Toward a Unified Metaphysical Understanding Information System Metaphysics and the Foundations of a Unified Science 2013-12-08T15:43:35Z User 550 john.ringland@anandavala.info https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/ OrgSpace NewsLog No Copyright Motivating and Clarifying the Paradigm Shift at the Heart of Science There is a fundamental inconsistency at the core of the scientific method / world-view that makes it unable to comprehend quantum mechanics (which seems paradoxical due to the inconsistency) nor can it comprehend consciousness or spirituality. I have been identifying, explaining and challenging...
I have been identifying, explaining and challenging this inconsistency in a series of articles to help motivate the paradigm shift that will eventually make quantum mechanics understandable as well as making research into consciousness and spirituality understandable to modern science and recognised as vitally important.

There is an entry point here: http://anandavala.info/article/Are-we-today-as-wrong-about-any-scientific-fact-that-is-widely-accepted-as-geocentrism.pdf

If what I say is correct, which it seems to be, then these documents point towards the possibility for a radical paradigm shift!

Pass on the good news if you know people who would be interested, the more people who help figure this out, the sooner and the clearer the shift will be.

Especially people interested in the interface between science, consciousness and spirituality. As well as the hard problem of consciousness, psi-phenomena, scientific realist interpretation of quantum mechanics, cybernetic interpretation of quantum mechanics, virtual realism, virtual reality hypothesis, simulation hypothesis, computational metaphysics, reinterpretation of ancient mystic wisdom, etc... It's all connected!

Enjoy :)]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000138.htm 2013-12-08T15:43:35Z 2013-12-12T03:09:16Z What is the highest perceived benefit or aspiration of my Life? Only a few hours ago the I Ching urged me to commit to my highest aspiration and to announce my intention. It said "Make known the arrival of a message from heaven and announce it at the Earth altar. If you don't deliver your important message you will be cut off and isolated. Call out. Tell u... It is to play my part in the reception and delivery of a subtle
message from spirit, via inspiration and insight. The purpose of
which is to guide and inspire us to collectively overcome certain
fundamental illusions and their destructive influences. In this I
feel I have a small part to play.


There are certain unconscious, habitual false interpretations that
lead to distorted perception, experience, interpretation, conception,
action, relationships, language, organisations, societies,
philosophy, spirituality, religion and science. In countless ways at
all scales this leads to suffering, destruction and ever deepening
delusion. It is a systemic crisis that permeates the entire
civilisation from our private thoughts, personal interactions, social
structures to global dynamics. These delusions remain unquestioned
most of the time and when brought to light they are easily dismissed
by minds deeply entranced by the many illusions. The countless
symptoms are treated in isolation and in dysfunctional ways,
eventually leading to more layers of delusion, suffering and
destruction.


There is a core false assumption that distorts all of our minds
(naive realism, see later for details). It serves as the root that
nourishes ever more branches of delusion, which branch off and become
denser. Most people live their lives out amongst the leaves, fruits
and flowers of the tree of delusion - that is what we call "normal
consciousness" and "the modern world".


Some activists and revolutionaries try to prune particular
branches, reacting to particular symptoms of the crisis, but the
branches keep growing back slightly different but even denser. Some
mystics penetrate to the root and cut it in themselves, liberating
that stream of consciousness, which helps us all in subtle ways, but
the tree still flourishes and steadily chokes civilisation. This has
been going on for tens of thousands of years and the tree has grown
vast and thick.


However if the root is cut, not just in the minds of mystics, but
at the core of our deepest cultural beliefs, it may take hundreds or
even thousands of years, but eventually the whole tree will whither.
There is nothing simple about this, but it is possible and without it
things will only get worse. Those attached to the delusions will
scoff at this, but many know that something is deeply wrong with the
world and know in their heart that there is so much more potential
that can be realised.


There are many converging factors, one of which is that there have
been certain excavations over the past century in the form of quantum
mechanics that reveal that root and thereby open up the opportunity
to strike at it within the core of physics and to remove certain
fundamental and far-reaching misconceptions such as materialism and
simplistic mechanistic thinking. Thus enabling many more than just
the mystics to strike at the root within themselves. Perhaps in my
life time or perhaps in coming generations we may manage to sever
that root at the core of physics. From there it can eventually be
severed in other sciences, then related cultural discourses and
practices, then the distorted religions - eventually even reaching
pop-culture and politics. But that would take a very long time if it
is even possible. However each step will radically improve the
situation.


The purpose is to clear away the tangled, choking branches of
delusion, to reveal the hidden potential of humanity which has gone
unnoticed. Thus allowing it to flourish and bring about a whole new
cycle of civilisation. It's a long term goal, in which I hope to play
a small but useful part.


For any of you who get what I'm saying and are interested in more
information, there are many ways to dig deep and cut through
delusion, here is an indication of some of my approach and tools:


Recent answers on Quora


Both Quora links and PDF versions.


What is naïve realism?


https://www.quora.com/Naive-Realism/What-is-naive-realism/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/What-is-naive-realism.pdf






What is the currently dominant paradigm?


https://www.quora.com/Quantum-Mechanics/Do-we-have-a-collective-paradigm-Else-is-it-fragmented/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/Do-we-have-a-collective-paradigm-Else-is-it-fragmented.pdf






Can science escape the influence of naïve
realism?


https://www.quora.com/Naive-Realism/Can-it-ever-be-said-that-Scientific-realism-takes-off-from-the-springboard-of-commonsense-or-naive-realism/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/Can-it-ever-be-said-that-Scientific-realism-takes-off-from-the-springboard-of-commonsense-or-naive-realism.pdf






How can we truly understand what quantum mechanics
is saying about the nature of reality?


https://www.quora.com/Quantum-Mechanics/Will-we-ever-be-able-to-truly-understand-Quantum-Mechanics/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/Will-we-ever-be-able-to-truly-understand-Quantum-Mechanics.pdf






How can we understand wave / particle duality?


https://www.quora.com/Wave-Particle-Duality/Is-light-a-wave-or-a-particle/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/Is-light-a-wave-or-a-particle.pdf






How has the entrenched paradigm responded so far
to the paradigm shift?


https://www.quora.com/Scientific-Revolutions/Has-science-become-too-dogmatic/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/Has-science-become-too-dogmatic.pdf






How does the emerging scientific paradigm converge
with mystic spirituality?


https://www.quora.com/What-can-be-learned-from-video-games-that-is-hard-to-learn-any-other-way/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/What-can-be-learned-from-video-games-that-is-hard-to-learn-any-other-way.pdf






What are some potential obstacles during a
paradigm shift?


https://www.quora.com/Psychology/Despite-having-evidence-that-contradicts-someones-belief-why-cant-they-come-to-believe-something-new/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/Despite-having-evidence-that-contradicts-someone%27s-belief-why-can%27t-they-come-to-believe-something-new.pdf






What is a viable candidate to the new scientific
paradigm?


https://www.quora.com/Philosophy/What-is-your-theory-of-everything/answer/John-Ringland


http://anandavala.info/article/What-is-your-theory-of-everything.pdf






Previous relevant links


Motivation behind the work


http://www.newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000134.htm






Recognising a self-reinforcing delusion


http://anandavala.info/article/How-does-one-recognise-when-one-is-caught-within-a-self-reinforcing-delusion.pdf






A deeper understanding of Consciousness


http://anandavala.info/What-is-Consciousness.pdf






Signs of an Emerging Paradigm Shift (brief
overview)


http://anandavala.info/article/EmergingParadigm.pdf






The philosophical core of my approach


http://anandavala.info/OIPVSE.pdf






The mathematical core of my approach


http://www.anandavala.info/SystemSimulation.pdf






Advice on Nurturing the Emerging Memeplex
(Paradigm)


http://anandavala.info/article/nurturing.pdf






STriking At the Root (STAR)


http://www.anandavala.info/STAR/






Main website


http://www.anandavala.info/





]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000137.htm 2013-12-02T21:25:56Z 2013-12-06T01:52:49Z Cognitive Repression in Physics - Reasons for the Entrenched Culture of Denial The quotes below discuss reasons for the entrenched culture of denial within physics (as well and philosophy and science in general) regarding the consequences that quantum mechanics has for naive realism (AKA classical objectivism). "After more than 50 years (now over 80 years) of unquestionab...
"After more than 50 years (now over 80 years) of unquestionable success as a theory, questions about the interpretation of quantum mechanics continue to plague both physicists and philosophers. It is argued here that discussions about the meaning of quantum mechanics remain stymied as a result of the failure of physicists to formulate a cognitive paradigm adequate to their theory. The conventional interpretations which they offer can be seen as inadequate in one of two ways — implicitly, they retain one or the other of the two basic tenets of classical physics, the objectivity or the knowability of nature. This, it is argued, can be viewed as a form of cognitive repression of knowledge acquired, but not yet assimilated. A psychological explanation for the persistence of classical beliefs is proposed...

