This is chapter 5 of the [1]"The Phenomenon of Science" by [2]Valentin F. Turchin
     ____________________________________________________________________________

   Contents:
     * [3]MATERIAL AND SPIRITUAL CULTURE
     * [4]THE STAIRWAY EFFECT
     * [5]THE SCALE OF THE METASYSTEM TRANSITION
     * [6]TOOLS FOR PRODUCING TOOLS
     * [7]THE LOWER PALEOLITHIC
     * [8]THE UPPER PALEOLITHIC
     * [9]THE NEOLITHIC REVOLUTION
     * [10]THE AGE OF METAL
     * [11]THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTIONS
     * [12]THE QUANTUM OF DEVELOPMENT
     * [13]THE EVOLUTION OF THOUGHT
     ____________________________________________________________________________

                                      CHAPTER FIVE.
                                    FROM STEP TO STEP

MATERIAL AND SPIRITUAL CULTURE

   A DISTINCTION IS MADE between ''material'' and ''spiritual" culture. We have put
   these words in quotes (the first time; henceforth they will parade themselves in
   the customary way, without quotes) because the distinction between these two
   manifestations of culture is arbitrary and the terms themselves do not reflect
   this difference very well. Material culture is taken to include society's
   productive forces and everything linked with them, while spiritual culture
   includes art, religion, science, and philosophy. If we were to attempt to
   formulate the principle on the basis of which this distinction is made, the
   following would probably be the best way: material culture is called upon to
   satisfy those needs which are common to humans and animals (material needs),
   while spiritual culture satisfies needs which, we think, are specifically human
   (spiritual needs). Clearly this distinction does not coincide with the
   distinction between material and spiritual on the philosophical level.

   The phenomenon of science, the chief subject of this book, is a part of spiritual
   culture. But science emerges at a comparatively late stage in the development of
   society and we cannot discuss this moment until we have covered all the preceding
   stages. Therefore we cannot bypass material culture without saying at least a few
   words about it. This is especially true because in the development of material
   culture we find one highly interesting effect which the metasystem transition
   sometimes yields.

THE STAIRWAY EFFECT

   A baby is playing on the bottom step of a gigantic stone stairway. The steps are
   high and the baby cannot get to the next step. It wants very much to see what is
   going on there; now and again it tries to grab hold of the edge of the step and
   clamber up, but it cannot.... The years pass. The baby grows and then one fine
   day it is suddenly able to surmount this obstacle. It climbs up to the next step,
   which has so long attracted it, and sees that there is yet another step above it.
   The child is now able to climb it too and thus, mounting step after step, the
   child goes higher and higher. As long as the child was unable to get from one
   step to the next it could not ascend even a centimeter; but as soon as it learned
   how, not only the next step but the entire stairway became accessible.

   [IMG.FIG5.1.GIF]

   Figure 5.1. The stairway effect.

   A schematic representation of this ''stairway effect'' is shown in figure 5.1.
   The stairway effect forms the basis of many instances in which small quantitative
   transitions become large qualitative ones. Let us take as an example the
   classical illustration of Hegel's law of the change of quantity into quality: the
   crystallization of a liquid when the temperature drops below its melting point.
   The ability of a molecule oscillating near a certain equilibrium position to hold
   several adjacent molecules near their equilibrium positions is precisely the
   ''capability of transition to the next step.'' When this capability manifests
   itself as a result of a drop in temperature (decrease in the amplitude of
   oscillations) the process of crystallization begins and "step by step'' the
   positions of the molecules are set in order. Another well-known example is the
   chain reaction. In this case the transition to the next step is the
   self-reproduction of the reagents as a result of the reaction. In physical
   systems where all relationships important for the behavior of the system as a
   whole are statistical in nature, the stairway effect also manifests itself
   statistically; the criterion of the possibility of transition to the next step is
   quantitative and statistical. In this case the stairway effect can be equated
   with the chain reaction, if the latter term is understood in the very broadest
   sense.

THE SCALE OF THE METASYSTEM TRANSITION

   WE ARE MORE INTERESTED in the case where the transition to the next step is
   qualitative, specifically the metasystem transition. For the stairway effect to
   occur in this case it is clearly necessary for system X, which is undergoing the
   metasystem transition (see figure 5.2), to itself remain a subsystem of some
   broader system Y, within which conditions are secured and maintained for multiple
   transitions ''from step to step''--the metasystem transition beyond subsystem X.

