Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

I'm sure John has already thought of much of this and I'm probably repeating well known and understood things but figured I'd give it a go to see if I could get constructive feedback:

DNA is at the heart of evolution and at the heart of DNA, information. In this regard evolution is an information optimization algorithm. For most species natural selection models this process pretty well. Procreation, death good genes passed on bad genes go bye bye. For humans though it is a different story because of their superior intellects is largely its biggest adaptive advantage (suck it dolphins!). GD comes in because it wholly describes the evolutionary picture for humans because humans are selected not only by physical attributes but also by informational content.

Physical natural selection is easy because with positive and negative feed back from the environment in conjunction with random variations information can be stored and grow in the genome. Information on the other hand is more difficult to optimize. With intellectual natural selection information needs to be extracted from the environment by individuals through trial and error and then passed on to other members in the species through various channels (written, spoken, stories, etc.). The groups of people whom this information is shared with are identity groups. The sensitivity and relevance of the information determines who knows what. Surface level immaterial info is easily passed across identity groups but information pertinent to survival stays "in the family" so to say. Identity is in some sense an "information species" when looked at from a high enough level of granularity.

To sub select within the species of humanity based on informational content though parts of humanity would have to intentionally kill the other part off via crisis wars. The process of extending and solidifying identity groups is the generational flows. All information is a remnant of the past. It is a description of how reality has worked in the past so it gives good clues as to how it will operate in the future. By definition though information cannot be known a priori and must be expensively extracted from the environment through hard trial and error. This information is conveyed to other members of the identity group and younger generations learn from past mistakes and success so the identity group and thus the species is better adapted to handle its environment.

However since preservation and extension are two conflicting parameters they cannot be optimized for simultaneously. This is why we observe women the more cautious sex because they are tasked with carrying the species forward via their womb. Their sexual desires revolve around this reality and making sure the offspring she does have do as well as possible. Men on the other hand are tasked with the risk taking and extending the species forward. If men are lost no worries to the species the women will still find men. However if men are successful they remain fertile till any age (contrast with women and their "biological clock") so the winners can go on to "pollinate many flowers" so to say. Similar dynamics can be found in the generation.

We see that the prophet generation is the one tasked as taking risks and try bold crazy new ideas that may or may not work out. They lack risk adversity and our shielded by the protection of the current structure of the identity group. However because there are far more things that don't work than do work it is the nomad generation that deals with the consequences of the prophets failed experiments. The identity group is able to sort out through this what things worked and what things didn't. The hero generation is risk averse because it is tasked with carrying the identity group forward and thus implies its title as the "hero". Ultimately after pairing back from all the failed experiments it is up to the hero generation what from the previous prophet generation shall be preserved and added to the structure of the new society moving forward as the structure solidifies.
I'm not fully clear how the artist fits in to this perspective but it is clearly a generation that "preserves" the new order.


DNA stores the OS level information, cultures store the (?) firmware

I think it really just has to come down to identity being a cornerstone. Ethnicity and religion really feel too far sighted for this theory. Say the day comes where the entire planet reaches one mostly homogeneous ethnicity, religion, language. It doesn't seem like it would just "stop". I think that is inherently part of the system. Identity is in some sense what sets you apart once everyone is "homosapien" it stops being something you recognize with your identity. Identity also changes in crisis era also in part because the society decides it must come to conclusions about some of these things. The society won't have "room" for the different "lifestyles". What doesn't get resolved comes back up in the next crisis probably. Don't know where this fits into GD and if it has already been covered. Also isn't there uncertainty about other species of humans living at the same time? If it hasn't been solved GD definitely solves it. RIght?

Some have suggested that the inevitable result of technology is that humanity will fuse with it which doesn't seem all that unreasonable (trans-humanists and the sort). From this informational GD perspective this could likely be the result. Obviously the society that can effectively integrate itself with technology would have clear adaptation advantages and would be able to more effectively deal with information. Those societies would then easily get rid of the societies that were unable or unwilling to take such measures. Eventually all the homo sapiens would be replaced by whatever the new race of humans are called. I don't think I've said anything really all that new here but it is interesting that it seems GD would predict this as the outcome.

uncertainty wrote: > Some have suggested that the inevitable result of technology is
> that humanity will fuse with it which doesn't seem all that
> unreasonable (trans-humanists and the sort). From this
> informational GD perspective this could likely be the
> result. Obviously the society that can effectively integrate
> itself with technology would have clear adaptation advantages and
> would be able to more effectively deal with information. Those
> societies would then easily get rid of the societies that were
> unable or unwilling to take such measures. Eventually all the homo
> sapiens would be replaced by whatever the new race of humans are
> called. I don't think I've said anything really all that new here
> but it is interesting that it seems GD would predict this as the
> outcome.

It's not just GD. It's the way of the universe. Each time a
superior species comes along, then it displaces the old species,
unless they can find a way to co-exist.

John wrote: It's not just GD. It's the way of the universe. Each time a
superior species comes along, then it displaces the old species,
unless they can find a way to co-exist.

I think I know that but GD explains the mechanism by which humans would sub select which for me is interesting.

I don't think I ever articulated another connection to information theory that I noticed. In order to produce high entropic/information results a channel needs to be low entropy. From a GD perspective this would be why the society becomes so uniform and "bland" during crisis wars. The simplicity is required for the society to produce results and handle high volumes of information. This is also why academic types like quite, simple environments often found at universities.

John wrote:

uncertainty wrote: > Some have suggested that the inevitable result of technology is
> that humanity will fuse with it which doesn't seem all that
> unreasonable (trans-humanists and the sort). From this
> informational GD perspective this could likely be the
> result. Obviously the society that can effectively integrate
> itself with technology would have clear adaptation advantages and
> would be able to more effectively deal with information. Those
> societies would then easily get rid of the societies that were
> unable or unwilling to take such measures. Eventually all the homo
> sapiens would be replaced by whatever the new race of humans are
> called. I don't think I've said anything really all that new here
> but it is interesting that it seems GD would predict this as the
> outcome.

It's not just GD. It's the way of the universe. Each time a
superior species comes along, then it displaces the old species,
unless they can find a way to co-exist.

All non-apex species lifeforms form the "platform" upon which the apex lifeform "hones" the next apex lifeform from some portion of itself, or from some portion of the platform itself, in retrospect, due to some "knockback" catastrophe.

Co-existence is merely "too much trouble to exterminate", which, luckily, occurs quite often.

The dinosaurs were, retrospectively, honing the mammals to become the eventual apex lifeform, while they "thought" they were honing better and better dinosaurs toward more intelligence and better manipulation "appendages".

..then,.. space rock.

But,.. weʻd still have to deal with GD phenomena if we were "dino descendants".