The Unknown
 Aleksandar Malečić |
How our minds work? Where is the origin of consciousness in classical and quantum physics? I have my answer to these questions, but this is not the place for this kind of discussion, especially because I might be wrong. What is interesting for me here is the concept of anticipation, defined by Robert Rosen (and it seems by other authors under different names). Anticipation is expectation, aligning to future events ("memory" of future events). The physical nature of consciousness (deterministic or non-deterministic) is irrelevant here. The only thing that matters is that anticipation works, it's very similar to creativity, and it's different than reaction. Here view link you can find an interesting text by Mihai Nadin about anticipation. I like this quote: "Moreover, in the cooperative-collaborative realm, one can identify many Websites where the expectation to transcend the authorship model of action-reaction aesthetics is obvious. To create under the expectation that many others will eventually continue the work changes the notion of locality, originality, authorship, and copyright." |
|
Aleksandar Malečić |
Have many people (interested in sustainability or not) will ever visit this meshwork? |
|
Aleksandar Malečić |
The problem solver(s) capable to deal with modern challenges is the biggest heretic ever. He/she doesn't have enough time to be burned and posthumously accepted. |
|
Aleksandar Malečić |
Backcasting, an opposite to forecasting, is similar to anticipation already mentioned in this topic. It is mentioned here: view link. If we want to avoid bad scenarios in the future, we must trace them back to the present and try to avoid their origins now. |
|
Aleksandar Malečić |
"The bird fights its way out of the egg. The egg is the world. Who would be born must destroy a world." Hermann Hesse, Demian |
|
Aleksandar Malečić |
|
|
Aleksandar Malečić |
The best way to avoid a disaster is to never see how it looks like when the tipping point is crossed. If we still can avoid a total disaster (natural resources, climate change and irreversible feedback loops (permafrost, albedo...), global population...), the best way to do so is to not see the worst possible scenario in its full force. But, in that case, we shall not know what is avoided, how the worst outcome really looks like. Our capability to create and destroy will still be with us. All those billions of people should behave reasonably (only the environment can define our reasonable behaviour - we can only do wishful thinking) during their lifetime. There will always be a tendency to stretch our definition of sustainability to the limit. It's more tiresome to care about everything than to not care at all. How to have freedom of choice when even many scientists don't understand how serious is (e.g.) peak oil? Can this kind of experiment we are in the middle of succeed even in theory? Is "more than half of people surviving" a good definition of success? If this is the case, than birth control and prevention (whatever it is) would be a huge success. Would you feel comfortable in a world with 51 percent of people surviving climate change, peak oil and crises with water, food and natural resources? It's not about our children and grandchildren. Our generation will either succeed or fail. Something enormous must be done by the year 2020. If your herd isn't doing anything about it, it doesn't mean that the problems will disappear if they ignore them. As long as we hesitate, it will be more challenging to do anything later. Even worse, if we do too much damage nature should need under such extreme conditions (biodiversity, forests, carbon in the atmosphere, humans in panic), millennia for self-reparation. If there is anything too big to fail, it mustn't last too long because it will eventually fail. We need a global circulation of information and knowledge and local supply chains. We have a local knowledge (corporations and their headquarters) and global supply chains. Is it possible to reverse this trend? Do you agree with me that it needs to be reversed? We can try or not try only once. If corporations fail (and it seems they will fail - debts, peak oil, climate change), everything around them (smaller and local companies previously destroyed because they were not the best in the world) could fail even more. We are all cooking in the same soup, no matter of our political, religious or other views. Maybe there is indeed a religion providing the best description of reality, but nature is politically illiterate. We may feel uncomfortable about our need to adapt to changed circumstances, but the environment will be totally indifferent our emotions. In order to deal with the unknown and radical change, it's time for maturity. Maturity can mean either wisdom or disease and death. What do you prefer? Don't look at your herd for the answer to this question. Find it within yourself. Those people who burnt Giordano Bruno at a stake are as rational as a typical member of your herd (including experts). If we reach wisdom, it will look more like a path than destination. In my opinion, a wise choice is to be farther from thresholds (population, biodiversity, natural resources) and tidal waves of globalization, just in case. Some very important people would disagree (http:/ |
|