Piaget has invited the comparison between the historical development of scientific thought and the cognitive development of the child. Both, it is suggested, proceed through the emergence of discrete stages of structural organization, each stage brings with it new possibilities of conceptual integration, and concurrently, the possibility of a verbal articulation of the new level of organization perceived. Prior to the establishment of a new conceptual structure, knowledge already present in nonverbal forms (in e.g., sensorimotor rather than representation schemes) finds no avenue of expression, and, to the extent that it jars with the earlier established structures, demands cognitive repression. Piaget [1] tells us that an action schema which "cannot be integrated into the system of conscious concepts is eliminated... (and) repressed from conscious territory before it has penetrated there in any conceptualized form." Caught in a transition between stages, the child, when pressed to articulate perceptions requiring cognitive structures which are not yet available, displays confusion, denial and avoidance - a disequilibrium strikingly reminiscent of the mechanism of affective repression." (Cognitive repression in contemporary physics, Evelyn Fox Keller, http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.11911)

"There exists a cognitive repression of the interpretation problem by the majority of physicists. For that majority the questions concerning the meaning of quantum mechanics are answered once and for all by the Copenhagen interpretation, and all further inquiry is rejected as a sign that the inquirer does not understand the topic. Further questions are called "only philosophical" and thus not befitting a physicist. But if one inquires in depth what the Copenhagen interpretation says one gets a variety of different answers. According to Fox-Keller this, too, is a sign for evasion, whereby what is evaded is the necessity of a new cognitive structure which differs radically from the existing one. Fox-Keller calls the old structure classical objectivism. To her, the confusion concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics exists, thus, in the attempt to retain one or more components of the classical position. While this may be as it is; I suggest that the search for interpretations different from the Copenhagen interpretation very often is motivated by trying to evade its radical consequences, that is, an act of cognitive repression on the part of the proposers." (On the Interpretation and Philosophical Foundation of Quantum Mechanics, Anton Zeilinger, http://typo3physik.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/zeilinger/philosoph.pdf)]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000136.htm 2013-11-30T01:17:23Z 2013-11-30T01:31:06Z The world-view arising from my work When one sufficiently overcomes the habit of naive realism one can coherently understand the nature of reality rather than remain trapped in a self-reproducing closed loop of unconscious assumptions and resulting misunderstandings. A coherent understanding can be attained personally and als... When one sufficiently overcomes the habit of naive realism one can
coherently understand the nature of reality rather than remain
trapped in a self-reproducing closed loop of unconscious assumptions
and resulting misunderstandings.


A coherent understanding can be attained personally and also
examined scientifically. A personal understanding will transform
one's life. A scientific understanding will transform civilisation.


The main features of a coherent understanding:



  • Reality is that which perceives rather than that which is
    perceived. The objects of perception are not objective because they
    depend on how we perceive them. The objective reality is the stream
    of awareness within which the objects of perception arise and which
    is our true self.


  • We have experiences of "being in a world", which is
    how the situation appears from our perspective. However those
    appearances do not reveal the true nature of reality, just as
    experiences of a VR game world do not reveal its true nature to be
    computation.


  • There are underlying processes that animate our stream of
    awareness and give rise to the appearances that we apprehend. These
    processes are that by which we perceive and cannot be apprehended as
    objects of perception, thus they themselves seem unmanifest and
    abstract.


  • All manifest forms are inferred to
    exist from our perceptions, however they have no independent
    self-nature. Hence the ideas of matter and a physical universe are
    myths.


  • The underlying processes animate all systems and enable them
    to experience, react and thereby interact. All system interactions
    are driven by reciprocal experiences and there are no inanimate
    systems.


  • The underlying processes that enable our individual streams
    of awareness are part of a unified process that animates everything.


  • There is a global coherence to this unified process, which
    imparts a global coherence to the realm of manifest forms. Thus no
    event is local, every event is a 'movement' of the entire cosmos.


