The Reality of Systems

One of my deepest frustrations in life is the mismatch - or blockage - that separates how people live from how the world actually works.

It's really insanity. Naivety. Stupidity from the perspective of a wiser self. What's silly is how animal-like we are. Just a smart animal - an animal that can think about its animalness. And that makes us very different in another way - but that way does not concern me right now. What concerns me is the distance between systems theory and folk-theories of how the world works. Folk theories are the type of stuff people pass from one another - lets call them "memes"; there the signals and standards that come with how people decide to present themselves to others. Always implied in this behavior is the rather self-conscious notion of doing it for attention, in particular, so that other peoples interest in you will "feedback" into your ego, and you can experience yourself as having more "effectance" (or the capacity to effect others in the world).

People are narcissistic like this. I do it, you do it, the pope does it. Buddha did it, Jesus, Moses and anything with a human body does it. We listen for feedback without really consciously knowing were doing it. Our minds are "wrapped" around one another in this way. Every potential connection is "fed through" an unconscious tableau of past meanings and so organizes a consistent response for that category of action. When we do it, that is, when we act, oftentimes were just enacting an unconscious script, played out with different words but the same feelings and meanings pass back and forth; if were used to being used by others, we find people who will find a "use" in our neediness. People often fit like "lock and keys" in this way. Sometimes, very different, contrasting personalities "hit" one another, and both realize that their goals - say, a desire for effectance - cannot be effectively realized amidst the effusive expressiveness of another person.

Since people are prone to narcissism, we all have it. But some of us have it in larger portions. From the pre-prenatal facts of economic factors and social status, to the prenatal environment, people are shaped by factors (molecular structures) contingent on social realities (the mothers relationships with others). The mothers mind, fantasies and concomitant feelings and affects intrude or caress the fetus' developing nervous system. Endocrine hormones like cortisol 'guide' the stress response system of the developing fetus, turning 'off' genes by attaching methyl groups to DNA (cytosine). The stress response system is actually central in much of developmental features, like bone growth and sexualization.

My point in mentioning facts like that is to impress upon you the centralization evolution has conferred upon the self that "consolidates" the life of the body. The self, the human self, seems so incredible to us because we are literally the only thing that exists in this enormous mess that is aware of it. Whats so interesting is how "uninteresting" this fact can be to most people. When I ask people questions like this (and I have a tendency to turn conversations in philosophical directions) the majority of the people I ask just aren't interested in the question. There is a lack of "affective interest" from their body. It's sort of a fly hitting the windshield, then wiped off by the windshield wiper. This is a significant dissociation of something they experience damn near every time they decide to do something. Our normal attention might be "in the loop" - subject to feedback affects as we experience reality from "within" a subjective emotional present; but then we 'remember' something, and then DECIDE on a new direction of goal related behavior (which can then place you back in the loop). Our lives often go on and on like this, with our mental lives moving from one ontological status (human, de-centered) to another (animal, centered, implicitly 'caught' in a feedback between desire to effect others, perceiving the effect, and reorganizing with every iteration, unconsciously, to find your affective "niche" - a state of affective/narrative coherence.

It really should be mandatory that we include mindfulness like practices in our school systems. Improper behavior i.e greediness, callousness, selfishness, stubborness, arrogance, occurs largely as an overblown expression of affect/emotion, in a mind that isn't "managing" the energies that foist perceptions/goals on the mind. Mindfulness, whenever we practice it, enacts molecular processes that go to support that phenomenological state. With each moment we dedicate to our self-awareness, self analysis, or reflection on our own mental processing and behavior in intimate or casual relationships, we add 'more' to the molecular processes subtending that mental experience. Overtime, genes that were "on", turn "off", when a methyl group neutralizes the replication process by attaching itself to the cytosine molecule. When the gene is 'off', other genes at other areas are presumably "on", perhaps through acetylation of histone proteins.

