PARALLELS







A Study in Thought

sa060



by





Marius Heuff

Chapter 1

Content

The parallel tracks of a rail-road.
An emphasis on the obvious.
The widespread occurrence of parallel phenomena.
A transient parallelism.
Identity, and the concept of being identical.
Similarities and their differences.
Is there a parallel between the reality "as we see it", and, "as it really exists"?
The apparent futility of doubting what we know for sure.
An urgent need to discuss the parallels between perception and reality.

Not far from where I live, the road connecting the village with the outside world crosses a railway track. The railway line is not used very often, and the road is not a busy one either. I like to walk to this crossing and pause for a few moments. I always look at the tracks and note their convergence as they disappear far-away into the fields. You may wonder why I stop, there, and what is so special about railway tracks converging in the distance. Perhaps, you suspect me of becoming a romantic, describing the peaceful stillness of the surroundings, or the somewhat barren and rocky grounds where I live. Or, you suspect, that I want to focus upon another object of interest in the same environment.

No, I am not going to become a descriptive writer, nor am I about to start a story about what happened, or, what I saw at one time or another. When I pause for a moment at the crossing of the railway line and the small village road, I look at the tracks, and I always note, how the tracks run perfectly parallel to each other, either in a straight line or describing a gentle curve, further away. At all times, these tracks remain at a precise distance from each other, in spite of the fact that they "appear" to converge, when I look at them from a distance. This is the phenomenon of "perspective".

The phenomenon of perspective shows us, clearly, that we see the realities of our environment, just like a camera. The camera, as well as the human being, registers its environment in relation to its own position or existence. Oh, you say, we are going to have a discussion on perspectives, but, this is not the case, either. I want to discuss the phenomenon of "parallelism". Perhaps, you are somewhat disappointed, because, as a first impression, you fail to see, what is so exciting about two parallel tracks. These tracks are mirror images of each other and are designed, solely, for the purpose of guiding the wheels of the locomotive and its wagons from one destination to another.

What is so remarkable about two steel bars, positioned at a constant distance from each other and fastened to numerous railway ties, situated every meter or so to support the load of the train and keep the tracks in place? What is so remarkable about the obvious need to keep these bars of steel at a constant distance from each other?

Yes, indeed, it is quite obvious, that the tracks have to be parallel, but, it is not nearly as obvious, why they appear to converge when we look at these tracks from a distance. We all know, that they remain, in fact, parallel to each other, and, this assumption is the foundation for the question, why these tracks appear to converge. Yet, I appear to ignore the far more interesting question of the apparent congruence, and I focus my attention upon the obvious; the fact, that these tracks remain parallel everywhere, regardless, whether running straight or describing a curve.

The reason, why I am fascinated by the phenomenon of parallelism lies in the fact, that we see so many examples of phenomena or events that appear to run parallel to each other. Certainly, not many of them are as obvious, and as well known, as the railway tracks, and, we will see, that, many forms of parallelism slide, gently, from a situation, where identical or mirror-images run exactly parallel to each other, to familiar but not identical entities or events, running a course that is more or less the same, but not precisely so.

In addition, we will also see many interesting examples of the phenomenon of "perspective", where we "know" events or objects to be identical or nearly identical to each other, and yet, they appear to converge or diverge. We also see a sort of "reversed perspective", where we "know", or, assume, that a strong, or, even, a strict parallel exists, such as between the images of our reality perception and the existence of an absolute, non-human reality "as it exists", while, on close examination, it is highly doubtful, that such a parallelism or similarity indeed exists between the external reality and our perception of it, in spite of the fact, that we have a strong instinctive urge, and need, to accept the existence of such a parallelism.

We will discuss, therefore, many examples and their mechanisms, whenever we detect similarities in appearance and occurrence, and, we will be surprised to note, how important the comparison, categorisation and detection of similarities really is, whenever we try to form a useful imagery of our realities, including the reality of our own existence. We will not discuss or review the entire field of reality perceptions, but, we will remain focussed upon the phemomenon of parallel tracks. We will imagine ourselves as a locomotive, tracking a number of parallel railroad lines, as we travel throughout the many awarenesses and experiences of our mind.

As I look out over my desk through the window, I can see the clothes-line of my neighbour. In our country it is customary to have a long line running over two pullies, so that the housewife can hang the washed clothes on the line from a small platform or balcony. After she has hung-up a few clothes, she pushes the line away, until, eventually, most of the line is full. If the clothes-line is empty, there are two parallel lines, an upper and a lower one, hanging in a gentle curve from pulley to pulley. They run nearly parellel, if the pullies have the same diameter. After the clothes have been hung on the lower line, it hangs in a big bight - unless supported by hooks connecting the upper and lower lines, while the upper line is taut. This is an example of transient parallelism, where the parallelism of the two lines, running together, is only an accidental feature that disappears as soon as the line is used, while, in the case of the railway tracks, the parallelism is the essential feature that has to be maintained for its safe use.

We will see, that the same mechanisms occur, time and again, as we look at a number of parallel examples. Sometimes, parallelism has to be maintained scrupulously in order to preserve its function, at other times, it is only a fleeting and accidental specific, which may or may not have any significance, and, which may only be noted whenever someone happens to have a particular interest in parallel phenomena.

Let us start this essay with a discussion of the concept of parallelism and compare it to the related concepts of similarity and "identicality", or "sameness". We will also compare it with the word or concept of "identity". There is a remarkable difference between the concepts of "identity" and "identicality". The latter refers to a situation where two items appear to be identical when compared with each other. We should tie-in this somewhat theoretical and semantic discussion with a review of the ideas that lie behind the concepts of cerebral and mental classification mechanisms. In addition, we should describe a number of interesting parallels in the observations of the world around us and within us, as we try to grasp this reality in a coherent and comprehensive manner.

When we look at events or phemonena in widely divergent fields of vision, we see many opportunities to make comparisons, or, to point towards similarities that help us correlate the significance of similar mechanisms, or phenomena, in these widely diverging fields of vision. By pointing-out similarities or parallels between a variety of observations, we gain a better insight into the mechanisms at work in each one of them, but, at the same time, we have to keep in mind, that we are playing with mental images, and, that we have to scrutinise, carefully and continuously, whether or not such comparisons and similarities are useful. By pointing-out similarities, we should not forget, that the concept of a similarity implies, that, in addition to the obvious or not so obvious features of similarity, there exist also a number of differences or dis-similarities. These are, often, just as important to know as the broad outlines of a similarity or parallelism.

Finally, we want to focus our attention, specifically, on this all-important question, whether or not we are justified to assume, at least, a measure of similarity or parallelism between our mental imagery about the reality "as we understand it", and, the reality "as it really exists", apart from any human existence. We will see, that we all act and behave, as if such a parallelism exists, and, we are inclined to equate our concepts and beliefs about reality with the absolute reality "as it really exists". We will see, that there are strong existential drives to make us behave this way, and, we will come to the conclusion, that it is very difficult to accept, or, even, grasp the concept, or the possibility, that any congruence or parallelism between our grasp over reality and the reality as it really exists, is, in essence, an illusion.

When we experience the ability to predict the occurrence of a series of events, especially, if we have recently mastered a difficult technological problem, it seems absurd and self-defeating to question, or, even, entertain the possibility of a discrepancy between our grasp over reality and the reality as it really exists, independently from our own existence. Yet, anyone familiar with my ideas, knows, that we have come to this relativistic conclusion on many occasions, and, it has become clear, that the conclusion or intuitive acceptance of such a form of parallelism, is, in essence, erroneous.

However, even, I have a strong tendency to disbelieve the conclusions of a relativistic perception of reality, and, I have also a strong instinctive tendency to accept, at least tacitly, the existence of such a parallel existence between perception and reality. Therefore, I feel the need to discuss this peculiar, but important, philosophical question more extensively and exhaustively than I have done, so far.

.......

Chapter 2

Content

A discussion of the concept of "parallelism".
A fixed, sharply delineated constant of difference.
The relative parallelism of the banks of a river.
Variability in the scope of vision.
Parallelism and similarity.
Discernible differences, and the problem of significance.
Identity and "identicality", or "sameness".
The roots of our identity experiences.
Common denominators of a group of similarities.
Classification mechanisms and the ability to be consciously aware.

Parallelism means, being parallel to each other, and, it is not surprising that this concept arose in the field of geometry. In the field of geometric concepts and ideas, it is possible, that, two lines run at a constant distance from each other, regardless, whether they run straight or curved. These two lines are then identical to each other in every aspect, except location, and, a simple, dimensional constant describes the only difference between them; at least, a simple constant describes the difference within a two-dimensional frame of reference. From this definition, it is clear, that the railway line or the tracks made by a car on a snow-packed road or on a wet pavement, are practical examples of the phenomenon of parallelism, because the fixed distance, or constant, between the wheels that make these tracks, ensures a perfect parallelism.

However, the concept of parallelism, or, the condition of being parallel to each other, has not been limited to the field of geometry. The idea of "running parallel" to each other has been extended to the field of ideas and concepts itself, and, the awareness, that one idea may be very similar to another, except for a single constant, has become a very useful tool to classify or categorise awarenesses, concepts and ideas.

It is true, that the concept of similarity is not nearly as precise as that of parallelism. Two lines may run into a "similar" direction, but this does not mean at all, that they run parallel. Parallelism is, then, only one specific incidence of a larger series of similarities. Similarity describes a much more vaguely delineated series of conditions that share a number of features, but, in the case of two lines running parallel to each other, the similarities become overwhelming, and the dissimiliarities have been narrowed down to one, precise, mathematical constant.

If we look, again, at parallel railroad tracks, or the tracks made by a car in the snow or on a wet pavement, we see a clear and precise mathematical constant, but, if we look at the parallelism of two river-banks enclosing a river, we see, that these banks are running, indeed, more or less parallel. However, the river may vary somewhat in width from one location to the next. Therefore, there is no strict parallelism between these two river-banks. From a great distance, the variations in width become less noticeable, and the two embankments of the river seem to run nearly parallel to each other.

Yet, the same applies also to a railroad track. While there is a strict mathematical constant keeping the steel bars at a fixed distance from each other, if we measure the distance precisely, down to fractions of milimeters, we are able to detect slight variations from place to place, or point to point. These minute differences may be inherent in the tolerance, or variability, with which the tracks were laid, or, it may be secondary to uneven wear and tear of the tracks.

Parallelism has a very strict conceptual definition in our mathematical or geometrical imagery, but, in the practical reality of concrete examples, slight variations are always present, and, the magnitude or significance of these variations depends, entirely, upon our vantage-point.

However, the concept of similarity is much broader than a form of parallelism showing a measure of variability in a practical reality. Similarity indicates a common feature that is much less precisely defined than a specific mathematical or geometrical constant. For example, the vagueness of a common denominator is demonstrated by a number of lines running into the same direction, but, not necessarily parallel to each other.

In the concept of similarity, the shared constant or feature is variable or poorly delineated, and, when determining similarities between concepts and ideas, we may choose a classifying principle that has lost all resemblance to a geometrical constant. The precise, mathematical constant that regulates the concept of parallelism, is too confining to be useful as a principle of classification in the ordening of awarenesses.

In order to grasp a category of similar objects under a common denominator, such as e.g. "cooking utensils", we have to be able to choose a somewhat flexible common denominator, so that we can group-together most, if not all utensils used for cooking, as "cooking utensils".

In the concept of similarity, we leave the definition of a particular common denominator or classifying principles somewhat vague in order to have some lee-way, or flexibility, in our efforts to make such a classification. In addition, we give ourselves the freedom to vary or change this classifying principle according to our needs.

You may want to know, why I emphasise a definition everyone is familiar with. You may concede, that you know the difference between similar and identical objects, events or phemonena, and, you know, that "identical" means, the absence of any discernible difference. You may grant me the correctness of the observation, that the term "discernible difference" depends on our point of view. From a great distance, many more items, observations or phemonena will "appear" to be identical, while they lose this quality of being identical, whenever we take a closer look and start to notice the many differences that do exist, after all.

Even, if we have found a few identical objects, items or events in our ordinary field of vision, we may still see a number of subtle, small, and, perhaps, insignificant differences, whenever we examine this identicality closely. Look, e.g. at our coins or currency bills. We may not see any obvious differences between them, but, if we look closely, we can always detect some sort of difference.

"Allright", you will say, "this is quite clear and conforms to the notions of common-sense. Let us leave the field of semantic definitions, or, do you want to say, quickly, a few words about the concepts of identity versus identicality, or "sameness", which is, perhaps, a better, or, at least, more acceptable word to use".

Yes, let us quickly define the essence of identity. Here, we see or emphasise the uniqueness of an item, individual, object or event, but, we should not forget that the term "identity" can also be used to classify an individual into the group one belongs to. For example, we use the concept "identity" as a synonym with "root", whenever someone has "identified" him- or herself with the cultural origins or ethnic background one has come from. The term "identity" is used, here, as a method of classification, where an individual, who had until then been "unclassified", can find a proper category to fit into. This feeling of identity gives us a sense of belonging, and, we become more self-confident, but, perhaps, also less tolerant, as we find confidence by identifying ourselves proudly with our cultural and ethnic origins.

In the concept of "identity" we have found the characteristics that set us apart from others around us, while we emphasise, at the same time, the common features of the group we belong to. The term "identicality" or "sameness" indicates, exclusively, that there is no discernible or significant difference.

This discussion is, probably, sufficient to give us a clear idea, what we mean by the words identical, identity, parallel and similar. We have briefly discussed the idea of a common denominator that lets us group-together a number of similar items or observations. The processes of classification, the formation of categories, as well as the abstraction of "secondary" awarenesses characterising a particular category, are very important to understand, because they give us some insight into the mechanisms, how our brain can "recognise" an object, or event, we have seen or experienced before.

In addition to the subconscious, neurological classification mechanisms, which we share with all animals that have developed along the road of behavioural flexibility, we, as human beings, have developed a rather unique method of re-stimulating memory-traces into a focus of conscious awareness. We do this with the help of a variety of representative symbols, and, we have become so successful in this technique, that we quickly experienced the need to classify and orden the ever increasing multitude of symbolically representable awarenesses. This is done with the help of a system of mental classifications.

These ideas have been discussed extensively before, but, I believe, that it is worthwhile to summarise these ideas, once more, briefly, in order to refresh our memories and recall a number of mental images that make it clear, how, and why, the phenomenon of consciousness or conscious awareness arose.

.......

Chapter 3

Content

A review of the background of "Homo Sapiens".
Cerebral mechanisms, and the faculty of recognition.
The importance of the "sphere of familiarity".
Physiological versus conscious or mental forms of recognition.
Memory, and the recording of similarities and differences.
A philosophical and generalised approach to the problem of grasping cerebral functions.
Playing with memory-recall as a "pass-time".
Recognition, through the mechanisms of an analogous stimulus.
Memory-recall, seen as a "flash of recognition".
Links with the mechanisms of an artistic evocation of images, memories and emotions.
The occurrence of a spontaneous "flash of recall".
Finding some use for a hyper-excitable faculty of memory-recall.
A quick review of features that have been discussed before.

The human species emerged together with a number of very similar anthropoids. They belonged to a large variety of species' that had become dependent upon the ability to modify their behaviour according to the circumstances. This capability of "behavioural flexibility" was developed by the anthropoids to a remarkable extent, but, only mankind survives as a representative of the anthropoid species' who set-out upon the road towards conscious or verbalisable awarenesses. A few, surviving anthropoid species` have long since sought refuge deep into the jungles, as far away from man as possible, because man was, and still is, by far their most dangerous enemy. Only Homo Sapiens survives as a species that experimented, extensively, with the possibilities given by the symbolic re-stimulation of memory-traces.