   [IMG.FIG5.2.GIF]

   Figure 5.2. The stairway effect within ultrametasystem Y. The arrows indicate
   changes taking place in time.

   We shall call such a system Y an ultrametasystem in relation to the series X, X',
   X", . . and so on. Let us take a more detailed look at the question of the
   connection between the metasystem transition and the system-subsystem relation.

   We have already encountered metasystem transitions of different scale. Metasystem
   transitions in the structure of the brain are carried out within the organism and
   do not involve the entire organism. Social integration is a metasystem transition
   in relation to the organism as a whole, but it does not take humanity outside of
   the biogeographic community, the system of interacting living beings on a world
   scale. There is always a system Y which includes the given system X as its
   subsystem. The only possible exception is the universe as a whole, the system Z
   which by definition is not part of any other system. We say ''possible''
   exception because we do not know whether the universe can be considered a system
   in the same sense as known, finite systems.

   Now let us look in the opposite direction, from the large to the small, from the
   whole to the part. What happens in system X when it evolves without undergoing a
   metasystem transition? Suppose that a certain subsystem W of system X makes a
   metasystem transition.

   [IMG.FIG5.3.GIF]

   Figure 5.3. The metasystem transition W ->W' within system X.

   This means that system W is replaced by system W', which in relation to W is a
   metasystem (and contains a whole series of W-type subsystems) but in relation to
   X is a subsystem analogous to W and performs the same functions in X as W had
   been performing, only probably better. Depending on the role of subsystem W in
   system X, the replacement of W with W'' will be more or less important for X. In
   reviewing the stages in the evolution of living beings during the cybernetic
   period we substituted the organism as a whole for X and the highest stage of
   control of the organism for W. Therefore the metasystem transition W -> W' was of
   paramount importance for X. But a metasystem transition may also occur somewhere
   ''in the provinces,'' at one of the lower levels of organization.

   [IMG.FIG5.4.GIF]

   Figure 5.4. Metasystem transition at one of the lower levels of organization.

   Suppose W is one of the subsystems of X., V is one of the subsystems of W, and U
   is one of the subsystems of V. The metasystem transition U -> U' may greatly
   improve the functioning of V, and consequently the functioning of W also,
   although to a lesser degree, and finally, to an even smaller degree, the
   functioning of X. Thus, evolutionary changes in X, even though they are not very
   significant, may be caused by a metasystem transition at just one of the lower
   levels of the structure.

   These observations provide new material for assessing quantitative and
   qualitative changes in the process of development. If system X contains
   homogeneous subsystems W and the number of these subsystems increases we call
   such a change quantitative. We shall unquestionably classify the metasystem
   transition as a qualitative change. We can assume that any qualitative change is
   caused by a metasystem transition at some particular level of the structure of
   the system. Considering the mechanics of evolution described above (replication
   of systems plus the trial and error method) this assumption is highly probable.

TOOLS FOR PRODUCING TOOLS

   LET US RETURN to material culture and the stairway effect. The objects and
   implements of labor are parts, subsystems of the system we have called the
   "super-being,'' which emerges with the development of human society. Now we shall
   simply call this super-being culture, meaning by this both its physical ''body''
   and its method of functioning (''physiology''), depending on the context.
   Therefore, the objects and implements of labor are subsystems of culture. They
   may possess their own complex structure and, depending upon how they are used,
   they may be part of larger subsystems of culture which also have their own
   internal structures.

   Specifically, the division of material subsystems into objects of labor and
   implements of labor (tools) is in itself profoundly meaningful and reflects the
   structure of production. When a human being applies tool B to objects of a
   certain class A, this tool, together with objects A, forms a metasystem, in
   relation to subsystems A. Indeed. subsystem B acts directly upon subsystems A and
   is specially created for this purpose. (Of course, this action does not take
   place without the participation of the human hand and mind, which are part of any
   production system.) Thus, the appearance of a tool for working on certain objects
   that had not previously been worked on is a metasystem transition within the
   production system. As we have seen, the ability to create tools is one of the
   first results of the development of human traits; and because the human being
   remains the permanent moving force of the production system, the metasystem
   transition from object of labor to implement of labor may be repeated as many
   times as one likes. After having created tool B to work on objects in class A the
   human being begins to think of ways to improve the tool and manufactures tool C
   to use in making tools of class B. He does not stop here; he makes tool D to
   improve tools of class C, and so on. The implement of labor invariably becomes an
   object of labor. This is the stairway effect. It is important to assimilate the
   very principle of making tools (learning to climb up a step). After this
   assimilation everything follows of its own accord: the production system becomes
   an ultrametasystem capable of development. The result of this process is modern
   industry, a highly complex multilevel system which uses natural materials and
   step by step converts them into its ''body''--structures, machines, and
   instruments--just as the living organism digests the food it has eaten.

