0065 Here is the first picture of cultural equilibrium after 2017.
Figure 25
In this cultural equilibrium, administrators2H, not faculty, adapt to the niche of an education system composed of instructors1H. Heying and Weinstein depart.
Here is a picture of how I configure the normal context3 and potential1 for the single actuality of higher education (after 2017)2.
Figure 26
0066 Where do Heying and Weinstein migrate to?
They enter another cultural equilibrium, discussed before, where professors adapt to the challenge of applying the lessons of biological evolution to life in the 21st century. The metaphorical genome of podcasting are individuals who sense that our current Lebenswelt is not the same as the Lebenswelt that we evolved in. We are adapted to the lifestyle of hunters and gatherers. But, that is not all, we are also adapted to the potential of triadic relations.
Here is a picture of a new single actuality2, guidance.
Figure 27
0067 Here is a picture of how I configure the normal context3 and potential1 for the single actuality of guidance (after 2017)2.
Figure 28
0068 Listening to a darkhorse podcast is more rewarding to a team of moderns (remember hunters and gatherers work in teams) than attending a formal lecture by an instructor who is grading on the curve. How so? The darkhorse podcast is a conversation geared to draw people into conversation. In the course of conversation, one learns information and how to be a member of a team. If one becomes a member of the podcast community, one joins the team.
The cost is small, compared to a college course.
0069 The exorbitant cost of higher education pays tribute to the long-held belief that certification opens the door to professionalism.
So, what happens when podcasts offer alternate certification?
Then, guidance2 will directly compete with higher education2.
0069 Chapter three (Ancient Bodies, Modern World) completes the author’s theoretical approach, which has been critiqued, using the philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce. The authors are not aware of a novel vision that encompasses their view that biological evolution involves adaptation into proximate niches of material conditions. The ultimate human niche is the potential of triadic relations. Why are hominins capable of switching proximate niches? All proximate niches are perfused with signs.
Heying and Weinstein are not alone in this regard. Few modern biologists (before 2023) have considered Razie Mah’s three masterworks, The Human Niche, An Archeology of the Fall, and How To Define the Word “Religion”, that pertain to the Lebenswelt that we evolved in, the first singularity, and our current Lebenswelt, respectively.
Yet, even without a well-articulated theoretical framework, Heying and Weinstein can draw lessons from biological evolution as it is currently configured, as if adaptations2H and phenotypes2V belong to the separate disciplines of natural history and genetics, and no one is quite sure how they belong to a single actuality.
Plus, disciplinary knowledge in biological evolution is superior to advocacy, in the same manner that a professor is superior to an instructor.
0070 Our bodies evolved in the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.
Our modern world in the 21st century is a hypernovel episode of our current Lebenswelt.
So, lessons from our biological evolution will show how our modern world is not so good for our ancient bodies.
0071 The remaining chapters contain applications.
Chapter four (medicine) applies guidance to the topic of medicine.
Figure 29
And, the cultural intersection looks like the following.
Figure 30
0072 At the end of chapter four, the authors offer a section called, “The Corrective Lens”, in which they encapsulate their guidance on medicine.
0073 For purposes of this examination, I will look closely at chapter five (Food).
Figure 31
0074 Guidance2, the intersection of professors2H and podcasting2V, enters into the nested form of postmodern internet education3 and situates the possibility of the authors’ disciplinary expertise along with their mission (which is to join your team at the same time that you join theirs)1.
0075 The chapter starts with two warnings. First, there is no fixed recipe as to what to eat. Second, food is not merely nutrition for survival. Eating food occasions social engagement. Yes, cooking is important. So, is eating with others. Know the culinary habits of your lineage.
Here is a picture of what the authors are offering.
Figure 32
0076 Here is how they proceed. Place food2 in the place for species2 as the single actuality2 that is composed of adaptation2H and phenotype2V. Then, consider the following intersection from more than one point of view.
Figure 33
0077 The first adaptation2H that comes to mind is cooking with fire2H. What does fire do to raw food? Elevated temperatures break down cellular and structural impediments to digestion. Cooked food provides more calories than raw.
