The Time to Be Aware: Ours Is SPT Civilization

It was for me as an revelation at reading Prof. Victor Allahverdov’s book “Methodological Travel on Ocean of the Unconscious to Island of the Consciousness” (S.-Petersburg, 2000, in Russian). It appears the very title of this vast 400-page book is playing upon the conceptual metaphor coined by William James, the American philosopher and psychologist. In addition I was, don’t realizing, his follower in last 12 years or so, as my activity was, if to continue his metaphor, to realize how to make this “island” bigger and rearrange better.

Wishing to know more about this great scientist of 19 to 20 century who looked as my like-minded person I have found a more confirmation that one of his conceptual thoughts concerning the future events is as well of my interests and considerations if it is interpreted correspondingly. I mean here his dictum: “The power to move the world is in your unconscious mind.”

Why it sounds as a prophecy and a guidance for acting I want to demonstrate by this article.

Most people seem to share the folks wisdom: “Some are wise, some otherwise.” No doubt, we are among those, “first some”. Truly, one of us may sometimes say: “What a stupid I was!” – but only in exclusive cases, not “for ever”, isn’t it?

I am to present here another approach to human Reason, entitled Top of the evolution. It looks like it to be able to have created our mighty civilization is unable to save it of extinction and self-extinction.

As far back as in mid-20th century A. Einstein said: ” We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive “. He surely meant a new manner of thinking to overcome our mentality’s backwardness stipulated by evolution. It’d be hard to treat “substantially” otherwise. Moreover the thought should be true in the beginning of 21st century. Twenty years after the Rio Summit of 1992 sustainable development remains largely a goal, and global problems are looming threateningly over the humankind. Global Catastrophes Risk InstituteGlobal Catastrophic Risks websiteWorld Crisis Web  may be considered as any tokens of the time we live at. Yuji Ishiguro’s proposal to bring the population intentionally from 6 to 1 billion (expressed in his book “One Billion World”, Booklink 2010) is seen rather as a prediction of an enormous depopulation.
Earth, what is a point under the question mark!
(This and other dictums hardly ever cited in English, here italicized, belong to Stanislaw Jerzy Lec to be I am sure a 21st century thinker although passed away in middle of 20th).

Why the backwardness? It may be hard to grasp right away. Someone may even be indignant: “What? Human Reason, which brought about a mighty civilization and took us to the top of the evolution, is characterized by a kind of backwardness!?”

Nevertheless, it is so. Let’s try to imagine those prehistoric circumstances of the evolution. Over the past few million years Homo’s existence was measured in periods of glacials (up to 100 millennia each) and shorter interglacials (up to dozens of millennia each). In such wild, cruel and dangerous conditions of existence pre-people survived uniting into tribes, mastering bonfires, freeing fore-legs (hands) for producing tools for labor, collective hunting, learning the more secure business of agriculture, coming up with spoken written communication.

Moreover, such good acquisitions endowed Human Sapiens with enormous evolution advantages before other animals, and this species began spreading across the Earth, its numbers increasing exponentially. As a result, the press of eliminating separation diminished, being since historical times generally out of significance. In result, Human Sapiens, this the newest species, had turned out under-evolved.

Thus a woman’s scream at childbirth: “Why I must so suffer?!” may be answered: “What you want, we all are under-evolved”.

After times when the Man had been invented he was perfected only with prostheses.

But Reason is not only under-evolved but posted in quite another circumstance of civilization existence, that is why SPT has such wide range of revealing itself. Here is only short list for you to make certain of it.

* Try to solve 2 simplest arithmetic tasks on adding and multiplying with numbers from 1 to 10, but simultaneously; or to draw, as well  simultaneously, triangle and circle. Some problem, isn’t it? Well, in order to remain alive our ancestors’ brains must be speedy and work like machines of successive action.

* Human brains are underused. Really, people like (and even adore) to limit themselves with not burdensome mental accompaniment of events. Million-strong armies of frenzied fans of sport and variety idols are a convincing evidence of this.

Let’s build no shelters for mental poverty!    

Other addictions to be though publicly not seen – abusing drugs, hazard games, sexual abuse, gluttony, conscious starvation – attest to the above-said.

People as I remarked like such thoughts what do not induce to thinking.

* More on the issue: why we to have in disposition our topical tool for thinking are so suffering and bored when forced to wait for something or somebody?
An involuntary association here suggests itself with the fact that only 1/10 part of the brain nervous cells are active.

* We have genes of our ancestors surviving owing to their immediate reacting on extreme situations, and our thinking because of it is too hasty. That is why our thoughts so frequently distorted with mistakes of under-thinking.

* People have little ability to confront one thing with another. Here is just one example however crying: we use terms  criminal person, criminal gang, criminal action,   quite used to the fact that the same adjective can be found in terms  criminal law, criminal policy, criminal legislation.   Understanding literally, criminal laws exist exclusively for criminals to lighten them their acts.

30 years ago or so, it was a revelation to me to realize my stupidity (and others’, too): if we speak  open the door / window   then we have to speak  open the eyelids / the lips   in place of  open eyes / mouth.   New reality of the life demonstrates our under-thinking: now doors / windows may be shut already “in grammatically correct way” – with shutters.

* Any language may be seen as a  linguistic museum,   more correctly, a neglected depository of words, without members of staff (except perhaps in the  hall of lexical norms  ), where somebody brought monstrous lexemes which then appeared apt for masse use and even for careful transmission to next generation. That is why such objects of critical attentions (OCAs) may and must be found, normative lexemes among them being of the highest interest. Leo Tolstoy was sure: “To use the language anyhow means to think anyhow.”

* We can see reflection of SPT in humor even. Humorists’ beloved trick is to illustrate their characters’ under-thinking or even as if it were their own. Here is an adage by Milton Berle: “We owe to Thomas Edison – if it wasn’t for him, we’d be watching television by candlelight.” Why the trick is so dear? A humorist then receives a grateful response from his audience for “allowing” them to feel themselves higher than those, stupid ones.

* But it is not a joke already that within our brains reside “mind-bugs” impending to think good. The classification of these “bugs” was given by American scientist John Warfield in his Mentomology; it gave me a possibility to replenish it with SPT-begot mind-bugs.

* In the light of the above, is it any wonder that SPT gives us numerous problems: corruption, terrorism; interpersonal, inter-ethnic, inter-confessional, inter-nation, military and other conflicts; pathologic (higher than chez animals) aggressiveness, which in utmost way narrows down our field of consciousness and releases violence. Well, we have a right to speak about  systemic discordance : the human mind is more and more out of correspondence with perpetually raising complexity of the civilization.

There is a comparison for us to ponder. Deep-water fishes to live in such deep oceanic waters that they know no tsunami nor hurricane may not be pulled from there alive because they are too narrowly specialized to those depths. Homo Sapiens to be “provided” with SPT, i.e. as if “specialized to realize programs of jungles and caverns”, are as well pulled upwards to higher civilization tops, with conditions now much more complex than those, of cavern times. We don’t correspond as well to new heights of civilization complexity, and this disparity is increasing. Catastrophic events are nearing, and just they along (if humans’ ability to foresee will be able to reach a remote future) are sufficient to command a reform of the world educational system.

When we will launch a rocket of the thought beyond the limit of the Reason?

The appeal is understandable: “beyond the limit of Reason” means for humans to get panoramic thinkers who have the capacity to open up for the civilization the passed-up opportunities to survive and develop. It depends on you and on all of us if we are ready now, even if to realize this existential global problem and to be interested in a plan which actions should be taken first towards this goal.

   People have the belated reflex: they understand only in next generations.

I’d like to believe that you to be reading this text, are not of those, belated ones. There is hope I am allowed to continue the subject with a plan to describe what, who and how should be attracted for humankind to overcome existential threats over the next decades and ensure sustainable development.

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Story about Ending the History

This is a story about four people: Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody.

 There was an important job to be done and Everybody was asked to do it.

 Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.

 Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did.

 Somebody got angry (about that) because it was Everybody’s job.

 Everybody knew that Anybody could do it, but Nobody realised that Somebody wouldn’t do it.

 It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody because Nobody did what Anybody could have done.

I’ve tried to transfer this joking story into serious one. Here is the result:

There was a job to be done for each and all of the topical importance and Everybody was asked to do it.

 * Everybody was sure that any Somebody wouldn’t do it.

 * Anybody couldn’t have done it counting it a job for Nobody.

 * Somebody got angry when asked thinking it was not Everybody’s job.

 * Everybody knew that none Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that some Somebody might do it for all that.

 * It ended up when all was over as there were not Everybody, Anybody and Somebody, Nobody only was left.

Out-of the story remark:

 Yes, ours, i.e. human race’s history, seems to be finishing. However there are ideas given here how humanity might try to remain alive. Tiny is a chance, but for all that non-zero… 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Commenting Stanislaw Lec dictum on religion

Commenting Stanislaw Lec dictum on religion

The proposed text is the first of my planned circle of comments to the thoughts said out by Stanislaw Jerzy Lec*). Despite the fact that his life ended in the last century (in 1966), his talent of foresight and depth of understanding of human nature allow to call him a thinker of the XXI century. So, let us enter deeper into his thoughts in spite of he treated them with irony, calling “unkempt”. Let the first one of them would be:
 
SOMETIMES DEVIL TEMPTS FOR ME TO BELIEVE IN GOD.
 
The said might be considered just as a play on words, as a kind of pun flavored with an oxymoron. But knowing other Lec thoughts, their rich hidden meaning, which is not open to everyone, it is worthy to ponder what is behind this game is.
 
It’s easy to see the obvious: the author of the dictum was proposed to get believer but he once and again rejected, but the devil pestered with his suggestion to believe in some god anew. It turns out that the author is an atheist on principle, having for its position some weighty arguments. And all this is also contained in Lec aphorism.
 