THE LOWER PALEOLITHIC

   LET US CONSTRUCT a general outline of the development of material culture. The
   history of culture before the emergence of metalworking is divided into two ages:
   the Paleolithic (Old Stone Age) and the Neolithic (New Stone Age). In each age
   distinct cultures are identified, which differ by geographic region and the time
   of their existence. The cultures which have been found by archaeological
   excavation have been given names derived from the names of the places where they
   were first discovered.

   Traces of Paleolithic culture have been found in many regions of Europe, Asia,
   and Africa. They enable us to confidently make a periodization of the development
   of culture in the Paleolithic and divide the age into a number of stages (epochs)
   which are universally important for all geographic regions.

   The most ancient stages are the so-called Chellean, followed by the Acheulean and
   then the Mousterian. These three stages are joined together under the common name
   Lower (or Early) Paleolithic. The beginning of the Lower Paleolithic is dated
   about 700,000 years ago and the end (the late Mousterian culture) is dated about
   40,000 years ago.

   The Chellean and Acheulean cultures know just one type of stone tool--the hand
   ax. The Chellean hand ax is very primitive; it is a stone crudely flaked on two
   sides, resembling a modern axhead in shape and size. The typical Acheulean hand
   ax is smaller and much better made; it has carefully sharpened edges. In
   addition, signs of the use of fire are found at Acheulean sites.

   The tools of the Mousterian culture reveal a clear differentiation. Here we
   distinguish at least two unquestionably distinct types of stone tools: points and
   scrapers. Stoneworking technique is considerably higher in the Mousterian period
   than in the Acheulean. Objects made of bone and horn appear. Fire is universally
   used. We do not know whether the Mousterians were able to make fire, but it is
   clear that they were able to preserve it.

   In a biological sense the human being of the Lower Paleolithic was not yet the
   modern form. The Chellean and Acheulean cultures belonged to people (or
   semipeople?) of the Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus types. The Mousterian was
   the culture of the Neanderthals. In the Lower Paleolithic the development of
   techniques for making tools (not only from stone but also from wood and other
   materials which have not survived until our day) proceeded parallel with the
   development of human physical and mental capabilities, with human evolution as a
   species. The increase in brain size is the most convincing evidence of this
   evolution. The following table shows the capacity of the cranial cavity in fossil
   forms of man, the anthropoid apes, and modern man:

   Gorilla

                                     600-685 cm^3

   Pithecanthropus

                                     800-900 cm^3

   Sinanthropus    1.000-1,1100 cm^3
   Neanderthal     1,100-1,600 cm^3
   Modern Man      1,200-1,700 cm^3

   Let us note that although the Neanderthal brain is only slightly smaller in
   volume than the brain of modern man it has significantly smaller frontal lobes
   and they play the chief role in thinking. The frontal lobes of the brain appear
   to be the principal storage area for "arbitrary'' associations.

THE UPPER PALEOLITHIC

   AT THE BOUNDARY between the Lower and Upper Paleolithic (approximately 40,000
   years ago) the process of establishment of the human being concludes. The human
   being of the Upper Paleolithic is, in biological terms, modern man: Homo sapiens.
   From this moment onward nature invests all its ''evolutionary energy'' in the
   culture of human society, not in the biology of the human individual.

   Three cultures are distinguished in the Upper Paleolithic: Aurignacian,
   Solutrean, and Magdalenian. The first two are very close and are joined together
   in a single cultural epoch: the Aurignac-Solutrean. The beginning of this epoch
   is coincident with the end of the Mousterian epoch. Several sites have been found
   containing bones of both Neanderthals and modern man. It follows from this that
   the last evolutionary change, which completed the formation of modern man, was
   very significant and the new people quickly supplanted the Neanderthals.

