Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 00:45:28 +1000 (EST)
From: Chris Lofting <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: SELF
In-Reply-To: <d8a291e4.243f5f35@aol.com>
Reading the 'scientism' discussion a thought the following may be of
interest re 'the self'.
The determination of 'self' requires the making of the distinction of
'self' from 'others'.
In other species (especially monkey) this distinction is not made in that
the behaviours of others is seen to be the result of self; 'I' made them
do 'X'.
IN humans the development of 'self' goes along with the development of a
precision oriented left 'thread' manifest as left hemisphere biases with
its emphasis on object distinctions and so independence rather than
relation patterns and so dependence.
With this bias comes an emphasis on the particular and so 'self' over
'others'.
This bias does not seem to be too common in lower lifeforms although there
does seem in some to be a hand preference, this manifesting the presence
of a 'precision' hemisphere and so a potental experience of 'self'.
Another property of this 'thread' is single context processing of data,
there is no distinction of text from context since both are seen as 'the
same'. As we shift right in our thinking so the use of analogy and
metaphor emerges as we move more and more into relational analysis and so
away from 'self' and more into 'others'.
The dichotomy of SELF/OTHERS (a one:many type of dichotomy) is fundamental
for us.
To 'escape' SELF we find that many religions use relational processes to
emphasis the entanglement with OTHERS where this includes 'nature' and all
that is 'out there'.
When we analyse thinking processes we see that one type of spiritual
exercise is to sink back into the context and 'dissapear'. The other type
is to expand into the context and 'drown' it with SELF.
Thus one favours taking over the context and so no distinction 'all is
one but this one is ME' and the other is to sink back into the context and
so all is one but the emphasis is on the universe (OTHER) rather than
SELF.
When we review the psychology and neurological functioning of the brain we
find that we can associate these behaviours with two fundamental modes of
behaviour, one is 'totalist' and the other 'aspectualist'. The former
emphasises identification, top reduce things so as to identify, and the
other emphasises re-identification, to exagerate, either positive or
negative and so 'confuse' or 'blur the edges' that allow for 'precise'
identification. This latter form is expressed in disguises etc where we
endevour to blend into or stick out from the immediate context.
Note that this aspectualist bias includes the 'sinking back into the
context' concept and it would seem that aspectualists favour this. But
then aspectualism is empiricism in that we study harmonics to analyse the
'thing'.
Rationalism is the reductionist bias where all is reducable to 'the one'.
This is more totalist than empiricism but BOTH manifest the WHOLE of us.
To assert that 'the self' does not exist etc etc is an aspectualist
manifestation where if you keep looking at relationships so the objects
just dissapear, and vica versa.
It is possible that the left brain bias has emerged as a result of
language precision and so there is a skewing of symmetry such that we see
'attractors' form. We know that the left thinks in 'jumps' due to the
object bias but these may be more like vortices (remember vortex atoms?)
in that they manifest distortions in relational space.
We must be wary in our distinctions applied to 'out there' in that there
is a root format that is symmetry prone and asexual/androgynous. This also
has a strong oppositional process (helps to maintain symmetry). The
secondary format emerges through sexual categorisations and skews the
symmetry of the 'root' format.
These two 'fundamental' modes of categorisation reflect the left/right
biases of our brain in that the symmetry prone type seems to be left
biases and the skewed symmetry, emphasising relationships, is right
biased.
Thus left biased thinking is archetypal, object oriented, and stresses
independence and so opposition or at best tolerance. Everyone does their
own thing and reality comes from the interference patterns. With this
comes a sense of SELF (and abstracted to fundamentalist faiths in the
'one' GOD, all of these are 'totalist' in thinking)
Right biased thinking is typal, relationships oriented, and stresses
dependencies and so relationships. With this comes a sense of OTHERS and
an emphasis on harmonics analysis, sensory experiences. (the right brain
does better at processing harmonics of vision (colour) and audition
(chords), these can elicit refined emotional experiences. The left is
single context and so more BLACK/WHITE or else one colour only or else a
single tone. In music this serves as the key).
These properties of thought affect our categorisation processes to such a
degree that if you are not careful you will confuse properties of the
method of analysis with properties of things 'out there'.
best,
Chris.
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit