value of Stand Alone Complex & maybe the end of history
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:05 pm
I've thought about making this post before but the first post always turned into a rambling beast of a essay on the real world implications of the effects we've seen in SAC. This time I'll try to keep it brief as what I'm really interested in is your opinions.
Also I'll try to keep footnotes to a bare minimum, as they're a pain to read and it makes me look pretentious.
Stand Alone Complex, i refer here to the event not the series; an event in which groups or individuals engage in what seems like organized or coordinated behavior when, in actual fact, each individual or group is acting on it's own unique personal motivations and self interest. In Ghost in the shell, this is mostly attributed to the mass use of cyberbrains, and it manifests itself through a wave of copycat crimes without an original criminal, the stand-alone complex occuring as a second-order simulacrum*. The lack of interaction with other stand-alone individuals is exaserbated by psychological or political events, that results in unpredictable actions by the individual. Combined with other stand-alone individuals, these unpredictable actions resonate exponentially to produce a cascade effect, resulting in a complex whole.
(I have tried to concentrate the above on the more philosophical view of SAC that is outlined in the first series rather than delving into the 2nd GIG 'SAC' which is more rooted in social theory and the question of wether Kuzes 'good cause' can be transmuted by goudas SAC; or the SAC in Solid State Society which more concerns collective conciousness. The SAC in the first series is thus the 'purest' form of SAC as it's merely establishing the phenomenom, so let's stick to that.)
The phenomenom that is Stand Alone Complex has been a part of human society for a long time, IMO it even seems to echo the 'clan mind' or the tribal social interactions that have been observed in very small populations e.g. an idea is had by the group, but no one individual knows who had the idea. And there are real world examples of SAC events to this day, the most obvious of these would probably be the supposed fundamentalist Jihad we have going on in the muslim world ATM. Humans have been gradually learning to desire the individuality that SAC counteracts (prehaps you disagree with me there? it seems to me at least that group thought and individualizm are a dichotomy), seemingly in concert with population intensity and the lessened need to rely on others**. But there is a part of us that yearns instead to be controlled, constricted*** and observed, wether we seek for this via rules, fame or gods. This is the part of us that is only too willing to accept information without question and to my eyes at least it appears as though this way of thinking is becoming more dominant over the way of individual thought, dissemination and parrelization of information is wide-spread. With the increasing speed and quantity of information absorbtion aided by advancements in communications technology we are reaching a tipping point of globalization of information, which allows for increasing frequency of SAC occurances, prehaps if we take it to the scifi extreme seen in SSS we can have a collective conciousness SAC if we reach universalization of information(ok maybe that's going too far, but it would be cool ). however the quality of information is constantly under increasing threat of manipulation by persons with suspect agendas, especially via media concentration or preachers reprogramming myth and legend. Or as gouda put it;****
"The mutation of information that should not mutate in principle, and the illusory originality called individuality, can easily trigger synchronization in the current societal system. I have named this "An Act of Creation in the Name of Consumption."
If SAC continues to become the dominant thought pattern then "society will become a concept which absorbs the reality offered it passively, becoming itself a media overwritten by those who speak for it. this is the natural end result of an ethic of unity in which actually antagonistic opposites are taken to be essentially the same. e.g. Baudrillard contends that universalism is equated with globalisation, which is not concerned with immutable values but with mediums of exchange and equalisation such as the global market and mass media."*+ There are two options that I can see for a world that predominantly follows the SAC thought pattern. The first is that a few gouda-like individuals control and manipulate information allowing them to control the effects of SAC events to serve their own self interests (the fox news model). The second is that organisation arises from chaos within an information system with no firm rules or control, like a road with no roadsigns, in which interaction between individuals and conflict between multiple information sources determines the parrelization of information and the effects of SAC events (the wikipedia model).
My questions to you are as follows; Do you think the SAC phenomena is a good thing or should we be trying to retain individual thought? can true individuality stand out after parallelizing information(a la tachikoma or Kuze)? Am I an overthinking pretentious troll? Is this sort of emergent behaviour the natural supercedent to the genetic cause and effect method of determining human behaviour? some other question probably involving mimetics and words i don't understand? and of course anything else you come up with
<Usual disclaimer about post not making sense because it's 3 am>
*A term coined by Jean Baudrillard second-order simulacrum are symbols without referents, they have no real object to represent. An idea taken to represent reality is simulated, causing the simulation to no longer describe reality directly. The symbol is itself taken for reality and more layers of sybolism are added. This happens when the symbol is taken to be more important than the original entity, a copy has been substituted for reality.
Sorry it's a confusing idea, but useful when thinking about SAC. Hyperreality is slightly easier to wrap your head around but isn't entirely accurate. (when a mind loses the ability to distinguish reality from fantasy and engages with the fantasy without awareness of what it is doing, this is hyperreality.)
**The more cynical side of me says that it's because after industrialization we have each become individual economic units and economic units must be allowed to move and act freely(integeral to individualism).
***Physical constriction at least has definate positive effects on our disposition when in a non threatening situation, constriction, especially among infants or young children is equated with safety, comfort or just being cosy (think about how being hugged makes you feel, or tightly holding a duvet around you, curling up when upset or being in a squishy chair in a small room. Complete freedom and no physical restrictions on the other hand can intimidate some people e.g. being alone in flat wide open spaces or being in a very deep ocean with miles of water below you.)
