| Northlord | Well, firstly, I want to apologize for not mastering the German language, someday, I'll hope to learn both German and French, so that I could feel like home in a greater part of the house I am living in, which is Europe. My name is Enrique, and I'm writing from the northernmost part of Europe, from the river of Umeau in the Baltic region. I'm here to show that another world is possible. As you know today, the philosophy of the decaying west, which does not have anything that could be described as "culture" any longer, is based on the concept of dualism, of conflict. Thus, as long as we encounter a problem, we'll start building dualisms, to explain these problems. The dualisms has so far existed on the metaphysical plain, between night and day, darkness and light, civilisation and barbary, good and evil, right and wrong. On the practical scale, these dualisms are based around the concepts of businesses against each-other, states against each-others, states against rebels, ethnical conflicts. There is also deeper lying conflicts, which are somehow latent, such as gender the conflict between men and women, the conflicts between those who have, and those who have not, and the deepest conflict of them all, the conflict between our specie, and nature itself. Although I am aware of the fact that confrontation is a usual evolutionary path, I believe it is dangerous to base our civilization around this concept, around the concept of dialectics, which ignores development, and are embrazing the concept of decaying. The truth - as far as we know it - is, that since life established itself on this planet, it has grown into more complex and fascinating entities and networks, not the other way around. The only conflict, which I am able to see as one of the pillars of the universe, is the eternal waves of destructive and creative forces, which are buried deep inside every event of magnitude. I do not believe that that there is any struggle [i]between[/i] these forces, but a constant switch of events, which together drives the evolution, not forward, but in many, many diverse ways. Every event has both destructive and constructive elements, as I'll see it. I do not believe in abstract terms such and "good" and "evil". Ethics is the way we'll take initiative out of these events, and chose to use them. I think this present civilization, though it's concept of dualism, has put itself in a self-destructive path to total entropy, due to it's emphasis on conflict. This is particular true in the European hemisphere, which is struggling with the scarcityficiation of the economy, and the povertification of the people. The richness is scarce, and thus, the distribution must be unequalified, just to increase the abstract phenomena of "growth", while destroying both culture and nature through the process of globalization. This state cannot continue. Our civilization has developed into a parasite against the nature, while the truth is that we would earn more on coexisting, both with ourselves and mother Gaia, otherwise, we are our own enemy. This perspective is - from mine viewpoint - the only sane, moderate perspective towards a world which, at the dawn of a new millennium, is threatened by dangers which on few seconds could destroy us all. The question is how? For a further discussion around this topic, I would recommen you all to take a look on this site - [url]http://www.technocracy.ca[/url] |
| grazia | hi northlord, basically i agree with your a.m. statements. yin and yang forces are way out of balance nowadays. resulting in dissociation, denial, sexism, racism, dominator-based wars on many levels. the yang-male domination and orientation to destroying the living essences has diminished, impoverished and exploited all of society, men and women alike. the three divine forces of building (youth / morning), maintaining (adult / daytime) and destruction (old age / evening) are represented in the three indian gods: Brahma, the world-creator, Vishnu, the world-maintainer, and Shiva, the world-destroyer and renewer. in ordinary bacteria cultures you´ll find them in this ratio: 10% building, constructive bacteria 80% opportunistic micro organisms 10% destructive bacteria when the percentage 80% irresponsible bystanders +10% = 90% destruction comes into fruition, which is the case in decaying overly acidic societies and climates, then lakes and soils and communities will decay. in western societies you´ll find this ratio: 5 % building, constructive humans 90% opportunistic humans 5 % destructive, cancerous, intaking humans western societies show this desolate state of more than 95% multiaddicted members. the innovative forces (2-5%) are generally held in a state of isolation and - if more well known - persecution. mass mind is very reluctant to switch its mode. this means undergoing the pains of sobering, of getting to terms how desolate it is, inside and outside and reorienting. change for the better IS POSSIBLE. it could get worse first. the chinese would only accept u as a hu-man (divine-human) being, once you´ve reached the age of 50, which is the time alloted for developping into souvereignty, taking on responsibility for oneself and the as a member of the world. formerly (the last