by that^ I mean how would any philosophy get started, if metaphysics has its origins and foundations in human cognitive variation

how much of philosophy got started with a casual swapping of notes about whatever seeming different to two people, or more

I guess some twins are near identical, trouble with that as an example is no neural unfolding or branching is ever exactly the same, in the womb and after, just a couple of alcoholic drinks in the second month could accelerate the divergence

anyway, to the subject proper…

what if humans are more like clones than is apparent. Sure there’s plenty of difference, but what if the clone problem really existed, in a lesser way, but still substantive in effect, sort of null territory

say if genetic engineering came up with an ideal creature, of human form, strongly resembling, call it Adam, and cloned from it

it’s just a thought experiment, brush away the impracticalities to get started, then roll back the extreme example to something more likely of the real world, to structures that are replicated with enough fidelity, in enough examples in the population, that they qualify as cloned, loosely of course, to be generous

transition said:

by that^ I mean how would any philosophy get started, if metaphysics has its origins and foundations in human cognitive variation

how much of philosophy got started with a casual swapping of notes about whatever seeming different to two people, or more

I guess some twins are near identical, trouble with that as an example is no neural unfolding or branching is ever exactly the same, in the womb and after, just a couple of alcoholic drinks in the second month could accelerate the divergence

anyway, to the subject proper…

what if humans are more like clones than is apparent. Sure there’s plenty of difference, but what if the clone problem really existed, in a lesser way, but still substantive in effect, sort of null territory

say if genetic engineering came up with an ideal creature, of human form, strongly resembling, call it Adam, and cloned from it

it’s just a thought experiment, brush away the impracticalities to get started, then roll back the extreme example to something more likely of the real world, to structures that are replicated with enough fidelity, in enough examples in the population, that they qualify as cloned, loosely of course, to be generous

> how would any philosophy get started, if metaphysics has its origins and foundations in human cognitive variation

Um, I’ll get back to you on that one.

> what if humans are more like clones than is apparent.

Now that one I can answer. We are. There is only about as much genetic variation within the entire human race as there is within a single tribe of chimpanzees, not much.

Another species with a similar, and even stronger, genetic bottleneck is the cheetah.

One consequence of the genetic bottleneck is a lower incidence of murder among the clone-like humans (and cheetahs) than among chimpanzees and gorillas (and lions and leopards) for instance. This has allowed humans to work together to solve problems, much more so than among most other species. All one big happy family, mostly.

And the genetic similarity also ties in with similarity of thought. Humans all tend to be ignorant about the same things, such as the subtleties of inter-species communication and the vital importance of smell.

People of high intelligence and high creativity tend to tend to be more original in their perspectives than people of low intelligence and low creativity. Thus if the entire species became more intelligent and more creative, the diversity of human experience would increase.

Bubblecar said:

People of high intelligence and high creativity tend to tend to be more original in their perspectives than people of low intelligence and low creativity. Thus if the entire species became more intelligent and more creative, the diversity of human experience would increase.

subtract 1 x tend to

Bubblecar said:

People of high intelligence and high creativity tend to tend to be more original in their perspectives than people of low intelligence and low creativity. Thus if the entire species became more intelligent and more creative, the diversity of human experience would increase.

It’s a QI question, to what extent clones would think differently if they had been raised separately.

I suggest probably more than transition suggests, but less than bubblecar implies.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bubblecar said:

People of high intelligence and high creativity tend to tend to be more original in their perspectives than people of low intelligence and low creativity. Thus if the entire species became more intelligent and more creative, the diversity of human experience would increase.

It’s a QI question, to what extent clones would think differently if they had been raised separately.

I suggest probably more than transition suggests, but less than bubblecar implies.

it’s entirely a thought experiment, I have no position on the divergent potentials of clone-propers

last night Michael and I touched on the subject of qualia

now, regardless whether you think much of an idea like qualia, the fact is some of the processing wetware is not accessible for mediation by conscious thought, pick a color in the rainbow you like, your sensation of that can’t be forced into another color sensation by force of thought, or will. Rainbows don’t even exist as you experience them outside that processing

anyway the thought experiment is a device, possibly a useless one, to ask the bigger question of what else, of say thought or ways of perceiving, even conceptualizing, the common shared experience of the world, the structure of thought even, categories etc, are generated and limited by hardwired processing in the wetware

I put the idea because to large extent, best I see it, philosophy starts with casual swapping of notes about how whatever seems, differences or anomalous aspects compared, so they, that territory is important to philosophy, so I suggested cognitive variation, or spread across the population is important

but what of cognitive territory that is so uniform across the population, as to be invisible, null strange, no anomalies, attracts no attention

what if we all had blonde hair and blue eyes, would we find something else to fight about

SCIENCE said:

what if we all had blonde hair and blue eyes, would we find something else to fight about

Only if we were siblings, then we’d try to murder one another.