The corresponding phenotype2V includes changes in the ways that we perceive flavors. Cooked food tastes good. But, that is not all. Cooking offers an occasion for everyone to eat together and talk. In the Lebenswelt that we evolved in,humans practice hand talk, which means that no one talks while eating raw food. But, with cooked food, one does not have to eat and eat and eat and chew and chew and chew to get nutrition. Plus, cooked food tastes better! Plus, afterwards, everyone can sit around the fire and enjoy conversation.
In this respect, after the domesticatin of fire, hunter and gatherers have it good.
Figure 34
0078 But, what about our current Lebenswelt? What about the 21st century?
0079 Our current Lebenswelt is one of specialization. After the mechanical revolution starting in the early 1800s, specialization increases beyond imagination. All sorts of new species of “food for humans” arise in the 21st century. And, one popular item is called, “fast food”.
On the horizontal axis, the normal context of product selection3H brings the actuality of processed food2H into relation with the potential of industrial food processing1H.
On the vertical axis, the normal context of business development3V brings the actuality of restaurants2V in line with commercialization1V. Commercialization1V appears to be like the genome1V. Think of brand recognition. Each brand has a slogan. Slogans are the DNA of advertising.
0080 Here is the resulting interscope.
Figure 35
0081 Well, that is my guess as to how the author’s discussion plays out.
Every inquirer will come up with a different scenario.
That is one beauty of this type of exercise.
0082 Once can replace restaurants with diet regimes. Once can replace processed food with vitamin supplements.
On top of that, different topics are available. Fire is just one. Fire is domesticated in the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.
What about other domestications?
Animal and plant domestication occurs much more recently. Sometimes it is hard to tell whether animal and plant domestication begins in the Lebenswelt that we evolved in as opposed to our current Lebenswelt. Dogs are domesticated in the Lebenswelt that we evolved in. What about pigeons?
0083 The topic of food shows me that there is a big difference between cooking2H and eating2V in the Lebenswelt that we evolved in and processed foods2H and restaurants2V in our current Lebenswelt. Guidance is required. Guidance2 is the single actuality that combines the professor2H and the podcaster2V.
0084 The same exercise of playing with intersections can be performed for the family, covering chapters seven (Sex and Gender), eight (Parenthood) and nine (Childhood).
Oh yeah, guidance is needed here. The authors provide valuable insights.
0085 As a complement to the authors’ guidance and insights on these topics, consider A Second Primer on the Organization Tier and A Primer on the Family, by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-work venues.
0086 In chapters ten (School) and eleven (Becoming Adults), the authors wrestle with 21st century social constructions that do not adequately conform with human adaptations that belong to the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.
On top of that, contemporary grammar schools, high schools and colleges in the modern West are… um… not what they were before 2017.
That ship has sailed.
On all levels, your instructors1H are now assigned2H to inform you, the student, of an actuality2a(1V) that guides the internal dynamics of the postmodern educational system2V: political advocacy.
More on that later.
0087 Former hunters and gatherers face questions, such as, “What are schools supposed to do? Why are the rituals of becoming an adult tied to modern schools?”
Yes, children are raised by parents. But, are schools more than an extension of parental authority? Yes, they are.
In terms of our evolutionary history, childhood and adolescence prepare the individual for a certain degree of specialization, characteristic of team activity.
0088 This allows me to propose, for the authors, an approach to include in their next book. After all, if anything, this examination shows that their guidance is the first step towards an entirely novel curriculum outside the bounds of higher education2.
0089 In the Lebenswelt that we evolved in, children and adolescents are “schooled” in the ways of team activities. Plus, each individual is given opportunities to compete to join a cooperative team. Each individual is expected to exercise his or her talents.
If there is guidance by adults who are not the parents of a child or an adolescent, then that guidance opens a door to joining a team activity. Teacher and student share risks within the team. Every success benefits the team, directly, and all social circles, indirectly. These risks and benefits accrue as the team encounters the world out there (the ecology and environment).
0090 Here is a picture.
Figure 36
0091 At this point, I can see that Heying and Weinstein’s book recapitulates an ancient paradigm, within the hypernovel world of the 21st century.
The student says, “Guide me.” The teacher says, “Join my team.”
Patronize the darkhorse podcast and join the team.
0091 What is team activity2?
Team activity2 is a genus-specific trait2 that regularly entails guidance by non-parental members of a band. Team-activities2 is a single actuality2 that contains adaptations2H and phenotypic traits2V. So, I can place the term, “team activities”, into the slot for “species” in the intersection for biological evolution.