  • We can operate via sensory perceptions and thereby exert
    influence locally, or we can operate via the inner-most animating
    process 'within' us and thereby exert influence globally or
    remotely.


  • Our individual state of being (both body and mind) arises
    from the many levels of interacting sub-systems that comprise us. If
    these sub-system interactions are dysfunctional we suffer.


  • Our interactions and relationships integrate us into many
    levels of super-systems (groups and organisations) that comprise
    society as a whole. The collective state of being emerges from this
    integration. If our interactions are dysfunctional the emergent
    collective suffers.



The main results of the work from which this world-view arises can be found
here http://anandavala.info/OIPVSE.pdf

]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000135.htm 2013-11-28T13:00:16Z 2013-11-28T13:28:55Z Motivation behind my work My initial motivation was the need to resolve the tension between my rational and spiritual sides. Once that was eased my attention also turned to the civilisation-wide tension between science and spirituality. There is so much needless suffering and destruction that arises from misguided scien...
There is so much needless suffering and destruction that arises from misguided sciences, misguided religions, the conflict between them all and the resulting confusions and dysfunctions that permeate our cultures and minds.

I really believe that this tension can eventually be resolved and out of that will arise a unified science/spirituality that will have a lasting positive influence on our whole civilisation; so profound that we can barely even imagine what it will be like from our current vantage point.

There are so many people contributing in different ways to this process of unification at present and my greatest hope is to serve some useful role in that effort...

"There is this hope, I cannot promise you whether or when it will be realized - that the mechanistic paradigm, with all its implications in science as well as in society and our own private life, will be replaced by an organismic or systems paradigm that will offer new pathways for our presently schizophrenic and self-destructive civilization." (Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Founder of general systems theory)


Schizophrenia seems to be a problem where there is no means for thoughts to be coherently 'grounded' in truth or reality, hence the tension of confusion builds upon itself creating more confusion and running out of control.

If the wikipedia description is interpreted as applying to our civilisation rather than an individual person it is surprisingly relevant to our current situation as reflected in politics, media, social breakdown, etc:

"Schizophrenia is a mental disorder characterized by a breakdown of thought processes and by impaired emotional responses. Common symptoms are delusions including paranoia and hallucinations, disorganized thinking and a lack of emotional intelligence. It is accompanied by significant social dysfunction. The onset of symptoms typically occurs in young adulthood." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia

In the case of our civilisation I would propose that the core confusion is naïve realism, which gives rise to numerous other confusions such as exoteric religion, empirical science, mechanistic views of human nature, oppressive legal and social systems, entrenched struggle for dominance over others, etc. These reinforce the confusions and generate vast amounts of tension throughout civilisation.

I explain this in more detail in "Simplified Anatomy of the Global Systemic Crisis and How to Heal Civilisation" http://www.anandavala.info/STAR/anatomy.html]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000134.htm 2013-11-26T11:47:20Z 2013-11-26T11:51:11Z Quantum Mechanics, Naïve Realism, Scientific Realism, Abstraction and Reality I was recently asked: "Is QM in its abstract mathematical proceedure that applies to particles, and just abstract conceptualisations, not considered naive realism?" No, it is called scientific realism because it claims that aspects of reality can be known scientifically. Scientific realism can ...
No, it is called scientific realism because it claims that aspects of reality can be known scientifically. Scientific realism can be naïve realist, for example via claims that particles are real. This is naïve realist because it is based on the assumption that that which is portrayed by our observations is real.

However in the case of QM it is not naïve realist - it is in fact the antithesis of naïve realism because it claims that the observables that we apprehend are not in any way objective, they are created in the act of observing and are thus totally dependent on how we observe.

Thus QM claims that anything that is portrayed by our experiences cannot be objectively real - whilst naïve realism claims that that which is portrayed by our experiences is objectively real. The two are diametrically opposed.

QM is realist because it claims that that which is represented by wavefunctions are real. I.e. they exist independently of our observations - in fact they are inherently unobservable. Whenever we try to observe them what we experience are the 'observables' that are created in the act of observing.

So QM doesn't claim that particles or waves are real, these are just observables. It is that which is represented by wavefunctions that are real and which give rise to observations of either a particle or a wave depending on how we observe it.

BTW QM doesn't claim that the mathematical proceedures are real - these are just symbolic models via which we comprehend quantum systems.

