for: social superorganism - vs human multicellular being, social superorganism, Homni, major evolutionary transition, MET, MET in Individuality, Indyweb, Indranet, Indyweb/Indranet, CCE cumulative cultural evolution, symmathesy, Gyuri Lajos, individual/collective gestalt, interwingled sensemaking, Deep Humanity, DH, meta crisis, meaning crisis, polycrisis

comment

• True, there is no physical cohesion that binds human beings together into a larger organism, but there is another dimension - informational cohesion.
• This informational cohesion expresses itself in cumulative cultural evolution. Even this very discussion they are having is an example of that
• The social superorganism is therefore composed of an informational body and not a physical one and one can think of its major mentations as collective, consensual ideas such as popular memes, movements, governmental or business actions and policies
• I slept on this and this morning, realized how salient Adam's question was to my own work
  • The comments here build and expand upon what I thought yesterday (my original annotations)
  • The main connections to my own sense-making work are:
    • Within our specific human species, the deep entanglement between self and other (the terminology that our Deep Humanity praxis terms the "individual / collective gestalt")
    • The Deep Humanity / SRG claim that the concurrent meaning / meta / poly crisis may be an evolutionary test foreshadowing the next possible Major Evolutionary Transition in Individuality.<br /> - https://jonudell.info/h/facet/?max=100&expanded=true&user=stopresetgo&exactTagSearch=true&any=MET+in+Individuality
      • As Adam notes, collective consciousness may be more a metaphorical rather than a literal so a social superorganism, (one reference refers to it as Homni
        • https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20140701-the-superorganism-engulfing-earth
      • may be metaphorical only as this higher order individual lacks the physical signaling system to create a biological coherence that, for instance, an animal body possesses.
      • Nevertheless, the informational connections do exist that bind individual humans together and it is not trivial.
      • Indeed, this is exactly what has catapulted our species into modernity where our cumulative cultural evolution (CCE) has defined the concurrent successes and failures of our species. Modernity's meaning / meta / polycrisis and progress traps are a direct result of CCE.
      • Humanity's intentions and its consequences, both intended and unintended are what has come to shape the entire trajectory of the biosphere. So the impacts of human CCE are not trivial at all. Indeed, a paper has been written proposing that human information systems could be the next Major System Transition (MST) that could lead to another future MET that melds biotic and abiotic
        • https://jonudell.info/h/facet/?max=100&expanded=true&user=stopresetgo&exactTagSearch=true&any=MST+-+information
        • or https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.frontiersin.org%2Farticles%2F10.3389%2Ffevo.2021.711556&group=world
      • This circles back to Adam's question and what has just emerged for me is this question:
        • Is it possible that we could evolve in some kind of hybrid direction where we are biologically still separate individuals BUT deeply intertwingled informationally through CCE and something like the theoretical Indyweb/Indranet which is an explicit articulation of our theoretical informational connectivity?
        • In other words, could "collective consciousness be explicitly defined in terms of an explicit, externalized information system reflecting intertwingled individual/collective learning?
    • The Indyweb / Indranet informational laminin protein / connective tissue that informationally binds individuals to others in an explicit, externalized means of connecting the individual informational nodes of the social superorganism, giving it "collective consciousness" (whereas prior to Indyweb / Indranet, this informational laminin/connective tissue was not systematically developed so all informational connection, for example of the existing internet, is incomplete and adhoc)
    • The major trajectory paths that global or localized cultural populations take can become an indication of the behavior of collective consciousness.
      • Voting, both formal and informal is an expression of consensus leading to consensual behavior and the consensual behavior could be a reflection of Homni's collective consciousness

insight

• While socially annotating this video, a few insights occurred after last night's sleep:
  • Hypothes.is lacks timebound sequence granularity. Indyweb / Indranet has this feature built in and we need it for social annotation. Why? All the information within this particular annotation cannot be machine sorted into a time series. As the social annotator, I actually have to point out which information came first, second, etc. This entire comment, for instance was written AFTER the original very short annotation. Extra tags were updated to reflect the large comment.
  • I gained a new realization of the relationship and intertwingularity of individual / collective learning while writing and reflecting on this social annotation. I think it's because of Adam's question that really revolves around MET of Individuality and the 3 conversant's questioning of the fluid and fuzzy boundary between "self" and "other"
    • Namely, within Indyweb / Indranet there are two learning pillars that make up the entirety of external sensemaking:
      • the first is social annotation of the work of others
      • the second is our own synthesis of what we learned from others (ie. our social annotations)
    • It is the integration of these two pillars that is the sum of our sensemaking parts. Social annotations allow us to sample the edge of the sensemaking work of others. After all, when we ingest one specific information source of others, it is only one of possibly many. Social annotations reflect how our whole interacts with their part. However, we may then integrate that peripheral information of the other more deeply into our own sensemaking work, and that's where we must have our own central synthesizing Indyweb / Indranet space to do that work.
    • It is this interplay between different poles that constitute CCE and symmathesy, mutual learning.
    • adjacency between
      • Indyweb / Indranet name space
      • Indranet
      • automatic vs manual references / citations
    • adjacency statement
      • Oh man, it's so painful to have to insert all these references and citations when Indranet is designed to do all this! A valuable new meme just emerged to express this:
        • Pain between the existing present situation and the imagined future of the same si the fuel that drives innovation.

quote: Gien

• Pain between an existing present situation and an imagined, improved future is the fuel that drives innovation.

for: Donald Winnicott, quote, quote - Donald Winnicott, quote - human INTERbeing, human INTERbeing, human INTERbeCOMing, white - humans INTERbeCOMing, DH, Deep Humanity, altricial, mOTHER, non-duality

quote: Donald Winnicott

• There is no such thing as a baby … if you set out to describe a baby, you will find you are describing a baby and someone.

comment

• what Winnicott says here is the essence of:
  • the Deep Humanity concepts of
    • the individual / collective gestalt and
    • human INTERbeCOMing,
  • the Buddhist concepts of:
    • emptiness,
    • non-duality in the human realm,
    • Indra's net of jewels in the human realm and
    • Thich Nhat Hahn's INTERbeing
  • complexity

• things are created from and expand from the mind

• There are different ways that you can interpret this,
  • but in its simplest form it means that
  • everything that we do in life begins with a thought or a feeling.
• The thought or feeling always precedes the action. / Comment: This is part of the philosophy of Deep Humanity that entangles inner transformation with outer transformation /
• Therefore the inner world, the spiritual world, drives the physical world. It is a mirror. / Comment: A Deep Humanity way to express this is to say that the outer world is a reflection of the cumulative inner world's of humanity/
• Everything that humans have ever done throughout our entire history
  • has begun as thoughts and feelings,
  • which then manifested as actions in the physical world.
• Our society is therefore shaped by the interaction between
  • our inner worlds and
  • the laws of nature.
• We cannot change the laws of nature
  • and so if we want to change the world,
  • we must focus our attention inwards. / Comment: Again, this is reflected in the Deep Humanity phrase: A stimuli occurs, the heart feels, the mind thinks, the body acts and an impact appears in our public, shared reality/

• I've been wondering if we are too focused on systems and actions
  • that we can do, rather than on ourselves as human beings and
  • what we can be.

• this is aligned to the Deep Humanity notion of the difference between:
  • human DOing vs
  • human BEing