Correspondence between Organism and Society
CE Stoicism acknowledges the idea of individuals composing a societies functions is like cells composing an organism's biological functions. However, CE Stoicism places greater focus on the idea that an individual's mind, a group's culture and society itself are each composed of one or more P-individuals.
metasystem transition
The metasystem transition is described in more detail here.
control the formation of associations of mental representations
For more about control of associations see here.
new mechanism of Universal Evolution
We see this new mechanism as comprised of memetic evolution and model-based knowledge building and control of associating mental representations.
Creative immortality
For further description, see here.
metaphysical immortality
See here for more information.
Cybernetic immortality
CE Stoicism de-emphasizes cybernetic immortality and instead emphasizes the idea of immortality in the form of a communally-created Paskian P-individual (sustained by many M-individuals).
will to immortality
Should we expect that the whole of humanity will unite into a single super-human being? This does not seem likely, if we judge from the history of evolution. Life grows like a pyramid; its top goes up while the basis is widening rather than narrowing. Even though we have seized control of the biosphere, our bodies make up only a small part of the whole biomass. The major part of it is still constituted by unicellular and primitive multicellular organisms, such as plankton. Realization of cybernetic immortality will certainly require some sacrifices --- a vehement drive to develop science, to begin with.
We do not foresee the integration off all humanity, even into a single cultural P-individual. Rather, there are and will be many, and many individuals are and will not affiliate with any. We do not use the "plankton" metaphor.
But it is the integrated part of humanity that will ultimately control the Universe. Unintegrated humanity will not be able to compete with the integrated part. This becomes especially clear when we realize that the whole Cosmos, not the planet Earth, will be the battlefield. No cosmic role for the human race is possible without integration. The units that take decisions must be rewarded for those decisions, otherwise they will never take them. Can we imagine "human plankton" crowded in rockets in order to reach a distant star in ten, twenty or fifty generations? Only integrated immortal creatures can conquer the outer space.
CEStoicism believes that certain cultural P-individuals with high fitness will be better competitors for survival, although expanding off Earth is not a priority.
even though present-day people can think realistically only in terms of creative immortality (although -- who knows?).
We believe present-day people can realistically think in terms of both creative and cultural P-individual immortality.
Current problems
In this section, replace all instance of "cybernetic immortality" with "cultural P-individual immortality".
the integrated super-being
aka, a cultural P-individual.
The problem of ultimate values is the central problem of our present society. What should we live for after our basic needs are so easily satisfied by the modern production system? What should we see as Good and what as Evil? Where are the ultimate criteria for judging social organization?
CEStoicism generally follows Principia Cybernetica's view of philosophy.
Also see Ecological Economic's ultimate ends.
16.Evolution and immortality Cybernetic integration of humans must preserve the creative core of human individual, because it is the engine of evolution. And it must make it immortal, because for the purpose of evolution there is no sense in killing humans. In natural selection, the source of change is the mutation of the gene; nature creates by experimenting on genes and seeing what kind of a body they produce. Therefore, nature has to destroy older creations in order to make room for the newer ones. The mortality of multicellular organisms is an evolutionary necessity. At the present new stage of evolution, the evolution of human-made culture, the human brain is the source of creativity, not an object of experimentation. Its loss in death is unjustifiable; it is an evolutionary absurdity. The immortality of human beings is on the agenda of Cosmic Evolution. 17.Evolution of the human person The future immortality of the human person does not imply its frozen constancy. We can understand the situation by analogy with the preceding level of organization. Genes are controllers of biological evolution and they are immortal, as they should be. They do not stay unchanged, however, but undergo mutations, so that human chromosomes are a far cry from the chromosomes of primitive viruses. Cybernetically immortal human persons may mutate and evolve in interaction with other members of the super-being, while possibly reproducing themselves in different materials. Those human persons who will evolve from us may be as different from us as we are different from viruses. But the defining principle of the human person will probably stay fixed, as did the defining principle of the gene.