Hence this type of realism is scientific realism because the things that are considered to be real can only be apprehended by the mind via 'abstract' scientific conceptualisations. The fact that these are 'abstract' doesn't imply that they are unreal - in fact it implies the opposite.

Within a naïve realist paradigm 'abstract' means 'unreal' because it can never be portrayed by the content of an experience no matter how augmented that experience may be (e.g. by microscopes or telescopes or particle accelerators etc). Due to naïve realism we are in the habit of thinking that only the things portrayed by our experiences can be real and that everything else is abstract and unreal.

However, when we step away from naïve realism and seriously consider the role of experience we realise that if experience is fundamental and not just an anomaly then that which is most real must underlie our ability to experience. Furthermore, "that which underlies our ability to experience" cannot be "that which is portrayed by our experiences". Thus that which can be observed is unreal and that which is real would seem 'abstract' because it can never be observed.

In other words, to use a metaphor, reality is the sight within seeing rather than that which is seen. Hence the most real is the most abstract.


BTW it is very rare to find a coherent discussion of the non-naïve realist nature of QM. Most discussions try to introduce naïve realist features or apply it within a naïve realist context.

This is because over the past 80 or so years there have only been a handful of physicists who could think outside of naïve realism. Thus the standard attitude is that we should focus on the world that we know via naïve realism (i.e. the physical universe) and we should use QM to make calculation about that world. Meanwhile we should avoid any attempts to think about what QM really means, i.e. what it is really saying about the nature of reality.

Thus it has been declared over and over that QM makes no sense and that attempts to think deeply about it will drive you insane. This attitude arises because a naïve realist cannot conceive that there is anything beyond naïve realism, thus someone who thinks outside of naïve realism must be insane, or so it seems to them.

There are now a few physicists who are beginning to see beyond naïve realism, but the vast majority of physics and science in general is still thoroughly naïve realist.

Here is a very short article that I wrote for a fringe science newsletter regarding the paradigm shift that is slowly emerging within physics: http://anandavala.info/article/EmergingParadigm.pdf

A more detailed analysis is conducted here: http://anandavala.info/OIPVSE.pdf


Note: in order to conduct this research I had to break away from habitual ways of thinking by dropping out of academia, however this means that this work has no way of being heard by academics or others engaged in similar work. If these ideas resonate with you then you can help by bringing it to their attention.

Thank you for listening and helping! I hope that it helps you as much as it has helped me to develop a clearer understanding of the nature of reality.]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000133.htm 2013-11-26T09:25:34Z 2013-11-26T10:24:07Z Reformulation of the Virtual Reality Hypothesis Here is a bottom up reformulation of the philosophical foundations of the virtual reality hypothesis, i.e. the idea that we could be living in a virtual reality. I have noticed over the years that there are many subtle confusions that arise when people try to approach this subject, myself inclu...
I have noticed over the years that there are many subtle confusions that arise when people try to approach this subject, myself included. Even for those who are cautious and sincere in their approach, there are unexpected pitfalls that can cause misunderstandings.

This reformulation attempts to elucidate and minimise the impact of those pitfalls in order to create a coherent foundation from which to approach the topic.

It is still a work in progress and any feedback or constructive criticism would be much appreciated

The Objective Information Processes & Virtual Subjective Experiences Hypothesis
]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000132.htm 2013-11-24T14:16:24Z 2013-11-24T16:08:38Z What is a differend? A differend is a form of invisible oppression. It was first examined in the context of a post-modern analysis of the judicial system and oppressed classes, however it applies to all human interactions. “A damage occurs when one being is harmed by another. Many kinds of damage may be litigate...
Such people are pushed to the fringes of society where they become isolate or form into sub-cultures of “deauthorized subjects, presubjects, figures of abjection, populations erased from view”. There are no formal or informal mechanisms for justice to be served within that society because it is unable to even recognise that what is happening is wrong. Harm is done but there is no way to get recognition of the harm, or reparations or treatment for the damage and there is no way to stop the abuse from continuing.

