THE PHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE, DESIGN AND REPAIR







A Study in Thought

sa040



by





Marius Heuff

Chapter 1

Content

What does "philosophy" mean?
The outlines and organising principles of a large panorama or point of view.
Philosophy is, in essence, an art; the role of intuition.
Recognition comes slowly.
Working with "facts" that are already available.
Criteria of usefulness.
The hard work of thinking clearly.
The role of honesty and magnanimity in a discussion.
Complexity and contradictions are the rule, not the exception.
A debate, versus an act of propaganda.
Blending the fragmented sciences into a coherent whole.

The title may seem, at first glance, somewhat austere and incomprehensible. First of all, you may ask, why the apparently unrelated concepts of knowing, designing and repairing are lumped together under one heading. In addition, you may want to know, what I mean by the "philosophy" of these unrelated concepts. What does philosophy mean anyway? Most of us have a rather uneasy feeling that a philosophy will turn-out to be a lengthy series of ponderous generalisations that have little meaning. We also have a tendency to suspect, that these generalisations are unhelpful to those, who are engaged in the process of mastering a particular field of knowledge, designing a piece of machinery, or repairing the instruments of modern technology.

I hope to make the relationships between knowledge, design and repair clear throughout this discussion, which will be an excercise in tracing broad correlations. We have to define, first of all, the concept of philosophy, as well as the relevance of philosophical generalisations. It is true, that philosophy deals, primarily, with large-scale relationships, but this is due to the fact, that the scope of vision and the areas under review are so large, that we can only make sense of the overall structure of this wide panorama, if we look at the overall structure and forget about the details.

As a matter of fact, the task of philosophical thought should be to bring the outlines and organising principles of a wide panorama into a clearer focus, and, then, it should bring these outlines and principles of operation into a coherent framework of understanding; always looking for "problems", where the proposed coherence does not seem to fit, or, where the degree of clarity can be improved. Philosophy is, indeed, the art of bringing the qualities of a large number of reality perceptions and conceptual entities into a clear perspective, and, the reasons, why this activity is called and "art", has to do with the way this task is being accomplished.

Rarely will it be possible to trace all the steps that led to the logical conclusion of a generalised statement. An individual with a tendency towards reflective thought, brings, largely intuitively, a quality or common denominator into a sharp focus of attention. In most instances, it is possible to elaborate on the generalised conclusion with a variety of supporting arguments and examples, but, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to furnish more than a number of supportive and plausible arguments for the generalised insights or conclusions that have been reached.

A generalisation can rarely be proven to be true; rather, the generalisation finds, if successful, gradually an increased acceptance amongst those, who are in contact with it. Then, people may recognise, pragmatically and intuitively, that the stated principle "works" and seems to hold true. As we have said before, a generalisation is very difficult to prove "right", but, it is easily proven wrong, since one valid exception to the rule will destroy the validity of a particular generalisation.

Frequently, an exception to the rule can, eventually, be accepted as an exception, if the generalisation allows a certain latitude in the way it relates phenomena to each other, but, often, widely accepted and strongly believed-in principles of truth are tenaciously defended against apparently devastating "exceptions" and contradictions. These exceptions and contradictions begin, then, to undermine the validity and credibility of a specific interpretation of reality. If this interpretation has become rigid and unquestionable, we call it a "sacred belief".

Philosophising is, therefore, nothing more, and nothing less, than trying to make sense of the phenomena we experience, whenever we look at ourselves and our environment from a broad perspective; a perspective, that has not been fragmented into comfortable scientific niches, but consists of broad views and yearnings, dealing, once again, with the questions of man's nature and destiny.

Let us remind ourselves, here, that philosophical scrutiny challenges existing generalisations and interpretations as often as it tries to formulate new structures of interpretation and belief. Philosophy is, indeed, an art, rather than a systematic approach in synthesising a coherent reality picture, and, its analytical aspects are not primarily concerned with an effort to dig-up new conceptual entities from virgin territories of natural existence, (which is the task of science), but, to examine many scientific facts and views in order to see, whether or not the many, intuitively and artistically conceived ideas and notions can be supported, or, are being contradicted, by the findings of the sciences.

Sometimes, an intuitive feeling, or, even, a generally accepted reality perception is systematically undermined by philosophical scrutiny, and, then, a long and often painful process of debate and re-assessment is necessary to improve and modernise a structure of generally accepted but out-dated beliefs and reality perceptions.

This, in a nutshell, defines the purpose and function of philosophical thought, emphasising, either scrutiny, or synthesis, and, the proof of its relevance is found in the level of influence thought structures excercise upon our reality perceptions. If a generalising principle turns-out to be quite helpful in ordening a previously chaotic imagery of reality, an individual will have few difficulties recognising the validity of such a helpful way of interpreting reality experiences, but, the usefulness of a philosophical generalisation is seldom perceived in such a dramatic and clear-cut manner. Frequently, we fail to appreciate the proposed generalisation in its full complexity, and, consequently, we find it rather awkward to handle such an instrument of thought, because it does not really fit our particular requirements.

People rarely realise or admit to themselves, that their reality perceptions could be improved, and, if people are not aware of the need to upgrade the way they perceive and interpret the realities they are confronted with, it will rarely be possible for a generalised statement, or a structure of thought, to make an impression. Only occasionally, will it be possible for a reader or listener to recognise, immediately, that a philosophical statement contains, exactly, the solution to one of their current and urgent conceptual problems; only rarely, will a structure of thought be fitted, so precisely, to someone's immediate needs.

Often, a number of people are able to recognise "something of value" in a new approach to the perception and interpretation of reality, because existing interpretations may have slowly become unsatisfactory or, even, useless. Yet, the sense of recognition will be somewhat vague and fragmentary, because it is not easy to give-up a perception we have become used to. Here and there, certain statements or passages of an innovative philosophical text may create a sense of recognition and approval. Other statements fall by the way-side, because their meaning and continuity of thought are not comprehended. Some statements will appear strange, controversial, or, even, offensive.

This process of "partial recognition", associated, perhaps, with a slowly growing recognition and influence of the text as a whole, defines the relevance of a philosophical "work of art". A dramatic improvement in organisation and manageability of a reality pereption is obviously relevant, but, even, if people recognise only partially the validity of a statement, or, if they are shocked into a vigorous reaction to some of these concepts and ideas, they still derive a measure of benefit from the mental excercise required to read and understand a philosophical discussion.

Such an excercise will sharpen the imagery of one's reality perceptions. It will bring to light areas of fuzzy thinking or non-knowing, and, it will sharpen the faculties of argumentation, critical evaluation and detailed perception for those, who excercise their faculties of judgement and evaluation to the fullest. Therefore, a statement may be relevant, even, if there is only a limited recognition of its validity, and, it may still be worthwhile taking note of such a statement, even, if it creates a storm of protest and opposition, rather than a reaction of support and approval.

We have dealt, to some extent, with the question of relevance or usefulness of a philosophical endeavour. We will not discuss these aspects in detail, because we have done so before. I agree, that philosophical discussions may easily degenerate into irrelevant hair-splitting, where the argument is carried-on "ad absurdum" because of the emotions aroused by the intellectual battle. As soon as we appear to lose an argument, we feel threatened, and, we have lost, then, the main criterium for being a useful philosopher, because we behave defensively rather than rationally.

If we appear to lose an argument, we should welcome the opportunity to correct, in one way or another, a detail of our belief structure, because this aspect of our beliefs appears to be incorrect, or, it can, apparently be made more precise. Unless we learn to accept, graciously, the persuasiveness of a powerful argument that seems to invalidate our own beliefs, we are not philosophising usefully and honestly, but, we are merely behaving instinctively and emotionally; like everyone else; without much insight into the mechanisms of our own behaviour.

We should always try to cultivate an attitude of scrupulous honesty, when evaluating, discussing and considering all aspects of a complex argument or piece of evidence. Let us never be afraid for contradictory aspects, which are inherent in every honest reality perception. Such contradictions, or signs of incomplete understanding, are the rule and not the exception. Let us be highly suspicious about any form of discussion that fails to bring to light these contradictory aspects, because it is very likely, that we are then dealing with a deliberate bias to persuade us to believe in a specific, preconceived notion. This is not philosophising or debating honestly. This is propaganda; a superficial and annoying effort to win credence and support with the help of simplified and distorted half-truths.

Propaganda is annoying, because it implies an attitude of lecturing or instructing on the part of the propagandising party, without the ability, or desire, to listen to what the other party has to say. A discussion is designed to look at a specific reality from all angles, without preconceived notions, without any areas that are unquestionable, and, without the assumption that one party "knows it all".

We should also learn to discriminate, clearly, between an honest and open debate, where people act in a spirit of good-will towards each other, and, the "battle of words", which is merely a smoke-screen for angry and suspicious posturing; where hostile actions are temporarily suspended in an apparent willingness to negotiate, but, where the effort slides, quickly, into a propaganda offensive.

Even in our attempts to define the meaning and relevance of philosophical endeavour, we have landed into the mechanisms of human behaviour, as well as the problems of preconceived notions, anger and hostility. This slide into emotional behaviour shows, once again, how artificial it is to separate reality into comfortable spheres of scientific scrutiny. It should bring home to us, once again, the fact, that the fragmentation of the sciences is caused, in part, by man's inability to contain more than just a small fragment of reality in a sharp focus of attention, but, the other, major rason for scientific fragmentation is the fact, that existential requirements lead people to nestle themselves into a small corner of knowledge, authority and expertise.

I do not want to justify any further discussion on the art and relevance of generalised thought or philosophical scrutiny. Let us cease to philosophise about the merits of philosophising, and, let us proceed with the task to elucidate the common features in the tapistry of our perceptions, whenever we know, design or repair something.

.......

Chapter 2

Content

The philosophy of knowledge.
The functions of conscious awareness.
The evolution of symbolically representable awarenesses.
The emergence of behaviourally flexible species'.
The genetic and cultural codes.
Cerebral classification mechanisms.
The subconscious process of abstracting a common denominator.
The ability to "recognise"; mechanisms of the experience of familiarity.
An optimum range of similarities.
Classifying symbolically representable awarenesses; a parallel with the cerebral or physiological classification mechanisms.
Logical requirements for the ability to recognise something.
A spectacular growth in the volume of memory-traces.
Mechanisms of memory-recall.
An analogous event, acting as the appropriate "trigger" for a specific memory-recall.
Existentially significant and non-significant stimuli.
The behaviour of spontaneous re-enactment.
The significance of practicing memory-recalls in a safe environment.
Sharpening our memories.

What is knowledge? What faculties lie behind this specifically human capability? How did it develop, and, for what reasons? These questions lead us beyond a mere search for an exact definition of the word "knowledge" or the faculty of "knowing". The answers to these questions are interwoven with our concepts about the broader functions of awareness and consciousness, and, it may be worthwhile to recall, briefly, how we visualise the origin and development of conscious or symbolically representable awarenesses to have taken place.

We have outlined these ideas before, and, we will only summarise those concepts, which let us see a plausible evolutionary development and a gradual transition from the non-symbolic form of animal awareness to the symbolic and voluntary recall of memory-traces in the human being.

In other essays, we have discussed the type of non-verbal consciousness that arose in the flexible mammals with their highly developed sense-organs and cerebral classification mechanisms. We saw, how behaviour changed, slowly, from a complex network of stereotyped but skilled motoric responses, to a form of behaviour that started to rely, increasingly, upon past experiences, as well as parental examples. (We are referring, here, primarily, to the need for newly born members of flexible species' to imitate or follow the relevant behaviour-patterns of the older generations.)

There is no evidence for the formation of "concepts" in these flexible species', in spite of the fact, that there is a possibility for the parental generations to "teach" their youngsters what is required, and, what is tolerated and what is not tolerated. This is done by setting limits to the range of permissible behaviour-patterns for their offspring. By imitating or following parental examples and experiencing what is encouraged or disapproved of, together with the ability to remember such experiences and recognise patterns of familiarity in behaviour, as well as familiar environmental conditions and circumstances, an animal with a flexible pattern of behaviour "learns", or, becomes "programmed", during its formative years, to adopt a specific mode of behaviour in response to a set of specific, recognised stimuli or sense impressions.

Because of the development of behavioural flexibility and the ability to learn, the details of the behavioural response can not be laid-down anymore by the genetic code of instructions. As we have discussed before, the genetic code contains the blue-print for the formation of the organism, as well as an outline of instinctive behaviour-patterns, but, in order to secure viability, a "cultural", or, non-genetic code of parentally transmitted behavioural specifics has to be programmed into the behaviour of each member of such a behaviourally flexible species. This type of behavioural programming allows for a remarkable degree of "fine-tuning" of the behavioural response in relation to locally relevant circumstances. In a species, where the behavioural reactions of an actualised or living member have been laid-down with great precision by the genetic code, the possibilities to adapt the behavioural response to local variables is much more restricted.

An evolutionary development, where viability is sought by rapidly varying, but precisely adapted, behaviour-patterns, requires the evolution of an "organic basis" for the acquisition of such a pool of "learnable" or culturally transferrable patterns of behaviour, together with an organic basis, or "anlage", for the development of the function of memory. These "organic bases", or potentials, are represented by structures of the body, including those of the sense-organs and the central nervous system, which allow an individual to develop the capability of carrying-out such precise but temporary behavioural adjustments.

