THE PHILOSOPHIC ORDER OF RELATIVISTIC THOUGHT







A Study in Thought

sa089



by





Marius Heuff

Chapter 1

Content

There is turmoil all around us.
There is turmoil and frustration, because there is injustice, weakness and indecision.
When the experiences of war-fare have failed to find a meaningful cultural tradition.
When disparity and hunger, injustice and poverty, continue to feed the festering sores of hatred.
The momentum of fear, and the facade of "peace".
Is the threat of nuclear retaliation, really, a viable option?
We, the people, have too little influence on the decisions of our leaders.
A plea for the voice of a coherent public opinion.
When we do not want peace, but the preservation of a favourable status-quo.
Are we burying our heads in the sand?
A paralysing fear that may kill us.
The search for an alternative form of security.
Can we forego the methods of forceful persuasion all-together?

There is turmoil all around me, and, not only, around me, personally, because, most of the people of my time seem to be engulfed by some sort of turmoil. Often, we contribute actively to the turmoil ourselves, as we become a militant member of a particular special-interest grouping, such as a union or a professional organisation, or, we are fighting for one cause or another. Indeed, if we are lucky to be healthy, most of us are caught-up in some sort of a struggle, whenever we believe, that our rights and dignity have been trampled-upon; whenever we believe, that we deserve a higher income, or, more say in the affairs of the State; whenever we believe to have all the right answers for our turbulent times, and we do not hesitate to point-out the criminals and culprits we believe to be responsible for the chaos and the turmoil we are in.

Perhaps, we always live in some sort of turmoil, if we dare to look a little further than our own personal concerns and relationships, but, even, here, in our affluent societies, we fight and struggle, argue and quarrel with each other. We fight as husband and wife. We fail to direct our children consistently, or, we fail to give a good example, and yet, we are perplexed to find them rebellious, stubborn and disrespectful, once they become teen-agers. There is turmoil and frustration, because there is weakness and indecision all around us, and, if we take a close look at ourselves, we will recognise, that we participate in these weaknesses, too.

The people, who are in their prime and in a position of power, today, were children at the time of the Second World War, and, many had not even been born, when the civilised world seemed to be engulfed in a titanic struggle. Millions of people lost their lives, often, under the most horrible and unspeakable conditions, but, by and large, the people of today are only dimly aware of what happened. It is "all history". Those foolish people, who fought and died, murdered and were being murdered, have been almost completely forgotten, and, the memories of a previous generation are not easily transferred to a new one, in particular, if the lessons of war and history have not been able to find a meaningful cultural tradition, able to impress the following generations and their leaders.

Our contemporary leaders seem to be powerless to defend society against an atmosphere of sterile and chronically hostile attitudes. Once again, the ideological competition is heating-up, and, either side is branded as "evil" by the other. The reporting of news and events becomes selective and biased, designed to put the adversary in a bad light. Once again, our leaders seem powerless to resist the temptation to seek shelter and security in a gigantic and utterly wasteful arms-race, while the problems of disparity and hunger, injustice and inequality, are allowed to continue to feed the festering sores of hatred.

We seem to be totally helpless to prevent this drift towards a polarisation of the nations into a few powerful blocks that are chronically engaged in a war of words, siphoning-off much needed resources into an enormous arsenal of un-imaginably destructive weaponry, while many of us, in particular, in the lesser developed and under-developed nations, can only stare, in disbelief, and with a feeling of hopelessness, at the spectacle of the super-powers, gearing-up for an all-out nuclear conflict.

Certainly, either side is quick to point-out that their intentions are peaceful, and, that they only engage in such an arms-race, because the other side is doing so, and is threatening to become superior in strength. The leaders of either power-block are so obsessed with an elusive balance of power, as well as the fear that the other side may obtain a margin of superiority, that they are pouring ever larger sums of monies into their gigantic military establishments, while ordinary people are unable to make their voice heard, or their influence felt.

Unfortunately, a majority of the people still tend to believe the arguments of their leaders, who are forever pointing-out, that, a relatively long period of "peace", or, at least, the absence of a major conflict between the super-powers, has been obtained at the price of engaging in an arms-race and maintaining a rough balance in power.

Too many people still find it acceptable, at least, in our Western nations, to support the strategy of a nuclear attack as a deterrent against a conventional military advance by the other side, without realising the agonising decision that has to be made if, indeed, some day, the West is faced with certain defeat in a conventional military struggle. Are we really going to unleash a nuclear war with a destruction of all the major cities on both sides, or, is a majority of the people in the West then prepared to accept domination by a foreign power under the motto; better red than dead?

The point I want to make, here, to the good willing, peace-loving people on both sides of the ideological dividing lines, is the fact, that, we, the people, will have absolutely no say on either side of the conflict. The peoples of the West, nor the East, will have any chance to stop the military establishments from drifting into a deadly conflict-situation, because these military establishments will have become absolute powers, and, their commanders will have become absolute rulers, even, if they are in name responsible and subordinate to a democratically elected government, or a Ruling Party, which, supposedly, represents the interests of all the working people in the nation.

Unless we, ordinary people all over the world, learn to see the dangers that are associated with the powers of an established military elite, we will not be able to reach meaningful results in the efforts that are being made to bring-about a halt in this absurd arms-race. We will not be able to bring-about a reduction and an eventual elimination of these dangerous nuclear weapons, as well as other weapons of mass-destruction, unless we, the people, regain a measure of control over these military establishments. It is about time, that, we, the people, become coherent in our thinking and our methods of expression, and, that we learn to control and regulate, carefully, the powers of an elected leadership, together with its military wing, and, one of our most urgent tasks is to make sure, that nobody can blow-up the world in a moment of madness.

Yet, before we can do so, and, before we can become truly masters of our own destiny, rather than pawns in the hands of those who have the ultimate power over life and death, we have to come to the conclusion, that there must be a better way to deal with our suspicions and hostilities. There must be a better way than to wall ourselves off from our challengers, and, surround ourselves with a fortress of armour, ready to fight at any price. If we fail to find a rational alternative to fear and suspicion, and the lure to use force to defend our presumed rights and privileges, we will be unable to resist our leaders, who will, invariably, point-out, that we have to be prepared to defend, with military force, our territories, our culture and our way of life; that we have to fight those hostile, alien and evil forces, who are just waiting for a moment of weakness in our attitudes of vigilance and military preparedness.

Indeed, if we act and behave on the principle, that we defend ourselves with force and might against any alleged infraction or challenge, our hopes for peace are hypocritical. Then, we do not want peace, but, we want a preservation of the status-quo, because this status-quo is favourable for us, and, we have become so used to our privileged status, that we can not live without it. Is this the real motivation for our yearning of peace and stability? If it is, we are, in essence, on the same "wave-length" as our military establishments and our hawkish, nationalistic leaders. If this is our attitude and our way of thinking, we may as well forget our pious but misleading and hypocritical hopes for peace, and, we may as well get into our uniform and help building those defenses, because we are going to need them.

If our yearning for peace and our clamor for unilateral or bilateral nuclear disarmament is nothing more than a fear for our personal well-being, we may as well forget about our efforts, because the "hawks" in our society will only snear at us. They will rightly point-out that we are burying our heads in the sand. They will argue, that we are going to survive on their efforts and on their backs, and, they will point-out, that we are, in essence, not any differently motivated than our hawkish colleagues. We all want to survive, but our hawks are realistic, and, they are willing to put-in the hard work and sacrifices necessary to put-up an impenetrable ring of military might, and, it becomes, then, very difficult to refute their claim, that it is the presence of such a nuclear deterrent, in conjunction with the strength of more conventional military forces, or the shield of a space-based anti-ballistic missile system, that has kept the peace. It has kept the peace for everyone, including our peace-marchers, as well as those, who have been demonstrating, loudly, to get rid of our nuclear weapons.