century) i have written the following: Der Dualismus bzw. der Widerstreit zwischen Schöpfer und Geschöpf, respektive Mann und Frau, ist im Kern bereits krankhaft, denn beiden ist gleichsam Göttlichkeit zu eigen. Einigung, Zusammenwachsen, das "Reich Gottes und der Göttin" kann erst entstehen, sobald die dualistischen Tendenzen von Ich-ODER-Du nach einem paradigmalen Sprung aufgehoben wurden und wir allmählich lernen, in eine Ich-UND-Du Kohärenz hinüber zu gleiten. Analog dazu wurde das geflügelte Wort anläßlich der Wiedervereinigung Deutschlands geprägt "Auf daß das zusammenwächst, was zusammengehört!" June Campbell, a Scottish academic and interpreter of tibetan language, spiritually and sexually exploited and deeply traumatized by a renown buddhist monk kalu rinpoche, did - as for her recuperation - a deep study in respect to oriental and occidental religious concepts, regarding the exclusion of the (divine) female aspect. she wrote: "Sollte die Entwicklung tatsächlich [positiv] laufen brauchen die Männer die Trennung von der »Großen Mutter« nicht mehr zu kompensieren, indem sie die »Mutter« und ihre eigene Abhängigkeit von ihr entweder leugnen oder sie neurotisch suchen, um die Wunden zu heilen, welche die Trennung von ihrer realen Mutter bei ihnen hinterlassen hat. Die meisten Frauen werden … nicht mehr den Kompromiß eingehen müssen, in die Welt des Vaters einzutreten und dabei entweder die Unterwürfigkeit ihrer Mutter nachzuahmen oder zu versuchen, den Männern ebenbürtig zu sein und wie diese ihre Abhängigkeit von der Mutter zu leugnen. Die Welt besteht dann aus zwei Subjekten, statt aus einem Subjekt und einem Objekt, und die Singularität und Multiplizität jeder Frau werden anerkannt und geschätzt.” the ideas of partnership researcher and ethnologist Riane Eisler i find very rewarding: reader´s comment on her new book [B]The Power of Partnership: Seven Relationships That Will Change Your Life[/B]: The Power of Partnership is a readable, "doable" book! It starts with the individual, moves to intimate relationships, relationships in organizations, workplaces, and communities. For all of life is relationships and until we learn how to live them out in a respectful (partnership) mode, we are stuck in the control (dominator) model. 2. book recommendation of author Riane Eisler: [B] Sacred Pleasure: Sex, Myth, and the Politics of the Body[/B] In her new book, the bold paradigm-challenger Riane Eisler continues her quest for a more comprehensive understanding of the cultural, spiritual, and political forces that drive us by exploring the complex realm of intimate relationships and posing some startling questions about our attitudes toward pain and pleasure, sex and spirituality. Why, Eisler asks, did sex, once the "sacred gift of the Goddess," become synonymous with evil? Why did veneration for women and their capacity for sustaining life change into such contempt and loathing? As Eisler traces the path of this destructive and pervasive bias, she reveals just how adverse its effect has been on every aspect of human life. Eisler makes some stunning points in this strongly argued, well-supported, and mind-stretching narrative, then urges us to imagine viable alternatives to the [B] "sacralization of pain"[/B] and the [B]"eroticism of violence"[/B] that stand in such stark and baffling contrast to our inherent "yearning for connection" and our aptitude for love. This is a gutsy and very important book. Donna Seaman [url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0062502832/reviews/103-3500207-7602240#00625028327297[/url] [url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0062502832/qid=1076776720/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-3500207-7602240?v=glance&s=books[/url] reader´s comment: The partnership-model, where Riane Eisler refers to is the healing tradition of Heaven and Earth, before humanity made the shift to separate nature and spirit in two different realms. And where one became more important than the other, with all its dehumanizing and destructive consequences. Although her tone is servere, it is not to put something in place, it is to highlight that, which is out of place, which is in utter disbalance. Before we act, we have first to see! Needed is the discovery of Heaven in ourselves, where all is One: to see the Grail(and this can be experienced) but at the same time asking the rebalancing question: Why is the Fisher-king ill? And Riane Eisler answers this question with an astounding but uplifting compassion. She points not to a theory, another Utopia by and for men, but a practical living based on core values as freedom, respect and equavalence of man, woman and children. Don't believe her but try for yourself. For me it is the most re-connecting experience in my live. As if my eyes for the first time starts to see. another link: [url]http://www.gwu.edu/~asc/papers/tdpc.html[/url] Toward A Dynamic Partnering Cosmology A World in I-Thou - Partnership by Veronika Kauffmann riane eisler: [i]I think ... because we have for so long been in a dominator system, men have a great deal to learn from women. There's no question about it. But this is difficult, and it's not only difficult for men to learn from women, but it's difficult for women to learn from women, because of the whole idea that authority figures should be male. We've all been conditioned to think of God as a man. We have been conditioned to think of the person, the entity, that you learn from as masculine. And it's also a question of the redefinition of what it means to be a man. The good news is that many men are now questioning the old models of masculinity, asking what does it really mean to be masculine or feminine? And they're beginning to recognize that this whole conquest thing is not masculine. It's just plain brutal.