20/10/2009 – 22’31’’
A brain wave – we cracked something, or had we?
The value of the replaceable element, if it would become replaceable, the question is would the meaning related to this element, continue to be just as dear to us as what it had been, when it was known that it could not be replaced, that there was no possibility of replication, that that was it, you loose it and it is gone forever.
An example we take is the photo which we had taken 15 twenty years ago, in relation to the printed photo we would have taken with a digital camera and which it lives digitally, therefore it can be replicated a many time as we wanted it to. The obvious answer that comes to my mind is that the dearer and more emotional one is the photo that cannot be replicated or it is much harder to do so.
Would we feel the same about our parents our lovers our children our dogs, would we loose sensitivity and or emotion and or love in relation to them, if we there was a possibility to replicate them?
This is a different argument thought. We were discussing.....
If we could change our bodies as easier as we could change the digital pictures, would we loose respect for it, would we care less for it?
Establishing a relationships, there is this folklore saying, I have had this hammer for the pst 10 years, I have changed it's head 7 times, and I have changed it's handle 12 times.
The underlying aspect is the emotional attachment. When you evaluate it, is it disposable, is it changeable, is it replaceable. If the emotion is related in creating our relationships with our bodies and the outside world. How do you kill the emotion? and does living here and now make any sense? does it make any sense without then and after . Be here now, it does not make sense, if we get rid of the past and future. WHY? well the be here now is related to being there for someone or something as suppose to not being there for someone or something, now this only makes sense if thre is past and future, otherwise you would be here now all the time. And is this not the same thing? the importance of being here now is due to the time factor, if we are to remove the time factor, the very essence of be here now would have no real meaning or at least it would not have the meaning as we understand it now.
We make a judgement about our feelings, we make lots of judgments, we do not analyse a lot of parameters, we look at it from the level we understand it, and we then work to making it better, adding this taking that out, maybe we should not be doing it, maybe we should appreciate the before and after in order to appreciate the here and know, as this is how we are wired to do so. This is within our bodies and mind's abilities to do so. How do we make sense of here and now without past and future. Well we anchor our thoughts of here and now to the past and future. The here and now only makes sense to past and future, or the emotional aspect of it anyway. If we get rid of past and future then we have removed the emotional aspect, and if we have removed the emotional aspect then we have removed the very meaning of what we understand humans to be. We do try and take out the emotional aspect on ou everyday business life, as this emotional aspect perhaps keeps us stagnant and does not allow us to move forward in terms of developmet. But then the question is what is development, by perpetuating ourselves to the future, we are in a way killing the very essence or aspect of the future. We are therefore a killing the very aspect of time, if things can be replicated at a digital speed, if we can make things at a digital speed, then what meaning is left to time. Time has no meaning, time seizes to exist.
My second question is the feeling of freedom. How this feeling does comes about? Is it related to our ability to dream about the future, is it about the feeling that there is something out there waiting for us to find out, there are opportunities out there. But if we have killed time, then we have killed the future, if we have killed the future, then have we killed the sense of freedom the sense of achievement, the sense of working towards something the sense of goals the sense of finishing something on time.
Our essence of life is linked to the aspect of time, if we kill the time then have we killed the very meaning of liefe? What is life if the context of timelessness?
It is interesting to think that by killing this one parameter everytihing changes. It is interesting to note that according to the discussions we have carried out in these previous pages.
So let’s just stop for a moment and try and highlight important aspect in ou lives and what they mean to us.
Time?
Future?
Past?
Emotion?
Freedom?
Relationship?
TIME TIME TIME TIME TIME TIME TIME TIME is of the essence at the centre of how we live our life’s, at the epicentre of how we make sense of the world. Is the digitisation killing the time and is this in return killing the human in us. The question is what makes us humans? What are the charachteristics that define us as humans?
So, is there time? Or have we invented it? Has the aspect of where we happen to have evolved created the sense of time in order for us to make sense and order of the world we leave in. Is time just another aspect we had to invent as we have invented religion as we have invented other social structures in order to make sense and order.
Time time time time time is on my side, yeas it is, time time time time time is on my side oh yes it is.....
Now the question is, are these the important characteristics of our brains functioning? Brain has to make sense of its surroundings in order to minimize energy consumtion in order to maintain a healthy balance in order to existi. Is brain continuously trying to negotiate that very fine line of existence, as the bubble does. It is most efficient up to a point and than it bburst, or rather it seases existing.
