Gregg, I welcome the opportunity to comment on communication, values, responsibility, etc, etc and language. In my way of cobbling life and matter together, starting from the Singularity/Big Bang, the cell as the first Niche Construction, cell-cell communication, cell-environment communication (epigenetics), 'First there were bacteria, now there is New York!', it would only make sense that language- body, oral- emerged to perpetuate the interrelationship between the inorganic and the organic. In the spirit of parsimony, it would make sense to consider the relationship between cell-cell communication and language as a continuum, in contrast to language as a human 'invention', which is anthropocentric and counter-productive IMHO. Suffice it to say that we now have a 'Tower of Babel', which we ToKers are trying to level in order to be able to find a common meta-language- a noble effort which I support wholeheartedly. Minimally, we will have solved C.P. Snow's 'Two Cultures' problem. On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 6:39 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > Mark, > I like your comments about communication. In terms of human > communication, it jumps me into the concept of language games. I think we > can build better language games that are more effective at fostering > wisdom. That is the essence of the ToK/UTUA mission. Concepts like > justification, influence and investments are, IMO, useful tools for > understanding human behavior. And we need new, better and wiser tools to > dance with the changes in the new paradigm that we find ourselves in. > > Would love to hear others thoughts about communication, values, > responsibility and so forth. > > Best, > Gregg > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: tree of knowledge system discussion [mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L@ > listserv.jmu.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Stahlman > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2018 4:16 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: On the possibility Integrating Human Knowledge > > Gregg: > > Welcome back and I like "the message is the medium" . . . !! > > When McLuhan decided to use that term, among the many things he had in > mind was the "medium" used in laboratories for growing colonies of > organisms -- or what we used to call "agar" when I was wearing a lab-coat. > > The challenge that everyone who has attempted to *integrate* Human > Knowledge has had, of course, is dealing with the one-and-the-many. > We know that both must simultaneously be "true" but how are they to be > reconciled? > > What is it that "unifies" and what is it that "separates" (and is it the > same thing)? How do we deal with the "universal" and the "particular" all > under the same umbrella? > > The notion that it is *communications* which unifies and separates -- from > cell-to-cell to culture-to-culture -- seems to be where we're heading and I > like that path. > > "Communication" is a word based on "in common," which it shares with > "community" &c. Within this etymology, there is both the recognition of > the "one" and the "many." It also carries the meaning that there are many > "mechanisms" for communications and what cells perform is not identical to > the communications that cultures are founded upon (thus my interest in > Semiotics &c). > > All of which begs the important question of how are we going to > *communicate* in our "new paradigm" and what will this new approach mean > for our "community"? > > Mark > > P.S. Under previous communications conditions, we tried to build "one > world." That is over now, because those conditions have changed. In > particular, I have been deeply engaged with China for the past 20 years. > China will never be a part of the Western attempts to make our > lives "global" (and we will never be a part of what they are doing.) > Two radically different *communications* approaches -- the Alphabet and > Ideo/pictographics -- developed in these two places 2500+ years ago (in the > Axial Age) and, as a result, two very different "cultures" > were produced. And, yes there are others . . . <g> > > Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>: > > > Hi All, > > > > It is good to be back at my home computer after 12 days of "gluttony > > and sloth." I have been thrilled by all the insightful contributions > > to the list. > > > > Corinne, thanks much both for your artwork and for the recent post > > about plants. Plant behavior became a point of fascination for me in > > figuring out psychology's language game. I also think the article > > highlights many of the things that John has been trying to say about > > how physiology and cell-cell communication is foundational to > > understanding our essences. At the same time, the nervous system is a > > "game changer" when it comes to the "fast" behavior of animals. > > Whereas plant behavior is complex, responsive to stimuli, and highly > > functional, I don't think we should call it "mental," and I think that > > we should be careful in using terms like 'see' and 'hear,' as