The central nervous system reflects, in its structure and development, the manner in which the forces of natural evolution have attempted to provide the organic requirements for the capabilities of flexible behavioural adaptations. The ability to record an outline of a specific experience, opens the possibility to modify a behavioural response in the light of past experiences.

However, in addition to the direct imitation of a valuable behaviour-pattern, the process of learning from experience can be augmented by an exposure to a range of tolerances, which has been set by the parental generation. In this way, the younger generations can experiment with a number of behaviour-patterns on the basis of trial and error, provided, they stay within the limits set by the parental generations, and, the parental generations can transfer a desirable and viable pattern of behaviour to its offspring. The younger generations can benefit from the experiences of the parental generation by imitating well-established and, obviously, viable behaviour-patterns, without having to duplicate all these experiences themselves.

We have discussed, before, how the ability to recognise an event or an item of existence as "familiar", depends, not only, on the ability to record, in outline, a series of experiences, but, it also depends on the ability of the brain to abstract a common denominator of these experiences. Only by abstracting common denominators, is it posssible to classify events or items of existence into groups that resemble each other in one aspect or another. This is the principle of "cerebral classification", and, without this ability, no memory function, recognition or learning process is possible. All experiences, be they experiences of an animal in relation to its physical environment, or, experiences that relate to contacts with other members of the group, are classified into categories of similarities in event or existence.

The term "similarities in event", means, that the brain is capable, in one way or another, to abstract a generalised quality from a series of similar but not identical events. Only, if a sense impression can be classified into a category with a generalising quality or principle, is it possible for an animal to make use of his past experiences. Only then, can it determine the most advantageous course of behaviour in relation to an event that is in the process of taking place.

If the generalised quality or principle that is classifying a series of similar experiences into a single class of events, would be extremely narrow, the class would be very small, and, the incidence of "recognition" would be quite low. This would lead to missed opportunities to find food, evade a predator, or, avoid some other dangerous situation. If the generalising principle of classification is too broad, the class of events would lump-together incidents that are too dissimilar, or, even contradictory in their significance and outcome. Such a classification would be useless, because its heterogenicity would seriously diminish the quality of predictability, which is such an essential element in the usefulness of flexible behaviour-patterns.

The criteria of viability dictate, therefore, that the generalising principles of cerebral classification find, empirically, a level of abstraction that is neither so narrow that it would lead to "under-recognition" and missed opportunities, but, neither so broad that it would lead to confusion and unreliable results.

Let me emphasise, again, that we are dealing with cerebral mechanisms that have been conceptualised and verbalised in my mind, but they occur in an animal organism as physiological or neurological mechanisms that have been laid-down during embryological differentiation by the genetic code. These mechanisms are further developed during the maturation of youngsters into adulthood, and function, therefore, as an essential behavioural tool throughout the life-span of a behaviourally flexible organism.

We have also developed the idea, that the classification of conceptual awarenesses by the human being, (once the species had crossed this all-important bridge between non-conceptual and conceptual awareness), is very similar in nature, and, we know, that we all learn to classify numerous conceptual or verbalisable awarenesses into categories that are based upon a similarity in event or existence.

Certainly, we are far from explaining or demonstrating the presence of such a mechanism on a neuronal or brain-cell level, and, it remains to be seen, whether it will ever be posible to translate these concepts into the complexity of brain-cell happenings. The reason, why it is, not only, logical, but inescapable, to conclude, that the brain must have such a classifying system and an organising principle acting as a common denominator for, or generalised abstraction from, a class of similar but not identical events or phenomena, is based upon the fact, that we are unable to classify or recognise anything, unless we have a criterium for classifying a sense impression.

A criterium for classification, means, that we analyse each item or event to be classified into a number of components or aspects, and, we select some of these aspects, qualities or characteristics as the criteria for putting items or events together into a class of similarities.

We can not classify anything, unless we analyse items of awareness as described above, and, the whole concept of classification is based upon the notion, that there are common denominators that can function as a generalising principle. We can not design a computer to do classifying work for us, unless we give it the ability to analyse data or events and "abstract" a number of features or qualities. The act of sorting or classification depends, therefore, upon the features selected as criteria to put the various items together.

This is the reason, why we say, that, in order for an animal organism to be able to benefit from past experiences, such an organism has to be able to recognise a facet or feature of an on-going experience as "familiar"; as something it has seen or experienced before, and, this recognition is only possible, if we visualise the brain to orden the steady stream of sense-impressions into classes or categories of similarities in appearance or event. These categories form together a "memory-bank". This memory-bank can be used to determine, whether an on-going sense impression is completely new and unfamiliar, or, has, at least, some familiar and recognisable features.

In summary, then; cerebral classification systems must exist, whenever there is a significant modification possible of an organism's behaviour-patterns. This modification has to be based on past experiences that can be "accessed", or addressed, in one way or another, and, even the conditioned reflex can be integrated into an imagery of overall cerebral function, as we will discuss in subsequent essays. However, let us not get lost in a pursuit of mechanisms that take place at the junction of neurological and psychological areas of our awareness. Here, we only want to summarise the transition from a non-conceptual to a conceptual form of awareness.

In the picture we have just drawn, it is clear, that the brain ordens, constantly, the sensory impressions that are being received by an organism, and, a behaviourally flexible organism will react in relation to its past experiences. The memory-bank of classified experiences is constantly "addressed" in order to give each sense impression its proper meaning and place in the framework of reality perceptions. If the experience is recognised and classified, the animal forms its response, partly, along innate or instinctive patterns, but, often, the behavioural response is modified by the input from judgements and evaluations in the light of past experiences.

However, it is clear from this imagery, that a memory-bank can only be addressed, if an on-going event or experience recalls a class or category into a focus of awareness on account of the fact, that the brain has found certain features in the incoming sense impression, which are similar to some of the past experiences. Highly developed mammalian awareness is, probably, described, at least, to some extent, by these statements. Flexible animals are aware and alert, and, there can be little doubt, that they are constantly classifying the incoming sense impressions into categories of similarities. Stimuli are analysed, compared and classified, and, these mechanisms of recognition and classification determine what their existential significance is. If the significance of these incoming stimuli is "positive", it may mean food, or a prey. If these stimuli are judged to be negative, they arouse a defensive reaction, and, if they are neutral, they do not cause any type of response. Perhaps, they are then not even noticed.

It is likely, that non-significant stimuli are hardly recorded at all, because there seems to be little benefit for an organism to retain an existentially unimportant stimulus. This reflects the fact, that, animals, including man, are primarily sensitive to stimuli with an existential meaning, and, non-significant stimuli are, therefore, useless and unnecessary to record, notice or react to.

The range of the existentially significant stimuli can change by coupling non-significant stimuli with stimuli that are significant, and, through this mechanism, an animal is able to change the judgement of existential significance, discarding criteria that have become insignificant and replacing them with new criteria that represent, more accurately, what is existentially significant.

What would happen, if a class of memory-traces, or, a particularly memorable event would be triggered into a focus of awareness by a series of behavioural acts that simulate a memorable event? This can happen, when a variety of gestures, vocalisations and dance-like movements are recognised as similar to, or representative of, a recent event that is still fresh in everyone's memory. What would happen, if a group of socially integrated animals would recall a memorable event by re-enacting their recent memories with mimicry and gesticular prancing?

It is logical to assume, that recent and highly significant experiences may come back, spontaneously, into the conscious awareness of an animal that is resting comfortably, after an exciting hunt or narrow escape. Suddenly, the animal begins to gesticulate wildly, re-living its recent experiences and imitating, be it somewhat crudely, the experiences it went through, earlier in the day.

Let us assume, that there are onlookers; members of the same group, who also went through the same sort of experience, because, after all, they live and hunt together. Would it not be possible, that, at least, a few of the onlookers would suddenly "recognise" in these wild gesticulations a similarity with the events they just went through?

It is logical to assume, that the members, who recognised in the gesticulations of their fellow member the symbolic representation of a recent event, will join-in the re-enactment of the happenings of the day. This may lead even more members to recognise what is going-on, and, we may imagine, how a small clan of related, pre-human anthropoids began to re-live, regularly, the events of the day; by re-enacting events with the help of gesticulations, wild dances and all sorts of mimicry and vocalisations.

What is happening, here, is of great importance for our attempts to explain the origin and development of a conscious, verbalisable or symbolically representable awareness. Of course, the pre-human anthropoids who were involved in these events of the past, had no idea at all about the significance of what was happening. They could not even talk or formulate any form of symbolic communication, as yet. Their awareness was not really any different from the other anthropoid species' around them.

Nevertheless, the accidental, or, perhaps, inevitable discovery of the ability to re-live the significant experiences of the day with the help of such mimicry and gesticular prancing, must have been an extremely exciting event, because these animals would experience the same emotions and feelings, when a memory-trace was recalled into a focus of conscious awareness by an analogous event or similar situation. Yet, the existential significance of a memory-recall on the basis of a symbolic representation was completely different, since it is reasonable to assume, that gesticular memory-recall took place in the relative safety of the home environment.

For the first time in the evolutionary history of living organisms, (at least, so far as we know), the recall of an experience became separated from the experiences of an actual, analogous situation, and, the frequent, near-voluntary recall of memory-traces in the relative safety of the home-environment, must have sharpened the conscious awareness of these experiences to a remarkable extent.

For these animals, the recognition of familiarity became enormously enhanced by virtue of the frequent recall of their memory-traces with the help of representative symbols, such as gesticulations and imitations, and yet, none of the dangers associated with the experience of an analogous situation were present during these mechanisms of symbolic recall of a memory-trace.

.......

Chapter 3

Content

A foundation for the evolution of "speech".
An increase in the extent and speed of symbolic communications.
The search for viability is the driving factor behind evolutionary change.
Specialisation in form and function, versus viability through behavioural fine-tuning.
The disadvantages of behavioural fine-tuning through a process of learning.
Cerebral preparations for the ability to adapt with learned or acquired behaviour-patterns.
A sharpened instinct of parental care; a method to compensate for the increased vulnerability of anthropoid infants and youngsters.
Behavioural flexibility within a social environment.
The awareness of being aware.
The many sources of mental images.
Secondary and tertiary abstractions.
The link between symbolic communications and existential needs.
Sharpening a mental imagery with dialogue.
Motivations; a unifying concept for the classification of awarenesses and behaviour-patterns.
Varying objectives and results.
The strength of fervor and commitment.
Symbolically communicable awarenesses have become an important tool for survival of the human species.
The faculty of "speech".

We have described a basic imagery upon which we can build further and unfold the capabilities of conscious awareness. When gesticulations became more stylised, the speed with which conscious awarenesses could be recalled, increased dramatically, leading, eventually, to an extremely efficient form of communication; speech. The rapid accumulation of the number of verbalisable or symbolically representable awarenesses led, quickly, to the need for further classifications. In this way, common denominators of conscious awarenesses found their own verbalisable symbols as "secondary abstractions".

Speech is the culmination of a long evolutionary trend that began with the experiment of behavioural flexibility. The method of behavioural flexibility as a solution for the ultimate objective of all living organisations, (nl., individual survival and a continued possiblity of existence for the gene-pool as a whole), was introduced, slowly and hesitantly, far back in the history of evolution, and, it is equally difficult to pin-point the exact beginnings of the experiment with verbalisable or symbolically representable awarnesses.

It is useful to keep in mind, that there is a constantly varying balance between the qualities of flexibility and specialisation. In order for a species to become more appropriately adapted to the circumstances in which it finds itself, (its ecological niche), the species has to become "specialised", but, this slow and detailed adaptation of the genetic code, necessary to obtain such a specialised form and function, also leads to a loss of further adaptative capabilities. Therefore, the risk of an evolutionary "dead-end" is increased by adapting, genetically, very precisely to a particular ecological niche, especially, if this niche undergoes rapid and significant changes.

In many cases, it would be "far better", if the specialisation necessary for the maximum utilisation of an ecological niche or circumstance, would be in the form of a temporary, behavioural adaptation that could be changed, quickly, and follow, accurately, the ever-changing circumstances of the environment. Before it was possible for the forces of natural selection to construct a genetic blue-print, allowing for such a behavioural rather than anatomical or structural specialisation to a set of specific, but, perhaps, temporary circumstances, a remarkable number of problems had to be solved in the "design" of such a behaviourally flexible organism.

If the act of "behavioural fine-tuning" was left to the living members, or, the actualised generation of a species, rather than the responsibility of the genetic code itself, the living members of such a species would, also, have to be provided with the necessary "tools" to "assess" the situation of their existence in far greater detail than is necessary, or possible, in organisms that come into the world with a specialised and precisely instructed blue-print of genetically encoded behaviour-patterns.

The behaviourally flexible organism has to be given the tools to analyse the situation, store the relevant "facts" of the circumstances over a prolonged period of time, and, it has to have constant and accurate access to this bank of memory-data in order to evaluate, appropriately, the situation of the moment. Only then, was it possible to let the behavioural response vary in accordance with the changing circumstances, and, only then, would it be possible to make maximum use of the potentials given in anyone particular situation.

It is clear, that these are formidable requirements for the forces of natural selection, and, the successful development of behavioural flexibility was not an easy matter. Nevertheless, a number of species' began to develop along these lines, long before we see any evidence for the differentiation of "Homo Sapiens". Yet, the requirements for a viable form of behavioural fine-tuning on the basis of individualised learning, brought, also, some distinct disadvantages and vulnerabilities to the fore. Obviously, if viability became linked to a period of learning, it meant, that the offspring of such a species became remarkably vulnerable during this learning period.

