Richard Dawkins writes in »The Greatest Show on Earth« in the chapter »You did it yourself in nine months«.
The key point is that there is no choreographer and no leader. Order, organization, structure – these all emerge as by-products of rules which are obeyed locally and many times over, not globally. And that is how embryology works. It is all done by local rules, at various levels but especially the level of the single cell. No choreographer. No conductor of the orchestra. No central planning. No architect. In the field of development, or manufacture, the equivalent of this kind of programming is self-assembly. — Richard Dawkins: The Greatest Show on Earth, Kapitel »You did it yourself in nine months«, E-Book S. 382 von 1004.
Could trends and group think be evidence of a form of telepathy?
by EndofMysteries 15 Replies latest social current
-
TheWonderofYou
-
TheWonderofYou
Likewise at murmulation, a social behaviour of starlings the starlings are not communicating by telephaty but following simple rules called "Flocking", this is why we can simulate it with computer software.
http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/Flocking
German with videos. http://www.rete-mirabile.net/biologie/schwaerme/
The birds follow three rules: "alignment", "separation", and "cohesion".
"Alignment" means that a bird tends to turn so that it is moving in the same direction that nearby birds are moving.
"Separation" means that a bird will turn to avoid another bird which gets too close.
"Cohesion" means that a bird will move towards other nearby birds (unless another bird is too close).
When two birds are too close, the "separation" rule overrides the other two, which are deactivated until the minimum separation is achieved.
The three rules affect only the bird's heading. Each bird always moves forward at the same constant speed.
-
Simon
I think you're mixing up the emergent behavior in response to the same environmental stimulus with people needing direct mental-only communication to achieve it (which isn't necessary).
Most trends now only happen when things get publicity (which is the environmental stimulus). If some tribesman in the Amazon suddenly wanted to buy a cabbage patch doll* then I'd believe it.
*Yes, I'm old and that's the last mass hysteria buying thing I can remember. I don't know what kids are buying now ... hover-boards?
-
Oubliette
Read my mind and you'll know my thoughts on the subject! -
-
EndofMysteries
Most trends now only happen when things get publicity (which is the environmental stimulus). If some tribesman in the Amazon suddenly wanted to buy a cabbage patch doll* then I'd believe it.
But if proximity plays a role then that would never happen and would explain why trends and such are largely grouped. There can be opposite trends in different states for example. Take beards for example. Not long ago people didn't really like them. If you as a person did not like them but suddenly or recently are beginning to like them, is that because your own taste has changed, because of peer pressure, or within a certain proximity just a person seeing a beard and 'thinking' they like it, does that message get picked up by you, and the more people and more frequency that happens that it actually influences your own taste then you begin to like it? So with trends, it becomes exponential in speed and scope once they reach a certain threshold.