We can shape brains - and thus minds - and thus do a pretty good job 'managing' the evolution of our species by consciously and reflectively shaping our school systems to include a period for mindful reflection. Finally linking human institutional practices that harmonize with the earth dynamics that make human life viable in the first place. Should we fail to restrain our darker instincts - really, parts of our selves that distort how things are - we mindlessly midwife our species to ineluctable extinction. And what a shame that would be! The very gift that nature afforded for us - which gave our lives such mystical and significant food for thinking - was ignored because it impinged on the far stronger goals of the primate self - to feel good/powerful amongst others chief amongst them.

Listening is a practice we all do to little of. If we listen to ourselves, we can hear a needy voice, pumping within us, wanting to speak, to be heard, to be understood. These needs are natural and normal, but like all things, we need to "consciously balance" what nature does unconsciously. Being human, effectively, and allowing ourselves to develop ourselves further, really does require a spiritual transformation of self from the hyper-individualism indicative of contemporary popular culture, to that of a society of people each equally amazed of their personal existence - feeling the need to be good and perceptive in their relationships with others; knowing themselves, they will better understand and sympathize with the needs that arise as inevitably in others as they do in us.

These skills ARE skills. They don't come with the package unless previous humans have "scaffolded" the development of these characteristics by living and being in positive and constructive ways in their immediate relationships. Failure happens. Always. The skill is the patience to take each failure as an opportunity for repair. To not expect anything more than a progressive, though never perfect, improvement in your capacity to perceive and influence in positive ways, is probably what most people should hope from living the human experience.

a reply to: Astrocyte
Wow nice read. I enjoyed it.

Thanks for posting and simplifying a somewhat complex reality.

originally posted by: Astrocyte

It really should be mandatory that we include mindfulness like practices in our school systems. Improper behavior i.e greediness, callousness, selfishness, stubborness, arrogance, occurs largely as an overblown expression of affect/emotion, in a mind that isn't "managing" the energies that foist perceptions/goals on the mind. Mindfulness, whenever we practice it, enacts molecular processes that go to support that phenomenological state. With each moment we dedicate to our self-awareness, self analysis, or reflection on our own mental processing and behavior in intimate or casual relationships, we add 'more' to the molecular processes subtending that mental experience. Overtime, genes that were "on", turn "off", when a methyl group neutralizes the replication process by attaching itself to the cytosine molecule. When the gene is 'off', other genes at other areas are presumably "on", perhaps through acetylation of histone proteins.

Wonderful OP! And I agree with you that too few people engage in contemplation of the nature of their intrinsic 'self'...

The average person just can't conceive of how valuable it is to self analyze, to look into the 'who' of themselves and to continually seek the answers to types of questions like "Why do always I react 'this' way to 'such and such'?", "What makes me feel 'y' about 'x'?", "How did I come to be so _______?", etc.

And the value in self analysis isn't only to the individual but to inter-relations with others as well. After all, if people can't even understand themselves, how could they possibly understand anyone else? And this inability to understand others is one of the primary causes of everything that is 'wrong' with society.

I too believe that all children should be taught how to be (objectively) self analytical from as early an age as possible.

If this were done, they would become the most psychologically healthy adults that civilization has ever known...

...and that would generate such an utterly beneficial societal game changer that within a generation or two, world peace might actually begin to be a possibility.

Higher Order thinking matters for intellectual progress which feeds societal and technological progress, which informed by constructive philosophy, facilitates truly progressive (in the truest form rather than political speak) societies.

The destructive societies of wars and oppressive regimes are the stuff of the opposite spectrum to that mentioned above. They are the stuff of superstition and uneducated lower mindsets.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Your post is enlightening. I attempted to describe what you have in another post of my own, regarding homosexuality and how I PERSONALLY believe it is nothing more than a developmental defect that began in the womb. I attempted to describe how 'stressors' felt by the mother ultimately influence the development of the fetus, to the point of which certain things in the mother's environment are causing the child to develop abnormally.... and in turn, homosexually.

