" The standard view in
biology that all life emerged from a primordial soup
on the Earth is far less likely than a tornado blowing through a junk yard
and assembling a Boeing 747." .............Chandra Wickramasinghe
"In wilderness I
sense the miracle of life, and behind it our scientific
accomplishments fade to trivia".....Charles A LIndbergh
& The UNKNOWN
Throughout history those who hold power have used it to create definitions
that marginalize people who do not hold power. At the same time that they
have made use of the technologies and resources of those they dominate,
they have minimized them or failed to acknowledge their originators.
...........Encyclopedia of American Indian Contributions to the World
- Keoke, Emory Dean.
The meta-assumption in this work is that in any thought as well as
any inevitable interpretation of any and all experiences, certain
assumptions and beliefs are inherent and implicit, whether these
are consciously realized or else these operate subconsciously.
One of the goals of this work is to make all operating assumptions
operate at a conscious level, and tested or examined for their validity
continuously in the light of new experiences, new situations, new
or tougher or broader or deeper challenges, and appropriately
expressed so that these expressions have not only personal
validity but also potentially acquire general validity.
"There are more things
in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
2.1.1 OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF CONCEPTS
THEIR DEFINITIONS : & THEIR USAGE IN THIS WORK
definition should entirely circumscribe what it defines,
and it alone."....... Andre Comte-Sponville
definition of definition is that it refers to every and only
of that term. A triangle is defined by every such shape that has three sides.
Every triangle has three sides and only triangles have three sides."
"The power to define the
situation is the ultimate power".
This section goes into the fundamentals of what are the building
blocks and elements of the concepts, thoughts and experiences
that are behind the construction of this work. Several have been
defined here, for the specific purpose of this work. Definitions are
crucial for any intellect based construct, discourse or expression of
ideas. It is only when an attempt is made to define a concept that
we can have some sort of coherent inter-relationship of concepts,
and any prose or language based construct is shaky without any
well defined concepts. The exercise of defining concepts is the first
constructive/creative step towards knowledge - which is the base
from which one can reach for power - by which one can redefine
and refine the concepts with which one's mind operates.
"It is the business of thought to
define things, to find the boundaries;
thought, indeed, is a ceaseless process of definition. It is the business
of Art to give things shape".....Vance Palmer
The only domain that does not require definitions is poetry. No poetic
artist can be bound by rules, and some of the best poets do not follow
any rules and definitions of words and their conventional arrangements
( grammar ). An inspired artist deliberately defies conventions and
boundaries set by others, one of the chief points of art being to expose
the limitations of conventions, standards, norms and boundaries.
"Existence is beyond
the power of words to define:
Terms may be used,
But are none of them absolute"........Witter Bryner
tells us the nature of a thing - the essence of a thing - what
the thing is. If you don't know what it is then you don't know anything
else about it, because you don't know what you are talking about.
The basic logical rule of a definition is that it is neither too narrow, nor
too broad. If it is too narrow it does not cover all the instances of the
thing that is being defined, and if it is too broad then it does not clearly
distinguish that thing from all other things.".........P. Kreeft
In all of analysis and /or descriptions using words and the concepts
behind them as tools, it should never be lost sight of that these are
always dealing with or representing 'parts' of a 'whole'. For example,
if the 'Self' is considered as a 'whole', then 'Will', 'Mind', 'Brain',
'Reason', 'Instinct', 'Emotions' etc are parts of the 'Self'.
Only the 'Spirit' and its carrying essence 'Soul' are both part of
the 'Self' as
well as 'beyond Self' or 'transcendent Self'.
In all analysis and descriptions, statements are made about assumed
parts of a whole, and how they relate to the whole and how they
inter-relate amongst themselves. It must be kept in mind always that
no statement is definitive, only tentative, as each individual is not only
uniquely constituted but also has to develop a unique understanding
about one's own self and its relation to Nature ....a larger whole.
"For a short
while, our mothers bodies are the boundaries and personal
geography which are all that we know of the world. Once we no longer
live beneath our mother's heart, it's the earth with which we form the
same dependent relationship.".....Louise Erdrich ( Chippewa )
contemplate the beauty of the earth find reserves of
strength that will endure as long as life lasts."...Rachel Carson
The thrust of this work is therefore an analysis of the Self in as many
ways as possible, but with coherence. But since sometimes the many
ways may lead the reader to confusion, the fundamental division and
distinction of the physical and non-physical should be referred to as the
primary analysis entry point. For example, the 'Will' although is a
combination of both the physical and the non- physical, if it comes to a
situation where the 'Will' needs to be classified, then it must be taken
as an aspect of the non-physical, that is, as a force rather than as a
process or function. The sub-conscious is clearly classified here as an
attribute of the physical, whereas the supra-conscious is classified here
as an attribute of the non-physical, and the conscious as the
convergence of both physical as well as non-physical.
But some aspects are clear cut : for example, base emotions
as part of the physical, but the higher emotions are usually
initiated by the non-physical.
There also has to be an aesthetic or abstract element in the way a split
has been made and applied: a given situation may account well for one
kind of analytic split, and yet another situation may call for a very
different sort of split. And ultimately any analysis is only good if it
leads to integration of the Self and a creative synthesis that results in
meaningful expression. Thus, synthesis is greatly dependent upon
correct and well directed analysis. The successful analysis of the Self
and a developed ability to synthesize leads to the most useful outcome
of the struggle : the integration into oneself the ideas and expressed
experiences of others.
To learn from the experiences as well as the mistakes of others means
that one does not fall into the traps and errors others have fallen
into or succumbed to.
"You must learn from
the mistakes of others. You can't possibly
live long enough to make them all yourself."....Sam Levenson
"Human beings, who are
almost unique in having the ability to
learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for
their apparent disinclination to do so"...........Douglas Adams
Here a distinction has to be made between what one learns from the
account of others through the direction of one's Will, versus that which
one has been made to learn through the bringing up and education
process. The first kind of learning is genuine and the latter kind is of
an entrapping kind. The latter kind is the kind that has to be first
'unlearned' in order to transcend its negative or trapping effects.
The first thing that needs to be learned is to unlearn the rigid
usage of words in expressions of beliefs that tends to fixate the
belief system of an individual so as to conform with the belief
system of the society and culture of that individual.
Since words, concepts and beliefs tend to create a secondary
reality of their own, it becomes critically important to treat them
as tools that are applied with a purpose, or else they become
traps of a virtual reality.
"We are born into
what William James calls a ' blooming, buzzing confusion'
by the acquisition of words we mosaic over various sectors of this 'blooming
buzzing confusion' with words. We replace the unknown with the known through
the substitution with words. By the time the child is two or three they have
completely created a cultural mosaic of words that is interposed between them
and reality. Reality from then on is only an unconfirmed rumor through the
medium of language. Every culture accentuates different parts of reality.