CEStoicism does not desire the immortality of the individual, to which points 16 and 17 aspire. The evolution of culture/worldview/p-individual can occur with or without the indefinite continuation of individuals. Instead, creative immortality and cultural P-individual immortality suffice.
10.Global integration Turning to the future we predict that social integration will continue in two dimensions, which we can call width and depth. On the one hand (width), the growth of existing cultures will lead to the formation of a world society and government, and the ecological unification of the biosphere under human control. The ethics of cybernetical world-view demands that each of us act so as to preserve the species and the ecosystem, and to maximize the potential for continued integration and evolution. 11.Human super-beings On the other hand (depth), we foresee the physical integration of individual people into "human super-beings", which communicate through the direct connection of their nervous systems. This is a cybernetic way for an individual human person to achieve immortality.
On both points 10 and 11, CEStoicism differs with Principia Cybernetica. Rather than humanity integrating into a 'world society and government', CEStoicism believes that people are gaining more opportunities to discover an increasing number of non-geographic cultures/worldviews (which are themselves stable conceptual systems (SCSs), which they may explore and possibly join. SCSs converse with each other through conflict and cooperation, through interaction. These conversations may result in the emergence of more complex SCSs capable of broader and deeper conversation. Potentially, these SCSs may be semi-immortal in the sense that they have the possibility to continue propagating through human generations, if they maintain fitness. We de-emphasize the idea of human minds integrating through a technological/physical connection of their nervous systems. Instead, we see language and culture as the connection, which technology may support.
old religious systems are slowly but surely losing their influence.
CEStoicism is unsure if older religious systems, and the idea of metaphysical immortality, are losing their influence. However, we do agree that other forms of immortality are gaining appeal, including the immortality of stable conceptual systems (SCSs).
Where are we going to
See ultimate ends.
confront us with a choice
See free will.
Values
a framework that ties everything together
A coherent framework.
understand society, the world, and our place in it, and that could help us to make the critical decisions which will shape our future
The understanding is knowledge.
model
We understand knowledge as a model.
the theory of knowledge
Who are we
“Life is the universe experiencing itself, in endless variety.” -Alan Watts.
"Through our eyes, the universe is perceiving itself. Through our ears, the universe if listening to its harmonies. We are the witness through which the universe become conscious on its glory, of its magnificence." -Alan Watts.
See Pantheism.
world view
A world view is a broad stable conceptual system (SCS).
How should we act?
Stoic disciplines and virtues offer guidance for individual action. Deep Ecology, Ecological Economics and the Solidarity Economics offer guidance for collective action.
Link in page 227 of 'Neither Ghost Nor Machine'
explain
CDStoicism is an incomplete worldview, however the explanations of the world that it offers include cybernetics, ecology, cybernetics, biosemiotics.
(Help make it more complete)[https://cestoicism.neocities.org/Nomic.html].
In cybernetics an autonomous system or agent is conceptualized as a control system, which tries to achieve its goals or values by initiating the right actions that compensate for the disturbances produced by the environment. For that, it needs to perceive or get information about the effects of its actions and the effects of the events happening in the world.
A perception-action cycle
However, there seems to be a continuing trend towards global integration.
We believe the majority of integration is on a sub-global P-individual level. However, there remains a possibility that agreement among P-individuals can lead to the emergence of new P-individuals able to engage in further broader and/or deeper conversations with others, possibly on a global level.
As the computer network becomes more intelligent it starts to look more like a global brain or super-brain, with capabilities far surpassing those of individual people
We emphasize that the computer network itself does not have intelligence, agency and autonomy. It is the P-individuals conversing over the network that have intelligence, agency and autonomy.
A remaining question is whether this transition will lead to the integration of the whole of humanity, producing a human "super-being", or merely enhance the capabilities of individuals, thus producing a multitude of "meta-beings".
Again, we believe the integration is mainly towards sub-global P-individuals, with potential for greater eventual integration. However, given that P-individuals integrate and bifurcate over time, global integration is not necessarily a goal. Instead, a more-expansive conversation is a goal. Since a conversation is a P-individual in itself, a global conversation would be a global P-individual.
how they control their actions
CEStoicism coordinates itself with a nomic.
this problem
functional
The functional perspective is one of three main ways CEStoicism looks at things.
a way to make some number of copies from it, possibly with variations.
