You do have a knack for seeing the forest and wondering where the tree are, and vice versa.
why would you discuss telescopes and microscopes in the context of studying culture? I know you are not stupid, so I can only assume you are being belligerent.
I see no evidence of colletive consciousness, other than as a metaphor. If it were something other than a metaphor then it could be studied with the appropriate analytical tools. Are you suggesting something along the lines of ESP?
Brains do not write books, at least no so far. People write books, and brains are a component part of people. So far, no one lacking a brain has written a book. And some people are born missing the cortex, and so far, none of them have written books.
Moi??? Belligerent? Do you really think that's fair or equitable, js?
You said: "If [the collective consciousness] were something other than a metaphor then it could be studied with the appropriate analytical tools."
Noted. But what does this mean? Does it mean that you dispose of the collective consciousness (regarding which there seem to be empirical reports) as a "mere" metaphor, going in? And therefore nothing of any substance whatever deserving of an organized investigation?
OR did you mean to propose an actual experiment, by which the collective consciousness could be falsified?
If the latter, then i am all ears. :^) If the former, then i have heard it all before, ad nauseam.
As for your comment regarding ESP: I make no claim for it pro or con whatever. But would like to note that, in order for ESP to be "true," it would need a field in which to propagate. Or so it seems to me.
When you say "brains are a component part of people," are you suggesting that somehow people are not reducible to their brains? Or did I misunderstand something?
What would the "irreducible" part look like?
Questions, questions, and then more questions.... There is never any end to it, in an infinite Universe.