Every culture is a different reality. language is the stuff of the world, not quantas
or wave packets or nutrinos. All the constructs of science are interlocking
constructs of syntax.
By dissolving the cultural conditioning, one returns to the primal language of the
animal body and can explore the real dimension of feeling that culture has a
tendency to cut us off from. Culture replaces authentic feeling with words.
The mystery is collapsed into a word. By the time the child is five or six years
old all the mysteries of reality have been carefully tiled over with words.
And we have sealed ourselves in within a linguistic shell of dis-impowered
perception and what the psychedelics do is burst apart this cultural envelope
of confinement and return us to the legacy and birthright of the organism."
Therefore the acquired concepts and beliefs from society and
culture are treated here as potential traps of a virtual reality
created by that culture. Language creates a 'virtual temporal
which can be both enlightening or entrapping.
It is indispensable for a self-explorer to realize this.
"We should be
careful to avoid the philosopher's fallacy of misplaced
concreteness - treating abstractions as if they were concrete realities.
We (humans) are the concrete realities"
....TMS P. Kreeft
" Kierkegaard is
noted for his polemics against three institutions of the
Danish society in his day, namely Hegelian philosophy, the established
church and the popular press. Hegelian philosophy in his view had traded
life for concept. He agreed with what was then the dominant school of
thought that life was to be understood historically in the sense that the
Hegelian system could uncover the necessity of events after they had
occurred, but he insisted that such speculation was powerless before
the contingencies of life as it is lived. 'It is perfectly true that as the
philosophers say that life must be understood backwards, but they
forget the other proposition : that it must be lived forwards. (Journals)'
Ideas can be systematized, life cannot. Attempting to live your life by
relying on abstract Hegelian philosophy, Kierkegaard scoffed, is like
taking your laundry to a shop that announces 'washing done' and
discovering that only the sign is for sale."....Thomas Flynn
"I must create a
system, or be enslaved by another man's"
"In the animal kingdom, the rule
is, eat or be eaten; in the human
kingdom, define or be defined."....Thomas Szasz
In the kingdom of politics,
manipulate or be manipulated,
in the economic kingdom, compete, monopolize or perish,
in civilizations, conquer or be conquered,
in the western kingdom, dominate or be dominated,
in the eastern kingdom, deify or be deified,
in the individual kingdom, create or be obliterated.
“The ‘Self under
siege’ under modernity presumed that there was a self
that was under siege, but in the view of Bourdrillard society has reached
a point at which it has literally been overcome by its technology and the
new issues are no longer issues like the non-believer or the non-offender,
but rather the non-person. In his view the social relations have disappeared
between humans because humans have begun to disappear, in fact ‘the real’
itself has begun to disappear – the symptoms of the trajectory of the
In the postmodern there can be no discussion of the ‘self’ or ‘real’ since both
of these would have disappeared. The postmodern is a blurring of the lines
between humans and machines, between reality and image – a world in which
‘reality’ simply can be simulated, Xeroxed, copied.
At some point in the development of technology, human beings
ceased to be the reason of things, and things took on their own reason.
In the postmodern the simulation has outrun reality - becomes more real than
the real – hyper-real. The heritage of philosophy and social theory has passed
over into advertising. The postmodern trajectory leaves us in a situation where
drawing the line between the real and the unreal is not merely philosophical
but a practical day to day issue - of figuring out what's a simulation and what's
not - is this guy really an insurance salesman or is he here to rob me.
This is not a Cartesian doubt but a wild radical doubt of the very ground beneath
our feet. Bourdrillard says what we are witnessing is the end of the world, the
end of human being and that this is nothing to be sad or cynical about - but
(rather to be taken as ) the ecstasy of communication. We have to look upon
the end of man, world etc. as an opportunity, because what were these
concepts anyway except concepts by which the world was regulated, policed,
mapped and controlled, which is now becoming more and more difficult to do
in a situation of rapidly increasing complexity and information technologies."
...........Rick Roderick ( TTC Self Under Siege )
HOW TO GO ABOUT DEFINITIONS:
WEB INT 2013: In order to define something new, we have to start with the known
concepts, symbolized by words, that are commonly known and well understood and
then build meaningful sentences that point towards the new concept. As an example,
I am taking up here the development of the concept of a physical thing, the electron,
because a physical thing is easier to define than a non-physical thing or intangible
quality that requires abstract conceptualization with complex analogies or metaphors.
I am doing so just to demonstrate how one can use simple concepts to build an understanding
of complex things or entities, and gain insight into the functioning of one’s mind, although in
this example it has been many minds that have built this model of the electron.
It was observed in the phenomena of electricity that the charges of static electricity were
in multiples of a specific, definite quantity of electrical charge, and therefore it was
assumed that a ‘PARTICLE' that contained this quantum of charge moved from one object to
another to build up a charge, whereas the opposite charge remained in the original object.
So this particle was of a definite quantum of moving charge of one kind: negative charge, was
given the name electron (although it could just as easily have been associated with the
words ‘positive charge’’).
Thus in this first level of definition of the electron, four basic concepts were used:
1) Particle: a very small part of something (matter) which may be so small as to be
invisible to the eye.
2) Quantum; a definite and small quantity of some physical property namely:
3) Charge – meaning to load up or maybe ‘charge into the enemy’
4) Movement: change of physical location or position……
These four concepts were sufficient to describe the electron initially. On development of the
first model of the atom, the electron was presumed to ‘orbit’ the proton like the model of
the solar system, but later on it was discovered that this was not an orbit but a ‘cloud of
possible locations’. So the concept of ‘particle’ was to be incorporated with that of a ‘cloud’.
Then it was discovered that the electron also behaves like a ‘wave’, a notion that was in
contradiction to the notion of a particle.
With every new property discovered, the electron’s initial model had drastically changed with
the incorporation of new, even contradictory concepts. So although the properties of the electron
are now well formulated, the concepts that were used initially were found to be not much more
than props and analogies in the process.
Extrapolating from this physical example, leads us to understand that abstract, intangible
realities can only be grasped by an extensive exploration of the existing concepts and their
inter-relation by analogy and metaphor, in which existing literature (diachronic) plays an
important role, but the process in this case is mainly art (of synchronic use of language).
Whereas for physical things the process of defining and construction of concepts is mainly logic,
and words are mostly symbolic in nature, but for non-physical or abstract things, the process
of artistic articulation is indispensable which can be in the form of parables, story telling, dialogs,
poetry and even prose in the form of rational constructs.