CEStoicism encourages both the formation of groups following its own nomic and entailment net, as well as similarly-concerned groups with different forms of self-coordination.
an additional mechanism which controls the behavior and production of the S-subsystems
Specifically, this mechanism is our nomic and entailment net.
In some situations the control mechanisms may come from a place external of the systems under control. For example, from a farmer (C) that controls many of the conditions/inputs of the plants (Sn) on the farm (S').
But in the situation of a true democracy (S'), the control mechanism (perhaps better called a coordination mechanism) comes from the people themselves (Sn). This coordination mechanism (C) is composed of a good-faith process where the people (Sn) create and edit the rules they agree to live under.
Constraint
Major transitions in evolution (Maynard Smith and Szathmary 1995) mark the generation of new coherences - that is, of new and overarching constitutive regimes that are the outcome of interlocking context-independent and context-dependent constraints.
A. Juarrero, Context Changes Everything, p.51
knowledge
existence
ultimate good
In Stoicism, the ultimate good is Eudaimonia.
Ecological Economics says we do not yet know what the ultimate end is.
specific deep questions
Such as these Eternal Philosophical Questions.
process
See Process.
Webster's dictionary.
See here. From that page:
Broadly speaking, philosophy has three concerns: how the world hangs together, how our beliefs can be justified, and how to live. — Jim Holt, New York Times Book Review, 15 Feb. 2009
states of affairs that they try to achieve and maintain, in spite of obstacles or perturbations
CEStoicism defines eudaimonia as a goal, attained by living with virtue.
equifinality
Besides stable equilibrium, equifinality also describes the 'release' stage of the adaptive cycle.
A goal, on the other hand, is something that determines a process, yet lies in the future.
The goal as something that is not present, but which the system works towards is an example of an absential.
by using the model it becomes possible to know something about the modelled process without actually running it, or predict developments before they actually happen.
We come, therefore, to the following definition: a piece of knowledge is an object which we can use to produce (generate) predictions or other pieces of knowledge.
The definition we are most interested in.
survival
Links to Survival.
proliferation
See r vs. k selection for two types of proliferation/survival strategies.
cybernetic immortality
CE Stoicism de-emphasizes and is uninterested in the idea of "up-loading" one's mind and instead emphasizes the idea of creative immortality achieved by an contantly-evolving Stable Conceptual System (SCS) that maintains high fitness.
Continuing constructive evolution is a possibility but not a necessity. Acts of will can contribute to evolution or counter it. Because of the natureof evolution, there is a fundamental difference between constructive and destructive contributions.
Living parts of existence that continue to survive) have periods of constructive evolution in the K-phase of their adaptive cycle, and also demonstrate resilience both within one cycle and throughout many cycles in a panarchy.
survival of the fittest
This is meant in its literal sense: That systems well-suited to their environmental niche are likely to recreate themselves in that niche.
Others misapplied this phrase to assert that the behavior of social groups is fixed and genetically-determined. This use of the phrase is called Social Darwinism, and is often used to justify racism. CEStocism does not agree with this interpretation and use of the phrase.
ultimate goals
See ultimate ends as defined in by Ecological Economics.
How much a given system will invest in one strategy at the expense of the other one depends on the selective environment. In biology, this is called r-K selection: in an r-situation, organisms will invest in quick reproduction, in a K-situation they will rather invest in prolonged development and long life.
The r- and K-situations correspond to different phases in the adaptive cycle. r is the growth or exploitation phase. K is the conservation phase.
An agent is the carrier of will, the entity that chooses between possible actions.
For a non-anthropomorphic agent like nature, 'choice' is done non-anthropomorphically, through randomness or by natural law/principle.