Figure 37
0092 Now, I can make alterations to this intersection, based on literal and metaphorical interpretations of the elements.
0093 First, I alter the potentials, then the other elements of each intersecting nested form, as follows.
The genome1b((1V) decodes DNA2a. Similarly, one’s motivations1b decode one’s talents2a. Talent2a supports an internal motivation to join a particular team1V. The phenotypic expression2V is a desire to participate2V. To participate2V is to belong2 in the normal context of both individual and team development3V.
The niche1b(1H) is the potential of an actuality2a that is independent of the adapting species2a(2H).
What is the actuality that is independent of all team activities?
It is the world out there!
Adaptation2H occurs in the normal context of natural (the individual must perform the appropriate tasks) and cultural (the individual must work for the team and with other team members) selection3H. I call the adaptation competing to cooperate2H. I shorten the slogan to comp-to-coop2H. Comp-to-coop2H coheres to the definitions of direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity and altruism. Compete-to-cooperate2H explains their evolution. Comp-to-coop2H emerges from (and situates) diverse potentials of the proximate niche1H.
0094 Here is a picture of the adjusted intersection.
Figure 38
0095 Well, this does not look modern at all.
Where are the desks lined up in rows, facing the instructor? Where are the threats by administrators2H for instructors1H to tow the line of the latest trend in advocacy2a(1H)?
Take a look at the corrective sayings that Heying and Weinstein offers as guidance. Do not fear. Respect others. Follow fair rules. Protest unfair rules. Do not get comfortable. Do not get complacent. Take risks.
All these suggestions describe the intersection of team activities2, in the normal context of the Lebenswelt that we evolved in3, arising from the potential of our talents and the world out there1.
0096 How does the current state-supported education system twist our natural being into something that can be controlled in a top-down political regime?
It channels the competition to cooperate2H into state-defined (and regulated) specializations2H. In order to gain entrance into a specialization2H, one must attend school and become certified.
It channels the desire to participate2V into state-defined (and regulated) bodies of knowledge2V. One must go to school in order to achieve certification in regards to that body of knowledge2V. Mastery of the real separates professors2H (pre-2017) from instructors1H (post-2017). State-regulated bodies of knowledge may be real. Or, they may be fictions that high-level administrators want to be advocated. Who knows the difference?
0097 In the 21st century, expertise2 is the single actuality2 that encompasses specializations2H and certification2V.
Here is a picture.
Figure 39
0098 With this diagram in mind, take another look at what Heying and Weinstein have to say.
Plus, consider the trauma that they endured.
Higher education (post-2017) has become a gamed and rigged system.
0099 Surely, there is more to Heying and Weinstein’s guidance than meets the eye.
Higher education (post-2017) resolves the intersection, by removing all the mystery.
Perhaps, the mystery dissolves into ways that administrators and their political allies rig and game the system.
When an intersection breaks down (that is, when it loses its mystery), it resolves into a two-level interscope.
0100 The following two-level interscope resolves the contradictions of expertise2.
Figure 41
0101 The actuality of postmodern (and modern) specialization2b virtually emerges from and situates school certification2aas the gateway to participation in a state-regulated system. State-management1a channels personal motivations1a. So, jobs1b are never satisfying, because they satisfy regulatory requirements1a and simply assume that personal motivations1aapply.
0102 At this point, I look backwards to chapter three (Ancient Bodies, Modern World) and forwards into chapter twelve (Culture and Consciousness).
Consider the following figure.
Figure 42
Can I say that culture goes with adaptation2H and consciousness goes with phenotype2V?
Figure 43
If so, then the above figure re-articulates the mystery within chapter twelve. Chapter twelve juxtaposes culture2H and consciousness2V and plays the one off the other. But, in reality, these two actualities pertain to a single actuality2, the Homo genus.
0103 “Homo” is Latin for “man”. “Genus” is Latin for “general kind”.
Consider how modern wordplay has twisted the meaning, presence and message of these terms.
Then consider the value of this book, as well as Weinstein’s darkhorse podcast.
0104 Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein are professors, once adapted to the niche of higher education (pre-2017) and now adapting to the niche of podcasting (post-2017).