A crucial contrast is that defining physical things is easier because physical reality is static
and consistent, and is developed through the experiments and consensus of large number
of scientists, whereas, non-tangible realities are not easily definable, because these are
dynamically manifest, and have to be based upon personal experience, exploration, and
expressions of artistic creativity in language, which by it’s nature basically cannot be
objectified or verified by consensus as it is in science.
In attempting to conceptualize and define abstract, intangible realities through study of
literature, experiences and experimentation by expressions in language, one also is able to
study and improve the functioning of one’s own mind.
And now for a more formal approach :
2.1.2 Ontology: The subject of ontology is the study of the categories of
things that exist or may exist in some domain.
"The world is not independent from the act of description"....T. McKenna
exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to
everything else.” ...Buddha
Ontology is the attempt to say what entities exist. It is one's list
of entities or concepts about entities, while one's metaphysics is
an explanatory theory about the nature of those entities.
More generally : ontology is a catalog of the type of things that are assumed to
exist in a domain of interest D from the perspective of a person P who uses a
language L for the purpose of study of domain D. The catch with this is that
if domain D is the domain of existential reality, then person P is also part of
the domain D, and therefore person P, in order to study D, will first of all
have to study P, i.e., P itself, otherwise it will be misleading to study D.
"The ultimate mystery is one's own self."....Sammy Davis Jr
( Unfortunately, modern science's failure to comprehend nature and reality
has its roots in this paradox, but an even bigger joke is that this is
not even acknowledged in science, and yet it claims to study reality
objectively, i.e., supposedly independent of the person who studies it !
The gist of this story is that if scientists admit and acknowledge
that the domain D of their study has been not reality, but the
objectified physical universe only, their problems would become
easier, and the rest of the world would stand a chance to
breathe a fresh gasp of air. )
"Science cannot solve the
ultimate mystery of nature. And that is
because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and
therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve"
"The inability to comprehend the
process and underlying principle of life and
it's essence in the form of human life, comes from the narrow ontology of the
western civilization's religion of having only two things: God and Matter,
and further narrowing down of this ontology only into Matter by the
western non-theist or materialist." .....G Ryder HPost 2014
This work therefore emphasizes that the proper order in the study
of Reality must initiate with a thorough study and knowing of
one's own self, one's own nature, one's own motivations, goals,
predilections and purposes, without which any study of Reality
is not only misleading but also meaningless.
"There is an old
difficulty here, that of the metaphysician who
describes reality but cannot include himself "(?)...Iris Murdoch
Ontology, in its wider sense, or one's list of entities, is therefore
not an objective, scientific study. The ontology of science is the
list of entities that can be objectified by general consensus. The
ontological domain of science is thus limited to the physical,
The ontology of monism or religious monotheism is a singular
entity that represents everything. All beings, living, non-living,
etc are only manifestations ( not even sub-entities ) of this
Religions that are not strictly monist, identify the manifestations
as sub-entities that interplay.
It should be clearly understood here, that the process of giving form,
conception, terminology and/or definitions to ANY entity is a mental
phenomenon arising from experience, and/ or created, and/or
acquired from society and culture.
"Radical simply means "grasping things at the root."......Angela Davis
2013: It's important to keep a fluid ontological (what is there) basis
in order to explore all possibilities and then by experience and experimentation with
language, discover what are the forces that run the universe in temporal reality (space
-time temporality) and have some experience of the eternal and transcendental.
Having a fluid ontology is essential as an explorer. Unfortunately, in Western philosophy,
this ontological stuck-ness has led it to a dead end, apart from the reason of not having
a rich experiential base.. Therefore what we have had so far is 'shots in the dark' in all
directions but no consolidation. But most have posited that there is a thing-in-itself
(ontological) that is beyond sense perception (metaphysical).
"A 'thing in itself' signifies that which exists independently of our perceptions by means
of the senses. In other words it is that which really and truly is. Democritus called this
matter (Atom), so did Locke in the end, and for Kant it was an 'X', and for me it is Will.".
Notice that the tendency is towards monism - that is, the ontological domain consists of one
thing only. Monism is okay in the domain of the eternal and absolute but has no explanatory
power in the domain of the temporal - where you have to contend with the complex 'many
things' and their inter-relation, out of which many are hidden (not accessible or
derivable from sense perception)
The whole question and process by which an Entity is formulated
( given form ) and assigned conceptual attributes is at stake here.
Unless one goes into deep self analysis regarding the core process
and roots of the conceptualization process by which entities are
assigned form and attributes and how these relate to oneself,
understanding of reality is not possible.
"There is no reality
except the one contained within us. That is why so
many people live such an unreal life. They take the images outside
them for reality and never allow the world within to assert itself."
First and foremost should be the study and analysis of the
list of entities that one has acquired from society and culture,
and the relevance of these for oneself. Then it is also vital for
these to be analyzed for their attached attributes and core
assumptions associated. Finally, it should at some stage
become necessary to empty oneself of all ontologies to
2.1.3 PHYSICAL and METAPHYSICAL ( BEYOND
PHYSICAL or NON-PHYSICAL )
"What is an
artist? A provincial who finds himself somewhere between
a physical reality and a metaphysical one. It's this in-between . . . this
frontier country between the tangible world and the intangible one --
which is really the realm of the artist".........Federico Fellini
Physical objects ( that have sensory attributes) are the simplest
entities, and in the scientific domain are the only entities.
But if one assumes that there are entities that are non-physical
(metaphysical), then their ( the entities ) domain becomes
beyond the scientific domain, and it is here that the concept
of Personal Validity assumes significance.
"All men whilst they are awake
are in one common world: but each
of them, when he is asleep, is in a world of his own"......Plutarch
The point is that metaphysical entities cannot be scientifically
investigated, but only at a personal level, valid for a specific
person. Metaphysical entities have no general validity insofar
as the domain of science or that of general consensus. A meta-
physical entity can only be referred to in context of a particular
being, or a group of beings sharing a common idea and/or
culture and/or ideal and/or purpose and/or space.
It should also be clearly understood that non-physical entities
cannot be brought into the domain of general consensus,
utmost special consensus, under exceptional conditions.
Failure to grasp this elementary aspect of one's mental process
leads to confusion and even worse - deception.
"I wish to
emphasize that there is a necessity not to espouse a truth
it is safe. Being driven to a set of assumptions because one is afraid of
another set and their consequences is the most passionate and nonobjective
kind of philosophy. Too many intellectuals and scientists (almost unconsciously)
use basic assumptions as defenses against their fears of other assumptions
and their consequences. Until we can train ourselves to be dispassionate and
accept both the assumptions and the results of making them without
arrogance, without pride, without misplaced enthusiasm, without fear,
without panic, without anger, hence without emotional involvement in the
results or in the theories, we cannot advance this inner science of Man very far."