In addition to the psychological and neurological requirements outlined above, we see, that, simultaneously, a number of other behavioural trends had to be initiated, encouraged or sharpened, in order to compensate for the vulnerabilities associated with the potentials of behavioural flexibility. The quality of "parental care" was, probably, the most important aspect that had to evolve, in order to make the development of behavioural flexibility a viable mode of existence, and, it is not surprising to see, that the behaviour of parental care became an essential part in the development of secondary socialisation. The relationship between mother and child was, and still is, the key to survival for behaviourally flexible animals, but, this sphere of protective parental care had to be supported by a general tendency of the stronger members within the immediate social environment to protect the more vulnerable members of the group, such as females and their offspring.

Obviously, those females involved in the arduous tasks of mammalian child-bearing, together with the equally arduous requirements of mammalian "child-rearing" during this vulnerable, post-natal learning period, made the attitudes of care and protection essential for species-viability, as well as individual survival. Viability became a matter of survival of a closely-knit group as a whole, however small this group may have been, and, the forces of natural selection began to select small, efficient multi-individual units with the ability to bring-up their vulnerable youngsters in adequate safety, in addition to the mechanisms of individual survival.

We have outlined these ideas before, but we wanted to emphasise, here, the fact, that the factors of behavioural flexibility, parental care, secondary socialisation and individual vulnerability, intertwine with each other, as well as with the development of ever more sophisticated symbolic representations and verbal communications. As we have discussed before, the number of awarenesses that could be recalled by a voluntary and symbolic manner, increased quickly to such an extent, that it became necessary to develop classifying or categorising principles for all these awarenesses. These classifying and correlating principles acquired, eventually, their own symbolic representation and took their place in the repertoir of language communications. The early members of the species of mankind must, eventually, have realised, that a significant difference existed between the "natural" or "analogous" recall of a memory-trace by an actually occurring experience, and, the mechanisms of symbolic recall of relevant memory-traces and past experiences. Therefore, man became slowly aware of the fact, that he could be consciously aware of a number of reality perceptions.

Awarenesses were, partly, the result of images that were evoked by the incoming sense impressions, and, partly, awarenesses arose as a result of images that had already been recalled from memory-banks. Certainly, even the contemporary images evoked by incoming sense impressions were associated with images from memory-banks, because, we know, that the faculty of recognition and classification would be impossible without such a process of comparing incoming sense impressions with existing images from the memory-banks.

In addition to the mechanisms of classification and recognition of incoming sense impressions, these incoming sense impressions could also trigger a series of associated or related awarenesses from the mental systems of classification. These "associations" go beyond the subconscious or automatic mechanisms of recognition, because the individual became or remained aware of the fact, that such "associated awarenesses" were only similarities, and were significantly different from the recognised entity that gave rise to a stream of associative awarenesses or thoughts.

Conscious awarenesses became organised and classified into classes of similarity, abstracting a common denominator or organising principle, and, as we have discussed, this process can repeat itself several times, leading to further levels of abstraction with their own verbal representations. However, secondary and tertiary abstractions were not the only methods through which the human language organised itself. The syntax, or, the "order" of word-symbols became also an important tool to clarify the meaning of a communication.

In addition, the verbal communication always remained supported by a vestige of gesticular mimicry, which was such an important phase in the development of speech. We can see the importance of this gesticular heritage in the nearly universal habit of people to underscore their verbal symbols with gestures, facial expressions, as well as changes in the pitch and intonation of the voice. Besides, the meaning of a communication can also be conveyed in the way verbal symbols are "spaced or paced" during their delivery or utterance.

We have discussed, how the processes of symbolic representation are linked to the needs and experiences of a socially integrated grouping. We have seen, that symbolic communications are based upon a set of commonly shared experiences, and, this aspect of communal or shared experience is never far from the surface, whenever we analyse the meaning of words, thoughts, or structures of knowledge and beliefs.

The development of symbolically represented awarenesses started with the recall of shared experiences, and, this process is, therefore, an act of communication, as well as an act of individualised mental recall. We have seen, that recognition is only possible, if the members of a group share closely a set of experiences, and, we have discussed, how the meaning of a particular symbol has to be sharpened by frequent use, and later, by a "conscious dialogue", which implies a deliberate or conscious effort to clarify the meaning of a commonly used word-symbol.

Even, now, we tend to sharpen or modify the perception of a specific awareness by talking about it with each other, and, the process of reviewing a large number of mental images, without the presence of someone else to talk to, turns-out to be, in many cases, a dialogue with oneself. In a dialogue with someone else, the matter under discussion may vary from routine aspects of daily existence to the more persistent and important problems people have to face. Or, a dialogue may be concentrated upon personal problems, as well as the problems of personal relationships, after it became possible to discuss and analyse many of the more emotional feelings and largely subconscious awarenesses.

While we can classify a dialogue according to its contents, we can also use the underlying motivations of the dialogue as a criterium for classification. This latter technique became possible, when we were able to abstract many of the feelings and awarenesses that were hitherto poorly verbalised. In this way, we can elucidate this all-important link between verbal and non-verbal communications; the link between rather sharply defined concepts and the realm of notions, attitudes, motivations and emotions. In other words, by classifying verbal communications along lines of motivation, we link the whole world of commnications together, and, we see, once again, that the tool of verbal communications is part and parcel of the overall objective of all behaviour-patterns; a search for viability.

For example, a communication may be initiated to tell the audience what happened, and, if the author of such a communication has been given a specific task by the leadership of a community to find-out something, the audience will listen attentively, since it is likely, that the content of this communication has significance for the entire group. The author may also tell a story, because he wants to impress the audience about his particular role in an event. The communication is, then, designed to benefit the author, and, the audience will be instinctively cautious in accepting such a communication at face value. The persuasiveness or credibility of a communication becomes, then, an important factor. This factor is partly determined by the social position and reputation of the author of a communication, and, partly, it is determined by the elements of skill and thoroughness of a presentation or communication.

A communication may function, therefore, not just as a vehicle to convey factual information, because it is, almost always, associated with a factor of authority and credibility, in spite of the fact, that these factors are often poorly realised and verbalised. A communication is, often, used as a means to get a desired response from the audience, and a skilled and persuasive communicator will, nearly always, become a leader in his community.

A communication may become an act of worship or ritual, whenever it addresses itself, in an attitude of humble submission, to the deities or super-natural protectors of the community, but, it may also become a weapon in the hands of clever manipulators, who are trying to deceive and exploit the members of a community. A communication may become a powerful conceptual tool with the ability to convey a large amount of specific and accurate information; e.g., when a small group of people tries to carry-out a dificult task or make a complicated tool or weapon; whenever they are trying to devise a better way of hunting or trapping animals, or, a more efficient way of defending the community against an enemy attack. A large number of specific and precise communications are necessary for the accomplishment of every practical, but rather novel task, including the building of a shelter, or the organisation of domestic and agricultural tasks.

Here, we see a powerful but pragmatic motivation at work for the development of precise communications, because a precise, rational symbolic communication serves, then, as a vehicle for the tasks of organisation and manufacture, facilitating the chores of survival.

If we look back at the functions of religious or political leadership, we recognise, also, a number of pragmatic aspects in the art of communicating, because the function of a social leadership is to stream-line the level of cooperation and harmony whithin the group, and, to strengthen the resolve and courage of the members whenever a community is under duress. There are few mechanisms and attitudes that are more powerful in strengthening the coherence of a small community, than the fervent belief and conviction that it has found favour in the eyes of God, or, that it has the Cause of Righteousness and Justice on its side. What can be more confidence-inspiring, than to know, that the all-powerful forces of the Universe are behind the efforts of the community?

In previous discussions, we have surveyed the role of belief structures, ranging from explanations that guide a community in its collective perception of reality, to a solution for the many practical problems that play a role in the search for a better and easier way to do chores. Structures of belief play a role in the struggle to maintain a position of power and privilege, credibility and authority, as well as in the techniques of deception and treachery.

If we look, closely, at the motivations that lie behind a communication, we can always see, that the act of communicating is related, in one way or another, to our way of life, as well as our existential requirements, and, it is, therefore, always a search for a better way to exist. The orientation of this motivation may be egocentric and adversary, whenever we have adopted an attitude of competitive strife, or, it may be "integrative" and socially beneficial, with an eye upon the well-being of the group as a whole.

Sometimes, the orientation of an effort to communicate is ambiguous, and, it may vary from moment to moment. If is often a subconscious but clever compromise between conflicting and mutually exclusive trends, where the existential requirements of an individual and the community as a whole, seem to blend together into a harmony of purpose.

All communications are, therefore, an individualised stream of commonly accepted concepts and ideas, mixed with a variety of emotional and contradictory under-currents from the communicator, evoking, on the one hand, a remarkably similar pattern of awarenesses and feelings in the audience, but, it may also lead to a slightly suspicious response, as the audience searches, subconsciously, for the hidden meaning and objectives of the communicating personality.

The whole field of verbalisable and communicable awarenesses remains a part of our overall behavioural spectrum, and, it remains just one tool amongst many others, to accomplish our goals and fulfill our existential requirements. Certainly, this tool of conscious awareness and communicable symbols has become so important, that the failure to acquire the use of this tool led to extinction for those near-human anthropoid species', which were competing with mankind for the same ecological niche. They became extinct, probably, as a result of their failure to acquire the faculty of concept formation and speech, and, it is not surprising, therefore, that the entire species of Homo Sapiens possesses the genetically encoded potential to think and speak.

.......

Chapter 4

Content

Secondary and tertiary abstractions, defined as a conscious representation of "classifying principles".
Categories, based on similarity in appearance or event.
Are we slowly unveiling an absolute truth?
A look back at history.
The reasons for an anthropomorphic interpretation of reality.
The ever-varing circumstances for living organisms.
Being cautious in concluding that we have found "the truth".
Evolving reality perceptions.
The question, whether or not our concepts mirror an absolute truth.
The criteria for making such a judgement.
A case of "natural optimism".
Scientific truths are based upon the faculties of man's commonly shared biological heritage.
The practical implications of such a point of view.
The varying success rates of scientific disciplines in formulating a coherent, widely agreed-upon core of basic knowledge.
The fragmentation of scientific reality perceptions.
Social chaos, and the natural desire to escape from a depressing reality.
An age of contrasts, and the need for certainty.
A few questions may show a structure of knowledge that is easily destroyed by criticisms and doubt.
Science and philosophy.
Cultivating the soil for growing useful reality perceptions.

Let us come back, for a moment, to the abstractions we need in order to classify the many sense impressions into categories of similarity. The abstraction of secondary and tertiary qualities, features or characteristics gives us the ability to form a mental classification system for our conscious or verbalisable awarenesses. The common denominators of similarities in event are, often, causes and their effects, while those of unchanging items of existence are qualities and characteristics. However, events may also show similarities in appearance, even, if their internal mechanisms of cause and effect are unknown. By abstracting common features or mechanisms for similar events, we create a sense of "predictability", because we can then extra-polate known or understood mechanisms and features of similarity, and we can apply these mechanisms of understanding to an on-going event.

Some readers may have difficulties accepting the idea, that the cause of an event is merely an abstraction of mental classification mechanisms, and, that it is nothing more than a summarising concept of the mind. This conclusion seems to go completely against the essence of our reality perceptions, because a successful isolation of the cause or causes of a series of events, is experienced as the discovery of a "true reality". We experience a stong sense of conviction that this reality was always there, but, we failed to see it, until we discovered its "inner mechanisms".

If we analyse the reasons, why we experience such a "eureka feeling", after the successful formulation of a powerful generalisation or cause-effect relationship, we come to the conclusion, that this interpretation is based upon the level of usefulness such a generalisation has for our understanding and manipulative abilities. While it is logical to consider a successful generalisation of cause-effect relationships as the equivalent of having found a truth that was always there, (but hitherto hidden from view), we can also notice serious problems with this interpretation of our reality perceptions.

The problems arise when we look, first of all, upon the history of human reality interpretations. We see, that early man began already to formulate cause-effect relationships of the force-fields he was subjected to, and could experience all around him. These interpretations were made in terms of "willed" or anthropomorphic force-fields, because these forces were considered to possess a quality of voluntariness, goal-directedness and motivational background, which was similar to the forces and powers of man's own behaviour-patterns.

The anthropomorphic explanation of the force-fields around early man was enhanced by the fact, that a major part of these forces consisted of animal life-forms. Many of these life-forms presented, indeed, a voluntary or goal-directed, motivational quality; e.g., the behaviour of the large mammals. Was it, therefore, illogical for early man to explain the other forces of nature, such as the phenomena of day and night, rain, wind, thunder and lightning, or flash floods, also in terms of anthropomorphic mechanisms?

We may safely assume, that it was impossible for early man to come to any other conclusion. As a result of the impressive behavioural manifestations of the large animals around him, together with the overwhelming events of birth, growth, death and decay amongst the members of his own communtiy, man had to come to the conclusion, that the natural surroundings of his existence were filled with a large variety of forces that could either help or harm him. Many of these forces seemed to originate from unseen but extremely powerful beings, who behaved somewhat like himself. Their intentions seemed to fluctuate between anger and friendliness, just like man's behaviour could range between a destructive fury and a compassionate helpfulness. These unseen, man-like forces were, obviously, much stronger than man himself, and, they were capable of controling and ruling the conditions and circumstances man found himself under.

