----- Original Message -----
From: "Secola/Nieft" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 6:05 AM
Subject: Re: EPR paradox


Kirt,
You say :
> "Meta's basic argument is
> that instincto leads to a breakthrough in mind about a more natural
> sexuality and ideational process--do I understand that correctly? The
basis
> for this "naturalism" is similar to instincto as it harks back to the
> "golden age of humanity": pre-fire humanity.

F : I guess it can be said that way, tough I don't know whether there's ever
been a "golden age".

> "Or do I have this all wrong? Is meta something never before seen?
> A new step
> in evolution that goes beyond whatever pre-fire H/Gs were up too?

F : I don't think so.

The true
> sexuality (cross-age, cross-gender, threesomes as unit) Burger has
> discovered? Or rediscovered? I really need to understand this point. If
you
> answer "discovered" I find much of my confusion falls away. Of course, it
is
> replaced but a different set of confusion, but I'm just a confused sort of
> fellow. ;)"
>
> The simple version of the question is whether meta is trying to emulate or
> improve on pre-fire humanity? Is it a "discovery" or a "RE-discovery"?

F : It looks like that with "instinco" we tend to (re)discover a somewhat
quiter psychical and sexual state wich we can  suppose nearer to the one of
our pre-fire ancestors. Such a state might be enough to eliminate conflicts
between us. But food isn't everything, environmental and social conditions
have also changed quite a lot and seem to be no more suitable to our
instincts. Since instincts are genetically "programed", it appears easier to
abandon the whole structure of the neolithic social dogmas and organisation
than change our instincts.
Of course it is more involving and difficult than simply throw away our gas
or electric cookers!

Regards,
Francois