Drilldown: //Grand Framework 0.1.0/Cliome/Meme/Noam/Nu
Nu are the value systems that underly choice; action operates in the service of those values.
Framework Navigation
Top: Grand Framework
Up: Noam
Down: Fabula
Attributes
| Attribute | Value | Notes | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Class | NoamFramework | ||
| Name | Nu | ||
| Type | Property | ||
| Symbol | v | ||
| Namespace | GrandFramework_0_1_0.Cliome.Meme.Nu | ||
| Version | 0.1.0 | ||
| Description |
|
||
| Example | νV) | ||
| Navigation | Drilldown: //Grand Framework 0.1.0/Cliome/Meme/Noam/Nu |
Properties
Parent: None
| Name | Symbol | Description | Example | Navigation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Why |
Specific Classes
In brief
Symbol system
The values system (or “semeplex”) is denoted by the Greek letter nu “v” which is located at the bottom point of the noam triangle.
νV)
An arbitary value can be denoted by nu. These are usually the more superficial values that are connected to a noam. Deeper core values are denoted by omega. The Darwinian bottom line is Omega.
ν more superficial values
ω deeper values
Ω the darwinian bottom line
Different values can be identified by a post-subscript where needed.
vb
In keeping with set-theory capital Nu refers to a set of “semeplex” nu. The full set of Nu is the complete system of a person’s values.
Ν
For a coordinate of more supreficial values connected with noams, epsilon pre-superscript indexes depth, and omega post-superscript indexes the engagement level [nb. next version might be different]. Note that the deeper value omega and the omega index are different things.
ενω
0ν0 the (0, 0) index is the value behind the noam of direct environmental engagement.
Derivations employ the Toulmin framework system of symbols
w: vb -> vd money buys food
Details
Memetics offers a special class of ideas, or beliefs, some kind of cognitive gadget that we can accept, act upon, and share. I have claimed that our value systems are what underpins our acceptance, action and sharing of memes.
For a first hint at how values operate in the acceptance, activation, and sharing of values, we should look inside ourselves as primary meme bearers (as humans that is) as each of us has direct experience of hosting memes whether or not we know or agree. This approach is one of phenomenology rather than old-school behaviourism (which now has a more grown-up form of Relational Frame Theory); some may find this to be subjective or anecdotal, and to some extent, that is the point. If we accept our own thoughts, even from a radical constructivist perspective, as bearing some reality to us, then we can leave the experimental psychologists to torture animals and undergrads to find “scientific” proof or refutation.
By this I mean humans operate on memes according to our values. We accept, action, and share them because of something we find important. The scope of nu goes beyond just values, it also includes attitudes, opinions, certain types of belief, assumptions, prejudices and preferences; wants, needs, desires, aspirations, aims, all that sort of thing that are essentially underpinned by values. They are those personal notions that can be upheld or violated, a sense of what we can accept or reject, or love or hate. We get annoyed when people trample upon them. Transpersonally, values may also apply to wider social structures such as organisations and nations.
It could be that we are fully aware of that importance, on the other hand we might not have a clue, or even hold some crazy theory of our own actions; or we might claim our actions support some ostensive value, but really they are for something more selfish. To some extent, we can generalise and say that the actual value is not the critical part, but rather that some value, whatever it is, is implicated.
Phenomenology gives us a wedge. We can ask of ourselves: how come I accepted that idea? what made me act on that advice? why did I share that recommendation? We are conducting these memetic operations a lot of the time, though we are too engaged to be mindful as to why.
Semeplex
A terminological distinction here is that nu is not a singular value like “compassion”; nor is it a set of values, in a set-theoretical sense like {“compassion”, “freedom”, “dignity”}. Rather, nu is a “semeplex” value product; a product of a cluster of related values. It is derived from a set of values (including the singleton set) but operates as if it were a single value. This is more like a vector sum of forces in mechanics, but here the force of importance is more akin to the Gestalt notion of “field” and the ideas of Kurt Lewin. The nu property then, is an axiological semantic field , a complex of semes around the notion of certain related values (a “semeplex”). Meaning is attached, but here we are dealing with fuzzy logic and semantic relationships that relate to “right” and “good”. A cluster of related values may be unconscious, but often revolves around some lexical item, and that word may vary considerably in its cultural and individual interpretation and therefore response. The words “drugs” and “medicine” do essentially refer to the same thing – pharmachologically active compounds, but depending on who is asked, they have connotations whereby drugs means addiction, criminality and danger, and medicine means necessary to health in combatting illness. While one is associated with moral terpitude and for some presents an inhibiting motive (“drugs are bad”), the other is socially accpeted, even encoraged (“you must take your medication”). Cognitive reframing, usually through conversation, can shift the associations. The current trend in the shift in attituded around Cannabis is an example of the transition of these species from “drugs” to “medicine” whereby it is being reattached to deeper values that are accepted culturally.
