Hey Gregg,

Apologies for the delay. Life has been chaotic to say the least. Haven’t
had a chance to watch the second episode but hope to get to it soon. Sorry
to hear of the collaborative breakdown. Sure it would’ve generated some
interesting findings.

After I sent it, I thought the hypothetical riffing would get me in
trouble. You’re absolutely correct that language is pre-agrarian. I
erroneously suggested it’s a new phenomenon less than several thousand
years old. Mea culpa. However, I was more referring to that qualitative
shift you mentioned in cultural and technological metastasis. Lack of
clarity on my part.

The concepts of Mind2 and Mind3 are interesting in so far that they
distinguish between specialized human behaviors, but I’m still unsure
whether the difference is one of degrees or one of kind (I’ll watch the
Stoa episode if you addressed it there). The implication is the shift in
behavior is a fundamental sort of strong-emergence. This is debateable, as
we arguably share much more in common with other organisms than we care to
admit. The expressed phenotypical differences are governed by the same
genealogical building blocks. If that’s a misinterpretation, please let me
know.

Also, does Mind2 and Mind3 actually contribute to the Problem of
Psychology? We experience reality as a whole, and it seems these
higher-order functions further separate the mind instead of unifying it.
Just my impression.

Sincerely,
Eric



On Sunday, October 18, 2020, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Eric,
>
>   Yes, please see the Stoa podcast #2. I am aware of the animal language
> studies. The most amazing, IMO, is Alex the grey parrot. Anyway, I worked
> closely with Sue Savage Rumbaugh for several years and we devised outlines
> of proposals to see if we could determine if bonobos might be able to
> justify their actions. She thought they could, but I was and remain
> skeptical. Unfortunately, unrelated disruptions at the Great Ape Trust
> derailed our collaborations, and we have not been in contact since 2010…
>
>
>
> Also, human language is almost certainly PRE-agrarian. I don’t know of any
> account that places it post-agrarian industrial. (Keep in mind, writing is
> ~5,000 years old). Late blooming language accounts are in the ~50,000 years
> ago. Some early accounts push it back to 500,000 or even 1,000,000. The
> Unified Theory argues for a fractured symbolic communication sometime
> between 500,000 and 50,000 with the propositional language tipping point
> happening by 50,000 and that is the game changer that essentially adds a
> second mind (i.e., Mind3 and the Culture Person plane) to our primate mind,
> resulting in a qualitative shift (because Cultural and technological
> evolution then spin us out of the normal evolutionary balance and we spread
> like a virus across the planet).
>
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
>
>
> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]
> EDU> *On Behalf Of *easalien
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 17, 2020 3:51 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Sensemaking Episodes on the Stoa
>
>
>
> *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.
> ------------------------------
>
> Hey Gregg,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the response. It explains a great deal.
>
>
>
> 1. Language: Will have to learn more about the unified theory. I agree
> language is a leap in evolution. However, in this case, I’m reminded of
> case-studies involving Koko, the gorilla who learned sign-language. It just
> seems the more we learn, the less special we become. Maybe our capacity for
> language is just naturally-selected niche-making behavior in post-agrarian
> industrial society. Will check out the new video when it’s posted.
>
>
>
> 2. Joint Points: Glad for the clarification. These frames are useful
> placeholders until a fuller theory is developed. However, based on
> research, it appears these joint points correspond to similar physical
> events, i.e. broken symmetries. That means it can be tested, or at least
> described mathematically (to a point). The TOK may be able to answer these
> fundamental questions.
>
>
>
> 3. There was a rapid run-through of the Garden I found difficult to
> follow. However, appreciate the link you provided. Not suggesting errors in
> the TOK, just that a slightly different perspective would provide a future
> culmination point: the Singularity, time-like in nature similar to what
> preceded the Big Bang.
>
>
>
> I agree with both you and Rob that a Fundamental Shift is taking place.
> We’re reevaluating relationships with one another, society, environment,
> and with ourselves. Grateful such a group exists where we can voice our