And what about others? They probably also are and were offered with this? Yes, of course. Here is information from Wikipedia about those who as if agreed to adopt the proposal. Here are deals of believers among whole world’s population: 33% are Christians, 23% – Muslims, 14% – Hindus, 6.7% – Buddhist, 6.6% – Confucians, 0.3% – Sikhs, 0.2% – the Jews, and 3.9% – adherents of local beliefs that are not common around the world. So, if you adopt this Lec thought then devil have done a handsome job. Really, not yielded to temptation there were only 9.4% of the population to be not privy to any confession, and 0.2% of atheists to have principal considerations for them not to be believers. And Stanislaw Lec – among those last “rara avis.”
 
By this logic, in the ancient times, the devil led only individual work pleading each. Now when the majority of the human population compose believers then to be unbeliever, let’s say in communities Islamic, Catholic, Hindu or Buddhist – is to be in opposition to the majority, be a stranger, feel everywhere attitude guarded, unfriendly or even hostile.
 
For comparison, innovative teachers had once theory of “the salt cucumber” when a newcomer in their classes got quickly “salted.” The same happened and happens now from time to time with newcomer from “unprincipled unbelievers”: as the statistics shows, they in majority joined others. Well, “the life makes a lot to do voluntarily,” and it was also marked by Stanislaw Lec.
 
But he, this wise Pole, could for all that remain an atheist among Catholics, with their rituals and prayer services to be strictly regulated by the church. If we take into account that it looks like he, over the heads those not understanding the subtext, expresses his solidarity with those who find it difficult to be an atheist in societies with overwhelming majority of believers. The mass of believers is unlikely to carry out something from his utterance. After all, to believe means to be over some rational arguments, and the opening of the Christian theologian Tertullian, “Credo, quia absurdum est” (I believe because it is absurd), as far as I know, none of the fathers of the church have disproved.
 
Well, it is possible that just such the meaning in that Lec dictum have laid. But this is clearly not all the meaning. Devil, as people perceive him, is always pushing into something devilish and evil (the believers would say “sinful”), even threatening to death. So the “behind the scenes” was rating religion as diabolical undertaking – this is what is hidden behind Lec aphorism. Of course, Lec could not have known about the religious massacres in Rwanda in 1994, where the last 3 months have been killed, according to various estimates, from 500 thousand to 1 million 30 thousand people, but he knew about the bloody Crusades (of books) and about the Nazi concentration camps (not by hearsay). Not everyone knows that Hitler was quite righteous Christian, just merely too militant, as he believed that all Jews as infidels and as such ones have to be exterminated in the concentration camps.
 
American journalist Samuel Huntington wrote in the 1996 book “The Clash of Civilizations”. It is just about the inter-religious clashes having been, taking place now and those future ones threatening the very world’s existence. So this danger of a clash of civilizations, i.e. inter-religious strives and wars, Stanislaw Lec realized in the middle of the last century.
 
In single faith communities the religion promotes softening of manners, whereas if such the community is whole humanity it stands a source of hatred and even mass death.

Here is how Lec contrived in 4 (four!) words to express the idea of vast content. Here is the idea:
 
ALL GODS   H A D    B E E N   IMMORTAL.
 
It says that they to be objects of mass adoration are alive in people minds only until humanity itself exist. And the possibility for humanity to go extinct is not excluded  because of an unreasonable desire of most people to idolatry up to the creation of DIFFERENT gods in particular.
 
P.S. About one of the reasons why people create gods I wrote in an essay Coauthoring with Voltaire (http://intentact.webs.com/voltaire.htm). I replenished there the known Voltaire thought for it to read so:
 
IF GOD DIDN’T EXIST, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INVENTED. THIS IS WHAT WAS DONE. MAYBE FOR HUMANITY TO LIVE UNDER THREAT OF SELF-EXTINCTION.
 
Fathers of churches of different denominations would have to recognize this anger already long ago and avert human catastrophe on a global scale, trying together to have agreement on something, and for the beginning to discuss that was proposed to the Elijah Interfaith Institute (http://intentact.webs.com/to_Elijah_prop.htm).
 

—————–
*) Lec, Stanislaw Jerzy. Aforyzmy, fraszki. – Kraków, 1977.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Don’t Give Humankind to Get Self-Fooled!

There is a Path to Sustainable Development

Appeal to the UN Conference participants in Rio de Janeiro (June 20—22, 2012)

Dear Delegates,

The proposed is a plan sketched how to act for launching movement to stay on this path, and it depends in particular on you will 2012 be the year when the goal begins its realizing.

Albert Einstein said out once a wisdom remark: “Significant problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.” It was said in connection with dead-lock situation in the physical science, but it is correct moreover for such significant problems as global ones.
Problematical character of such the existence Polish thinker Stanislaw Jerzy Lec expressed so: “Earth, it is a point under the question-mark”. From those times (1960s) this question have grown significantly as global problems unsolved pilled up over the world in all more threatening way, in spite of innumerable attempts to solve them or even if not to give them to become stronger. The very Conference is evidence of this as remarking 20 year jubilee of non-reaching the sustainable development in the very its name.  
 
Realizing the root cause of unsustainable development

Situation seems so that humankind cannot cope with these global problems, i.e. the existing level of intelligence, first individual one, as pre-determining even the very possibilities of individual thinkers to unite themselves and work cooperatively, is insufficient.  

Striving to understand why it is so I came up to notion of the shortage of panoramic thinking (SPT) and conjugated with it the panoramic thinking (http://intentact.webs.com/pan_th.htm). The last was defined as a manner of thinking overcoming narrow field of consciousness (NFC) being the evolutionary conditioned backwardness of human mentality. Following such the definition, panoramic thinking (PT) may be considered as the united name for several kinds of any “good” thinking, including already known, such as systemic one, lateral, inventive, creative, parallel, breaking-through, of full spectrum, of more than one track, non-standard, etc., all being not characteristic for majority people. 

Here is a straightforward arguing: as all mighty human civilization was created owing to creative activity of some hundred generations of mentally active people, then global problems was also “created” by them as by-products “owing to” any features (negative) of their thinking. Someone may account impossible to admit that this mighty human reason is imperfect, but the anthropogenic theory gives us possibility to understand that it is possible:
Human reason to be begot 40 Millennia ago in result of eliminating selection among hominids gave Homo Sapiens huge evolution advantage before other animal species, and the human species’ numbers since that times got growing exponentially. It meant that first people, living by tribes, were already secured enough, and selection by the reason got weaker or disappear at all. In result NFC having been former an advantage turn into dangerous common human shortage, SPT. Now, there is a systemic disparity: people in mass don’t correspond dynamic and information complexity of that civilization what had been created by their ancestors.

At place here may be my interview Shortage of panoramic thinking to ask about and answer (http://intentact.webs.com/spt_ask_answ.htm) where some aspects of SPT concerning its “cohabitation” with people were expounded in details. Here is one question-answer for example. –>

What ways you see for SPT to overcome and which are possible hardness of the process?

— For any human being the genetically transferred living experience of generations is only insignificant part in comparison with the experience got in result of social inherence. This fact from comparative physiology of animals gives a base for inference that the humankind has principal possibility to rebuild the existing systems of education onto development of the panoramic thinking in order to upgrade to higher mentality. However the system of education of any country has big inertia, so even the very realization of necessity to change in radical way directions of education — from to master knowledge onto  a better thinking – is presupposed to be hard. Not simple task is as well experimental checking of how much panoramic thinking people may be mastered in result of education reform. Really, a group of teachers-enthusiasts, in order to prove principal possibility to overcome SPT, may present their final-year students taught in the new fashion at best via 10—12 years.

 

And even after that, it is entirely not obvious that these results will be convictive for education ministry workers. After my prognosis, panoramically thinking pupils prepared by panoramically thinking teachers may appear in 2060—70, not earlier.

 

However strange it might appear, especially unhappy circumstances may only accelerate this transformation of educational systems. The question is about an imperative of survival, i.e. possibility to perceive that SPT-people (i.e. insofar we all as narrow-minded in evolutionary sense), being “specialized to realize programs of jungle”, are situated under awesome threat as they being pulled out to civilization tops may be likened deep-water fishes when pulled out from kilometer depths to oceanic surface. It is known such fishes can’t be taken out of there alive. Homo Sapiens, with this “narrow species specialization” of the thinking, as well don’t correspond to new heights of civilization complexity, and this disparity is increasing. It means that catastrophic events are unavoidable, and just they and only they (at any humans’ ability to foresee) might “make for” the educational transformation to have occurred.

I felt a necessity to realize better and more, for others and myself, what is the scale of the SPT appearances pre-determined by its evolution prehistory. So the lecture arose: Shortage of panoramic thinking: signs seen everywhere (http://intentact.webs.com/spt_signs.htm), written on the ground of in-Russian collection of SPT’s appearances with characteristic title: A hunting for the deficit. Following on animal foot-prints left in the human brains (http://tvinteltech.narod.ru/follow_spt.html). Recently, to understand more the nature of these “foot-prints” I used another metaphor thought up by Prof. John Warfield: mindbugs. In result it appeared a lecture that was posted: Replenishing John N. Warfield’s Mentomology Identifying and Classifying Mindbugs with Evolutional Mentomology (http://tvinteltech.narod.ru/eng/Lectures/15.html). At that Evolutional Mentomology, being in essence a classification of those mindbugs from the evolutionary point of view, was given separately as well: http://intentact.webs.com/my_mentom.htm.

What does mean to live with SPT?” is an excerpt of the lecture. ->

The shortage of panoramic thinking to be rooted into our mentality pre-determines mass of regularities existing in human society “owing” to it. Thus, because of SPT:
* people can debate long time with no result;
* always there are people who, after having lived almost all the life, suddenly realize that their lives were for nothing;
* PR services propose advertising texts what later appear to be anti-advertising, to great surprise of those who have prepared it;
* MPs adopt laws turned out to be shortly needing to be changed; politicians always found human material for their suggestive recruiting of adherents;
* a murderer almost always finds justifications for the murder performed;
* heads of state can’t come to agreements with others heads of state — to avoid wars, and with own peoples — to avoid revolutions.
* among normative lexical expressions of any language with sureness are lexemes-viruses existing unrevealed for some human generations. 

“Questions what might be set” are taken of the project proposal Creating the civilization security system in 3rd millennium (http://intentact.webs.com/civ_secure.htm; written for the DPI/UN from the name of International Academy of Information Technologies (Minsk). –>

Don’t think you that many million armies of fans going mad of their sportive and variety idols are evidence of what may be named as “the not claimed human minds“? Aren’t evidence of the same that we usually hate to be in waiting of something or somebody? May we say that the not burdening thought accompaniment of events as well as idle talks “reply by reply” are quite unusable for people? Don’t you see in it an association with the fact that only 1/10 part of head brain nervous cells are acting? May we be surprised then that we have the thinking which gives rise to numerous problems? Why one can’t think that just because of SPT human communities again and again face such problems as corruption, terrorism, interpersonal, inter-ethnic, inter-confessional, inter-nation, military and other conflicts? Don’t you think that there are dangerous errors of thoughtlessness which happen because of SPT, and there is dangerous aggressive behavior — because of pathologic SPT, i.e. limitary narrowed field of consciousness? After all that, may you admit there is a systemic discordance: the human mind is out of correspondence with such huge complexity of the civilization having created during hundreds of human generations?

However strange it is, Humor secret from evolution depths (http://intentact.webs.com/humor_secret.htm) revealed has much to do with understanding what means SPT in our life.  
It was proven that all 15 forms of wordy humor selected for its classification -you can step-by-step to prove it- demonstrate the only mechanism in operation when any known (it may be implied) is compared / confronted with any unknown, giving in result new thought or like-thought.  The very secret is: If science and inventiveness “hold” on overcoming of  SPT, then jokes — on playing upon overcoming of SPT.

Some years ago Prof. Stephen Hawking posted on Yahoo.com a question, almost rhetorical: “How can the human race survive the next hundred years? In a world that is in chaos politically, socially and environmentally, how can the human race sustain another 100 years?” Nevertheless, I answered it (http://intentact.webs.com/yah_answ.htm), with Discussion added later. –>

This question is about how to remain alive, and moreover to live without threats of self-extinction.

Here is a plan how to do for it. It contains 3 goals to be reached that have signs of imperatives how to survive. Paradoxically, if they are only getting categorical ones, any chances of surviving will appear.

First goal-imperative. The evolution of our animal ancestors was proceeding at sufficient high selection’s pressure. In result, our operative field of conscience is narrow. In other words, we had provided in during of evolution by the «narrow minds». Just because of such our peculiarity the human logic is “black-white”, systemic thinking and synthetic ideas are rather rear among people, who like simple decisions and are losing very often sight of something.

 This «narrow-mindedness», having been formerly an advantage in surviving (as allowing quicker behavior reactions), now is a dangerous shortage. The cause is that discrepancy is more and more between ‘the same’ individual mental possibilities of people and the raising complexity of their existence’s conditions. So, a limit to our existence is felt yet. To overcome the shortage of panoramic thinking (SPT) — just so we can reformulate Blaise Pascal’s ordinance: “Let’s think correctly: here is the main principle of moral“.

 …To overcome SPT with educational means is in concordance with new reality, the information abundance. Because of this circumstance, educational priority “to study in order to know” is obsolete, a new priority should appear, “to study in order to be able to think”, it means using the thinking creative, effective, panoramic, taking into account all necessary.

 One of appearance of SPT is aggressiveness. The Austrian biologist Konrad Lorentz wrote:

«We have weighty bases to consider inner-specific aggression as the most serious danger threatening to Humankind… But the prospect to fight this danger will not by no means better if we consider it as something metaphysical and inevitable; if on the contrary we will try to trace a chain of the natural causes of its origin, then, this may help».

There, a hope exists. Really, it is known that more educated people are less aggressive. So, we can admit that the special directed education methods, developing panoramic thinking (PT), will be able to lessen it to normal, civilization level and to make for pacification in the world.

 If we take into account else that because of SPT any fatal errors are inevitable, and that the raising might of the civilization makes their after-effects more and more catastrophic, then reforming of the national education systems in direction of PT looks like not the wished but imperatively compulsory demand.

Second goal-imperative. In the animal world, there is a general system-forming tendency named the cephalization ending brains’ forming at its final phase. There is as well the analogy between an organism and its brain, from one hand, and a state and its governing body (i.e. a social organism and its social brain) — from other hand. It means in any form is going the process of social cephalization on the level of states. But there is no analogous process on the level of whole humankind.

Let us say this by other words. Individuals have often Life goals, states are guided by national ideas; but Humankind as a super-organism does not follow any strategy of own development having no analogue of a social mind for elaborating it. A feature of our civilization is that it is as if ‘super-headless’.

 Complexity of the world, first of all the information one, now huge, will be enormous via next 2–3 generations. To correspond it, human community should create any form of planetary intelligence. Owing computer nets such social mind would provide necessary balance of complexities of the two systems — governing (the very global mind) and governed (all the humankind).

Third goal-imperative. The UN declared 2001 the Year of Dialogue of Civilizations. However the dialogue might be continued to the century’s end. But how to propose such topical subject for discussion which would be of general interests?

The today challenges are multi-faceted, and the response to them requires “a vision based on dialogue”. Let us mark: for the first time in the human history such the dialogue owing Internet and other mobile communication may be organized as world-wide. The main subject of it then might be, let’s say, “To Happy Life on Earth for All“.

Such the subject, as concerning all, as asking opinions of all (what and how to do), and permitting everyone to express own opinion, is preferable to resolve problems of Global Peace and Security. By the way, ‘Golden Billion’ and ‘Not-Golden ones’, they are from a model of unstable world, having no positive perspective, and that would be one of problems to be discussed.

 The problem of happiness appears to absorb all other problems facing Mankind: military conflicts, terrorism, the growing poverty, resources’ exhaustion, environment’s pollution, overpopulation, climate change. It is why to raise the problem of happiness is not indulging in fantasies, but realizing in whole complexity the main imperative of survival for Humankind. … widening at that temporary diapason to fulfill demands of 1st and 2nd goals-imperatives.

 Discussion. The known old-Greek philosopher Democritus considered: “Not words, but unhappiness is a teacher of blockheads“. Because of blockheads’ attendance among us, such the chance appears when the situation in the world is ‘sufficient bad‘, how after global catastrophes like “repetitions of the end of the world“. But just such massive “teacher” should not get the right to teach. It’d be better for human beings to use their ability to foresee far after-effects and act correspondingly.

In 2010 Dr. Yuji Ishiguro book “One Billion World” issued. It may be seen as a serious precaution: one of the global problems, the overpopulation, is the only what may get solution itself, with no human interface.

Collective mind of global scale needed

But on this way to it lies a heavy problem of Institutional and strategic bankruptcy of intelligent people in the civilization process (http://intentact.webs.com/bankr_intels.htm). Really, let us juxtapose: whole mighty human civilization, with its culture and techno sphere, had arisen in result of intellectual, creative activities of many generations of people, of those, who later were called intellectual minds, intelligentsia. That is why just they might take responsibility for the civilization’s state and future. Titus Plavt, ancient Roman dramatist, had been already certain:  “All clever people should be in interrelation.”

Moreover we, modern people, may admit that the historical mission of intelligentsia in perspective of some generations is elaborating a strategy of existence and civilization development being able to minimize threats of its extermination and self-extermination, in order then the strategy might be corrected “in course of the life”.

However the problem of this interrelation, in modern conditions signifying an institutional socialization of the intelligent people in form of any planetary intelligent resource, may appear especially hard and long process. That is why the intelligent people “like” to be and act separately, and there are intelligentsia of natural sciences, humane, technical, being in and out power, with and without degrees, titled and untitled, being in and out any elites, belonging to scientific/artistic schools “good” and “bad”, not to mention about common human barriers of separation – by national, racial, of age, sexual, religion-confessional signs. “To like” turns in result into intelligentsia’s inability to active participation in the civilization process. 

A project draft Urgent Creation of the All-World Intellectual Web Resource
(http://intentact.webs.com/intel_uni.htm) gives a prompt how to launch this long promotion to the aim.

Here is how the very problem is presented. –>

All human civilization had been created owing the brainwork of more intelligent people in some tens of millennia; problem is how to save our not sustainably developing world from extinction and self-extinction for some decades using new technologies in technique and informatics, new technologies of thinking (both individual and collective ones), new information databases being provided with necessary and replenished equipping.

My work to promote the plan into realizing proceeded in some directions. The first was…

Presenting it more convincingly and in details

I return to the project proposal “Creating a civilization security system in 3rd Millennium” (http://intentact.webs.com/civ_secure.htm) written in form of a report before the UN Leading Body and developing the thoughts said out while answering S. Hawking’s questions.

Here are 2 excerpts of it. –>

(1) Re-comprehending the security problem. There is a cybernetic principle of external addition, very optimistic: Any problem may be solved being re-formulated on an appropriate higher, meta-systemic level. Stanislaw Lem gave in “Summa Technologiae” an example of such successful reformulation. It is about the everlasting dream of people to fly as birds. The dream-problem had not been solved in during of many centuries, and only its reformulation (admitting the use of apparatus heavier than air) got the solution when new technologies were mastered.

It is a right time now (earlier, it was impossible; later, it may be too late) to reformulate in similar way the problem of civilization security so for it to be resolved in some decades using new and newest technologies — educational, intellectual and information ones.

(2) A hope however exists.

The point is that the best representatives of intelligentsia, those who are living with accordance with the conscience, used to evaluate all after the largest moral counting. It is why having realized the very hard global problem, of the very civilization existing, just they may take responsibility for the civilization’s security and its further development, starting that high security plan. The United Nations I am quite sure might count on their support, even disinterested.  