Circumstances were always changing. There was an ever recurring need to cope with the dangers and hardships of the hunt, as well as to move and face the unknown in order to find new hunting grounds or better conditions for survival. All these factors, as well as the realisation that strength and vitality, today, may change to sickness and death, tomorrow, must have given early man the unshakeable conviction, that he was only a small part in a gigantic web of spiritual, demonic or divine forces; forces, that were either for or against him.

If we forget, for a moment, the pervasive influence of our own contemporary reality perceptions, we see, that the world of reality for early man was not a quaint effort to excercise the faculties of thought, but a serious attempt to come to grips with reality. The attempts of early man to grasp reality were not any different from our own attempts, and, we may safely assume, that reality for early man was as real as our contemporary perceptions of reality are real for us. Just as a "successful" or satisfying explanation of the relationships between the forces of reality constituted a discovery of "truth" for early man, so are satisfying reality perceptions giving us in our contemporary world the impression of discovering an absolute truth; a truth that was always there, but, hitherto, hidden from view.

The very fact, that we now have such a completely different perception of these same realities, should teach us to be somewhat cautious about the conclusion, that we have, finally, discovered an ultimate truth. Most of us, however, do not seem to experience such a sense of caution. Most of us dismiss the reality images of early man, or, even, those of a generation ago, as images that were the result of a "poor" and "imperfect" understanding, while, now, we are really grasping the ultimate truth.

We have a tendency to see the reality perceptions of the generations that have faded into history, as "quaint". Perhaps, they are historicallly interesting, but, we fail to realise, with any degree of clarity, that, fifty or a hundred years from now, our own contemporary reality perceptions, attitudes and opinions will also arouse nothing more than a historically oriented curiosity from the then living generations.

Really, what guarantee do we have, that our reality perceptions, now, are any different from those that have gone before us? Certainly, throughout history, we can see, how people tried to formulate, in many different ways, a satisfying and convincing grasp over reality. During Medieval Times, in the history of our Western civilisations, the Christian reality perception enjoyed its greatest triumph, because, by far the majority of the peoples of Europe considered it to be a divinely revealed, Absolute Truth, but, the advent of scientific discoveries and technological advances have led many people to believe, that these scientific images are, finally, revealing the absolute truth. Yet, a perfunctory examination of this imagery shows us, clearly, that, even the most fundamental concepts of the scientific reality perception keep changing, and, the hope of finding the ultimate truth seems to recede ever further away from us, regardless, how close, we think, we have come.

You may object to this line of thought by saying, that we are still coming closer and closer to an ultimate understanding of, and grasp over reality, and, that we have good reasons to believe, that our scientific imagery mirrors, at least, to some extent, the reality "as it really exists", because, otherwise, it would be impossible to explain, why we have such a remarkable scientific and technological mastery over our environment.

Again, I like to go back to early man and his interpretations of reality. We can easily visualise, how early man felt quite confident about the degree of mastery he had over the environment. Almost all the large animals had yielded to the cunning and technological mastery of early man, who had become a capable hunter with his tools and weapons, and, it is quite conceivable, that, in many ways, man felt "on top of the world". Certainly, when confronted with sickness, death or disaster, such a confidence would be quickly shattered, but, then, in spite of our conceptual mastery over the stars and the Universe, as well as our technological mastery over events taking place in our terrestial environment, we are far from immune to sickness, death and disaster ourselves.

In spite of all our mastery, our confidence can also be shattered quickly, and, we come to the conclusion, time and again, that we really know nothing. As a matter of fact, the technological revolution that has taken place in the last hundred years or so, and, which is based on a refined mastery over scientific reality perceptions, has created a great deal of confusion and anxiety, as we see in the potential for wholesale nuclear destruction, or, the many forms of pollution and contamination that can take place, at any moment.

The scientific and technological developments have given us, indeed, the potential for an unprecedented mastery over our environment, but, the practical results are often far from beneficial, as we see, so clearly, in the problems of social tensions, unbridled economic activities, the disparities between the rich and the poor, as well as the increasingly more complex living conditions for many hundreds of millions of people.

The question remains; how justified are we in saying, that our contemporary reality perceptions are much closer to an "absolute truth" compared to the many different reality perceptions that have found a measure of acceptance in the past? In order to be able to say, that we have come close, or closer, to understanding a reality "as it really exists", we have to have some idea, what this ultimate reality perception looks like. We can only gauge, to some extent, a distance we have to go, if we know, with a measure of accuracy, where the final destination lies. It seems to me, that our confidence about the scientific imagery, mirroring, closely, a reality "as is", is based, primarily, upon a natural and logical, but, nevertheless, an intuitive assumption or feeling.

It seems clear, that, by allowing ourselves to be guided by such a natural optimism about the absolute validity of our reality perceptions, we are merely continuing a long, historical line of similar hopes and aspirations. Unfortunately, such confident, but, essentially, unwarranted attitudes have led, more often than we can imagine, to misunderstandings, conflicts and misery.

You may ask the following question; "If the scientific imagery has no correlation with a reality "as it is", existing independently of human existence, how, then, is it possible for so many people across cultural boundaries to agree amongst themselves about the validity and reality of these scientific images? Does this not mean, that these images must represent a certain truth?".

Certainly, they represent a certain truth. An agreement amongst the scientists about the validity of a certain observation or interpretation, means, that such an interpretation or observation is verifiable to anyone, who is able to acquire the necessary expertise to verify the validity of a scientific reality perception.

However, it is quite reasonable to argue, that, a consensus amongst a group of people reflects a number of common denominators in our physiological abilities, rather than the existence of an absolute truth. It is quite reasonable to argue, that, common physiological and psychological mechanisms make it possible to translate certain sense impressions into commonly agreed-upon interpretations. By seeing scientific reality as a biologically given constant between human beings, we interpret the reality of scientific understanding, not, as the final discovery of an ultimate and always-present reality, but, as an exploration of the possibilities of agreement and similarity in perception and thought, which have been "given" by the similarities in the existence of human beings. A remarkable feature of scientific agreement is the fact, that it explores the possibilities of understanding in an attitude of emotional neutrality, divorced, as much as possible, from cultural specifics and existential prejudices.

The usefulness of making a distinction between a common reality perception, (based upon our physiological and biological similarities), and, the feeling or tacit conclusion, that such a commonly agreed-upon imagery represents, in one way or another, a mirror-image of an absolute truth, is to be found in the attitudes we develop towards each other, as well as in the level of confidence we show, when we think to possess an absolute form of knowledge.

We will explore a few more avenues of thought, which may make it clear to the reader, why it is not justified to conclude, that we are coming closer to grasping an ultimate reality on the basis of scientific agreement. First of all, we see remarkably varying rates of success in the various scientific disciplines. While many of the physical sciences, together with their technologial applications, have done very well in formulating a core of well-integrated and widely accepted knowledge, other fields of endeavour have failed, to a remarkable extent, in providing such a useful and coherent central core of understanding.

The sciences around the behaviour of man are still largely confused, and, our modern scientific grasp has done little, so far, to shape a sensible way of life, or, an essential equality of living standards on a global scale; nor, have these scientific images been able to shape a confident set of beliefs and attitudes that can help a society or individual to weather a crisis.

In addition, the sciences have become so fragmented, that, most of their potential appeal has been dissipated in frustration and bewilderment. The knowledge of science and technology in every field is, nearly always, used as a tool to carve-out a position of personal well-being or advantage, either by individuals, or, by a community as a whole.

Many people have turned-away from the insights of science and technology, seeking their fortune and happiness in the fuzzier perceptions of hope and mysticism, the exclusive elite, the religious congregation, or the quagmire of drugs and financial or psychological enslavement. Even those people, who have sought a professional career in a scientific field, have often a confused perception of reality, which is narrowly scientific in its chosen field of expertise, but, it is often confused and semi-religious, hedonistic or blatantly egocentric in its overall outlook.

The chaotic fragmentation of the sciences, the confusing momentum of economic and technological interests, the bewildering spectacle of diverging opinions and attitudes in all spheres of human existence, the power-struggles between contradictory but influential groupings, the conflicts of interests and the chronic anxieties of the average individual within an affluent social environment, all these factors may well provide a historical perspective for future generations. Future generations may well shake their heads in disbelief at our pre-occupation with consumption and economic development, as well as our inability to agree amongst ourselves about the basic requirements, rights and obligations that are a necessary part of responsible and dignified human existence.

Our's is an age of contrasts, but, then, perhaps, any age can be analysed in terms of contrasts. Certainly, just as we can discern the seeds for future changes in a retrospective analysis of past societies and their events, so will it be possible for future generations, (if they find a possibility to exist with a measure of leisure and well-being), to see the seeds for change towards their particular reality within the confusion and chaos of our times.

It may well be, that every age has appeared to be somewhat chaotic and confusing to the reflective individuals of their time. Anyone, who tries to grasp some of the overall trends and mechanisms of a contemporary society, must experience a sense of confusion, because we do not have the proper intellectual tools to analyse such a complex entity efficiently and with confidence. Probably, our times are not anymore chaotic than those of other periods, but, the rate of change, in particular in economic, technological and social developments, is extremely rapid, and these changes will, most likely, remain a focus for study and analysis for a long time to come.

However, let us not stray too far from our line of thought, because we want to discuss the various reasons, why we should look, with an attitude of caution, at any conclusion equating modern scientific insights, in particular those of the physical sciences, with an absolute reality. Probably, most scientists engaged in the exciting developments of fundamental research into the nature of matter and energy, will not have any illusions about such a correlation, and, they do not expect to formulate a final grasp over ultimate realities, but, ordinary people seem to have a great need to look forward to, or hope for, such a final and absolute certainty.

If we look at a field of scientific knowledge in more detail, we see another strong reason to doubt the belief, or conclusion, that we are coming, in any way, closer to grasping an absolute reality. Each field has a more or less coherent basic structure that is agreed-upon by all who are familiar with this field, but, in many areas of knowledge, attempts to arrive at a more refined reality perception run into problems, as the structure of scientific certainty seems to fade, so quickly, into varying shades of hypothesis, and, eventually, into an area of the unknown.

Besides, each field has a foundation upon which the basic core of agreed-upon knowledge is based, but, within a few questions about the relationships of cause and effect, this basic foundation will have been exposed, and, then, questions regarding the basis of this foundation are shrugged-off as irrelevant by the scientific workers in the field, because they have to admit that such questions can not be answered satisfactorily. They will point-out, rightly, that it is not their task to question the foundation of assumptions they work with, but, it is their task to dig-up the relevant observations that can be made, within their field, with the help of this basic foundation of ideas and assumptions.

After a number of facts and observations have been described, considered and debated, various attempts will be made to fit the new observations within the overall structure of understanding and knowledge, which constitutes a particular field of science. It is true, that the main objective of each field of scientific endeavour is to refine this particular field of reality perceptions, and, it is true that a structure of coherent relationships has to be built upon a framework of assumptions, or given constants, which are themselves not subjected to scrutiny.

Often, it is impossible to scrutinise these basic foundations, because the tools for doing so are not available, but, more often, the foundations start to disappear from a particular field of vision, and, the scientific specialists feel uncomfortable and ill-equipped to handle questions about the fundamental assumptions within their field of science or technology.

Traditionally, the nature and coherence of the foundations upon which a science constructs its scaffold of precise mental images and refined relationships, belong to the field of philosophy, but, since it has become so difficult to have a clear understanding of many different scientific foundations, the art of generalising and summarising philosophically about the nature and relationships of these various foundations, has long been neglected or shunned.

In a way, the sciences can be described as comprising of many different groups of workers, plowing and cultivating a specific area of a common and contiguous scientific "soil". Each group is trying to develop a different part of this overall field of reality perceptions, and, the scrutiny of each section reveals many similar, but, also, many different aspects. Many of these groups of scientific workers use different tools. They develop different vocabularies, and, they begin to relate their findings to differing frames of reference.

As the sophistication of investigative tools progresses, the mass of data becomes overwhelming, until it becomes imperative to subdivide the original "plots" of the "scientific garden", and, the tasks of scientific investigation are, then, divided into ever smaller segments. Rapidly, these sub-divisions develop their own particular frames of reference. The jargon becomes specialised, and, it becomes increasingly more difficult to communicate with neighbouring fields or with the general public.

.......

Chapter 5

Content

Questions, and their underlying assumptions.
The infinity of time and existence.
When reality perceptions and powers of imagination have been stretched to the limit.
Where did God come from?
The concept of "natural laws", when constructing scientific reality perceptions.
The evolution of the Universe.
The concept of space-time; difficulties for our imagination.
The need for an understandable imagery.
Matter, mass, inertia and gravitation; difficulties with the imagery of general relativity.
The reality of our decision-making "will".
Something can not come from nothing.
The Oscillating Universe.
If space-time is finite and curved, what is there beyond the boundaries of space-time?
The specifically human nature of the sphere of reality perceptions.
A brief review of the body-plan of life-forms.
Its influence upon the "orientation" of an organism.
The perception of space is a result of the organisational plan of the body and its sense-organs.
The stereo-location of visual and auditory stimuli.
The perception of time.
Existing in a continuum of the past, the present and the future.
Biological constants.