   In the Aurignac-Solutrean epoch, stone-working technique made great advances in
   comparison with the Mousterian epoch. Various types of tools and weapons can be
   found: blades, spears, javelins, chisels, scrapers, and awls. Bone and horn were
   used extensively. Sewing appeared, as evidenced by needles which have been found.
   In one of the monuments of Solutrean culture a case made of bird bone and
   containing a whole assortment of bone needles was found, as was a bone fishing
   hook. By the Magdalenian epoch (about 15,000 years ago) throwing spears and
   harpoons had appeared. A noteworthy difference between the Upper Paleolithic and
   the Lower is the emergence of visual art. Cave drawing appeared in the
   Aurignac-Solutrean epoch and reached its peak in the Magdalenian. Many pictures
   (primarily of animals) have been found whose expressiveness, brevity, and
   exactness in conveying nature amaze even the modern viewer. Sculptured images and
   objects used for ornamentation also appear. There are two points of view on the
   question of the origin of art: the first claims art is derived from magic
   rituals, the second from esthetic and cognitive goals. However, when we consider
   the nature of primitive thinking (as we shall below) the difference between these
   two sources is insignificant.

   Looking at material production as a system, the crucial difference between the
   Upper Paleolithic and the Lower is the appearance of composite implements (for
   example, a spear with a stone point). Their appearance can be viewed as a
   metasystem transition, because in making a composite implement a system is
   created from subsystems. Before, the maker would have viewed the two components
   as independent entities (the point as a piercing stone tool and the pole as a
   stick or wooden spear). This is not a simple transition; even in historical
   times, there could be found a group of people (the indigenous inhabitants of the
   island of Tasmania) who did not know composite implements.

   The Tasmanians no longer exist as an ethnic group. The last pure-blooded
   Tasmanian woman died in 1877. The information about the Tasmanian culture that
   has been preserved is inadequate and sometimes contradictory. Nonetheless, they
   may certainly be considered the most backward human group of all those known by
   ethnography. Their isolation from the rest of the human race (the Tasmanians'
   nearest neighbors, the Australian aborigines, were almost equally backward) and
   the impoverished nature of the island, in particular the absence of animals
   larger than the kangaroo, played parts in this. With due regard for differences
   in natural conditions, the culture of the Tasmanians may be compared to the
   Aurignac-Solutrean culture in its early stages. The Tasmanians had the stone hand
   ax, sharp point, crudely shaped stone cutting tool, wooden club (two types, for
   hand use and throwing), wooden spear, stick for digging up edible roots, and
   wooden spade for scraping mussels off rocks. In addition they were able to weave
   string and sacks (baskets) from grass or hair. They made fire by friction. But,
   to again repeat, they were not able to make composite tools--for example, to
   attach a stone working part to a wooden handle.

THE NEOLITHIC REVOLUTION

   UNLIKE THE PALEOLITHIC CULTURES, the Neolithic cultures (which are known from
   both archaeological and ethnographic findings) show great diversity, specificity,
   and local characteristics. In terms of techniques of producing tools the
   Neolithic is an elaboration of the qualitative jump (metasystem transition) made
   in the late Paleolithic: composite tools made using other tools. Following this
   route human beings made a series of outstanding advances, the most remarkable of
   which is clearly the invention of the bow. Great changes also took place in
   clothing and in the construction of dwellings.

   Although the Neolithic cannot boast of a large-scale metasystem transition in
   regard to tool manufacture, a metasystem transition of enormous importance
   nevertheless did occur during this period. It concerned the overall method of
   obtaining food (and therefore it indirectly involved tools also). This was the
   transition from hunting and gathering to livestock herding and farming--sometimes
   called the Neolithic revolution. The animal and plant worlds, which until this
   had been only external, uncontrolled sources of food, now became subject to
   active influence and control by human beings. The effects of this transition
   spread steadily. We are thus dealing with a typical metasystem transition.

   Archaeologists date the emergence of farming and livestock herding to about 7,000
   years ago, emphasizing that this is an approximate date. The most ancient cereal
   crops were wheat, millet, barley, and rice. Rye and oats appeared later. The
   first domesticated animal was the dog. Its domestication is dated in the Early
   Neolithic, before the emergence of farming. With the transition to farming,
   people domesticated the pig, sheep, goat, and cow. Later, during the age of
   metal, the domesticated horse and camel appeared.

