STP

I believe the DARPA website mentions the role of the military in making changeover transitions. Energy is probably the largest area of transition for the military due to its importance.

You are confusing 'cooperation' with 'altruism'. Every member of a community gains from cooperating; cooperation isn't altruistic. I'm gonna try to recap. Ok, so first of all, I start out by saying: "...one way to look at the world as we know it..." Then I made a statement about 'Darwinian' intending to imply its classical meaning but one that is primarily kept alive by Richard Dawkins (The Selfish Gene guy). The basis was that 'competition' and/or other antagonistic behavior such as predator-prey relationships (eating) is an evolutionary 'race' (but in reality it seems more like that example of the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland). There are 'costs' associated to maintain reproductive survival. But here's the kicker: Even though it appears that what drives evolution at the species level appears to be undirected is there some 'teleology of life' and does it operate as epiphenomenon or emergent property or as some 'Grand Design'. Ok, you can probably guess which camp I'm in but I'm leaving enough room for synthesis. (Now, I’m a shitty writer so you might get lost but here goes…) For instance, the history of life: 4.6 bya earth formed (somewhere early on meteorites/comets/debris hit early earth; one huge fucker swipes the area known today as the Pacific, throwing debris into earth orbit and which coalesces as our moon), 3.8 bya signs of 1st life in fossil record…then we have up to six formations of supercontinent (Proto-Pangea, Pangea). From early earth primarily dominated by CO2 from degassing volcanoes there is a secular trend through time and operating through both organic and inorganic feedback loops for CO2 drawdown and buildup of O2. Superimposed on the large scale trend are smaller scale trends driven by exogenic (astronomical like Milankovitch cycles) and endogenic processes so that O2 fluctuates around 21%, sometimes higher during efficient oceanic upwelling (enhanced carbon burial), evidence of wildfires, etc but SIGNIFICANTLY changes in life appear in fossil record. Now, basically there are two organism trends, one in invertebrates (exoskeleton, size and nervous system restriction) and the other in vertebrates (endoskeleton, etc)—filling of niches by convergent evolution as these two lines approach the same problem from different angles (no prior directedness implied here)—for instance, the evolution of the eye, flight, etc…invasion of land preceded by plant and perhaps fungal life (plant/fungal symbiosis beginning as parasitism or infection). Overall biological evolution precedes with something you could call ‘terraforming’, for instance, formation of soils, not entirely biologically mediated but sure as hell enhanced by microbes, for instance. On land you see weathering of continental rocks that yield silica to the seas which in turn provides raw material for things like diatoms—there’s enough variety in life from the formation of the major phyla (bauplans) during the preCambrian (Ediacaran) so that life is ‘fruitful and multiplies’…but problems remain difficult to explain like the ‘sudden’ appearance in the fossil record and adaptive radiation of mammals although precursors are evident by looking at body parts such as the ear (mosaic evolution) but yeah problems because limitations of preservation in the fossil record--'rapid speciation followed by stasis'(punctuated equilbrium of Gould & Eldridge). Thinkers outside the box like Hoyle suggest ‘seeding’ from space…Some other suggestions for change on macroevolution scale include something along the lines of Fischer-Tropsch reactions with major plate tectonics resulting in production of oil and other organic compounds some of which may be mutagenic….?....Development of nervous system coincident with development of senses and body changes for locomotion through spatial dimension…bigger brains…climate change….picture of earth from space…water on mars…quantum computers...etc…. Do ya get the picture?? Anyway I have nothing against Tvash, Gary, or anyone else…just clarification nothing more. So the question is: “Is there a ‘teleology of life’ at one scale of observation (or ‘Grand Design’ but different of course from fundamentalist, literalist Bible thumpers conceptions of our world) while having another mechanism at another scale? There I said it.

Yep. Flowers smell and appear more attractive to get pollinators. They give the bees nectar. The bees adapt to see flowers better, e.g., in uv, carry pollen better, become social, etc Gary, I don't really have any problem with what you're saying but aren't you making an 'a priori' assumption. I mean, you do have a Ph.d., right? Isn't this the point that Stephen Jay Gould had tried to express, not by casting doubt upon evolution, but rather to clarify it? For instance, take this example: The Jesus Christ hypothesis for the evolution of flight

Heyyyyy, are you channeling Kropokin?

With regard to the future, realistically it could go either way, in our lifetime we saw the reorganization of Europe and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. So the future. Try to imagine the confluence of large scale trends superimposed with 'black swan' events. Will this be a momentary bump on the upward trajectory, a long decline (and regression), a rapid decline, a long stasis, or will this eventually smooth out when viewed at a different scale as we approach the Singularity? As far as my family, perhaps I would favor martial law over anarchy. Although I am uneasy about either alternative. The status quo isn't so bad.

