Taking the bait

One of those neolithic buttons, that globe-trotting ideas push, triggers xenophobia. Taking the bait means that, once pressed, the drumbeat that "subhumans threaten" competes for attention with sustainability issues like community health.

For instance "lose-lose" situations now unfolding in Africa suggest that taking the bait is a long-term recipe for state failure, through oscillatory cycles of indiscriminate response and reactions thereto. Jared Diamond points to older examples in his book "Collapse". Have you noticed other examples say in the past 100 years?

Unfortunately focus on community health is not a useful sound byte, since it involves multiple scales of time, space, and organization. Nonetheless avoiding the bogeyman button could help us do what we can to strengthen all communities involved.

Dollars and longevity are not the whole story. The most robust measure of progress (or its lack) may be niche-layer multiplicity i.e. the extent to which individuals in a community are able to: (i) stay fit, (ii) cultivate friendships, (iii) care for a family, (iv) function as a citizen, (v) participate in a culture, and (vi) contribute as observer to our understanding of the world around.

What fraction of your time have you managed to spend on each of these things in the last week? If your ability to do some of these things is starting to suffer, then perhaps you too will benefit from a collective effort to make these things possible for all. How can I help?

Monoscale thought

James Fallows' November 2002 article in The Atlantic Monthly on Iraq as "The fifty-first state?" described the long-term commitment that later materialized. Institutions making sub-prime loans at this time were also selling long-term commitment while thinking on only one scale.

The arguments given at the time did little to inform resulting decisions to the consequences they would have in other places, at other times, and on other levels of organization. Considering more than one opinion in these cases may have helped.

Such examples might also say this about second opinions: If those who disagree with you look like cartoons, then you may be mistaking the world that you live in for a cartoon world. The real choices that we have are seldom so simple.

Reproducing codes

Only since the middle of last century has it become apparent that life is intimately connected to the ability of codes to replicate. These codes are variously written in molecules (e.g. DNA and proteins), in memorized actions (e.g. tradition), in sounds (e.g. song and speech), on paper (e.g. text and images), and in digital media. Codes evolve through selective replication, and in that sense play a role which is complementary to that of organisms and cultures.

If the foregoing is true, then we might want to pay attention to the fact that new kinds of codes are easily replicated on the web. In addition to letters for making words, whose replication took a giant leap with invention of the printing press and libraries, and sounds whose replication took a giant leap with the invention of audio recording and radio, two dimensional videos with sound are now recorded and able to traverse the globe in seconds. Although this doesn't change organisms per se, it may change the nature of communities just as circulatory and nervous systems (YouTube for molecules?) changed how individual metazoans get by.

How does this changing picture of code replicability serve to modify the various narratives by which we live?

Neolithic habit

An important ancestral use of language was probably the use of ideas to represent other humans. Do you know any folks who act as if the reduction of human beings to code was a perfect fait accompli?

Representing people with ideas is a useful, even necessary, approximation in today's immense global community. However the dangers of taking the equivalence, between a human and a category or stereotype, too literally are legion as well. What examples of this pop into your mind?

The fact that egregious examples of "human abuse via stereotype" seem to effectively employ radios, TV, and the internet may be telling us this: Ideas that can replicate by taking advantage of a neolithic trait will do so, whether it's in the interest of humans or not. If so we might want to figure out which fun-to-replicate ideas serve our collective interests, and which don't. How can we do that?