NDT & evolution 2002-08-26
k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Mon Aug 26 12:19:39 EST 2002
If my comments, quoted below, lead folks to 'think' that 'facial beauty' is some kind of 'overall-indicator' with respect to expectations of 'overall performance', please search back to all of my Loving references to Lincoln - a Man, except for his exceptional physical stature, quite superficially-unattractive. Lincoln even 'joked' about such.
"Physical beauty' can, in fact, work-against one's long-term success because all of the 'fawning' in which a physically-beautiful person becomes immersed is, itself, a form of relatively-powerfully-coersed 'consensus' that tends, strongly, to act-upon one's Being, 'bouying' such within the realm of experiential superficiality.
In the end, it's overall-TD E/I-minimization that is 'attractive', as is explained in AoK [especially in Ap7], over the long-term.
Hence, my flat-out Love of Mr. Lincoln, Einstein, Mother Teresa [all the Saints], Yitzhak Rabin, Anwar Sadat, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, etc., and, though many find such 'difficult', most-significantly-in-my-Life, Jesus.
What one does with the stuff with which one is born can tower above, in significance, that with which one is born.
One is not born with Experience.
With respect to such, the main thing is long-term TD E/I-minimization.
k. p. collins
Kenneth Collins wrote in message ...
CORRECTION color [below]
Kenneth Collins wrote in message ...
I've discussed everything that's in NDT's view of evolutionatry dynamics. The discussion is 'scttered', in little 'snippets' over the course of years of posts. I'm not going to reiterate it, here [it requires detailed discussion of Physics [with respect to which, I'm still sorting-out a couple of numbers], with a correlated discussion of Chemistry [which follows directly from the Physics]], but I will offer an example of how it differs from the traditional approach.
Last Friday night, here in the U. S. A., ABC TV broadcast an installment of its 20/20 program. The show presented information pertaining to how perceptions of 'facial beauty' enter-into folks' daily decision-making processes. It presented some 'under-cover' work in which 'beautiful' folks gained preference, and discussed how such preference is discernable even in Childhood.
Although it was not rigorously-stated, the gist of it is that there is a 'genetic basis' for such 'preference' - that there 'must be a gene' that 'establishes' such preference for 'facial beauty'.
NDT's position on evolutionary dynamics hold that such is not True.
Rather, NDT's position is that sensing, and recognizing, 'facial beauty' occurs as a function of symmetry, and relative symmetry correlates rigorously with relative-TD E/I within the visual 'subsystem' -the greater the symmetry, the more-minimized is visual 'subsystem' TD E/I [see AoK, Ap4 "facial expressions", Ap3, 5, 6, 7, "ramparchitecture", and all of Ap6, "relative symmetry", for correlated discussion].
The sensing and recognition of relative-symmetry is a highly-generalized aspect to genetic stuff be-cause relative-symmetry is rigorously-correlated with WDB2T ^ -1.
That is, high-symmetry, is anti-WDB2T, and, so, is coincident with what Life does - 'climb' the energy-flow gradient that is the one-way flow of energy from order to disorder that is what's described by 2nd Thermo [WDB2T].
So the 'facial-beauty' thing is 'just' a reproduction-correlated instance of 'stuff' that's evaluated as being 'well-put-together' be-cause, when it's stuff drives visual sensation, a relatively-high degree of TD E/I-minimization occurs within the visual 'subsystem'.
In other words, there exists no 'gene' for 'facial-beauty'.
Rather, what exists within the tablo-rasa genetic stuff is a highly-generalized innate information-processing capability with respect to TD E/I-minimization, and it can See-right-into the genetic-stuff ['xray-vision - we all have it :-]
Folks've mis-taken such as 'indicating' that stuff like appreciation of 'facial-beauty' has a 'gene'. It doesn't.
