This is fascinating, Brent. Thanks. You definitely have me “canonizing” the ToK. Here is some of what I have been playing around with. In terms of its entry point, the Tree of Knowledge System, at its broadest level is an approach to natural philosophy<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_philosophy> (aka science). That is, as this blog suggests<https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-knowledge/201303/three-worldviews-the-nature-consciousness-1>, it offers a natural versus supernatural or paranormal/mystical metaphysics. Note, I would characterize my “Garden Platform<https://www.gregghenriques.com/the-garden.html>” as an approach to philosophy writ large (i.e., metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics, and aesthetics). It would be great to do an inventory of views of natural philosophy. Perhaps Stephen Pepper’s summary of world hypotheses<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Hypotheses> could be a good place to start. However, I am not sure the ToK is well-placed as one of these worldviews. It most definitely is closest to organism-holism, but for reasons I will not get into here, I actually think it offers a “meta” metaphorical perspective. Perhaps the next header might be “consilient/holistic” (i.e., coherent and ordered) versus “disordered”<https://www.amazon.com/Disorder-Things-Metaphysical-Foundations-Disunity/dp/0674212614> and particular. (These skeptics could probably be divided into folks who believe consilience has not been achieved because we lack the correct model versus those who believe it could never be achieved). Perhaps the next division for those who advocate for consilience would be strong reductive physicalism (an example of which I criticize in this blog<https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-knowledge/201303/completely-misguided-guide-reality>), versus an emergent evolutionary view, which would be David Christian’s Big History<https://www.bighistoryproject.com/home> view, and E. O Wilson’s Consilience view. Ken Wilber’s view is also in this camp, although his ultimate metaphysics is more spiritual than natural<https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-knowledge/201510/positioning-our-knowledge-in-four-quadrants>. If it could work, it would be great to have a catalogue of the various natural, emergent evolutionary viewpoints. So, using this canonizer inspired choice frame, the ToK is definitely a kind of world hypothesis, and is a natural (versus super or parapsych-mystical) philosophy, and is an “organic-meta” view point. It is also consilient, and emergent evolutionary. It then claims that the biggest impediment to achieving this view is the problem of psychology<https://www.gregghenriques.com/uploads/2/4/3/6/24368778/problemofpsych.pdf>. That is, it argues that there is no consilient, emergent evolutionary view that effectively solves the problem of psychology, and thus the jump from the physical and organic aspects of the universe into the mental and cultural aspects is confused in Wilson and Christian’s systems. As such, they fall short of effectively achieving their vision. The ToK and Periodic Table of Behavior (see here<https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-knowledge/201706/periodic-table-behavior-psychology>) enters new territory with its map of the unfolding wave of behavior (measured object field change, with energy and information being foundational concepts). It can be characterized as strongly (as opposed to weakly) emergent<http://www.consc.net/papers/emergence.pdf>. In fact, it offers a specific and new approach to emergence. Although I have not published this, I consider the ToK to be a “property quadist” view of emergence, in that the properties seen in each dimension of behavioral complexity following Matter (i.e., Life-Organisms, Mind-Animals, Culture-Persons) are strongly emergent. There is weak emergence within the dimensions (e.g., chemical properties are weakly emergent relative to physical properties). The different cones of behavioral complexity represent the different, strongly emergent jumps—which arise because of novel information processing/communication network systems. The ToK (especially when placed in the broader Garden platform/metaphor/metaphysical language game, because of the enhanced emphasis on ethics and values), offers an additional view about our place in the universe. Specifically, it says that we are entering into a digital, globalization age and the rapid technological changes are changing us and the planet around us in fundamental ways. And our knowledge systems are breaking down and reside in a state of fragmented pluralism, which is producing existential angst. As I put it in an early post: Take a confused and interconnected talking ape and massively change the environment and give them hope that anything is possible despite the existential reality of their inevitable deaths and insignificance, create huge levels of status inequality, change the lifestyle playing field dramatically, and then see what happens. Oh, and for a kicker, as a reflection of this fragmented pluralism, elect a chaotic disrupter with poor character values to the most powerful job on the planet! Ok, I think I will end it here. I was supposed to get something else done this morning, but it was just too tempting to “canonize” after seeing that video. Best, G From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Brent Allsop Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2018 6:30 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: New Vimio on Canonizer Just FYI. My Partner Jim Bennett just uploaded this 2 minute vimeo about Canonizer. https://vimeo.com/307590745?fbclid=IwAR2tAtV_sxww1kRlPfqSX87PaZ84sHq6zdIvpdGYQ8DFqYTZiUSk0MS5SGs<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__vimeo.com_307590745-3Ffbclid-3DIwAR2tAtV-5Fsxww1kRlPfqSX87PaZ84sHq6zdIvpdGYQ8DFqYTZiUSk0MS5SGs&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=OkNzwIfxTOQHjDcV7w2kkGZ3h0BQZ1-Z4pNI1tfq0oA&s=2OUtxasfHDhEQhZVqIyM7zztbP54Q-AexF8_erENKWU&e=> Brent Allsop ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto: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