In accordance with Naturalistic Pantheism, we choose to not anthropomorphize nature.
representation
"Taking the transcendental idealism of Immanuel Kant as his starting point, Schopenhauer argues that the world we experience around us—the world of objects in space and time and related in causal ways—exists solely as ‘representation’ (Vorstellung) dependent on a cognizing subject, not as a world that can be considered to exist in itself (i.e. independently of how it appears to the subject’s mind). Our knowledge of objects is thus knowledge of mere phenomena rather than things-in-themselves. Schopenhauer identifies the thing-in-itself—the inner essence of everything—as will: a blind, unconscious, aimless striving devoid of knowledge, outside of space and time, and free of all multiplicity. The world as representation is, therefore, the ‘objectification’ of the will."
From Wikipedia's The World as Will and Representation
We understand will as the quality that allows to choose between the (possible) options and act.
For a non-anthropomorphic agent like nature, we believe 'choice' is done non-anthropomorphically, such as through randomness or by natural law/principle.
In accordance with Naturalistic Pantheism, we choose to not anthropomorphize nature.
It seems reasonable to speak of an agent which comes into being for the express purpose of causing an act of radioactive decay. At each moment in time this agent makes a choice bewteen decay and not decay. This immediately explains the exponential law of radioactivity
Again, for a non-anthropomorphic agent like nature, 'we believe choice' is done non-anthropomorphically, such as through randomness or by natural law/principle.
We differ from PcP here: Nature as an agent does not come into being. Rather nature itself is being, and exists throughout all time and space (as does nature's agency).
bootstrapping
See Bootstrapping
agreement between the different cognitive patterns of different individuals
Agreement between several p-individuals across several m-individuals. See Pask's Conversation Theory.
distinguishes us from the animals
We respect the specific definition of 'thought' defined by Principia Cybernetica, but we feel the real distinction of the human animal from other animals is humans' extensive use of fine-grained signs. We also stress that self-consciousness, tool making, imagination, planning, play, sense of humor and esthetic feelings are likely abilities/activities shared by some other animals, although maybe not to the same fine-grained ability as humans. We further stress that human are still animals.
which will bring us to a yet higher level of complexity or consciousness, transcending individual thought. This emergent level is perhaps best described by the metaphor of the social superorganism and its global brain.
CEStocism believes various forms of media already allow humanity to transcend individual thought, however the use and quality of media ranges widely, and this variety leads us to disbelieve that a single coherent superorganism or global brain will come about. Rather, we see the continuing evolution, interaction, merging and splitting of distinct worldviews or stable conceptual systems.
We also believe the future holds a chance of either or both: (a) A novel metasystem transition that allows for a continued greater conservation phase. (b) A significant risk of either a consequential collapse, release and reorganization of societal resources
An idea can furthermore support another idea by providing an explanation, evidence or arguments why the latter idea should be true
See Entailment Net
constructivism
See Constructivisim
selection
See https://cestoicism.neocities.org/selection
Also see Rachel Burnham's review (http://rachelburnham.blogspot.com/2019/07/review-of-curation-power-of-selection.html) of Michael Bhaskar's book "Curation. The power of selection in a world of excess" describes curation in terms of selection:
[Bhaskar] describes curation as 'using acts of selection and arrangement (but also refining, reducing, displaying, simplifying, presenting and explaining) to add value. ... He sees expert selection as at the start of good curation and quotes from Maria Popova, curator of the highly thought of 'Brain Pickings': "The art of curation isn't about the individual pieces of content, but about how these pieces fit together, what story they tell by being placed next to each other, and what statement the context they create makes about the culture and the world at large. This is, she argues, a process of 'pattern recognition'. Seeing how things fit together, understanding connections (which multiply in a networked environment), but then also, crucially, creating new ones by recombining them, is a massive part of curation."
Constraint
Major transitions in evolution (Maynard Smith and Szathmary 1995) mark the generation of new coherences - that is, of new and overarching constitutive regimes that are the outcome of interlocking context-independent and context-dependent constraints.