People, if our wishes for peace and stability are only motivated by the fear, that we may lose what we have now, or, by the fear, that our weapons may kill us, our concerns and motivations remain just as egocentric as the motivations of our political leaders and their military establishments, who are willing to make an effort to secure their positions of privilege and stability with a military build-up. The real question is not, whether or not we want peace and stability, because we all want that. The real question is, whether or not we are willing to search for an alternative method to secure our existence and living conditions, our possessions and our culture; whether or not we are genuinely interested in finding an altenative to the methods of a military defense.

Perhaps, you will raise your eyebrows, here, and you would like to point-out, that the most basic mechanism of nature to secure survival, is the ability to defend against attackers and predators. Even within society, we need an extensive police-force to make sure that people behave according to the rules, and, that criminals are arrested, judged and sentenced if found guilty. If we all need a measure of forceful restraint in order to behave appropriately, and, if all life-forms, throughout the entire realm of natural evolution, have searched for methods to defend themselves against predators, how can you say, then, that it is possible for man to defend himself against greed, envy or just plain lawlessness, by anything else, but a good, strong, healthy body and mind, which includes the vigilance to watch for aggressors, as well as the willingness to use force to ward-off an attacker?

Is this not such a basic, primary biological instinct, that it seems futile to alter it or deny its existence? Does Christianity not provide an example, where a different attitude has been tried; where people, when attacked, are urged to "turn the other cheek", in an effort to break-through the vicious circle of attack and revenge? How successful has this effort of Christian ethics been? So far, we have not seen any decline in the use of the military solution by Christian believers; on the contrary, Christian beliefs and attitudes seem, often, to promote a measure of fanatic resistance and dogmatic self-righteousness, and, there are no examples, where a Christian community has "turned the other cheek" to an aggressor.

Therefore, it seems highly unlikely, that it is worthwhile to make another attempt to loosen the natural response of a forceful defense, and, indeed, it seems very difficult to overcome the drift towards fear and suspicion, a polarisation of beliefs and attitudes, as well as inexorable arms-race followed by an armed conflict, in spite of the fact, that such a development may make a premature end to the existence of man.

......

Chapter 2

Content

The search for "truth", in a relativistic sense, of course.
Coming to grips with our natural defense-mechanisms.
The entire animal kingdom is "obligatory predatorial" in its behaviour.
Competitive and predatorial behaviour-patterns characterise animal existence.
We have not grasped the whole story of natural evolution, if we forget to look at the phenomena of "symbiosis".
Territorial dispersion and hierarchical positioning.
The mechanisms of yielding and adaptating to a superior force, whenever possible.
Divergence in form and function; the development of mutual inter-dependence.
The monumental developments of "cellular symbiosis" and multi-cellular existence.
The never-ending arms-race is, also, one of nature's solutions in the search for survival and possibilities of existence.
An essential differentiation in function that goes back to pre-cellular evolutionary mechanisms.
Possibilities of existence have a chance to "jump" to a new level of performance with the solution of inter-dependence.
The stalemate of competitive strife always returns.
The price of a specific adaptation to existing pressures and opportunities.
Why it is vulnerable to specialise.
The quick development of "obligatory inter-dependence" by a symbiotic unit.
Many individual members of a symbiotic unit become "dispensible", and are often "deliberately sacrificed" for the survival of the unit as a whole.
A shift in emphasis by the mechanisms of natural selection towards the survival of a larger social entity.
Behavioural flexibility, and the mechanisms of socialisation.
The emergence of a "cultural code".
The arms-race between nations is a reflection of an old stalemate.
The route of finding security in a state of cooperation and inter-dependence between ever larger social units.
The "nation-state" is only one step on the ladder of progressive social integration.
The level of social integration is dictated by our existential needs.
War-fare used to benefit a neutral "third party", who would carry-out the major elements of reconstruction and rejuvenation, after the conflict came to an end.
Is it possible to lower, deliberately, the barriers of suspicion and hostility in a desperate attempt to stay alive?

True, (in a relativistic sense, of course,) nature has provided each living organism and each species with a variety of defense mechanisms, which help the individual organism to endure or overcome the pressures and stresses it may be confronted with. Part of these stresses are caused by other living organisms, such as competitive pressures between organisms with similar requirements, or, there may be predatorial pressures upon an organism.

We have reviewed the nature of living existence before, and, we have seen, that the predatorial way of "making a living" has been such a successful development, from an early stage in the evolution of life, that the entire realm of animal existence is "obligatory predatorial" in its behaviour, and, this means, that an animal life-form has no choice, but to ingest another life-form; be it plant or animal. Both trends; the pressures of competitive existence, which are present in the the vegetative life-forms as well, and the specific animal characteristic of predatorial behaviour, have influenced, profoundly, the large variety of species' that have developed throughout the period of natural evolution.

We see already in the uni-cellular life-forms a large number of specific adaptations, or specialisations in function, emphasising defensive and aggressive capabilities. There is, therefore, little argument about the observation, that, competitive, as well as predatorial characteristics form an essential element of all animal behaviour, and, since the human species belongs to the animal life-forms, we should not be surprised to see a strong, instinctive, biological heritage in our behavioural package, which makes us slide between the poles of defensive and aggressive behaviour. We have discussed this before, and, we will not repeat, here, the arguments or the description of the three basic poles of animal behaviour; defensive against pressures and stresses, aggressive towards a possible source of food, and, sexually interested, whenever the circumstances are suitable to fulfill the strong, instinctive and genetically endowed drive to secure the next generation and a continuation of the species.

However, we have not grasped the entire story of natural evolution, if we look, only, at the aggressive or defensive confrontations between animal life-forms. If we want to survey the numerous ways life searches for a possibility to exist, and looks for a measure of security to extend this possibility of existence from one generation to the next, we have to consider the other solutions nature has found to the problems of survival. A competitive confrontation, or a predatory hunt, does not always end with a violent struggle to the death of the loser.

Competitors tend to spread-out over a large territory, thereby easing the competitive pressures. The territories needed to sustain life do not overlap, anymore. They begin to border on each other, and, as long as there exists a reasonably stable situation, each territory can feed or support a number of life-forms. Then, there is little need for competitors to encroach into each other's terrain, and "contacts" may be limited to a few border skirmishes, where "adventurists" are driven back to their own territories.

We see, here, that the quality of "vigilance", together with the ability to defend a territory, can maintain a relatively peaceful status-quo, and, undoubtedly, our leaders and military strategists will be happy to refer to such biological examples, whenever we try to question the reasons for their existence and their insatiable demands for cash and resources.

In a confrontation between competitors, or, between a predator and his prey, the confrontation or tension may, therefore, be resolved by a flight, or a yielding of the weaker party. This is a viable and prudent decision, especially, after it has become clear that the forces are not matched; and, that the weaker party risks death and injury, if it continues to resist the pressures of the stronger party. Nature always uses the methods of yielding or adaptation to search for new or different possibilities of existence, if the pressures upon a life-form are becoming dangerous.

We have discussed, on previous occasions, that the existence of a large variety of life-forms is an expression of the fact, that competing life-forms tend to diverge, not only, in territory, but also, in function. This divergence in function is a successful method to reduce competitive pressures, and, we see, that, many different species' can occupy the same territory, if they do not compete with each other's needs. This is the reason, why a large number of species' can live closely together, without interfering with each other, and, without any appreciable awareness of each other's existence.

This principle of divergence in form and function, in order to minimise competitive pressures or to complement each other's functions and requirements, is mirrored, be it on a much less dramatic scale, in the social organisation of the human being. However, we want to discuss, first, the most dramatic, and most successful, forms of complementary existence, which developed long before the human species arose on the scene of the living organisation. We are thinking, here, about the monumental development of "cellular symbiosis", together with the emergence of "multi-cellular existence".

In spite of our extensive knowledge about the living organisation, we still have only vague ideas, how, and when, multi-cellular life arose, and, we have to be satisfied, for the time being, with the enumeration of a number of possibilities and overall principles, rather than a precise description of what happened in that distant past; when the evolutionary success of uni-cellular life-forms in the original protoplasmic seas led to a teeming population of highly competitive organisms, all vying for a possibility to exist and a chance to reproduce themselves. This sea of uni-cellular life was highly competitive and aggressive, because these same features can still be seen in the many cellular specialisations that still exist, and, there are some remarkable examples of aggressive as well as defensive weaponry, when we look, closely, at the numerous species' of uni-cellular life still in existence, today.

Somewhere, somehow, nature explored a totally different path-way of viability. In stead of the never-ending arms-race between uni-cellular fighting machines, a mode of existence was being explored that came to be known as "symbiosis". In symbiosis, we see a mechanism, where life-forms can tolerate each other at close quarters, as long as they differ sufficiently in their functions and requirements to reduce their competitive pressures to a minimum.

As we have discussed before, a life-form is often highly selective or specific in the energy-sources or building-blocks it can use, and, this means, that different life-forms may use different energy-sources and different building-blocks in order to sustain their existence. In this way, they are not competing with each other, and, if one life-form can use as a building-block a product that is a waste-product, and, therefore, a hindrance, for another lifeform, the balance shifts from an ability to tolerate each other at close quarters, to an actual need of each other's presence, in order to exist and function optimally.

We have also discussed the fact, that the emergence of symbiotic uni-cellular life-forms is not a new pinciple at all, because each living cell consists of a large number of complementary and divergent biochemical reaction-patterns, which "need" each other's proximity, together with a variety of specific spatial relationships, in order to function as a living entity.

The solution of symbiosis as an answer to the limitations of competitve strife, has, therefore, already been fore-shadowed by natural selection in the construction of this basic living unit, the cell, and, the mechanism of symbiosis was repeated by the momentous development of the multi-cellular life-form. On each occasion, we see, that the possibilities of existence "jump" to a totally different plane of performance. Just as the freely floating, metabolising and reproducing cellular unit was a break-through to a higher dimension of existence, compared to the capabilities of a biochemical chain-reaction, so was the emergence of the multi-cellular life-form a break-through that led to existence possibilities that were completely out of reach for the single cell.

We only have to look at the world of multi-cellular life, in particular, the highly evolved mammals, to realise, how far the possibilities of living existence have evolved since the emergence of the single cell. Yet, eventually, the same stalemate of competitive existence, together with an ever-intensifying arms-race, developed between multi-cellular organisms as well, in spite of the fact, that, multi-cellular organisms evolved the ability to spread-out over the entire land-mass, and occupied an unimaginably vast number of ecological niches.

Everywhere, species' were driven into a specialised development, with a specific set of aggressive and defensive, as well as reproductive capabilities. These qualities would secure their success in a particular ecological niche, as long as the circumstances did not change too dramatically, or, too quickly, because we see, invariably, that the specialisation of a species into a particular ecological niche, makes it vulnerable to rapid and profound changes, and, if such changes did occur, it would become clear, that the species had lost, by and large, the ability to mold and adapt into a form with the ability to survive and make use of the changed circumstances.

The principle of "vulnerability in specialisation" is also visible in the cellular communities that make up the organ-systems of a multi-cellular unit, just as we can see the same vulnerability and fragility in the biochemical systems that make up the unit of a single cell. In both instances, the organ communities of the multi-cellular life-form, as well as the biochemical communities within the cellular protoplasm, depend upon the integrity of the unit of the cell, or the integrity of a multi-cellular organism, and this dependence is so strong, that survival as a separate and single fragment or isolated member is not possible, any longer.

Nature's experimentation with possibilities of existence would naturally explore a particular avenue relentlessly, because survival in the struggle between the capabilities of an organism and the pressures and tensions it was subjected to, were the only criteria for evolutionary success, and the persistence of a specific genetic code. This means, that a symbiotic multi-cellular life-form, (provided it had sufficient time to be molded by the forces of natural evolution), would either perish as a failure and become extinct, or, it would develop into such a sophisticated unit of inter-dependence, that its level of specialisation, internally as well as externally, would not allow, any longer, the survival of individual members of the socially integrated unit outside the confines of such a unit.

We should keep this principle of specialisation and inter-dependence in mind, once we start exploring the viability and the evolutionary trends of the much more tentative symbiotic units that are formed by the human social groupings. There is another principle we should recall, here, too; nl., the evolution of a successful symbiotic unit leads to possibilities of existence for the unit as a whole, which are not within reach for the members individually.

We see this principle clearly reflected in the range of existence possibilities of the cell, the multi-cellular organism, as well as the socially integrated units of human beings. The performance capabilities of socially integrated, multi-individual units tend to exceed the capabilities of the participating members, at least, in some aspects. However, the price for such a break-through of a possibility to exist on a higher plane, or a new dimension, is "paid-for" by the need to become specialised and inter-dependent upon each other. The level of inter-dependence shifts quickly to the point, that the criteria of viability have shifted from a "defense" of individual requirements, to a defense of the symbiotic unit as a whole. Only the survival of the unit as a whole will lead to the subsequent survival and existence of most of the contributing members, while the death of the unit as a whole will lead to the demise of all the members.

I emphasise, here, the feature that survival of the unit as a whole may lead to the survival of "most" of the members, because, in the defense of the symbiotic unit as a whole, large numbers of individual members may perish.

We see, clearly, in the story of evolution, that multi-cellular life-forms have searched, on many occasions, for viability and security with the technique of symbiotic harmony, or "socialisation", but, we see, also, that the socially integrated unit of multi-cellular organisms has rarely become as effective, or, as efficient, as the multi-cellular organism itself.

Perhaps, the insect colonies reveal a remarkably coherent and specialised form of social inter-dependence and integration, but the larger mammals and the anthropoids were certainly not able to accomplish a degree of socialisation that resembled, anywhere near, the precision and total commitment to the status of social integration, which is such a striking feature of the cells within a multi-cellular unit. We have traced, before, the reasons for this, and, we have discussed the difficulties associated with two contradictory trends.

On the one hand, nature sought, and found, a highly successful avenue of viability by letting the behavioural response of the more complex and slowly reproducing multi-cellular species' evolve into a pattern of flexibility, where the behaviour of an organism could be far more finely tuned and adapted to existing and rapidly fluctuating circumstances. This required the evolution of a memory-bank, as well as the incorporation of past experiences, together with contemporary behavioural examples, in order to shape the behavioural response to rapidly and continuously varying conditions.

The trend towards behavioural flexibility was, at the same time, a hindrance, as well as an advantage, in the search for viability and survival, manifested by the trend towards the social integration of the large, flexible, multi-cellular organisms, from which, eventually, the human species arose with its specific emphasis on the capabilities of conscious thought. The early stages of secondary socialisation of the large, behaviourally flexible, multi-cellular animals evolved well before the differentiation of the human species, because the pre-human anthropoids were already "socialised", by the time man started its specific evolutionary development with the experiment of symbolic representations. Therefore, it is not surprising to learn, that our biological heritage of genetically encoded behavioural instructions includes a definite trend, or propensity, towards forming a small, natural, socially integrated grouping, largely, of members that were related to each other.

However, the much larger societies of mankind, which arose at the beginning of recorded history, did not have any genetic blue-print at their foundation, and, yet, we may safely assume, that these larger social entities arose out of a dire necessity. Therefore, the processes of socialisation continued, because the small natural societies of man had become locked into a fierce, nearly continuous round of competitive strife. Yet, the means by which a larger social entity of human beings could evolve, were strictly "cultural", and, this means, that man's individual and collective conscious awarenesses had to take-over the mechanisms of progressive social integration on a much larger scale. Here, we see the role of conscious awareness and deliberate decision-making in the equation of viability for the members of mankind.

It is clear, then, that the answers of our leaders about the need to continue an arms-race, and, to continue to seek security in defensive and aggressive weaponry, is nothing more than a reflection of this old, pre-historic stalemate that arose, already, at a cellular and pre-cellular level of evolutionary developments. This stale-mate has been "broken-through" on several spectacular occasions by the emergence of a symbiotic unit. If our leaders would take the time, and make the effort, to review the history of natural evolution, and, especially, the history of the human species, they would be able to acknowledge the fact, that, security was, eventually, found in the harmony of ever larger and more sophisticated social units. We live, now, in an era, where the existence of the "nation-state" is considered to be the highest form of social evolution, but, in a historical perspective, we see, that this nation-state is only one step on the ladder of progressive social integration.

You may want to ask the question, how far such a level of secondary socialisation has to proceed. Indeed, the required level of socialisation depends on our needs. For a long time, it did not really matter, which societies, tribes, or, even, nations were fighting with each other, and, often, a third nation and on-looker, would, ultimately, profit from a weakening fight between powerful rivals. Now, the world is becoming increasingly polarised, and, already, the last two major world-wide conflicts engulfed a majority of the peoples in one way or another. Any major conflict in the future will surely engulf and devastate most of us, and, there will, probably, be no neutral third party moving-in after the super-powers have annihilated each other. Even, if a third party could move in, the degree of devastation and impoverishment would be so great, that the "third world" would suffer rather than benefit, if the major civilisations would have annihilated each other in a nuclear holocaust.

The answer to the escalating arms-race, is, therefore, the conclusion, that we have, indeed, no choice, but, to carry-on the processes of socialisation, until the entire world of mankind is united into some sort of a social and symbiotic unit; united by the common enemies of scarcities, pollution, deteriorating environmental conditions, and, perhaps, dangerously high levels of radio-active and toxic substances. We may, eventually, come to the conclusion, that, only, in such a sophisticated, well regulated and socially just entity of social integration, can we combine our talents to survive, but, very likely, we will not be able to come to such an agreement, until the last moment; when the necessity to do so, is so obvious to all of us, that, we, as well as our leaders, are finally able to lower the barriers of suspicion and hostility, and start to work, together, for our survival, in the hope that it is not too late.

.......

Chapter 3

Content

A deceptive rethoric.
Leaderships are tacitly admitting, that they can not trust their neighbours, because they, themselves, would abuse, treacherously, a position of military superiority to obtain an opportunistic advantage.
We have to reduce the level of competitive strife and territorial ambitions by encouraging a trend towards inter-dependence.
A complete freedom of opinion and movement.
The need for regulatory mechanisms.
The common bonds of a shared, Christian reality perception in the Middle-Ages prepared the way for the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the much larger political unit.
The possibilities for a globally shared perception of reality, based on the insights of evolutionary developments.
A network of "monasteries", based on a relativistic interpretation of reality?
Why we have a tendency to remain captive to a posture of suspicious defensiveness and aggressive opportunism.
The Philosophic Order of Relativistic Thought.
No "walling-off" from the rest of the world, but, we need time to study, reflect and recuperate.
The danger of elitist attitudes.
When we become an object of scorn and ridicule.

Let us not be deceived by our leaders, when they loudly proclaim to be the champions of world-peace and social justice, because the truth is, that they blame the "other side" for all the troubles and obstacles to such a lofty goal. Our leaders believe, invariably, that they are the true champions of the Cause of Justice, and, that they have done everything in their powers to further the Cause of Peace. They may believe, what they are saying, but, if we look closely at their behaviour, we see, that, each side is posturing belligerently and is eyeing its opponent with suspicious attitudes.

Either side is engaged in a ruthless battle of espionage, where they are searching for each other's weaknesses, and, either side is trying to negotiate from a position of strength. It seems unbelievably naive, but, neither side is able to acknowledge, that it is, at least, partly responsible for the attitudes of its adversaries. It is incredible to see, how both sides waste gigantic sums of money and resources, just to balance an elusive threat that is meaningless to a majority of the people on either side of the ideological and military divide.

Neither side has any intention of lowering its defenses, because the level of distrust is so high, that, neither side attaches any value or reliability to the treaties that have been negotiated over the years. Their fears and suspicions are a tacit admission, that, either side will make use of an opportunity to exploit a weakness, and, this means, that all the assurances of peaceful intentions and good-will are a smoke-screen to pacify their own peace-loving populations. Because both sides know, that they, as well as their military establishments, would make use of any opportunity to gain an advantage over the adversary, neither side dares to take a risk. Indeed, leaderships of super-powers, and, perhaps, the majority of proud and sovereign nation-states are tacitly admitting, that they can not trust their neighbour, because they, themselves, would treacherously abuse a position of military advantage for an opportunistic gain.

As long as our leaders behave this way, people, we will hope, in vain, for world-peace, and, we will hope, in vain, for stability, prosperity and a genuine atmosphere of cooperation. We have to replace our reliance upon security through military force and alliances, with a security that is based on the process of further social integration. This means, that we have to aim for a reduction of competitive strife and territorial ambitions, by allowing a trend towards increased inter-dependence. A trend towards increased inter-dependence may be accomplished by an increased contact between people from the various nations with differing social systems, an increase in the exchange of goods, services and ideas, as well as an increased dependence upon each other's products. We have to develop complementary rather than competitive economies and military establishments, and, we have to allow a much more intensive freedom of opinion and movement of goods, people and their ideas between the societies of the world.

However, before we can successfully increase the level of symbiotic harmony and functional inter-dependence, we must be able to create a clear perception of the realities, including, a mutually agreed-upon pact of guidelines and regulations for our behaviour. Just as the biochemical symbiosis of the cell, or, the cellular symbiosis of the multi-cellular organism, would have been totally impossible without stringent regulatory mechanisms, ensuring the orderly behaviour of each cell or biochemical unit, so is it logical to acknowledge, that we first need a structure of concepts and guidelines, where we agree amongst ourselves what justice is; how we should reach for and maintain a state of justice, and, how we should safeguard a desirable harmony of attitudes and living conditions against powerful, egocentric elements, which may be tempted to abuse the existing social machinery for their own benefit.

Here, we see an interesting parallel with Medieval Times, when a nearly hopeless situation of feuding principalities, was finally changed, after centuries of chaos and a slow conceptual preparation, into a much more coherent system of nation-states. Certainly, these states were, perhaps, just as often at war with each other as the feudal barons, but, it would have been inconceivable to see the emergene of nation-states, trade, industry and the arts, as well as the institutions of scholarship and government, without the unifying bond of a common reality perception. This common bond in which to interpret reality, and, with which to judge human behaviour, made it possible to communicate with each other, and these communications became, gradually, more sophisticated and more sensible.

The common bond of a unified reality perception was due to the tireless work of the Christian Church, which slowly prepared the way for the Renaissance, as well as the Reformation, during the long evolutionary period towards citizenship and statehood. This preparatory stage was necessary, because the heritage of the many European tribes had lost its superficial veneer of a Roman culture, together with its governmental organisation.

The point we want to make, here, is the fact, that it is inconceivable, at least, to me, to see the evolution of Medieval Times into the Renaissance and beyond, without the common bonds and beliefs that were slowly forged between the various tribes of Europe by the Christian Faith, as it was being propagated by a still remarkably united Christian Church. Just as most of the culture of the so called "white", or European people, has been based upon the common heritage of Christianity, so will the future culture of the world be based upon a common reality perception, which takes as its foundation, not so much, the common belief in the Redemption of mankind trough Jesus Christ, but, the common biological factors that guide the functions, as well as the existential needs of every human being.

Until recently, a common reality perception had to be based upon a religious belief, together with the national interests of a social environment. Now, we can design a reality perception that lets us see the common bonds of living existence, including the common functions of thought and conscious awareness, as well as the common bonds of competitive strife and existential needs. Until recently, we could afford to solve our problems, exclusively, in the light of our national interests, but, soon, we should be able to acknowledge, that a durable solution to our problems can come, only, if we learn to solve our problems on a global scale.

Just as the monasteries of Europe forged, over a time-period of several centuries, a common reality perception, which, eventually, evolved into a glorious achievement, (this explosive mixture of Western culture and technology), so is it logical to assume, that we will need, perhaps, for centuries to come, a network of institutions, or "monasteries", where a small group of people is dedicated to probing the depth of a truly global philosophy; where we can forge a basis for a truly global reality perception. As we know, so well, from our experiences and observations, without a commonly shared perception of reality, we can not communicate. Look at the frustrations of our political leaders. Even, their best intentions come to nothing, because their efforts to communicate are consumed by the attitudes of mistrust and the mechanisms of misunderstanding.

Unless we, and our leaders, learn to understand, what attitudes and motivations we are generating in each other, we all remain captive to a posture of suspicious defensiveness and aggressive opportunism, which makes the stalemate of a continuing arms-race inevitable; with the threat of a fatal conflagration never far-away.

In the suggestion that we need monasteries representing a "Philosophical Order of Relativistic Thought", I do not want to give the impression, that we need to wall ourselves off from the world and from society, in order to contemplate the blessings of a world united in peace and harmony. We can only contemplate, fruitfully, upon the needs of the world and the viability of mankind, if we have been exposed, widely, to this world, and, if we know the drives and motivations of human beings, intimately, but, we need, indeed, periods of time to digest and orden our thoughts, because a contribution in thought can not come, unless its author has had time to think about his experiences, and, has had time to shape his thoughts, slowly and carefully.

The last thing we need is a grouping of people, who feel and behave as "elitists", because they are united by an exalted ideal and have become somewhat familiar with the complexities of a relativistic philosophy. As long as we give-in to the temptation to use a particular form of knowledge, or a bond of belonging, to foster our own particular position of well-being and security, we become an object of scorn and ridicule in the eyes of those, whom we are trying to teach and convince.

Our enthousiasm and labours should be entirely motivated by the conviction, that the answers to the need for security have to come from a process of further socialisation, and the formation of a global, symbiotic unit for the species of mankind. This means, that we have to design a mutual pact of just and open relationships, which gives every individual, at least, a chance to develop into a healthy and responsible human being. If we use our knowledge and membership of a prestigious club, exclusively, to further our own cause and strengthen our own position of privilege and advantage, we would not be any different from the Christian who despised and hated his neighbour, because this neighbour would not accept the commandment that "one should love thy enemies".

.......

Chapter 4

Content

An outline of the essential features of a relativistic reality perception.
Mankind is one of many species', developed by the mechanisms of natural selection.
The faculty of conscious awareness is a product of natural evolution.
God is "created" in man's own image.
The importance of physiological and psychological mechanisms.
No reason to equate our perception of reality with a "reality, as it really exists".
The many specifically human factors that play a role in the perception of reality.
A relativistic interpretation of reality does not mean, that all perceptions are equally valid.
Observations that are based on physiological capabilities, rather than on cultural pre-conceptions.
The value of the quality of "verifiability".
The importance of the factor of "agreement".
A particular point in the "curve", or historical profile of scientific understanding and mastery.
Relativistic considerations apply, also, to the relativistic interpretations themselves.
Conscious awareness; seen as a tool in the struggle for survival.
The classifying functions of the brain and the mind.
The importance of the quality of "familiarity".
The fragility of our reality experiences.
The existential nature of our beliefs is clearly demonstrated in a situation of conflict.
When rational thought becomes an instrument for justifying existential needs and emotional decisions.
The observations of an impartial onlooker.
The problem of enlarging the sphere of our concerns.
Ethical concerns are always centered around the well-being of a specific social entity.
There is no superior power, or authority, to make nations and their leaders behave according to a common set of guidelines.
The judgement of right and wrong is always strongly influenced by existential needs.
When strife becomes a primitive and lawless struggle for survival.

Let us proceed, therefore, by outlining, briefly, the essential features of a relativistic reality perception. Then, we should pay attention to the question, how we can begin to discuss and elaborate such a relativistic framework for the interpretation of our perceptions and beliefs. We need a relativistic reality perception for a workable, globally relevant social organisation, and, we have to design a reasonably save and non-destructive way to implement the ideas of a world-society, with a globally implemented standard of social justice and essential equality.

A relativistic perception of reality is solidly based on our evolutionary insights, which show us, that the human species is one of the life-forms natural selection has brought into existence. This means, that we have to consider the faculty of conscious awareness, with its ability to form and communicate concepts, as a product of natural evolution. It may not make much sense to anyone who is unfamiliar with the concepts of natural evolution, to see all conscious faculties as a product of our organic existence, but, this is a central feature in the relativistic interpretation of our realities, and, it contrasts, therefore, sharply with the religious reality perceptions, where the faculties of thought and conscious awareness, as well as the ability to believe in God, made man appear so different from the animal life-forms around him. In the religious perception of reality, man came to the conclusion, again and again, that he was a "special creature"; that he was a "pinnacle" in the Creation of God, and, that he had a special relationship with his Creator, just because of this ability to "know God". Yet, these remarkable scientific insights of natural evolution seem to bring us, increasingly, to the conclusion, that our capability of conscious awareness is a direct result of nature's experiment with a voluntary and arbitrary recall of memory-traces and sense-impressions.

We have elaborated these ideas before, and, we want to repeat and emphasise, only, the main conclusion we have come to; nl., that our awarenesses and concepts are natural capabilities, and, that our awarenesses, interpretations and beliefs depend upon the way we function, physiologically and psychologically; that these awarenesses and interpretations depend, also, upon the beliefs and attitudes which happen to be current in the society we have been born into, as well as the experiences and sense-impressions we have acquired. We have also argued in favour of the conclusion, that there is no justification to equate a seemingly perfect or near-perfect grasp over reality, with the existence of a reality "as it really exists"; outside and independent from our human existence.

Even, if we agree that our knowledge of reality is never complete or final, we have a strong tendency to assume, that there must be a close correlation between the reality "as we finally perceive it", and the reality "as it exists", because, if there is no correlation whatsoever, it becomes very difficult to explain, satisfactorily, how it is possible for man to have such a good grasp over the realities of his environment. It becomes difficult to explain, why his predictability and manipulability of the environmental forces and happenings have led to such dramatic scientific and technological successes.

However, if we assume, that such a correlation exists between the reality "as we believe in it" and "as it really exists", (and we are thinking, now, primarily about a modern, scientific reality perception) , we run into the problem, that such a conclusion is based upon feelings, intuitions or a process of logical deductions, while we lack the essential criterium needed to make this judgement; whether or not there really exists such a congruence between reality and our perception of it. This essential criterium that is always lacking, is a form of knowledge about the reality "as it exists", independently of our own existence. We have seen, that it is, by definition, impossible to know anything about such an extra-human reality, because all our thoughts and imaginations about such a hypothetical, absolute reality, are always human concepts and images. We have argued these points before, and, we have discussed the peculiarly focussed aspects of all our reality perceptions, while there is no reason to believe, that such a focussing, or "bundling" function exists in an absolute, external, non-human reality perception.

All-right, you will say, if all reality is necessarily a human reality, why, even, discuss the existence of a non-human reality, and, let us get-on with the task of finding-out, which reality perception or interpretation is the right one, or "the truth". But, now we run into a major difficulty. Every time we think, that we have found a truth that can be proven, at least, to our satisfaction, sooner or later, someone comes along, who disagrees with our assumptions, and, if we analyse carefully our beliefs, we come to the sobering conclusion, that our beliefs and certainties are full of assumptions we can not prove. Many of these assumptions are tacit or explicit "truths", which we have taken-over from our cultural environment, without much thought and criticism, and, we can always meet someone, who comes from a different cultural environment and has different assumptions.

"Yes, but", you will object, "is not the main feature of a scientific belief structure that it can be proven by experiments and demonstrations, regardless of the cultural background of the scientists? Is this not the reason, why scientists can communicate with each other across wide cultural barriers, and, is it not remarkable that scientific facts can be interpreted and believed-in, in the same way, all over the world, regardless of race or creed?". This is certainly true, but, we have also pointed-out, on previous occasions, that the conviction associated with a conclusive proof, experiment or demonstration, still depends on the degree with which the scientists share a set of common assumptions on which the evidence has been based, and, we have also pointed-out, that, indeed, the strength and durability of the scientific imagery depends upon the fact, that we all function physiologically more or less in the same way.

Psychologically, we experience primary sense-impressions, also, in a similar manner, and, if we are careful to construct a belief structure that rests, exclusively, upon such biologically verifiable sense-impressions, we may come to a widespread agreement about the reality of a particular event or phenomenon. Still, we need agreement, and, we all know, how scientific certainty evolves slowly, as more and more members of the scientific community come to accept a particular interpretation of a sense-impression. We also know from a historic perspective of our insights and beliefs, that, even, the scientific beliefs change and are, almost constantly, being challenged, either, by people who advance an alternative way to interpret the same basic phenomena, or, by people, who present facts and phenomena that seem to contradict or invalidate a particular interpretation of reality.

Therefore, it seems inescapable to come to the conclusion, that, even, the scientific reality perceptions of today, are subject to change and evolution, and, that we are only seeing a particular facet or moment in the "curve" of scientific understanding and mastery. Besides, we have to consider all scientific understanding as "peculiarly human" in the way it is grasped, communicated and manipulated, and, there is no reason to believe, that scientific beliefs correspond any more with an absolute reality than any of the older, more widespread, and, often, easier to understand, religious reality perceptions. Ironically, the scientific imagery of evolutionary phenomena, as well as the conclusions of a relativistic truth apply, just as much, to the foundations of the scientific imagery upon which these relativistic concepts have been based. Relativistic conclusions apply, therefore, to all interpretations of reality, because they all result from an inter-action between a conscious awareness and its particular environment.

The point we want to emphasise here, is the fact, that, seen in a relativistic light, the function and purpose of our conscious awareness is a tool in the struggle for survival, and, more specifically, it is a tool in the task to orden and classify this vast and unending stream of sense-impressions to which we are exposed during all our waking hours.

We have discussed, before, the classifying functions of our mind, and, we have seen, that it would be totally impossible for us to relate to our environment, without the ability to classify the incoming sense impressions, because we would lack the ability to recognise anything as "familiar" if we could not classify the incoming sense impressions routinely and confidently. It does not take much imagination to realise, how profoundly disturbing a lack of recognition would be, and, we get an inkling of the severity of this disturbance, if we see, on occasion, someone, who has a defective reality perception and suffers from an inability to classify the familiar as "familiar".

Every distortion in the perception of familiarity leads to a profound sense of confusion, as well as totally erratic behaviour-patterns, and, it unleashes severe anxieties, because the individual who suffers from such a break-down in normal reality perceptions, feels, intuitively, that this state of the mind is a grave threat to his or her existence.

A more profound insight into the mechanisms of the mind, (such as the factors and chemicals that can alter the flow of classifications and perceptions, or the state of our emotions, motivations, or "moods"), shows us, ever more clearly, not only, how fragile our reality perceptions are, but, also, to what extent our conscious awareness is a product of a healthy, sane and stable mind. As we become more familiar with the scientific imagery that lies behind the mechanisms of our anatomic, organic and functional existence, it will be easier to accept this apparent contradiction and somewhat frightening limitation; nl., that the truths we believe in are only real and truthful to us, as well as a handful of people in our environment who happen to agree with us.

Indeed, the crux of the feeling of truthfulness turns-out to be the level of agreement we can muster between our own beliefs and the beliefs of those we associate with. Now, we understand, better, why we like to associate with like-minded people, because we re-enforce each other's beliefs by increasing the degree of agreement or consensus we experience, and, we avoid those, who disagree with us, in particular, if we fear their powers of logic and argumentation.

Nowhere is the existential nature and function of our beliefs more clearly demonstrated, than in a conflict-situation. Here, more than in any other situation, our powers of rational thought and logical deduction, as well as objective observation and balanced argumentation, become the servant of our existential needs, and, we are all aware of the phenomenon, (so much more clearly seen in others than observed in ourselves), where we "rationalise" or justify a primarily emotional or instinctive attitude of belligerence or defensiveness. How good are our political leaders not at rationalising their, and our, existential fears, and, how successful are they in galvanising us, time and again, towards an attitude of patriotism and a willingness to take-up arms! Of course, always in the defense of our absolute truths and unquestionable cultural values!

Yet, if we happen to be an un-involved, but keen and intelligent onlooker, we can see, how nations are posturing in a conflict-situation. We see, how they get ready to do battle, and, how each side is supremely successful in convincing its own people to go to war; to risk everything, and, to go willingly to the battle-fields, where the law-abiding, loving parents and children of both citizenries are slaughtering each other in an unbelievable and indescribable carnage. If only our leaders on either side of a conflict-situation, would be, or could be, as convincing in their efforts to instill in their peoples an attitude of understanding and cooperation towards those, who appear to challenge their existential certainties and security! How much easier would it be to create a world-order of justice and real peace!

Yet, we all know, that such a lament is a pious and rather superficial wish, because nature has endowed us all, regardless of the side we belong to, with a strong, instinctive behaviour-pattern to defend our security with force and military might, but, we have only a very weak instinctive drive to seek a solution for conflicting security needs, in a process of further social integration.

As we have pointed-out before, this instinct of social integration may apply to a group of a few dozen individuals, but, it is not readily applied to a much larger social grouping. If it is already so difficult for us to see competitors within our own social environment as members of the same social entity, it becomes nearly impossible to seek a solution for our existential problems by extending the bonds of inter-dependence far beyond the boundaries of our society. Besides, our national leaders will teach us, constantly, to be patriotic, and, to keep the political or ethnic unity of our nation in mind, but, these same leaders are the first to issue a call to arms, whenever the leadership of a competitive, hostile, neighbouring society gives any indication that it wants to challenge the leadership or the privileged position of our social environment.

We have discussed, on various occasions, why it is unavoidable and, only apparently paradoxical, that our national leaderships will teach and preach, incessantly, about the virtues of being a good and patriotic citizen, while their own behaviour in relation to other societies appears to be lawless and opportunistic. The root of the problem lies in the fact, that there is no superior authority to make these nations, and their leaderships, behave according to a set of commonly accepted rules and guidelines.

Let us come back upon the observation, that our judgements of right and wrong are strongly influenced by our existential needs. Within a social grouping, we learn to take the existential needs of others into account, and, the leaders will constantly teach and enforce an attitude of cooperation and inter-dependence between the members of the social grouping they excercise jurisdiction over. However, if societies clash without any framework of common rules or commonly accepted reality perceptions, the clash becomes a primitive and lawless struggle for the survival of the fittest.

We have hinted upon the observation, that the slow emergence of a common reality perception of Christian beliefs and attitudes paved the way for the Renaissance and the flowering of Europe after the Middle Ages, and, we re-iterate, here, the idea, that a similar preparation for a commonly shared perception of reality is necessary, in order to make it possible, and likely, that the nations of the world will, eventually, be able to choose the route of socialisation, raher than confrontation, as they search for solutions and answers to their increasingly more complex and dangerous existential problems.

.......

Chapter 5

Content

A strong instinct to seek security in military might.
Counter-arguments.
A philosophy that runs counter to our intuitive needs.
Predictability and manipulability; are they proofs of reality?
Why would a slippery and sophisticated philosophy succeed, where so many simpler and more dogmatic beliefs have failed?
When a belief is treated as a "prized possession".
The influence of a relativistic reality perception will, probably, remain "in the background".
A slow coloration of existing beliefs, rather than an independent ideology.
Relativism, seen as a method to present scientific concepts and ideas.
An emphasis on the phenomenon of human existence.
We have to know more about motivations, instincts and psychological mechanisms.
Why Marxism is psychologically inadequate.
The importance of a proper and illuminating perspective.
An emphasis on the theories of knowledge and perception.
Relativism may help to prevent scientific fragmentation.
Looking forward to the time when people will be turning-away from the mad rat-race for consumerist gratifications or prestigious ambitions.
When there is more time to reflect.
When deteriorating environmental conditions will re-direct our attention and activities.
An optimistic outlook.

"I think that you are a naive and utopian dreamer", my critics will retort, "and I do not believe for one moment, that such a vague and slippery concept as a relativistic reality-perception will ever be popular and convincing enough to break-through the barriers of mistrust. Our instinct to seek security by force and military might is so much stronger than the more rational solution of global socialisation, that, I fail to see, how the body of world-opinion will ever be sufficiently united to overrule the territorial intincts of our leaders, and ourselves".

"You have compared, rather boldly, the rise of Christianity, and the socialisation of Europe, to the processes, you think, are needed, before we can see a viable social integration of the world as a whole. However, you forget that the Christian Faith was brought to the people on the authority of God; with the help of a divinely revealed plan for mankind. The images are direct and simple; with a clear-cut choice between what is right and wrong, good and evil. Do you really believe, that a difficult and slippery philosophy will ever have, anywhere near, the same power of persuasion as a religion?".

"We have seen, that, in spite of the great authority with which the Christian Faith has been brought, the Church had to be rescued, several times, by daring innovations, and, Christianity has never succeeded to stop people from making war on each other. Even warfare between the peoples of Europe, all Christians, mind you, has been continuous, or, nearly continuous, and, often, with a ferocity and fanaticism that was, ironically, enhanced by the fortitude of a Christian conviction. Do you really think, that a philosophy will ever have the staying power to function as a model for ethical behaviour on a global scale? Not only, do you lack a divine sanction, or authority, in bringing your particular message of good-will and cooperation, but, you can not even bring clear-cut guidelines for the judgement of right and wrong. Even, the philosophies of Marxism have not been couched in such vague and uncertain terms, and, in many areas of the world, the doctrines and practices of Marxism are taught with a religious fervor, and are presented as absolute truths".

"It is, indeed, strange, that you come to such an uncertain conclusion about the nature of truth; that our perception of reality has no correlation with an absolute reality. Perhaps, the arguments you have been presenting, so far, are difficult to refute, but, the conclusion, that our beliefs and, certainly, the realities of our sensations and experiences, are nothing more than man-made aids to help us behave, is so strongly against our intuitive convictions, that this concept will be a great hindrance to the wide-spread acceptance of such a philosophy. We need certainty. We need to believe, that we are in possession of the truth. How can we function, if we have to doubt all our apparent certainties?".

"In situations of conflict, we can often see, that both parties are emotionally involved, and, we see, indeed, that they are rationalising their behaviour, but, is it not much simpler to state, that belligerent parties are clouded in their judgement by the emotional involvement in a conflict-situation, and, that, therefore, the neutral party has a much better and more realistic, and more truthful imagery of, or grasp over, the situation?".

"Certainly, scientists realise, very well, that their certainties are preceded by long periods of discussion, where a variety of hypotheses are tested, and, only slowly, is the scientific truth elucidated. Undoubtedly, scientists realise, that their particular grasp is often incomplete, and, that it may be refined in the future, but, the fact, that such a grasp lets us manipulate the forces of nature, and, that it lets us predict the outcome of many events, makes it completely unbelievable, and un-acceptable, to state, that this grasp has no correlation or congruence with a reality that exists apart from human existence".

"However, my main reason for objecting to your optimism is the fact, that Christian beliefs and doctrines, (such as those, which tell us to love our neighbour as ourselves, and, that the meek shall inherit the earth), do not seem to have any appreciable impact upon the behaviour of people. If people really understood the precepts of their Christian Faith, how could they go to war and kill? The reason for this apparent paradox is the following; a creed or a belief becomes a treasured possession, in particular, if it has been sanctified by God himself, and, anyone challenging this creed, or opposing the authority that flows from an adherence to this creed, becomes an evil force. It is, then, easy to believe, that the destruction of such an evil force will please God, in spite of the fact, that the Scriptures never sanction the killing of other people "for the sake of the Lord".