Currently, higher education eliminates the distinction between disciplinary mastery and educational mission. Higher education (post-2017) resolves the mystery of team activities into a rigged system of regulated specializations situating school systems that game certifications.
The niche of podcasting keys into the evolution of team activities. In order to join the team, one patronizes the podcast. The next step, a crucial endeavor, concerns certification. How does one certify what another person has mastered while listening to and supporting podcasts?
This is the question that I pose at the end of this examination of Heying and Weinstein’s book.
Surely, we need guidance in answering the challenge.
Can righteousness1aC be pictured or pointed to with hand talk?
Of course not, what is there to image or point to?
Yet, our hominin ancestors adapt to the niche of righteousness, in the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.
How can our ancestors adapt into a niche that they cannot label?
0094 In our current Lebenswelt, the term, “righteousness”, is an explicit abstraction. An explicit abstraction places a label on ‘something’ that we cannot image or indicate using hand talk. Such is the advantage of speech-alone talk.
0095 So how do we figure out what the term refers to?
We project reference into the term, “righteous1aC“, and construct artifacts… er, do I mean to say?.. organizational objectives2aC that validate the projections.
If that sounds circular, like some sort of feedback loop, then I can only conclude that humans are loopy. As long as the artifact, the objectorg2aC, continues to be relevant to the individual in communityA and the organizationB tiers, then the institution3aC remains, promulgating its righteousness1aC.
0096 As soon as the artifact is no longer salient, then who remembers?
0024 The first singularity2H is a hypothesis inhuman evolution2H.
The hypothesis explains why our current Lebenswelt is not the same as the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.
The hypothesis pertains to the start of our current Lebenswelt.
The hypothesis is plainly stated in The First Singularity and Its Fairy Tale Trace, available at smashwords and other e-book venues.
The hypothesis2H is dramatically portrayed, in tandem with originating sin2V, in the fiction, An Archaeology of the Fall.
This produces a balanced intersection.
Figure 06
0025 With this in mind, I digress, in order to discuss two complementarities between the contributing actualities (2H and 2V).
0026 The first complementarity matches the construction of what is in the Positivist’s judgment, as developed in Comments on Jacques Maritain’s Book (1935) Natural Philosophy. What is presents itself as an actuality, composed of two contiguous real elements, characteristic of Peirce’s category of secondness. But, this presentation is an illusion, because the two elements are really the same thing, regarded from two different vantage points.
The real elements are a noumenon (the thing itself) and its phenomena (the observable and measurable facets of the noumenon). According to Kant, a noumenon cannot be objectified as its phenomena. So, the contiguity is [cannot be objectified as].
The two contributing actualities complement one another in the following manner.
Figure 07
The Fall is like a noumenon. The first singularity models its corresponding phenomena.
0027 The second complementarity matches the distinction between primary and secondary causation, which plays a role in Comments on Armand Maurer’s Essay (2004) “Darwin, Thomists and Secondary Causality” (see July 2020 of Razie Mah’s blog).
Secondary causation describes what goes on in the Peirce’s category of secondness, the realm of actuality2.Primary causation describes what goes on in Peirce’s categories of thirdness and firstness, the realms of normal context3 and potential1.
Figure 08
The two contributing actualities complement one another as follows.
Figure 09
0029 This digression into the complementarity between the two contributing actualities reinforces the idea that they should balance.
In chapter four, Haarsma discusses human evolution2H, as configured before the hypothesis of the first singularity. Indeed, he does not place any importance to the start of civilization, which is potentiated by the first singularity.
Does he realize that almost all of human evolution predates the stories of Adam and Eve?
I wonder.
Plus, I chuckle.
0030 Why?
Saint Thomas Aquinas, the great medieval philosopher, argues that original sin is the lack of original justice.
So, the long period of human evolution2H is joined to original justice2H in the single actuality2 of the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.
Here is a picture.
Figure 10
0031 Wow. The size of the contributions match.
Plus, just as original sin2V asks theorists in modern Anthropology about a recent (and immaterial) natural transition in human evolution2H, which turns out to be the hypothesis of the first singularity2H,original justice2V challenges theorists in modern Anthropology concerning the nature of the ultimate human niche2H.
0032 At present, modern Anthropology has not confronted the concept of an ultimate niche in human evolution, now elucidated in the e-masterwork, The Human Niche. The ultimate human niche is not defined by material conditions. It is defined by an immaterial condition: The realness of triadic relations.