Let us propose any group of such intelligent people realizes their involvedness into the problem and unites in the group for civilization security (GCS). What might be their actions?

Understanding the necessity to heighten the quality of thinking in their countries they went ahead with articles and interviews in media explaining ways of education reforming. Some of them elaborate programs of different levels of learning, others publish articles with critical analysis of the language showing reveals of SPT in lexemes by nobody marked earlier, argue that our instrument of the thought should not be stupid and rusty if it pretends to be a tool of good thinking. That and similar activities attract other thinking people, and GCS is replenishing. At any time the IntelNet, i.e. Internet’s intellectual part, recognize GCS as appropriate partners, take their research problems as own ones. A movement to World Intellectual Resource begins.  

So united intelligent people can’t leave unnoticed the problem of happiness, seeing their use of participating in its analytical, scientific, programming etc. accompaniment. For them, a forum on the problem would be huge sociologic laboratory where they might prove how their ideas of different strategies, of versions of future predicted were perceived, etc.

First initiators’ activity would be many more successful if were supported by such authoritative organization as the UN. By the way, in early 2002, I posted at Forum, what Club of Rome hold then on its website, the text entitled “For all that, happiness on Earth is possible” (http://intentact.webs.com/for_all_that.htm). It was just about the old-age problem of happiness discussed in the World Net. Supporting GCS plans the UN have got an image of the foreseeing organization taking care of future generations’ fortune.

It was there as well about the main root problem determining human calamities what had been and may be, up to the very humanity’s self-extermination. Alas, until now any shift to rebuilding world education system onto the path going to overcoming SPT had been done. Realizing root evolution linkage of SPT with widely apprehended interest, emotionality, and inherited instinctive programs of behavior, understanding how hard is for majority people to refute of the idea of Mighty Human Reason and to see its numerous defects I came in an essay to grievous inference, how the very its name says: All humanity may be fooled. But new and new SPT’s appearances, in particular in political and state activities, together with no shift made me soon strengthen that title up to: All Humankind must have been fooled (http://intentact.webs.com/betise.htm). I.e. we are already “after event” but only don’t know about it.

However it doesn’t mean to give up and do nothing. In the end, the last title differs from previous only by measure of sureness in that apocalyptic end what may only happen without dependence on whomever efforts, ours and even of our progeny. 

That is why let us discuss what measure might help in achieving of these three goals-imperative. –>

Making for success of the proposed

A subject New dimension of human rights I proposed for discussion of the 61st Annual Conference DPI/NGO delegates (http://intentact.webs.com/new_dim_hrs.htm). I argued that quite in spirit of the Conference working paper they might to discuss how panoramically thinking people might help to create “new mindset around human rights“; moreover, how entering into new dimension of human rights would sharpen interest to the very UN Declaration, giving in result “greater awareness of the state of human rights in the world”.

Towards the moral revival. Friedrich Schiller counted: “The educated reason ennobles moral feelings; the head should bring up the heart“. This thought may be considered as short expression of the all humane ethics created by Erich Fromm. So, renewal education would give people wider view on the world and on themselves inside to move away from the precipice of moral degradation.

Grounding the new dimension of Human Rights. Panoramic thinking (PT) has properties of any imagery, intuitive intelligibility and is justified from neurophysiologic consideration, as the surface layer of the cerebral cortex is the main substance of thinking. The right to be taught with PT is more than a new human right, it is a breakthrough opening an entry into the huge space of new opportunities both for persons and the civilization whole.

Pondering of role that renewed reason to play for moral coming-to-be of individuals I wrote in result Ethic panorama of thinking (http://intentact.webs/ethic_panor.htm) highlighting applications of ethics to school pedagogy, international relation, global problems, civilization security, attempts to present widened ethical framework for sustainable development, to set link between ethics and overcoming the SPT.   
I had formulated there as well a credo of an intelligent person:  if you are mastered with knowledge and apt abilities, you may and should realize that your historical mission, having in view the perspective of some generations is assist in elaborating a strategy of existence and development of Humankind, the strategy what might minimize threats of civilization’s extermination and self-extermination and to be corrected then “in course of the life”. 

Commenting Universal Declaration of Human Rights from point of view of the new dimension of human rights (http://intentact.webs.com/comm_UDHR.htm) I dare to propose changing and replenishing some articles of the Declaration.

The plenary report Evolutionary sense of notions and techniques of Earthy science (http://intentact.webs.com/evol_concept.htm) given in 1990 at all-USSR Conference on non-traditional ideas in the science, gave me a sureness that I realized existence of the important common-biological principle early unknown, the principle of tolerance. Owing to it I might present Nature’s recommendations for international institutions (http://intentact.webs.htm/nat_rec_IIs.htm), i.e. for international NGOs, including the main of them, the United Nation Organization, and also for governments, as a rule acting in contact with all the world. Owing to the principle I could get a notion about Civilization’s omissions, how look for and fill in them (http://intentact.webs.com/omiss_all.htm) and make three attempts to give direct confirmations of the said describing something like filled-in omission:
(1) mathematics to be more adequate the world we live in, (2) new comprehension of the physical law, (3) generalized principle of tolerance for alive and lifeless nature, and (4) renewed science striving for realizing its earthy subjectivism (and even any apt institution for such the science – National Academy of Renewed Anthropology (http://intentact.webs.com/na_antrpl.htm).

Raising a chance of success at working for secure civilization

Hardness of the problem above make think how to gather all possibilities, available and possible, in order to lighten its solving, to widen temporal framework for the participating thinkers, to create stimuli for others’ participation going ahead with new problems conjugated.  

The UN might have done very much for attracting attention of thinkers-volunteers to the problem having adopted
Proposal to create the UN Civilization Security Committee (http://intentact.webs.com/civ_sec_UN.htm). It is said there: –>

Many people have adopted the call “Think globally, act locally” as corresponding their direction of activity. From the UN tribune this appeal was wired for sound repeatedly. We can see the very structure of the UN Security Council reflects this motto. Really, there are there the locality as geographic (Yugoslavia, Rwanda) as well as functional (peace-building, peacekeeping, terrorism, criminality, military problems). 
New the UN’s motto might however be wider:

Think globally, act locally, preparing all to act globally. 

Creation the UN Civilization Security Committee would be then the very first of the future global actions.

In New dimension of human rights (http://intentact.webs.com/new_dim_hrs.htm) such the problem is posted:

George B. Shaw said out the thought: “Intellect, it is a passion. Descartes, without doubt, took of the life more than Casanova did“. Anton Chekhov said even more: “For those who have experienced delights of creativity, other delights do not exist“. Then such the question is justified: Doesn’t it happen so that the most of people awfully impoverish themselves, not having possibilities to express themselves in creative way, having no notion about the highest delight getting from intellectual emotions? Maybe people in masse, not separated individuals, have such tacit abilities of creators, and absence of the corresponding education system only does not permit them to experience in their lives moments of the highest happiness? If so, are there any opportunities to provide for people such a new human right as the right to be educated so for them to get abilities for creative activities?

It is about the right for people to get panoramic thinkers being able to overcome their mentality’s evolution backwardness.

It is at peace that is only possible to think of human rights and their widening. In Comment and additions to Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://intentact.webs.com/comm_UDHR.htm) was shown how the very possibility to perfect the human tool of the thought might give new content of declared human rights.

Nature’s recommendations for international institutions (http://intentact.webs.com/nat_rec_IIs.htm) were given both for international NGOs, including the UN as the main international institution, and for governments. Why recommendations of the Nature might be guidance for actions? Let’s juxtapose: 6 decades, 40 millennia and about 1 billion years. First is the time of the UN existing, second is the period since Homo Sapiens arisen to present, and third is the evaluated time of the life on Earth.

So, such the long earthy experience of the life might give us very serious ground providing in-depth reforming any human-containing systems, including international institutions. Theoretically, it is possible, if we know how ‘to hear’ the Nature’s recommendations. Well, that know-how was worked out in my D.Sc. thesis “Searching Algorithms of Nature’s Recommendations” [1] defended in 2001 at IAIT (http://tvinteltech.narod.ru/auto_ref.html, in Russian).

My lecture Ethic panorama of the thinking (http://intentact.webs.com/ethic_panor.htm) might give
any stimuli for citizens to be socially responsive:
Blaise Pascal reckoned: “All our dignity is enclosed in the thought. Neither the space nor the time elevates us, but only it, our thought. Let us learn to good think: that is the main principle of moral”. Friedrich Schiller’s principle – “head should bring up the heart” – is in full agreement with Pascal’s. To elaborate one’s own ethical principles, to out-build an individual life strategy intending to be / to get a fruitful person to be interesting and necessary for others – all that is about overcoming SPT on the moral-ethical territory.

So the head may have taught the heart to think good. What does it mean?
Good thinking is honest thinking, i.e. controlling whether double standards are not used: one “for me”, another “for others”. In particular, it is presupposed as well for you to be “suspicious” to yourself: “Whether I have “played” with myself at give-away?”

Modern times give for ethical, i.e. honest thinking fantastic, unprecedented causes. Really, you can now ask yourself: “What I, educated and much knowing how to do, can help in solving, or even if relieving, these huge all-human problems because of which any long prospective for Humankind is not seen?”

Proposing to DPI/UN from the name ISPU “IAIT” draft of  Universal Declaration of Human Planetary Responsibility (http://intentact.webs.com/udhresp.htm) I’d want to fill in omission of 60 year remoteness. I mean here that the international law with Universal Declaration of Human Rights without corresponding declaration on human responsibilities is not full and not harmonic as not giving guarantees of declared human rights’ observance. It was Mahatma Gandhi who said as back as 1948: “Ganges of rights flow from Himalayas of responsibilities.” Human responsibility and corresponding Universal Declaration are waiting too long to be adopted. It is characteristic how much organizations and separate people had proposed already for it to move in action, mine was one of them, only with adjective Planetary (see about it http://intentact.webs.com/pl-respon.htm).