It is easy to ask the question; "where does this or that come from?", and, we imply in our confident assumptions about the mechanisms of cause and effect, that, indeed, everything within the framework of our imagination has originated from somewhere or something else. However, the religious and scientific interpretations of reality find themselves in a similar dilemma, whenever we pursue these thoughts to their logical conclusion. We come easily to the point, where we ask questions about the origin of matter and energy, or, about the origin of God, and, the only answer that seems to satisfy us, is to assume, that, God, or matter-energy, always existed. The reasons for this, is the fact, that we are totally unable to comprehend or visualise a process, where God, or matter-energy, came from nothing.

We have a vague feeling, that such a line of questioning is irrelevant, because we realise, that our sphere of reality perceptions and logical deductions is stretched, here, to the limit. Logical reasoning tells us, that something can not come from nothing, but, the experience, that something always came from something else, leads to the "feeling", that the existence of God, or the presence of matter-energy, must have had a beginning or an origin, somewhere, at some time in this distant past. Yet, it will be difficult to justify our intuitive assumptions, that there existed a time before the beginning of time, or, that something can come from nothing. (The latter assumption is implied in the question, where God or matter-energy came from).

The religious explanation has a somewhat easier time, here, since the concept of God implies, that such an all-knowing, all-powerful and incomprehensible form of existence is, indeed, capable of creating something from nothing. This ability is an essential element in our concept of God, and, in particular, in our reverent attitudes towards God, because it does not make sense to place any limitations upon the powers of God. Similarly, we tend to disregard as irrelevant and irreverent the question "where did God come from?", because such a question seems to contradict this mysterious attribute of omni-potence, or, all-powerfulness.

The scientist has a more difficult time with the question, where matter and energy came from, because, one of the most important and curious characteristics of all scientific imagery is the fact, that the voluntariness of an anthropomorphic "will" has been taken-away from the human reality perception. It seems, indeed, to be a characteristic feature of all scientific conclusions to disregard the idea of a specific act of Creation. In the scientific reality perception, the voluntary, anthropomorphic act of fashioning something for a specific purpose has been abandoned in favour of the idea, that all changes in the Universe flow along lines of constant, and, essentially, predictable mechanisms of cause and effect. These mechanisms are grasped by the human intellect as the "laws" of nature.

Even the existence of matter and energy is now considered to represent merely two different phases, or appearances, of essentially the same unit of existence. This unit of existence oscillates between a radiant energy-form and an orbiting or locked-up energy-form, called "matter". In other words, the unitary form of "matter-energy" can find a measure of stability in a radiant form, (such as a photon or a "wave-packet of light") or, it may have found stability as an elementary particle that is characterised by a locked-up or orbiting form of energy.

Elementary particles have a tendency to form more complex forms of existence, because such complexes are more stable compared to elementary particles. We visualise, that these complexes will, eventually, form, spontaneously, a proton, or a particle such as the nucleus of a hydrogen atom, which, then, attracts a much smaller stable particle,  an electron, in order to find the stability of existence characterised by "electro-static neutrality".

The heavier atoms have been "forged" in stellar interiors, where massive gravitational concentrations of hydrogen atoms bring-about temperatures and pressures that disrupt the internal structure of a hydrogen nucleus, allowing larger nuclei with more complex and heavier internal structures to be formed, or forged, together with a number of radiant forms of energy that carry-off the "excess" energy from such nuclear transformations.

The main point we want to emphasise, here, is the fact, that the physical realities of all existence we are aware of, (including living existence), are the result of essentially predictable evolutionary changes. These developments start with the building-blocks of mattter-energy. The mental imagery we have about every physical reality is, essentially, evolutionary in nature. This applies, not only, to the organisation of terrestial life-forms, including human life and the possibilities of conscious awarenesses and scientific insights, but, also, to the realities of non-living existence, as well as the Universe itself.

At the present stage of our intellectual development, it seems reasonable to regard the origin of the Universe as a gigantic, primordial explosion, or "Big Bang". Ever since this primordial explosion, radiant energy has been transforming itself back into elementary particles. The stable particles, such as hydrogen atoms, coalesce under the force of gravitational contraction into galaxies, with many billions of stars and planets. In the stars, the orbital energy-state is converted, once again, to the radiant state, as a result of the enormous pressures and temperatures that are generated in the stellar interior. As we mentioned before, nuclear transformations also lead to the forging of more complex and heavier configurations of orbital energy, which are represented by the various "atomic elements" of matter-energy.

However, such a vision of the origin of the Universe still leaves many questions. While the evidence for the essential correctness of such imagery is overwhelming, at least, at the present time, there are a few fundamental questions. First of all; what was there prior to this gigantic explosion? While we are talking about enormous periods of time, like eighteen billion years, it is intellectually very easy to ask the question what there was twenty billion or a hundred billion years ago.

In the imagery of modern physics, we have learned to abandon, to some extent, such simple, linear extra-polations of time. We have tried to tie time and space together into a unit of "time-space". Another refinement under the influence of a relativistic interpretation of fundamental physical phenomena has been the idea, that the presence of matter influences the configuration of "time-space".

The question, where time was, before there was space or matter, becomes, then, irrelevant. Unfortunately, our imagination is unable to picture such concepts satisfactorily, and, since the essence of understanding includes the ability to form an understandable imagery of reality, we will never be able to find true satisfaction with answers that deprive us of a visually satisfying concept of the Universe.

One solution, and, probably, a very plausible one, is to restore eternity into the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe. This can be done by postulating a rythmically expanding and contracting Universe, where "matter-energy" oscillates, continuously, between a predominantly radiating or expanding form, and a contracting, orbiting or locked-up form of matter-energy.

Yet, there is still another fundamental question about the nature of gravity. The theory of general relativity has tried to answer this question by equating the concepts of inertia, mass and weight; the latter being an expression of gravitational forces, while "inertial mass" is due to the resistance of a body of matter to forces that accelerate or decelerate the motion of such a body, or "mass". However, these ideas required a rather incomprehensible "distortion" of space-time as a result of the presence of matter.

While such a solution may have advantages for those who like to work, exclusively, with mathematical equations, rather than mental images, I can not help, but feel, that this particular imagery is not very helpful, in spite of the fact, that many aspects of special and general relativity have been shown to be relevant and useful, especially, in the prediction of the behaviour of elementary particles in nuclear reactors and particle accelerators.

In other essays, we have indulged in a wide-ranging discussion about these matters, but, here, we have only tried to sketch, briefly, some of the characteristics of the scientific imagery; such as its need for unquestioned reference systems or foundations, its tendency to ever-increasing fragmentation under the pressure of enormous quantities of data, as well as the curious absence of any trace of anthropomorphic features or creative events, outside the existence of human intelligence.

Even the anthopomorphic aspects of voluntary human behaviour, the "free will" of our own existence, have been questioned and "explained away". This has been done by considering the function of the voluntary choice as an "algebraic summation" of contrasting or contradictory influences. While such an imagery is in many ways valid, we have also discussed the reasons, why it is legitimate to consider the aspect of conscious evaluation and decision-making as an undeniable, if subjective, reality experience of the "free will". This experience is subjective, because it seems to disappear from our reality perceptions under certain conditions, but, it reflects a generally accepted fact of existence, and, it is, therefore, at least, a "practical reality".

We have seen, that it is impossible for the scientific reality perception to acknowledge the possibility that something can come from nothing, and, every logical approach to the question of the origin of God, runs into the same problem. It is tempting, therefore, to brush such questions aside as "irrelevant". However, such a question may be irrelevant to someone, who has been asked to provide an answer, but, it certainly is not irrelevant to the individual who is asking the question. It is a logical question, and, we can only provide a logical answer if we agree that we do not know, or, by trying to point-out to the questioning individual, that some of the assumptions about causes and their effects, as well as about the concept of time, may not be correct.

We have to teach, patiently and persistently, that a question is always based on a series of assumptions, and, we have to be able to analyse these assumptions, before we can expect to receive helpful answers. We can not hope to find useful answers, unless we make sure, that the assumptions we base our thinking and questions upon, are correct; at least, that they are correct to the best possible evidence of our current state of comprehension.

Can we show, here, convincingly, that there is something wrong with the conclusion, or the assumption, of an indefinite, linear extra-polation of time, as well as the iron laws of cause and effect?

The idea that something can come from nothing is, at the present time, so strange to us, that we readily accept the alternative; where something exists, something has always existed before, and, with the introduction of the concept, that time had no beginning, we see a remarkable convergence in attitudes and beliefs between the religious and scientific reality perceptions. The unfathomable infinity of time and existence begins to resemble, in some aspects, the unfathomableness of God.

From this point of view, it is, indeed, much easier to accept the imagery of an indefinite series of contractions and expansions of the Universe, in stead of a single Big Bang. However, it seems even more reasonable to combine this imagery of a rythmically contracting and expanding Universe with an imagery that shows us a constant transition between radiant and orbital energy-forms. These transitions between radiant and orbital energy-forms take place, continuously, as we see in the emission of light and other radiant energy-forms in each and every star, as well as in the absorption of radiant energy by all orbital energy-forms in the form of "heat".

It is far more speculative and hypothetical to visualise the formation of primordial matter particles, or, locked-up forms of energy, in "empty space". Yet, empty space may not be so empty after all, because, at each point in space, we can visualise the presence of many radiant forms of energy, which form some sort of an "electro-magnetic grid". We like to refer to the essay "Oscillations", where we have dealt with these speculative images before.

There are many ways in which we can sow some doubts upon our assumptions. There are sophisticated, but, probably, not very clear arguments relating to the concepts of a "time-space continuum", and the distortions of this continuum by the presence of mass or matter. In addition, there are also ideas that let us see the Universe as a finite, curved volume of space. Perhaps, there are good reasons to consider space as finite and curved, but the question immediately re-asserts itself; "what is there beyond the boundaries of such a curved and finite space?".

It is remarkable to see the ability of the human mind at work in the art of asking questions. By asking a question, we create a volume or area in our sphere of reality perceptions that needs to be "filled" with a content of knowledge and comprehension. Certainly, we are coming back, here, to the idea, that all reality is, in the final analysis, a human reality, and, it will be beneficial to explore these concepts, and see, whether or not we can, indeed, relate the perceptions of time and space to the way we have been "put-together" by the forces of natural evolution.

To what extent is the mode of our existence responsible for the way we see reality, including the phenomena of space and time? From observations in the field of biology, we have become aware of the fact, that, living organisms may show different "organisational patterns" or "body-plans", and it is likely that these different body-plans have a bearing on the type of perception such an organism will be capable of.

It is clear, that uni-cellular organisms can only react to a stimulus in two ways. They can avoid or back-away from a very strong and potentially harmful stimulus, or, they can try to prolong contact with a beneficial stimulus. A beneficial stimulus indicates the presence of a useful source of energy, or, a beneficial range of temperatures. All living organisms have to utilise a suitable source of energy, and, the complex, multi-cellular animals are organisms that have developed the ability to capture other life-forms as a source of such suitable and necessary energy; or "food".

On other occasions, we have outlined, how the entire spectrum of human capabilities can be traced to such a predatory form of behavioural requirements. Here, we want to concentrate on the idea, that a multi-cellular animal develops successively more sophisticated methods to capture its prey, and, together with the emergence of the capabilities of mobility, agility and coordination, there is, also, a development of special and general sense-organs allowing an ever more refined perception and interpretation of environmental conditions.

In order to make spatial orientation possible and more refined, we see how multi-cellular organisms become differentiated in such a way, that they develop three axes around which their bodies develop. A simple mass of cells, clumped together as a colony, such as a sponge, has no head or tail, no up or down, no sides, except, perhaps, an "inside" and an "outside", but the more complex animals form definite planes of bodily orientation.

After the differentiation into an inside and an outside, the head-tail axis seems to be the first to form, quickly followed by a dorsal and ventral orientation, or, a differentiation into an "up and down". For many species', the sides remain equivalent, indicating, that an animal has no way of distinguising between right and left, but, eventually, this distinction becomes possible in the form of a conscious awareness, after it became possible to make this distinction physically or physiologically.

It is likely, that this physical ability of right-left orientation is reflected, at least, to some extent, by an increase in cross-connections between the two sides of the central nervous system, making it possible for the two sides of the body to be "informed" about each other's sensory experiences. Eventually, one side begins to "dominate", introducing the possibility of a "unified command" over the entire organism with a clear-cut distinction between one side and the other.

The way the body of an organism is organised, determines the potential for orientation of the animal in space. It is clear, that a simple discrimination between positive and negative stimuli, is a "linear" or uni-dimensional orientation, since the animal can only be "aware" of a movement possibility in one plane of existence. With the development of a head-tail axis and a dorsal and ventral differentiation, we see, that an animal can orient itself in a three-dimensional plane of existence, but the difficulty in discriminating between right and left places a limitation on an effective three-dimensional orientation.

It is clear, that an effective right-left orientation develops long before the emergence of the human species. It occurs, probably, well before there is any evidence for the development of stereoscopic vision. We should remind ourselves, however, that the ideas about right-left orientation are seen, here, in a physiological sense, and, not in the sense of a mental, conscious and verbalisable capability. The latter is easily impaired, and, it is, obviously, a specifically human ability.

With the development of stereoscopic vision, the accuracy of localising a visual stimulus became enormously enhanced, just as bilateral hearing capabilities provided the potential for the stereo-location of an auditory stimulus. The capabilities of stereo-location of an auditory stimulus have been explored to a remarkable extent in the echo-location techniques used by such animals as bats and whales.