0033 The modern scientific community follows a rule: Actuality is all there is. Models are built from observations and measurements of material actualities. These models are couched in various disciplinary languages. In the empirio-schematic judgment, disciplinary language brings mathematic and mechanical models into relation with observations and measurements of phenomena.
0034 The problem?
Material actuality is not all there is.
0035 This point is obvious in the category-based nested form, derived from the semiotics-friendly philosophy of Charles Peirce. The category-based nested form manifests the realness of triadic relations.
In the nested form, a normal context3 bring an actuality2 into relation with the possibility of ‘something’1. The subscripts refer to Peirce’s categories of thirdness, secondness and firstness.
Material actuality2 is real.
Immaterial normal contexts3 and potentials1 are also real.
But, don’t tell that to modern anthropologists.
As soon as the hear, they will become “postmodern”.
0036 When a human encounters an actuality, the human does not understand. The human can observe and measure the phenomena associated with the actuality. The human may model these observations and measurements. The human may discuss the model using well-defined disciplinary language. But, understanding is not modeling.
Understanding is a triadic relation. Modeling is a dyadic formulation.
0037 Understanding concerns the noumenon, the thing itself. Actuality2 demands a normal context3 and potential1. Figuring out the normal context3 and potential1 leads to understanding.
Humans evolve to understand. Modeling things is only part of understanding.
0001 Matthew B. Crawford, at University of Virginia’s Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, publishes an essay at the website, UnHerd, on May 21, 2022. The website is worth investigating. Crawford is worth reading.
0002 But, that is not my only motive for this sequence of blogs.
It turns out that well-organized writers provide excellent material for triadic diagrams. These blogs aim re-articulate Crawford’s argument, following the technique of association and implication. The method is the same as with the other blog this month, concerning Vigano’s speech on how Vatican II serves the agenda of the Great Reset crowd.
0003 The title of Crawford’s essay is displayed in the header. The subtitle reveals the nature of the endgame. Liberal individualism has an innate tendency towards authoritarianism. That tendency manifests as real behavior.
0004 What is the real behavior?
Italian Giorgio Agamben (b. 1942) captures its essence with the political philosophical… or is it theological?.. label, “state of exception”. During the past eighty years, emergency declarations become more and more the norm. An emergency declaration inaugurates a state of exception and provides cover for top-down programs of social transformation.
0005 What do emergency-justified “liberal” projects aim to accomplish?
The core of the “liberal” regime is both political and anthropological: to remake humans.So, the answer depends on the meaning of “make”.
Two key political philosophers articulate two visions.
0008 John Locke (1632-1704 AD) regards humans as self-governing creatures. Humans are endowed with reason. Commonsense allows us to rule ourselves. Democracy is the mode of government most suitable for reasonable citizens.
Liberals remake humans by changing their votes.
Locke’s position may be re-articulated as a nested form. A nested form? See A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Form, by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-book venues.
Here is the nested form. The normal context of human nature3 brings the actuality of commonsense2 into relation with the potential of a form of governance suited for self-governing people1. Democracy1 labels that potential1. Democracy1 is the potential of a state arising from self-governing people1.
Here is a diagram.
Figure 01
0009 Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679 AD) claims that each human is vulnerable, especially in regards to other humans. Every person is vulnerable to the ambitions of other people. We need a state to protect us (from one another).
Liberals remake humans asking the government to protect them from harm.
Hobbes’s position may be re-articulated as a nested form.
The normal context of the state of nature3 brings the vulnerability of each person (especially with respect to other people)2 into relation with the possibility that the state will protect us (from ourselves)1. Hobbes has a label for a form of governance that manifests the potential of protecting us from one another. He calls it1 “leviathan”. Leviathan1 is the potential of a state capable of protecting us (from one another)1.
Here is a picture.
Figure 02
0010 From its inception, the liberal civic religion holds both Locke’s and Hobbes’s positions as a mysterious union. Of course, this union is filled with contradictions that cannot be resolved. But, that is the nature of mystery.
What is a mystery?The chapter on message, in Razie Mah’s masterwork, How To Define The Word “Religion”, describes a relational structure corresponding to mystery. An intersection of two nested forms portrays a mystery.