We perpetuate a differend whenever we think “they are just a _____” and we use that thought to dismiss someone’s suffering, ignore their perspective and testimony or to excuse draconian measures against them. Some examples of terms that fill that blank are: child, lunatic, criminal, junky, whore, moron, cripple, nip/nigger/foreigner, mystic, queue jumper (a term used to dismiss desperate asylum seekers in Australia), etc.]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000131.htm 2013-11-11T05:25:30Z 2013-11-12T04:50:10Z Freedom, Slavery and Fundamental Limits on the Growth of Civilisation "... for some reason it appears we’ve given up our freedom to varying degrees in exchange for something. But in exchange for what? Security? Acceptance? Ease? It sure appears that way. But how did this come about? ... Looking at the contrived and extremely controlling political and economic stru...
A useful perspective on this is: it is happening via the process of social meta-system transition (social MST).

"A metasystem is formed by the integration of a number of initially independent components, such as molecules, cells or individuals, and the emergence of a system steering or controlling their interactions. As such, the collective of components becomes a new, goal-directed individual, capable of acting in a coordinated way." (Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metasystem_transition)

This is a general systemic process that operates on all systems and from which emerge the successively higher levels of complexity (levels of the holarchy). For more on this see the article in Principia Cybernetica (http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/MST.html).

A "social MST" is what we think of as the "growth of civilisation"; i.e. the self-organisation of myriad humans into societies / organisations that then control the individuals from the perspective of the collective and in pursuit of political agendas.

This perspective sheds light on the fundamental forces at work, which explains why this process has been proceeding for thousands of years despite numerous regime changes, paradigm shifts, revolutions, etc. It is more than just the work of some ruling elite or even some ruling idea. Thinking only on the level of human beings and their actions and ideas leads us to misunderstand the deeper forces at work and thus makes our attempts to retain our freedom ineffective.

To clarify this further I will briefly draw a parallel between the main biological and social instances of MST.

A relevant example of a MST occurred around 550 million years ago (called the Cambrian explosion), when single cells self-organised into multi-cellular organisms. For billions of years cells were whole, separate, free, individuals. However then the Eukaryotes evolved. Their greater capacity for complex communication allowed them to self-organise in complex ways for mutual benefit. These collectives began to experience things from their own perspective and took on a life of their own - thus becoming multi-cellular organisms.

After the Cambrian explosion Eukaryotes were no longer free individuals, instead they became fully integrated parts of multi-cellular organisms. The Eukaryotes still live their individual lives within the organism but they are totally bound, dependent, conditioned and manipulated into performing the various roles that are required for the functioning of the organism and the pursuit of it's agendas.

Because cells are relatively simple and unaware they became totally enslaved by the collective.

A similar process has been occurring at a higher level of complexity (higher level of the holarchy). For hundreds of millions of years multi-cellular organisms were whole, separate, free, individuals. However then we humans evolved. Our greater capacity for complex communication allows us to self-organise in complex ways for mutual benefit. These collectives are increasingly experiencing things from their own perspective and taking on a life of their own - thus becoming multi-human organisms.

As civilisation grows we lose our freedom and increasingly become integrated parts of society (including various forms of organisation such a religions, nations, corporations, sub-cultures, etc). We still live our individual lives within society but we are increasingly bound, dependent, conditioned, manipulated, seduced, deceived and coerced into performing the various roles that are required for the functioning of society and the pursuit of it's agendas.

Most of the oppression we face in our daily lives (surveillance, coercion, the growing plethora of intrusive regulation, etc) is due to social systems seeking self-control. Most of the propaganda and manipulative distortions are due to social systems asserting their perspective over our individual perspective. Most of the suffering (poverty, over-consumption, war, etc) is due to social systems competing amongst themselves in pursuit of their agendas.

Cells totally lost their freedom, thus the cellular MST progressed to an extreme level; the cells effectively ceased to be individuals, thus allowing multi-cellular organisms to develop a strong sense of individual existence and self-control. However it is unlikely that we will lose so much of our freedom and individuality thus the emerging multi-human organisms won't develop as strong a sense of individual existence and self-control. There is something in the human spirit that cannot tolerate total slavery and this places fundamental limits on the potential growth of civilisation. At some point the pervasive personal suffering leads to an eruption of social tensions that destroy the oppressive social structures. These tensions may manifest as a violent revolution or if that is suppressed then an epidemic of depression / suicide / drug-abuse or non-compliance / minimal-compliance leading to generations of wasted potential and wasted resources spent on intimidation and coercion or any number of other social pathologies.