However, not only the anthropoids, but, all animals that explored the ability to modify or "fine-tune" their behaviour according to the circumstances, had to develop an elaborate central nervous system, capable of recording a large number of experiences. Past experiences could then serve as a guideline for the behaviour of an animal, whenever it would encounter a similar situation. Such a behaviourally flexible animal would, therefore, "automatically", or, at least, subconsciously, compare all incoming sensory data against past experiences. In this way, an animal would experience a "sense of recognition", whenever it encountered a familiar object, circumstance or event, and, because of this sense of recognition, or "familiarity", it finds it easier to shape its response to on-going events. The ability to recognise objects, circumstances and events as "familiar" also increases the ability to "predict", or foresee, the immediate future or outcome of on-going events.

The sense of familiarity facilitates the process of adaptation, because the animal can focus all its attention upon those features that are slightly different from this pattern of familiarity, and, by concentrating upon the details that differ, it may again recognise a similarity, because it may have encountered a similar variant from the overall pattern of familiarity. In this way, the animal is able to perceive, constantly, subtle but important differences from the more routine experiences.

An animal's behaviour is, therefore, shaped by the overall, genetically given range of physiological faculties and behaviour-patterns, together with a local, temporary "fine-tuning" of the behavoural response, depending on a check of the incoming sense impressions against past experiences that have been stored as "memory".

However, let us ask the question, how the brain is capable of "recognising" a particular situation, object or event as "familiar". Let us emphasise, first of all, that we are talking, here, about a "physiological" type of recognition. This type of recognition takes place in all animals that recognise an opportunity to get food or a situation that may endanger their life. We are talking, here, about mechanisms in cerebral function, which evolved well before the advent of a conscious awareness. These mechanisms of cerebral recognition evolved long before awarenesses could be verbalised or re-stimulated into a focus of conscious awareness with the help of some sort of a representative symbol.

We may be able to describe a few general principles of cerebral function in the behaviourally flexible animals, which may give us a "feel" for the way these animals accomplish their behavioural adjustments. These principles of operation will also provide a useful background for the evolution of "consciousness" or conscious awareness, without the need to describe known cerebral functions or anatomical features in detail.

The complex, behaviourally flexible animal is capable of recognising a familiar territory, object or animal, and, its entire behaviour indicates, that it can "learn". This means, that, it adapts its behaviour according to the circumstances. If we accept this interpretation of animal behaviour, we have to assume, that the central nervous system of these behaviourally flexible animals has developed the capability to retain a large number of memory-traces, representing previous experiences and situations that have been encountered by this particular animal.

However, the statement that a number of experiences are retained as memory-traces, does not mean very much, because the ability to recognise a familiar situation must mean, that some sort of "cerebral classification" takes place. In a classification, a number of items, be they conscious, verbalisable tools and instruments, or, a number of subconscious memory-traces, have to be placed into a category, but, the brain can only classify these experiences, if there exists some sort of a common denominator that is shared by all these experiences, in spite of the fact, that, these memory traces are not identical to each other and contain a number of accidental or incidental specifics that make them different from each other.

As we have outlined before, the ability to recognise would be nearly impossible, if previous experiences would be recorded with a precise, photographic exactness, because the slight differences of an actual, on-going experience would interfere with the mechanisms of recognition. Besides, such a photographic record of past experiences takes-up a large amount of "cerebral capacity", and, these mechanisms would reach, quickly, a physiological limit. Therefore, experiences are grouped-together around some sort of a common denominator, and, it is obvious, that none of these differences should be so pronounced that the common denominator is invalidated.

Certainly, this is a somewhat philosophical and generalised approach to the problem of cerebral function, and, we are still not quite successful in correlating the ideas of a "cerebral classification system" with the anatomically and physiologically known characteristics of the central nervous system.

Yet, I believe, that this relatively simple concept of a cerebral classification mechanism is important to keep in mind, because it helps us to oversee the overwhelmingly complex functions of the central nervous system, whenever we look at known anatomical and physiological details. The simple fact, that the process of recognition can and does take place, even, without the help of conscious or verbalisable awarenesses, means, that the central nervous system is able to store memory-traces in the form of categories, and, it means, also, that an incoming sense impression from a situation "as it exists at a specific moment", is compared with a group of appropriate memory-traces.

Sense impressions are analysed continuously, and, features that are given a "label", have been classified successfully and have been recognised as "familiar". However, there are always a number of sense impressions or awarenesses that can not be classified so easily. This evokes a sense of "strangeness", which has a strongly alerting influence upon the animal, because the animal does not know, as yet, the existential meaning of these strange, unfamiliar and non-classified sense impressions.

We want to emphasise this particular feature of "cerebral classification" in the behaviourally flexible animals, because it provides a useful background for the description of a "parallel" mental classification system. This mental classification system became a necessity, as soon as the repertoir of symbolically representable awarenesses began to grow rapidly. However, in contrast to the cerebral classification mechanisms that occur "automatically", (and are entirely under the control of the brain, and, thereby, under the control of the genetic code), the mental classification structures of verbalisable symbols, ideas, awarenesses, concepts, "knowledge", etc. is, largely, a voluntary process that has to be constructed as a deliberate act of our will. At least, it is absorbed or assimilated as a cultural heritage from the social environment in a learning process, and, it is, therefore, not directly under the influence of the genetic code. Yet, the overall form in which mental or conscious awarenesses are classified, represents a cerebral function, and, in this sense, the ability to form a mental classification system is, ultimately, a function of the genetic code.

We have described, on previous occasions, how we visualise conscious or verbalisable awarenesses to have arisen as a result of the frequent re-stimulation of memory-traces by imitative gesticulations and vocalisations. The ability to stimulate our memories or mental images into a focus of conscious awareness, without the physiological trigger of a similar or analogous circumstance, had an enormous impact upon the behaviour of animal groupings that started to "play" with these imitative gesticulations, and began to explore the possibilities of symbolic communications as a "pass-time".

Certainly, these ideas are speculative, and, the fact that we have discussed them extensively before, does not give us the right to present them, now, as a "matter of fact". Nevertheless, a frequent discussion of these ideas about the origins of verbalisable awarenesses has strengthened, at least, for me, the usefulness of this imagery, and, since we will, probably, not be able to prove or disprove, convincingly, whether or not this imagery is a valid explanation of the origins of conscious awareness, I will continue to use this imagery, until something better comes along.

However, this is an aside. We should return to the imagery that gives us a feeling of plausibility for the concepts of "conscious awareness", as well as for the manner in which such a conscious awareness may have come-about. Let us go back to the time, when socially integrated pre-human animals started to "re-live" the significant events of the day with the help of mimicry and vocalisations. Now and then, such a spontaneous act of mimicry was unusually sucessful, and, the other members of the group, who shared similar memory-traces because of the fact that they live together, would experience, suddenly, a flash of recognition, as they underwent a memory-recall, triggered by the mimicry that was being carried-out or acted-out by one of the members.

We have to appreciate the fact, that there is a marked difference between a recall taking place as a result of actually experiencing a similar situation, and, the recall of a memory-trace in totally different circumstances, evoked by an act of mimicry or re-enactment. The first type of "recall by association", is the "normal", physiological or analogous form of recall, which the evolutionary processes have shaped over many millions of generations. As we have seen, this recall makes the act of recognition possible in the first place, and, it serves as the basis for an appropriate behavioural adaptation of behaviourally flexible animals.

The recalled memory-trace, evoked by an act of mimicry, gives rise to a totally different situation, because the actual circumstances in which the recall takes place, may have nothing in common with the circumstances that are being recalled. The act of mimicry may evoke the memory of an exciting hunt or a daring escape, a moment of great danger and existential significance, while the act of mimicry takes place in the relative shelter and safety of "the camp", or the home environment.

This means, that it became possible to evoke, or stimulate, a number of experiences into a focus of awareness with the help of mimicry, gesticulations and vocalisations, without the same element of danger or existential significance that is always associated with an analogous experience. Certainly, the moment a "gifted actor" was able to evoke a scene of the hunt, or battle, with his gesticulations, the "audience" experienced, not only, a "flash of recognition", but, it experienced, also, a flash of associated emotions, which would accompany such an experience in a "real life" situation.

We still see, how an actor or interpreter moves his audience in essentially the same manner, because, with his speech and gestures, his clothes, props and theatrical scenery, he evokes, not only, a certain series of complex recognition-patterns in his audience, but, he also evokes a series of emotions. The successful actor "becomes" the character he portrays, just as our primitive actors in the primordial past of our burgeoning conceptual vocabulary, must have "become" the beast, the enemy, or the situation, which the actor was protraying during a spontaneous "memory flash-back" within himself.

You may want to ask me, why an "actor" in this primordial past of developing conscious awarenesses, would feel the need to re-enact an event that has flashed back into the focus of his consciousness. We may begin to answer this question by recalling, that, all highly significant experiences will recur, spontaneously, into a focus of awareness; at least, from time to time. If we experience this to be the case, now, in the present, where we can continuously verbalise and communicate these experiences with a smooth and easy flow of language-symbols, it is logical to assume, that, such a re-living would also occur in those animals of the past, which had not developed, as yet, the ability to communicate their experiences. Certainly, we have no indication, that, any of the contemporary flexible species', except, perhaps, the anthropoids, have a desire or inclination to "act-out" a previous experience, but, this does not preclude the possibility, that these animals could have, on occasion, a spontaneous "flash of memory-recall".

Besides, we should see this argument in the light of evolutionary developments. Let us assume, that most flexible animals, had, at least, at some time during their evolutionary history, a tendency to experience spontaneous memory-recalls rather frequently. Perhaps, many species', and, certainly, the anthropoids were likely to experiment with the possibilities given by spontaneous and evoked memory-recall. Species' that experienced a sense of beneft from these re-stimulated experiences would, naturally, but, entirely subconsciously, explore these potential benefits further, while animals that could not find any benefit in such spontaneous recalls, would not proceed any further on this pathway of evolutionary developments.

As a matter of logical extrapolation, we are probably justified to state, that, a hyper-excitable memory, which would frequently and spontaneously flash into a focus of awareness, even, after the situation or circumstances had passed, would be felt as a liability. It would be experienced as a confusing and exhausting nightmare, especially, to those species' that had no use for such experiences. As always, natural selection would weed-out what it does not use, and, the physiological basis for an excitable imagination with spontaneous flash-backs would be suppressed as a liability, unless it began to serve a useful function.

In the human species, this excitability of memory functions became the corner-stone for the development of a voluntary and communal recall of memory-traces, and, this ability to manipulate our memory-traces in the "quietude of an existentially calm environment", became the foundation for our conceptual mastery over the environment.

This is a quick review of features we have discussed before, and, we have elaborated, here, a feature that has not been discussed on previous occasions; nl. the spontaneous flash-back of a hyper-excitable imagination as a phyiological basis for the emergence of acts of mimicry, gesticulations and vocalisations.

.......

Chapter 4

Content

Accumulating a wealth of recallable mental images.
The need to learn a remarkably "stream-lined" symbol.
A "fact", or a reasonable "working hypothesis".
The transition from a "block-recall", to the careful "building-up" of a composite image that is "new", and has not been experienced.
Initially, memory-recall depends on having acquired a specific memory by actual experience, before it can be recalled.
In "secondary learning", an image can be synthesised from commonly available notions and features.
The shared awarenesses contained within a "cultural pool".
The road of abstraction and the verbalisation of common denominators.
Who did what? To whom? When, where and why?, etc.
Language symbols, and the criteria of usefulness.
The role of "qualifying attributes".
Our language reflects, how we think, and, how we try to grasp a reality that is centered around a verb or a noun.
The function of "logic".
A "bridgehead" for our efforts to communicate with each other.
Problems with a communication, or its author.
The need to resolve contradictions.
How does a square peg fit into a round hole?

Let us now concentrate on the wealth of ideas and images that are accumulating as a result of the mechanisms of voluntary memory-recall. With frequent use, it becomes easier to bring-back into a focus of attention a variety of familiar mental images, and, it becomes less necessary to go through an elaborate act of mimicry. As recall becomes easier, a stylised or stream-lined gesture, or a verbal allusion, is often sufficient to evoke a particular memory-trace, and, gradually, the processes of symbolic representation, be it in acting, gesticulations, spoken words or recorded images, slide from a faithful description of the represented mental imagery to a rather crude, stylised, or, even, arbitrary symbol. This arbitrary symbol has to be "learned", however, because it lacks the original connection with the reality it represents. Therefore, it lacks the power to evoke a particular mental image on its own, and, the audience has to learn to associate a particular, arbitrary symbol with a specific mental image.

It is time to leave this interesting field of speculations, where we visualise, how the ability of a conscious, verbalisable awareness arose. We have to concern ourselves with the developments that took place, after the conceptual vocabulary, or, at least, the number of representative symbols, began to increase dramatically. Here, again, we have to admit that these ideas are still largely speculative, and, it is not my intention to present this imagery as a generally accepted theory, but, merely as a reasonable working hypothesis, serving as a basis for further conceptual refinement, or, making itself obsolete, as we find a better image to replace it.

It seems safe to assume, that, initially, the commonly shared memory-traces within a small grouping or community of early human beings, could only be evoked, if the acting or mimicry was "fairly good", and, if it represented a reasonably faithful "description" of a paticular event. At the same time, we note, that a whole complex of details and specifics would also be evoked into a focus of attention by an act of mimicry, since the ability to direct attention to specific details, or, to shape deliberately the contours of the evoked imagery, had not yet developed. In other words, the mental image evoked would be in the form of an "entire scene", which we, in our contemporary mastery, could describe with a great variety of words, or, even, a number of sentences.

Indeed, in a later stage of development, an entire scene or event would be recalled, or "described", by a large number of symbolic representations, or "words", which, together, depict such a complex scene or event. At the same time, we also note, that it is, then, possible to "build-up" a "new" mental image with the help of commonly shared symbolic representations, and, we are not dealing, anymore, with the recall of an entire sequence of memory-traces, which has been registered when an individual witnessed an important event.

How did such a transition from the "block-recall" of an entire scene to the build-up with the help of a large number of symbolic representations come-about? Obviously, it is possible to describe a scene far more precisely with a great number of symbols, concepts, awarenesses or ideas, compared to the wholesale recall of an entire scene by triggering the specific memory-trace of this particular event.

Indeed, the primary limitation of the more primitive symbolic representations was represented by the fact, that these symbolic representations lacked the ability to focus attention on specific features. As long as everyone in the community had shared, or seen, the event that was being depicted by the author of an act of mimicry, the evoked memory-trace was roughly similar for all participants, but, if an event was acted-out, which had not been witnessed by everyone, those, who had not seen it, would have difficulties understanding what exactly happened.

Certainly, they had seen or participated in similar events before, and, therefore, the overall lines of the story or event were understood, but, it remained difficult for the person who was not intimately involved, to know, e.g., who did what, or, to whom, or, when it happened; who killed the animal or the enemy, and, who fled or hid, etc., etc. It seems reasonable to postulate, therefore, that, slowly, a series of secondary symbolic representations arose, which "clarified", at least, to some extent, what happened.

We have discussed, before, the idea, that a classification of verbalisable objects or events had to take place, because it would be impossible to remember a large number of stylised symbols, especially, if these symbols would not have been ordened properly or categorised efficiently. In this process of classification, the common features of an entire group of events or items of existence found, slowly, a separate awareness and symbolic expression, and, the individual members of a group of related awarenesses were, then, designated as "variants". In other words; an item or object could be identified, first of all, by indicating the class to which it belonged, and, then, it could be identified, more precisely, by a specific quality or a further description, indicating its uniqueness. This is the road towards the "abstraction" of common denominators and qualifying attributes, and, without these mental or psychological techniques, the evolution of speech and language would not have been possible.

