The following history of the evolution of Dasein, the mind, has been kept as concise as possible and contains many background concepts necessary to support subsequent theory. We begin with... EvolutionThe human brain is a product of evolution, and came into being, as part of our species, about 200,000 years ago; life on earth arose approximately 3.5 billion years ago. Life started with chemical compounds that could copy themselves automatically given the required materials were present in their environment. This copying is called replication, and these first compounds were the ancestors of what we call DNA. If a replicator was successful, it would flourish and produce many more copies. If another replicator, with perhaps and inefficient copy-mechanism, had difficulty reproducing itself then it might die out. This is the start of natural selection, where the replicator best suited to its environment is logically and practically more likely to survive; we say it is more fit. Now, these replicators would change; their code would be altered by mistakes in copying, or stresses suffered by the environment, this is mutation. These changes would then be subject to the natural selection just mentioned, and over generations these accumulated changes are called evolution. The replicators then grew larger, held more information, acquired fatty coats and became what we call cells. To be sure, smaller replicators are more efficient, they require less resources to copy themselves and so can sustain themselves in an environment of limited resources for a longer time. But, a larger replicator with more information is able to respond to a greater variety of external challenges and so is better suited to existence in a wider range of environments. Thus, the replicators diversified and adapted to different environments on the planet, and grew in size and cell number to cross the "boundaries" of these environments so that a larger number of resources would be at their disposal. The origin of the nervous systemWithin a multi-cellular replicator adjacent cells can communicate by chemical transfer; what is scientifically known as the active or passive transfer or diffusion of compounds between, and within, cells. The genetic code produces proteins that act as receptors and others, amongst other compounds, that act as messenger molecules, and in this way may detect and react to the environment in which they live. In a small replicator of, say, a few cells, this mode of communication is sufficient, efficient and timely enough for its purposes of survival to replication. But once a replicator consists of millions, billions or trillions of cells, such communication becomes, literally, fatally slow. Thus, some cells within such larger replicators, by the process of evolution, became messenger cells; long cells stretching within the body of the replicator that by transmitting a potential difference (electrical impulse) faster than the possible transport of the messenger compounds, could enable rapid reaction at far parts of the replicator in response to a stimulus or threat detected elsewhere. These cells are what we call neurons, or nerves. The origin of the sensesThe senses began when replicators first acquired lipid membranes to make cells. Receptors on the surface of the cell would first function to regulate the concentrations of compounds and minerals within the cell, by transporting compounds in or out, and so optimising the lifespan and replicative potential of the cell. Once replicators acquired motility, some receptors would now function to guide, in a very rough way, the replicator towards areas of high concentration of the compounds required for its metabolism. This is the sense of smell. Then, perhaps, crude photo-receptors that could detect coarse differences in light developed to allow the replicator to find light and heat, or shade and cool, as required. This is the sense of sight. And so, gradually and in response to the diversity in and differences between environments, replicators evolved different ways to gather information on their surroundings, so that they might respond to their surroundings and thus maximise their replication efficiency; their chances of survival. The origin of the brainThe brain is a very pragmatic response to the increase in neural complexity of the replicators brought about by their increased data collection; they needed a place to coordinate responses to the senses. Invariably, the brain is adjacent to the eyes, these sensors evolved to produce a huge amount of data, since there was more visual information to be gleaned from the environment, especially near the surface of the planet, and this data has advantages over the other senses; it is practically instantaneous from a long distance, and tells the replicator more about the environment physically (and practically) than any other sense. Coupled with the increasing number of senses; hearing, touch, temperature, proprioception etc., the brain is the evolutionary response for the need to compare all datas, "build an image" of the surroundings, and so coordinate a physical response that takes all these senses into account to ensure the best possible reaction. The origin of memoryThough natural selection may act on the slowest, dimmest and most ill-adapted replicator to slowly evolve it to become suitable for its environment, the real beauty, and speed, of evolution through natural selection comes through conflict. Environmental danger is a natural fact of life; one's environment can change in such a way as to kill the individual, group, species or ecosystem. For early replicators there was little that could be done to combat this (except through ecological diversity, but that is another matter). The primary threat, however, always was and continues to be assault; one of the easiest ways for a replicator to gain resources is to take them from another that already has them. For replicators then that had evolved some senses, it is possible through the machinations of evolution for a so called "hard-wired" response to be built into their senses. They see a blue fish, they swim away because their ancestors had always had the tendency to avoid the said predator. The unfortunate