The point we want to make, here, is the fact, that, three-dimensional orientation in space is based upon the "building-plan" of an organism, and, that the perceptual capabilities of the human being are also based on the possibilities given by the organisation of our physical or physiological existence.

How do we perceive time? The sensation of time becomes only possible with memory, as well as with the development of a type of behaviour that starts to rely, heavily, upon the recognition and intuitive analysis of a sequence of events in order to anticipate, correctly, the outcome of such an event. For example, in any complex form of hunting, such a behaviour of anticipation must play a role. The hunting animal monitors constantly the movements of its prey, while adjusting its own movements, and, often, it will adjust its movements in anticipation of the next movement of the prey.

We have discussed, how the human being is heir to a line of evolutionary developments that explored these capabilities to the utmost. We have also outlined, how human awareness, even, before it became symbolically representable and communicable, blended the existence of the moment with the past, as well as with an expectation of the immediate future. Because of our ability to link the past, present and future together into a flowing continuum, we are able to perceive the passage of time, and, we have been able to abstract, later, the quality of time, as a separate concept of great organising and generalising value.

Does this mean, that time exists as a reality, independent from human existence? The answer to such a question depends upon the way we visualise such a non-human awareness to function, and, since we can only visualise a type of awareness that is essentially human in nature, we necessarily imagine any non-human awareness to function in a human manner. This is the reason, why all our ideas and concepts about God are so strongly anthropomorphic in nature, in spite of the fact, that we always try, subconsciously, at least, to remove the most obvious aspects of anthropomorphism from our concepts about God; as soon as we have become aware of their existence and influence upon our beliefs.

We can only come to the conclusion, as we have done many times before, that the reality-experience we have, or can imagine, is a reflection of the specifically human possibilities of knowing and experiencing, which natural selection and the mechanisms of evolutionary change have endowed us with. The near-absolute realities, such as space and time, form a part of this overall, anthropomorphic reality experience, and, they are perceived in a nearly identical manner by everyone, be it mostly empirical and often poorly conceptualised. This means, that we are dealing with biological faculties, rather than cultural tools.

.......

Chapter 6

Content

More pragmatic considerations.
Knowledge and skill; a blend of abilities.
Knowledge and the art of teaching.
Confidence and beauty result from mastery and clarity.
The researcher and his place in the academic environment.
A gifted "research conductor".
Sliding effortlessly from knowledge to hypothesis, to the unknown.
The need to keep the usefulness of knowledge in mind.
Knowledge for its own sake is a romantic notion.
Beauty and authority.
The existential needs of scientific workers.
Knowledge may be used as a defensive or aggressive weapon.
Exclusive attitudes, and the power of knowledge; social implications.

We have devoted a rather extensive part of this discussion to the theory and mechanisms of perceiving reality, and, the reader may justifiably ask, when a more practical discussion about the aspects of knowledge, design and repair is going to come. Indeed, let us consider, now, the more practical apsects of knowledge, as well as the concepts of design and repair. Interestingly, this discussion will re-enforce the conclusion, that the entire faculty of conscious awareness has a utilitarian or existential purpose.

When we reflect for a moment upon the faculty of "knowing", we see, that it blends with the area of "skill", because there is no sharp boundary between, what we know how to do, and, what we know in the form of a framework of coherent conceptual relationships. In scientific terms, knowledge indicates familiarity with a specific field of science, and, it indicates the ability to discuss many different aspects of a topic of concern. A scientific expert can discuss with colleagues subtle theoretical points of his field, and, he should be able to handle most of the questions and concerns that are associated with his particular branch of science or technology.

Knowledge also means, the ability to explain, lucidly and logically, the basic framework of a structure of concepts to a group of students. The ability to present a topic of knowledge lucidly and logically, varies greatly from one person to the next, and, we see, how the diverging talents and interests of people engaged in scientific work, lead to equally diverging tasks and occupations. Those, who have a flair for teaching, will be drawn to the task of conveying, not only, factual knowledge to a group of students, but, they will also try to impart some of the fascination and enthousiasm they felt, when they were exposed to a particular field of knowledge and insight for the first time.

Different teachers of the same field, still tend to emphasise different aspects, because each scientist sees reality slightly differently, in spite of the fact, that they all agree about the outlines of a basic conceptual framework. Some use a variety of "tricks" to get the attention of their pupils, others drone monotonously through a series of facts, carrying-out their teaching duties as a solemn task that has lost every spark of enthousiasm a long time ago.

Indeed, the ability to perceive a fragment of reality in a truly clear light of understanding, conveys a feeling of beauty and enthousiasm. Then, the teacher is a supreme master over his subject and its intricate mental imagery, confidently improvising parallels of thought and illuminating answers to the many questions of his attentive but relaxed audience.

Others have a somewhat more fragmentary understanding of a field of knowledge and expertise, and their ability to communicate is less well developed, but, they may possess a remarkable affinity for solving problems. These peope find themselves most happily occupied in the work of "research", where they can pursue in the freedom of their own little domain, the joys and frustrations of carrying-out a series of, hopefully, useful and convincing experiments. Their intellectual capabilities are reflected by the rapid rate with which they can absorb new information or discuss minute technical details with their colleagues, but, they may also lose sight of the overall thrust of their field, especially, if they become too isolated and absorbed with their own particular project.

Research should really be orchestrated by a brilliant and gifted "conductor". This function of "orchestration", or coordination, could be carried-out by just one individual, or, more likely, by a small but efficiently organised group of seasoned scientists and researchers, who determine, together, the overall "score" of the research to be carried-out. After the research projects have been outlined and carefully crafted, the many "parts" that have to be "played" by the members of various "research orchestras" are then assigned. This is the only way to carry-out efficient and meaningful research, avoiding the pitfalls of blind alleys and costly duplications. Each player will be firmly guided, and, any wrong move or tendency to slide into a blind alley, will be noticed and corrected, because the work of the various research groups and inviduals will be monitored carefully.

The gifted and enthousiastic teacher knows, not only, the basic structure of thought in the field he or she is teaching, but, he also knows, how to convey this structure in a systematic and well-ordened series of lectures. The material should be presented in a form which the audience can absorb without too many difficulties. In addition, a good teacher is able to slide smoothly from factual knowledge to hypothesis, and, eventually, to the area of speculative extra-polations in the "unknown". Again, we see, how important it is for a good teacher to be really a master in his field, because, if one has difficulties grasping the coherence of one's field, one will be struggling all the time. The teacher struggles, then, to keep his thoughts straight, and, he struggles with the task of teaching others, or trying to answer questions.

Let us make no mistake; every student, and, every thoughtful adult will always ask, either implicitly or explicitly, why he has to learn something; why he should make the effort to learn this or that; what the value is of a certain field of knowledge. An adult may be overwhelmed by the notion, that a particular field is very important. Then, to question its usefulness would be sacriligious, but a student has, often, no such scruples.

Every teacher has to be able to answer the question, why their field is interesting or important to his students, and, in the task of answering this question, the teacher is given a golden opportunity to relate the relevance of the subject under discussion to the circumstances of his students and himself, or, to the question of human existence in general.

It is amazing, how the factor of usefulness keeps cropping-up in any form of teaching. We should say a few words, here, about a common attitude amongst the more prestigious sciences, where the element of usefulness is looked-down upon, and, where the notion has developed, that "pure science" is a form of knowing that is justified by its own existence. This implies, that the field of knowledge is important enough to make the effort of knowing it, worthwhile. This is a parallel of the romantic notion of "art for art's sake".

It is true, that the concept of art for the sake of art, was an appealing idea, since art became unshackled from rather stringent motives of purpose, and, this led to a free and largely fruitful exploration of a wide variety of art expressions. Many of the results are still a part of our contemporary cultural heritage, and have been a source of enjoyment for many generations. Yet, in the concept of "art for art's sake", we still see the criteria of viability at work. The artist has to convince his audience that his art is genuine and valuable, and, that it is a contribution to man's ability to express or understand himself.

The notion, that we like to know for the sake of knowing, has to be based, also, on some sort of a benefit that is associated with the possession of knowledge and insight. The benefit may be a feeling of beauty and enthousiasm, and, it may also lead to a feeling of confidence, or, even over-confidence. Such feelings and attitudes are aroused as a result of the hard work necessary to understand and master a particular field. If we understand the expression or attitude of "science for science's sake" in this way, we can wholeheartedly agree with it, but, unfortunately, the statement, that science should be known for its own sake, reflects, often, an attitude of superiority and authority, where the importance of science is enshrined in the expectation of an unquestioned loyalty from the public, as well as a justified demand for financial support from the society at large.

Such an attitude invites, rightly, a measure of scepticism and disbelief. No scientist should ever get-away with an attitude of unquestionable authority. If he can not explain, why his field of endeavour is important for you, a lay-person, who is not employed by the scientific community, and, who is not making a living in this particular field, you are fully justified to consider the scientist and his work to be unimportant. You may, even, be justified to suspect, that such an attitude is detrimental to the public interests, until proven otherwise.

Science has become completely dependent upon financial support from society, far more so than the arts. True, most important scientific activities could not easily justify their existence with concrete results or practical applications, which could be translated into a useful service for the community. There is certainly a need for competent, well-orchestrated research that is unhurried and thorough. Nevertheless, it seems to me, that the activity of research has often been awarded an exaggerated aura of prestige. This has led to a proliferation of research activities over many universities and other institutions of science and technology. Such a scattering of research activities is largely unproductive, in spite of the fact, that, occasionally, the competitiveness of research scientists has provided a motivation for excellent work.

In the field of science, research has been "king", and, teaching has been its "servant", in the mistaken belief, that the development of the ability to carry-out research is essential for the establishment of a useful institution of higher learning. Certainly, good research can be fascinating, as well as attractive to those, who are specifically interested in this sort of work, but, the art of good teaching is so important for the influence it has on the attitudes of students and other interested people, that we need, urgently, to switch our priorities back to teaching.

We do not have to teach specific details to students, who are not going to be professionally engaged in a specific field. The detailed expertise of a field can be left to those, who are doing active research and are teaching or training people, who want to enter a field professionally. In a curriculum of general education, we have to emphasise the overall structure of knowledge and its relationships to the organisation of life. These philosophical relationships can certainly be taught, in outline, during the period of secondary schooling, but, the finer details of a broad philosophical comprehension of life and society, are too complex and too important to be neglected in a university curriculum of general education.

The beauty and fascination of knowledge for the sake of knowledge can always be traced back to the usefulness of knowing something that helps us to understand ourselves; our nature, our environment, as well as our origins. All knowing and understanding has to have a measure of relevance. This sense of relevance may take the form of an appreciation for the vastness and complexity of nature, and, it may, then, inspire a feeling of awe and insignificance. Such a feeling is, at the same time, humbling and beautiful, because we sense, that we have gained a valuable perspective on life and our own existence. Or, the relevance may be far more pragmatic, whenever we consider what we can do with our knowledge. For example, we may be able to use our knowledge for making tools or weapons, and, the existential significance of such an activity is immediately apparent.

We may use knowledge entirely for our own benefit, or, our knowledge and activities may benefit a small circle of friends and relatives, but, we may also try to let our knowledge and comprehension be of benefit to a much larger grouping of people, or, perhaps, mankind as a whole. In our modern societies of rapid technological change and frantic economic growth, it is often difficult to distinguish, clearly, between the egocentric and altruistic benefits of technological or commercial developments.

If someone invents a new tool, or a better way of doing something, the invention may spread quickly through a community, and, we have then witnessed a "cultural innovation" that benefits us all. Similarly, an idea, an explanation, a point of view, or a particular interpretation of reality may become generally accepted and useful. A word or concept may be added to the cultural pool, and, the viability of the whole community has then been raised without a disproportionate benefit for anyone particular group or individual.

However, if the manufacture of a tool or product remains in the hands of an individual or small elite, such a product will, inevitably, lead to disparities and tensions. Even knowledge and insight, secret religious explanations or rituals upon which a small community begins to rely for its psychological security and social stability, all these items of knowledge and mechanisms of psychological control can become instruments of power and dominance in the hands of a privileged elite, and they are then likely to be detrimental to society as a whole.

.......

Chapter 7

Content

A conceptual or technological innovation may become a widely shared benefit, or, it may become a source of strife and injustice.
Problems with specialisations in function; the responsibilities of leadership.
Wide-ranging consequences of changes in the perception of reality.
The contradictory meaning and result of many technical innovations.
The life-saving attitudes and activities of "repair".
Cellular and multi-cellular repair activities.
Reproduction; the repair or maintenance of the gene-pool.
Ecological repair; the earth's "infestation" with human life.
Medicine, and the functions of physiological repair mechanisms.
Survival is an on-going effort to repair damaged structures and mitigate harmful influences.
A thoughtless way of life.
The devastating effects of unbridled consumerism; the need for repair, as well as a lessening of the impact of our collective existence upon the environment.

Any innovation, be it a new concept or a technological development, may become a generally available tool of knowledge, accessible and beneficial to all, or, it may remain a source of privilege and power for a small elite, especially, if social mechanisms allow this to happen. Often, the degree of expertise necessary to work with a conceptual or technological innovation is such, that it is difficult for most people to take advantage of it. Then, we see a tendency for "specialists" to emerge, who sell their knowledge or expertise to others.

However, specialisation in function may contribute towards social disparities, unless the leadership regulates, carefully, the level of dependence ordinary people develop on specialised knowledge and services. If the relationships between people are not regulated properly, we see, once again, that a society falls-apart through a process of increasing disparities with the accumulation of power, privilege and wealth into the hands of a small upper crust.

