Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[09071540]

So, I just finished the Dawkins, taxonomic subject reading...interesting, a little odd, but my main question is how other people have understood the concept of the 'discontinuous mind'? I get that it has to do with gaps in the mind, as the essay is titled, but in what other ways, other than neglecting the intermediates in the process of evolution, could a discontinuous mind be represented?
Also, just a practical question: I have not been able to access the article The Word Made Flesh by Dawkins, indicated on the further reading list for The Taxonomic Subject. Is there a more recent link where we could access this?

[Paolo Ruffino]

Hi, thank you for having reported the broken link. I think the article is the same as this one here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2001/dec/27/genetics.medicalscience

[CyberChimp]

Your question is a good one, 09071540.  Dawkins' discussion specifically concerns gaps imposed on evolutionary lineages, but there are other arenas in which people can't resist imposing discontinuities where they don't really belong.  Did you have any suggestions?  Or anyone else?  (Choosing an interesting example would provide ideal material for an hypomnemata, of course.)

(Link updated here: http://www.cyberchimp.co.uk/U75184/taxonomic.htm.  Thanks for that.)

[09071540]

At first I thought that a possible example of where a discontinuous mind may be encouraged, as Dawkins might agree, would be in the Christian faith. However, as I reflected more on this possibility, it actually occurred to me that the Christian faith might reconcile the discontinuous mind by both recognising creation's massiveness in comparison to humanity's tininess despite the fact that humans are given greater value than to other living creatures. In this way, rather than adhering solely to Dawkins' theory that the religious live with only a discontinuous mind, the responsibility Christians are given to take care of nature and to "not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment” (Romans 12:3) could maybe suggest a greater continuity among Christians that Dawkins suggests??? (I really hope that makes sense....I'll be presenting this as my show and tell on Thursday!) :O

[Paolo Ruffino]

At first I thought that a possible example of where a discontinuous mind may be encouraged, as Dawkins might agree, would be in the Christian faith. However, as I reflected more on this possibility, it actually occurred to me that the Christian faith might reconcile the discontinuous mind by both recognising creation's massiveness in comparison to humanity's tininess despite the fact that humans are given greater value than to other living creatures. In this way, rather than adhering solely to Dawkins' theory that the religious live with only a discontinuous mind, the responsibility Christians are given to take care of nature and to "not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment” (Romans 12:3) could maybe suggest a greater continuity among Christians that Dawkins suggests??? (I really hope that makes sense....I'll be presenting this as my show and tell on Thursday!) :O

This sounds like a very interesting case, please bring it along at the show and tell this Thursday and we'll discuss about it!

[adubz]

i found this reading much easier to grasp than the previous Dawkins reading. The discontinuous mind is fascinating. The human need to rank oneself as more important than other creatures is an interesting point. The fact that human beings classify things that need not be classified in order to 'understand' the world is evident.
He describes the ring species in order to clarify his point which i think he does well. Instead of thinking in terms of short and tall, or Ape and Human, we should understand that instead of evolution jumping from one species to the next (Species A and Species B) it is a journey.  (I loved his equator example, holding hands to reach or ancestor) It shows exactly what his point is, go back far enough and we find similarities to other animals.

This by no means makes me a supporter of Dawkins, I just appreciate how cleverly he communicates his views.

We do not see ourselves on a similar level with other beings due to the apparent non existence of these beings. What would we say if a link between chimpanzees and humans existed, would that lay waste to our categories of absolutism.
Although Dawkins makes his point to reinforce his pre existing views, to someone outside of his work it is clear that his point does raise issues, why must we have a grouping for everything. Guilt is a product of these groupings. it is due to the worry that we may stray from a group definition that we feel guilt. i.e. not obeying a sin. If one doesn't respect a parent due to that parent abusing its child. Is the child in sin.

[scary fairy]

I understand the limitations when applied to the Christian faith, but still think that religion as a whole could be reasonable example. Take for example Christianity, as its what I understand most. There are 2 main divisions of Christianity - Catholic and Protistant, but within each category, there are many denominations, and still further, within the denominations there are different churches, with different worship styles, and within those churches there different study or activity groups, and even on an individual level, 2 people will not have an identical understanding and application of their faith! So saying 'I'm a Christian' is about as helpful as saying 'I'm a mammal!' but to reverse it, none of thse statements are untrue, it is only the discontinuous mind that insists on these limitless categories!

