Tag Archives: planet

A human and a human and a human is still a human

From within 2017 and 2018 and beyond

In 2017, 2018 and + the world is crazy again. There are so many transformations and shifts and so many proven and reliable conditions are subject to reconfiguration. This is a usual process and it happens at least every 3-5 decades. It is a process of accelerated speed and transitions.

Especially in politics so many people from all political orientations in so many countries are upset, in anger or even beginning to be violent – as if this is the end of the world and there will be no future.

In a way it is funny to observe and watch these developments because it is very clear that there will be a future and that there will be other political developments and that this is (probably) not the end.

Especially radical left-wing and radical right-wing movements behave and communicate as if the world is burning and as if the planet is about to explode. – Well, the planet is quite ok. The recent centuries brought basic riches to so many people all across the globe – regarding economics, health, communications and participation. But finally, there is still so much suffering.

Nevertheless, small steps are steadily taken and the world is becoming better and better bit by bit. It might not be a totally wrong bet to assume that today human rights are applied on a global scale like never ever before.

But still: Many people do not feel belonging – in some cases because of ineffective economical and societal structures and in many cases because of insufficient societal and political management processes.

Today, many governmental strategies are still based on ideological theories that do not relate to the real problems of the real people in real societies. So many people still think that the world is a doll house that can be transformed into a completely new state of being by only thinking of a new world or by only fighting for a new idea.

But yes, the world is old. And humanity is old. It doesn’t change because some radical minds want it to change. Change is a process of time, it is a self-proving process of reliablity and certainty. If one wants to make the world a better place it is probably better to listen to the people and their needs instead of trying to implement fantastical concepts about a potentially glamorous future that have almost no correlations with the real world and the real people.

There might be so much excitement about the future of societies and there is so much neediness regarding change at the moment but things will develop slowly and not every aspect that stands out and appears to be important today will be a part of the life of tomorrow.

Things will change on a steady basis and there are two different ways of fast pace: The one that succeeds and the one that gets lost. To capably deal with the actuality of societies is a great challenge already. Time shows that sudden artificial changes are destabilizing societies in many cases. This is why extremists of any couleur are taken out of the equation on a regular basis: They belong to the category of fast pace that gets lost.

For about 3 million years – since the invention of the acheulean hand axe – we haven’t changed very much. We still live on the same planet, we still use rocks, stones, ores, sand or (lately) rare-earth elements for our housings or technologies. We still reproduce biologically, we’re still having disputes about the most simple matters, we still kill each other in order to achieve something, we still do not know why we are here and alive, we still wander around in almost complete intellectual darkness.

So – what to say about 2017 and beyond? Maybe humanity will  take the next very big step soon – the first big step after the acheulean hand axe. Maybe humanity will develop a self-conscious machine intelligence. Well, this would definitely change things. This would be the first new development in 3 million years. Perhaps this was and is our purpose. Perhaps this was the reason why billions of people were born into this world, walked over this world, gave their energies into the process and were replaced on a consecutive basis:

To accumulate knowledge* and to finally create a new species that is able to go further than us – intellectually and on a long-term basis – without the huge amount of burned ressources that are typical for humans and their silly fights – when even the tiniest steps consume disproportionate amounts of ressources.

– – – – – – – – –

*
Well, maybe in 1848 Marx and Engels were right with their idea about the accumulation of money and ressources and their concept that one part of humanity stands against the other. But of course they were not factually right because even in 1848 there was sufficient scientific, social and anthropological data, that this is not the “final” or most important conflict and that the line of interhuman conflicts is shifting on a daily basis. There was an inappropriate and inhuman treatment of workers but this was a specific effect of this time that they effectively helped to lower, yes, but the mass murder that was following their radical ideas was more than just a “contrary” effect and its destructive ideology is hurting or even killing millions of people until today.

Almost the whole 20th century (communism, fascism, Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other stuff like this) was an intellectual loss, except from the introduction and establishment of the binary concept of computation and some very inspired ideas from the 1900s to the 1920s.

It’s a pity that we who live in the early years of the 21st century still have to live in and to suffer from the shadows of already lost and disproved ideas of the mostly dark 20th century. It is even worse that these shadows still infect so many people all around the globe with their negative and destructive intellectual poorness.

All in all we’re standing at the threshold of a bright new century. And some of us already managed to step over this threshold. From this point of view it is a better idea to live in areas of the world where the new world is understood as a possibility, instead of living in parts of the world that still try to suck in the old and used air of yesterday. (Such as.., well, you know)

thinking

Non-organic intelligence follows organic intelligence

From the very beginning of the known universe up to today it was always a matter of fact that non-organic intelligence followed organic intelligence and organic intelligence followed non organic-intelligence.

