for - critique - definition - crisis - perhaps interpret less anthropocentrically? - extend to non-human organisms as well?

for - definition - cognitive glue - Michael Levin

definition - cognitive glue - Michael Levin - a set of policies and mechanisms that allow competent subunits to form together into some kind of an emergent Collective that's more than the sum of its parts

Adjacency - between - cognitive glue - multi scale competency architecture - human species - Jordan Hall - cognitive glue destresses goal seeking activities - adjacency relationship - Cognitive glue is a general concept that applies to the entire spectrum of the biosphere - Michael goes on to give examples with rats and other biological contexts like cells - This is an important question for humans at two levels: - first, at the level of the individual human - second, at the level of human groups - Jordan Hall brings the conversation to the cognitive glue at the human social level in which - anyone who has worked in a group context knows that when there is a flow, there is signaling taking place - that is at a higher group level not present at the level of the individual that destresses goal seeking activity

for - definition - bowtie - Micheal Levin - adjacency - bowtie - indyweb - symmathesetic fingerprint - symmathesetic folding

definition - bowtie - Micheal Levin - In the conscious experience of a living organism, - All that a living organism they possesses memory has access to are earlier memory engrams - The details of these are not saved, only the general pattern - Further, these engrams are recalled in the present and the general pattern must always be contextualised for is saliency to the present context - The caterpillar-to-butterfly transformation is a radical example of this - The specific details of it's life as a caterpillar is irrelevant to the butterfly - Yet the butterfly still has memories saved during its earlier morphological form as a caterpillar - The butterfly must re-interpret those earlier memories in a radically different new morphological form so that they are relevant - When humans recall memories, we do the same thing - The context has changed - We've learned more things about reality - Concepts are constantly being redefined in realtime - The goalpost is constantly changing - The bowtie is this cone of memory engrams from the past that must constantly be re-interpret in the present

adjacency - between - bowtie - Indyweb symmathesetic fingerprint - Indyweb symmathesetic folding - adjacency relationship - The bowtie framework is a key design feature of the Indyweb - Symmathesetic fingerprint and symmathesetic fingerprint, - derived from Cortical.io's concepts of - semantic fingerprint - semantic folding

epiphany - between - adjacency - bowtie - indyweb symmathesetic folding - Indyweb symmathesetic fingerprint - synchronicity - adjacency relationship - After making the above annotation, I was doing something else when this epiphany suddenly sprung up out of nowhere, as they usually do - Could it be that this the lower level (or higher level) system is the source of our epiphanies? Could this be the synchronicity that Michael Levin alludes to in another one of my annotations here? - Indeed, adjacencies - novel connections between already existent ideas in our associative network of ideas may be the human expression of Levin's - Bowtie AND - synchronicity - ideas - When we discover a new relationship between old (existing) ideas (engrams), that is a kind of reinvention or reinterpretation of an existing (old) idea in a new (salient) context. - This is what Levin is alluding to in the Bowtie and the radical caterpillar-to-butterfly example - We only make note of a new relationship because we implicitly recognize its saliency - Hence, the human being is - NOT a human being, - a name that implies a static thing, but rather, according to Deep Humanity terminology, - IS a human INTERbeCOMing, - a verb, a process that is in constant evolution - As we learn new relationships between existing engram ideas, - our symmathesetic fingerprint changes, - our meaningverse changes - and a new "human butterfly" is being born every moment

for - definition - human climate niche

• for: quote, quote - Stowe Boyd, quote - progress trap, quote - unintended consequences, unintended consequences, progress trap, cultural evolution, technology - futures, futures - technology, progress trap
• quote:
  • Technological change is an accelerant and acts on the social ills like pouring gasoline on a fire
• author: Sowe Boyd
  • consulting futurist on technological evolution and the future of work
• paraphrase
  • In an uncontrolled hyper-capitalist society,
    • the explosion in technologies over the past 30 years has only
      • widened inequality,
      • concentrated wealth and
      • led to greater social division.
    • And it is speeding up with the rise of artificial intelligence,
      • which like globalization has destabilized Western industrial economies while admittedly pulling hundreds of millions elsewhere out of poverty.
  • And the boiling exhaust of this set of forces is pushing the planet into a climate catastrophe. -The world is as unready for hundreds of millions of climate refugees as it was for the plague.
  • However, some variant of social media will likely form the context for the rise of a global movement to stop the madness
    • which I call the Human Spring
  • which will be more like
    • Occupy or
    • the Yellow Vests
  • than traditional politics.
  • I anticipate a grassroots movement
    • characterized by
      • general strikes,
      • political action,
      • protest and
      • widespread disruption of the economy
    • that will confront the economic and political system of the West.
  • Lead by the young, ultimately this will lead to large-scale political reforms, such as
    • universal health care,
    • direct democracy,
    • a new set of rights for individuals and
    • a large set of checks on the power of
      • corporations and
      • political parties.
  • For example,
    • eliminating corporate contributions to political campaigns,
    • countering monopolies and
    • effectively accounting for economic externalities, like carbon.

A somewhat indirect construction of human? Language is located in the mind? Therefore, humans have minds that they use for language? Or language that they use for minds?

Articulate:

Definition: (noun) Having or showing the ability to speak fluently and coherently; having joints or jointed segments; (verb) pronounce (something) clearly and distinctly; express (an idea or feeling) fluently and coherently; form a joint.

Origin: Mid-16th century: from Latin articulatus, past participle of articulare ‘divide into joints, utter distinctly’, from articulus ‘small connecting part.’

So while words vary widely and have no direct relation to the ideas they represent, tone is universal. Here we have another claim about the human: it is one who uses tone in a certain way.

This seems like a break from Locke, and possibly even from Hume.

A hu(man) has things other than ideas running through its mind.

Limitations are being set. If organs cannot be affected or if the affect isn't "sensible", what of the one experiencing it?

Oxford reference: "Not common sense in its ordinary meaning, but in Aristotle (De Anima, II, 1–2) and following him Aquinas and others, a central cognitive function that integrates and monitors the delivery of the other distinct senses, as when a shape is both seen and felt."

Kant discusses this concept extensively, but his definition is closer to "common sense" than Aristotle's.

Locke assumes that such a person does not exist, defining human as "one who understands all simple modes/ideas."

Restrictions on intelligibility and comprehension, which by extension imply a restriction on what's human or universal

i.e. one story's version of being human compared to another.Similar to what I was saying in the prior paragraph.

This brings us back to the point that the definition of human is similar to the definition of rhetoric. The more you try to define either, the more confusing and exclusionary each can get. Just like rhetoric, there is no one way to define human, but instead you stack all definitions on top of each other, without one superseding the others. The definitions are also situational, like Le Guin being human by this definition, but not by the previous one about killing.

Le Guin gives a definition of what it means to be human; the idea of theorists that humans must kill. Then, she makes it clear that this isn't the only definition of human, considering she's human and wouldn't/couldn't act in such a way. Then there's this awesome and gross little paragraph about women possibly not being human, but rather, defective and unworthy of having a say. Ouch.