf&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=u_p9FYYQva2cLiNs3hrX61Y3gjSjjMH56RqUbUtExKY&s=V239e__0Kj_JPCVjYsJOW_6VNRrYskgBKhEQUtT404k&e=).
>>
>> Here is a link to Steve's talk, which was on how hunter gatherers
>> solve relational issues by fostering autonomy and community and
>> regulating dominance.
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.gregghenrique
>> s.com_evolution-2Dwell-2Dbeing-2Dand-2Dhuman-2Dvalues.html&d=DwIBaQ&c=
>> eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6C
>> fxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=u_p9FYYQva2cLiNs3hrX61Y3gjSjjMH56RqUbUtExKY&s=mo
>> M74q2xpF-Ui0QowTviWTw6I82HGdXsoZTBqr_FiuI&e=
>>
>> Best,
>> Gregg
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tree of knowledge system discussion
>> <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Mark Stahlman
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 7:35 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Humans and Language
>>
>> Tim:
>>
>> The approach I take is (and I had thought) the *same* one taken by
>> Gregg -- which is to say the one put forward by Merlin Donald. He is
>> an evolutionary neuro-psychologist who is working with my Center.
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_
>> wiki_Merlin-5FDonald&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBE
>> mmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=jtGEWYngeGkLHbpF
>> 05r9EOzFOXrDYqAZf6kwj_zoHrc&s=rb0Iuiu_vOCGc7Bu3aATEPwe70hZGrXfXmx27c-a
>> 6b4&e=
>>
>> His 1992 "Origins of the Modern Mind" -- which sharply distinguishes
>> "mimetic" from "mythic" cultures -- is a further elaboration of the
>> 1976 Julian Jaynes "Origins of Consciousness." I was also Jaynes'
>> "last student."
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Or
>> igins-2DModern-2DMind-2DEvolution-2DCognition_dp_0674644840&d=DwIBaQ&c
>> =eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6
>> Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=jtGEWYngeGkLHbpF05r9EOzFOXrDYqAZf6kwj_zoHrc&s=9
>> ReDL2pIk9yhs1Xyp2AA5RSDruPmvgwox8sh9YqihjA&e=
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Or
>> igin-2DConsciousness-2DBreakdown-2DBicameral-2DMind_dp_0618057072&d=Dw
>> IBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-U
>> Opybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=jtGEWYngeGkLHbpF05r9EOzFOXrDYqAZf6kwj_zoH
>> rc&s=Hauk9nsswBw-L3LLMnciM-smw6qtvEarRKDrKFAl5zM&e=
>>
>> No I wasn't at Gregg's conference and if someone else has a different
>> view on this topic, which I've been studying for many years, I'd be
>> happy to take a look if you can provide a reference .
>> . . !!
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> Quoting Tim Henriques <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>>> Hi Mark - I wanted to get clarification on the post you mentioned
>>> below
>>>
>>> Homo Sapiens did *not* have anything like human language as a direct
>>> result of its own biological evolution. From 200,000+ years ago
>>> until some time much more recently -- perhaps only 10,000+ years ago
>>> -- humans most likely didn't have spoken language and written
>>> language is only 2500 or-so years old.
>>> Just to make sure I am reading that correctly, is the claim you are
>>> making that we didn't have spoken language 200k years ago or more?
>>>
>>>
>>> Did you happen to attend the ToK conference that Gregg held earlier
>>> this year? There was interesting presentation on Hunter Gatherer
>>> society as one of the main topics of a lecture, and in that
>>> presentation the presenter (Steve Keefer I believe) made that case
>>> that humans had reasonable working language at 600k years ago if my
>>> memory serves correctly. I am not an expert on this topic myself and
>>> so I can only relate the information presented. I imagine one of the
>>> points of contention is "what constitutes language". It was a
>>> subject I was interested in so I specifically asked about him about
>>> this and his basic point was that the hunter gather community could
>>> communicate quite well with each other and broader tribes.
>>> From a justification point of view they could ask each other "why did
>>> you do that" and then expect an answer. I asked him if that was more
>>> of his 'pet theory' or if there was reasonable consensus on that and
>>> he seemed to indicate the latter.
>>>
>>>
>>> Does that information jive with your account of history or do you
>>> take a different approach?
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Henriques
>>> Director, NPTI VA/MD/DC
>>> 703-531-0795
>>> NPTI's Webpage
>>>
>>> Did you know I wrote a book about Powerlifting?
>>>
>>>
>>> Refer a friend to NPTI and receive a FREE CEU Class of your choice
>>> (including TRX and KB) if they sign up
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Mark Stahlman <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: TOK-SOCIETY-L <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Tue, Sep 25, 2018 5:48 pm
>>> Subject: Re: Stam's critique
>>>
>>> Gregg:
>>>
>>> As we've discussed, there is no simple "identity" between language
>>> and humans.
>>>
>>> Homo Sapiens did *not* have anything like human language as a direct
>>> result of its own biological evolution. From 200,000+ years ago
>>> until some time much more recently -- perhaps only 10,000+ years ago
>>> -- humans most likely didn't have spoken language and written
>>> language is only 2500 or-so years old.
>>>
>>> Yes -- Merlin Donald is probably the best source on all this . . . !!
>>>
>>> Mark
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> 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
|