What do you think about this? I believe homosexuality is a completely natural birth defect, yet i am berated by those who claim I use "pseudoscience". I most certainly believe that the "vibe" one puts out, and that intent it has, affects everything it comes in contact with... I compared it to magnetism aligning pieces of magnetic substance. I correlated the magnet to our soul, and the magnetic substance to the cells of our body.

You actually listed chemical processes within the body and paired it to the next paradigm. Thank you for the post, i love this perspective.

a reply to: chadderson

Increased in utero testosterone is cited as a causal factor of homosexuality, though there are often endocrine reactions that are not of the norm due to abnormal brain reactions found as a pattern of trans/homosexuality. There are also cases that appear a result of psychology and /or environment.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Ah you thought-feeder you did it again S&F. Never thought about it that way but sure, we make our synapses grow with repetition so it totally makes sense the first "maping" starts when the brain develops and of course it has to be in the womb.
I just don't agree with "society or educational system being responsible" how could that be? The problem is more likely unreflected grown ups getting babies just so they have someone to love them unconditionally, which is the biggest crisis we face in procreation (species wise speaking=> devolution)=> it's mostly just unaware dumb #s wanting huge families and the having nothing other to teach them except "Kevin/Lisa clean your room and make sure the neighbors don't talk about you"
While more reflected people nowadays decide against having babies, because of overpopulation, environmental issues and the fact they don't want their little nerdies to get beaten up every day from the little rats just born to further inflate their parents egos...

Thought has made all the trouble and no matter how we think it will never solve the problem because it is thinking that caused it - you cannot mend something by the same means as it was made.
Here is a very enlightening talk (with audience asking questions) by David Bohm who was an American scientist who has been described as one of the most significant theoretical physicists of the 20th century and who contributed innovative and unorthodox ideas to quantum theory, neuropsychology and the philosophy of mind.

He speaks about the system of thought and what it has been doing in the world. He speaks about how no matter how hard we try to make things better we seem to be making things worse - but why?

David Bolm explores in depth how the incoherent thought system effects all the other systems in the body and the environment.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I think you have understood that in order to solve our problems we have to look at the big picture. We cannot look at human beings like if they were metaphysical entities disconnected from everything else. Everything is linked and humans are not separate entities but are totally dependent on their environment. You have spoken of education, and it is a good point, but we can also talk about economics, politics, entertainment etc.. Everything is linked. The first and most important problem that I see is this : humans cannot evolve intellectually and 'spiritually' if at the same time they struggle to survive, because the instinct of survival will always be more powerful. And what do we see everyday around the world ? Humans working from morning to night just to be able to survive. And the education that we give to children is of the same nature : we don't train them to become critical thinkers, but we train them to become consumers and producers and to fill a spot in the productivist world that we have created for them, we train them to build and sell Iphones and we train them to buy Iphones. Despite all the productivity improvements that science and technology provide us, society is still functioning as if we never came out of the medieval era, or worse : antiquity.

There is a big difference between hard sciences and social sciences. We are able to launch a robot on planet Mars with all the correct predictions that the feat implies, and at the same time on Earth, socially we still function on the basis of outdated values and systems. We progress tremendously in one domain of knowledge and we stagnate in one other domain. Today, people are still quoting what this or that Greek philosopher deceased thousands of years ago has said about human beings, about the "soul", about human relations etc.. But who quotes them on astronomy or physics, or optics anymore ? Could we launch a robot on planet Mars if we continuously quoted what a guy deceased 3000 years ago has said about the nature of light, or gravity ? No we couldn't. But when it comes to the question "what is a human being and how does it work", it mistakenly seems to us that what they said was right, that what they said contains truth. Alfred Korzybski in his General Semantics defined human beings as "time-binders", because we are creatures capable of building knowledge bridges between points in time, while other animals are only "space-binders" and plant life are "energy-binders". We are the only creatures we know that can transmit information of our choice through centuries and millennia, and this is obviously a great advantage, but it can also become a great disadvantage because there is no natural mechanism which could help us to make a difference between useful knowledge and useless knowledge : our brains are not equipped with an on-board device to detect what is true and what is not. Thus we transmit everything and anything, the good and the bad, the useful and the useless, the beneficent and the harmful. But there is Science : why do we seem to have invented a method that can sort between the useless knowledge and useful knowledge with such great efficiency, and why do we seem to be unable to apply this same method to every other domain of knowledge ? Why are we still quoting Greek philosophers when it comes to politics and economics etc ?