Somewhere between total freedom (anarchy) and total slavery (totalitarianism) a balance will be found. It is the myriad power struggles between individual needs / perspectives and collective needs / perspectives that will determine how and where this balance will be found. It is not the absolute amount of power that is relevant, but the relative power between the collective and the individual. If society's power over us becomes as great as an organism's power over cells then we too will eventually become totally enslaved and lose all individuality, thus allowing organisations to become the new dominant life form.

Because we human beings are more aware than cells, the details of this systemic process will unfold differently. We are more capable of valuing our freedom, experiencing our slavery and holding our ground in the face of increasingly intrusive incursions from society. However most of us have no idea that we are in the midst of a social MST, this leads to many misconceptions such as conspiracy theories or many flawed strategies (such as terrorism). These misconceptions and mistakes make most of our struggles for freedom ineffective or even destructive (giving the authoritarian systems more justification for intruding into our lives).

The more conditioned (by the mass delusion), confused, fearful or apathetic we become the weaker we become and the stronger the collective becomes - thus shifting the relative power balance against us. Our greatest weapon in our defence is our awareness and capacity for understanding the situation, which enables us to interact in ways that respect our individual perspective and undermine the authoritarian perspective - thus shifting the relative power balance in our favour.

If we understand the situation we can act effectively and retain / regain many of our freedoms. Even once achieved, the systemic forces won't disappear so constant vigilance is required lest the spectre of authoritarianism rears its ugly head again.

Note: this perspective is not anti-society or anti-organisation. We do need to cooperate for our mutual benefit. However when our social systems become oppressive to the human spirit this is not only destructive to individuals but also to society as a whole. If we mindlessly drift in the direction of totalitarianism there can be no hope for humanity on any level. A workable balance must be found, within which individuals can flourish and cooperate for mutual benefit without creating oppressive structures that will only self-destruct due to growing social tensions.

I have previously discussed these and other related issues at length in the ebook: "Gaian Ego Hypothesis: Systems Analysis of Organisation, Ego, Control and Authoritarianism" http://anandavala.info/GaianEgo/

Regarding a solution, the project STriking At the Root (STAR) never got off the ground but I believe that it does point in the direction of a solution: http://www.anandavala.info/STAR/
]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000130.htm 2013-10-29T13:38:39Z 2013-11-07T05:34:41Z What is the relationship between processes and systems? I happened to answer a question on Linkedin and thought I'd share it... Question: Has someone an idea , about the relationship between a process and system? is it the same ? what are the differences? Answer:
From a process oriented perspective processes are considered to be ontologically fundamental and objects exist as the phenomenal content of an experiential process.

From an object oriented perspective (the conventional view) objects are considered to be ontologically fundamental and processes exist as the behaviour of, and interactions between, objects.

System theory can help to unify both of these perspectives, by recognising that all systems have both an inner and outer aspect. I.e. A system has an inner process by which it experiences other systems as objects and thereby interacts with them; as well as an outer appearance by which it is experienced by other systems as an object.

This connects with some interpretations of quantum mechanics, where quantum information processes are considered to be ontologically fundamental and classical systems exist as 'observables'. Hence the quantum field is a kind of universal system simulator and the classical universe is analogous to a virtual reality within which we are virtual systems. Thus all classical systems are animated by underlying quantum processes.

It also connects with pan-proto-experientialism, which is a variety of pan-psychism; also neutral monism, type F monism as well as Advaita Vedanta, Buddhism and many Eastern philosophies - where "awareness" is the fundamental process that animates minds, which then experience the virtual appearance of an external world.

From this perspective 'processes' and 'systems' are intimately entwined. So too are information and computation (defined very generally).

From this perspective, a system is a dynamic pattern of information that conditions the flow of information, whilst information is discernible difference and computation is a coherent process involving the flow and transformation of information.

Using these general definitions one could say that a computational process within an information space animates virtual systems that experience each other as objects within a world that is characterised by appearances. These appearances arise within each system's 'inner' experiential process and portray the 'outer' appearances of other systems.

Thinking about processes and systems in this way opens up avenues for mathematical modelling and computer simulation of general systems. For an example see System Science of Virtual Reality.

Ciao

From a discussion in the "Systems Theory Passion" group on Linkedin.]]> https://newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v550/__show_article/_a000550-000129.htm 2012-05-31T15:35:03Z 2012-05-31T15:39:28Z