THE AGE OF METAL

   THE AGE OF METAL is the next page in the history of human culture after the
   Neolithic. The transition to melting metal marks a metasystem transition in the
   system of production. Whereas the material used earlier to make tools (wood,
   stone, bone, and the like) was something given and ready to use, now a process,
   melting metal, emerged and it was directed not to making a tool but rather to
   making the material for the tool. As a result people received new materials with
   needed characteristics that were not found in nature. First there was bronze,
   then iron, various grades of steel, glass, paper, and rubber. From the point of
   view of the structure of production the age of metal should be called the age of
   materials. Strictly speaking, such crafts as leather tanning and pottery, which
   originated earlier than metal production, should be viewed as the beginning of
   the metasystem transition to the age of materials. But there is a crucial phase
   in each metasystem transition when the advantages of creating the new level in
   the system become obvious and indisputable. For the age of materials this phase
   was the production of metals, especially iron.

   The most ancient traces of bronze in Mesopotamia and Egypt date to the 4th
   millennium B.C. Iron ore began to be melted by 1300 B.C.

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTIONS

   THE NEXT qualitative jump in the system of production was the use of sources of
   energy other than the muscular energy of human beings and animals. This, of
   course, is also a metasystem transition because a new level of the system
   emerges: the level of engines which control the movement of the working parts of
   the machine. The first industrial revolution (eighteenth century) radically
   changed the entire appearance of production. Improvement of engines becomes the
   leitmotif of technical progress. First there was the steam engine, then the
   internal combustion engine, and then the electric motor. The age of materials was
   followed by the age of energy.

   Finally, our day is witness to one more metasystem transition in the structure of
   production. A new level is emerging, the level of control of engines. The second
   industrial revolution is beginning, and it is obvious that it will have a greater
   effect on the overall makeup of the system of production than even the first did.
   The age of energy is being replaced by the age of information. Automation of
   production processes and the introduction of computers into national economies
   lead to growth in labor productivity which is even more rapid than before and
   give the production system the character of an autonomous, self-controlling
   system.

THE QUANTUM OF DEVELOPMENT

   THE SIMILARITY between successive stages in the development of technology and the
   functions of biological objects has long been noted. The production of industrial
   materials can be correlated with the formation and growth of living tissue. The
   use of engines corresponds to the work of muscles, and automatic control and
   transmission of information corresponds to the functioning of the nervous system.
   This parallel exists despite the fundamental difference in the nature of
   biological and technical systems and the completely different factors that cause
   their development. Nonetheless, the similarity in the stages of development is
   far from accidental. It arises because all processes of development have one
   common feature: development always takes place by successive metasystem
   transitions. The metasystem transition is, if you like, the elementary unit, the
   universal quantum of development. Therefore it is not surprising in the least
   that having compared the initial stage of development of two different
   systems--for example industrial materials and living tissue--we receive a natural
   correlation among later stages, which are formed by the accumulation of these
   universal quanta.

THE EVOLUTION OF THOUGHT

   OUR NEXT TASK on the historical plane is to analyze the development of thought
   beginning with the most ancient phase about which we have reliable information.
   This phase is primitive society with Late Paleolithic and Early Neolithic
   culture. But before speaking of primitive thinking, before ''putting ourselves in
   the role'' of primitive people, we shall investigate thinking in general, using
   both the modern thinking apparatus as an investigative tool and modern thinking
   as an object of investigation that is directly accessible to each of us from
   personal experience. This is essential in order that we may clearly see the
   difference between primitive thinking and modern thinking and the general
   direction of the development of thinking. The investigation we are preparing to
   undertake in the next two chapters can be defined as a cybernetic approach to the
   basic concepts of logic and to the problem of the relationship between language
   and thinking.
     ____________________________________________________________________________

References

   1. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/default.html
   2. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/turchin.html
   3. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading2
   4. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading3
   5. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading4
   6. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading5
   7. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading6
   8. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading7
   9. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading8
  10. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading9
  11. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading10
  12. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading11
  13. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/POS/Turchap5.html#Heading12