Responsibility of planetary scale, how it was said in my draft, relates in the first turn to those who have levers of influence on many people’s lives, i.e. state leaders, politicians, public figures, military; intellectuals, analysts, methodologists and other brain-working people; educational sphere’s workers; ecologists, biologists, workers of material production sphere; belletrists and artistic actors; those who are working with information and its technical providing. Though for other people it might be as well a good component their ethical behavior as having much to do with the culture of peace. The same goal was important for me in while writing Ecology of intra-human space as a school discipline (http://intentact.htm/ec_space.htm).

The thought suggests itself here that the planetary responsibility and planetary consciousness might have got structurally forming the modern education in the world what may go to collapse because of lack of responsibility, first of politicians and state leaders.

Another possibility for pacification in the world might give an inter-faith agreement what was proposed to Elijah Interfaith Institute (http://intentact.webs.com/to_elijah_prop.htm). In particular, it was said there: –>

It is well known, cooperation of people linked by a common affair is the best nearing factor. Just such common affair should be in place of dialogues/discussions/debates. In other way, it should be a dialogue-cooperation. This common affair is of civilization meaning, namely: to elaborate, looking for consensus, in result of collective network of believers and unbelievers, taking into account the already made and found, a common moral-ethic platform of whole humanity, being sure that Homo Sapiens Ethicus only may have future.

I proposed even, being unbeliever, a motto to be initiating believers to cope with their mission task: “Let us, we, believers, serve not only our gods, but as well all the humanity”.

Summing up the said above

* Rio+20 Conference gives direction where to strive to:
Sustainable societies, responsible citizens” in the nearest times. To overlap a longer temporary diapason needs to assist at realization Creating the system of civilization security in the 21st century (http://intentact.webs.com/civ_secure.htm);

* Rio+20 Conference proposing to carry out global dialogue “Vote for the future you want” foretokens appearance of similar global dialogue at many-language Internet forum on happiness, eternal dream of people (http://intentact.webs.com/for_all_that.htm). “When people negotiate, guns are silent”, and to create a grounded strategy of civilization sustainable development would be more time;

* The UN Leadership having create Committee for Civilization Security (or a division at the UN Council of Security of corresponding direction)
(http://intentact.webs.com/civ_sec_UN.htm) would show all the world its care for the future of the humanity, gave people more sureness on a day tomorrow;

* Moreover, such the UN structure would make for uniting now separated think-tanks and networkers into collective super-intelligence, in perspective of some generations – of planetary scale, what might get Planetary Reason of Humankind (http://intentact.webs.com/intel_uni.htm);

* The UN Committee for Civilization Security might get organizing force to launch elaborating national pilot educational projects for creation of learning programs letting pupils and students to overcome common-human evolutionary backwardness, the shortage of panoramic thinking (http://intentact.webs.com/betise.htm);

* Human Planetary Responsibility (http://intentact.webs.com/pl-respon.htm) having been declared from the high UN Tribune as another, on a level with Human Rights, object of the international law, would gave the world community better observance of human rights, assist in  better apprehending among people, permit them though if not to strengthen global problems threatening the very existence of modern civilization;

* It’d like to think that the very idea of civilization’s omissions (http://intentact.webs.com/omiss_all.htm), of a train of discoveries seemingly standing behind it might give scientists and any networkers orientation where and how to “digger” in order to come to breaking-through solutions, what, in turn, would open new possibility for civilization to cope with global problems impending to live in sustainable world.

* Nature’s recommendations proposed for international institutions (http://intentact.webs.com/nat_rec_IIs.htm) are only one of possible applications of the principle of tolerance (a little known insofar) for human-containing systems. A better (the best?) social system for people to be found – is possible result of this new common-biological principle’s application. Moreover, international NGOs, as the very mobile among international structures, taking into consideration there recommendations, might carry out more into the life the spirit of the times and be more conjugated with the UN at its international affairs.

* I hope that my Free School for Panoramic Thinking (http://www.wiser.org/group/Sch_pan_th) may be considered as well as a step in the same direction, to more sustainable development.

Written by Dr. Vladimir Tretyakov (Belarus),
Representative at the DPI/UN powered by ISPU “IAIT”.

Posted as well as a  Lecture 16 / WikiPage at  Free School for Panoramic Thinking

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Opinions of the human reason said out by experts of diverse countries and epochs

Posted as Lecture 13 at Discussion forum by Free School for Panoramic Thinking

The father of Yury Ryashentsev, of that very poet what created a hit for “The Three Musketeers” film: 

Let us, let us be joyful
whilst we all are alive
  
  

– when his infant Yurik found difficulty in replying or didn’t know how to behave gave him device “Take it more widely!”

This recommendation might be considered as enveloping a significant part of methodological means for us to think better – when “more widely” is understood directly, – and envelops all possible in general – if it is understood with taking into account not only the widened base of concrete thinking process, but as well presupposes self-controlling thinking for us not to admit distortions of the thought because of pragmatic considerations or emotional subjectivism.

This text is destined rather for to widen directly our mental view how human reason was understood and evaluated by people having had great experience of using their reason.

May the world be saved by the reason?     

“By reason” means that in result of its thinking activity a strategy of survival has arisen what being realized is able to carry out humankind onto the path of sustainable and progressive development. It applies as well that all threats and challenges were until aware. We may however be in doubt of it, as wordy cautions about threats are frequently ignored by people.

That such the course of events is not only possible but even very likeable, confirms popular sayings: “Things will turn out all right somehow!”, “Two deaths won’t happen, one isn’t escaped”, as well as wide distribution of by-trial-and-error method. The last means that people firstly do something and then elucidate why it should not be done at no circumstances. It remains for elucidating already to those who remain alive.

Such general trend had been noticed as back as near 2.5 thousand years by Democritus: “Not words but unhappiness is the teacher of fools”

Turning to our reality, i.e. to the civilization being until now able to cope with the threatening global problems and to stand onto the path of sustainable development. I apply here the imminent catastrophes problem what is unless challenged. It hardly will be realized as a challenge soon. It means that no systemic, aiming-directed shifts in social consciousness and societal settlement proceed until these warnings “say out” with all their cruel persuasiveness  — in the “language” of catastrophes, disasters, wars and terrorist attacks. But there is circulus vitious (vicious circle): for us to begin counteracting, catastrophes are “needed”; but when these come, for those who remain alive (maybe few), much more emergent affairs having dictated by cruel post-catastrophe reality will not admit to think of future and realize any all-planet project of civilization salvation.  

Thus, let us have heard opinions of creative people of past and last centuries about the human reason and its possibilities in order to know is our chance to save ourselves big.

    Imaginaryround table» on problem of the reason

Within this School, it is presupposed as an axiom on failure to mention, that not the beauty will save the world, but rather the beauty of the human thought generated by the human reason having got more perfect in result of an intentional, conscious evolution. 
But why then, knowing Blaise Pascal dictum: “Nothing is more in agreement with the reason as its distrust to itself”, not to get interested in others’ opinions? Especially interesting for us are a priori opinions of the very authoritative experts, i.e. great and talented creators.  My task is only not to make a mess and ask them questions of big importance for the essence of the human reason to be grasped. Let experts-sages speak different languages and belong to not only different centuries but even different eras (B.C. and A.D.) – that may not be a obstacle to carry out this “round table” as it is imagined.

Well, I ask respectful experts to say out on key questions linked with mind, reason, intellect.

    – What is the part taken by the reason in the life of an individual and a society?   

Pythagoras.   – It is only reason, as a wise trustee, whom should entrust all the life in.
Heraclitus.   – The wisdom consists in the only: to recognize the reason as something what govern all with help of all.
Shakespeare.   – If there were not the reason, we would be overridden by sensuality. The mind is to bridle its absurdity.
 Leo Tolstoy.   – If reason doesn’t point you at your place in the world and your destination, then know that is guilty of not bad the world’s arrangement nor of your reason, but wrong direction you gave it.
– If people didn’t have the reason, they might not distinct good and bad, might not seek for truth blessing and possess it.

    – What are faults of the reason and how it might be perfected?   

Pascal
.   – I surprise the most that people are not astonished at their reasoning’s feebleness.
 La Rochefoucauld.   – Our reason, by its laziness and inertness, is occupied usually only with that is for it easily and nicely; this custom limits our cognitions, and nobody took the trouble to enrich and widen own reason up to limits of the possible. Our reason is lazier than the body.
– Obstinacy is born because of limited ness of our reason: we believe reluctantly that is out of our horizon’s limits.  
– To be wise in alien affairs is many easier than in own ones.
 Labruere.   – It’s easier to meet people having the mind than ability to apply it at affairs, estimate another’s mind and find it useful application.
 Shakespeare.   – There is no place for jokes/At mind that is not sharp <the original quotation needs here>.
 Pascal.   – All our dignity consists in the thought. Not the space nor the time, what we may not to fill up, ennoble us, but just it, our thought. Let us then learn to think good: here is the main principle of the morality.
 Horace.   – Dare to be wise!
 Cicero.   – Not enough to be possessed of the wisdom, it needs to know how to use it.
 Helvetius.   – One ought to deepen one’s mind, but not to widen, to gather, like inflammatory glass focusing, all heat and all light of one’s mind in the single point.
Vauvenargue.   – That are liveliness and pliancy what may be attached to the mind, as well as to the body; it needs for this to train the former, as the latter is trained.
Descartes.   – Not enough to have good mind. The main is to use it rightly.
Brecht.   – The very main is to have taught a human to think.
Goethe.   – A strong mind pursuing practical goals is the best mind in the world.
Montaigne.   – It is very useful to sharpen and polish one’s mind with minds of others.

    – How do Reason and a happy life correlate?   

Sophocles
.   – Reason is without doubt the first condition for the happiness.
Dostoyevsky.   – Not the mind is the main, but what aims it, – nature, heart, noble features, development.
Griboyedov. – Grief because of the mind.
Publius Ovidius.   – The reason abandons first those who unhappy.
Titus Plautus.   – Wise person self forges own happiness.
Kant.   – Happiness is an ideal not of mind but of imagination.