Mea culpa. Sure. there's selective advantage in mutualistic or commensual relationships but the point I made originally when I mentioned "Darwinian" was that these relationships begin as antagonistic behavior. If you want to carry it to the cultural realm, then competition and/or war leads to accelerated technological scientific development. Not that I favor war but paradoxically it can function as a progressive force in history.

Regarding species with higher brain function (birds, monkeys etc), if you're not aware by now that they have consciousness, emotions, and intents, well, you don't get out much, do you? Little advice here: try sticking to subjects you know at least a little about. You're a smart guy, but you don't know jack shit about animal behavior. Right. You're on the cutting edge of atheism. Yes, morality is derived from nature not God. But that doesn't quite explain why you're such an asshole.

Ha,ha,ha...sure it could be a reading comprehension thing or you could just be an obtuse writer. You're interjecting your own sociobiology onto animal behavior to justify your beliefs. Isn't it more of an epiphenomenon or emergent property of competition or otherwise antagonistic behavior rather than the other way around?

Well if you invoke altruistic behavior then you're inferring a conscious intent which I don't believe is present. Mutualism is inadvertent. The bacteria in your gut exist because you swallowed something and tried to digest them. Only later did the beneficial effect arise. Similarly with symbiotic zooanthellae in reef corals. The coral's tentacles grasped the photosynthetic plankton but they were not digested. In time the calcareous secreting function of the corals was enhanced by freeing energy previously used in metabolism. Etc. So are you saying that angiosperms and bees evolved simultaneously?

Looks like Obama made his picks for CIA director and for director of national intelligence.

DON'T QUESTION AUTHORITY!

Yes, yes, that's the specifics. But what is the mission? Is it essentially to protect "American" business interests? To project "American" influence globally? Just what the hell does "American" mean?

Two Lawyers--Yale Law School Commencement Remarks May 22, 2006 (Amended 5/25/06)

I dunno, what's the mission of the NSA and the CIA?

So let me get this correct, what you're saying is that altruism is an essential part of evolutionary biology. I do believe you're talking out your ass.

Oh, shit! I think the zombie apocalypse is imminent. Elliot Wave analysis predicts we are riding a Grand Super Cycle degree wave 4. As if Things Weren't Bad Enough, Russian Professor Predicts End of U.S. --Wall Street Journal

As an aside, one way to look at the world as we know it, Darwinian evolution as the history of life has been one of competition, a race between the strong and the weak. The survivors in the realm of action have an advantage such as more efficient senses, mobility, protective shielding, or the most effective means of all: intelligence. There is a tradeoff between traits, for instance, in time the squid lost its shell seen in some other cephalopods so that it could utilize speed. Some creatures drop out entirely from the field of action by retreating to refugia only to reemerge in some future time. The question is whether there is an teleology of life so that Darwinian evolution is informed by something other than chance.

Well, if you believe that religion is the root cause of the conflict then you have to address it from that standpoint. Look at the religious texts and tell me what they say is the basis of wisdom. Wisdom is not intelligence and wisdom that is not informed by love is not true wisdom. Now I'll make an assumption for the sake of argument and say that I believe the Jews as a people on average are more intelligent, so it remains what they do with this intelligence that determines the outcome. They are still waiting for their messiah (the religious ones anyway, not the atheistic ones). So the question becomes will their messiah take them out of their historical path, one which has seen repeated building towards communion with G-d, a falling away yielding to destruction, etc. So what does the convenant mean? Does the Jewish identity necessarily mean the establishment of a temporal realm of space or does it transcend place so that each individual in a collective identity carries an imaginal ark of covenant in his own heart? The killing, the pain of attrition will continue as another wise man said, until "an eye for any eye makes the whole world blind." Now what do the texts say about the first commandment, i.e., to seek to know G-d? Of course, there is danger in seeking to immanentize objectives from the yet unformed realm.

Oh, shit. Shocker: Huffington Post carries climate realist essay

Just take one look at that mullet and tell me it isn't criminal.

I don't know much about the practical mechanics of a peace process (re: where to place reasonable boundaries). It would seem in that particular case to be predicated on certain assumptions. So, I happen to think that ideology and identity play a greater role in forging a future peace. It really has more to do with the ethics of place. For instance, here's a short read: Can the Jewish People Survive Without an Enemy?--Time.com What Avrum Burg says is more in line with the sentiments expressed by Albert Einstein, as mentioned in my earlier post. Now for a particular example, take the Temple Mount and read Gershom Gorenberg's take on it ( Gershom Gorenberg on The Temple Mount--Religion and Ethics Newsweekly). I think there is wisdom in what he says. As an aside, the following may not have relevance here or it may: Cursed is the man who moves his neighbor's boundary stone. (Deuteronomy 27:17) Now, I can't argue the finer points of theology. Of course, there may be more than meaning, for example, a literal meaning and another hidden meaning. Maybe Moses Maimonides has the answer.

