The Psychohistorical-Dialectical Equation of Human-Social Formations ‘Meta-Evolution’.
Part II. B. Epoch t = 1: “Camps” ‘Socio-Ontology’ Emergent.
In his book Non-Zero: The Logic of Human Destiny, Robert Wright describes some specimens of the ‘multi-band’ “camps” stage of human-social formation as follows:
“Often a !King camp will have at its core a single group of relatives such as a brother and sister."
“But they commonly have spouses, whose siblings may also live in the camp, as may these sibling’s spouses.”
"So even when a camp is loosely based around a single group of close kin, the camp can comprise multiple families and include many individuals who are not biological kin.”
[ Robert Wright, Non-Zero: The Logic of Human Destiny, Pantheon Books [NY: 2000], p. 353, emphases by M.D.; see also http://nonzero.org/toc.htm ].
In terms of historical ‘‘‘Real time’’’, the Whole-Number model-epoch from t = [FONT=Arial Black]1[/FONT] to t = [FONT=Arial Black]2[/FONT], during which the highest forms of human social formation all extant together are believed to have been only the foraging, ~single-family “bands”, and the ‘multi-band’ “camps”, lasted from perhaps circa 100,000 B.C.E., to the emergence of the first, pre-agricultural ‘multi-camp’ “villages” [e.g., Natufian], circa 12,500 B.C.E. – a duration of ~ 87,500 Earth-years.
We have defined the « arche’ »-«arithmos» of human settlement formations to be that of the non-settlement-pattern ‘‘‘population’’’ of small, mobile, ‘‘‘nomadic’’’ “bands” of [proto-]human predators/foragers/scavengers/hunter-gatherers.
By ‘‘‘population’’’ here, we do not mean that “population” whose unit is the individual [proto-]human[oid] living bodies that make up these “bands”.
We mean the ‘‘‘population’’’ that has these individual “bands” themselves as units.
[Note further: By ‘‘‘population’’’, in this context, we do not mean the count of [proto-]human “biological individuals”, whether of the typical or average “band”, or of the totality of all “bands” extant as of a particular value of some time parameter, or epoch parameter, t.
The [minimally ‘memetically-emerged’, phenomically ‘proto-ic’, proto-]human individual is not the unit, or «monad», of counting for this ‘dialectical meta-model’ narrative.
The “band itself, for the t = 0 epoch, whatever a given band’s size in terms of [proto-]human individuals, is that unit, or «monad».
This ‘meta-model’ thus eschews the usual, metaphysical, “methodological”, contra-empirical ‘‘‘human individual-ism / atomism / reductionism’’’].
Suppose that the ‘‘‘population’’’ of the “bands” «arithmos» — the ‘‘‘population’’’ of which each individual “band” is a «monad» / unit — reproduces itself with expansion – grows – in certain localities of the planetary biosphere [as a manifestation of the growth of human-societal self-productivity – the growth of the human-social forces of human-societal self-reproduction].
Then, as the ‘monadic population’ of the “bands”-as-«monads» ‘densifies’ itself in those localities, a condition of ‘‘‘critically’’’ high “bands” density – or of “bands” ‘physical-spatial concentration’ – may arise, which we term the ‘self-surroundment’ of the typical “band” «monad»; the ‘self-environment’ / ‘self-envelopement’ of the “bands”, or their ‘surroundment / environment-by-likes’, created, for the “bands”, by the “bands” themselves.
This condition would arise, first and especially, within the ‘centerward’ sub-population of “band” «monads» of each of the key / core such localities – the ‘meta-meristemal’ / ‘‘‘vanguard’’’ social-relations-innovation ‘‘‘nucleation zones’’’.
This means that there has arisen a condition of “bands” densely surrounded by [other] “bands” at the heart of each such locality: “likes” ‘‘‘times’’’ “likes” as “bands” ‘‘‘times’’’ “bands”.
This condition would have thereby supplanted, in intensity / ‘intensivity’, within those key/core loci, the ‘precedingly-dominant’ condition of the ‘surroundment’ of the “bands” «monads» only by the accumulated ‘monadic populations’ of various scales / levels / layers of pre-human-natur[e-]al ontology, especially of the immediate ontological predecessor of the ‘taxonomy level one’ ‘‘‘human societies’’’ «arithmos», in the form of the «arithmos» of the likewise ‘taxonomy level one’ ‘multi-meta-zoan’ “animal societies” / ‘multi-meta-phytan’, single-kind-of-plant plant ‘‘‘communities’’’: “bands” ‘‘‘times’’’ ‘metabiota’.
A new innovation in the human-social settlement / governance patterns’ taxonomy of ‘socio-ontology’ is thereby seeded.
The former condition was dominated by and characterized by ‘merely-hybridizing’ reactions / inter-actions, ‘ontological conversion’ ‘hetero- / inter-actions’, of “band” «monads» with the accumulated ‘monadic populations’ of the various ‘qualo-fractal’ scales / levels / layers of the pre-existing ‘pre-human-natur[e-]al’ ontology, and, especially, with humanity’s most recent ontological predecessor, the ‘metabiota’.
The new condition — in the ‘human socio-ontological innovation nucleation zones’ — is dominated by, and characterized by, ‘self-hybridizing’ interactions, ‘self-interactions’, or by ‘intra-actions’, of “band” «monads» with [other] “band” «monads», which become more and more frequent / increasingly ‘self-frequentized’, as the ‘‘‘population density’’’ of “band” «monads» grows therein.
