From Slater:

I think that life had to first evolve from this operational necessity. A rapid interchange of information at all levels(I use “levels” here because it i simply most convenient for my expression).

In James’ “Painful truth” page, under “Ralph on Everything”, I explore this development in regard to what is known as the Cambrian Explosion.http://www.hwarmstrong.com/ralph_haulk_part_2.htm#cambrian

What I point out in that essay is that during the Cambrian explosion, a number of different species appeared, and the mechanism for the development of each species occurred because sexual reproduction helped to provide for the immunity that created each separate species.

Until that time, viruses and bacteria entered “willy nilly” in constant exchange for host bodies to replicate themselves. I proposed this theory several years ago, and was pleasantly surprised to discover that it became the dominant theory now known as the “Red Queen” hypothesis. This ties back to Slater’s introductory quote, because communities, in their beginning, operated the same way, with a necessary exploration of all new interconnections.

Biologically, each organism recorded the information contained in the DNA of each virus and retained it in a kind of database that allowed for recognition.

That is, in fact, the basic function by which the immune system operates. When a viral or bacterial invader appears, the organism must identify and recognize the invader, “tag” it, and neutralize its overall effects. This ensured that the same invader will not create chaos by constantly affecting the integrity of the information built by the organism’s DNA. So, in parallel with Slater’s statement, first you have the process in which all new information is examined and “cross referenced” by each participant in the system, and then the system(or community) gradually “tags” that information and neutralizes it. That is, it simply stores it in a database for future reference, as the organism stores “junk DNA” which is actually former viruses that have remained within the organism.

Dr. Sharon Moalem, in “Survival Of The Sickest“, a study of DNA and epigenetics, makes this statement in regard to sexual attraction:

“Even sexual attraction has a connection to disease. Why is the scent of someone you find sexually attractive so alluring? It’s often a sign that you have dissimilar immune systems, which will give your children wider immunity than either of their parents.”

With a wider exchange of DNA “ideas”, each organism gradually selected a process by which specific “ideas” for reproduction were coded sexually. Sperm provided environmental information, and the egg was “charged” with that specific information, creating a mixing and matching of DNA that would act to screen out future DNA that had already created genetic disturbance.

Communities, essentially, began the same way, with a “willy nilly” interaction of ideas across a limited geographical spectrum, and each idea was cross referenced by the members and applied in ways that ensured survival as a community. Within ancient societies, sex and culture were recognized as connected, since each member, especially of the males, went through a “rite of passage”, which generally represented passage from boyhood to manhood. Puberty.

With this entrance into social/cultural responsibilities, a method was obtained for “screening” new information that would be destructive to the reproductive success of the tribe or community. It is likely, from this approach that “levels” did emerge, with different orders of hierarchy to direct the function of the society.

This leads to what I think is the next insight:
Intelligence, both as an individual and culturally, springs from needs of the immune system.

Deception, for example, occurs at the cellular level of an organism. As Dr Moalem writes:

“Many types of streptococcal bacteria exhibit a phenomenon called molecular mimicry in which they display characteristics of human cells in order to trick the immune system”.

In cultures, the idea of a trickster or ‘deceiver’ is part of the religious ritual/ceremonial culture.
“Satan and his angels may appear as ministers of light”.

Consequently, cultures preached against deception, protecting the integrity of the system against those who appeared as “good” but were really “evil”. Males were to recognize and do battle with “evil” and maintain reproductive integrity by following careful ritual.

This ritual is little different than sexual reproductive rituals that animals undergo in finding mates. Species often protect the integreity of that particular species by very intricate “dance” that allows recognition between two of the same species, especially when there are other related species that are of little difference other than the mating rituals they perform, as in some species of crabs that share close environments.

Viewed in this fashion, community as described by Slater’s opening quote would be “natural”, but it would be just as “natural” to gradually develop structured defenses against “deceivers” at all levels within any community.

It is quite likely that religion as we recognize it is nothing more than a conceptual process by which we developed a “pattern” in our minds of a deceiver who battles a protector. We align ourselves with this “protector” by carefully obeying specific commands that accompany the survival strategy.

This also aligns with Dawkins’ notions of the “genetic replicative algorithm”. If a gene is to successfully replicate itself, it will seek to minimize change within its immediate environment. A strategy of the replicative algorithm, therefore, would be to control the environment as much as possible, so that excess “decisions” are not necessary. The “prime directive” of the gene is to replicate, and all strategies that maximize that ability will gradually be selected.

We can apply this at both the genetic level and the cultural level, which means that, in any culture, the natural tendency is to minimize options. The defensive strategies of the culture will be come ever more complex in its protection of its own replication, as it will “unconsciously” in robot-like fashion, operate from a “will” that no loger represents the best options of its members, as we are seeing today in our corporate centralized culture.