[/i] DAVID Loye, riane´s partner in life says: From my point of view, it's been extremely important to me to interact with a woman who is able to love me as I'm able to love her on some basis of equality. Rather than have the old superior-inferior relationship, which many men and women have. [B] Women are making this breakthrough and they've begun to see out beyond this cage that every male is still encased in, almost without exception.[/B] [url]http://www.levity.com/mavericks/el.htm[/url] salve |
| Northlord | The solution could not only be done on the individual level, because the problem is not only individuals, but the entire civilization. In a world where parasitism is rewarded, how could you expect humans to begin to act differently? I tend to the solution of creating a new civilization. How many of you are happy with Germany, happy with Europe, as it have become? I'll do not say that we should destroy civilization (because it will inevitable destroy itself), but that we should try to begin to build a new civilization. There are some constructive strays in the great Eastern civilization of Japan and China, but these are not integral part of those cultures, rather a "way of life" which was put over an extremely hierarchic society to lower tensions. The future Europeans do not need hierarchies, nor gods. Buddhism is - in my eyes - the most sympathetic world religion today, especially if you consider the amount of "absolute truth" religions which our western civilization is based on. These "word-based" monotheistic religions have worsened the most barbaric and primitive emotions, by 1. officially banning them, and 2. inofficially enstrengthening them by making these destructive feelings (hate, racism, stupidness) necessary for religious expansion. Another character of our civilization is it's radioactive tendency towards entropy. When it is finally achieving a state that could be called "peace" (in 1989), it begins to collapse by itself, into smaller entities. The move towards decentralization, is somehow screwed by the constant process of urbanization, which is rendering Europe into an island civilization of Urban areas, indeed a very vulnerable state. Register on [url]http://www.technocracy.ca,[/url] and take part in our discussions. We need more people who are ready to take part in dialogues about philosophy. By the way, check out the "symbiosism"-thread on "ecotechnocracy" forum. |
| grazia | [QUOTE][i]Original geschrieben von Northlord [/i] [B]The solution could not only be done on the individual level [/B][/QUOTE] i fully agree on this. however, evolution grows from low to bottom, from inside out. it starts with grass roots networking. riane eisler´s partnership model of 7 levels starts with the partnership on an individual basis: i and me i and you i and ... ... i and the universe to evolve the entire civilization -- a critical mass of 10% is needed at least to make an impact. as far as i can see they have not reached the level of the ice peak yet. the few whistleblowers around are being snatched and dispatched to discourage others. still, in the unseen there are rumblings ongoing. [B][QUOTE] I tend to the solution of creating a new civilization. [/B][/QUOTE] upps, it´ll rather be an evolution after dissolution that the making of ... we´ve had too many of them, i think. the miracle word ist not creation but cocreation. from there might spring a new creation. not thesis, but synthesis. [B][QUOTE] The future Europeans do not need hierarchies, nor gods.[/B][/QUOTE] read ken wilber, a visionary thinker of the 3rd millenium. he talks about the intricacy as well as neccessity of: hierarchy (above - under) simple stage heterarchy (mutual agreements among equals) more complex stage holarchy (most complex stage - not easy to describe) regarding gods - we live in a time of götterdämmerung. before new gods may rise, the old images will be darkened, put away with, i guess. i sympathsize with the mystical activist Andrew Harvey who has stated the flwg: [I]About mystical activism ------------------------------- "So, mystics on their own, while they may be able to send out very important loving vibrations, unless they actually start to act in a crisis of this magnitude, will be part of the problem and not the solution. They will be breeding passivity. You hear it all over the New Age. You have people coming up to you and saying, "The world is an illusion. Why are you worried about the deaths of species and the millions of people who are poor? It’s all an illusion. It’s a dream.” Are they crazy!!! Isn’t that a psychotic response to what’s going on? That’s not wisdom! That’s madness! ... So the mystics must get active. The