on humanism and environmental crisis

Archive for July, 2014

Aside

TER (towards evolutionary reality)- the concepts of time and explicitness

Many complicated concept are greatly simplified and demystified.

The time.

The Universe is still. It is such  and such, mathematically pure and complete.

It is completely implicit, no communications, no axioms, conventions, paradigms.

As I am trying to understand it , I am doing it in the way my mind allows me to do it.

I am naming , making sense, categorising, communicating.

This creates my Universe, the only reality I can get.

I have been creating this and learning about this reality since birth.

Now, almost 70 year old, I believe that that process is common for all beings.

All beings who have nervous system,  create their Universes with the a marked degree of explicitness.

It is possible to prove this by examining their nervous system and find  some description of the reality or understanding.

As we would use our mind for this investigations, we’d find that even very primitive  beings

would “use’ two categories very familiar for us.

1. good-bad category

2. Level of intensity category.

Both of them contain the concept of time in them:

1. “Good” means – live longer- means- bigger number of behaviors/ experiences/ choices/units of understanding/ chances to multiply between birth and death.

2. “Intensity” divides immediately into the energy concentration, distance( space) and time.

This will tell how many of these behaviors can be packed between birth and death.

So, so simple- this is the origin and nature of time in the intellicentrism. Without doing something, without understanding, making sense of something what is time good for.

Remember: there is no Nobody Universe!

The explicitness.

Simple behaviors/experiences/units of understanding shift from implicit to explicit rapidly.

In one pocket you have 2 dollars and in other also 2. Your being 4 dollars worth is completely implicit. Then , ka-boom- you pulled them out – everybody sees 4 dollars, or you just say “ I have 4 dollars” or  just 2+2= 4. or you scribble this on the blackboard- whatever you do – the shift to explicit is rapid and complete. The communication is full across very broad social spectrum. At least most humans , excluding the infants and imbecils, will get it. You feel kind of strange- implicit- then you think- I know , I am hungry!- more explicit, but except for you and your wife, nobody knows. Then you shout”I am hungry”, then you tweet it to the whole Universe, then additionally you gesture ‘ mangiare, mangiare”- more and more explicit. But the concept is more complex and communication less complete, less explicit. (see also “implicit and explicit worldviews”)

With the evolutionary march of complexity, the level of the explicity is very important. The animal’s expression of its life purpose  is mostly implicit- it is the sum of its behaviors experienced by its parents, mates , offsprings and the rest of the social group. Very, very few of these behaviors have the characteristics of communication, even fewer , of the metaphor.

But still, the nervous system has the ability to mushroom complexity relatively easily by increase of explicity, that the other systems of the nature just have no chance. The development of the metaphor, then language, then the culture, then reflective thinking, is so energetically cheap that the rest of the all life systems(eyes, necks, crocodiles, birds and monkeys, civilizations, et caetera, et caetera ) practically stop evolving.

Also, most of the systems have clear evolutionary constrains:

the neck can be only so long – see giraffe’s dilemma,

the brain can be only so large- see pelvic dilemma,

the  population can be only so large- see Malthus, or year 2050 dilemma.

But explicity? Can you see the limits of the depth of communication, closiness of relationships, or how much you understand or love? And all of these with the shift of the hierarchy of the few synapses and a smile.

Czy by sie Ter podobala Jezusowi?

Czy by sie Ter podobala  Jezusowi? Bo Buddzie na pewno.

Najwazniejsze punkty  TER ( towards evolutionary reality)

1.Materialna rzeczywistosc jest “podlegla” albo “zdominowana” albo “zalezna” od idei niematerialnej . NP.katechizm:” swiat byl stworzony z niczego dla nas , abysmy go doswiadczali”

albo Howard Thurman: ”nie pytaj co swiat potrzebuje, zapytaj co daje ci natchnienie. I rob to. Czego swiatu potrzeba, to ludzie z natchnieniem” moje tlumaczenie, “what makes you come alive” =natchnienie?, entuzjazm? pelnia zycia?

albo:Roald Dahl : “ a przede wszystkim, blyszczacymi oczami ogladaj swiat dookola , bo najwieksze tajemnice sa zawsze ukryte w niespodziewanych miejscach. Kto nie wierzy w magie, nigdy ich nie znajdzie”

2. Wszystkie istoty , teraz, w przeszlosci i przyszlosci doswiadczaja ten sam swiat.

3. Nauka i nasze zrozumienie swiata musza sie zgadzac. Nie mozemy sobie pozwolic na przymruzenie oka albo “zgode” na odmienne opinie. Nauka bez filozofii zruinowala kulture i nasza planete, kazda chwila jest droga zeby to odwrocic.