in the > > title of the article. For us human primates, the term "see" > > is intimately tied to our subjective experience of vision. There is no > > evidence that plants have a subjective experience (AKA perceptual > > consciousness) of vision. They are clearly physiologically aware of > > light stimuli and respond accordingly. The relationship between > > functional behavior and the subjective experience of being, is, as > > Steve's review of William James will likely point out, crucial in > > trying to solve the language game of psychology. As slide 11 in the > > BIT key idea ppt highlights, consciousness does not equal > > behavior<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.greg > > ghenriques.com_bit.html&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5 > > nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m= > uHKAWFaAP1VQfQO7Zs6RMMP9dM1fVSGtIkNi3Oi3Mg0&s=7zOkydjiK47pYS4hoKM-38Lw7Z4O0O153QWaV-8u0ec&e=>, > although we can use the ToK System to understand how perceptual > consciousness is a subset of behavior. > > > > Thanks much to Nancy for her articulation of the development of human > > cognitive abilities and her evolutionary/Piagetian analyses. > > Nancy, I think both of your assumptions about evolutionary lineage and > > about lining up phylogeny with ontogeny in the way that you to > > understand the evolution of human thought highly valuable. I am glad > > to hear your connection to Merlin Donald. We have not spoken about > > that previously. Early in his book, Merlin Donald makes a central > > point: During the relatively short time of human emergence, the > > structure of the primate mind was radically altered; or rather was > > gradually surrounded by new representational systems and absorbed into > > a larger cognitive apparatus. (p. 4) In the language of the ToK, what > > we became surrounded by were both the technological and linguistic > > environments that resulted in a dramatic shift in the flow of > > energy-information. The linguistic networks that formed were > > justification systems; narratives that provided the structure for our > > social lives and labeled Culture as the fourth dimension of behavioral > > complexity. > > > > Mark, I have been very much enjoying reading up on the Center for > > Digital Life and Marshal McLuhan's work on media. I have found his > > analysis of mediums fascinating. In what might be an odd association, > > it reminded me a bit of Richard Dawkins' The Extended > > Phenotype<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiki > > pedia.org_wiki_The-5FExtended-5FPhenotype&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7 > > vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4 > > -A&m=uHKAWFaAP1VQfQO7Zs6RMMP9dM1fVSGtIkNi3Oi3Mg0&s=dfNfUeDnjiTyyZYuh8x > > a4IXqvSBvXL3D4oWAmVhr5LI&e=> (and John's notions of Niche > > Construction). Certainly, as we radically alter our environment, we > radically alter ourselves. On the ride home from the beach yesterday, I > found myself inverting is his motto (the medium is the message) to "the > message is the medium." The inverted motto lines up directly with the key > insight of the ToK. > > That is, the mediums of cell-cell communication/genetic info (Life), > > neuro-mental-subjectivity (Mind), and > > linguistic-person-society-intersubjectivity (Culture) are the > > "conglomerates" that allow us to unweave the rainbow of behavior and > > see the dimensions that make us what and who we are. > > > > Ultimately, it seems to me that these are the kinds of > > interdisciplinary conversations that should be going on as we search > > for ways to integrate knowledge. As Joe commented, none of us has all > > the answers. But together we might be able to fashion a reasonable > > picture of the whole. I am reminded of the philosopher Oliver Reiser's > > opening call in his book The Integration of Human Knowledge (which I > > found had remarkable parallels to the ToK version of reality), which > > seems perhaps even more appropriate today as it was when he wrote 60 > > years ago: > > > > In this time of divisive tendencies within and between the nations, > > races, religions, sciences and humanities, synthesis must become the > > great magnet which orients us all...[Yet] scientists have not done > > what is possible toward integrating bodies of knowledge created by > > science into a unified interpretation of man, his place in nature, and > > his potentialities for creating the good society. Instead, they are > > entombing us in dark and meaningless catacombs of learning (Reiser, > > 1958, p. 2-3, italics in original). > > > > Am happy to be back in the flow. > > > > 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 my Theory of Knowledge blog at Psychology Today at: > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytod > > ay.com_blog_theory-2Dknowledge&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9R > > SjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=uHKAWF > > aAP1VQfQO7Zs6RMMP9dM1fVSGtIkNi3Oi3Mg0&s=iyFRFA9RrDTde63r0NoDqF9Q4vP1aP > > Gsb8-0WN1FbRs&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