.....Dr John C Lilly, Programming & Metaprogramming....
2.1.4 THIS WORK'S ONTOLOGY :
REAL, VIRTUAL and IMAGINARY ENTITIES
'AS IF' and 'WHAT IF' ENTITIES
must be experience-able somewhere, and every kind
of thing experienced must somewhere be real"......William James
CONCEPTS DEFINITIONS & DISTINCTIONS:
An entity is a being or thing that exists, whether it is perceptible or not.
Thus entities are 1) Living beings that live and die 2) Physical objects
3) Non- Physical beings (like Spirits)
'Entity' is distinguished from 'Essence' (like soul) or 'Force' (like Will).
The overlap is only in the case of 'Spirit', as the spirit is both an
(thing-in-itself) as well as a force, that is, a signifying action.
Thus a real 'entity' is that which is experienced or has some basis in
personal experience. An 'as if entity' or virtual entity (as is signified in
analogy, metaphor, myth etc.) is only a concept or belief about an entity
that cannot be directly experienced by anybody at will but is either
1) Fleetingly experienced by a person 2) Derived analytically (through
reason) 3) Resulting from Synthesized perception. (through intuition)
I have called virtual entities 'as if' because these are representations of
things that are not directly perceptible, and therefore are simulacra
(representative similarity to sense perceptions) of intangible realities.
However, another distinction has to be made between 'as if' and 'what if'.
'As if' is a representation or abstraction of existing but intangible realities,
whereas 'what if' is a created or imagined entity - i.e. fictional.
(People with a scientific only world-view are incapable of making this
distinction, and therefore in this doctrine only physical entities, i.e. those
that can be consistently verified by objective methods are considered real
and the rest all is considered imaginary, or fictional.)
Let's try to apply these on physical entities. A rock is a physical entity that
has consistent, verifiable sensory attributes and thus generally experienced
uniformly by everyone.
An 'electron' is not directly experienced, but is derived by analytic break up
of physical 'matter'. Initially it was labeled as a 'very small thing' having
a definitive quantity of electrical charge, i.e. it was presumed to be 'as if'
it is a 'particle'. Later on it was found to behave 'as if' it was a 'wave'.
Still later it was not found to exist not as a particle occupying a specific
area, but was 'as if' a 'cloud'. Thus an 'electron' is properly speaking an
'as if entity' that is 'modeled' by use of common words which only signify
an 'as if' behavior. An 'electron' is an analytically 'derived entity' of
a physical whole.
Metaphysical entities are, in their conceptualization only
'as if entities' but in direct experience become real entities,
however fleeting this may be, given the nature of meta-
CAUTION : Since any novel experience has a very strong
tendency to be interpreted and understood firstly and fore
-mostly in terms of the ontology that each one of us has
been taught or programmed from birth by society, the worth
of a novel experience is thus limited by the existing set of
acquired entities and the flexibility (or inflexibility) of the
Secondly, since any new experience is synthetic in nature,
and usually has a strong visual content, the existing icono-
graphy is involved in the synthesis and so the preconceived
interpretation or meaning of existing icons tends to become
the default interpretation.
Thus any new (synthetic) experience must have a flexible,
modified or even synthesized ontology for it to be potent
and genuinely meaningful.
Many so-called primitive religions didn't have a fixed ontology
and thus individual experience was not limited by the
constraints of an imposed ontology.
22.214.171.124 THE DOMAIN & ITS ENTITIES
" We have learned the
answers, all the answers:
It is the questions that we do not know."
"Even if you have not found the answers, it is important that you find
the questions, and that's half the job. Getting the questions out, really
raising the questions, not just hearing them and understanding them,
but asking them yourself. That's far more precious and more difficult
and far more rare than you usually think. Once we do that, once we
seek, finding answers turns out to be easier than we think, because
life is full of answers. But not everyone asks the questions.
...................TMS P. Kreeft
" The reason why we have no answer to our question can only be
because our question is incorrectly formulated or arose from our
own narrow minded assumptions or was self-contradictory."
Since experienced Reality is primary, i.e., what is being experienced in the current
moment the only Reality a being knows and everything else, (all entities) is derived
from experience, it follows that the experience of a being is the foremost focus and
domain of study, insofar as this experience has novelty or spontaneity and is not
induced by external factors like social programming and mere survival or base
This sorting out is also essential in order to know on what motivations/forces
this experience is based upon, and is the key role of self-analysis, on which
much more will be presented later.
Thus the Self as a totality of all experiences as well as the essence of the being
is the primary entity in this work. And since the experience of being, as well as
the essence of being are inseparably bound and connected with the interactive
environment, this interactive environment then is also very much part of
the domain of study, and exploration.
In this work's ontology therefore, the primary entity that is being studied is
the Self. So the core assumption is that the Self is a distinct and
primary entity whose experience is a constituent of current
Reality, and whose essence or core is a constituent of
The Domain of study is the "Self and its interactive environment",
the person doing it is the Self and the list of Entities in this domain are:
1) The Entity of the Known self : the set of concepts and beliefs that one holds,
that are to be dealt with and put to test for their usefulness in the arena of one's
personal experiences, one's interactions as well as one's expressions. It is clarified
here that the domain of Personal Validity is that set of beliefs that apply to the
self in its isolation ( non-interactive ), and the domain of General Validity is the
set of beliefs that are valid in the interactive mode ( the self in its interactions
with other beings ) Both the 'operational domains' are thus part of the Entity of
the Known Self. So both the 'operational domains' are basically sub-domains of
the ' Self and its interactive environment' as the parent domain. In this domain
it is the balanced and harmonious development and ordering of the various
elements that poses the first and foremost challenge for every being. The limits
to which a being can go to depends upon the quality and efficiency of this to-be
self - developed order. The ideal of the known self thus symbolizes a
constructive order, cohesive
consolidation and integrity.
2) The Entity of the Unknown self : is that part of the domain where there is
the greatest potential for exploration, but that which is beyond concepts and
beliefs, its manifestation sought under critical but testing conditions. This is
that hidden entity which carries and thus represents the essence and core of the
being, and therefore is representative of the real potential of the being, but whose
manifestation must be sought in the critical expressions, decisions and actions of
the being, or else this potential is wasted.
Any manifestation of the unknown self is interpreted by the known self and firstly
becomes part of the domain of Personal Validity, and only after that it can this
expression of knowing become generally valid or in the domain of General
Validity, if at all.
The unknown is therefore not only the beyond - physical or metaphysical but also
that potent part of the physical that has yet to be explored or manifest, for
example the Brain's potential for intelligence and creative expression.