    – Which virtues are characteristic for the human reason?   

Aristotle
.   – The mind consists not only in knowledge, but also in ability to apply the knowledge to affairs.
 Anaxagoras.   – All things had been lumped together; then it was the reason that came and put them in the order.
 Leo Tolstoy.   – Destination of the reason is opening the truth, and that is why a great and pernicious delusion is using the reason to hide or pervert the truth.
 Kant.   – The reason is an ability to see connection between general and partial things.
 Hegel.   – The very serious need is the need to cognate the truth.
 Bruno.   – An ability of an alive mind is that it is needed a little to see and hear that it then might to consider a long time and understand a lot.
 La Rochefoucauld.   – A distinctive feature of great mind is to say many in some words.
 Leo Tolstoy.   – Don’t think that the wisdom is a property of outstanding people only. Wisdom is necessary for all people and them is characteristic of all people. Wisdom is to know our destination and means to fulfill it.
 Vauvenargue.   – It is the heart that prompts us the very high thoughts.

    – Does Human Reason give us any causes for historic optimism?   

Vauvenargue.
   – There are fools less than it is considered: people don’t merely understand each other.
 Bacon.   – Human reason is greed. It can’t stop nor be at the rest, it endeavors all farther.
 Leo Tolstoy.   – There are not such situations and such insignificant affairs, where the wisdom might not reveal itself.
– Every human may and should use all what has worked out joint reason of humankind, but together may and should check by the reason those truths elaborated earlier living people.
 France.   – Don’t consider yourself uninvited guest at the feast of wises. Occupy there the place in store for you. And then, tête-à-tête with beautiful works of poets, scientists, artists, historians of all centuries and peoples, you can evaluate correctly your abilities, and your eyes will open new, wide, unknown horizons.

    First inferences     

 General evaluation of the reason.  The distinguished experts agreed about a high score of the reason’s role, considering that one’s own life may only be entrusted to it (Pythagoras), that it governs all (Heraclitus), that without it nobody might govern self (Shakespeare) and that any wisdom has everybody (L. Tolstoy).

Virtues of the reason. Reason gets to use the knowledge in deed (Aristotle), to put things in order (Anaxagoras), to open the truth (L. Tolstoy), to set links between general and particular (Kant), to satisfy a need to cognize the truth (Hegel), to consider and understand  (Bruno), to formulate thoughts clearly (La Rochefoucauld), at that especially significant ones – at prompt of the heart (Vauvenargue).

  Faults of the reason:    few self-criticism (Pascal), laziness, inertness and limitedness (La Rochefoucauld), a weak expressed thinking process (Pascal, Vauvenargue, Brecht, Goethe, La Rochefoucauld), insufficient aliveness and pliancy (Vauvenargue), little ability to use itself (Cicero, Descartes, Labruere), low sensitiveness revealed in undeveloped sense of humor (Shakespeare).

 Directions to bettering.  It needs to think good (Pascal), to master a wisdom (Horace) and to learn use it (Cicero), to deepen the mind (Helvetius), to attach to the mind aliveness and pliancy (Vauvenargue), to teach / learn to think and use the mind rightly (Descartes, Brecht, Goethe), to juxtapose the mind own with others’ minds (Montaigne).

  Correlation between reason and happiness. Clever human being may be happy (Sophocles), but wise human gets happy (Titus Plautus); the mind may bring unhappiness (Griboyedov), unhappy people are unreasonable (Publius Ovidius), there is something what is more important than the reason: that direct it (Dostoyevsky), happiness is an ideal not the reason but the imagination (Kant).

About historical optimism.   There are not so much fools (Vauvenargue), the reason is aiming to new (Bacon), a wisdom may reveal itself even at insignificant affairs (L. Tolstoy), everybody may find own place at feast of wises (France).

Thus, here is the generalized opinion of the wises living for 25 centuries about the human reason: all depends of the reason, but it is not without faults being however possible to be overcome with teaching and learning.

   The expert Luc de Clapier de Vauvenargue (France) drew attention all distantly presenting experts of different epochs to wideness of the mind:     

 “There is nothing more favoring judgment and perspicacity than the wideness of the mind. On my opinion, it is nothing just splendid capacity of organs of the thought to acquire many ideas simultaneously, not muddling one with other.

Wide mind considers different essences in their interrelations; in single sight envelops a subject with all its branches; carries out the lasts to common origin and centre, and then explores from the single point of view. It, at the end, highlights many the very important questions and vast domain.

It is impossible to be a genius without wideness of the mind, but one may possess it being not genius, as that are different things: a genius is active and productive; wide mind frequently limits itself considerations, it cool, lazy and timid.

Every know that wideness of the mind much depends on the seal that usually transfers it its own boundaries or moves them apart depending on forces applied”.  

30 year old Luc dе Vauvenargue shows in this excerpt the same quality of wide mind, what he described already 2.5 centuries ago. I experienced big gratification having read this “agitation for the panoramic thinking”, moreover that my conception of PT was formed 1.5 decade before I saw this Vauvenargue’s text.

The author of bright dictum “Les grandes pensées viennent du coeur” (Great thoughts issue from the heart) was highly estimated by Voltaire who said “Not self suspecting, he (i.e. Vauvenargue. – V.Т.) drew his portrait”. Imho, what is more, in this short aphorism he was able to express humane principle of creative, socially significant thinking, joining scientific correctness with humane direction. Such thinking, of course, has the explicit panoramic character.

P.S. Helvetius, proposing to deepen the mind, not widen, appears at first glance an opponent of my thesis on development of PT. But let’s take into account that “to gather …all heat and all light of one’s mind in the single point” is possible only after you are sufficiently widely thinking and do not miss something important. Just because of it mind’s “deepening” depends on how you had managed to widen your mind for previous period of your life. Thus, Helvetius’ thought needs only little correction: “One ought to deepen one’s mind, not only to widen…” (farther the same).

In other words about the same. If a scientist or merely thinker hits upon a deep thought being known nobody, then that or this widens in result the panorama not only of their minds. It means juxtaposition wideness—deepness within conception of panoramic thinking is not correct as in the space of notions there is no difference in which direction your mind’s panorama widens, in wideness or deepness.

P.P.S. “The Grief Because of the Mind” is the title of well-known poem by Alexander Griboyedov, where its main hero, clever Chatsky, was forced to leave capital beau monde because of being not understood there. He is evidently clever, the poem’s hero, as his sayings and remarks almost 2 centuries entered in cultural practice of Russian language people. It was published even a literary critical study (Vissarion Belinsky) where was proved that Chatsky was not at all clever if demonstrated his mind before fools of the beau monde. But more convincing is an explanation that Chatsky as an youth under 20 years old, having returned in the homeland after long absence, got merely joy at intercourse with familiar people in the mother tongue, that is why such the behavior. Btw, the first title given by the author was “The grief to the Mind”, i.e. to a concrete clever (though not yet wise) man. Thus, Griboyedov, this wise writer, didn’t make a blunder with his hero, and of course he was not that who strived for to humiliate the human reason.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Global referendum and world-wide forum on happiness-unhappiness


 Discussion between John Kintree (USA)and Vladimir Tretyakov (RB)about possible connection between the named problems carried out in June 2011 under Lecture 7 Shortage of Panoramic Thinking to be asked about and answered (see in the blog) at Free School for Panoramic Thinking.

JK: Nice lecture, Vlad.  It brought a number of thoughts to mind. <…>

You were asked, “How do SPT and happiness correlate?”  It is often said, “Ignorance is bliss.”  A person who sees and thinks panoramically may experience sadness because of awareness of impending catastrophe, and by being isolated and alone in this awareness. On the other hand, with extreme panoramic thinking, enjoying a viewpoint encompassing billions of years, one might not be too sad about impending catastrophes or isolation. 

If my memory is correct, Dennis Meadows, one of the co-authors of The Limits To Growth, wrote that the lines in their world model graphs are inherently flawed.  The flaw is that the lines are based on a model that is unable to handle what happens when the limits to growth are reached.  Considering that we are hitting the limits now, projections of what may happen in 2060—2070 are extremely uncertain.  We don’t have that much time. 

I might have shared this link before.  For those who have not yet seen it, here is a link to a modified graph of the world model standard run that I published at http://www.citizenofplanetearth.org/vitalsigns.php

VT: Thanks John for your appreciation. To have as well “a number of thoughts” about how your sites  http://www.citizenofplanetearth.org and http://theglobalvote.org may widen my insufficiently panoramic thinking I am going to study both these resources. <…>

Do you agree to discuss with me necessity (just so!) to launch possible creating global discussion web resource on happiness-unhappiness in connection with making nearer realization of global voting, at that the last being obligatory part of the first? Where to discuss is of course your right of choice. I look forward at that any training for out thinking to be better equipped.

JK: Well, Vlad, I’m not sure what else there is to say about the happiness-unhappiness connection with global voting.  As you see from the Citizen of Planet Earth website, there simply was inadequate interest for the pilot referendum that took place in a small area of St. Louis in May of 2010 to try to develop that idea further at that time.  It might be worth attempting again at a later time as the limits of the planet’s material resources increasingly impose themselves on us, and as increasing numbers of people gain access to the Internet.  The Internet can be used many ways.  It seems to me that the Internet tends to help us see things panoramically.  And, if leaders continue to act through a shortage of panoramic thinking, as Francis pointed out, the Internet may yet help people at the grassroots level bypass the obstruction from the top. That’s what I keep telling myself.

VT: It appears me, John, I can say something not trivial about connection global voting to happiness-unhappiness problem. 

You said out very correct thought, “The Internet can be used many ways. It seems to me that the Internet tends to help us see things panoramically.”  It would be much more correct if there were a vast problem of a panoramic scope for mass of people to discuss, at that being able to attract their attention for many years and even decades. Happily, such the problem exists already in some millennia and appeared and appears itself as the everlasting dream about happiness.