In a way, we note, how a similar process of categorisation ordens a series of happenings or events. Initially, the entire story, so to speak, was represented by a single act of mimicry, but, as the recall of a memory-trace became facilitated by experience, the symbolic representations became much shorter. This led to the possibility to represent the "common denominator" of a number of events. Such a common denominator could be the action in generalised form, without the specifics of who took part, where or when it happened, etc. After having indicated an action, an event or a happening, the specifics could, then, be added by a series of separate symbols. Who carried-out the action, or, who was the participant in an event. Who did what, to whom, and when, where, why. We have learned to manipulate these specifying indicators of an event with great dexterity, and, we rarely think about the laborious linguistic or symbolic experimentations that must have taken place, before it was possible to obtain such a great precision in the description of complex circumstances and numerous details.

We can still see in the language of smaller groupings, and, especially, in the symbolic communications of primitive and isolated tribes, that these mechanisms of secondary abstractions are far less advanced. In many instances, there are separate symbols which do not recognise a relationship, while we, capable of handling a more sophisticated language and reality perception, would recognise such differing phenomena or experiences as variations of essentially the same item or event.

This does not necessarily mean, that the more primitive language or the smaller group is always less discerning, or, that it has failed to developed the differentiations we are aware of. On occasions, a more primitive language makes distinctions that are meaningless or unnoticed by us. For example, a small group or tribe, living close to nature, will often give a much greater significance to variations in the local environment, compared to people, who do not live as closely to their natural environment. People, living close to nature, have then many more names or shades of differentiations for a number of specific items or events, compared to the language of a larger and more sophisticated grouping that is not so dependent upon local features.

However, let us come back to the concept, that, as a rule, the symbolic representation refines itself by a process of ordening, where a variety of representations are grouped-together around a common denominator. Individual variations in existence or happening are then specified by qualifying attributes. This definition applies to the classification and specification of objects and items of existence, as well as happenings or events.

I do not pretend to be a linguist, and, I have not made a specific study of the way linguists analyse and approach the study of a language. I have found it convenient to keep this basic classification of static and changing aspects of observation in mind. Such a conception of the use and evolution of language-symbols seems to correspond with the evolutionary developments of conscious or verbalisable awarenesses, and, it seems helpful to consider language as a structure of common denominators for our numerous awarenesses, together with its many specifying qualities or attributes.

We tend to call the specifying characteristics of static observations, like objects or items, "qualities", while the qualifying or specifying attributes of events or happenings are more complex. Here, we make use of a large variety of descriptive or specifying symbols, which indicate an answer to the questions; who, or, to whom, where, when and why, as well as the more elaborate conditional propositions. We do not just describe what happened in the past, is happening now, or, will, perhaps, happen in the near future, but, we also speculate, what would happen, if...., or, when...., etc. Or, we may utter a wish that something should or ought to happen. If we examine language closely, we see, how it reflects the way we think and continuously clarify and specify the overall characteristics of a situation that has been indicated by a verb or a noun.

Perhaps, it is time to say a few words about the function or capability of "logic", because, we tend to approach the concept of logic with a measure of mystery and timidity, or, we reject it as a tool for clever deceit or unscrupulous intimidation. Logic is frequently hidden in a rather austere and somewhat out-dated tradition of scholastic thought, and, it is shrouded by the largely incomprehensible efforts of contemporary logical positivists.

I prefer to look at the functions of logic from a physiological or organic point of view, and, we should again review, briefly, the processes of classification by common denominator, and, the specification of a specific awareness by qualifying attributes. After we have outlined the general thrust of our communication by stating the action, people and objects involved, we spend a lot of time, and words, clarifying and sharpening, or "polishing" the imagery, so, that, eventually, the meaning of what we want to say is precise and can be clearly understood by everyone who makes an effort to do so. At least, this is, or should be, the objective of every communication, but, we nearly always fail, at least, to some extent.

Let us analyse, for a moment, why we fail, so often. First of all, there may be a significant difference in the extent of our conceptual vocabulary, or the way we interpret the meaning of our conceptual symbols. Such a "mismatch" between the interpretation of common symbols is difficult to overcome, and, it requires good-will, patience and a persistent effort to bring, first of all, the commonly shared concepts and ideas into a focus of attention, in order to establish a basis, or "bridgehead", for an attempt to communicate with each other.

There may be other problems. The author of a communication may not be quite certain about specific details. During the process of communication, he may come to realise, more precisely, what he knows, and, what he does not know. A careful communicator could bring-out this difference quite clearly to his audience, but, his audience may not always be appreciative of such an honest effort to be precise, because it is often difficult to understand and retain these differences, and, the attention-span of an audience is quite short. Often, an author leaves details deliberately vague, in order to conceal the boundaries between knowledge and speculation, and, to leave room to the audience to fill-in the details "as they wish".

There is always the temptation for an author to "please" his audience; to play upon the emotions of his public; to communicate in such a way, that the emphasis is not on a precision of understanding, but, on the synchronisation of a specific mood or attitude. This shows us the ability of a clever communicator to manipulate the mood of his audience as he pleases.

However, let us assume, here, that a communication is taking place in a small group, where the atmosphere is calm, and, where everyone wants to get as precise a picture as possible. This will be accomplished by a dialogue, where every participant has the opportunity to ask additional questions in order to sharpen one's mental imagery as much as possible.

Nevertheless, questions and discussions always include speculations, assumptions and anticipations. During the process of sharpening the mental imagery of a particular perception of reality, it is necessary to make sure, that, none of the specifying or qualifying attributes are contradicting each other. When there are contradictions, they have to be resolved, and, this can be done, either, by a refinement in the understanding of the conditions, or, by rejecting one or several qualifying attributes as erroneous or impossible.

For example; if we ask the question, "how can a square peg fit into a round hole", there are several answers. The most obvious answer is to point-out the essential contradiction between being round and being square, and, it is logical to point-out that one shape can not be made to conform to the other, without losing the essential characteristic that has been given in the qualifications of roundness and squareness. These qualifications are contradictory and mutually exclusive.

However, there is another answer. One can say, simply, that a square peg fits into a round hole, if the diagonal of the square equals the diameter of the circle of the round hole. But, you will say, it does not really fit, then, because the square peg only touches the round hole at its edges. Precisely, and, we may then launch into a discussion of the meaning of the concept "fitting into". Does it mean a conformity in contour over the entire length, or, does it only mean, that the square goes snugly into he round hole, as it touches with all four edges of its square corners against the circular wall of the round hole?

The contradiction is resolved, either, by rejecting one of the qualifying specifics, or, by re-examining and re-defining the meaning of one of the concepts used in this apparent contradiction. Clearing-up inconsistencies and contradictions is the essence of logic, and, we will see, that we are always engaged in this sort of mental activity, whenever we think and act logically.

.......

Chapter 5

Content

When logic becomes beautiful.
The beauty of clarity and precision.
A precise and deliberate imagery of indecisiveness; impressionism.
Returning to the concept of a common denominator.
A wide choice of criteria for classifying conscious awarenesses.
The essence of scientific work.
Building-up a dynamic picture of causes and their effects.
Observing similarities in appearances and events.
A look at the phenomena of ebb and flood.
The evolution of conceptual images and explanations.
A scaffold for the images of reliance and truth.
Synthetic aspects in putting-together a coherent imagery of reality.
Sloppy and hasty conclusions will never lead to a durable or useful perception of reality.
Sketching a tentative "working hypothesis".
Why the "synthesist" has to be bold and daring.
Large-scale parallels that cut across traditional scientific boundaries.
Essential features of the living organisation.
Parallel developments in cerebral and mental systems of classification.
A stimulus for thought and debate.

Logic becomes beautiful, if we forget about the somewhat narrow and traditional connotations associated with the concept of logic, because we see, that the beauty and persuasiveness of a story, or a work of art, depends upon a good, if intuitive, use of our faculties of clarification and precision. Perhaps, you object to the idea, that the beauty, appeal and persuasiveness of art are, necessarily, a function of clarity and precision. What about the softness of contour or the vagueness of an impressionistic expression? Why have these forms of art found a great deal of attractiveness, if art is supposed to be clear and precise?

Indeed, the qualification of clarity and precision does not prescribe or exclude a specific technique of communication. In the art of impressionism, as well as many other forms of art, we are not dealing with a photographic precision, or an invariant application of pre-conceived rules or methods. People are always looking for innovative ways to communicate or express their ideas and feelings, and the lack of clarity, the ambiguity of our existence, as well as the ambivalence of our moods, can find a beautiful and persuasive expression in a technique that reflects this element of imprecision and vagueness.

However, it becomes only great art, if the technique is clear and precise in its intentions, and, if it conveys, precisely, what it wants to convey. If it wants to convey a lack of precision, an indecisiveness, a softness of contours or vagueness in outline, let it do so, decisively and precisely. Once again, we see the resolution of an apparent contradiction. By equating the beauty and attractiveness of art with a measure of logic and precision, we seemed to run into difficulties explaining the persuasiveness of art-forms that were vague and impressionistic in nature, until we realised, and formulated clearly, the idea, that the qualities of clarity and precision apply to the intention and technical mastery of a communication, and not, to the form and content of an expression.

Let us accept, then, the fact, that logic and clarity of expression go hand in hand, and, that a particularly convincing, logical and clear communication, be it artistic, philosophic or scientific in nature, will evoke a sense of beauty and admiration, if the reader, or art-lover, appreciates the effort, precision, clarity of thought, as well as attention to detail, which have gone into a particular work of art.

It is time, now, to move back to our previous line of thought, where we began to analyse the parallelism, or similarities, between many phenomena. We have traced a short over-view of the mechanisms that may give us some insight, how, and why, the human species developed the ability to communicate with verbalisable symbols, and, we have discussed, briefly, the origin and function of language.

Let us consider the similarities between the classification of events and objects into categories, as well as the much broader observation, that there are parallels between events or circumstances in fields of vision that are usually not compared with each other. The possibility to extract a common denominator from a number of items or events, means, that this common denominator is the feature that is similar to all the members forming a group of events. Frequently, this common denominator is, at the same time, an explanation for the reasons, why the events or items of existence belong together.

For example, if we group-together all human beings as a single species, we do this on the basis, that we share the same gene-pool, and, the common denominator of a shared gene-pool is, at the same time, the reason for the concept, that human beings form a single species. If we narrow our focus, we can see regional differences in this common gene-pool, leading to varying racial characteristics. These differences can, then, also be used as the common denominator for a particular race, but, we know, that the boundaries are vague and tend to blur, especially, when inter-mingling and inter-marrying has been taking place, recently.

The vagueness of racial contours is due to the fact, that all races are genetically compatible with each other. In other words; the differences between human races have never led to such a degree of divergence, that genetic compatibility was lost, and, we have discussed, on previous occasions, that the evolution into diverging species' is based upon a break in this bond of sexual compatibility.

For example, we can take as a common denominator between people, a certain language or cultural characteristic, the geographical area or habitat, or, a kinship relationship. It is interestng to note, how we can choose, almost at will, from a large number of criteria or common denominators, and, as a result, the groupings change continuously. In other words; different aspects of similarity are emphasised and different classifications arise as a result, depending on the common denominator that has been chosen as the classifying principle.

We can easily extend a particular grouping by choosing a common denominator that crosses the boundaries of species specificity. For example, if we take as a common denominator the ability to "learn", we group-together a very large variety of behaviourally flexible animals, and, depending upon our definition of learning, we may include nearly all life-forms in such a category.

We can also choose the method of procreation as a criterium for classfication. We may emphasise the distinction between sexual and a-sexual procreation, or, we can focus our attention upon the various methods by which the off-spring are brought into the world; e.g. the laying of eggs, or, the "live birth" of mammalian species'.

We do not have to stay within the realm of living organisms to find a great variety of criteria for the classification of various phenomena. For example, atomic elements may be classified according to their atomic weight, the number of orbiting electron shells, or, their tendency to absorb from, or give-off electrons into, the outer electron shells of other elements or molecules. Molecules are chemical combinations of a variety of largely dissimilar atoms, and, they can be grouped and classified in many different ways or "systems". In short, we classify the realm of the "macroscopic", or, the "directly visible" world of nature by numerous qualities, attributes and distinctions, which we have learned to become aware of and give a name to, while the manner in which we classify the phenomena of the "microscopic" world, reflects the evolutionary history and the methods by which we have developed this imagery.

We are still engaged in these processes. The world of scientific endeavour, of unraveling relationships and making more comprehensible groupings, is going-on all the time. Scientists, working in the realm of sub-atomic physics, are trying to put-together a plausible picture of sub-atomic events and elemental particles by creating coherent groupings and cause and effect relationships, and, this reminds us of the fact, that we use, not only, static qualities, features and attributes as the classifying principles for a grouping, but, we can also use the outline of an event, or its internal, causative mechanisms, as criteria for classification.

For example, if we look at a shower of rain-drops or snow-flakes, we can focus our attention upon the similarity of all the rain-drops or snow-flakes, and, we can describe these similarities as a physical constant of appearance, but, we can also group them together by the common mechanisms that take place during their formation, descent and growth of rain-drops and snow-flakes.

We can follow the events when water evaporates under the influence of sun-light, and, we can note its condensation as vapour clouds, its travels with the wind, its accumulation into low-pressure areas, as well as the cooling and condensation into "precipitation", when areas that are saturated with water-vapour come into contact with colder air-mases. There is a balance between the ability of the air to carry water-vapour and the temperature of the air. This balance determines the maximum concentration of water-vapour the air can carry at any particular moment. This maximum level or "saturation point" is lowered, when the air is cooled-off, and, this explains the condensation of water-vapours into droplets or snow-flakes, as well as their growth as they start to fall towards the earth under the force of gravity.

It is true, that, many of the mechanisms in such a dynamic picture of causes and their effects are complicated. Many of us have some idea, why a certain event takes place, but, most of the time, our ideas are somewhat vague and imprecise, and, we are, usually, not aware of a very important distinction; is this vagueness due to the fact, that, we, as a community of informed members or scientists, do not have better ideas or anwers, or, is this vagueness and imprecision due to our particular lack of knowledge and understanding, which could be corrected, if we wanted to study, learn, or ask questions, from people, who are familiar with a particular field of knowledge?

The observation of a similarity between certain objects and events, has, frequently, been a stimulus to investigate, why such an apparent parallelism exists. For example, people, living in an area with a spectacular rise and fall of the tides, must have noted, that the waxing and waning of the tides had something to do with the changing appearances of the moon, and, they may also have noted, that the timing of the tide had something to do with the position of the moon in relation to the sun.

A long series of observations by interested and intrigued people over many generations, have made such observable phenomena more understandable by creating some sort of a classification for these phenomena. This classification may be entirely "statistical", where its predictive value is based, exclusively, upon an extrapolation of recognised patterns of events, without understanding or grasping the underlying causative mechanisms. However, the phenomenon may indeed by grasped in a beautifully coherent scheme of cause and effect relationships. The latter form of grasp and understanding gives, not only, a great predictive power to the events under observation, but, it may also tie-in a large area of related, or, even, apparently unrelated phenomena.

Certainly, it is true, that man has always tried to "explain" a phenomenon, after a certain correlation had been established as a fact by a large series of observations, and, we know, how most, if not all, of the excercises in comprehension give-way, eventually, to another, usually more comprehensive mental imagery of causes and their effects.

There is, therefore, no reason to believe, that our contemporary or current "explanations" will have an eternal durability, or an absolute validity, but, we may, somewhat paradoxically, enhance the viability or durability of our mental imagery, if we are able to make this imagery more flexible. We can make it more flexible by recognising the mental nature of the perceptions of our realities, and, by accepting the remarkable flexibility that comes with a concept of "relative validity". This means, simply, that we keep in mind, at all times, the fact, that, the apparent reality and validity of our explanations and perceptions, remains dependent upon the state of our knowledge, as well as the imagery of the assumptions we have accepted as "unquestionable truths".