The concept of the unknown is a potent symbol for the freedom
The unknown thus symbolizes this potential for exploration and creativity - the
making of an open space for the creative to manifest, and the known serves as
the means to do so. It is the proper handling and ordering of the known that
creates possibilities for
the manifestation of the unknown.
3) The Entity of the World as one's interactive environment ( Nature):
The Planet Earth and its ecosystem is a crucial interactive entity for the self, (being
a part of it), and in this work, Nature is considered as the mother entity towards
which a being owes the highest responsibility. This ability to respond can only
become effective if the integration of the self has been attempted and achieved
to some extent, and when the two operational domains are in harmony and
"It has taken
scientists until the last half of the 20th century to prove what we
have known all along...we are all related. Not just human beings, but four-legged
and winged brothers and sisters, as well as those who crawl. We, too, are related
to, and part of our Mother, the Earth (Kukna), and everything on her. When we
say she is our mother, we do not say this in some symbolic sense, but with the
knowledge that we came from her and will return to her.".
.... Turtle Clanmother, Thunder Mountain Lenapé Nation
am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world."
belong to the planet now, Mama. Does it make sense to you that
if we're no longer attached to one piece of land, we belong to the
planet? Wherever we happen to be standing, why, that spot belongs
to us as any other spot.".......Kingston (The Woman Warrior)
"In a world of
shifting and increasingly hybrid populations, where do any
of us truly belong?" .......TTC Peter Conn
4) The Entities of other Beings as part of the interactive environment :
these become the crucial entities that the self encounters as the highest
interactive challenge, both to learn from as well as to clash with.
"Listen or thy tongue will keep thee deaf"...Native American Proverb
listening until everyone has been heard and understood,
only then is there a possibility of "Balance and Harmony" the goal of
Indian Spirituality." ........Dave Chief, Grandfather of Red Dog
makes a distinction between:
Ontic questions – questions having to do with particular
things and their nature. And
Ontological questions – questions about the nature of
being as such.
But before he can investigate ‘the nature of being as such’, he tells
us we first have to examine the being through whom the question
of being comes into question. And that is a creature whom he calls
Dasein (being in the world). What he is trying to do is to find our
primordial experience (primordial being) – to understand how it is
that we see and perceive the world.
What Heidegger is after is the essential structure of Dasein.
The first aspect of Dasein is ‘being in the world’ – which means a
certain kind of engagement with the world, such as I may say ‘in
philosophy’- one defines me in terms of my involvement in
Philosophy. What Heidegger suggests is that being in the world is
an absolutely unitary phenomenon. What it means is that there can
be no Dasein if there is not a world, and there is no world without
Dasein. One of the first of these existential structures is going to be
simply – that Dasein is in the world as a unitary structure with the world.
When we are talking about Dasein, when we are describing Dasein, we
have to get away from a certain theoretical attitude, and in particular, we
have to get away from the idea that Dasein itself is primarily theoretical.
To say it is ontological is to say it asks questions, and many of those are
the sorts of questions that give rise to theory. But theory itself is fairly
ethereal; theory itself is not what Heidegger would say ‘primordial’.
Our basic engagement with the world is not primarily theoretical.
Where other philosophers talk as if our primary relationship to the
world is “to know it”, what Heidegger wants to say is that our
primary relationship to the world is “to be involved in it, to care
about it”."....R. Solomon ( TTC) on Heidegger
126.96.36.199 THE GENERAL GOAL
The general goal is to enhance the depth and variety of one's thoughts and
experiences, to develop the ability to meaningfully co-relate these with
one's held beliefs and their applicability, to promote creative expression
and interaction and thus to enhance the efficiency of one's
existence to its potential limits.
"Take advantage of the ambiguity
in the world. Look at something and
think what else it might be"......Roger von Oech
2.1.5 SUB ENTITIES of the Known Self
"Man is a tool-making animal"....Benjamin Franklin
In the overall domain of study of the self and its interactive
environment, the two sub-domains are those of Personal Validity
and of General Validity. These sub-domains are to be understood as
distinct operational domains. Thus the set of valid entities or "as if
entities" in one domain are bound to be different from the set that
is valid for the other domain.
For example, if I say that the mountains represent for me an entity
that is more than just a physical entity, then this entity is valid only
in the Personal domain and not in the general domain, i.e., I cannot
expect others to agree with me on this. Alternately, E=mc^2 is
an established relationship between conversion of energy and
mass, and so if I want to design a nuclear device, I cannot say that
I don't accept the validity of this relationship.
Thus in these respective domains a set of entities as well as "as if
entities" must have an valid integrity that is distinct in the two sets.
Since all entities are given form and expressed in symbols or
language, these "as if entities" are properly speaking, linguistic
and conceptual tools.
'language' that constitutes reality has here an open creative
fringe where poets and critics take some part in inventing new
concepts. The critic as philosopher and metaphysician approaches,
indeed tends to become, the artist who is making the language"
One set of linguistic tools in which Personal Validity is the central concept
is presented in this work and in short summarized here as :
Assumptions, Beliefs, Programs and Concepts are the building
blocks or materials of the structure of the Mind, whereas the
process tools that work on these are the analytic ( rational ) and
the synthesis ( creative ) processes, whereas the valuation and
control is derived from the reward and punishment systems, as
well as to and from sources unknown.
2.1.6 CONCEPTS :
Anything and everything that we know or can know is defined or becomes defined
in terms of what can be called concepts, which are generalizations from sensed
observations. These combine with the experienced or derived valuation to form
a "truth" termed as belief. These combine and organize to form a structure of
inter-related concepts, beliefs, analogies, models and patterns of responses
and behavior. This structure and its operation thereof is termed here as
the Mind of a Being.
Concept: A general idea derived from specific instances, a thought or notion.
A concept in technical terms is an meta-operating pattern of sensory data, that
is, a static arrangement or order of sensory data or in other words sensory
data related arrangement having an underlying order or
reflecting an underlying order.
individuals, have their histories and are just as incapable
of withstanding the ravages of time as are individuals. But in and through
all this they retain a kind of homesickness for the scenes of their
childhood. ........Soren Kierkegaard
PROGRAM : A fixed pattern or set of patterns of behavior or responses as
part of the operating system or Mind of a being.
METAPROGRAM : a higher order of program that has not just been
learned or acquired from society, but generated internally. These may be
generated by linear processing of programs ( rational, analytic ) or non-
linear type of processing ( creative, intuitive or synthesis).
" To avoid the
necessity of repeating learning to learn, symbols, metaphors,
models each time, I symbolize the underlying idea in these operations as
metaprogramming." ...... Dr John C Lilly
like rabbits. You get a couple and learn how to handle them,
and pretty soon you have a dozen." - John Steinbeck
"Primitive man is no
more logical or illogical that we are. His presuppositions
are not the same as ours, and that is what distinguishes him from us. His
thinking and conduct are based on assumptions other than our own.