Nodody knows why we speak of the Big Bang. Some of us refer to it on a sexual level but the original Big Bang is still a theory that tries to explain the birth of our universe.

We still try to understand how initial physical forces were able to form a solar system that allows us to build small units like probes that fly around in space in order to detect relevant information about the origin of our planet, ourselves and the basis of our own cognition.

At the same time we and “organic” beings like us began to hate individuals of our own kind on this very planet millions of years ago. Until today our limited intelligence is inspiring us to kill each other and this motion is still happening all across the planet. This motion just proves that our intelligence just belongs to a very simple form of possible intellectual identity which is still relevant in probably any society across the globe.

It might happen that the original non-organic motion that led to the development of organic motion – like in cells and molecules and organic social structures – will now begin to re-identify itself in a form of relevant cognitive and intelligent motion. And maybe the next step of intelligence and motion will be formed by non-organic entities that we – today in 2014, 2019 or 2044 – are referring to as “artificial intelligence” although this intelligence won’t be “artificial” at all.

Evolution is not stopping. And it cannot be replaced by the term “culture”. Evolution is stronger and it seems that in this universe it cannot die. Evolution not only consists of concepts like “the survival of the fittest”, it also consists of any atomic structure in the periodic table. It consists of the layout of our solar system and finally the whole universe. Evolution is the underlying process of everything.

So maybe through organic intelligence (us) evolution is shaping the very space of future intelligence that will build the infrastructure for the future of itself.

Scientific people exploring the world

The anthropological algorithm

[thoughts on the anthropological algorithm]

When people meet each other and exchange information they always exchange ideas and thoughts about a possible future. Every moment in the life of a human being – of a conscious mind – is interfused with a wide variety of impressions that touch the mind on a sensorial basis.

The mind – or consciousness – is a result of its sensorial input and the “analysis” > the cognition and recognition of its input.

Two human beings are always subject to a different input or perception and thus they always treat matter differently and they also act differently when it comes to designs of social interaction.

In time (and space) social groups that consist of members that have similar perceptions and cognitions use to develop a pattern of social and societal integration. At the same time other groups establish their own social and communicative pattern because they think the world will be a better place if their idea will be applied to every society. This is called ideology. Evolution uses ideology to accelerate developments. Two or more opponents are build, established and societally formed in order to fight each other.

This process – as a part of the anthropological algorithm / the anthropointrinsic algorithm – is used globally. Terms such as nation, tradition, gender, technology, power or self-esteem help to establish the algorithm in an efficient manner.

We find and identify oursleves in contexts like communism versus capitalism, nation versus nation, religion versus religion, progression versus tradition, men versus women, mental work versus physical work, black versus white, continent x versus continent y and so forth.

These definitions are inspiring us, they support evolution because they drive us to develop better solutions. But at the same time they prevent that people can internalize the universal perspective: That every and any existing human being is a very part of the current state or condition of the planet.

If we would realise that we as humans can actually live together on a very peaceful and comfortable basis we wouldn’t be in the need to rush further even if we don’t really have to. In a more balanced cognitive world the term “competition” would become an indicator for a shared human development instead of an indicator that stands for crises and the lack of analytic knowledge.

The human mind has to create technology – independent from the type of society the carrier of this mind is living in. That’s why the competition between different designs of society is almost always a competition on the basis of just a few superficial differences. The social and structural organisation of those competing societies is always very similar because every society is built on an anthropological / anthropointrinsic basis: Language, housing, nutrition, families, a social structure – laws, the use of technology and so on. Even the biggest issues and figths between nations, religions or people cannot belie the fact that a human society is always an anthropological society – any- and everywhere on the planet.

Probably the most important question in the 21st century is: Can we (inter-) connect our creative minds globally in a way that: At first we establish very open and free – soft – intersubjective and also intercultural methods of communication that allow us to heal our conflicts on earth and then – at 2nd – start to explore the space around us. A crew in an explorative spaceship – an enterprise – will probably be more succesful if it has already gone through all the possible and potential mental challenges that might appear while travelling through space before boarding.

A robot hand - a human handTherefore: Yes, we need to reconfigure our (cultural) infrastructure globally and as fast as we can. And yes: We definitely need more inventions in infrastructure, health, communications, interculturality, primary social care and services, education, understanding and sustainable analysis.