Deeper values
Nu is considered to be more of a surface value, one that is closely linked to situational awareness and potential responses. Values, however, form a hierachy. Some values are more important to the individual than others. Some values are instrumental in achieving deeper intrinsic values. In the framework, and in accordance with object oriented terminology, it is considered that derivation occurs between values; that there is an inheritance of what is deemed to be important. While the exact relationship of value inheritance remains to be fully examined, it is thought that such relationships are more derived or less derieved. A value that is based on a deeper value being more derived; the deeper value being less derived. In difference to prior axiomatic treatments, the current model is not a total-order, a stack of values arranged by importance. Rather, it is a partial order, a tree (or perhaps more like a flow network), which also exhibits transativity, reflexivity, and antisymmetry. In other words, it could be possible that one value may be derived (directly, or though some intermediate value) to some other. On the other hand, two values might not have a path of derivation between them, rather they are likely to share some deeper common value (like an ancestor) from which they are mutually, but independently, derived.
For the framework, there is an ultimate, fundamental value, from which all others are derived. This is taken from biological imperatives of survival and reproduction, termed the “Darwinian bottom line”. It is symbolised by capital omega (Ω) to indicate that it is the whole set of values in itself.
Between the Darwinian bottom line and surface level values that drive responses, there are numourous levels of values. These range from core values such as love and commitment and security and health, to the more superficial such as money and material posessions. The more superficial, surface level, values tend to support the deeper ones from which they are derivatives. Money can be instrumental in enhancing security, nutrition as well as aquiring possessions that confer social status. The means of derivation can be modelleld out as a Toulmin argument the claim being the derived value (vd), the grounds being the base value (vb) and the connection rule being a warrant.
warrant: vb -> vd money buys food
grounds: vb food is important
claim: vd therefore money is important
Warrants can be flimsey and fikle. A dodgy warrant can support a bogus claim, meaning that a base value might be sound, but the derivation is weak. in some cases, the originating argumentation of a derived value can be broken or forgotten resulting in a kind of value floating in the air. Sometimes the mesh of derivations can result in clashing values, particularly where the argumentation has been broaken.
The mesh of derivatives provides a level of depth. The engagement level of a noam’s value is a measure of width. This gives two axes of epsilon and omega respectively. These can be used as a coordinate index of values.
Possible ways values are derived
externalities – the env influences nu
realisation
prior-existance of a deeper value; particualrly suseptable demes
push pull
A shared environmental experience, or kinetic behavioural response are public events. Values, on the other hand are private – they are internal throughts not directly available to others. Through language, it is possible to express values, or at least attempt to say what we believe our values to be. Alternativly, by watching the patterns of environmental stimuli and the response of others, through “mind reading” we can attempt to impute what the values of others might be. In general nu is pushed onto the individual through some environmental event. That could be through being told what is important by someone else, by observing what results someone is getting, or through some epipheny (deriving a value).
Given that an individual, organism, or organisation aquires a value, then according to the principle of engagement levels, if they are capable of aquisition and metacognition, then it might be possible that they can aquire other noam properties autonomously. This value then invokes pull in aquiring means. So, on realising something is important to them, a person becomes likely to seek out knowledge for themselves: through experimentation, literature review, apprenticeship. As Buddha says, ‘When the student is ready, the master appears.’ Where, the pull has drawn in a teacher, then motility will move to push (or moreover as a push-pull sequence).
This initial “push” from the environment (including the influence of other people) provides a minimal model for noam formation. To use an fishing metaphor, the value is a hook.