However, let us refrain, here, from discussing the relativity of truth, because we will come back to it, later in this essay. We have a rough idea, now, why, and how, we tend to classify phenomena and events into categories with the help of common denominators, and, we have a rough idea, how we identify each particular member of a group by a series of attributes or specifics. We have seen, how the observation of similarities may be a spur to ask for the reasons, why something or some event appears to be the way it is, but, we also know, that a scientific inquiry is, often, initiated or motivated by the observation of discrepancies; by a sense of dissatisfaction with the answers given to the question "why", as well as by a vague, ill-defined desire to tie-in more of the observable Universe into a comprehensive and understandable imagery.

This last feature of science, the "synthetic aspects" of our faculty of understanding, is very attractive to me. I have discussed, before, why the methods with which we have to accomplish such a synthetic imagery of reality differ from the analytic tools of science. Yet, the synthetic side shares with the analytic methods a careful and thoughtful approach, weighing, carefully, the validity of statements, and, scrutinising, constantly, for discrepancies and areas of unnecessary vagueness and imprecision.

Sloppy and hasty conclusions will never lead to a durable perception or interpretation of reality, but, on occasion, we have to gamble and dare to sketch a tentative picture as a "working hypothesis". The effort to synthesise an overall picture of reality differs remarkably from the analytic approach, because the fields of vision are opposite to each other.

The "analyst" looks at a fragment of reality, and, he is dissatisfied with analysing and putting-together a number of features in the available field of perceptions and explanations. He is acutely aware of discrepancies that have been given insufficient attention, and, as a result, he focusses his attention on an even smaller "sub-field". The "synthetist" takes a large number of basic and agreed-upon images from a number of widely diverging fields and tries to put them together into a coherent, wide-ranging philosophical canvas. The "synthesist" has to be bold and daring, however, because in his attempts to paint such a coherent picture, he can not hide behind the excuse that some areas lack scientific details.

It is difficult for the philosophical synthesist to neglect the fields of religion, morality, ethical behaviour-patterns and concerns, social and political goals, just because these fields have no firm roots of facts and interpretation. It would be rather narrow and unsatisfactory to neglect all these fields and concentrate on a minute concern, such as e.g. the function of logic, or the meaning of words.

The method of bringing-out large-scale parallels that cut across traditional scientific boundaries, is, therefore, an essential tool in the repertoir of the synthesist, or painter of a wide-ranging philosophical canvas, because these parallels give meaning, structure, depth and a perspective to the philosophical inquiry.

We want to discuss, therefore, a number of such parallels, but, some of them will be controversial, because we may not all agree that these parallels are there, and, we may certainly disagree about the finer details of these parallels. One of the parallels we want to discuss, is the following; we want to discuss the gradual increase in complexity in the evolution of inorganic matter, as well as living organisms. The idea, that matter evolves, will be strange to many readers, and, even the concepts of a natural evolution of living organisms, including the human being, will be rejected by those, who believe, that the variety of living organisms, as well as other items of existence, are the result of an act of Divine Creation.

We will also discuss the parallel phenomena, or, the "essential features", shared by all living organisms throughout the realm of life, and, we will see, that common denominators play a role, here, too, when trying to understand these processes. Then, we want to discuss the phenomena of "social integration", which we can see in the mechanisms of the single cell. Here, biochemical complexes make the functions of the cell possible by their complex inter-actions and inter-dependencies, and, we see the same process of social ordening, whenever the cells arrange themselves into the orderly society of a multi-cellular organism. From here, we want to extrapolate the next step, when a number of multi-cellular oganisms organise themselves into a social unit. As a sideline, we should emphasise, once again, the remarkable differences between an insect colony and a socially integrated unit of behaviourally flexible organisms.

We will recall, briefly, the parallel developments of the cerebral and mental classification systems, but, at this time, we want to bring-out another interesting parallel. We want to trace, in overall terms, the parallels between the anthropomorphic forces of man's own behaviour-patterns, (including those of the large animals in his natural environment), and, the anthropomorphic forces which man attributed to the world of "super-natural existence".

As we mentioned in the beginning of this essay, the final and, perhaps, most important parallel we all assume to exist, at least, tacitly, is the parallel between the reality "as we observe it", and, the reality "as it exists", independently from our own existence.

We hope, that the patient reader will agree, that it was worthwhile to have a look at these parallels, and, that this look contributed, in some way, to a comprehensive overall view of the realities in which we live. We all need to make this synthesising effort, because we all want to obtain, or regain, a sense of control over our realities, as well as a sense of grasp over the social environment in which we live.

Of course, an agreement that it was useful to look at these large-scale and broadly laid-out parallels does not imply, that everyone will have the same perspective. Even, if these sketches serve only as a stimulus for further thought, the effort that has gone into them will have been worthwhile.

.......

Chapter 6

Content

Forms of existence evolve from each other in a smoothly flowing manner.
The evolution of matter.
Forging atomic elements in intra-stellar furnaces.
The evolution of mono-theistic thought.
Creation and Evolution are both "stories of belief".
Why we have a strong desire to believe in a Creator.
Global acceptance is never possible for a reality perception that has cloaked itself with an aura of absolute validity.
Every form of existence is subjected to some pressure-gradient.
The birth and decay of elementary particles.
The solar system, and its origins from "left-over" debris.
Gravitational contraction, nuclear fires, and an ultimate collapse.
The end; a gigantic explosion; the "nova", and the "white dwarf".
The contraction of matter into a "neutron star".
Biochemical and molecular transformations, leading to the phenomena of life under "early terrestial" circumstances.

The idea that forms of existence evolve from each other in a smoothly flowing manner, is based upon the observation, that "everything changes", sooner or later. Only recently have we come to realise, how literally true this is, even, for such a seemingly immobile mass as a continent, a star, or, the apparently indestructible unit of an atomic element. Sooner or later, everything changes, even, if some changes never occur during our life-time, and, many forms of existence do not change in the environment we happen to live in.

When we look at events on a cosmic scale, the expanse of the Universe, as well as the cosmic time-scale, we see, that, not a single atomic, sub-atomic or molecular structure will exist forever. None of the massive aggregates of matter, such as stars or galaxies, are immune to change. We have discussed in the essay "Oscillations", how matter and energy transform into each other, and, we have also outlined the concept that matter "evolves". This occurs, partly, in the "emptiness" of outer space, whenever radiant energy transforms itself, under certain conditions, into an orbital, or "matter" form of energy, and, partly, as a series of nuclear transformations within stellar interiors.

A whole series of increasingly heavy atomic structures are forged in the interior of gigantic stars. These stellar interiors become nuclear furnaces and forges, as a result of the extremely high pressures and temperatures generated under the influence of massive gravitational contraction and the mechanisms of nuclear fusion.

Before we elaborate our ideas about the evolution of matter any further, we should look at the reasons, why the concept of a deliberate Creation by an Intelligent Being is such a widely accepted explanation for the existence of all forms of existence. The belief in a Created Origin for all existence, is, by far, the oldest and most widespread explanation for the origin of all things, and, even, those of us, who have come to accept the much more modern and scientifically oriented concepts of evolutionary change, should be able to understand, why the concept of a Creator, and the Creation of life and matter, are, not only, logical, but inescapable, especially, for people who have not been exposed to scientific concepts and ideas.

Let us not forget, that it requires a thorough familiarity with scientific insights into the evolution of life and matter-energy, before these ideas can become plausible, and function as a corner-stone for the interpretation of our realities. For those, who do not have a broad exposure to the logical coherence of a large number of phenomena in a scientifically sound framework of concepts, reality unfolds intself, just as it has unfolded for many thousands of generations of human beings, who had to rely, exclusively, upon their naked senses, the traditionally transmitted beliefs and concepts of their social environment, as well as a measure of common-sense and individual decision-making, whenever they were building a plausible and concerned imagery of the realities they were confronted with.

From the history of religious beliefs, as well as the slow evolution towards a mono-theistic interpretation of reality, we see, clearly, that early man, as well as most people living today, have a strong, intuitive conviction, that only a Creator, a Superior Intelligence, or an Unfathomable Consciousness, can bring-about the myriad of complex forms of existence we are confronted with. For these people, an explanation in terms of evolutionary principles is foreign and unattractive.

In the theory of evolution, the myriad of phenomena are presented as the result of a blind, searching, natural force, and, this is an imagery that is even more unreal and incredible than the story of Creation; at least, the story of Creation has lost credibility for us us, because we have had the good fortune to be exposed to a broad and coherent scientific imagery.

Some of us find the ideas of evolutionary change sufficiently comprehensive to make them the fundamental building-blocks of our reality perceptions, and, if we are serious about our desire to let a majority of living human beings share in such imagery, we will have to create a very careful, extensive and persuasive program of education. In this program, we should emphasise, not only, the technique of bringing a plausible image of evolutionary change and development to our students, but, we will also have to develop a coherent explanation for the reasons and motivations, why so many people remain suspicious of the imagery of evolutionary change. In other words; the scientfic imagery of evolutionary change and natural developments has to include a plausible picture of man, his physical as well as psychological existence, and, we have to explain, in clear terms, the origins of our behaviour, as well as the reasons for our beliefs and motivations.

We have to understand our desire to believe in a Creator, and, especially, in a personal God, who rewards the just and punishes the wicked. Only, then, can we hope to be convincing, as well as compassionate, whenever we criticise the intellectual short-comings of religious beliefs. Only, then, can we hope to present an alternative imagery, that is much more difficult to accept, intellectually as well as emotionally, and much less satisfying, psychologically.

However, this difficult imagery will, eventually, unite us into a viable social unit of global dimensions, and, it will foster a development in mutual understanding and tolerance, which has not been possible, and, will never be possible for a belief structure that adheres to the idea and practice of an absolute truth.

This, however, is an aside that seemed to slip out spontaneously, because it touches upon a subject close to my heart. Let us return to the main theme of our discussion and recapitulate, briefly, why, and how, we visualise, in the imagery of our modern times, matter to evolve from the simple to the complex; from the lighter elements to the heavier ones. No form of existence, nor any structure of beliefs, is eternally stable, because of the fact, that, every form of existence is always subjected to some sort of pressure- or energy-gradient. This pressure- or energy-gradient will change every form of existence at some time in the future, because these forces will exceed the internal resistance of a particular form of existence, sooner or later.

Radiant light may exist for centuries, or, perhaps, even, for billions of years, (if our interpretations about the quasi-stellar objects in the Universe are correct), but, sooner or later, this light, as well as any electro-magnetic radiation, is absorbed by an existing complex of matter, or, it may collide with another radiating form of electro-magnetic existence, transforming itself into some sort of an elementary particle after its radiant existence has become unstable.

True, our imagery is speculative, and, we do not really know, what kind of elementary particles may be created by the collisions of various quanta of radiant energy, or "photons". Neither do we know, what happens to these elementary particles, as they float through space, tossed, here and there, by electro-magnetic radiation that is coming at them from all sides. Probably, most elementary particles are broken-up again, and the resulting electro-magnetic forms of radiation are absorbed by, or super-imposed on, a passing wave-train of electro-magnetic energy, but, some elementary particles may form more stable complexes, as they combine and seek a measure of stability by forming conglomerates.

We have explained, before, that the use of the term "seeking" does not imply an active, anthropomorphic, teleological or purposeful action, but, that it can be compared with water flowing over the ground, filling-up a niche, then here, then there, as its fluidity or low internal resistance and the force of gravity work together to carry-out a smooth and flowing adaptation of water to its physical environment.

We have also discussed the idea, that elementary particles may be formed by the "interlocking" of electro-magnetic quanta. These quanta of energy find a possibility to exist on account of their rotatory momentum as they orbit around each other, while the stability of existence for a radiating quantum of energy is found in a high-velocity propagation of an electro-magnetic "wave-front".

To what extent elementary particles fuse spontaneously in "empty space" is still a matter of speculation, and, we have discussed the reasons, why many elementary particles are likely to show a net electro-static charge, such as the electron. Many complementary particles may form as a result of the presence of electro-static bonds or force-fields.

We are not suggesting, that the electron is such an elementary particle that arose from a collision between, or inter-locking of electro-magnetic quanta, because the electron is, probably, already a much more complex and composite particle. In the picture of a positively charged atomic nucleus and its surrounding cloud of negatively charged electrons, we may see a process that is analogous to the formation of composite and complementary particle formation.

Regardless of the exact nature in which elementary particles are formed, we may state, that, at one stage or another during the evolution of matter, a fairly stable, electro-statically neutral particle emerged, which drifed in huge quantities through space as "inter-stellar gas", made-up primarily of hydrogen atoms. A hydrogen atom consists of a proton and an electron, making it into an electro-static neutral particle. At this stage in the evolution of the Universe, this gas exists in between the already heavier and more condensed gravitational "bodies". These electro-statically neutral elementary particles are able to aggregate as a result of the phenomenon of "gravitational attraction". These aggregates become, eventually, large and dense enough to form a "nuclear furnace", or a "star", where the further evolution and forging of more complex matter particles or atomic nuclei takes place.

Let us forego, here, a discussion about the nature and origin of gravitational attraction, because we have speculated, extensively, in the essay "Oscillations" about these and related phenomena. Let us remind ourselves, that we have good scientific evidence to believe, that, indeed, a sort of "material evolution" takes place, and, that the incorporation of many heavy elements in the composition of our planet, means, that the origin of the solar system took place, largely, from nuclear debris that was "left-over" from the giant stars that formed early in the history of our galaxy.

These giant stars provided a large number of "nuclear fires", and, as a result, a large number of atomic elements were formed in the varying zones of temperature and pressure, which formed a nuclear furnace, or forge, within these huge stars. We also know, from astronomical observations, that most of these giant stars with multiple levels of nuclear transformations, had, and still have, a tendency to die a violent death, as they explode in gigantic eruptions, called "novae". In the light of present knowledge, it seems reasonable to attribute all the atomic elements that are heavier than hydrogen, to the forging actions of such giant stars, which have long since vanished. At least, they have vanished from our "neighbourhood".

The imagery of this "material evolution" is quite new and has not really been widely taught, as yet, but, it seems, at least, to me, that the overall conceptual outlines of the evolution of matter are sufficiently well established and accepted to be taught widely at schools all over the world.

"Not so quick", you want to say to me, because you will point-out that the generally accepted concept of a nuclear transformation includes the destruction of matter and the liberation of a large quantity of radiation. "How do we have to visualise these forces at work, forging complex nuclei for heavy atomic elements?"

True, radiant energy can be liberated, when a complex and unstable atomic nucleus "disintegrates", such as we see in the fission of an uranium atom, but, we still are left with large quantities of orbital matter. However, a part of the "weight" or mass of the uranium molecule has been converted back into an intense radiation. In other words; some of the energy trapped as an orbital form of existence has been "liberated" into a radiant form of existence. However, it is important to realise, that the energy-balance has been scrupulously maintained. The energy that has come free as radiant energy represents exactly the same amount of energy that was contained by the matter, that has now "disappeared".

Similarly, in a "fusion-reaction" a large amount of energy can be liberated as two or more lighter elements are "forged" by the extremely high temperatures and pressures of a stellar interior into a more stable and more complex form of existence; a "heavier" nucleus. The sub-nuclear structures that, somehow, bind together into a complex, oscillating and orbiting complex of highly energetic particles and anti-particles, which make up a nucleus, become unstable under the extremely high intra-stellar pressures and temperatures within the nuclear furnace of a star. Part of these "nucleons" or sub-nuclear particles are transformed into radiant energy, while others are grouped together into an even more complex configuration that is better able to resist the existing high pressures and temperatures.

We may state, in overall terms, that the extremely high temperatures and pressures, generated by gravitational contractions of huge material aggregates, make the existence of the lighter elements less stable. These lighter atomic elements have a tendency to disintegrate into a large number of nucleons or fragments of nuclei, which get a chance to weave more complex, but, also, more compact patterns of orbital co-existence as a result of the local circumstances. Matter becomes more "compact" as it yields to the gravitational contraction, while the liberation of huge quantities of radiant energy is counter-acting these gravitational pressures, at least, for a while.