A. Juarrero, Context Changes Everything, p.51
Selective
Selection
See https://cestoicism.neocities.org/selection
Also see Rachel Burnham's review (http://rachelburnham.blogspot.com/2019/07/review-of-curation-power-of-selection.html) of Michael Bhaskar's book "Curation. The power of selection in a world of excess" describes curation in terms of selection:
[Bhaskar] describes curation as 'using acts of selection and arrangement (but also refining, reducing, displaying, simplifying, presenting and explaining) to add value.
...
He sees expert selection as at the start of good curation and quotes from Maria Popova, curator of the highly thought of 'Brain Pickings': "The art of curation isn't about the individual pieces of content, but about how these pieces fit together, what story they tell by being placed next to each other, and what statement the context they create makes about the culture and the world at large. This is, she argues, a process of 'pattern recognition'. Seeing how things fit together, understanding connections (which multiply in a networked environment), but then also, crucially, creating new ones by recombining them, is a massive part of curation."
constructivism
See Constructivism
An idea can furthermore support another idea by providing an explanation, evidence or arguments why the latter idea should be true
See Entailment Net
an additional mechanism which controls the behavior and production of the S-subsystems
Specifically, this mechanism is our nomic and entailment net.
In some situations the control mechanisms may come from a place external of the systems under control. For example, from a farmer (C) that controls many of the conditions/inputs of the plants (Sn) on the farm (S').
But in the situation of a true democracy (S'), the control mechanism (perhaps better called a coordination mechanism) comes from the people themselves (Sn). This coordination mechanism (C) is composed of a good-faith process where the people (Sn) create and edit the rules they agree to live under.
which will bring us to a yet higher level of complexity or consciousness, transcending individual thought. This emergent level is perhaps best described by the metaphor of the social superorganism and its global brain.
CEStocism believes various forms of media already allow humanity to transcend individual thought, however the use and quality of media ranges widely, and this variety leads us to disbelieve that a single coherent superorganism or global brain will come about. Rather, we see the continuing evolution, interaction, merging and splitting of distinct worldviews or stable conceptual systems.
We also believe the future holds a chance of either or both: (a) A novel metasystem transition that allows for a continued greater conservation phase. (b) A significant risk of either a consequential collapse, release and reorganization of societal resources
distinguishes us from the animals
We respect the specific definition of 'thought' defined by Principia Cybernetica, but we feel the real distinction of the human animal from other animals is humans' extensive use of fine-grained signs. We also stress that self-consciousness, tool making, imagination, planning, play, sense of humor and esthetic feelings are likely abilities/activities shared by some other animals, although maybe not to the same fine-grained ability as humans. We further stress that human are still animals.
agreement between the different cognitive patterns of different individuals
Agreement between several p-individuals across several m-individuals. See Pask's Conversation Theory
agreement between the different cognitive patterns within an individual's brain
Agreement between several p-individuals within one m-individual. See Pask's Conversation Theory
In cybernetics an autonomous system or agent is conceptualized as a control system, which tries to achieve its goals or values by initiating the right actions that compensate for the disturbances produced by the environment. For that, it needs to perceive or get information about the effects of its actions and the effects of the events happening in the world.
A perception-action cycle
explain
CDStoicism is an incomplete worldview, however the explanations of the world that it offers include cybernetics, ecology, cybernetics, biosemiotics.
(Help make it more complete)[https://cestoicism.neocities.org/Nomic.html].
by using the model it becomes possible to know something about the modelled process without actually running it, or predict developments before they actually happen.
It seems reasonable to speak of an agent which comes into being for the express purpose of causing an act of radioactive decay. At each moment in time this agent makes a choice bewteen decay and not decay. This immediately explains the exponential law of radioactivity.
Again, for a non-anthropomorphic agent like nature, 'we believe choice' is done non-anthropomorphically, such as through randomness or by natural law/principle.
We differ from PcP here: Nature as an agent does not come into being. Rather nature itself is being, and exists throughout all time and space (as does nature's agency).
We understand will as the quality that allows to choose between the (possible) options and act.
For a non-anthropomorphic agent like nature, we believe 'choice' is done non-anthropomorphically, such as through randomness or by natural law/principle.