Folks're 'attracted' to 'Beautiful' faces for the same reason that they're attracted to 'Beautiful' anything, including relatively-'abstract' stuff, such as Logic, be-cause it's correlated with relative TD E/I-minimization [it's only superficially-'relative' because, at it's most-'detailed' 'level', the dynamics become 'defined' with respect to the stuff of one's experiential-environment - but it remains the Same-Stuff - TD E/I-minimization. This's why a Mathematician might be moved-to-tears by a 'Beautiful' set of equations, while a Lay-person, typically, is not. Why a Breeder 'appreciates' the beauty of Champion bull more than does a Lay-Person, and, in general, why a person born and raised in one culture, or a person who becomes 'expert' in this or that, considers the stuff of that culture, or his area of 'expertise', to be more-'beautiful' than the stuff of 'foreign' cultures, or ['outside of'] his field of 'expertise'.
So, it's not "selfish-genes", etc., that determine the course of evolutionary dynamics through 'reproductive choice', and there's nothing that occurs 'by-chance' in-there. It's WDB2T determining the course of evolutionary dynamics be-cause, for the genetic material to do anything, it must, first, 'climb' the one-way flow of energy from order to disorcer that is WDB2T.
That is exactly what the genetic stuff does, and what evolutionary dynamics do.
WDB2T, itself, actively-drives evolutionary dynamics, deterministically - that is WDB2T determines what 'mutations' are 'acceptable', not anything that's innate within any 'species'. If a 'species' is relatively-more-facile with respect to 'climbing'-WDB2T, it's survival-propensity is commensurately stronger.
And there's not 'a gene for this' and 'a gene for that'.
What there is is a genetic-totality, in which genetic-stuff co-operates, of-a-piece, to imbue an organism with the greatest 'facility' with respect to 'climbing' the WDB2T energy-gradient. [If folks have former discussions, search on "standing-wave genetics"]
The Logic of the 'climb' is that doing so 'carries' an organism to 'the place' where the energy upon which its Life-stuff depends is increasigly-abundant.
This's what 'Life' is.
As is discussed in AoK, Ap4, even bacteria do such.
It's WDB2T that forms the neural topology, not 'the genes'. The genetic stuff is 'only' analogous to a 'piano'. It's WDB2T that 'composes' the 'symphony' of Life, conducts and performs it in-concert, upon a 'piano' that it has created.
k. p. collins
Peter F. wrote in message ...
"Kenneth Collins" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:Lfn99.39$p%3.9460 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
I understand that the stuff I've been discussing is 'Difficult', and even a bit 'frightening'.
Understanding the manner in which nervous systems process-information via 'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization 'turns-off' the 'blind'-automation - allows one to recognize the information-processing functionality of this or that formerly-'scary' stuff inherent in nervous systems' innate functioning, with the result that, rather than being 'coerced', via 'blindly'-automated nervous system functioning, into this or that 'blindly'-automated behavioral manifestation - rather than Killing, for instance - one can understand the TD E/I-differential[s] inherent, and work things out on the basis of such understanding, seeking TD E/I-minimization routes that are not necessarily predetermined within experience, giving, as well as receiving, such, without Prejudice with respect to that which they constitute - without 'banning' them just because they are not, yet, within experience.
Your "NDT" view of the brain is not difficult. And, more importantly, it is NOT frightening enough!
Your encompassing explanation for how the brain works creates "*too comfortable* a cocoon" of cognitive comprehension.
It is too comfortable because of what it fails to directly address (or because of what it largely leaves out).
It has failed the test for "specifics" as far as our evolution is concerned; Similarly it falls-down on being far too feeble an explanatory force as far as "selective unconsciousness" is concerned, and what it is that "selective unconsciousness" hides, and how (by which cultural / psychobehavioural / neurophysiological means and mechanisms -- "AEVASIVE such") what we "hide" is being hidden.
All of *these aspects* of "what is going on" -- "what is hidden, and how, and central evolutionary (peripherally even down to ultimate cosmological reasons) why" -- are *generally* (but still with poignant philosophical precision) *specifiable* in a compactly 'concEPTualized' way which is, if not formal and conventional, so at least in essence *entirely aligned* with our best bet, by "Science" (holistically defined) securely confirmed and/or established, principles and theories.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Neur-sci