Tag: science

Autopoesis

barryhLeave a comment

An excellent article by Alfredo Erlwein-Vicuna in the recent edition of Resurgence magazine champions the concept of autopoesis – which is perhaps hampered by its rather obscure name. 

The basic idea is that cognition is the basic process of life, which is a process of a self creation. There is no separation between organism and environment; our perception of these sees different aspects of the same process. The whole is self regulating. Cf Gaia theory. 

According to Wikipedia “the term originates from the Greek αὐτo (self), and ποίησι (creation, production), referring to a system capable of producing and maintaining itself by creating its own parts”.

Fritjof Capra described this as “the first scientific theory that unifies mind, matter and life.”

Originator of the theory, Humberto Maturana states that reality is different for every living being because it is determined according to the sensory processes of each organism. There is no absolute truth. 

Erlwein-Vicuna suggests that democracy is a way of people living in mutual acceptance, which is perhaps a way of organising human affairs that is consistent with autopoesis. 

These ideas point the way beyond the current scientific materialism and the unsustainable politics of power and domination, towards a science that begins to understand life itself and a politics of cooperation and sustainability. 

Inside out

barryh1 Comment

Looking at myself I see an ‘inner’ and an ‘outer’, dualism. Similarly I see this in my dog, perceiving the ‘inner’ reflected in the dog’s ‘outer’. I have no reason to believe this does not apply to every living being, and even to beings that we would not regard as ‘living’ according to certain criteria.

I can call this ‘inner’ mind or soul or spirit or elan vital or etc. The ‘outer’ is what I perceive through the senses – which is the subject matter of empirical science. So there it is for each of us to see – two aspects to reality, subjective and objective.

I understand that this ‘ontology’ (idea of the nature of reality) was common among advanced thinkers in medieval times, such as Roger Bacon in 12/13C. It was also common in the East, such as the Indian Vedanta.

Then came the Renaissance, Reformation and establishment of Science. In the early days of science, pioneers such as Newton and Kepler shared the same dualistic ontology. Somewhere along the way, in the development of science, some of its exponents began to identify that which was the ‘outer’ domain as the true reality, measured by mathematical models, dismissing the ‘inner’ as something science would eventually explain in terms of the ‘outer’, without any justification. This was the ontology of materialism. Of course, the great thinkers such as Einstein, Pauli, Schrodinger… knew better.

The materialistic ontology succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of its proponents because mathematics gave the tools to control the ‘outer’ of nature – and there was no recognition of the ‘inner’ of nature. It also, incidentally gave the tools to manage people, in ways that did not need to take account of ‘inner’ factors such as justice, sanctity of life, beauty, goodness and truth even. The result is before our eyes, the ‘inner’ screaming for recognition as never before.

Yet it’s all ideas that are clearly not valid, if you just look at your self and your dog (or other living being).

Time to go back inward, individually and collectively to refind that beauty, goodness and truth.

With thanks to Maylinno’s post on the mind body connection
and Harald Walach’s paper on Inner Experience – Direct Access to Reality

Dowsing

barryh3 Comments

Well, it happens from time to time. Some scientist pokes his head above the parapet and characterises some traditional knowledge as credulous, bogus beliefs, witchcraft or some such. This time it’s dowsing, although it might be homeopathy, astrology, poltergeists, the paranormal, near death experiences, telepathy, precognition, knowledge of a previous life, etc etc.

The pattern is always the same. The scientific materialistic paradigm of scientism lives by the dogma that everything is material and everything will ultimately be explained in objective terms by science. Of course, this is just as much a bogus belief as any of these other systems. Sadly it seems to be espoused by much of the UK’s mainstream media.

If the guy really wants to know about dowsing he should research it, get some rods or a pendulum and try it out, give it a chance. He might get a big surprise. Water companies are commercial organisations and are likely to be seeking the most cost effective way of finding water, leaks etc. If this is dowsing, so be it.

I’m not trying to denigrate science itself, which is a wonderful way of understanding aspects of the world and developing technologies which enhance our lives. It is the closed mind of materialism, and the denial of possible alternative explanations and approaches to the world, that actually contradict the very spirit of science.

Dismissing things because of your own credulous beliefs is not science.

See also earlier posts Materialism, The Master and His Emissary, Battle of Ideas.

 

Inner and Outer

barryh1 Comment

Simple observation tells us that there are two aspects to life: inner experience and the outer world, subjective and objective. Our senses provide the link between the two, the inner perceives the outer.

We also recognise the life in other humans, beings in the animal world and, more subtly, insects, fish, the vegetable world, and so on. They clearly also have a ‘vital, living’ inner as well as a perceived form. Even places and spaces can have a clearly perceived atmosphere.

As far as I can see, Descartes came along and muddied the water, saying ‘I think therefore I am,’  when the reality is ‘I perceive therefore I am’ – thinking is something layered on top of this. This was part of the process that led to the creation of modern science and technology, and their focus on the objective, rather ignoring that inner subjective element. Quantity became all-important, to the exclusion of quality. Vitalism, that recognised the living spark within, was in the process rejected.

It seems at times that we live in a sort of half-world, glorifying science, technology, money, material goods, laws – but somehow disconnected from the qualities, beauty, truth and goodness that make it all worthwhile, indeed that make human life work sustainably – as is beginning to become apparent.

Featured image of Tao symbol courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

 

Periods of Renaissance

barryhLeave a comment

In “The Heart of Man”, Erich Fromm relates social narcissism to the Roman Catholic Church and to the Renaissance, in an illuminating discussion on the nature of periods of Renaissance which might give us clues to the nature of a New Renaissance.

Humanism and Fanaticism

When considering narcissism in large groups, such as major religions, Fromm suggests that there are counteracting forces of narcissism and anti-narcissism at work. He uses the Roman Catholic Church as an example, the personal humility that is at the heart of Christ’s teaching being at the opposite end of the scale to the intense narcissism of a church that believes it is the only chance of salvation and its officers provide the only path to God.

Read More »