It just seems to constantly go round and round but there's even a social price to be paid for seemingly momentary victory: Former Israeli Soldiers "Flipping Out" in India--Jewish Post At some point, even if the funding and the supply of weapons is curtailed, ideology lies at the heart of the issue and a large part of that ideology is identity. --Albert Einstein, Our Debt to Zionism , 1938

If I understand correctly, we have applied in Iraq what we have learned from the Israelis regarding urban warfare. I suggest that the Middle East is just another petri dish for development of techniques that can be put into practice if the need should arise closer to home. Some of the other areas of application would include enhanced psychological techniques of coersion and neutralization, non-lethal crowd control, border checkpoints, identification technology, etc. We have already trained military personnel in these techniques, some of who will transition into the law enforcement field. The 'enemy' can as easily transform from Arab Muslims to domestic dissidents. But of course it'll never happen in America. We're much too enlightened. And get this, not just the practical aspects but the theoretical as well. Some quotes: --- The Art of War Well, you get the drift. And so it goes... BTW, I found this great video: [video:youtube]vuyRCfhCZT0

Look I'm not an economist either. And although I'm not a journalist by trade, I fulfill a similar function as him, as propagandist. But I don’t feel as bound as he appears to be by ideology. I spend a lot of time trying on ideas since I frequently have more questions than answers. So it comes down to this: even the expert economists are having a difficult time with explanatory models and their depictions of reality: Blindsided by crisis, economists rethink profession along with theories—The Boston Globe. Personally, I think economists do interesting work, for instance: Estimating the Economic Value of Ice Climbing in Hyalite Canyon: An Application of Travel Cost Count Data Models that Account for Excess Zeros--Social Science Research Network (as referenced here: http://paul.kedrosky.com/). But the work I find most interesting are those efforts that examine the intersection with the moral dimension. Maybe Friedman does that. But to some extent, it is about control, for instance, to increase consumption patterns by seeking to understand human behavior. So, here’s the digg [sic], I have a hard time with justifying the fleecing of America by people who see that the larger goal of profit-making takes precedence at the expense of and over the welfare of the people. I don’t have specific qualms about the goal of the business model but about the ethics of means. --source: Millions of monkeys So, when a financier produces an exotic instrument whereby someone of lesser means can achieve the unthought-of, then that raises a red flag. It’s ok in a limited sense but when it balloons to the extent where it can produce the effects that we’re seeing, then something’s fucking rotten in the state of Denmark. Here’s a graphic to ponder: http://voltagecreative.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/bailout-pie.png

Ok, here's my critique, albeit weakly developed: Friedman’s worldview is dominated by ‘cornucopian’ ideas, that technology will be our saving grace, ideas exemplified by the late economist Julian Simon. However, there is a potential disconnect between this and the ideas he expresses in closing. The question is how does one prevent a type of technofascism from suppressing individualism? When does our savior become our oppressor? With one eye on blind patriotism if we look at the contemporary situation, one asks whether Europe has a better grasp on a philosophy as guiding principle but more importantly if they will emerge sooner out of the present crisis positioned for dominance. Here we have the ideas expressed in Schiller’s Ode to Joy (expanded by Beethoven), the spirit of which takes them into the future. The birth pangs were many and devastating in extent but each time resulting in a ‘creative destruction’ leading to a higher arrangement. So today, the fires in the East (Greece, Ukraine) threaten the union. Or perhaps someone from Iceland takes up the mantle of ‘William Tell’ and produces a crack in the ice that represents the veneer of European unity. If developments in Britain and to some extent Germany are any indicators then the application of technology, for instance, surveillance tools, will be used to locate the incipient tears in the social fabric. Then the application of force will be the glue that holds the social fabric together. The problem essentially, as I see it, is one of translating knowledge into action (praxis). And to proceed we have to reexamine the table of values (Nietzsche). Should we really direct our motivation into space, for instance, space based solar arrays, because at the bottom of this exists a cold war struggle (the fear of technological superiority)? Or have we entered a new age, a new order, where endeavors such as the International Space Station, the HLC, are truly world entities, no longer national but representing a global ‘rhizome’ (Deleuze & Guattari)? Maybe the focus does not necessarily rest contigent on spatial historical relations but should rather decouple from the material plane itself. The threat of systemic risk has presented itself as a special case of a ‘crisis in capitalism’. But is it actually a function of the size of the entity or is it rather a crisis of confidence, of trust, so that it raises the spector of moral hazard that lies at the heart of the problem? With globalization if the size of the entity is the issue then that is an argument against itself owing to its own inherent instabilty. Addendum: [video:youtube]vXuhvzbQ5EI [video:youtube]_0v07InoFiU So, what is our vision?