The externality then would induce nu, but possibly not the means to service it. The person would then encounter dissatisfaction at the aquisition level of engagement (¬pi1) which would invoke aquisitional behaviour (rho1) from the environment, possibly an observable model or teacher. The skills and learnings aquired would then contribute to rho0.
exaple – learning a language to go abroad
For cliology, and its use of psychological influence in affecting culture, the push of, and particularly the recursive push of values, is of greater interest. Given that a newly derived value can induce higher levels of engagement, then by fostering sufficient interest to encourage autonomous learning, pushing values has an economy of influence. At the populational level involved in memetics, in a minimal model, this push would be recursive whereby aquiring the new value would subsequently encorage the recipient to act to share that value with others. Multilevel marketing, religions, political causes, academic fields and other cults are prime examples of these minimal push conditions, whereby ideology and practice takes a hold of a population that already adhere to some common deeper value. Jesus’ furthers the above metaphor in his call to Peter and Andrew to become “fishers of men.”
Relation of other framework elements
pi is the relationship between nu (motive) and sigma (situational awareness) and gives a measure of satisfaction
tau is the relationship between nu (motive) and rho (potential response) and is a measure of motivation
Examples
{law, science, sales (direct, mlm), PR, military, thermostat, environmentalism, the cat sat on the mat}
Sales (direct)
From the salesperson’s perspective, the value of making a sale is the pricetag. This goes towards commission, wages, bonuses, and targets. There are deeper values such as keeping their job, whatever their commission pays for – food, mortgage etc. One of the big drivers though, besides the cash, is the rush of making a sale which can be exhilerating.
For the customer, the value is that of the product. Moreover, it is what benefits that that product confers for them, and all the deeper values that their act of purchasing works in the service of. Buying a lawnmower isn’t about the lawnmower itself; that is just an instrument. The lawmower creates a benefit by meeting their need of the ability to cut grass. The GTech chordless (with its large grassbox) enables large areas to be cut without messing about with the cord or having to empty the grassbox too often. That is, it reduces labour and hasstle of doing the chore. And as the advert says ‘all of which leaves more time to enjoy your garden’. Deeper values might be inferred: pride in a job done well and quickly, satisfaction at neatness, aesthetics and so on.
Sales (MLM)
For the MLM distributer, the financial reward is part of the compensation plan. Beyond direct commission, there is opportunity to create a residual income by building a strong down-line team – a smaller commission coming from what a larger number of people are selling. Hence there is a financial motive to recruiting by identifying potential new distributers and introducing them to the compensation plan. The values here are recursive, as the new distributer will be able to recruit others and so on. Other values come into play as well. In MLM there can a strong sense of teamwork and socialisation. It is not just about the distributer creating finacial independence for themselves and giving up the 9-5, paying off their mortgage, sending the kids to college, and whatever dreams they aspire to, but also that of helping their freinds achieve their ambitions also.
By way of example, I have recommended Airbnb, as a result of a conversational thread I was having. OK, I’ve acted on the Airbnb meme and it has been a good experience so far. But why would I want to share it with some stranger, other than the value of small talk? Maybe small talk and all the social stuff that entails was a component of the value. I suppose it was the novelty of the price, convenience and the technology that made it a conversation piece, man bites dog, as well as a service that could benefit someone else. The psychological principles could be quite involved, but I don’t think we need to go into it that deeply to get the point. Perhaps the subjective appraisal is one starting point for appreciating the structure of thought contagion.
Application
Related Issues
https://www.ted.com/talks/eric_liu_how_to_revive_your_belief_in_democracy?utm_source=newsletter_daily&utm_campaign=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_content=image__2019-05-07
Versioning and change-log
Origin and history
I denote values by the Greek letter nu “v” It is no accident that “v” sits at the bottom of the “V)” as the Greek letter is derived from the Phoenician letter “nun”. However, I’ve kind of ignored all that and opted it as looking like a v for value.
The omega index arises graphically from “vv = ω”: the difference between two nu values horizontally; similarly, the epsilon index is the virtical nu distance “ε”. For omega referring to a core value, its omega index is arbitary and possibly detached from a noam, hence the value itself can be symbolised as omega – this leads the the bottom line wher Omega is the last letter of the Greek alphabet.
Current version
NoamFramework 0.1.0