Just kidding. Fights break out typically over scarce resources, but also because we like to fight.

>> how would any philosophy get started, if metaphysics has its origins and foundations in human cognitive variation

> Um, I’ll get back to you on that one.

To answer that, need to go back to first principles. Start by looking up the proper definition of metaphysics.

1. the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, identity, time, and space.
2. abstract theory with no basis in reality

Should I set definition 2 aside? Or include it? ;-)

Human cognitive variation doesn’t have to be a variation between different individuals. It could be a variation within one individual over a period of time. Take Plato’s analogy of the cave for example. So long as Plato has at different times been inside and outside a cave, there is nothing to stop him from coming up alone with the analogy of the cave.

Also, I find the cognitive variation between the different senses a source of metaphysics. From the cognitive difference between touch and sight, I could derive the parable of the blind men and the elephant.

From the time difference in my own heartbeat I could derive a metaphysics of time, from my own footsteps a metaphysics of space. From self-observation come up with Descartes “I think therefore I am”. From the use of tiles come up with Cartesian space.

The existence of humanity as a set of identical clones would not be an impediment to the starting of philosophy and metaphysics.

But, if the set of clones leads to the aligning of Johari windows between individuals, then that would delay the rate of growth of philosophy and metaphysics, because that which is originally unknown would take longer to become known than it would if the Johari windows were misaligned.

Get me?

mollwollfumble said:

SCIENCE said:

what if we all had blonde hair and blue eyes, would we find something else to fight about

Only if we were siblings, then we’d try to murder one another.

Just kidding. Fights break out typically over scarce resources, but also because we like to fight.

>> how would any philosophy get started, if metaphysics has its origins and foundations in human cognitive variation

> Um, I’ll get back to you on that one.

To answer that, need to go back to first principles. Start by looking up the proper definition of metaphysics.

1. the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, identity, time, and space.
2. abstract theory with no basis in reality

Should I set definition 2 aside? Or include it? ;-)

Human cognitive variation doesn’t have to be a variation between different individuals. It could be a variation within one individual over a period of time. Take Plato’s analogy of the cave for example. So long as Plato has at different times been inside and outside a cave, there is nothing to stop him from coming up alone with the analogy of the cave.

Also, I find the cognitive variation between the different senses a source of metaphysics. From the cognitive difference between touch and sight, I could derive the parable of the blind men and the elephant.

From the time difference in my own heartbeat I could derive a metaphysics of time, from my own footsteps a metaphysics of space. From self-observation come up with Descartes “I think therefore I am”. From the use of tiles come up with Cartesian space.

The existence of humanity as a set of identical clones would not be an impediment to the starting of philosophy and metaphysics.

But, if the set of clones leads to the aligning of Johari windows between individuals, then that would delay the rate of growth of philosophy and metaphysics, because that which is originally unknown would take longer to become known than it would if the Johari windows were misaligned.

Get me?

yeah similar what I was thinking

you and I are probably casually swapping notes, about how this and that seem

>Human cognitive variation doesn’t have to be a variation between different individuals. It could be a variation within one individual over a period of time

applies mental states, re-apprehension (understanding; grasp) with different configuration

feel of colors change, for example, for me, depending on time of day, how well slept and other things

I get image fade, looking a pictures a lot, reduced impression, desensitization maybe

sometimes the fade is more interesting than the pictures

transition said:

>Human cognitive variation doesn’t have to be a variation between different individuals. It could be a variation within one individual over a period of time

applies mental states, re-apprehension (understanding; grasp) with different configuration

feel of colors change, for example, for me, depending on time of day, how well slept and other things

I get image fade, looking a pictures a lot, reduced impression, desensitization maybe

sometimes the fade is more interesting than the pictures

I reckon that phenomena ^ is exploited in the advertising on social media pages