In explaining things in his way he is just like ourselves : he does not
examine his assumptions.".........Jung
Assumption : A statement or concept taken as true without proof.
In this work, assumptions are of two kinds - consciously created, acquired or
realized assumptions, and the other are sub-consciously operating programs
but not realized as such, also stated here as underlying assumptions.
(A sub consciously operating pattern has value attachments that are not
realized consciously and therefore influences our thought processes in
unpredictable and uncontrollable ways, putting a limit on the potential of
our hardware and software capabilities. In this work therefore I have
included all inbuilt patterns that are active, as " underlying operating
assumptions ", to be realized in a developing and growing structure
(mind) and if need be - to be transcended.)
It is one thing not to have gone to the root assumptions of the
structure of one's mind, but an even more serious thing is to
suppress alternate assumptions of an alien culture.
Fundamental ignorance or denial of alternate sets of assumptions
makes a whole culture completely blind about aspects of reality
related to those assumptions
"Keep your face to the
sunshine and you cannot see the shadow".
BELIEF : Something accepted as true ; an opinion ; a conviction ; especially
a tenet or body of tenets . In this work a belief is defined as a concept or
an assumption or a operating program assigned a definitive value.
VALUE: worth, importance, usefulness, goodness. In this work
value is equated with usefulness, i.e., value is that quality of a being that
determines the control and direction of one's experiences, emotions,
and choices or decisions made thereof.
2.1.8 Assumptions , Beliefs & Concepts :
" Every human beings
that reach adulthood are programmed biocomputers,
none of us can escape our reality as programmable entities. All that we are
or become is a result of our programs - nothing more, nothing less -by
which I mean that the basic substratum under all our metaprograms are
our programs."- Dr John C Lilly
All of our conceptions and constructions thereof have at the base or
substratum, concepts learned or acquired from the interactive culture
of the beings in our close interactive environment.
Any new concept that one develops is therefore in terms of existing
concepts. Concepts therefore are circular, i.e., one is defined in terms
of others. Which means that concepts represent assumed or
"as if" entities.
argued that meaning (value) is created through difference -
through what something is not (so "dog" means "dog" because it is not-"cat",
not-"goat", not-"tree", etc.). In fact, he viewed meaning as near enough
self-referential: objects, images of objects, words and signs are situated in a
web of meaning; one object's meaning is only understandable through its
relation to the meaning of other objects; in other words, one thing's prestige
relates to another's mundanity."......Wikipedia
Putting this differently, if you come to think about it carefully, everything
that we know has basically at the core of it, ultimately an assumption,
because everything is understood in relationship to or in terms of something
else. A concept is distinguished by its relation to other concepts, and by no
other way. No concept can exist absolutely without any relation or analogy to
other concepts and every conception also has a counter-concept. One can also
conclude from this that everything conceived, has, at a base level or its
substrate, operating assumptions and at a gross level everything is an
analogy or a collage of analogies, i.e. - models or paradigms.
" The genuine
knowledge originates in direct experience"....Mao Zedong
The Universe, the Self , the Mind , God and even the laws of Science
( Which as we now know are true only under certain conditions or limits )
are descriptions or models of entities derived from experience and its
consequent assumptions and beliefs, taken to be true without proof.
Proofs are nothing else except agreed upon generalizations.
So when we speak of "proof" it actually means corroboration, that is,
supported by or agreed upon by at least one more being."Skepticism about what is unproven can easily turn into
Therefore, "proofs" are "agreements" about processes, relationships
and entities. The domain of science is based upon such proofs as are
accepted as proven by general consensus. Proofs imply definiteness,
certainty and deterministic relationships. The idea of proof is an
antithesis of creativity. Any spontaneous creative activity cannot
be "proven", because it cannot be repeated, because in its repetition,
it ceases to be creative, by the very definition of the concept of
creativity. The obsession with proof is the death of creativity, and is
the escape resort of both scientists and priests.
without proofs. By which it must be understood that it
cannot prove, not only what it says, but even that it is worth the
trouble of saying it"......Roland Barthes
"Absence of proof is not proof of absence".....Michael Crichton
"Life consists in
penetrating the unknown, and fashioning our actions
in accord with the new knowledge thus acquired".....Leo Tolstoi
"The new always
happens against the overwhelming odds of statistical
laws and their probability .... the new therefore always appears in the
guise of a miracle"........................Hannah Arendt
What is the "Unknown" ? Does it exist ?
It exists as a yet to be. It exists as a realizable potential. It is
the vast space of possibilities available to us as human beings.
It exists as a symbol of all that is mysterious and yet challenging.
It is that space that beckons and entices the human imagination,
intellect and deepest emotions.
It symbolizes the capability and capacity to which a living human
being can go to. Thus there is a personal "Unknown space" limited
to an individual living being, as there is a much larger "Unknown
space" for the human species as a whole. It is distinguished from
the concept of the "Unknowable" in that the "Unknowable" is
beyond human capacity to fathom. The "Unknown" unravels in the
development of mankind and becomes known to those beings who
dare to venture into it, or it unfolds by default at a time or under
certain conditions in a pre-scripted manner. The non-scripted space
of the "Unknown" expands by every creative action and expression
of a living being.
To venture into the "Unknown" requires a first step - to conceive
or assume or imagine something beyond the known.
'If you do not expect
the unexpected, you will not find it, for it is not to be
reached by search or trail"......Heraclitus
After or along with an unusual experience, assumptions are the starting point
of all experimentation, logic, religion and science, the first stage of the
conscious formative process or of imagination, although the first formation
of a new thought or conception or visualization can't strictly be called
an assumption in a formal sense, so for a lack of a better word for this
embryonic process I have labeled it assumption to distinguish it from
And now for a mind twister : Only the unknown is not an assumption and
that is something we know nothing about, although the unknown is where
all assumptions can be said to come from.
2.1.10 Assumptions to Concepts and Beliefs
"Let's trace the birth of an
idea. It's born as rampant radicalism, then
it becomes progressivism, then liberalism, then it becomes moderated
conservative, outmoded, and gone"......Adam Clayton Powell
Assumptions are the first formulation by the mind of a new experience.
"What happens is
that your wretched memory remembers the words
and forgets what's behind them".....Augusto Roa Bastos
It is not as if conceptualization and beliefs derived from experiences and
assumptions are undesirable.