[09071540]

I understand the limitations when applied to the Christian faith, but still think that religion as a whole could be reasonable example. Take for example Christianity, as its what I understand most. There are 2 main divisions of Christianity - Catholic and Protistant, but within each category, there are many denominations, and still further, within the denominations there are different churches, with different worship styles, and within those churches there different study or activity groups, and even on an individual level, 2 people will not have an identical understanding and application of their faith! So saying 'I'm a Christian' is about as helpful as saying 'I'm a mammal!' but to reverse it, none of thse statements are untrue, it is only the discontinuous mind that insists on these limitless categories!

I like your comment about the limitless categories that are created by the religious world in which we live - I just wish I would have thought of the concept first!
Question to module leader and tutor: is it possible to quote from the forum in our Hypopnemata?

[scary fairy]

My comments are not formally published, so there's no reason why you can't use them for your assignment, I have no problem with it :)

[Paolo Ruffino]

Hi,
good question!
about quoting the forum... why not? Of course you have to consider this is not an academic reference, but that's the point of the hypomnemata, it asks you to re-think about your daily experiences (including this forum) through theory.

I understand the limitations when applied to the Christian faith, but still think that religion as a whole could be reasonable example. Take for example Christianity, as its what I understand most. There are 2 main divisions of Christianity - Catholic and Protistant, but within each category, there are many denominations, and still further, within the denominations there are different churches, with different worship styles, and within those churches there different study or activity groups, and even on an individual level, 2 people will not have an identical understanding and application of their faith! So saying 'I'm a Christian' is about as helpful as saying 'I'm a mammal!' but to reverse it, none of thse statements are untrue, it is only the discontinuous mind that insists on these limitless categories!

I like your comment about the limitless categories that are created by the religious world in which we live - I just wish I would have thought of the concept first!
Question to module leader and tutor: is it possible to quote from the forum in our Hypopnemata?

[popcorn]

   My understanding of the Discontinuous mind is one that is the underlying theory for how humans instinctively categorize each other as a species to a species. However, this has been greatly enhanced in our culture and has formed each of our identities as individuals affecting the political, social and cultural systems. Humans are however homo-sapiens however, not all homo sapiens are equal. Just because a subject can be defined as an organism they cannot be on the same level. It is undeniable that humans are superior as of their variety and ability to the extreme extent. We do not all have the same value or worth even if we can be scientifically labelled with the same term.

[mouse90]

Going back to the discussion of evolution, Dawkins refers to’ intermediates’, that represent the missing link between man and ape. He says if a chain of intermediates had survived it would be enough to link us to chimpanzees by not just a chain of hand holders, but of interbreeders.
I have found an interesting clip that provides an example of a mammal with different characteristics to the chimps we know, possibly providing us with this missing link Dawkins talks about

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1Ozky8xeFQ&feature=related

[BJRushy]

While the discontinuous mind is often presented in a negative light, I feel it worth further acknowledging that it is arguably necessary in order for us to make sense of the world not simply by means of classification, but also as a means of supposed crucial identity construction. Without the discontinuous mind then we should be incapable of differentiating between ourselves, other people and animals; therefore arguably eliminating the need for a strong sense of personal identity and self-worth. If everything and everyone is percieved as equal and unclassified into set categories, then surely there is no need to find ones place within these categories, or forge new ones as a means of self-expression and identity formation; things which are always present within our society. The construction of our own identity then could itself be argued as evidence of the discontinuous mind.

[Dominique]

In line with BJRushy, I also agree that the discontinuous mind is not necessarily negative. For instance I'm using a hybrid animal as an example for my Hypomnemata, and medical research has proven that these animals who where forced bred with different species do not have the same survival abilities as their "categorized" parents and thus have to be kept in captivity. Survival of the fittest is key, and althought humans try to 'play' God with such experiments the results are often detrimental when interfering with nature. There is no place for them in the Animal Kingdom as their fate is pretty much sealed due to hierarchy. They can't survive, they can't reproduce, they will not form a new species. Although we are aware of such hybrids, they will always remain a 'lesser' animal.

[Sammy]

My understanding of the discontinuous mind is that it involves believing in an absolute concept and that can lead to the strict classification of species. It can, in my opinion, lead to racism. For instance, classifying a mixed race person to be either 'black' or 'white' depending on their skin tone. So if he appears to be 'black' then he is classified as such, without taking into account his 'white' part.