> thoughts in these chaotic times.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> On Saturday, October 17, 2020, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
>
>
>   Thanks for these questions.
>
>
>
>    1. I believe the question was sparked by this article on “sensory
>    consciousness
>    <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.popularmechanics.com_science_animals_a34165311_crows-2Dare-2Dself-2Daware-2Dlike-2Dhumans_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=90tqcFu0rAbHrH21ysozyN43PK5L4ehpCdxt7D0DlGU&s=mEm7UUAJ5ROHJ2xoxwUallrjgaDduoX4IP7Ok7d9Y7o&e=>”
>    in crows and evidence that they know that recognize an experience (i.e.,
>    with training, they can have conscious access to their subjective
>    experience). It was a good article and an interesting experiment. It offers
>    very strong evidence for subjective experience in crows. I would have been
>    amazed if crows did not have subjective experience. Indeed, I believe it is
>    likely subjective experience may go all the way “down” to insects. Here is
>    a book on the evolution of sensory consciousness.
>
>
>
> 1a. Sensory consciousness is what I call “experiential consciousness” and
> corresponds to Mind2 in the language of the unified theory. That is
> different than Mind3, which emerges as a function of language in an
> explicitly aware intersubjective environment that uses propositions and
> requires individuals to give accounts for their action. From a ToK/UTOK
> vantage point, it is CRUCIAL to differentiate sensory/experiential
> consciousness from linguistically mediated self-consciousness. Bottom line
> is that we share in a largely continuous fashion experiential/sensory
> consciousness with many animals, but only humans are persons that have the
> fully developed capacity for self-conscious narration. The talk I gave this
> past week at the Stoa was on JUST and what makes human consciousness so
> different. I encourage you to check that out when it is posted.
>
>
>
>    1. The joint points are frames of understanding. No joint point can be
>    considered to be complete. Quantum mechanics, general relativity and the
>    Big Bang form the first Energy-to-Matter joint point. It is framed but not
>    solved. Likewise, natural selection, genetics and cell (including
>    epigenetic physiological developmental considerations) FRAME the
>    evolutionary synthesis, but it is not complete. Behavioral Investment
>    Theory frames the Life-to-Mind joint point that links behavioral selection,
>    neurocomputation and whole brain activity, but it is not a complete
>    understanding (still many mysteries about sentience, for example). JUST/JH
>    frames the Mind-to-Culture joint point and boxes in language, justification
>    processes, human self-consciousness and the evolution of the Culture-Person
>    plane, but again many questions unanswered.
>
>
>
>    1. There have been many additions to the model. Its first publication
>    is the Tree of Knowledge System and the Theoretical Unification of
>    Psychology
>    <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.gregghenriques.com_uploads_2_4_3_6_24368778_unifiedtheory.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=90tqcFu0rAbHrH21ysozyN43PK5L4ehpCdxt7D0DlGU&s=u5ujS6pU64yOrpWe7HkaTz7KA52g9NpomjqWfMSRTZk&e=>.
>    That specifies only the first three key ideas of what becomes the Eight
>    Key Ideas
>    <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_202010_eight-2Dkey-2Dideas&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=90tqcFu0rAbHrH21ysozyN43PK5L4ehpCdxt7D0DlGU&s=JAA5WX--TcREsDEw_I8wU93u-PGJ55-Kky3oHE9zq1E&e=>
>    that make up the Unified Theory of Knowledge. The Garden
>    <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org_content_unified-2Dtheory-2Das-2Da-2Dgarden&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=90tqcFu0rAbHrH21ysozyN43PK5L4ehpCdxt7D0DlGU&s=IF1tVBUWlBVgJFjpaS6rTk2F1pZDMXlT_Qo_SLLsLm0&e=>—which
>    represents the full system--has even more elements to it. There have been
>    minor revisions, such as the fact that what I used to call the
>    “Justification Hypothesis” is now Justification Systems Theory.
>    <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201812_the-2Djh-2Djust-2Dwhy-2Dname-2Dchange-2Dis-2Djustified&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=90tqcFu0rAbHrH21ysozyN43PK5L4ehpCdxt7D0DlGU&s=hWE-LKjuuHXJy0oKAbm2veI2zPB2mSI1naaLHkuoO9c&e=>
>    I have not found many errors in the original formulation. Mostly
>    adjustments to accommodate and assimilate and integrate more knowledge.
>
>
>
> 3a. Note that the ToK/UTOK by no means says the progression is inevitable.
> If we blow ourselves up tomorrow with a nuclear holocaust, all you do is
> remove the Culture and most of the Mind layers (i.e., assuming that all