On the contrary, concepts and beliefs are the tools and materials with which
the structure of our minds is built, in order to function & interact with the
world around us & in order to survive. Concepts and beliefs are the building
blocks of our minds that are crucial not only for our basic functionality
but also to provide fulfillment and stability to our rational & emotional
structures - an essential requirement for survival/creativity.
The problems arise when concepts and beliefs instead of being used only
as tools and materials are used instead for everything - as substitutes of
experience or as control programs. We start believing that the very concepts
and beliefs that provide clarity and meaning to us are absolute, rather than
just one of the many ways of understanding ourselves and
the world around us.
2.1.11 THE SANCTUARY OF THE KNOWN
"It is what we think
we know already that prevents us from learning".
The value and importance that we start attributing to well operating beliefs
( stable operating patterns ) and programs reaches such proportions that any
experiences or situations contrary to these beliefs are rejected or suppressed
without even an assessment of their indicative value : for we have built a
house, a structure of concepts and beliefs, in which to live and survive and in
which we feel safe and secure, and once this has been accomplished to a
degree of comfort, anything outside it is perceived to be potentially
dangerous and detrimental to our very existence.
closing of a door can bring blessed privacy and comfort -- the opening,
terror. Conversely, the closing of a door can be a sad and final thing -- the
opening a wonderfully joyous moment"....Andy Rooney
To protect this hard earned stability and survival requirements, we almost
hold the supporting beliefs as sacred, and their counters or opposing beliefs
as something to be attacked or defended against.
We invariably and almost un-noticed by ourselves have built the temple of
THE KNOWN that must be defended from the demons of THE UNKNOWN .
" The greater our knowledge increases the more our ignorance unfolds."
...John F Kennedy
2.1.12 THE KNOWN AND THE UNKNOWN
" All poetry is a journey into the unknown. " .....Vladimir Mayakovsky
“I want to urge
you to be patient towards all that are unsolved in your heart
and to try to love the questions themselves, like locked rooms and like books
that are written in a foreign language. Do not seek to have answers which cannot
be given to you because you would not be able to live them, and the point is to live
everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps then you will gradually, without
noticing it, live along some distant day to an answer.” - Rainer Maria Rilke
"Very few beings really seek
knowledge in this world. Mortal or immortal,
few really ASK. On the contrary, they try to wring from the unknown the
answers they have already shaped in their own minds . . To really ask is
to open the door to the whirlwind. The answer may annihilate the
question and the questioner."......Anne Rice
thesis of this book is that there are many blocks to creativity, but there are
active steps we can take to protect the creative process. but the most compelling
mechanisms to me are those that deal with uncertainty, instability, lack of candor,
and the things we cannot see. I believe the best managers acknowledge and make
room for what they do not know—not just because humility is a virtue but because
until one adopts that mindset, the most striking breakthroughs cannot occur. I believe
that managers must loosen the controls, not tighten them. They must accept risk;
they must trust the people they work with and strive to clear the path for them;
and always, they must pay attention to and engage with anything that creates fear.
Moreover, successful leaders embrace the reality that their models may be wrong
or incomplete. Only when we admit what we don’t know can we ever hope to learn it."
Ed Catmull (Creativity)
We feel more and more comfortable with the known , and more and more
uncomfortable with the unknown . The unknown becomes a threat , and
the known becomes a source of stability and strength .
Why would we want to endanger the structure or state of mind that we
have so laboriously built ? Why let anything disrupt this shell in which we
feel secure? Why leave the world of the familiar to venture into
the unfamiliar ?
So we worship and defend the known and try to slam shut the doors to
the unknown . So we seek "agreement" and try to convince our peers about
our beliefs to further support and strengthen our structure and to further
convince ourselves about how superior is our system of thought.
This trait "evolves" from a personal to a cultural trait, fuelled by "agreement ",
to a point that when we come across a culture whose world view is radically
different than ours, we must destroy it or "convince" it to agree with us so that
it may not do the same to us . Little do we realize that the very known that we
worship (or overvalue ) eventually becomes the death warrant of our growth.
"When you stop learning, stop
listening, stop looking and asking questions,
always new questions, then it is time to die"......Lillian Smith
2.1.13 The Limits of the Known
" When the
present is intolerable, the unknown harbors no risks. "
"Let us return,
for a moment, to the metaphor I used earlier in this chapter,
that of the door. On one side is everything we see and know—the world
as we understand it. On the other side is everything we can’t see and
don’t know—unsolved problems, unexpressed emotions, unrealized
possibilities so innumerable that imagining them is inconceivable.
This side, then, is not an alternate reality but something even harder to
fathom: that which has not yet been created.
The goal is to place one foot on either side of the door—one grounded in what
we know, what we are confident about, our areas of expertise, the people and
processes we can count on—and the other in the unknown, where things are
murky, unseen, or uncreated.
Many fear this side of the door. We crave stability and certainty, so we keep both
feet rooted in what we know, believing that if we repeat ourselves or repeat
what is known to work, we will be safe. This feels like a rational view. Just as we
know that the rule of law leads to healthier, more productive societies or that
practice makes perfect or that the planets orbit the sun, we all need things that
we can count on. But no matter how intensely we desire certainty, we should
understand that whether because of our limits or randomness or future unknowable
confluences of events, something will inevitably come, unbidden, through that door.
Some of it will be uplifting and inspiring, and some of it will be disastrous.
There are others who venture into the unknown with surprising success but with
little understanding of what they have done. Believing in their cleverness, they revel
in their brilliance, telling others about the importance of taking risks. But having
stumbled into greatness once, they are not eager for another trip into the unknown.
That’s because success makes them warier than ever of failure, so they retreat,
content to repeat what they have done before. They stay on the side of the known.
The most important lesson from history is that the " knowns " of a certain
culture ( or individual ) have a limited potential, value and utility which
eventually exhausts or burns out or at best becomes stable or static,
which explains why a culture rarely learns from its mistakes or wrong
doings, and keeps repeating them until its own survival is threatened,
but by then they are
incapable of correcting their course.
"People of privilege
will always risk their complete destruction rather than
surrender any material part of their advantage.".....John Kenneth Galbraith
And it follows from this that a culture that operates only from the " knowns"
will eventually degenerate, or at best stagnate. The other most important
lesson from history is that in a particular culture or society, certain key
individuals were the catalysts that changed the course of stagnation
and degeneration by challenging and even sometimes demolishing
the "knowns" of that society.
How and why ? Because they saw something other than what was generally
known and taught, and therefore realized that the existing known had its
own particular limitations which could be overcome. So they provided a
description of what they saw and this description which was apparently
a better one ( for society seemed to benefit from it , else it would never
be accepted ) became part of the new known by replacing or adding
to the old known.
Many of the old knowns that got demolished were mythical beliefs, based
upon phenomena that had no satisfactory cause-effect explanations.