In accordance with Naturalistic Pantheism, we choose to not anthropomorphize nature.
representation
"Taking the transcendental idealism of Immanuel Kant as his starting point, Schopenhauer argues that the world we experience around us—the world of objects in space and time and related in causal ways—exists solely as ‘representation’ (Vorstellung) dependent on a cognizing subject, not as a world that can be considered to exist in itself (i.e. independently of how it appears to the subject’s mind). Our knowledge of objects is thus knowledge of mere phenomena rather than things-in-themselves. Schopenhauer identifies the thing-in-itself—the inner essence of everything—as will: a blind, unconscious, aimless striving devoid of knowledge, outside of space and time, and free of all multiplicity. The world as representation is, therefore, the ‘objectification’ of the will."
An agent is the carrier of will, the entity that chooses between possible actions.
For a non-anthropomorphic agent like nature, 'choice' is done non-anthropomorphically, through randomness or by natural law/principle.
In accordance with Naturalistic Pantheism, we choose to not anthropomorphize nature.
How should we act?
Stoic disciplines and virtues offer guidance for individual action. Deep Ecology, Ecological Economics and the Solidarity Economics offer guidance for collective action.
Link in page 227 of 'Neither Ghost Nor Machine'
How much a given system will invest in one strategy at the expense of the other one depends on the selective environment. In biology, this is called r-K selection: in an r-situation, organisms will invest in quick reproduction, in a K-situation they will rather invest in prolonged development and long life.
The r- and K-situations correspond to different phases in the adaptive cycle. r is the growth or exploitation phase. K is the conservation phase.
ultimate goals
See ultlimate ends as defined in by Ecological Economics.
survival of the fittest
This is meant in its literal sense: That systems well-suited to their environmental niche are likely to recreate themselves in that niche.
Others misapplied this phrase to assert that the behavior of social groups is fixed and genetically-determined. This use of the phrase is called Social Darwinism, and is often used to justify racism. CEStocism does not agree with this interpretation and use of the phrase.
Continuing constructive evolution is a possibility but not a necessity. Acts of will can contribute to evolution or counter it. Because of the natureof evolution, there is a fundamental difference between constructive and destructive contributions.
Living parts of existence that continue to survive) have periods of constructive evolution in the K-phase of their adaptive cycle, and also demonstrate resilience both within one cycle and throughout many cycles in a panarchy.
Cybernetic Immortality
CE Stoicism de-emphasizes and is uninterested in the idea of "up-loading" one's mind and instead emphasizes the idea of creative immortality achieved by an contantly-evolving Stable Conceptual System (SCS) that maintains high fitness.
old religious systems are slowly but surely losing their influence.
CEStoicism is unsure if older religious systems, and the idea of metaphysical immortality, are losing their influence. However, we do agree that other forms of immortality are gaining appeal, including the immortality of stable conceptual systems (SCSs).
10.Global integration Turning to the future we predict that social integration will continue in two dimensions, which we can call width and depth. On the one hand (width), the growth of existing cultures will lead to the formation of a world society and government, and the ecological unification of the biosphere under human control. The ethics of cybernetical world-view demands that each of us act so as to preserve the species and the ecosystem, and to maximize the potential for continued integration and evolution. 11.Human super-beings On the other hand (depth), we foresee the physical integration of individual people into "human super-beings", which communicate through the direct connection of their nervous systems. This is a cybernetic way for an individual human person to achieve immortality.
On both points 10 and 11, CEStoicism differs with Principia Cybernetica. Rather than humanity integrating into a 'world society and government', CEStoicism believes that people are gaining more opportunities to discover an increasing number of non-geographic cultures/worldviews (which are themselves stable conceptual systems (SCSs), which they may explore and possibly join. SCSs converse with each other through conflict and cooperation, through interaction. These conversations may result in the emergence of more complex SCSs capable of broader and deeper conversation. Potentially, these SCSs may be semi-immortal in the sense that they have the possibility to continue propagating through human generations, if they maintain fitness. We de-emphasize the idea of human minds integrating through a technological/physical connection of their nervous systems. Instead, we see language and culture as the connection, which technology may support.
world view
A world view is a broad stable conceptual system (SCS).
bootstrapping
See Bootstrapping.
the theory of knowledge
Who are we?