This balance between radiation and gravitational contraction is the cause for the local "climate", as well as the possibilities for heavier atomic elements to be forged in the nuclear furnaces. As long as there is enough "fuel" to sustain these nuclear transformation processes, the star maintains a measure of stability, but, if the fuel runs-out and the level of radiation diminishes, there is a tendency for the star to "collapse" into a more densely concentrated form of energy and matter, which opens-up a new series of nuclear transformations. The end-result of this process is the contraction of a star into a "white dwarf", or a neutron star, made-up of neutrons rather than atoms. At least, this is the mental picture I have of these matters, and, it may well have been refined and changed to a considerable extent by the time you are trying to follow this discussion on "parallel phenomena".

Let us proceed to the, for me, more familiar terrain of the evolution of life, where we see, also, an increasing complexity of molecular structures. Let us emphasise, however, the essential difference between atomic and molecular transformations, because the atomic transformations take place in the world of particle-physics and extreme conditions of pressures and temperatures within stars, while the molecular transformations that lead, eventually, to the phenomena of life, are, so far as we know, a process that takes place in the much less extreme conditions that exist on the surface of a planet, like the earth.

It seems fair to state, that the range of inorganic molecular transformations as we know them, can take place under "normal" terrestial circumstances, but, the "biochemical" molecular transformations are much more dependent upon a rather narrow range of physical conditions, as they happened to be present at an early stage in the evolution of our planet. These early, primordial protoplasmic conditions are still being maintained and reproduced by a number of regulatory mechanisms, taking place within the protoplasmic interior of a living cell.

Nevertheless, it seems logical to conclude, that, planets, with similar physical conditions as the early earth, should also exhibit a strong tendency to evolve the existence of living organisms. So far, we have no knowledge of the existence of another planet that has developed and sustained life as we know it. Surprisingly, all the other planets in our solar system seem to differ quite markedly in their physical conditions of existence, and, none of them seems to have evolved, to any extent, the biochemical and molecular transformations that led to the phenomena of life on our own planet.

.......

Chapter 7

Content

One billion years of protoplasmic evolution, summarised in a few sentences.
Fluidity, seen as one of the most characteristic features of the living organisation.
Features of the living cell; cellular physiology in outline.
An inexorable tendency towards complexity.
A high degree of rigidity leads to immutability and "lifelessness".
The need for a continuous influx of energy.
The concept of entropy; a brief discussion.
High-energy electron bonds; an essential source of energy for the living organisation.
Absorbing and giving-off quanta of electro-magnetic energy.
Life; a "river" or pathway for the dissipation of an energy-gradient.
Dispelling an apparent contradiction of the tendency towards entropy.
Rivulets of biochemical energy.
Living systems and river systems; an extensive comparison.

The story of natural evolution begins, indeed, with the fortuitous physical conditions of a medium-sized planet, encircling a medium-sized star. This planet has a suitable rotational speed around its axis to allow for the atmospheric conditions, temperature-range and climatic characteristics, favouring the existence of a watery planet with luke-warm, shallow seas. Here, the processes of polymerisation led, eventually, to a gigantic protoplasmic primordium, which led, in turn, to the evolution of a cellular unit.

The cellular unit, an off-spring of this protoplasmic primordium, could and did survive, even, when slow but steady changes in environmental conditions abolished the possibility for the protoplasmic primordium to exist. With the disappearance of the protoplasmic primordium the possibility for life to originate from pre-cellular existence, also disappeared.

Here, in a few sentences, we are trying to summarise and capture the essence of a billion years of protoplasmic evolution, and, for those who are interested in exploring the mental imagery of the protoplasmic primordium in more detail, I would like to refer the reader to a number of essays, where this imagery has been elaborated extensively. Here, we want to sketch, only, an outline of the way life came into being, without going into detailed discussions. This imagery remains speculative, in spite of the fact, that the overall idea of a protoplasmic primordium is well-accepted by the biological sciences.

Let us concentrate on the essential and existential characteristics of the living organisation, because these characteristics are present throughout the realm of life, regardless, how specialised and divergent some species' of life have become. Perhaps, the most characteristic feature of the living organisation is its "fluidity". This fluidity is represented by the fragility of the cellular structure, together with a constant tendency to fall-apart, in spite of the fact, that this feature is not always apparent in the sturdy, multi-cellular life-forms that have been able to adapt themselves to harsh environmental circumstances. Yet, in essence, the cell remains a highly structured organisation of a large variety of labile biochemical substances and reaction-patterns.

Many, but certainly not all constituents in a cell need constant repair or replenishing, because they can not exist, or persist, without some sort of a continuous influx of energy. This energy is needed for an on-going process of repair that is necessary to maintain or replenish these fragile biochemical constituents.

The cell always exists in an environment that is different from its own internal composition, because the cell has been "living", reproducing and adapting itself to an environment that has been changing constantly. The environmental conditions are now far removed from the conditions of the protoplasmic primordium, which we postulate to have existed at the beginning of the origins of life.

The cell requires a nearly continuous supply of nutrients, building-blocks and oxygen, which is absorbed through its "wall", or semi-permeable membrane, and, it needs to extrude a variety of waste-products. The "transport" of all these substances across this semi-permeable cell-membrane, together with a number of substances that have a tendency to "leak through the gates", requires, continuously, a certain amount of energy. This energy-expenditure is summarised by the concept of "metabolic activity", and, it implies the availability of a minimum level of maintenance-energy that is necessary to maintain healthy living conditions.

You may be inclined to ask, why nature sought a possibility of existence in such a complex but fragile and continuously metabolising conglomerate of biochemical reaction-patterns or path-ways, and, you may wonder, whether or not other conglomerates without the requirement for this continuous availability of a suitable energy-source, would not have been a more suitable way to look for a possibility to exist.

In a way, this is true, and, nature has certainly explored a whole realm of existence possibilities with ever-increasing levels of complexity in the many elements, as well as molecular combinations of these elements. The entire world of inorganic chemistry is made-up by such conglomerates of matter particles that are stable and do not require a constant influx of energy to prevent them from falling-apart. However, the absence of continuous metabolic activities by a conglomerate of continuously changing and fragile chemical pathways, also means, that such a conglomerate of inorganic substances can not react to a large number of subtle variables, as they occur in our terrestial environment.

The price a particle of existence pays for a great measure of stability and independence from an external or internal energy-source, is a high level of rigidity or stability. This is the same as saying, that the particle is characterised by immutability, or, "lifelessness".

We see, quite clearly, when looking at the realm of living existence, that all the characteristics of the living organisation are made possible as a result of this low resistance to change. A low resistance to change also leads to a spontaneous tendency to decay, as well as a run-down to the lowest level of random existence. We see, therefore, that the features of adaptability, reactabilty, reproduction and growth, but, also, those of death and disintegration, are due to the fact, that the internal components of a cell are unable to maintain themselves in a "living" status-quo, without, at least, some form of energy-influx to maintain this vitally important element of being a "living organisation".

Life is impossible, without the ability to repair or replenish the fragile substances that are continuously "running down", and, life is also impossible, without the ability to restore the biochemical equilibrium by removing waste-products and unwanted intruders from the immediate cellular environment.

"Fine", you tell me, "I have some idea, now, why the cell has to be a conglomerate of such a large number of fragile and continuously changing biochemical subtances, but, I still do not see any reason, why such a tendency to form a living organisation, came-about. You said yourself, that the cell has a tendency to become chaotic, to die, to lose its organisation because of this tendency of the biochemical substances to "run-down" to their lowest levels of energy. (This, of course, is the essence of the concept of entropy). Are the processes of cellular growth, reproduction, differentiation and adaptation, and, especially, the processes of forming multi-cellular colonies, together with the search for possibilities of existence in complex, multi-cellular organisms, are all these processes and trends not completely against the concept of entropy, where everything reverts to chaos, rather than a higher level of organisation? How can you explain this contradiction?"

The answer to this question, and other, apparent contradictions, has been treated extensively before, but, we will outline, in a brief summary, the essence of the argument. We have to consider the evolution of the entire protoplasmic primordium as a possibility that was given by the fortuitous, physical and climatic circumstances of the early earth, as we mentioned above, but, we have to visualise that these evolutionary changes came-about, also, as a result of the availability of a large number of molecules that lend themselves to an experiment with the possibilities of polymerisation. The vast and unimaginably complex experiment of molecular combinations and re-combinations, led, eventually, to the possibility of capturing solar energy in the form of a specific alteration of electron-orbits, where special molecular complexes form a so-called "high-energy" bond that has the ability to "fuel" other molecular transformations.

We know, that, solar radiation is largely captured as thermal energy, and, all matter becomes "heated", to some extent, by the absorption of a portion of the solar radiation that falls upon it. This absorption of thermal energy takes place in the form of an increased molecular agitation. However, many electrons encircling atomic nuclei are able to absorb a quantum of solar energy, especially, when they exist in a free-floating, gaseous form. They absorb this energy by moving-out, or jumping into a more peripherally situated electron orbit. If such an electron is easily displaced by the prevailing energy characteristics of solar photons, it may absorb a portion of the solar energy in this way, but, those displaced electrons can jump back, at any time, to their original orbits and liberate, again, the quantum of energy they have absorbed in the form of a photon of light.

This liberation can take place in the form of "luminescence", as these electrons jump back during the period of darkness, giving an eerie but spectacular, flashing glow to the protoplasmic primordium. However, the energy may also fuel a large variety of biochemical transformations, especially, if these high-energy electrons have been captured by molecules that are capable of forming special bonds, allowing them to give their energy to other molecules.

These biochemical transformations start to flow as "rivulets of energy" through the protoplasmic primordium, as the various activated substances are trying to get rid of the energy that has been "handed-down" to them from a neighbouring substance. We see a situation arise that is analogous, or a "parallel", to the dissipation of water from an indentation in a rock formation, which has been filled with water after a rain-shower. Through cracks and fissures, water escapes, and, as it reaches the softer, sandier grounds, we see, how these rivulets are scouring a pathway for themselves. If these rivulets persist for any length of time, we see, how a large number of small rivulets tend to merge into a few large ones. This situation is analogous to, and an important parallel with, the run-off of water falling on the continents of the earth.

We see, how small brooks, eventually, coalesce into a few large river-basins. The reason, why this happens, is related to the "need" or the tendency for a fluid medium, like water, to "dissipate" the gravitational energy-gradient which is contained in its existence, whenever it has been trapped, somewhere, in a hollow or a small lake, above sea-level, or, as it flows under-ground. The energy that makes water flow from a high to a low position, is the potential energy of gravitation, and, the reason, why these rivulets and streams have a tendency to converge and merge, lies in the fact, that the larger streams have "less resistance" to the dissipation of gravitational energy, compared to a smaller stream or brook. It is logical, therefore, that water tends to "gravitate" towards the larger streams and rivers, as individual water-molecules seek, invariably, a path of least resistance.

This imagery of the dissipation of gravitational energy as water runs-off the continents and flows towards the seas, is entirely analogous to the imagery of the protoplasmic primordium, where the capture of solar energy, in the form of "high-energy bonds", forms a potential energy-gradient that has to be dissipated. As we mentioned, the most direct way to dissipate this captured solar energy, is through the proces of luminescence, where the electrons jump back into their original orbit, giving-off their energy as a flash of light.

However, as ever more effective pathways emerge in the protoplasmic primordium, we see a large variety of small "rivulets" of biochemical energy emerge. These rivulets become increasingly important as a source for the entropic dissipation of captured solar energy.

Let us not go into details, here, how, and why, we visualise these biochemical pathways to open-up, slowly. We have developed this imagery extensively before. It is important to realise, that the internal machinery of the cell is a conglomerate of biochemical pathways that found a possibility to exist within this gigantic protoplasmic primordium. These pathways became the chemical corner-stones, or building-blocks, for the origin of the living organisation; the cell.

The growth in the size and complexity of a biochemical pathway is analogous to the growth in size and complexity of a river-system, and, the mechanisms favouring these trends are the same. A complex and large system is a more efficient "dissipator" of energy than a smaller system. I hope, that this analogy or parallel makes it clear, why the apparent contradiction to the tendency of entropic dissipation by the phenomena of growth and procreation, is not a contradiction at all. We have to look at the overall system, where captured solar energy seeks path-ways of energy-dissipation in a random, entropic way, trying to dissipate its energy-gradient of high-energy electron bonds, and, the entire realm of living existence represents, collectively, such a system of energy-dissipating channels.

If we study, carefully, the mechanisms at work in the overall system of the water run-off from our continents, we see a remarkably faithful parallel with the origin, development and evolution of life. Without exaggeration, we can state, that we have, here, in this comparison between the river systems and the living systems, one of the most important and fundamental conceptual parallels we can find.

This parallel is a good illustration of the reasons, why the search for parallels is far more than a mere curiosity, or the result of a mildly interesting phenomenon. When we study and comprehend this parallel, we see, how an intellectual grasp of the easier system, the river system, gives us access to the far more complex, and, until recently, completely unfathomable system; the living system.

Rather than enumerating the traditional list of characteristics that set the living systems apart from the non-living systems, we have chosen to emphasise the essential fluidity of the living system. Not only, can we relate all the other features, such as growth, reactability, reproduction and metabolism to this essential feature of fluidity, but, the concept and imagery of the fluid, biochemical conglomerate gives us, at the same time, access to this beautifully illuminating parallel between the living systems and the river systems.

.......

Chapter 8

Content

Further complexities.
A search for durability, or viability, by non-living systems?
An event is a "fluid" form of existence.
Water, leveling-off under the force of gravitation.
Why fluid matter will transform into a form of existence that has the lowest energy-level, or most stable possibility to exist.
The vulnerability of a low level of internal resistance.
An urgent need for the faculty of adaptation and stress-avoidance.
Rigid structures rely on internal stress-resistance for durability.
Adaptations to minimise the occurrence of competitive strife and dispersive tendencies.
The adaptations of socially integrated entities of existence.
A gradual shift in the size of the unit of survival.
A strong legacy of egocentric instincts.
Obligatory inter-dependencies.
Inter-dependence with a strict genetic encoding of behavioural guidelines; a form of socialisation.
The virus, and the borderline between living and life-less existence.
Behavioural flexibility complicates the search for viability through the mechanisms of inter-dependence.
The need for collective insights, and an excercise of the collective will.

The parallel between the living systems and the river systems explains also the phenomena of growth and increasing complexity, and this parallel is therefore useful, well beyond the sphere of the single cell. We should, indeed, focus our attention upon this most remarkable characteristic of the living system; the tendency towards ever greater complexity. This trend can be seen in the formation of specialised appendages and organelles within the single cell, as well as in the cohesion and specialisation of the multi-cellular community.

The multi-cellular organism reaches quickly a measure of organisational cohesion under the constant evolutionary pressures of competitive existence, which is still unparalleled in the societies of man. The tendency towards complexity is evident, not only, in the evolution of specialised organ-systems of the multi-cellular organism, because the complexity of the biochemical organisation of a single cell had to reach a level of remarkable sophistication, before the single cell could emerge and survive in an environment that was changing and becoming more difficult and hostile, all the time. As we mentioned, these environmental changes led, eventually, to the complete disappearance of the protoplasmic primordium.

We see, therefore, that, a tendency towards ever increasing complexity is, not only, a trend that is favoured as a path of least resistance, letting a greater amount of energy through the large and complex systems, but, the tendency towards a situation of complex inter-dependencies, seems, at least, in the living systems, to be the result of a search for a larger range of tolerance, and, therefore, a more durable or viable existence.