As better explanations replaced the less satisfactory ones, distinct cultures
developed their own systems of beliefs, resulting in mythical beliefs
consolidating under monotheism's of various kinds and the rational
beliefs, based upon physical cause-effect relationships, consolidating
The concept of god became part of the known. And similarly so did science :
an even more real known : a known that is presumed to be forever valid and
immune to the demon of the unknown. And so we now have two apparently
permanent knowns - God and Science (take your pick or better still,
take both) - to insulate us from the demons of the unknown.
And technology : the bright child of science, making life more and more
comfortable and easy, will forever keep us in touch with the known , make
sure we do not forget all that is known and also keep us constantly
entertained as well. (The neo concept of edutainment).
has already outstripped our ability to control it."
.................Gen. Omar Bradley
Until.... the time comes when the knowns can no longer account for conditions
that become more and more troubling or untenable, but by then it is
almost always too late....
"If you see a bandwagon, it's too late".....James Goldsmith
"Here we stand in the middle of
this new world with our primitive brain,
attuned to the simple cave life, with terrific forces at our disposal, which
we are clever enough to release, but whose consequences we cannot
comprehend."..........Albert Szent Gyorgyi
policemen were only representing history's henchmen ...civilization's
fear of nature, men's fear of women, power's fear of powerlessness. Man's
subliminal urge to destroy what he could neither subdue ( Science ) ,
nor deify ( Religion )." ................Arundhati Roy
2.1.14 Beyond The
Limits of the Unknown
lies the Unknowable
The unknown becomes or has the potential to become the known at an
appropriate time, context or situation of the world as well as becomes
known through the creative actions of the beings of the world, but the
clear-cut distinction with the unknowable is that it cannot become known
in the world, simply because the unknowable is beyond human capacity
to grasp or fathom. But then comes the question: how do we even 'know'
that there is the unknowable, and not just nothingness beyond human
capacity? This is another classical paradox. Many mystical traditions
instead of trying to answer this (mystical traditions are mostly non-
intellectual if not out-rightly anti-intellectual) simply assume that there
is no unknowable, only a nothing-ness beyond the human capacity.
Some of them even include the unknown in this 'nothing-ness', and
some do not even subscribe to 'nothing', taking refuge in silence -
which for them is the ultimate human stage.
And yet there are so many words associated with the unknowable:
'absolute', 'infinity', 'eternity', 'God', and all of them are valid in
some way or another that symbolizes the unknowable. But one
thing is common among them: all of them are fundamentally
beyond human capacity to fathom or grasp; or understand; or
develop any tangible knowledge about any of these.
The other significant thing that is common is that no one can
either prove or disprove any of these aspects of the unknowable,
nor with any degree of coherence assert or deny any of these,
and any attempts to do so leads to fallacies in thought and
has been the cause of utterly useless conflicts.
The strange thing is that while denial of these has not been of
any use, the attempt to have some idea of these has led to many
paradoxes and these have led to new thought, even branches of
mathematics. There is one BBC documentary titled 'Dangerous
Knowledge' that has documented the efforts and results of a
series of mathematicians. While all of them produced results of
significance in the domain of mathematics, tragically and even
more so strangely, all of them either went insane or committed
The good news is that although it is not possible to 'know' the
unknowable, it is possible to get a glimpse or a fleeting experience
of any of the aspects of the unknowable. The only caution that one
must exercise is not to fixate that experience in definitive or assertive
conclusions, much less try to convince others about it. Organized
religion is already choked to capacity with that kind of junk.
The other possibility is even more significant: through rigorous
reasoning one can come to the inescapable logical conclusion
that if there were no absolute, then time, space and existence
themselves become meaningless and totally absurd.
Time, space and existence has meaning only when there is a
transcendental essence (another aspect of the unknowable)
that reflects the logos and the telos ( the reason or the cause for
there to be something [existence] rather than nothing) of the
process of time-space existence.
"We can claim to
live in ignorance - unable to understand the connection
between all existence and in particular the connection between our
particular existence and the whole of existence. Our life is only short
and our knowledge of it severely limited. We can't look back beyond
our birth or forth beyond our death - our consciousness a momentary
flicker in the midst of night. It appears as if a malevolent demon has
limited our ability to know so that he can enjoy our discomfort.
But such a complaint is unjustified. It is based upon the mistaken idea
that the world was created by an intellect and as a result originated
as a mental picture or representation before it became real. According
to this mistaken view, the world originated from knowledge and thus
accessible to knowledge - capable of being analyzed and completely
understood by it. But the truth is that what we complain of not knowing
is not known by anyone or anything and is itself absolutely unknowable
- it is in fact inconceivable." .......Schopenhauer
When is that
magic moment when we shift from protection to engagement?
This is sort of like asking the mama bird how she knows it’s time to nudge her
baby out of the nest. Will the baby have the strength to fly on its own?
Will it figure out how to use its wings on the way down, or will it crash to earth?
People want to hang on to things that work—stories that work, methods
that work, strategies that work. You figure something out, it works, so you
keep doing it—this is what an organization that is committed to learning does.
And as we become successful, our approaches are reinforced,
and we become even more resistant to change..
Moreover, it is precisely because of the inevitability of change that people fight
to hold on to what they know. Unfortunately, we often have little ability to
distinguish between what works and is worth hanging on to and what is holding
us back and worth discarding. If you polled the employees of any creative
company, my guess is that the vast majority would say they believe in change.
But my experience, post-merger, taught me something else: Fear of change—innate,
stubborn, and resistant to reason—is a powerful force. In many ways, it reminded
me of Musical Chairs: We cling as long as possible to the perceived “safe”
place that we already know, refusing to loosen our grip until we
feel sure another safe place awaits.. Ed Catmull
With some explanation of the basic building blocks that constitute the
structure of our minds and its operations, the next article lists most of the
assumptions made in the process of constructing this work.
NEXT PAGE 05 : 2.2 Assumptions made in this Work
ROOT LINK http://www.personalvalidity.webs.com/
epistemology, philosophy, metaphysics, religion, belief, system, social, cultural, paradigm, knowledge,
ontology, power, moral, fundamental, force, Will, Spirit, Intent, knowing, Heart, Mind, reason, intuition,
autonomous, unique, being, exi
epistemology, philosophy, metaphysics,
religion, belief, system, social, cultural, paradigm, knowledge,
ontology, power, moral, fundamental, force, Will, Spirit, Intent, knowing, Heart, Mind, reason, intuition,
autonomous, unique, being, existence, space, time, meaning, purpose
GrossRyder Gross Ryder grossryder G RYDER GROSS RYDER
stence, space, time, meaning, purpose