“Life is the universe experiencing itself, in endless variety.” -Alan Watts.
"Through our eyes, the universe is perveiving itself. Through our ears, the universe if listening to its harmonies. We are the witness through which the universe become conscious on its glory, of its magnificence." -Alan Watts.
See Pantheism.
model
We understand knowledge as a model.
understand society, the world, and our place in it, and that could help us to make the critical decisions which will shape our future
The understanding is knowledge.
a framework that ties everything together
A coherent framework.
values
16.Evolution and immortality Cybernetic integration of humans must preserve the creative core of human individual, because it is the engine of evolution. And it must make it immortal, because for the purpose of evolution there is no sense in killing humans. In natural selection, the source of change is the mutation of the gene; nature creates by experimenting on genes and seeing what kind of a body they produce. Therefore, nature has to destroy older creations in order to make room for the newer ones. The mortality of multicellular organisms is an evolutionary necessity. At the present new stage of evolution, the evolution of human-made culture, the human brain is the source of creativity, not an object of experimentation. Its loss in death is unjustifiable; it is an evolutionary absurdity. The immortality of human beings is on the agenda of Cosmic Evolution. 17.Evolution of the human person The future immortality of the human person does not imply its frozen constancy. We can understand the situation by analogy with the preceding level of organization. Genes are controllers of biological evolution and they are immortal, as they should be. They do not stay unchanged, however, but undergo mutations, so that human chromosomes are a far cry from the chromosomes of primitive viruses. Cybernetically immortal human persons may mutate and evolve in interaction with other members of the super-being, while possibly reproducing themselves in different materials. Those human persons who will evolve from us may be as different from us as we are different from viruses. But the defining principle of the human person will probably stay fixed, as did the defining principle of the gene.
CEStoicism does not desire the immortality of the individual, to which points 16 and 17 aspire. The evolution of culture/worldview/p-individual can occur with or without the indefinite continuation of individuals. Instead, creative immortality and cultural P-individual immortality suffice.
The problem of ultimate values is the central problem of our present society. What should we live for after our basic needs are so easily satisfied by the modern production system? What should we see as Good and what as Evil? Where are the ultimate criteria for judging social organization?
CEStoicism generally follows Principia Cybernetica's view of philosophy.
Also see Ecological Economic's ultimate ends.
A goal, on the other hand, is something that determines a process, yet lies in the future.
The goal as something that is not present, but which the system works towards is an example of an absential.
equifinality
Besides stable equilibrium, equifinality also describes the 'release' stage of the adaptive cycle.
states of affairs that they try to achieve and maintain, in spite of obstacles or perturbations
CEStoicism defines eudaimonia as a goal, attained by living with virtue.
proliferation
See r vs. k selection for two types of proliferation/survival strategies.
survival
Links to Survival.
We come, therefore, to the following definition: a piece of knowledge is an object which we can use to produce (generate) predictions or other pieces of knowledge.
The definition we are most interested in.
Webster's dictionary.
See here. From that page:
Broadly speaking, philosophy has three concerns: how the world hangs together, how our beliefs can be justified, and how to live. — Jim Holt, New York Times Book Review, 15 Feb. 2009
process
See Process.
specific deep questions
Such as these Eternal Philosophical Questions.
ultimate good
In Stoicism, the ultimate good is Eudaimonia.
existence
knowledge
a way to make some number of copies from it, possibly with variations.
CEStoicism encourages both the formation of groups following its own nomic and entailment net, as well as similarly-concerned groups with different forms of self-coordination.
functional
The functional perspective is one of three main ways CEStoicism looks at things.
this problem
This will link to CEStoicism's Ecology page or a subpage within.
how they control their actions
The CEStoicism group coordinates itself with a nomic.
fragments of world views as a starting point.