The formerly-dominant modes of monadic interaction — of ‘ontological other-conversion’, or ‘hetero-conversion’ — had partially converted pre-human-natur[e-]al [including animal-social-]bio-mass into ‘[proto-]human-socio-mass’, in the form of this ‘monadic population’ of the “bands” «arithmos».
This process of ‘‘‘[plant / animal-social-and-earlier]bio-mass’’’ to ‘[proto-human-]socio-mass’ ontological conversion was ‘self-catalyzed’ by, or ‘auto-catalyzed’ by, and ‘self-[ac]celerated’, in proportion to the presence of, and to the density of / ‘physical-spatial concentration’ of, the thus ‘‘‘[self-]expanding’’’ “bands” «arithmos».
But as the — therefore growing — ‘physical-spatial concentration’ of the «monads» of the “bands” «arithmos», in the key / core ‘‘‘nucleation zones’’’ of initial [proto-]human-social formation, crosses a “critical mass” / ‘‘‘critical density’’’ threshold, the process of ‘ontological hetero-conversion’, of past monadic sub-populations, into the growing “bands” monadic population, shifts.
It shifts into a new and previously unprecedented process, a process of the nascent ‘ontological self-conversion’ of [part of] a burgeoning “bands” «arithmos» ‘[proto-human] socio-ontology’, by that burgeoning “bands” «arithmos» ‘socio-ontology’ itself; its ‘self-conversion’ into the ‘socio-ontology’ of a new, ‘self-involutively higher’, previously unprecedented, unexampled ‘‘‘onto-logical type’’’, the first increment of ‘[proto-]human socio-ontological’ innovation in the history of human-social formation(s).
That is, the ‘self-frequentization’ of this new mode of action — of ‘‘‘self-inter-action’’’, or of ‘‘‘intra-action’’’ — of “band” with “band”, then, as it exceeds its critical frequency / density / concentration threshold, precipitates the irruption of yet a new, previously non-extant, previously non-existent ‘meta-fractal’ scale / level / layer of human settlement / governance patterns and practices: namely, that of the multi-“band” — episodically settled, semi-sedentary — “camps” [proto-]human-social formation(s).
F.E.D. characterizes such critical-threshold transitions as specimens of their «genos» of ‘metafinite singularities’ in general, and of the «species» of ‘metafinite resonance singularities’ [e.g., as opposed to the «species» of ‘metafinite depletion singularities’], within their “ideo-taxonomic dialectic” of singularity-kinds.
F.E.D. calls these ‘‘‘singularities’’’ “metafinite” because they are unlike the “standard” valuations of cases of “division-by-zero singularity” that arise, at specific, finite values of the “Real” time parameter, t, e.g., in many “purely-quantitative” nonlinear integro-differential equations, leading to spurious purely-quantitative infinities, or to “undefined”, “indeterminate” values.
“Realistic” singularities exhibit, according to F.E.D., everywhere finite results, called ‘metafinite’ because those results include relatively rapid [not “instantaneous”] irruption of qualitatively different, new ontology.
A “camp”, grasped as a [proto-]human-social unit / «monad», is a ‘meta**^1**-«monad»’, i.e., a ‘meta**^1**-unit’, or ‘super**^1**-unit’, relative to a “band”, grasped also as an – immediate predecessor – [proto-]human-social unit / «monad».
Each typical “camp” is a ‘meta-“band”, made up out of a [local-][sub-]«arithmos» of the “bands” «arithmos», i.e., made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of «monads» from the “bands” category, by means of a ‘self-«aufheben» self-internalization’ of a part of that local, predecessor «arithmos» of “bands”, i.e., with multiple “band” units as predecessor «monads».
This ‘self-«aufheben»’ self-operation — of an «arithmos» of “band” «monads», as collective human-social ‘‘‘subject’’’ / agent of [self-]action, acting / operating, upon / within, itself, via the “band” «monads» operating among themselves — gives rise to an ontologically, qualitatively, behaviorally new and different, previously unprecedented «arithmos», one that has “camps” as its «monads»: the «arithmos» of the — initially multi-“band” — “camps”.
The ‘subject / object identical’ of “bands” squared, “bands” x “bands”, or ‘bands**<** bands**>**’ [“bands” of “bands”] – the ‘self-reflexive functioning’ of “bands” acting upon “bands” – still possibly reproduces the “bands” «arithmos»-of-band-«monads», but also possibly produces something new and unprecedented: “camps”; the “camps” «arithmos»-of-camp-«monads».
Formulaic Summary for “Camps” Emergent. ‘Ideographized’ / ‘ideogramized’, “shorthand” summary of the narrative rendition above.
[in the following formula, b denotes the ‘socio-ontological’ category of the “bands”; the “bands” «arithmos», and c denotes the ‘socio-ontological’ category of the “camps”; the “camps” «arithmos»] –
epoch t = 1:
< b >^(2^1) = < b >^2, so –
b → b< b > = b ‘‘‘of’’’ b = b^2**[FONT=Arial][SIZE=4] = b x b = b + Δb =
b + c[/SIZE]**[/FONT],
as t = 0 ****[FONT=Arial][SIZE=4] →** t = 1**[/SIZE][/FONT].
[Link to supplementary information: If you would like more information about the rules of ‘purely-qualitative calculation’ that are used in the “shorthand” expression above — i.e., about the rules of ‘ontological multiplication’, ‘multiplication of qualities’ [‘multiplication of ontological qualifiers’], ‘categorial multiplication’, or ‘«aufheben» multiplication’ — then click on the following link: http://www.dialectics.org/dialectics/Primer_files/8_Fract1-1_OCR.pdf , and scroll down to p. 4].