SO yes, I think I am now surer then ever that the time element is the making of our brains, and the social acceptance of time is an outcome of the sum total of all the other human brains that have accepted the explanation of time. It cost, energy wise a lot more to fight it then to accept it, it is therefore acceptable. But as we move forward as we undertand more and more as we try to squeeze more meanings into this social accepted understanding there comes a point when our theories fail, when our theories and beliefs fail to explain how and why are things happening the way they are. These point are the points of bifurcation of a total paradigm shift, sonce up until that point the social know how could be explained unders those existing terms, and past that point the social know how was larger and more complex than the theories up to that point made sense in relation to it. So when they stop making sens then we shift to new theories.
Perfect example is the brain and the outer body experience. We are so engrained in our bodies that we can only make sense to the world in relation to our bodies. Now try and remove the consciousness from our bodies and you will see what happens, our consciousness shifts, our brains start making new relations to the world, they start making new meanings, as why has appeared true, no longer does. What has appeared true was the base through which that brain used that body to navigate and make sense to that context or that worlds, t now no longer does, why? Well, because now there is this new body related to this conscious brain, there is this new environment related to this conscious brain, the brain has found out that it is no longer safe in making sense the way it did until now, as it has found out that actually what the brain thought made sense, it actually does not, under these new findings and these new conditions. So what is SENSE in relation to the brain and consciousness, well I would guess that sense are the walls. The house the place where we feel safe. And unless we make sense of things we do not feel safe and if we do not feel safe we fear for our existence and if we fear for our existence and we look to make sense to the world in order to exist then we either try and make our home by making sense to the world or we ask for a refuge by following other peoples definition of sense. We try and adapt that sense; we seek refuge to that sense. This is the sense as a religion, when we cn not make sense of something we start believing in something out there that we can not make sense of. This is a pure example of how we/our brains invent sense or stability in order to minimise energy in order ot feel safe and secure in order to persevere.
So, we have discussed various interesting aspects of how we make sense of the worlds, we have related sense to stability to the house to the place where we are comfortable in.
If we understand the workings of the brain, we ought to start thinking in a more direct way in relation to our house, our roads/streets, our towns, our cities our countries and our world. How do we translate this notion of making sense to the notion of making sense within our house, our familieis, our roads, our cities.
Do we push ahead and kill the time, and what fundamental impact will this have in how we make our cities? Are we developing that way wehre this is happening.
So the question is, do we truly understand how the new technologies are having an impact in how we make sense of our world and how we interact with it today. DO we trully understand what are these key aspect? What are these key components through which, or based on which, we interact in our daily lifes. Can we simplify them? Can we find out the core elements? and based on these core elements, and by understanding where the technology is going, can we then make prediction about the future events? Will it have the same meaning? If the meaning of these key words through which we make sense of the world today and every day shifts, do our futures shift? Undoubtedly they do.....
Can we try and identify major shifts in history that had a major impact on how we lived our lives?
The invention of the internet? The computer? Electric light? ……
Can we trace how our brains have changed, shifted or transformed the relationship to our bodies. CAn we change the culttural shift, which it is very much related to the economical shift, whcih is very much related to traditional shift. We move from one pace to another, and we try and keep on the same values as we did to where we came from. We soon find out that it does not work, we assimilate and move on. We do tend to find out people that do not assimilate quite easy, they do not move on, they stagnate. Why does this happen? WI would get back again to the very essence of the path of least resistance. They do not move on because up to that point that they do it is somehow easier for them stick to it, it is because that is what they know that is what they have learned that is what they are comfortable with and they do not know what the effects would be of changing gear, changing sides, they are in a way afraid of the unknown because the ties that link them to the known are probably still very strong. A lot stronger than just letting go.
We see these happenings with the ALbanian Diaspora in America. We see this these happenig with the Albanian dispora in Switzerland and Germany. Why does it happen, why has happened a ot less in London. It is a lot to do with the environment, with the context. Does the context accomodate this change? does it allow for a transformation and fusion? or is it a closed system, it protectss itself from the new and unknown. I beleve that this is the difference between the socially closed systems and socially opened systems. What are the density numbers we need to reach before the barriers of networking and negotiation are broken down to the level where interaction is allowed. Is there a specific number of people? Is there a correlation of this type of close knot community nd seggregation? what needs to happen within these communities in order to open uo and allow the new to enter. Allow for turbulances and see them as positive, rather then as a negative.
So the question is?
What is the relationship betweeen the cities density, it's mix of social background and race before it changes behaviour?
What do you gain from opening up?
..and what do you loose from opening up?
see the social knitting at the city level and how does history effects the interaction and relationship?
No comments:
Post a Comment