We use the following starting fragments: Cybernetics, Ecology, Panarchy, Ecological Economics, Solidarity Economics, Modern Stoicism and Pask's Conversation Theory.
A remaining question is whether this transition will lead to the integration of the whole of humanity, producing a human "super-being", or merely enhance the capabilities of individuals, thus producing a multitude of "meta-beings".
Again, we believe the integration is mainly towards sub-global P-individuals, with potential for greater eventual integration. However, given that P-individuals integrate and bifurcate over time, global integration is not necessarily a goal. Instead, a more-expansive conversation is a goal. Since a conversation is a P-individual in itself, a global conversation would be a global P-individual.
As the computer network becomes more intelligent it starts to look more like a global brain or super-brain, with capabilities far surpassing those of individual people
We emphasize that the computer network itself does not have intelligence, agency and autonomy. It is the P-individuals conversing over the network that have intelligence, agency and autonomy.
However, there seems to be a continuing trend towards global integration
We believe the majority of integration is on a sub-global P-individual level. However, there remains a possibility that agreement among P-individuals can lead to the emergence of new P-individuals able to engage in further broader and/or deeper conversations with others, possibly on a global level.
confront us with a choice
See free will.
the integrated super-being
aka, a cultural P-individual.
Current problems
In this section, replace all instance of "cybernetic immortality" with "cultural P-individual immortality".
But it is the integrated part of humanity that will ultimately control the Universe. Unintegrated humanity will not be able to compete with the integrated part. This becomes especially clear when we realize that the whole Cosmos, not the planet Earth, will be the battlefield. No cosmic role for the human race is possible without integration. The units that take decisions must be rewarded for those decisions, otherwise they will never take them. Can we imagine "human plankton" crowded in rockets in order to reach a distant star in ten, twenty or fifty generations? Only integrated immortal creatures can conquer the outer space.
CEStoicism believes that certain cultural P-individuals with high fitness will be better competitors for survival, although expanding off Earth is not a current priority.
Should we expect that the whole of humanity will unite into a single super-human being? This does not seem likely, if we judge from the history of evolution. Life grows like a pyramid; its top goes up while the basis is widening rather than narrowing. Even though we have seized control of the biosphere, our bodies make up only a small part of the whole biomass. The major part of it is still constituted by unicellular and primitive multicellular organisms, such as plankton. Realization of cybernetic immortality will certainly require some sacrifices --- a vehement drive to develop science, to begin with.
We do not foresee the integration off all humanity, even into a single cultural P-individual. Rather, there are and will be many, and many individuals are and will not affiliate with any. We do not use the "plankton" metaphor.
will to immortality
Cybernetic immortality
CE Stoicism de-emphasizes cybernetic immortality and instead emphasizes the idea of immortality in the form of a communally-created Paskian P-individual (sustained by many M-individuals).
metaphysical immortality
See here for more information.
Creative immortality
For further description, see here.
will to immortality
See additional description here.
new mechanism of Universal Evolution
We see this new mechanism as comprised of memetic evolution and model-based knowledge building and control of associating mental representations.
control the formation of associations of mental representations
For more about control of associations see here.
metasystem transition.
The metasystem transition is described in more detail here.
Cybernetic Immortality
CE Stoicism de-emphasizes and is uninterested in the idea of "up-loading" one's mind and instead emphasizes the idea of immortality in the form of a communally-created Paskian P-individual (sustained by many M-individuals) that engages other P-individuals in conversations.
Correspondence between Organism and Society
CE Stoicism acknowledges the idea of individuals composing a societies functions is like cells composing an organism's biological functions. However, CE Stoicism places greater focus on the idea that an individual's mind, a group's culture and society itself are each composed of one or more P-individuals.
Regulation
It is defined here.
Ethics, introduction
"Ethics or moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct." - Wikipedia
CEStoicism has micro-ethics (what is right and wrong conduct for individuals) and macro-ethics (what is right and wrong conduct for groups).
CE Stoicism's micro-ethics are informed by Modern Stoicism and ecology.
CE Stoicism's macro-ethics are informed by solidarity economics and, again, by ecology.