4. Koncept “mojego swiata”, czyli “ jak ja widze ewolucje funkcji mozgu”, jest podstawa mojego rozumienia swiata, moich uczuc i mojego celu.

5. .Moj zwiazek uczuciowy (‘stosunek”?) z toba ,z toba, i z toba, moja Mamo, i z toba moj Ojcze, jest lustrzanym odbiciem tego ja, ktory probuje zrozumiec. Czyli , jestesmy- ja i Ty.

Tak, Ty. Im bardziej sie poznamy, tym berdziej sie mozemy zaprzyjaznic. Jeden na jednego. Jesli stworzymy “nas” to ze strachu przed “nimi”. A to nie byloby evo-ob

6.Moj swiat, ktory buduje od momentu poczecia, sklada sie z informacji/doswiadczen wzietych ze swiatow tych istot i  jest czescia kazdego z tych swiatow. Jest on takze moim celem, tym co zostawie, moja niesmiertelnoscia.

7. KIedy umre  , natura mojego swiata sie nie zmieni, nadal bede czescia tych swiatow, to

podkresla odpowiadzialnosc i beztroske. Nalezy umrzec kiedy ta spuscizna jest maxymalna, ku uciesze wszystkich zainteresowanych.

8.TER jest dziwaczny, przeciw-intuicyjny i radykalny. Nawet ja , ktory go wymyslilem i “siedze w nim” od dawna, czasem wen wierze i jestem pelen zachwytu a czasem watpie i chcialbym to rzucic “w czerty”.

Would Jesus like TER?

 

Would Jesus like TER (towards evolutionary reality)

I think so, and Buddha would for sure.

 

Basic principles of the evo-real worldview:

 

1.In my worldview the material reality is dominated by or dependent to immaterial ideas. For example:my catholic catechism: “the world was created from nothing for us to experience and enjoy”.

or Howard Thurman: “ Don’t ask yourself what the world needs; ask yourself what makes you come alive. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive.”

or Roald Dahl: “And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don’t believe in magic will never find it”.

 

2. All beings (past, present and future)  live in same world, they share same reality.

 

3. The Science needs to be compatible with our understanding and the worldview. We can not anymore afford “agreement on disagreement” or “taking the religion with the grain of salt’ or “wink of the eye”. The science without philosophy have ruined our culture and our planet over the last 500 years of the hypocritic truce. We have to reverse it and it is not a moment too soon. The TEO is scientific idealism.

 

4. .The concept of “my Universe”  or “the way I see the evolution of the function of the brain”, is absolutely central for my understanding of the world, my feelings and my purpose.

 

5. I relate to you, to you, to you, my Mom, to you my Father as a mirror image to seeing myself, this understanding me or the evolutionary me. So, this is me and you. Yes, you. The more we know each other, the better friends we’d become. One on one. As soon as we create “us” it is because of fear of “them”.

6. My Universe , which I have been building since conception, consists of the experience/ information taken from beings I have related to, directly or indirectly. My universe also contributes to the universes of these beings. Obviously, my Universe is my project, my purpose, my legacy and my immortality.

 

7. When I die, nothing much will change. I will continue to be part of the Universe of these beings. It brings responsibility, purpose but also great lightness.

 

8.TER-kind of exaggerated existentialism- is weird, counter-intuitive and radical.  Even me, who invented it, and dwells in it for ages,. sometimes I believe in it, and everything seems to “click” in harmony, and sometimes the routine and convention takes over, then I doubt and want to give up.