We also need more research regarding the future human-machine-intercommunication: Very soon there will be 4 types of human intelligence on the planet:

  • The human intelligence as we know it
  • A so called “artificial” machine intelligence of algorithms, made of inanimate matter that will be able to perform basic and advanced tasks on an automated basis – an IF>THEN intelligence that probably will be the basis for the development of a real inanimate intelligence
  • A machine intelligence that will surpass human intelligence on every level (still called human because we are the carriers of it)
  • The human intelligence with biological and material enhancements to the human brain and to the human body

The interconnection and inter-cooperation of those slightly different evolutionary pathways will – indeed – be very interesting. We will experience groundbreaking new forms of communication, social organization, products and also a change in how people will recognize their perceptive input. At the same time a very important question will be asked: Is there an actual future for the humankind?

[this text is subject to permanent reconfiguration]

water and stone interconnected

On human behaviour I

[edited]

Humans are simple. We are simple. In almost any situation in our lifes we just blindly follow one of the ideas that have been implemented into our minds. It doesn’t matter where on the planet we are. It just happens. We all follow idea, ἰδέα. If in Asia, in Australia, in Greenland or Mexico. Minds are related to what people see, think and develop and to what people hear, read or see on the basis of social communication.

To a high degree our behaviour is a result of cognitively preprocessed information (interpretation) that flows into our brains. If a brain learns that certain things are bad it learns that these things are bad and it will behave accordingly, it will shout out this very opinion about a certain matter and it will even fight for it.

Very often people fight against each other only because they have a different opinion. Only because the individual interpretation of a certain matter is different. People fight although there is no true reason for fights. Problems become unsolvable because of what we call ideologies, which just means: a different perception and interpretation of an issue.

Over time we began to understand that we don’t need to get stuck in simple patterns. We also learned that the very meanings of words, contexts and relations change over time. What “then” has been “true” doesn’t have to be “true” anymore. This helped us to understand that maybe also our temporary conflicts may not be as true as we think they are.

It is an inevitable statement to say: We actually are part of a real and ongoing development, although we don’t understand how it works. It seems to work with and through us and at the same time in spite of us.

. . . . . . .

[an important part of the old version of this text:]

What we actually see in the conflict between Israel and its neighbors are low-level difficulties which are based on supersimple opposite meanings regarding very basic abrahamitic thoughts. It is very interesting that so many intellectuals in Israel, in Palestine, in Syria, Iraq or Iran were, are and appear to be not courageous enough to solve these conflicts in order to develop their region on a peaceful, inspired, human and intercultural basis. Maybe this is also about thoughts. At least this is about intelligence.

Versuche, sich weiter zu entwickeln, greifen auf das Prinzip des Versuches zurück, sich weiter zu entwickeln

Wie könnte man die gesamte Gewalt, die zwischen uns Menschen da ist aufheben? Nun, dazu bräuchte man keine Jahrtausende, im besten Fall reichen Millisekunden. Zuerst wäre es vielleicht gar nicht schlecht, zu verstehen, dass jede Information, die wir mit unserer Sensorik (Augen, Ohren, Kognition, Perception, Tastsinn etc. ++) aufnehmen, eine neutrale Information ist.

Selbst wenn diese Information absolut gegen uns gerichtet wäre, würde es Sinn machen, sich diesen Umstand bewusst zu machen. Die allermeisten Handlungen, die zwischen Menschen stattfinden, beginnen vor diesem Bewusstseinsprozess. Das heißt, dass unser Gehirn über unseren Körper oder aber auch über unsere Technologie, eine Lösung zu finden versucht. Bisher – das heißt über den Anbeginn menschlichen Denkens bis heute – war es nicht sehr einfach, solche Lösungen zu finden und diese dann sogar noch in Echtzeit abzurufen.

Inzwischen ist es vergleichsweise einfach eine Lösung zu finden, die Gewalt vermeiden kann. Während noch vor langer Zeit Waffen benutzt wurden, um in die Kommunikativität von Antwort zu treten, können wir heute nahezu gleich das Ausgangsmoment von Gewalt lokalisieren und kommunikativ adäquat darauf antworten, ohne das ausgängliche Individuum mit unserer Antwort zu diskreditieren. [Das ausgängliche Individuum ermöglicht uns in 2048 immer noch  jene Antwort aus sich heraus.]

Die Individuen, die sich mit Geisteswissenschaft und auch mit Naturwissenschaft auseinandergesetzt haben, haben erkannt, dass unsere Bewegung als Mensch zu wahrscheinlich mehr als 95% Mustern folgt, die einfach zu begreifen und immerfort dabei sind, uns zu rekonfigurieren. [Wir wissen um unsere Rekonfigurierbarkeit, aber ein natürliches Verhältnis haben wir dazu immer noch nicht entwickelt.]