friends of their ancestors that, by the chance of their neural inter-connections, had not been inclined to swim away had more likely been eaten by that fish and not passed on their genetic information as much as those that had. But, if a replicator is able to have the experience of seeing and swimming away from a predatory red fish and survive the encounter and in some way retain the neurological imprint of that encounter then they will stand a better chance of surviving the next time they encounter said red fish; this is memory. One can see here that memory has provided the same evolutionary benefit as the hard-wired response did with the blue fish, but without the need for natural selection to act, ie. no replicator had to die for the benefit to be "acquired" by the individual and thence perhaps the species as a whole. Thus, memory is, relatively speaking, a massive benefit for replicators' chances to successfully pass on genetic information. It is important to appreciate that memory is not akin to a digital "copy" of the event in the mind of the replicator, nor a separate new section of the brain that stores the information like a hard drive while the processor keeps ticking away; at first it was simply the plasticity of the neurons that retained the inter-connections established by that first experience. More experience would reinforce such connections and produce a stronger response in the future. Memory is a part of the sense system itself. Yet, this is not the complete picture, for to fully understand a memory, the function of its creation and recollection must be understood, and this leads us to Interpretation... The origin of InterpretationThis is probably the most subtle of the steps here, and also the most important to understand. We have just seen how the senses and the brain (Dasein) have come into being, and Interpretation is but a combination of these functions, co-evolving with memories. The word, "interpretation", is commonly used in the world of artistic criticism, where one understands it to mean the opinion, or insight, or way in which something was considered or received, by an individual. We talk of "his" or "her" interpretation as an object, a thought or point of view; a noun, and the verb simply as the act of producing this noun. To differentiate then, we shall talk of Interpretation, capitalized, to indicate a more fundamental mental process; the fundamental process of the mind. Take a look with your eyes, if you will, at any object around you now. A book, a plant, a cloud, another person. How is it that you recognise these things? We know that photons are emitted or reflected by many surfaces, and these produce a pattern of electrical signals in our mind that corresponds with what is seen. But how do we "know" where the book ends and the desk begins? To be sure there is a difference in the appearance of both, a different pattern, but for our minds to see that pattern and recognise it is an amazing thing. To appreciate the difficulty, imagine trying to explain how you can see the borders of an object to an inquisitive child, or, for the more technically minded, how to program a computer to recognise individual objects in a still image. This is called pattern recognition and it is very difficult to do. Yet, this is what our minds do every moment of our lives. They process, filter and analyse the data from all the available senses and spot patterns that they have seen before; identify Entities (a form of memory) within our experiences. This is Interpretation. Interpretation is the identification of a commonality between two things, the commonality between two Entities. Accordingly it goes hand in hand with the emergence of Entities among the replicators, so it is important to see this as a function integrally connected with our process of Entity formation and retrieval. The origin of TemporalityThus far we have considered the most basic form of Interpretation, the recognition of a static pattern amongst the Entities (memories of the world) held within Dasien (the mind). Now the nature of the world in which replicators exist is one of persistence, matter has stability and inertia; if a rock is sitting on the ground near a replicator then it is likely to be there ten seconds and ten years from the present if no agent acts upon it. Accordingly, if a predatory replicator is running towards oneself, it is not likely to suddenly vanish and appear two leagues away but continue on its course. Thus using an Interpretation of the present it is possible to determine something of the nature of the future environment. This is the next evolutionary step that Dasein may take; by using the same neurological model it evolved to Interpret the senses, a replicator may now Interpret the product of those senses and in so doing create a possibility of what what is sensed may become. This Interpretation is called Anticipation, its source the Now and its product the Potentiality-for-Being. Co-evolved with this was the need to check the Potentiality-for-Being, so a complimentary Interpretation, the Making-Present, Interprets the Potentiality with the senses and in turn creates the Now. A cycle is formed that creates an inherent temporality within Dasein; the Temporal Cycle. A replicator that Interprets only the senses is going to be in a continual state of reaction, and though learning from its environment always temporally behind events that occur. The ability for a replicator to Anticipate, or predict, a possibility of the world from what it can detect in the present, and act on that possibility before it even occurs gives the replicator a huge evolutionary advantage. Not only can a replicator now act on what another replicator may do, but also, through development of an Entity of the self, on what itself may do and so to some degree take control of itself as a process. These are the first steps towards sentience. DaseinHere we have seen the evolutionary pressures and derivation of the mental functions of a replicator that may produce what we know as Dasein Please proceed to the next page, the Temporal Cycle, to follow through the processes of Dasein we just sketched out in more detail. Created 27th June 2008 Last revised 26th November 2008 |