Let us examine the question, whether or not there is, here, indeed a significant discrepancy between the systems of life and those of the run-off of water. Or, is it possible to find in the river systems, also, a "search for durability, or viability"? Is the search for viability a typical and exclusive trend of living systems, as the word "viability" suggests, or, can we equate the search for viability with similar, or, even, identical trends in fluid, but non-living systems? The answer seems destined to be negative, because the word viability implies the idea, that it embodies something that is a specific characteristic of the living organisation. Yet, I believe that there is no essential distinction between the living and non-living organisation in this respect, because we can enlarge, or generalise, the concept of viability to the concept of "a possibility to exist". Then, we can demonstrate the fact, that the "behaviour" implied in the search for viability is not a teleological, goal-oriented form of behaviour, which depends upon the existence of a complex, highly developed organisation of life.

We can argue, that the possibility to exist results, simply, from a particular constellation of factors, guiding and shaping a particular event. Let me amplify and clarify this statment. The shape or form, which an event, or a fluid form of existence, takes, depends upon the constellation of factors influencing this event, and, it depends, also, on the characteristics, as well as the degree of internal resistance, which exists in the matter taking part in a particular event.

For example, a puddle of water will quickly shape itself according to the contours of its surroundings, because it has a low internal resistance to the pressure-gradient of the gravitational force-field. Therefore, it flows, not only, quickly, into all the nooks and crannies of the space in which this puddle of water happens to exist, but, we see, also, that its surface bcomes a beautifully flat and level surface, unless disturbed by other force-fields.

This phenomenon is, of course, a result of the low internal friction, or resistance, to level-out under the influence of gravitational forces. If the puddle of water becomes a block of ice, we see, that it loses completely the ability to follow changing contours, because its internal resistance is, then, far greater than the forces of gravitation infringing upon it.

This difference in behaviour between water and ice reflects, also, the difference between organic and inorganic existence. Nearly all inorganic matter we are familiar with, does not change under the normal variations and fluctuations of terrestial conditions. These inorganic substances or compounds do not "follow the contours" of local possibilities of existence, nor, do they flow with a series of changing possibilities of existence. However, if we look at the behaviour of inorganic matter in the interior of a star, we see, that the pressures and temperatures are sufficiently strong to overcome the internal resistance of matter, not only, of the strong chemical bonds between atoms but, also, the much stronger bonds that keep the sub-atomic elements of the nuclei together.

Matter becomes, then, "fluid", and, it can be forced into a more compact, but, also, more complex form of existence, as it yields to these enormous pressure-gradients. What sort of matter finds a possibility to exist under these conditions, depends upon the circumstances, or, rather, it depends on the energy-gradients of the environment that are acting upon and through the now fluid systems of existence. We see, then, how inorganic matter "yields" to pressure gradients, and, we see how it "seeks", or establishes forms of existence, that are appropriate for the prevailing conditions; in other words; matter will, then, transform into a form of existence that has a possibility to exist under a specific range of circumstances.

Viability mechanisms for living systems are behaving in exactly the same manner, but living systems are already "fluid" under normal terrestial conditions, and, we all know, that the normal range of terrestial conditions may easily exceed the limits that can be tolerated by a life-form. The life-form, or living organisation, has, therefore, to adapt, continuously, to the fluctuating circumstances, and, it must try, at all times, to avoid a situation, where the environmental stresses infringing on its existence, would exceed the level of stress it can endure.

This adaptation takes place in a variety of ways. The primary form of adaptation is to stay in the zone of environmental conditions it is "used to". These reflect, by and large, the conditions of its origins, but, continuously changing climatic and environmental conditions, as well as competitive pressures from other life-forms, may make this primary and most desirable approach to the problem of survival impossible. The accent shifts, then, to an increasing ability to withstand the pressures of competition, or, to withstand the harsher fluctuations of environmental conditions at the periphery of the habitat, where population and predatory pressures are less severe.

We have discussed these important considerations before, and, we do not want to elaborate them, here. Let us proceed, now, to another important form of adaptation that can, and does, increase the degree of viability, or the possibilities of existence for life-forms. This is the trend to minimise competitive and dispersive pressures by differentiating into slightly different ecological niches, preferably, with a measure of mutual inter-dependence. This is the form of adaptation that lies behind the mechanisms of socialisation or social integration, and, it is the basis for the development of the multi-cellular colony, as well as the multi-cellular individual.

By developing complementary rather than competitive requirements, the competitive pressures fall-away, at least, to a significant extent, and, a much greater population density becomes possible, provided that the total level of available energy is able to sustain the population as a whole. Therefore, the level of energy-consumption or energy-dissipation increases proportionally to the "mass" of living organisms or organisations. However, a higher rate of energy-dissipation is favoured by the dissipating or entropic tendencies of the overall system of energy-dissipation, regardless, whether we are looking at the run-off of water, or the capture of solar energy in high-energy electron bonds, as we discussed before. However, it is still possible for a life-form, or, rather, a collection of life-forms living closely together, to outstrip the available energy-supply in a particular locale.

The main point we want to make, here, is the fact, that the "search for viability" seems to be synonymous with the search for more efficient channels for the dissipation of an energy-gradient. The "viability" of more efficient channels for the dissipation of an energy-gradient is, of course, a physical phenomenon that does not necessarily depend upon specific organisational qualities, such as those of a living entity, but, it is quite true that the non-living or inorganic channels for the dissipation of an energy-gradient, grow "passively", according to the opportunities of the moment and the prevailing circumstances, while the living organisation has been able to secure, and perpetuate, with the help of genetic instructions, an active search for, or duplication of, mechanisms that favour the existence of a channel for the dissipation of an energy-gradient.

Let us discuss, once more, the general principles of the type of adaptation that leads to a social entity with inter-dependent relationships. Often, this development takes place by units or entities that were originally in a state of competitive strife, and, these entities had, therefore, a tendency to disperse themselves over as wide an area as possible. Let us keep in mind, that the overall purpose of such an evolutionary trend towards socialisation is, always, a search for a better way to survive, an easier way to exist, or, an enlarged range of adaptative possibilities.

One of the most difficult aspects to get a good grip over, is the gradual shift in the meaning of survival or viability. While, obviously, the accent of survival was, initially, centered entirely upon the individual entity, we see, during the processes of socialisation, a nearly imperceptible shift towards an emphasis upon the survival of the social unit as a whole. This brings-about a "relative dispensibility" of individual organisms, as we can see, so clearly, in the concept of "acceptable fatality rates" for combat units.

This gradual shift in emphasis seems to contradict the behavioural tendencies that have been sharpened into the behaviour of the previously independent units. During the process of socialisation, the individual entity becomes a "sub-unit" in a much larger, overall entity, but, its evolutionary history, as well as the forces that shaped its behaviour, have emphasised as its primary objective, for many, many generations, the survival of this particular unit, which has now become a sub-unit within a socially integrated entity of living existence.

When the mechanisms of socialisation are trying to find a measure of success amongst a population of individuals with a strongly developed trend towards behavioural flexibility, competitive strife and individual survival, we see, that the solution of socialisation, or social integration, remains a difficult, tentative, and, sometimes, nearly impossible task. However, if we look at the socialisation of cells on the road towards forming a multi-cellular organism, we note, that the pressures to conform to the interests of the "unit as a whole", were so dominant, that the cell-groupings that failed to acquire a sufficient degree of cohesion, were ruthlessly weeded-out by the forces of natural selection.

If we look at the society of complementary groupings of dissimilar biochemical reaction-patterns, we are probably justified in assuming, that the processes of socialisation, did, in this case, not start amongst a homogeneous population of similar reaction-patterns with strongly competitive and dispersive tendencies. As we have discussed, before, on many occasions, the society of biochemical reaction-patterns seems to have been the result of a fortuitous coming-together of many different substances and patterns of biochemical change. Yet, even so, the biochemical community of pathways and reaction-patterns within the cell shows many competitive tendencies, and, we have discussed the reasons, why a continuous flow of energy, as well as a poorly understood structure of spatial relationships and functional checks and balances, is necessary, to keep the unit functioning as an entity.

The mechanisms of socialisation need the impetus, or stimulus, of an increasing dependence upon the socialised state, making it increasingly difficult to exist outside the social unit. Quite clearly, the individual biochemical reactions of the cell, as well as the cells of a multi-cellular individual unit, can not exist, anymore, as solitary or isolated sub-units.

In the single cell, with its society of biochemical reactions, as well as in the multi-cellular individual with its community of inter-dependent cells, the processes of socialisation have progressed to the point, that the social unit has become a clear-cut entity, with a highly effective, centrally organised form of behaviour. Only recently, have we begun to understand, that the cell, as well as the multi-cellular organism, is made-up of a composite society of sub-units.

Actually, the imagery I am using, here, will appear foreign to many people, because they have not been accustomed to see such large parallel phenomena between social developments on different levels of observation. Many people lack the background of scientific information to appreciate the social nature of such seemingly indivisible entities as a multi-cellular organism, or a single cell.

I know, you are anxious to point-out to me, that we are not justified to call the stringent organisation of numerous sub-units into the complex entity of the cell, or, the multi-cellular organisation of a single individual, a "social unit", because, we have reserved the concept of a social unit for the more or less voluntary association of flexible organisms, like human beings and other, highly developed, social animals. You even like to exclude from the definition of social integration, the behaviour of insect-colonies, because their inter-dependencies and behavioural reaction-patterns are so stereotyped, and, they are so completely determined by chemical or genetic instructions, that they resemble more a multi-cellular organism than a society of flexible animals.

This is a valid point of view, and, it shows, that the multi-individual insect-colony of multi-cellular insects is an evolutionary development, resembling the strict, genetically encoded, evolutionary line of development. This is the same line of strictly encoded development, which made the integration of cells into a multi-cellular unit, or, the biochemical reactions into the unit of a single cell, possible. However, strict genetic encoding should not invalidate the concept of "socialisation" or social integration, because this concept describes, merely, a search for "viability by inter-dependence", regardless of the nature of the sub-units involved, and, regardless of the nature of the regulatory mechanisms employed.

If we look, again, at the single cell, we see, that the community of biochemical reaction-patterns has, now, only a possibility to exist as a social unit, and, we see, that no fragmentary existence of biochemical reaction patterns is possible. Perhaps, we may consider the "virus" as such a fragmentary existence, but, let us not forget, that the virus outside the cell can hardly be called a "living entity", and, it is certainly not a biochemical pathway or reaction-pattern, but, it has all the characteristics of a lifeless, crystalline structure, like a fragment of the genetic code.

Inside the cell, this lifeless, crystalline structure has the peculiar ability to instruct the biochemical machinery and energy-flow of a cell to make copies of itself. It reproduces, therefore, in a parasitic way, making use of the machinery and energy-resources of the protoplasm. This type of duplication gives it, to some extent, the "appearance" of a living entity, but, since it lacks the characteristic of fluidity, I am less inclined to consider the virus as a true life-form.

This is an aside, however, and, we want to continue the line of thought, where we saw that the sub-units, such as, e.g., biochemical reaction-patterns, the cells within a multi-cellular individual, or, the insects separated from their colony, are rapidly doomed to die. The evolution of social integration progresses quickly to a stage, where the level of social integration and inter-dependence becomes absolutely necessary, or obligatory, for the survival of all the members.

We notice, that, none of the sub-entities which become so totally dependent upon these inter-dependencies in a social organisation, have a tendency towards behavioural flexibility. This means, that their behaviour patterns can be strictly controled, and, these sub-units can, therefore, be precisely instructed by chemical regulators.

As we climb the scale of evolutionary development, we see, that the sub-units become more and more complex. The complexity of these social organisations, be it the biochemical societies in the cell, or the cellular societies within the multi-cellular organism, are so complex, that we still have only vague notions about the regulatory mechanisms that are at work in such entities of living existence.

In spite of the fact, that we are almost completely ignorant about the detailed mechanics of these complex regulatory mechanisms, as well as the numerous checks and balances that must play a role, we can state, as a generalised principle, that the genetic instructions of the cell, (this marvelous but largely unknown set of instructional codes), can determine the timing as well as the quantity of a particular substance or product. Such a substance may, then, act as a regulator for the manufacture of other substances, and, we see, here, at least an outline of the mechanisms of detailed instructions, regulating the living organisation of a unit or sub-unit.

However, the mechanisms of socialisation, or, the search for an enhanced level of viability by social integration, cooperation and task-differentiation, are a much more difficult road to travel for life-forms that have explored the possibilities of behavioural flexibility. In a way, these two trends, the trend of social integration and the search of enhanced viability by individual fine-tuning of one's behaviour, are contradictory, and, perhaps, essentially incompatible with each other.

The search for viability in the complex multi-cellular species' that have been endowed with the methods of behavioural flexibility, is an activity, that is, in essence, individualistic in nature, and, very strong existential pressures are needed to subdue these individualistic trends.

We have seen and discussed, before, that the genetic "turn-over" of the large and complex animals became so slow, that it was impossible for the methods of genetic encoding to prepare the animal adequately for all the rapid fluctuations that could and would take place in its natural environment. If a species of large individuals wants to make fully use of all the transient and rapidly fluctuating possibilities of existence, given in the environment, the genetic code had to "loosen" the precision of its behavioural instructions, and, it had to allow the mechanisms of memory and past experience to influence, and modify, the behaviour-patterns of the animal.

This has been an extra-ordinarily successful experiment by nature. We have seen, how "Homo Sapiens" is a prime example of this natural experiment with the possibilities of behavioural flexibility, and, why it has developed and explored these evolutionary possibilities to the fullest. As a result of a prolonged evolutionary spurt in the recent, pre-historic past, Homo Sapiens has inherited a "small-scale" tendency towards social integration, cooperation and inter-dependence as a means to enhance viability. This tentative, small-scale social trend has come to the fore, in spite of a strongly developed instinct of individual survival and behavioural flexibility.

We also have to keep in mind, that the human species has a background of strong, competitive pressures, in particular, as a legacy of its most recent past, when the successful combination of intelligent behavioural flexibility and social cooperation on a small scale, gave excellent survival rates to a large number of small but competitive human groupings.

The contradictions between the trends of social inter-dependence and behavioural flexibility are, indeed, very difficult to overcome. We have seen, how a successful and truly large-scale social organisation, such as those of cellular communities in the form of organ-systems, or biochemical reaction-patterns within the protoplasm, requires extensive and precise instructions for a successful mode of existence, while the trend towards behavioural flexibility removes a great deal of precise behavioural instructions in favour of a "self-made", past-dependent, individualised synthesis of a finely-tuned behavioural response, within the framework of an overall, genetically given, range of behaviour-patterns.

Now, we have some idea. why the processes of large-scale social integration are so difficult for the members of mankind. When the time has come, that we understand and appreciate the possibilities, as well as the limitations that are inherent in the make-up of our biological heritage, we will be able to come to some startling insights and far-reaching acts of collective creativity.

.......

Chapter 9

Content

Tentative and transient attempts at social integration; an inevitable result of the search for viability by complex, behaviourally flexible, living organisms.
A remarkable degree of coherent insight is possible, when we look at individual and collective human behaviour from a biological point of view.
The emergence of a dominant elite.
Qualities of far-sighted leadership.
Every member has to benefit from belonging to society.
It is not enough to have faith, and to trust our leaders blindly.
An increasing control over collective and individual existence with the help of Constitutional Guidelines.
A clear idea about the purpose of socially integrated existence.
Some people are great contributors, others great parasites.
The need to profile the development of every personality.
There has to be an authority to investigate, judge, correct errors and punish wrong-doings.
A look back at useful parallels.
Factors of stress for human integration.
Giving Homo Sapiens a proper perspective in the panorama of natural evolution.

