[thoughts on the evolutionary* algorithm]
People think that power is one of the most relevant achievements in a human life. With power you can change societies, politics, development processes and yes – almost everything. There has been this influential thinker named Karl Marx who expressed that power and money are correlated. And there are billions of people following this analysis. But Marx was wrong in so many ways, especially when he thought that the “system” we are living in has been consciously created by humans themselves.
Recent neuroscientific research is indicating that the classical understanding of consciousness or the free will cannot be taken for granted anymore. At the same time it is very important to take into account that – even if there is a relevant influence of the “free will” on the decisions that we make – the human brain learns and develops its mental structure on the basis of environmental input. The behaviour of people – our decisions and opinions – are highly connected to what we learn and how we are taught to classify what we learn.
Power is just one expression of the human mind. It is a relevant part of the algorithm that – socially and materially – forms and transforms the world. The anthropological algorithm in its full power supersedes any temorary motion or movement that is gaining attention in order to control the world on a long-term basis. It is more likely that all of us are subject to temporary evolutionary* developments. Any human design of a society will be subject to change.
Billionaires may think that they can change the world. At the same time they mostly don’t understand that their behaviour is part of the evolutionary or anthropological algorithm that is developing the world permanently. At the same time people who think that they fight against billionaires – and the term named capitalism – don’t know that they are part of the algorithm as well. Everyone is controlled by evolution. Everyone is subject to development processes as a certain and important part of evolutionary changes.
Thus, disputes are part of the changes themselve. Maybe we have to analyse (human) conflicts in a more Darwinian way: Disputes express an evolutionary development (a race for the fittest) – the parties have to bring forward good reasons in order to “win” a certain span of time to change a society according to their ideas . Those ideas have mostly been of a military nature during the recent centuries but now they are allowed to be of a communicative nature as well.
Power is just a part of how evolution is structuring life on the planet earth. And yes: Powerful people can kill other people (there is no talent needed to kill other people but there is talent needed to be a relevant part of a future society or to substantially change societies in a positive way). Throughout history humans were trying to change human societies – and human societies were actually changing – but maybe all the changes and processes were induced as a result of the motion of the anthropological algorithm.
Yes, power can change the world and create future. But maybe power is not in the hands of human beings – probably it is in the hands of evolution which is using people to apply changes to the world according to her inner algorithm (the evolutionary algorithm).
. . . . .
* In this text “evolution” is not defined in the classical way. The author of this article does not differentiate between “nature” and “culture” – as it is often done. The opinion of the author is that evolution accelerates its speed on the basis of the human brain and that what many people call “culture” is a very part of “nature”.