Some of these cultural, intellectual or technological innovations remain in the hands of the social leadership, e.g., improvements in administrative or legislative functions. This is good for society, because these improvements will allow the leadership to be open, informed and fair. The acquisition of administrative, legislative and communicative skills and powers made the larger social units possible in the first place, because, without them, no leadership could hope to govern such complex societies.

Certainly, the same techniques that allow a government to be informed and fair, competent and decisive, allow it also to be repressive and arbitrary. We are still struggling with the problem, how to keep a sophisticated and well-armed leadership from becoming a ruthless dictatorship, and, we have often outlined the need for Constitutional Guidelines, as well as a well-educated electorate, in order to ensure, that a leadership remains responsible and responsive to the will of its people.

An enlightened leadership reflects a measure of concern for the well-being of society and its members. It has acknowledged its responsibilities, and, its power has been based upon a mandate from free and fair elections, where people are able to express their informed choice from a spectrum of political opinions, free from co-ercion or fear for retaliation. Such a leadership will be able to control the natural tendency for successful people to acquire a measure of power and influence that are so quickly distorting and destroying the conditions of essential equality.

True, it is unavoidable that people will become different, and, someone who makes a contribution to society, will always have more influence and responsibilities than someone who does not occupy a position of leadership and influence. We still have to delineate, more precisely, what sort of differentiation in power, influence and social position is beneficial for the society as a whole, and, what sort of concentration of powers is detrimental, leading to injustice, elitism and social fragmentation.

We are beginning to understand the limitations and undesirable side-effects of unbridled free-enterprise, as well as unregulated economic and technological developments. Everywhere, we see the need to examine, very carefully, the balance between advantages and disadvantages, whenever we propose a measure of social and economic development. Everywhere, we see, that progress in scientific knowledge and technological mastery has to come to terms with the problems of contradictory effects.

Here, we see one of the reasons, why an unbridled exploitation of economic and technological potentials in a free-enterprise society is doomed to failure, since the theoretical checks and balances that are supposed to be provided by the free flow of the forces of supply and demand, are always disrupted by the bonds of existential enslavement. These bonds of enslavement, together with the resulting distortions in the checks and balances of free-enterprise mechanisms, develop as a result of a dependency upon complicated living conditions which technological and economic developments have brought-about.

We should not go further into a discussion about the mechanisms of free-enterprise and the trends of unbridled economic and technological developments, because we have done so before. We have only emphasised, briefly, the enormous influence upon the security and viablity of a community and its members, whenever a technological, economical or conceptual break-through occurs. Whether it is an idea that ties together previously incoherent facts and observations, a novel way to make or do something, or, a technique to solve tensions between people, or harmful pressures upon their natural environment, we can always see a need for changes in the positions of power and influence. In other words, a healthy society allows the positions of influence and responsiblity to be filled on the basis of merit and skill, and, not on the basis of inheritance, financial powers or nepotism.

While it is not difficult to trace the importance of the more theoretical fields of science, those of applied science and technological design reveal their existential significance even more directly. We have come to realise, how contradictory this significance may be, ranging from an obvious increase in comfort and ease of existence, to the threat of extinction by a catastrophic deterioration or destruction of the terrestial life-support systems.

Let us say, finally, a few words about the last term of our title, because we tend to see the activities of repair as a somewhat "lowly activity". We tend to think, that it requires only a smattering of knowledge and insight to repair the instruments of technology, which have been designed and constructed by the more clever brains in society. Not so, because, in looking-down, at least, to some extent, upon the activities of repair, we lose sight of a far more important and encompassing activity, which can justifiably be considered an all-embracing and life-sustaining endeavour.

Look at the fundamental unit of living existence, the cell, and, you will see, how one of the most important activities a cell has to carry-out in order to maintain this structural and functional integrity called "life", is the activity of "repair", or, "re-constitution", where the cell has to work, ceaselessly, in order to remove polluting elements from its interior. Every cell has to replace worn or defective structures in order to maintain the functions of living existence.

Repair is an activity that is, probably, the most fundamental activity of all living existence, because, as we have discussed on many occasions, the fragility and lability of the complex biochemical reaction-patterns in the cell require constant replenishment and re-constitution.

I believe, that it is worthwhile to see the concept of repair in such a broad light, because it illuminates, not only, one of the most fundamental aspects of the organisation of life, but, it finds ready parallels in our everyday existence. As a corollary to the need of each individual cell to carry-out some sort of metabolic activity, (geared towards re-constituting a favourable status-quo), we see, that, all multi-cellular life-forms, including the human being, have numerous internal regulatory mechanisms that try to bring the conditions of existence back to an "optimum equilibrium". This, is also an activity of "repair".

A majority of the activities a muti-cellular organism carries-out in relation to its environment, is concerned with the needs for repair and reconstitution or reconstruction. The entire spectrum of the search for food, is, in essence, a search for an energy-source that can sustain these constant activities of metabolic and structural repairs, while defensive activities are designed to keep the organism away from dangers and make these repair activities possible, after a supply of suitable energy and building-blocks has been obtained.

What about reproductive activities? Are they not an expression of the need to repair or maintain the gene-pool of a species? Is reproduction not an effort to off-set the attrition of the gene-pool by the deaths of actualised members? After all, the actualised members are alive and carry the entire gene-pool with their collective existence. Is this not a repair activity that exceeds the needs of the living individual, but is, nevertheless, essential for the continued viability of the species as a whole?

Wherever we look around us, the activities of repair are always a major part of our reality perceptions, and, we will benefit by acknowledgeing the importance of the functions of repair. In so far as the repair of our own body is concerned, we can fortunately rely, to a large extent, upon the inborn and automatic regulatory mechanisms that have been shaped by, and are operated under, the direction of the genetic code.

The effects of our way of life upon the terrestial environment, require, ever more urgently, an intelligent and concerted effort of repair, because nature's automatic repair mechanisms of the injuries inflicted upon it by our collective existence, are rapidly becoming overwhelmed. We are living like parasites on our host, the earth, and, we are threatening to kill our host with our presence. We have become so successful, as a species, that our host's "infestation" with the "disease" of human life, is likely to be lethal, but, we know, too, that a parasite loses its possibilities of existence, as soon as it has killed its host.

Repair, repair, repair!. Are we, physicians, not trying to assist the natural repair mechanisms of the human body and mind? Is the whole field of medicine, with its gigantic organisations of diagnosis and treatment, administration and research, not geared to the objective of repairing the organisation of human life? What is the use of knowledge and technological or conceptual design, if we do not have, at least, the expectation, or the hope, that we can maintain or repair a status of individual and collective health or well-being?

However, the activities of repairing and re-constituting an optimum equilibrium are not limited to the field of medicine. In the rapid development of technology and mechanisation, the emphasis was initially placed, almost exclusively, on an increase in the comforts of life, as well as the level of consumption, but, in recent years, man has been forced to re-think the consequences of this trend, because it became increasingly apparent, that an unbridled progression of this trend would lead to ever increasing burdens upon our natural, terrestial environment.

Now, we have to consider, seriously, how we can minimise the impact of our existence. In particular, we have to consider the damage caused by high levels of consumption in the affluent societies, and, we have to place our technological expertise, as well as the interpretations of our realities, in the service of the activities of repair and re-constitution.

Not only, has it become obvious, that our thoughtless and wasteful habits of ever increasing consumption place an intolerable burden upon our atmosphere and natural resources in the form of noxious and toxic pollutants, but, we have realised, finally, that our terrestial soils are being eroded by careless techniques of forced fertilisation, in an ever-increasing effort to obtain greater yields from the same acreage.

We have dangerously eroded the ecological balance by our indiscrimiate use of pesticides, hormones and antibiotics, and, we are now faced with the formidable task of sorting-out what we have done; what the short and long-term effects are of the gigantic chemical manipulations we have engaged in; what we can do to minimise the harm, and restore a condition of health in the balance of natural force-fields.

Slowly, we have come to the conclusion, that we have to examine, carefully, the consequences of all our actions. We have to re-think our affluent life-style. We have to learn to diagnose the ills of our societies, including the rising levels of frustration and despair, the dwindling sense of justice, fair play, and control over what is happening in our societies. We have to learn to diagnose, what sort of stresses we create in society by allowing an ever more militant behaviour from special-interest groupings, be they labour unions, professional associations, or multi-national economic enterprises.

Eventually, we have to be able to repair everything we use and come into contact with, because, in essence, life is a process that tends to destroy its environment and possibilities of existence, unless it is kept in check by a balance of competitive ecological forces. The human species has become so successful in its bid for mastery and dominance, that we have virtually escaped from predatorial and competitive pressures from other species'.

The major threat to continued human existence comes from our ability to be extremely destructive in our armed conflicts, and, to a lesser extent, from our tendency to adopt an extravagant and wasteful life-style. There are other threats of lesser importance, since the control of diseases should not become a major problem, provided, that man does not lose his scientific and technological mastery on account of a catastrophic disaster, such as a nuclear war.

Man's search for ever more luxurious conditions of existence, as well as the unprecedented pressures caused by enormous disparities in living conditions, will remain a source for incredible tensions within and between the social entities of mankind, threatening to destroy these societies by violent upheavals. The need to prevent such catastrophic developments, as well as the need to repair the harm done by tensions, conflicts and the incidences of extravagance, are activities of "social repair", and, these activities will become increasingly important for future generations.

Gone is the time, that we could imagine ourselves to be heir to unlimited resources and possibilities of existence. The time has come, and is here to stay, that human life will be a watchful, cautious, and, even, somewhat anxious and precarious form of existence, where the most sophisticated insights and the best impulses will have to go hand in hand, in order to prevent a further slide into an irreversible impoverishment.

.......

Chapter 8

Content

The ascendency of the philosophy of repair.
Repairing the social organisation.
Relevance of knowledge.
Survival, based on the attitudes of repair and maintenance.
The need to repair the ravages of inflation and destructive commercial interests.
The age of a frugal life-style.
A definition of frugal attitudes and practices.
Poverty and entrapment.
The quality of life in a frugal, near-self-sufficient life-style.
Frugality; not only, as a desire to escape from tensions, but, the deliberate choice of a socially beneficial life-style.
The trap of wasting time.
Making time free to think.
The balance between effort and ease of existence.
Rising awarenesses.

The activities of repair will become man's primary concern, after the triumph, and decline, of the activities of knowing and believing. The initial stages of conceptual mastery were followed by a similar triumph and early decline in the philosophy of technological mastery and consumerist extravagance. The final, but, possibly the most prolonged phase of human existence will play itself out in an atmosphere of cautious optimism and vigilance, as man discovers, once again, the main reasons for social cohesion. Then, the break-through of the human species will, finally, have been halted by the counter-pressures of limited resources and fragile environmental conditions.

Man will finally realise, to an extent he has never realised before, that, continued viability in an age of rapidly mounting pressures from toxic waste-products and declining natural resources, can only be found by scrupulously maintaining the conditions of justice, frugality, essential equality and social harmony on a global scale. Only then, will it be possible for the members of mankind to keep abreast of the challenges to our life-support systems, and, only then, is it possible to avoid a cataclysmic demise of human existence.

The creation of social harmony is by far the most difficult task man faces at the present time, and, we have to solve this task, before we can muster the technological skills and cooperation necessary to ensure long-term viability in an increasingly complex and complicated terrestial eco-sphere. The effort of repairing and re-constituting society has to be based on a philosophical grasp, requiring, not only, a good grasp over the traditional sciences of our natural environment, but, also, a firm control over the phenomena of our own existence.

The philosophy of repair will become a corner-stone for judgeing the usefulness of every philosophic over-view of our existence, since our existence can only be secure, if the philosophy of repair finds useful insights and practical solutions to the problems of maintaining viability.

We have extolled the philosophy of repair, and, indeed, if we look around us, we see, how we are already involved with this increasingly important field of awarenesses. Gone are the days that we could throw away everything that became defective or lost our attention. We have to spend the time and effort to maintain our car, house, appliances, tools and gardens. Increasingly, we have to make an effort to prolong the useful life-span of something we have acquired, because we can not afford to keep replacing it.

Besides, it does not make sense to have to start from scratch, again and again, because we know, that we can not start life all over again; neither can we regain the vigour and strength of our youth. In addition, we realise, that our job and income may not be as secure as we thought them to be, and, we suspect, that we can not keep relying upon an ever-expanding economy, or, an ever-rising level of income and affluence. We know, that gains in salary or income are quickly eroded by inflation and spiraling costs for the items we need and want, as well as by the increasing taxes for the privilege of living and working in society.

We should acknowledge, that the time of wasteful abundance is over, hopefully forever, and, that the screaming advertisements on the public media represent the anxious forebodings of industrial giants, who are about to experience a drastic decline in consumerist attitudes. The commercial and industrial enterprises still need, desperately, the financial resources of a consuming public that is willing to keep throwing away its earnings on disposable items of luxury and desire.

The age of a frugal and cautious life-style is upon us, and, it has come to stay. Slowly, more and more people will join this life-style of the future, as they struggle to loosen themselves from the web of financial obligations they have woven around themselves.

Frugality is the essence of the philosophy of repair, because we have to give increasingly attention to maintaining and repairing the few necessary possessions we use in a life-style of moderation. By cutting-out waste, as well as the unnecessary consumption of energy and all sorts of renewable and non-renewable resources, we practice the best kind of "preventive medicine" for the life-support systems of our planet. Then, we minimise the impact of our existence upon the environment, and, we give nature's repair mechanisms a chance to counter-act a manageable level of stress caused by our collective existence.