Really, thinking about a better life, how we make do without referendum on problem of happiness-unhappiness? …what absorbs in itself all other global problems facing Mankind: national egoism, military conflicts, intra-confessional enmity, terrorism, overpopulations, climate change, migration, refugees, resources exhaustion, shortage of food, clear water and air, environmental pollution, unequal life-securing, unsecured future. The list may be gone on.

You wrote about “inadequate interest” for the pilot St. Louis May-2010 referendum and said out a hope that later, when “increasing numbers of people gain access to the Internet”, such action will be successful.

Now I want to attract systems consideration to move farther and maybe to put under doubt this hope. There is Stafford Beer cybernetic principle of external addition asserting: Any problem may be solved being appropriately reformulated at higher level. In case of systems, it means to accomplish meta-systems transition to a wider system including the studied.

The necessary condition for a set of any elements to be a system consists in mutual connection of its elements. Look at Beer principle once more where appropriately is very important condition. What does mean to be appropriate if the question is about a referendum, moreover global one? It is then when majority of people are ready to take in it a part. Then, what about to choose as a meta-system all the conglomerate of global problems facing the humankind and united by the name happiness-unhappiness problem?

Here are grounds it is appropriate choice for the meta-system. Really, thinking on “happiness for all” to make by “all the world”, people are getting interested in knowing opinions of others (otherwise, why discussion and debates do need?), moreover when opinions of “all others” are asked. But the last is just a referendum.

The inference is that to start creating an Internet forum on happiness-unhappiness, global one or of a narrower area, we prepare referendum of corresponding level with bigger probability to be more successfully realized then when other questions are proposed, moreover when there is not very strong appeal to participate in a pilot project framework.                                      

So all global problems united by happiness-unhappiness problem consist any meta-system in referring to global referendum being one of them.

Was I convictive that to bring nearer a planetary Internet forum on happiness-unhappiness means to make for moving to global referendum more then when to solve the very referendum-problem separately?

Posted in Civilization security, Imperatives of survival, Psychology, Sociology | Leave a comment

Lecture 7: Shortage of panoramic thinking to ask about and answer

Dr. Uladzimir Tratsiakou interview granted for http://modernthinkers.narod.ru in middle 2000s. Obtained by Lev Polikovskiy (Vitebsk), Editor-in-Chief, «Человечество» (The Humankind) Minsk magazine.
Translation from Russian.
{In brackets {} are given my latest remarks}

 — Whom in the largest (the least) degree is inherent shortage of panoramic thinking (SPT), and why: workers of intellectual labor, employees, workless, déclassé people, believers, adherents of totalitarian cults?    
—  As I imagine, to be devoted to any totalitarian cult means that an individual gradually lost the ability to think independently and became with no criticism accepting all issuing from hierarchs of the cult, i.e. turned into a distantly governed plaything in their hands. Among people named by you, zombificated executers of alien wills has I think the most expressed SPT. On the contrary, workers of intellectual labor should appear SPT at the least degree as for them openness of the reason, independence of the thought, and critical thinking are professional qualities.

—  Are human vices a cause (consequence) of SPT?    

—   SPT finds generally in causation with immorality. All people turned out once and again in situation of moral choice. Majority want at that to do this choice taking into account their different interests – personally biased, business, merely material ones – in correlation with near future plans, and moreover to remain in harmony with their conscience. Because of SPT, some of them may “come to agreement” with their conscience (it is so when as an argument to choose any variant a «prop» profitable is accepted or convictive “explanation” is given for indecent deeds). Thus, among «morally slovenly», «light-fingered», and «with tarnished reputation» there are such who could not make their choice in the framework of decency because of under-thinking or laziness of the thought, i.e. because of the same SPT.

—  What vises are mostly guilt of that SPT exists, and why: moral defiance, ignorance, bureaucracy, dogmatism, fanaticism, excessive romanticism, rosy  optimism or something other?    

—  Ancient people accounted that truly wise human (I’d say: being able to think in panoramic way) should be necessarily virtuous. If so, moral deficiencies are without doubt going out of SPT as from common backwardness of our mentality. In particular, ignorance, bureaucracy, dogmatism we may consider as appearances of moral damage; panoramic style of thinking has especially nothing to do with fans that have obvious SPT (because of their absorbedness by something). As far «rosy» optimists and romanticists, they have obstacles on path to panoramic thinking because of their striving for psychological comfort. Their psychological defense works so to ignore facts of the living negative not letting these come in consciousness.

—   What ways you see for SPT to overcome and which are possible hardness of the process?    

—   For any human being the genetically transferred living experience of generations is only insignificant part in comparison with the experience got in result of social inherence. This fact from comparative physiology of animals gives a base for inference that the humankind has principal possibility to rebuild the existing systems of education onto development of the panoramic thinking in order to upgrade to higher mentality. However the system of education of any country has big inertia, so even the very realization of necessity to change in radical way directions of education — from to master knowledge onto towards a better thinking – is presupposed to be hard. Not simple task is as well experimental checking of how many panoramic thinking has been mastered in result of education reform. Really, a group of teachers-enthusiasts, in order to prove principal possibility to overcome SPT, may present their final-year students taught in the new fashion at best via 10—12 years.

And even after that, it is entirely not obvious that these results will be convictive for education ministry workers. After my prognosis, panoramically thinking pupils prepared by panoramically thinking teachers may appear in 2060—70, not earlier.

However strange it might appear, especially unhappy circumstances may only accelerate this transformation of educational systems. The question is about an imperative of survival, i.e. possibility to perceive that people with SPT being narrow-minded, i.e. “specialized to realize programs of jungle”, are found under awesome threat as they to be pulled out to civilization tops may be likened deep-water fishes pulled out from kilometer depths to oceanic surface. It is known such fishes can’t be taken out of there alive. People, with the “narrow specialization” of their thinking, as well don’t correspond to new heights of civilization complexity, and this disparity is increasing. It means that catastrophic events are unavoidable, and just these and only these might “assist” for the educational transformation to have occurred. …under condition that its imperative necessity will be plenty realized.

There is a cause here to remember a Democritus thought: “Not the words, but unhappiness is a teacher of blockheads”. But – paradoxically! – that massive “teacher” may appear unsuccessful even if after millions of people have died. Global catastrophes may not get a decisive argument in order to make the transfer onto the 3rd Millennium thinking, panoramic one. Cause is we are “blocked” by our evolution backwardness for it to remark and perceive!

—   Whether there are people with no SPT? Who are such people? How you evaluate your personal SPT?    

—   Entering the notion “SPT” I tried with help of it to have fixed that integral species feature of human mental ability what shows itself in adherence to binary, “white-black” logics (“true-false”), intention to separate dichotomy-divided notions, aiming onto analysis to the detriment of generalizing, synthetic mind activity, dominantly successive principle of actions, appreciation of utterances to be of paucity-notion volume (aphorisms, proverbs, sayings, jokes, witticism).

Of course, I dislike my level of panoramic thinking (as I get insight of apprehending quite often not at once or lost sight of something), but I see that my SPT is now for all that no so appreciable as earlier. There is optimistic moment what consists in that in order for you to “widen mind” is appeared to be sufficient to give yourself only one warning directive:  “Prove, whether all necessary was taken into account!” I was trying to imagine what others might omit, and that the only helped me to hit upon new ideas:

●a language (any!) carefully (just so!) saves and transfers from one generation to the next the language viruses to be considered as language norms;
●the human science is subjective many more that it is accepted to reckon;
●because of SPT in the science might and may long time exist hidden delusions;
●there are possibilities in some cases to give recommendations where and how to look for and have found fundamental civilization omissions;
● radical transformation of the world educational system and creating civilization “brain” (i.e. any all-planetary Internet resource) is getting imperatively vital.
{Some of the ideas I am going to present at FSPTh as separate lections for you to see results of the arrangement  onto switching on the panoramic thinking.}

—   How one can evaluate one’s own SPT?    

—   If you being in company:

  • once and again produce witty, joking replies;
  • go ahead with initiative proposals;
  • give counsels even if you were not asked;
  • pick up others’ initiatives developing them in constructive and/or critical way;
  • find unexpected explanations of the life events;
  • give stunning interpretation of that everyone is talking about it , —

then you are able consciously or not consciously to overcome SPT, so it is not for you any keen problem.

Well, if you show nothing of the above or almost nothing, then you should work for your SPT to be overcome.

—   Whether there is any quantitative measure of SPT or it is only qualitative index? If the first “yes” then how to measure (a) individual SPT, (b) in framework of a social group, (c) of the all society?     

—  It should be realized that panoramic thinking is in essence an euphemism to mean “in comparison with not-panoramic one”. The modern Homo sapiens is characterized by a psycho-physiological law  5 + 2, i.e. not more than N = 7 objects may “be placed” at a moment in the field of his attention; then we may anticipate that for those thinking in panoramic way the upper N possibly will reach 9—10. Taking into account factorial dependence of possible number of combined notions on N it’d be a significant break in the thinking. {Really, 10! = 720·7!, i.e. higher in almost 3 orders.}

Principal possibility of such the break we may admit as really humans use, after physiologists evaluations, only about 10% nervous cells of the brain.

If ever a sociological service appears to determine quantitative measures of shortage of panoramic thinking, then psychologists surely will prompt them that it is more agreeable for people when quantitative measures of their panoramic thinking (PT) are determined, not of any their shortage.

So, a carefully elaborated testing questionnaire will be needed for the measure of panoramic thinking (MPT) to be determined on (a), (b) and (c) levels. The level (c), i.e. a representative cross-examination of all the society, is to envelop all more-less significant social groups and is necessary because it may give answer what are normal (average) MPT, as well as low (subnormal) and higher MPT (over normal). Then, after correlation with the norm, will get more apprehended MPTs both individual (a) and groups (b).