In view of the arguments we put forward in the previous chapter, it seems justifed to see a continuing parallel between the biochemical and cellular forms of social integration, on the one hand, and, the somewhat tentative and transient attempts at social integration throughout the history of mankind, on the other. The objective has not changed, and is still represented by the search for an enhanced viability, or an easier way to live, but, we can now define, more precisely, where we differ from the multi-cellular community, and, where we still have a great potential for progress in our attempts to form a useful and durable social entity.

Indeed, we should be able to secure a better quality of existence and a more certain future for us all. We have to recognise, first of all, our biological origins, and, we have to appreciate the implications of this biological heritage of behavioural instructions, together with its possibilities and limitations. We have to acknowledge, that our instinctive behaviour is shaped, largely, along concerns for self-preservation, and, we have to acknowledge, that it is natural to consider a majority of the people around us as competitors.

Our primary behavioural characteristics are egocentric and aggressive in outlook, and, we use a finely honed intelligence to make use of every opportunity to gain an advantage, or, to defend ourselves against attack and competitive strife. Super-imposed on this primary pattern of self-preservation, we have inherited the tendency to seek shelter and security within a small group, and, we have learned, at least, to some extent, to arrange ourselves in a hierarchical order, where we know, whom we can dominate, and, who will dominate us.

The tendency to integrate socially is a hesitant one, however, because any trend towards an increased reliance upon others to provide us with the basic needs of food, shelter and security, makes us vulnerable to abuse and exploitation by those, who dominate us and provide these services. As a result, there is, in every society, an elusive and fluctuating balance between conflicting interests, and, each individual has to evaluate, consciously or subconsciously; whether or not it is worth belonging to a particular social grouping.

As soon as it becomes more difficult to leave the grouping and seek an alternative social arrangement, or a solitary mode of existence, an individual can be placed under exploitative pressures by unscrupulous, dominant elements. In every society, we see, at one stage or another of its history, that, indeed, a small dominant elite benefits greatly from the existing social relationships, while a large segment, or, even, a majority, slaves and serves this elite.

Sometimes, a majority of the population barely survives, because it lacks the power, the insight, or the organisational skills, to overcome an oppressive elite. Once an oppressive elite has established itself, it becomes dependent upon its position of power and privilege. Exploitative practices become increasingly oppressive, until, sooner or later, a rebellion bursts into the open, regardless of the price in suffering and bloodshed.

Far-sighted leaderships have recognised these trends for a long time, consciously or intuitively, and, they have tried to slow-down the polarisation between the rich and poor, as well as the emergence of a dominant and exploitative upper crust. Such a polarisation is invariably associated with a rise in the tensions of resentment and rebellion. The most effective way to forestall these developments, is the formulation of a code of behaviour, or, a code of ethics, which explains the nature of man and his society to the people, and regulates the relationships between them in careful detail.

We have discussed, before, how the most important factors for a successful social integration of human beings, are centered around the concept, that society should benefit, as well as burden, every member in an essentially equal measure. This means, that, those, who have the capability and the good fortune to be in a position where they can contribute a great deal, will be asked to do so, while those, who are less gifted, or less endowed with the capability and the opportunity of making a contribution, will be taxed or asked to contribute within their means. In short, social integration will be successful, if every member benefits from belonging to society, and, if the burdens of taxation and contribution are shared equally, according to each member's ability to contribute. This introduces an equitable stress-load upon each and every member.

Obviously, these principles require a well educated and far-sighted membership, as well as a strong, competent and far-sighted leadership, because people will only entrust their well-being to those who can lead and govern persuasively. However, history shows us, very clearly, that it is not enough to trust someone, or some leader, blindly. We know, now, that we will have to become more knowledgeable about the conditions that will ensure a good, stable, and, above all, peaceful leadership. We have to learn, how to avoid giving a position of power and leadership to self-centered and emotional members, who will lead us, sooner or later, into war. We may be confident and happy, if we see a capable and persuasive leadership emerge, but, we have now sufficient experience and historical data, to know, that no leader will always make the right decisions, and nobody, including the most socially conscious leader, is totally free from the temptation to use the powers and privileges of leadership, to satisfy his own existential requirements.

Many leaders are not even able to make a distinction between a course of behaviour that is dictated by their own involvement in a power-struggle with others, (either within or outside their community), and, a form of behaviour, that is centered around the well-being of the members under their jurisdiction, as well as other people in societies all over the world.

In the future, we will see an increasingly intense scrutiny of the motivations and behaviour-patterns of our leaders, as well as everyone else who occupies a position of responsibility and trust. There will be a trend to guide the behaviour of our leaders with a globally standardised set of Constitutional Guidelines.

The point is, that the human society requires regulators, checks and balances, just like the biochemical and cellular societies, but, the nature of these regulators, or checks and balances, is completely different from those of a biochemical or cellular community. The reason for this difference is, of course, this heritage of behavioural flexibility; the fact, that we shape, at least, a part of our behaviour by the actions and decisions of a "conscious will".

While it is certainly possible to exert some pressure upon people to conform to a set of rules and guidelines, we also know, that any attempt to force cooperation unleashes powerful emotions of resentment and anger, anxiety, as well as a feeling of injustice, because the human being feels, intuitively, that most of these guidelines and rules of conduct will benefit a small elite.

Because the egocentrically oriented behavioural organisors, or instincts of self-preservation, are so much stronger than the willingness to cooperate with each other, we should not be surprised to see, that the human being is far more capable and willing to tear a hated order apart, than to contribute, constructively, to a new social order. The latter requires a large measure of patience, foresight and good-will, and, it taxes our highest capabilities, while the former depends, largely, on emotional and instinctively programmed patterns of behaviour.

The only way we can construct a durable set of social guidelines with proper checks and balances, is to develop, first of all, clear ideas about the purpose of a social order. As long as we do not acknowledge, clearly, that everyone should, at least, have an equal chance to benefit from the social structure, we have already lost the fundamental corner-stone upon which durable and peaceful relationships within society have to be based.

Perhaps, you want to ask, whether or not all differences should then be abolished between those who have worked hard all their lives and contributed abundantly to the well-being of society, and those, who have always done as little as they could get-away with. Let us analyse, when trying to answer this question, why some people are, indeed, "great contributors", while others are, perhaps, equally "great parasites", sponging off the efforts of others. We will see, that there are nearly always good reasons to explain these marked discrepancies in social performance.

First of all, some people are more gifted than others, and, together with a fortuitous set of circumstances, as well as the right kind of stimulus or motivation, these people become highly successful and respected citizens, while others, less capable, and, perhaps, adversely affected by an unfortunate set of circumstances, never develop, fully, the limited potentials they have been endowed with. It is not surprising, then, that such people never feel very comfortable in society, and, that they are prone to become criminals or psychopaths.

As we have argued before, these discrepancies in personality development, as well as many other factors, lead to the need to monitor carefully the birth, growth and unfolding of each personality in society. In this way, we can ensure, that future citizens get an equal chance to develop their potentials, or, at least, some of their potentials, while, at the same time, a careful, considerate and informed record-keeping should give us an early warning about insideous incidences of injustice and aberrations in the development of a personality.

If someone's limitations have not been recognised, one may easily be taxed too heavily, e.g., as a child, who is trying to find his or her place in the home environment or in school. Unreasonable demands may lead to tensions and frustrations for someone, who can not perform according to expectations. On the other hand, those who are well endowed with a variety of talents, should be given ample opportunities to develop them at a more advanced pace, but, such gifted people should also be taught, that society expects a little more from them compared to the average individual, because they have been given exceptional opportunities to unfold their talents.

It is natural, therefore, to see a divergence in achievement, but there is no reason, why such a divergence in achievement and capabilities should lead to a great disparity in the standard of living or life-style. It is logical, that the most gifted people will, eventually, occupy the most responsible positions in society, but, it is also reasonable to expect from these people the insight, that this position of responsibility should not be used as a means to obtain egocentric privileges and advantages.

We have to ensure, that the gifted segments of society are properly educated and instructed in the principles of social responsibility and essential equality, because the future of society will depend, largely, on the wisdom and insights of this leadership segment.

However, as we have discussed before, we can not rely entirely upon the insight and good-will of our leaders. The mainstream of society, which includes the well integrated, concerned, but average citizen, has to scrutinise, carefully, those, who are in a position of responsibility and leadership, to see, whether or not the behaviour of their leaders conforms to the moral, ethical and Constitutional Guidelines of society. These guidelines form, together, a system of checks and balances. This type of social organisation makes a well-organised information and education system possible and mandatory, as well as a complete and scrupulously maintained transparence in social transactions and relationships.

These guidelines, checks and balances provide the essential regulatory systems for a durable social organisation. If we all have a good idea what the purpose of society is, and, what our rights and obligations are, then, there is no reason to let situations of conflict and friction rise to the level of explosive confrontations. There is good reason, then, to believe, that, careful scrutiny, as well as informed and considerate judgement, can find a solution that is acceptable to all parties in a situation of conflict.

However, we should not make the mistake to think, that we can rely entirely upon the mechanisms of mutual trust, good-will and voluntary cooperation, to make society into a just and stable unit. Without a carefully excercised authority, the whole system would quickly collapse, as people get, invariably, into arguments with each other. For this reason, we need to give a measure of power, or law-enforcement, to the guidelines, laws and mutual checks that will slowly be designed and implemented as a result of a collective effort to govern ourselves, peacefully and fairly.

In the final analysis, there has to be an authority that can impose a settlement after due consideration, whenever bickering parties can not come to a voluntary agreement. We will never be absolutely sure, that this ultimate authority, regardless, how carefully selected and prepared for its tasks, will be infallible in its judgements, but, there is no reason to doubt, that its functions will be immensely more preferable to the methods of armed confrontation.

I want to emphasise, once again, that there is a useful parallel, but, also, a noteworthy difference between the human society and the cellular communities of multi-cellular individals. The human society needs a carefully designed system of regulators and checks, just like the cellular community, but, these regulators can not be rigid, chemical instructions, manufactured and controled by a genetic code. They have to be designed by the conscious will of our collective choice.

Just like a cellular community, we have to carry-out a large number of tasks that require the specialised function and training of a large number of individual people, but, unlike the permanent, anatomical and physiological differentiations of the cells, which take place during embryonic growth under the influence of chemical regulators, the requirements for human specialisation and task-differentiation are accomplished by a process of learning, and, they are, therefore, much less rigid than the cellular specialisations.

The human society has to develop and construct, with a deliberate, conscious, technical effort, the many organ-systems that are needed for an efficient accomplishment of the many tasks at hand, and, once again, we see many parallels. Just like the nervous system of a multi-cellular organism, the human society has to have efficient channels to gather, classify and present information to its decision-making institutions, as well as to anyone interested in what is going-on, and, we have to have just as efficient "out-going", or "efferent", channels to carry-out the decisions of the various leadership institutions in society.

Just like a multi-cellular organism, society has to have an accurate, complete and instantaneous picture of its internal and external realities, and, it should be able to monitor, in a process of constant feed-back, the results and effects of its behavioural responses, because, only then, can the society as a whole correct, quickly, whatever seems to be going wrong.

Just like any living organism, society can not afford to keep on soiling its environment, because, sooner or later, it will be impossible to live in such a soiled and spoiled environment. If a community of organisms can not move to a new location, after it has exhausted its energy-supplies and accumulated a high level of waste-products, such a colony will start to die-off rapidly. This is a picture we see, time and again, in the bacterial colonies that are grown in the laboratory on special dishes for study or identification, and, there is no reason to believe, that the "human colony" would be immune from the same iron logic of causes and their effects.

However, as human beings, we have, at least, the possibility to foresee, what the rapid accumulation of dangerous waste-products is going to do to our society, to our ability to sustain our existence, and, to our heritage of behavioural flexibility. Our ability to finely tune our behaviour and anticipate, intelligently, what is going to happen, gives us, at least, a chance to take corrective actions, before it is too late.

The human society is a living organism, and, it has all the characteristics of life, including the inevitability of death and decay, but because the level of cohesion is much less stringent than the level of cohesion of the biochemical or cellular societies, we see, that, social structures can form, decay and reform, without the demise of all the participating members. Certainly, social upheaval often costs dearly, as a lot of lives are lost in warfare, epidemics or famines, and, even, those, who do survive the transition from one social order to the next, often go through a period of great difficulties.

If we study, carefully, the nature and development of the living organisation, and, if we analyse, conscientiously, where we, Homo Sapiens, fit into the overall picture of evolutionary developments, we will see many, extremely useful parallels in the realities around us. These parallels give us valuable clues to the formulation of a collective or individual response, and, these parallels are especially important for our efforts to shape a viable and durable social order on a global scale.

.......

Chapter 10

Content

A last parallel.
Is there a congruence between our perception of reality, and, a reality "as it really exists"; independent from human existence?
Reflecting upon the nature of sense impressions and awareness mechanisms.
A necessary act of reliance.
The value of being reflective, from time to time, when it is useful.
When can we reflect upon transience and death, sadness and happiness?
The need to teach the art of living thoughtfully and inquisitively.
We all have to formulate, to some extent, our own philosophy of life.
Circumstances and interpretations are always subject to change.
A useful relativity of truth, based upon a commonly acceptable imagery of our biological faculties.
Science; a possibility of agreement across cultural boundaries.
Is our perception of reality not, at least, a shadow of an absolute reality?
A strong tendency to believe such an attractive concept.
A high level of validity, achieved by a "flawless" and widely shared perception of our realities.
The essential difference between a common human denominator in the perception of reality, and the assumption of an absolute, external reality that is independent from human existence, yet, somehow, reflected in the beliefs of mankind.
It is better to concentrate upon a consensus about the realities we are able to know and communicate.

There is one more parallel we have to discuss. In the beginning of this essay, we have alluded to this remarkable parallel we all assume to exist; nl. the parallel between our perception of reality and the reality "as it really exists"; independently from the existence of any human being. For many of us, this parallel is so obvious, and so unquestioned, that we may not concern ourselves about any distinction between the reality as it exists and our perception of it.

We all assume, at least, tacitly, that there exists a perfect synonymity, or "sameness", between our perception of reality and the reality as it exists. The word "reality" indicates, after all, that it is "real" and not a "figment of the imagination", but, such an assumption overlooks the fact, that all perceptions and interpretations of this reality still take place as a complex process of cerebral function within our brain and mind. Even, if we are aware of the fact, that all perceptions of reality are, in the final analysis, mental images of a conscious, concepualising and communicating individual, we still behave, in many aspects, as if there exists such a perfect "fit" between "the reality", and our perception of it.

We have discussed, extensively, the fact, that, in our most routine, motoric behaviour-patterns, we accept, without any question or hesitation, the realities as we perceive them, and, we have become completely dependent upon such an intuitive and instinctive reliance. We could not grasp an object, step over an obstacle, or jump from a platform, without relying, unquestionably, upon the accuracy of our judgements about spatial relationships, and, we extend this unquestioned reliance, also, to the sphere of everything that is familiar and routine.

We have argued, before, that there is nothing wrong with such an act of total reliance, and, we have acknowledged the fact, that we could not function effectively, if we had to question, constantly, whether or not our routine and automatic responses were based upon accurate sense impressions. Some of us know, how debilitating it is to develop a sudden and severe lack of confidence in the accuracy of our sense impressions, including the automatic or nearly automatic judgement functions of our brain. Most of us are quite happy to extend this type of intuitive reliance upon automatic judgements to the entire sphere of our awarenesses and actions, and, we become, then, somewhat complacent, comfortable, but shallow people, who can cope well, as long as the situation remains "routine", or "familiar".

However, such comfortable and confident people are severely handicapped, as soon as they have to synthesise a new approach or an innovative solution to an unfamiliar problem, where they have to make use of their experiences, as well as their ability to think and correlate experiences in a deliberate and conscious manner. Many experiences may not have any obvious correlation with each other, and, they may be so remote from a routine, everyday existence, that we have never learned to make use of them, or, to see these correlations and parallels.