activists who have been working heroically to try and wake the world up are now feeling total despair because they see on the one hand the growth of a right wing agenda and on the other hand a whole spiritual movement stupefied in fake bliss and absolutely immobilized to do anything real about the world, and they are just losing hope. And they (the activists) are losing energy; and they are losing trust; and they are just saying, "It can’t be done. The world cannot be saved.” ... But also activists must learn something. They must learn that if they are not acting from Divine Peace, and unless they are acting with Divine Energy, and unless they are acting with Divine Wisdom, and unless they are acting with Divine Stamina, they will not be wise or brave enough for the struggle ahead. And they will not be able to last it out because the defeats and divisions are going to be so grave that only those that are absolutely grounded in God are going to get through the next part because it is going to shake everybody, mystic or activist. ... But if you bring together the illumination of the Divine Identity with the passion of the Divine Love, and the passion for the divine love for justice, then what you have is a human being that is simultaneously rooted in deep peace and capable of enormous passion, simultaneously rooted in the dark and the light, simultaneously both male and female, simultaneously in heaven and on earth. And therefore someone who can be a fearless light warrior, and a fearless lover, and fearless and radioactive nuisance to all those in power!!!" Mystical Activists – Servants of Truth, Excerpt from an Inspiring Lecture at The Great Rethinking: The Prophets Oxford, August 2003[/I] again, he also emphasizes the balance of yin and yang - and many other qualities at the same time. salve |
| Northlord | Holarchy was one of the most interesting words I have ever heard, I must confess. It is in fact so interesting, that I want to hear more. I think it is feasible to create a holarchic system within a technate. |
| grazia | [QUOTE][i]Original geschrieben von Northlord [/i] [B]Holarchy was one of the most interesting words I have ever heard[/B][/QUOTE] the term holarchy is mentioned in Ken Wilber´s book: "Sex, Ecology, Spirituality". the German title is: "Eros, Kosmos, Logos" the term has been introduced by Arthur Koestler first. he commented in "The Ghost in the Machine" (dt. "Das Gespenst in der Maschine"), dass man eine Hierarchie eigentlich korrekterweise "Holarchie" nennen solle, da alle Hierarchien aus Einheiten bestünden, die er als Holone bezeichnet. Holone wiederum definiert Koestler als solche Dinge bzw. Einheiten, die je nach Kontext oder Betrachtungswinkel gleichzeitig sowohl als Ganzes wie auch als Teil eines anderen Ganzen fungieren. "It is for all these reasons that Koestler, after noting that all complex hierarchies are composed of holons, or increasing orders of wholeness, pointed out that the correct word for "hierarchy" is actually holarchy. He is absolutely right, and so from now on I will refer to hierarchy in general, and the Great Chain--the Great Nest--in particular, as holarchy. So that is normal or natural holarchy, the stage-like unfolding of larger networks of increasing wholeness, with the larger or wider wholes being able to exert influence over the lower-order wholes. And as natural, desirable, and unavoidable as that is, you can already start to see how holoarchies might turn pathological. If the higher levels can exert control over the lower levels, they can also over-dominate or even repress and alienate the lower levels. That leads to a whole host of pathological difficulties, in both the individual and society at large. And the "cure" for this pathology, in all cases, is the essentially the same: rooting out the pathological holons so the holarchy itself can return to harmony. The cure does not consist, as the reductionists maintain, in getting rid of holarchy per se, since, even if that were possible, it would simply result in a uniform, one-dimensional flatland of no value distinctions at all (which is why those critics who toss out hierarchy in general immediately replace it with a new scale of values of their own, i.e., with their own particular hierarchy). While it is true, as I said, that one of the unifying paradigms in modern thought, from physics to biology to psychology to sociology, is evolutionary holarchy (see, for example, Laszlo, Jantsch, Habermas, Lenski, Dennett), nonetheless most orthodox schools of inquiry admit the existence only of matter, body, and mind. The higher dimensions of soul and spirit are not yet accorded quite the same status. We might say that the modern West has still only acknowledged three fifths of the Great Holarchy of Being. The agenda, very simply, is to reintroduce the other two fifths (soul and spirit)." [url]http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/eyspir_chapter.cfm/xid,5038958/yid,95447535[/url] some critical notes on Ken Wilbers view: [url]http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/content/v17.1/rowe.html[/url] wilber´s tendency is towards transcendence. this in itself is hierarchical, pyramidal. what´s with immanence. it is there, included already. salve |