The beginning point for the questionnaire to complete has to be an intuitive understanding of more/less MPT as wider/narrower operative field of the consciousness (OFC). As current OFC may be within maximum-minimum diapason, the thinking may be not verbal one, wide OFC gives evidence concerning a predisposition to PT only, not the very PT, then the questionnaire should foresee as well such questions to elucidate indexes of PT proper, i.e., in particular, how many the thinking is creative, not-standard, witty, associative, operative. All this shows that to create such the questionnaire on MPT will be for psychologists and sociologists not simple affaire demanding possibly a whole row of preparing studies (especially in a part how, on which criteria to evaluate results got).
{That was The Mind Needs to Change group (http://www.wiserearth.org/group/To_higher_mentality)  where the problem of straightforward MPT calculation was discussed for intuitively natural situations when few-notions utterances studies.}

I may not omit there a remark about the known Canadian psychologists’ “tests on IQ”, only sufficient high IQ being ground to join the organization Mensa International. Those tests are oriented onto solution of, as a rule, graphic tasks and at that having single answers, that is why those are responsible only for comparatively little sector of the panoramic thinking, whereas problems of the life (and even of science) far not always have the only correct solutions.

 —  How do SPT and happiness correlate? Whether that who doesn’t know all the panorama of truth is happy or such his happy is false?    

—   There is necessity here to make more correct. Our sub-consciousness lets pass in consciousness only little part of that perceived by organs of senses, and such filtration chez different people, of different fates, is doing very differently. That is why only because of it we may not say about “panorama of all truth”, as any truth is relative. Moreover, such panorama is associated with erudition, wide-reading, but not with ability to think panoramically, i.e. effectively, creatively, our-of-standards.
Taking the second question logically, it omits possibility not to “know all the panorama of truth” and to be quite unhappy. However the first question is interesting for discussing. I think so: if one, overcoming one’s inherited SPT, upgrade to the wisdom what presupposes not only developed intellectual apparatus, but wish and ability to be governed by the conscience —   then that one will have more chances to be happy. Really, as Jean-Jacque Rousseau said, “nobody may be happy, if he have no respect for himself”.

 —   May be happy a person, more than others realizing and feeling all happened in the world?    

—   If the person have realized and felt all so good, then he/she may look for happy moments to get satisfaction of being realized his/her neediness for people, deeming and promoting social projects to better the life. I remember á propos ancient Greek wiser Plato’s utterance: «Being troubled about others’ happiness, we find our own happiness».

 —   Medical ethics forbids saying incurable patients truth about their illness. Whether it is possible that whenever an all-planetary ethics will ban people to cognize the all-planetary negative from therapeutic considerations?    

—   I admit that Areopagus of the very wise people of Earth will ever gather for them to analyze the human prehistory, history and tendencies of modern development to come to conclusion: “the patient», i.e. Humankind, is hopeless, no hope to recover. Only under such obstacles to close “all-planetary negative” for free access may be proposed in order not to bring to global psychoses and not to poison the lost days of the humanity’s existence.

But such fully irreparable situation will hardly appear whenever: we know it is a hope that dies last. Sages without doubt will propose any variants of saving to give a hope —  even if as a straw to clutch.

Any way, for the present there are exits to exist without threats of extermination. One of them is to launch creation of that “Areopagus” of global scale, i.e. any all-planetary intelligent web resource equipped with technologies of collective problem-solving and provided with all necessary scientific, information, sociologic services. Such the action is already clearly seen as an imperative of Humanity’s survival. The resource would have more chances to realize its destination if it tackles at first the ripened, even over-ripened transformation of the world education aimed to overcome that SPT of human minds. World-wide dialogue on happiness-unhappiness being organized as a global web forum would be for people of enormous significance per se (giving any pacification in the world), but it’d be of especial importance for the global Areopagus giving it huge current information on the world situation to correct the elaborated strategy of survival “on the life”.
{As you can see, then, in earlier 2000s, I was less concrete in my vision of the future and more optimistic: neither the report Creating a system of the civilization security in the 3rd Millennium (http://uladzimir.bravehost.com/civ_secure.html) nor article All humanity must have been fooled (http://uladzimir.bravehost.com/betise.html) were then  written…}

—   What is the structure of high-quality (ideal) panoramic thinking? Which knowledge and about what are for it paramount / secondary?    

—   Let’s begin from that knowledge is placed not in the thinking but in the memory. Moreover, ideal panoramic thinking is not existing as each separate human can have seen and comprehend in during of the life only paltry part of whole continuum of possible facts and events. That is why one may say only about panoramic thinking more or less developed.

I imagine that an individual with developed panoramic thinking, in addition to one or some specialties, should be necessarily as well a philosopher “on the life”. So, any panoramic thinking is needed not only to achieve professional objects, but as well to have a general orientation in the life in order to be sure that he/she will cope with problems arising in during of the life and that the adopted life principles permit him/her to be “on the level” in situations of moral choose, and his/her life strategy elaborated won’t be needed to radically change because of it was insufficiently considered. Moreover, such a person is concerned to choose and achieve any over-personal aims, intends to take a part in affairs of others, has genuine interests to public and even common human problems.

Thus, the storage of paramount importance in a panoramically thinking person’s memory contains:

  • wide kit of techniques of problem-solving and methodological base to replenish similar techniques;
  • elaborated abilities to generate new ideas;
  • methods, tricks, means to reveal mistakes of under-thinking, at first turn his/her own ones;
  • to have in near sub-consciousness in causally-logical way tied professional notions and concepts;
  • the same concerning life philosophy and worldview;
  • deeply elaborated life and ethic principles;
  • strategic tasks of the life, in correlation with its comprehended meaning.

All the last but personal information may be considered as having secondary significance.

 —   Either SPT is only negative phenomenon or it has any positive moments?    

—   I count this phenomenon is not only negative but in long perspective being incompatible with existence of human civilization – just because of that SPT “opens wide expanse” for:

  • appearances of aggressiveness to be of diverse kinds, from irritability up to murders in the affected states ;
  • managing solutions of different levels, from family to state and even over-state ones, that carries out to “defaults” of corresponding levels;
  • sequence of catastrophes of the planetary scale if overcoming SPT doesn’t get common affair of the humanity.

I heard such objection when talking about transformation of the educational system onto development of the panoramic thinking:  “Intelligent people are inclined to reflection. Being taught to think panoramically, they at all won’t be able to accomplish whichever resolute deeds!”

Of course, such resolute deeds as murder in state of affectation or self-murder are not for panoramically thinking people. Because of this even if there is reason to renew in radical way all public education. But there is here a “moreover”. I mean that the cause of a murder in result of confrontation of two may be both. But if one of them is thinking panoramically, then that, showing self-possession and being informed on the psychology of aggressiveness, may remain alive and, not being under the aggressor’s thumb, not accomplish once more “resolute deed”, the murder as an act of self-defense.

 —   There is a problem of information oversaturation of the society. Is it possible that overcoming SPT in radical way we will come against a dead-lock of the saturation?    

—   If the question of information over-saturation really exists, then mass of people mastered with PT will come against this dead-lock later (if ever) than these without PT. It is understandable as people thinking panoramically, for them to be adequate in the world it is needed lesser volume of information because they may supplement lacking information necessarily. The same optimistic inference is fair for a society overcoming evolutionary obsoleteness of their thinking with transformation of the education system.

—   How do SPT and worldview correlate? Does panoramic thinking guarantee a “high-quality” worldview?

—   One’s own worldview is not for those ones with significant SPT; for them there is the only possibility to adopt already ready worldview worked out by others. But even being mastered with PT, to elaborate a worldview “for self”, at that of “high quality”, is super complex task, and  the intended result may be guaranteed then only when you will be yourself to set criteria of quality. You are needed to “integrate” so much to find integral code for this improbable complex world to be scanned for short human life with our narrow band information channels, and what is more to look into interrelations with people – next of kin, other relatives, familiar, friends, colleagues, enemies, —   in order to elucidate your destination in the world, not speaking about to have a notion on the main and “not-main” philosophical questions.

Then, having mastered with panoramic thinking (relatively panoramic, taking into account commonly human character of SPT), a person may in end of his/her life to have sureness that mainly is oriented in the life, has found clear, thought-out view on the world and himself/herself in. It costs very dear. At least the last minutes of such the person’s life won’t be darkened regret for the life spent to no purpose.

—   How does SPT link to possibilities of the science to be not exhaustion?     

—   The problem appears to be rather exhaustion of the science then not exhaustion. In early 1990s, working as a scientific journalist, I had a conversation on prospectives of scientific development with a philosopher, DSc. Eduard Soroko. The text prepared and published in Belarusian newspaper The Banner of Youth, I named following the main thought of the interlocutor: “The effect of saturation. A new sense needed”. It was meant that linear period of scientific development had ended or was ending, then sciences had be studied in double, triple and multiple interaction, being mutually enchained each other.

One may see these are already studied in intersection, and this hard process is going on. Taking into account that the panoramic thinking for this intersection of specialties in one scientific head is more appropriate than not panoramic one,  the question about exhaustion of the science won’t be to come up so keenly against the limited possibilities of its human component, because this “component” is characterized by the panoramic thinking.

—  Do you admit that panoramic thinking is obligatory stage for humans to open deeply their essential forces and creative potentials? Whether benevolence, humanism and altruism are necessary conditions for people to upgrade?    

—  Thrice “yes” for benevolence, humanism and altruism being all together necessary to survive! As for the direction to overcome SPT then it would admit humans to be Humans more than they are now. Though the question is not so much about to open deeply essential forces and creative potentials of people, as to use these forces and potentials to carry out humanity from under threats of extinction and self-extinction.

{There is a situation of moral choose for all people, for member of WordPress community in particular: you may make for this process aiming to promote ideas of more perfect human mentality to upgrade it up to thinking of the 3rd Millennium, or you may indifferently propose all can have managed in itself, without your participation. }

Posted in Civilization security, Education, Ethics, Evolution, Imperatives of survival, Psychology | Leave a comment