****Sorry, I lied about not delving into 2nd GIG, but hey i also lied about the footnotes and not mentioning SSS
*+ straight from some old notes on simulacra, but i'm fairly sure i more or less copied that from somewhere.(aren't I honest)
Also I'll try to keep footnotes to a bare minimum, as they're a pain to read and it makes me look pretentious.
Stand Alone Complex, i refer here to the event not the series; an event in which groups or individuals engage in what seems like organized or coordinated behavior when, in actual fact, each individual or group is acting on it's own unique personal motivations and self interest. In Ghost in the shell, this is mostly attributed to the mass use of cyberbrains, and it manifests itself through a wave of copycat crimes without an original criminal, the stand-alone complex occuring as a second-order simulacrum*. The lack of interaction with other stand-alone individuals is exaserbated by psychological or political events, that results in unpredictable actions by the individual. Combined with other stand-alone individuals, these unpredictable actions resonate exponentially to produce a cascade effect, resulting in a complex whole.
(I have tried to concentrate the above on the more philosophical view of SAC that is outlined in the first series rather than delving into the 2nd GIG 'SAC' which is more rooted in social theory and the question of wether Kuzes 'good cause' can be transmuted by goudas SAC; or the SAC in Solid State Society which more concerns collective conciousness. The SAC in the first series is thus the 'purest' form of SAC as it's merely establishing the phenomenom, so let's stick to that.)
The phenomenom that is Stand Alone Complex has been a part of human society for a long time, IMO it even seems to echo the 'clan mind' or the tribal social interactions that have been observed in very small populations e.g. an idea is had by the group, but no one individual knows who had the idea. And there are real world examples of SAC events to this day, the most obvious of these would probably be the supposed fundamentalist Jihad we have going on in the muslim world ATM. Humans have been gradually learning to desire the individuality that SAC counteracts (prehaps you disagree with me there? it seems to me at least that group thought and individualizm are a dichotomy), seemingly in concert with population intensity and the lessened need to rely on others**. But there is a part of us that yearns instead to be controlled, constricted*** and observed, wether we seek for this via rules, fame or gods. This is the part of us that is only too willing to accept information without question and to my eyes at least it appears as though this way of thinking is becoming more dominant over the way of individual thought, dissemination and parrelization of information is wide-spread. With the increasing speed and quantity of information absorbtion aided by advancements in communications technology we are reaching a tipping point of globalization of information, which allows for increasing frequency of SAC occurances, prehaps if we take it to the scifi extreme seen in SSS we can have a collective conciousness SAC if we reach universalization of information(ok maybe that's going too far, but it would be cool ). however the quality of information is constantly under increasing threat of manipulation by persons with suspect agendas, especially via media concentration or preachers reprogramming myth and legend. Or as gouda put it;****
"The mutation of information that should not mutate in principle, and the illusory originality called individuality, can easily trigger synchronization in the current societal system. I have named this "An Act of Creation in the Name of Consumption."
If SAC continues to become the dominant thought pattern then "society will become a concept which absorbs the reality offered it passively, becoming itself a media overwritten by those who speak for it. this is the natural end result of an ethic of unity in which actually antagonistic opposites are taken to be essentially the same. e.g. Baudrillard contends that universalism is equated with globalisation, which is not concerned with immutable values but with mediums of exchange and equalisation such as the global market and mass media."*+ There are two options that I can see for a world that predominantly follows the SAC thought pattern. The first is that a few gouda-like individuals control and manipulate information allowing them to control the effects of SAC events to serve their own self interests (the fox news model). The second is that organisation arises from chaos within an information system with no firm rules or control, like a road with no roadsigns, in which interaction between individuals and conflict between multiple information sources determines the parrelization of information and the effects of SAC events (the wikipedia model).
My questions to you are as follows; Do you think the SAC phenomena is a good thing or should we be trying to retain individual thought? can true individuality stand out after parallelizing information(a la tachikoma or Kuze)? Am I an overthinking pretentious troll? Is this sort of emergent behaviour the natural supercedent to the genetic cause and effect method of determining human behaviour? some other question probably involving mimetics and words i don't understand? and of course anything else you come up with
<Usual disclaimer about post not making sense because it's 3 am>
*A term coined by Jean Baudrillard second-order simulacrum are symbols without referents, they have no real object to represent. An idea taken to represent reality is simulated, causing the simulation to no longer describe reality directly. The symbol is itself taken for reality and more layers of sybolism are added. This happens when the symbol is taken to be more important than the original entity, a copy has been substituted for reality.
Sorry it's a confusing idea, but useful when thinking about SAC. Hyperreality is slightly easier to wrap your head around but isn't entirely accurate. (when a mind loses the ability to distinguish reality from fantasy and engages with the fantasy without awareness of what it is doing, this is hyperreality.)
**The more cynical side of me says that it's because after industrialization we have each become individual economic units and economic units must be allowed to move and act freely(integeral to individualism).
***Physical constriction at least has definate positive effects on our disposition when in a non threatening situation, constriction, especially among infants or young children is equated with safety, comfort or just being cosy (think about how being hugged makes you feel, or tightly holding a duvet around you, curling up when upset or being in a squishy chair in a small room. Complete freedom and no physical restrictions on the other hand can intimidate some people e.g. being alone in flat wide open spaces or being in a very deep ocean with miles of water below you.)
****Sorry, I lied about not delving into 2nd GIG, but hey i also lied about the footnotes and not mentioning SSS
*+ straight from some old notes on simulacra, but i'm fairly sure i more or less copied that from somewhere.(aren't I honest)