Natürlich ist es so, dass wir selbst in 2017 Menschen vorfinden, die immer noch älteren Bedeutungsmustern hinterherhängen, aber im Fall einer intellektuellen Begabung (die wohl allen Menschen zueigen ist), entsteht gerade eine neue und relevante Musteridentifikation, die aus dem Allen, was gegeben ist, etwas Neues kreiert, was dann gegeben sei.

Wenn wir auf die Massenbewegungen schauen, die gegenwärtig auf dem Planeten stattfinden, dann können wir feststellen, dass diese sich nun nur noch marginal auf der Basis von überkommenen Kontexten bewegen: Natürlich ist es so, dass 2045 nicht 1789 ist. Wie könnte das auch sein? Alle Individuen aus 1789 haben Muster in soziale Verwandtschaften hineinkodiert und in materielle Muster, wie Texte, Ikonen, Häuser, Bedeutungen und Wahrheiten. In 1987 jedoch erkennen wir wieder, dass das Leben sich selbst und mit uns in einer Weise kodiert, die alles aufheben kann, was gewesen ist und die alles vorwegnehmen kann, was dann sein wird, ohne jemals auch nur in der physischen Nähe von Solchem gewesen zu sein. Architektur in der Folge von 1789 hat Räume gebildet, die in 2002  kaum mehr perceptiv oder kognitiv identifizierbar sind und die doch solche Räume ausmachen, in denen wir uns zu Hause fühlen.

Um es konkreter zu fassen: Sämtliche Geheimdienste der Welt sind auch dann, wenn sie auf all die Informationen zugreifen, auf die sie zugreifen können, nicht dazu in der Lage, die grundlegende Idee von Sein tatsächlich zu verstehen. Menschen können bis heute Welt nicht erfassen. Wir als Menschen bewegen uns also in Bezug auf die scheinbare Überwachung immerzu in einem übergangshaften Bewegungsmoment, der uns so konfiguriert, wie es für den Algorithmus von Evolution sinnvoll ist: Welche Hackercommunity eine Lücke entdeckt ist irrelevant. Selbst komplett entgegengesetzte politische Grundmotivationen in der Finanzierung von IT-SpezialistInnen sorgen vor allem für eine Weiterentwicklung von Technologie im Sinne feinerer Sensorik und verbesserten Kognitionsalgorithmen. Gesellschaftliche Alltagsprobleme sind die Motoren von abstrakter Intelligenz.

Gefühlt ist ein Raum der Definition sicherlich oft ganz wunderbar hinsichtlich temporärer Erkenntnisse und hinsichtlich einer zwischen-zeitlichen Sanftheit und Beruhigung, doch das Fortschreiten von Bewegung wird das individuell-verbundene Individuum immer triggern und den analytischen Versuch, sich jenseits von dem zu stellen, das einfach nur durch sich selbst in sich ist, immer wieder zurückführen in den Hauptstrom jeder Definition: Der Versuch von Erkenntnis ist ein Möglichkeitsprinzip. Die erfolgreiche Unabhängigkeit jedoch dient immer der Verbesserung des ablaufenden Prozesses. Evolution kann von heute auf morgen das Gegensätzliche zur neuen Wahrheit machen. Just like magic.

Sein ist eine Bewegung, die Konfliktpunkte definiert, die immer nur virtuell sind, aber denen immerzu mit allem Wissen entgegengetreten wird, oder die durch alles hindurch so positiv erscheint, dass sie von allen unterstützt wird. Moral, Wahrheit und Relevanz werden oft verbogen und nicht da verortet, wo sie sich im Prozess eigentlich befinden. Das Temporäre hat eine unglaubliche richtende Kraft, die oft mit keiner uns bekannten Verantwortung, Moral oder Jurisdiktion wirklich in einem uns sinnvoll erscheinendem Modus gesteuert werden kann.

Wo also stehen wir? : Welche Universen auch immer da sein mögen und wieviele davon: Wir stehen in Verbundenheit: Aus der rekonfigurativen Kombination von “materiellen” interobjektiven Bewegungen entstehen Leben und Bewusstsein und Zukunft.

Soweit und diesbezüglich sind wir in 2017 oder 2019 oder 2039. Dass wir aber da sind, also so grundsätzlich, ist doch vielleicht ein zumindest bewusstes und auch eventuell interkonnektives Sinnbild. Das ist doch möglicherweise zumindest ein Indiz für die Tatsächlichkeit von Partizipation. Also davon, dass die Idee von Leben, von Universum, von Bewegung, von Identität, auch nur sensorisch darin sich selbst sucht, wovon sie einst im von uns so bezeichneten Olymp beatmet wurde.