We need to apply the scientific method to social concerns and problems. If we analyse science, we see 2 main things : there is a method and there is a language and both are linked together. The method is simple : leave all prejudices and biases behind and confront everything to reality at every moment, and the language is mathematics.
[I will add more later]

a reply to: Peeple

The problem is more likely unreflected grown ups getting babies just so they have someone to love them unconditionally, which is the biggest crisis we face in procreation (species wise speaking=> devolution)=> it's mostly just unaware dumb #s wanting huge families and the having nothing other to teach them except "Kevin/Lisa clean your room and make sure the neighbors don't talk about you"

The problem is systemic. This means that every element in the system is itself subject to the same self-organizing processes. Every person you mentioned, the "unaware dumb #s" are persons with names and developmental histories. Think of it like a canal. Social cues (the intersubjective connections that are made between relating minds) interact with the developing human anatomy in certain ways. When you get down to it, at the biological and evolutionary level, you get an organism that is built just like other organisms: any skills or abilities it possesses it possesses because of it's geneological history. Slow, graduated reengineering of nervous system tissue according to the 'meanings' the organism learns to adjust to is how evolution "entrenches" development. What we have, we have within us because of countless generations of preceding humans (and even further to primates, mammals, right down to the homeostatic serving functions of the brain stem shared by all vertebrates.

It's tempting to want to blame someone, but there is just no good to it. Seriously. When you live in this circle of a situation that we do, the concept of blame goes out the door. Of course, consciously, were expected to internalize the need to obey the law. But ones ability to stay 'within' a certain boundary of thought is different for everyone. This difference is largely mediated by cultural elements (say, memes) that attract the minds of developing youth. The youth aggregate around the idea, which is manifest in their interests, ways of relating, and the activities they carry out together. Every community has it's own "center". If a mind is developing in THAT community, depending on the number of relationships they develop to "good" (referring to people who teach and exhibit positive behaviors) and bad (people who enact negative behaviors, who demonstrate violations of accepted ethical norms, and relate in ways that are dominating with others). If you take into account particulars like the quality and nature of the mothers pregnancy, her diet, her stress level, amount of time laughing, joking, playing or absorbed in a deep interest (such as a book), or conversely, her arguments with her boyfriend/husband, preoccupation with other children, perhaps; anxious, depressed, or paranoid about the health of the baby. These effects trickle down to the fetus and play a role preparing the developing nervous system for an 'expected' social environment (why else would the mother be crying/sad/scared?)

Everyone of those people - everyone of us - passes through this process. Nobody is exempt. Few of us are fortunate to have parents who are mindful of these facts (since it's really just been discovered over the last 100 years, and picking up steam in the last 25 years) and so consciously influence the trajectory of development i.e. by being mindful and reflective of themselves, they are able to relate in ways that encourage positive feedback and minimize negative feedback. Such an infant is likely to develop a healthy self-esteem, aware of others and so understanding boundaries, it finds its joy's in expressing their unique self in healthy and constructive ways with others.

We can only correct this miasma of mutual blame by installing programs in our schools that are mindful of what developmental psychoneurobiology has discovered about human development. Systems are biased at their very beginnings by already established biological facts; the longer a child lives in a dangerous environment, the worse off he will be: each episode of dejection, of not being responded to, or yelled at, shapes his responses. The longer he spends his time in this state, the more "reified" - regulated by gene expression factors - his brain/mind will become. Thus, really, whatever your views on political matters or ideology, that clearly has to take a back seat to basic empirical scientific facts about the development of a human brain (which is only 1/3rd developed at birth and totally unmyelinated) in a social world with its own particular meanings.