> people and most animals go extinct following a nuclear Armageddon…maybe the
> cockroaches would find a path). Death is when the complexity bubbles pop.
> Thus, when I die, my Life-Mind-Culture systems of complex adaptation “pop”
> and what remains is my body operating at the Matter dimension.
>
>
>
> 3b. The 5th joint point is the way I describe the current situation we
> find ourselves in. There are needed developments in both our knowledge
> systems and how we conceive of our identities and how we raise our
> children. I love Rob’s Fundamental Shift
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.popularmechanics.com_science_animals_a34165311_crows-2Dare-2Dself-2Daware-2Dlike-2Dhumans_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=90tqcFu0rAbHrH21ysozyN43PK5L4ehpCdxt7D0DlGU&s=mEm7UUAJ5ROHJ2xoxwUallrjgaDduoX4IP7Ok7d9Y7o&e=>
> because he points to many ways of being that fall under what I call a
> “Meta-Cultural Consciousness” kind of awakening.  We need to put our Energy
> into that direction, which yields the fun “equation” of E=>MC2
>
>
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
>
>
> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]
> EDU> *On Behalf Of *easalien
> *Sent:* Friday, October 16, 2020 12:04 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* TOK: Sensemaking Episodes on the Stoa
>
>
>
> *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.
> ------------------------------
>
> Hey Gregg,
>
>
>
> Great presentation. As a new student of the TOK, was wondering if you
> could help clarify some questions I was having:
>
>
>
> 1. Animal Consciousness: One participant mentioned an article concerning
> consciousness in crows. Was wondering if you considered higher-order
> functions in human beings a difference in degree or a difference in kind.
>
>
>
> 2. Joint Points: As major unresolved problems in physical/behavioral
> sciences, do these joint points represent similar processes?  Does the TOK
> potentially answer these questions or is that left to respective experts?
> Also, are the solutions important to fully understanding the TOK?
>
>
>
> 3. Have there been any revisions/additions to the model since it was first
> published? The hierarchical nature implies  evolution towards higher-order
> processes, but is there a point at which it terminates, e.g. social
> stagnation, death, etc.? Had an insightful conversation with Rob, and
> viewing the TOK from “above” allows the model to culminate at its
> source—completing the system. Wondering your thoughts on this
> interpretation.
>
>
>
> Hope to hear from you. Appreciate your insight on the matter.
>
>
>
> Eric
>
> On Wednesday, October 14, 2020, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi TOK Folks,
>
>   Here is the link to my first session on the Stoa:
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DcPiSjWIY-5FmE&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=AwrK1b4fZtY-w-_uWyWBakbXmHI9teM_pYZhIZcE9Mo&s=PfdFeoOJZqzek6DhBfY5gXq71NnRFRb-NbsHdbSpo-A&e= 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DcPiSjWIY-5FmE&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=YEbSDW8BR4IAPrlVDZSaI6XBGvS09Se7O92wUtN0rJo&s=gvxGccgcZcQt2xUHCC-m7kI9CzJS9Nvvvm6ESb98cP8&e=>
>
>
>
> I am up again tomorrow at 2:00 pm. It is on Justification Systems Theory.
> I did a run through which I can share here for folks who are interested,
> but won’t make the live show:
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1XIP8swR1lf2Ug2OxDEkJHAT7BK859&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=AwrK1b4fZtY-w-_uWyWBakbXmHI9teM_pYZhIZcE9Mo&s=iD-8dF7PCE68x-fg8-uWKVvL8-bpB-oRPkkEMfoQi18&e= 
> ZUI/view?usp=sharing
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1XIP8swR1lf2Ug2OxDEkJHAT7BK859ZUI_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=YEbSDW8BR4IAPrlVDZSaI6XBGvS09Se7O92wUtN0rJo&s=1K4KOG6N3_MqLuv417rRqsx52GAc34f_IBeC6K4y0u0&e=>
>
>
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________
>
> Gregg Henriques, Ph.D.
> Professor
> Department of Graduate Psychology
> 216 Johnston Hall
> MSC 7401
> James Madison University
> Harrisonburg, VA 22807
> (540) 568-7857 (phone)
> (540) 568-4747 (fax)
>
>
> *Be that which enhances dignity and well-being with integrity.*
>
> Check out the Unified Theory Of Knowledge homepage at:
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=AwrK1b4fZtY-w-_uWyWBakbXmHI9teM_pYZhIZcE9Mo&s=LpZsFOkk1GI9qpyN0ZvzMJKuosFeOT5_0NUTKjnXy4c&e= 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=YEbSDW8BR4IAPrlVDZSaI6XBGvS09Se7O92wUtN0rJo&s=lDW2t4FdY0SIHmIWp5THgwxzTQI-aiI55oehGmhxXwY&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
>

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

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