We see, once again, that the value of concerning ourselves with the phenomenon of broad parallels, lies in the excercise of our mind, as well as in the development of the ability to think; to see reality in an ever broader scope and a more conscious perspective. We do not want to abandon the ability to rely upon routine responses, nor on a familiarity with our surroundings, because we need such routine behavioural responses in order to function well, and, we need our routine responses in order to give ourselves time to think about those aspects of reality that do not deal with everyday, routine existence.

Unless we rely upon routine behaviour-patterns in response to routine situations, we would not be able to question the fundamental nature of our own existence and other living organisms, or, the nature of existence itself. Only, then, is it possible to reflect upon the nature of transience and death, and, only then is it possible to question, why we experience sadness and happiness, misery as well as feelings of well-being.

You will agree with me, that we can not rely, anymore, upon routine behavioural responses and reality perceptions, whenever we want to reflect upon fundamental questions and topics that concern us all. Certainly, in stead of thinking about such questions and experiences, we can merely repeat the pat answers which our society provides for such questions, but, such an attitude is unsatisfactory to many people, because many of us have some doubts about the validity of commonly accepted ideas and concepts in these matters.

We do not want to suggest, that everyone should start to doubt the cultural, religious and moral values and guidelines of their social environment, but, it certainly is important, that everyone is taught to think and reflect. We have to teach the younger generations to examine, thoroughly, whatever truths are being handed-down to them, because, only then, will they be able to endorse, wholeheartedly, the truths they have found to be valuable, and, to modify those concepts and guidelines that need change.

We already have to accept a lot of information without the ability to question or scrutinise it, and, it is, therefore, important to cultivate an attitude of thoughtfulness and care about accepting the fundamental ideas and concepts that determine the outlook or atmosphere of our reality experiences.

We do not want to question the judgement functions of our brain, whenever we want to make a move, pick-up an object, or avoid an obstacle, but, we certainly want to question the overall beliefs and concepts society hands-down to us as an explanation for our existence. We want to examine the reasons why we experience a measure of turmoil, why we have to suffer and die, or, why we may be provoked into an angry rage and kill someone. After all, these concepts and guidelines deal with the overall conclusions, or the "philosophy of life", of the generations that have lived and died before us.

We certainly are able to accept the idea, that their experiences are very similar, or, even, parallel to our's, but, we still have a responsibility to formulate our own "philosophy of life", because the conditions of existence may have changed, at least, to some extent. Our forefathers and parental generations may still have left many questions unanswered, and many problems unsolved. Circumstances always change, insights evolve, and, what was absolutely right, or absolutely wrong, a generation ago, may now be perceived as an injustice, an error, or the right thing to do.

"Yet", you may ask me, "if you are advocating a continuous scrutiny of accepted beliefs, you are still replacing one absolute truth for another, are you not? I thought that your intention was to discuss the idea, that we have to abandon the belief in an absolute, immutable truth?"

Precisely, we are approaching a stage in our development, where it is possible to see, on the basis of evolutionary concepts, that our own mental imagery is nothing more than a behavioural tool that arose near the dawn of the evolution of mankind. This tool was the result of a successful experiment with the manipulation of memory-traces. The fact, that, we, human beings, can communicate thoughts and ideas from one individual to another, or, even from one generation to the next, does not imply, that we are, collectively, beginning to unravel an absolute truth. However, it means, that we have a large common basis of anatomical and physiological features in the constitutional make-up of our existence. These shared features of our existence make it possible to see reality in essentially the same manner.

Culturally, we tend to perceive the realities of existence in many different ways, because the belief structures have diverged from community to community, but, in the scientific method of perceiving reality, we see, that a large measure of agreement is possible, even across widely diverging cultural boundaries, because in the scientific method, we see ourselves on the basis of shared anatomical and physiological characteristics, and, not, on the basis of diverging beliefs and experiences.

As we have argued before, the reasons for this measure of agreement have nothing to do with the fact, or the hope, that, we, finally, by virtue of the careful scientific method, are discovering the nature of things "as they really exist"; apart from human existence. What we are discovering, is the possibility to agree amongst ourselves, at least, to a remarkable extent, about the appearance of certain forms of existence, especially, if we adhere scrupulously to a carefully designed method of collecting, describing and interpreting data. The interpretation and registration of these data are, then, clearly dependent upon our physiological properties and anatomical constants, and, therefore, they are based upon commonly shared capabilities, rather than upon culturally divergent notions and beliefs.

"Fine", you will say, "I grant you this, but, explain to me, why this perception of reality, based on certain anatomical and physiological constants which we share as members of the human species, does not mirror the existence of an overall, much broader, and, perhaps, ultimately incomprehensible reality. If we can shape a measure of order in the perception of reality, and, if we can manipulate and predict many events successfully, how come, that you keep insisting, that we have no right to call our perceptions of reality, at least, "a shadow", or, a mirror-image of this absolute, overall and essentially unknowable reality?".

"It seems so illogical to deny, at least, some sort of congruence between our reality perceptions and this overall reality, in particular, because our mastery and grip over the events in nature re-enforce the feeling, that we are dealing with a reality "as it really exists". Is it, then, a total illusion to see "our reality" as a parallel, or "shadow", of this absolute, eternal reality? If it is an illusion, how can we obtain a measure of control or predictability over this external, absolute and "unknowable reality?"

I agree with you. I feel the same way, and, I have also this intuitive feeling or tendency to believe, that there must be some sort of parallel between those aspects of reality I am so totally convinced about, and, an absolute, external reality. The question is, whether or not our intuition, here, is correct. It may be, that our intuition and strong feelings about the reality of such a parallel or congruence between the perception of reality and the reality as it really exists, is more an indication of our existential need to believe that there is such a parallel, than a "proof", that such a parallel indeed exists.

The crux of the matter lies in the fact, that we experience a strong need to believe in the realities "as we perceive them". We have to believe, that this reality is "real", and, that we can rely upon it in order to formulate an appropriate response. In this sense, we can certainly say, that our reality perceptions may show a parallel with an "ideal" human perception of reality, where a hypothetical human being would perceive reality "flawlessly", without being side-tracked by errors, preconceptions, incomplete or faulty observations. etc. Yes, in this sense, we can talk about a parallel between the reality "as we perceive it", and, the reality "as it could be perceived", optimally, by a flawless human being.

This concept, however, is fundamentally different from the idea, that there is an absolute reality, and, that we have, at least, some sort of access to it; sufficient, to let us form a parallel between our own perceptions of reality, on the one hand, and, this absolute, eternal reality, on the other. We know, now, that entire generations and many millions of people have believed that their perception of reality was "The Reality"; a reality, revealed by God Himself. We know, that man has always had a tendency to explain the mechanisms of the phenomena around him in an anthropomorphic manner. We understand, now, why man was always quite willing to die, or kill, for his beliefs, because this total commitment to the truth of his belief structures was a great strength, as well as a fatal flaw. Such an attitude provided a great deal of strength and endurance to an individual or community under severe duress, but, at the same time, the rigidity of their beliefs made the actions and attitudes uncompromising, heightening the stress for themselves and their opponents, often, unnecesarily.

However, in addition to the many historical and practical observations that let us see, how easy we are led-astray when believing in the absolute validity of our beliefs, there is also another, simple and logical argument to make us aware of this essential illusion. In order to know, whether or not a parallel exists, we have to know both sides. We can not judge, whether one line runs parallel to another, if we have no idea, where and how the other line runs.

In the definition of an absolute reality, we imply the existence of a reality that is totally independent of human existence, and, it is, therefore, an "extra-human" reality. Since we have no idea at all, what a non-human reality looks like, we can not know, whether or not our perceptions have any resemblance to it. Any concept about such an extra-human reality is part of a speculative human reality.

Therefore, we can not say, whether or not there is such an entity as an absolute or extra-human reality, and, we do not know, whether or not our reality perceptions are, in any way, shape or form, a parallel to such a hypothetical reality. As we have seen, there are many other fruitful parallels that fall within the sphere of our commonly shared reality perceptions, and, it would be much more beneficial to concentrate upon a better understanding of whatever we are able to know, rather than give-in, rather unthinkingly, to the feeling, that we know something about a reality we can not know.

.......

Summary

1. The parallel tracks of a rail-road.
   An emphasis on the obvious.
   The widespread occurrence of parallel phenomena.
   A transient parallelism.
   Identity, and the concept of being identical.
   Similarities and their differences.
   Is there a parallel between the reality "as we see it", and, "as it really exists"?
   The apparent futility of doubting what we know for sure.
   An urgent need to discuss the parallels between perception and reality.
   
   
   
2. A discussion of the concept of "parallelism".
   A fixed, sharply delineated constant of difference.
   The relative parallelism of the banks of a river.
   Variability in the scope of vision.
   Parallelism and similarity.
   Discernible differences, and the problem of significance.
   Identity and "identicality", or "sameness".
   The roots of our identity experiences.
   Common denominators of a group of similarities.
   Classification mechanisms and the ability to be consciously aware.
   
   
   
3. A review of the background of "Homo Sapiens".
   Cerebral mechanisms, and the faculty of recognition.
   The importance of the "sphere of familiarity".
   Physiological versus conscious or mental forms of recognition.
   Memory, and the recording of similarities and differences.
   A philosophical and generalised approach to the problem of grasping cerebral functions.
   Playing with memory-recall as a "pass-time".
   Recognition, through the mechanisms of an analogous stimulus.
   Memory-recall, seen as a "flash of recognition".
   Links with the mechanisms of an artistic evocation of images, memories and emotions.
   The occurrence of a spontaneous "flash of recall".
   Finding some use for a hyper-excitable faculty of memory-recall.
   A quick review of features that have been discussed before.
   
   
   
4. Accumulating a wealth of recallable mental images.
   The need to learn a remarkably "stream-lined" symbol.
   A "fact", or a reasonable "working hypothesis".
   The transition from a "block-recall", to the careful "building-up" of a composite image that is "new", and has not been experienced.
   Initially, memory-recall depends on having acquired a specific memory by actual experience, before it can be recalled.
   In "secondary learning", an image can be synthesised from commonly available notions and features.
   The shared awarenesses contained within a "cultural pool".
   The road of abstraction and the verbalisation of common denominators.
   Who did what? To whom? When, where and why?, etc.
   Language symbols, and the criteria of usefulness.
   The role of "qualifying attributes".
   Our language reflects, how we think, and, how we try to grasp a reality that is centered around a verb or a noun.
   The function of "logic".
   A "bridgehead" for our efforts to communicate with each other.
   Problems with a communication, or its author.
   The need to resolve contradictions.
   How does a square peg fit into a round hole?
   
   
   
5. When logic becomes beautiful.
   The beauty of clarity and precision.
   A precise and deliberate imagery of indecisiveness; impressionism.
   Returning to the concept of a common denominator.
   A wide choice of criteria for classifying conscious awarenesses.
   The essence of scientific work.
   Building-up a dynamic picture of causes and their effects.
   Observing similarities in appearances and events.
   A look at the phenomena of ebb and flood.
   The evolution of conceptual images and explanations.
   A scaffold for the images of reliance and truth.
   Synthetic aspects in putting-together a coherent imagery of reality.
   Sloppy and hasty conclusions will never lead to a durable or useful perception of reality.
   Sketching a tentative "working hypothesis".
   Why the "synthesist" has to be bold and daring.
   Large-scale parallels that cut across traditional scientific boundaries.
   Essential features of the living organisation.
   Parallel developments in cerebral and mental systems of classification.
   A stimulus for thought and debate.
   
   
   
6. Forms of existence evolve from each other in a smoothly flowing manner.
   The evolution of matter.
   Forging atomic elements in intra-stellar furnaces.
   The evolution of mono-theistic thought.
   Creation and Evolution are both "stories of belief".
   Why we have a strong desire to believe in a Creator.
   Global acceptance is never possible for a reality perception that has cloaked itself with an aura of absolute validity.
   Every form of existence is subjected to some pressure-gradient.
   The birth and decay of elementary particles.
   The solar system, and its origins from "left-over" debris.
   Gravitational contraction, nuclear fires, and an ultimate collapse.
   The end; a gigantic explosion; the "nova", and the "white dwarf".
   The contraction of matter into a "neutron star".
   Biochemical and molecular transformations, leading to the phenomena of life under "early terrestial" circumstances.
   
   
   
7. One billion years of protoplasmic evolution, summarised in a few sentences.
   Fluidity, seen as one of the most characteristic features of the living organisation.
   Features of the living cell; cellular physiology in outline.
   An inexorable tendency towards complexity.
   A high degree of rigidity leads to immutability and "lifelessness".
   The need for a continuous influx of energy.
   The concept of entropy; a brief discussion.
   High-energy electron bonds; an essential source of energy for the living organisation.
   Absorbing and giving-off quanta of electro-magnetic energy.
   Life; a "river" or pathway for the dissipation of an energy-gradient.
   Dispelling an apparent contradiction of the tendency towards entropy.
   Rivulets of biochemical energy.
   Living systems and river systems; an extensive comparison.
   
   
   
8. Further complexities.
   A search for durability, or viability, by non-living systems?
   An event is a "fluid" form of existence.
   Water, leveling-off under the force of gravitation.
   Why fluid matter will transform into a form of existence that has the lowest energy-level, or most stable possibility to exist.
   The vulnerability of a low level of internal resistance.
   An urgent need for the faculty of adaptation and stress-avoidance.
   Rigid structures rely on internal stress-resistance for durability.
   Adaptations to minimise the occurrence of competitive strife and dispersive tendencies.
   The adaptations of socially integrated entities of existence.
   A gradual shift in the size of the unit of survival.
   A strong legacy of egocentric instincts.
   Obligatory inter-dependencies.
   Inter-dependence with a strict genetic encoding of behavioural guidelines; a form of socialisation.
   The virus, and the borderline between living and life-less existence.
   Behavioural flexibility complicates the search for viability through the mechanisms of inter-dependence.
   The need for collective insights, and an excercise of the collective will.
   
   
   
9. Tentative and transient attempts at social integration; an inevitable result of the search for viability by complex, behaviourally flexible, living organisms.
   A remarkable degree of coherent insight is possible, when we look at individual and collective human behaviour from a biological point of view.
   The emergence of a dominant elite.
   Qualities of far-sighted leadership.
   Every member has to benefit from belonging to society.
   It is not enough to have faith, and to trust our leaders blindly.
   An increasing control over collective and individual existence with the help of Constitutional Guidelines.
   A clear idea about the purpose of socially integrated existence.
   Some people are great contributors, others great parasites.
   The need to profile the development of every personality.
   There has to be an authority to investigate, judge, correct errors and punish wrong-doings.
   A look back at useful parallels.
   Factors of stress for human integration.
   Giving Homo Sapiens a proper perspective in the panorama of natural evolution.
   
   
   
10. A last parallel.
    Is there a congruence between our perception of reality, and, a reality "as it really exists"; independent from human existence?
    Reflecting upon the nature of sense impressions and awareness mechanisms.
    A necessary act of reliance.
    The value of being reflective, from time to time, when it is useful.
    When can we reflect upon transience and death, sadness and happiness?
    The need to teach the art of living thoughtfully and inquisitively.
    We all have to formulate, to some extent, our own philosophy of life.
    Circumstances and interpretations are always subject to change.
    A useful relativity of truth, based upon a commonly acceptable imagery of our biological faculties.
    Science; a possibility of agreement across cultural boundaries.
    Is our perception of reality not, at least, a shadow of an absolute reality?
    A strong tendency to believe such an attractive concept.
    A high level of validity, achieved by a "flawless" and widely shared perception of our realities.
    The essential difference between a common human denominator in the perception of reality, and the assumption of an absolute, external reality that is independent from human existence, yet, somehow, reflected in the beliefs of mankind.
    It is better to concentrate upon a consensus about the realities we are able to know and communicate.

.......