However, in order to practice a useful and intelligent life-style of frugality, with a minimum impact upon our ecological and natural environments, we can not simply reject all technology as "evil" or "wrong". Actually, a frugal way of life is, in essence, a highly intelligent and skillful way of life, even, if it is associated, outwardly, with a life-style that goes back, in many ways, to old and proven methods of the past. The frugal life-style of the future can not be, and should never be, a thoughtless imitation of the past, because, by glorifying this past, we also become vulnerable to repeating its mistakes.

What do we mean by a constructive and informed life-style of frugality? Perhaps, it is fitting to give some attention to this question in the final pages of this essay, and, it may be worthwhile to draw a profile of the "saving grace" of a frugal way of life, which seems to be such a necessary and essential step in the evolution of mankind.

Frugality is definitely not poverty. In poverty, the circumstances are beyond the control of those who are poor. Poverty constitutes a condition of entrapment that is harmful to physical and mental well-being. If poverty is widespread, the condition may be accepted as "normal", because people do not know any better. However, the definition of normality should not depend upon a local judgement, or, the haphazard standards of majority existence, but, the definition of normality and health will, increasingly, depend on international standards that have been enshrined in a global Constitution.

We have to separate the conditions of health from those of affluence. Certainly, we need to be able to fulfill the basic requirements for a physically and mentally healthy existence, but affluence deteriorates, always, into an unnecessary abundance that is unhealthy. Affluence is physically and mentally unhealthy for a large variety of reasons, which we have referred to throughout these writings.

A family living in a near self-sufficient life-style, somewhere in a rural area, without debts, and, without the need to slave from morning till night, enjoying, at least, some private property, a dwelling of their own making, (with ownership of this shelter and the piece of land surrounding this shelter, together with a few animals and farm equipment), such a family may live in reasonably healthy and happy circumstances, in spite of the fact, that their income may be low and their luxuries are limited.

On the other hand, a family, living in an urban slum, exploited by high rents, high costs for food, shelter and other necessities, wracked by ignorance, drunkenness and other abuses, crowded into unsanitary conditions, living in a ghetto of fear and resentment, without knowing any other way of life, such a family may, not only, live in poverty, but, the living conditions may be so detrimental to the attitudes of parents and children alike, that they become part of a social disease process that rots-away the last vestiges of hope and happiness.

In poverty, we see, not only, an insufficient financial income to ensure a healthy and stable life-style for a majority of people, but, we see, also, the ravages of ignorance and abuse; of quarrels and tensions, of deceit and primitive patterns of behaviour, poisoning the outlook on life and society. In a frugal life-style, we see a deliberate choice by inteligent people to live a way of life that is physically and mentally stimulating and does not lack any of the basic necessities. Such a frugal way of life, often, provides a quality that is unobtainable by those, who look for happiness and health in a life-style of affluence.

Frugal people have decided, that it is not worthwhile to keep enduring the pressures and tensions of a suburban way of life, which is needed to continue generating a high cash-flow or income. Frugality is the realisation, that the job which provides such a high income, is not really contributing anything to a beneficial way of life, and is, often, merely a perpetuation of this gigantic economic momentum, which so many of us have become enslaved to. Frugality is the realisation, that it is possible to live a healthy and balanced way of life with much less income requirements, away from the big city; away from the luxurious suburban home with its high taxes and expensive up-keep; away from the two-car status-symbol, with the never-ending cycle of purchases, bills, payments and unexpected costs.

Frugality is a deliberate change in life-style, where the status and prestige associated with the ability to display a high level of material acquisition and consumption is forcefully rejected as false and misleading. Not only, is the change in life-style generated by the desire to lessen tensions associated with living and maintaining affluence, but, it is also influenced by the realisation, that the life-style of affluence is harmful to society as a whole; that it constitutes an injustice to the less affluent societies of the world, and, that it places an unfair burden on our terrestial eco-systems.

However, in choosing a life-style of frugal, near self-sufficiency, it would be wrong, and, even, disastrous to throw-away all the fruits of technology, or the insights of modern science. It is self-defeating to adopt a frugal life-style, if the bare necessities require a back-breaking labour from dawn to dusk. Our forefathers lived this way, because they had no choice, and, we would err, grossly, if we failed to recognise the fact, that mechanisation and industrial developments made it possible for man to acquire the basic necessities with much less effort.

The secret of a truly successful life-style of frugality, is the ability to make intelligent use of the resources, tools and insights of our times. Then, we have the freedom to think, learn and talk with each other about the meaning of life, as well as the decisions we have to make about future developments. Frugality means, to waste nothing; least of all time. The most productive way to use our time, is to think about the meaning of our existence and of human life in general. We have to think about those, who have been here before, as well as those, who will come after us. Waste not; no food, no resources and, certainly, do not waste time.

Let us use the available energy sparingly and wisely; to power the necessary machinery; to plow the fields, to mine our resources, to move earth, or, to cultivate the soil. Let us not scorn any of the modern contributions, like electricity, or the modern tools of communication, because, after all, these tools are there to help us build a better and wiser world, but, let us make an all-out effort to control the power of money, as well as the power of the public media. Let us control every position of authority and prestige, and, let us regain control over our societies, because we tend to lose this control, so easily, to commercial and military interests.

Frugality means, an intense interest in the possibilities of communication, education, information and thought. We live a frugal life-style, because we want to free ourselves from enslavement to our passions and desires. We do not want to be manipulated by commercial interests, nor, do we want to enslave ourselves to the financial needs of banks, governments or industries. We want to be free from unnecessary pressures in order to have the time to think and reflect upon the meaning of life, and, take upon ourselves responsibilities that are really necessary and worthwhile.

"Too utopian", you say? "You expect too much from the average individual", you say? That is probably correct. Probably, most people are attracted to a simple and frugal life-style, because they are getting tired of the pressures and want to get out from affluent pressures. However, if frugality is merely an escapist's dream, there will be many disappointments. If one jumps, unthinkingly, into the dream-world of owning your own little place in the country, you become, so easily, another victim of the clever merchants of day-dreams.

While it is true, that not many people have the ability to become independent thinkers, a measure of common-sense, objectivity and plain rational thought is necessary to give frugality a sense of reality, and, to escape the pitfalls of irrealistic dreams. After all, our objective is to develop an appreciation or mastery over reality, and, not to lose ourselves in dreams. The grasp over reality requires work, just as it requires work to earn a living and obtain our daily bread.

In the final analysis, we discover, that the importance and relevance of the world of knowledge is determined by the level of mastery it gives us over the circumstances of our existence. Similarly, the significance of the ability to design tools, is, ultimately determined by the measure of improvement we can obtain for our existential requirements. This means, that the ultimate goal of all our mental and conceptual activities, is to create or re-constitute the best possible conditions of existence.

The task for the philosophy of repair are not going to be any easier in the future than they are now, because the pressures of collective human existence, together with the problems of increasing population densities, environmental pollution and resource scarcities, will remain a formidable challenge at even the highest levels of comprehension, insight and technological mastery.

.......

Summary

1. What does "philosophy" mean?
   The outlines and organising principles of a large panorama or point of view.
   Philosophy is, in essence, an art; the role of intuition.
   Recognition comes slowly.
   Working with "facts" that are already available.
   Criteria of usefulness.
   The hard work of thinking clearly.
   The role of honesty and magnanimity in a discussion.
   Complexity and contradictions are the rule, not the exception.
   A debate, versus an act of propaganda.
   Blending the fragmented sciences into a coherent whole.
   
   
   
2. The philosophy of knowledge.
   The functions of conscious awareness.
   The evolution of symbolically representable awarenesses.
   The emergence of behaviourally flexible species'.
   The genetic and cultural codes.
   Cerebral classification mechanisms.
   The subconscious process of abstracting a common denominator.
   The ability to "recognise"; mechanisms of the experience of familiarity.
   An optimum range of similarities.
   Classifying symbolically representable awarenesses; a parallel with the cerebral or physiological classification mechanisms.
   Logical requirements for the ability to recognise something.
   A spectacular growth in the volume of memory-traces.
   Mechanisms of memory-recall.
   An analogous event, acting as the appropriate "trigger" for a specific memory-recall.
   Existentially significant and non-significant stimuli.
   The behaviour of spontaneous re-enactment.
   The significance of practicing memory-recalls in a safe environment.
   Sharpening our memories.
   
   
   
3. A foundation for the evolution of "speech".
   An increase in the extent and speed of symbolic communications.
   The search for viability is the driving factor behind evolutionary change.
   Specialisation in form and function, versus viability through behavioural fine-tuning.
   The disadvantages of behavioural fine-tuning through a process of learning.
   Cerebral preparations for the ability to adapt with learned or acquired behaviour-patterns.
   A sharpened instinct of parental care; a method to compensate for the increased vulnerability of anthropoid infants and youngsters.
   Behavioural flexibility within a social environment.
   The awareness of being aware.
   The many sources of mental images.
   Secondary and tertiary abstractions.
   The link between symbolic communications and existential needs.
   Sharpening a mental imagery with dialogue.
   Motivations; a unifying concept for the classification of awarenesses and behaviour-patterns.
   Varying objectives and results.
   The strength of fervor and commitment.
   Symbolically communicable awarenesses have become an important tool for survival of the human species.
   The faculty of "speech".
   
   
   
4. Secondary and tertiary abstractions, defined as a conscious representation of "classifying principles".
   Categories, based on similarity in appearance or event.
   Are we slowly unveiling an absolute truth?
   A look back at history.
   The reasons for an anthropomorphic interpretation of reality.
   The ever-varing circumstances for living organisms.
   Being cautious in concluding that we have found "the truth".
   Evolving reality perceptions.
   The question, whether or not our concepts mirror an absolute truth.
   The criteria for making such a judgement.
   A case of "natural optimism".
   Scientific truths are based upon the faculties of man's commonly shared biological heritage.
   The practical implications of such a point of view.
   The varying success rates of scientific disciplines in formulating a coherent, widely agreed-upon core of basic knowledge.
   The fragmentation of scientific reality perceptions.
   Social chaos, and the natural desire to escape from a depressing reality.
   An age of contrasts, and the need for certainty.
   A few questions may show a structure of knowledge that is easily destroyed by criticisms and doubt.
   Science and philosophy.
   Cultivating the soil for growing useful reality perceptions.
   
   
   
5. Questions, and their underlying assumptions.
   The infinity of time and existence.
   When reality perceptions and powers of imagination have been stretched to the limit.
   Where did God come from?
   The concept of "natural laws", when constructing scientific reality perceptions.
   The evolution of the Universe.
   The concept of space-time; difficulties for our imagination.
   The need for an understandable imagery.
   Matter, mass, inertia and gravitation; difficulties with the imagery of general relativity.
   The reality of our decision-making "will".
   Something can not come from nothing.
   The Oscillating Universe.
   If space-time is finite and curved, what is there beyond the boundaries of space-time?
   The specifically human nature of the sphere of reality perceptions.
   A brief review of the body-plan of life-forms.
   Its influence upon the "orientation" of an organism.
   The perception of space is a result of the organisational plan of the body and its sense-organs.
   The stereo-location of visual and auditory stimuli.
   The perception of time.
   Existing in a continuum of the past, the present and the future.
   Biological constants.
   
   
   
6. More pragmatic considerations.
   Knowledge and skill; a blend of abilities.
   Knowledge and the art of teaching.
   Confidence and beauty result from mastery and clarity.
   The researcher and his place in the academic environment.
   A gifted "research conductor".
   Sliding effortlessly from knowledge to hypothesis, to the unknown.
   The need to keep the usefulness of knowledge in mind.
   Knowledge for its own sake is a romantic notion.
   Beauty and authority.
   The existential needs of scientific workers.
   Knowledge may be used as a defensive or aggressive weapon.
   Exclusive attitudes, and the power of knowledge; social implications.
   
   
   
7. A conceptual or technological innovation may become a widely shared benefit, or, it may become a source of strife and injustice.
   Problems with specialisations in function; the responsibilities of leadership.
   Wide-ranging consequences of changes in the perception of reality.
   The contradictory meaning and result of many technical innovations.
   The life-saving attitudes and activities of "repair".
   Cellular and multi-cellular repair activities.
   Reproduction; the repair or maintenance of the gene-pool.
   Ecological repair; the earth's "infestation" with human life.
   Medicine, and the functions of physiological repair mechanisms.
   Survival is an on-going effort to repair damaged structures and mitigate harmful influences.
   A thoughtless way of life.
   The devastating effects of unbridled consumerism; the need for repair, as well as a lessening of the impact of our collective existence upon the environment.
   
   
   
8. The ascendency of the philosophy of repair.
   Repairing the social organisation.
   Relevance of knowledge.
   Survival, based on the attitudes of repair and maintenance.
   The need to repair the ravages of inflation and destructive commercial interests.
   The age of a frugal life-style.
   A definition of frugal attitudes and practices.
   Poverty and entrapment.
   The quality of life in a frugal, near-self-sufficient life-style.
   Frugality; not only, as a desire to escape from tensions, but, the deliberate choice of a socially beneficial life-style.
   The trap of wasting time.
   Making time free to think.
   The balance between effort and ease of existence.
   Rising awarenesses.

.......