"My objection is this; if people find it already so difficult to bring any of the Christian guidelines and commandments into practice, what, then, makes you believe, that a sophisticated relativistic philosophy will have any appreciable effect on the behaviour of human beings? Let us assume, for a moment, that such a philosophy does find a remarkable following, and, that we see, indeed, a "popular" movement to propagate its ideas and behavioural guidelines. What, then, makes you think, that these followers will be anymore tolerant of dissenters than Christian followers, or the adherents of the Socialist Dogmas? Will a relativistic philosophy not become one more rallying-point or battle-cry with which people will arm themselves and do battle with each other? If other philosophies and religious doctrines have led to polarisations and strife, what, then, makes you think, that a relativistic philosophy will be any different, if, it ever happens to become popular, which I doubt very much".

Yes, these are valid questions and objections. Perhaps, we should, first, answer your observation, that a belief or ideology is, so often, treated as a "prized possession", and, that it becomes, then, an object for strife and conflict. This is perfectly true, and, there is no particular reason, why the same could not or would not happen to a relativistic philosophy, if, and when, it ever would obtain a sufficient degree of popularity to make it a prized possession for a large number of people. However, the very nature of such a slippery philosophy makes it less likely to become such a popular possession, as you mentioned yourself, and I foresee, therefore, that its influence will be felt, (if it ever finds a measure of acceptance and recognition), "in the background" of other beliefs, opinions, doctrines or dogmas.

I mean this. It would be preferable, at least, to me, if a relativistic view-point would slowly start to permeate the beliefs and opinions of a large number of people, with all sorts of reality perceptions; with many different professional and cultural backgrounds, without becoming ardent adherers of a "new philosophy". After all, the concepts of relativistic thought will only make sense in conjunction with well-defined and well correlated scientific images, ranging from the biological, physical and chemical sciences, to those of the arts, history and the humanities. The common bond between all these sciences will be the method of approach; the way data are gathered, discussed, classified, and put into an overall perspective.

These data and well thought-out images of the sciences will have to be taught logically and coherently, because, only then, will it be possible for students to learn, in a short time, the overall outlines of a large number of fields, and, it will be the only way to appreciate, how these fields relate to each other. The "facts of science", together with their correlations and their relevance for us, living human beings, will form the framework for a relativistic perception of reality.

As part of the scientific intrusion into the realm of human existence, we will be giving more attention in our teachings to the behavioural totality of the human being, in contrast to the more narrowly defined aspects of man's structures of belief. When man did not really know anything about the mechanisms of perception and the formation of belief-structures, it was difficult to see the many discrepancies and fallacies between the beliefs and the behaviour-patterns of man. When someone became an ardent believer of the "Truth, or the Gospel of Jesus Christ", it was logical, that such an individual would become fanatic in his commitment, and, it was logical, that he saw himself as a "warrior for God", not realising, that God's message to mankind, was, primarily, one of being cautious with the decision to fight each other.

As long as man knew little of motivations and instincts, and, as long as man did not have a coherent picture of the living organisation and its biological evolution, man's impulses and behavioural instincts were a confused jungle, and, man could only orden them as "good or evil". Yet, to sort-out, what was good, and, what was evil in man's behaviour and intentions, has never been very successful, and, this judgement has always been an extremely vague and uncertain classification that was full of ambiguities. For this reason, man did not even notice, that there was something wrong with killing his enemies, in particular, if these enemies would not accept the commandments of God, such as; "love thy enemies".

Even, the doctrines of Marxism were drawn-up and formulated at a time, when there was no clear insight about the structure and function of the human personality, and, still, the Socialist doctrines are tainted by the emotions of a revolutionary fervor, where energies are bundled into a fierce struggle against a hated oppressor or an upper social class, but, these doctrines of Revolutionary Socialism become shallow and misleading, as soon as a complex and large society has to be guided by them, after the Revolution has been won.

It is my hope, and belief, that there will be a continuation of the growth of psychological insights, in particular, since the sciences are now beginning to put-together a beautifully coherent picture of the evolution of life, including the emergence of man himself. If we do not lose these insights, and, if we can build upon them by placing them into a proper and illuminating perspective, we may expect, that man will have an ever more precise understanding of the mechanisms of his own personality, and, at the same time, man will come to the startling conclusion, that, he, himself, as well as his deadliest enemies, are functioning essentially in the same manner. These insights are scientifically completely correct, but, they can also be placed in a relativistic perspective, by emphasising the theories of knowledge and perception.

We see, then, that it would be impossible to teach these relativistic perspectives without a solid foundation of scientific insights, and, this is the reason, why a relativistic philosophy should not be considered a separate and independent way of looking at reality, but, it should become, quite naturally, and, perhaps, hardly noticeable, the underlying ground-tone or under-current of our future scientific teaching methods and reality perceptions.

You may want to point out to me, that you see little of this happening in the world of science and academia today, and, you may suspect, that I am, again, overly optimistic and idealistic about the way science will be used and taught. True, at the moment, science is extremely fragmented, and, very few people have a coherent scientific view extending over more than one or a few related fields.

Besides, strong commercial and competitive pressures in the affluent societies arouse a chronic anxiety in most people who are engaged in scientific activities. On the one hand, there is the lure of big commercial gains with a successful technological application. There is the lure of large grants from the military establishments, or, there is the pressure to achieve recognition and fame with a large number of scientific publications. There is the infighting for a prominent academic position, there are jealousies and envies, and, most, if not all scientists become, eventually, so absorbed in the struggle to make a living, or to hold-on to a prestigious position, that, not many of them have the time, or the inclination, to think about the more philosophical and broader aspects that have been raised by the emerging scientific imagery.

However, a situation as it seems to exist today, may radically change in a short period of time. The Universities may undergo organisational changes, if more and more people turn-away from a mad rat-race for consumeristic or prestigious gratifications, or, if more scientists find time to think and reflect, because their projects and research grants are cut-back during a period of economic depression.

The deteriorating environmental conditions, and, especially, the deteriorating quality of human life in the bigger cities; the ever increasing need to have adequate information and answers about complex social or environmental problems, the need to talk to each other about justice and arms-control, about the way we want to live and secure a possibility to exist for ourselves and our children, all these aspects may divert some of our energies away from the blind, ambitious and self-righteous attitudes that seem still to be so prevalent in many of our modern societies.

Certainly, I am indulging in wishful thinking, because a shift towards a more contemplative attitude is necessary, before we can appreciate the possibilities of a relativistic interpretation of our realities, including our scientific realities, but, it seems likely, that the era of frantic consumerism and ever-rising expectations for the consumption of material comforts is coming to an end, as soon as we, in the affluent world, realise, that we pay a high price in the form of financial enslavement, and, that the activities of frantic consumerism only lead to greater disparities between the affluent and the developing or under-developed worlds.

Now, we are facing falling living or, rather, "consuming" standards, as our industries slow-down. We close our borders to each other's products, and, more and more people turn their backs upon senseless consumerism and prefer a measure of freedom and independence, in stead of the continuous financial worries that are a hall-mark of the consumerist rat-race.

In other words; in spite of the fact, that I can still not see any clear-cut signs that a majority of people is willing to become a little more contemplative in its behaviour, I feel, that the ground-work for such a change in attitude is being laid by the changing circumstances of our affluent societies, and, I think, that here is a good chance, in the near future, that a lot more people are willing to excercise their powers of thought, even, if it is only for the simple reason, that they will have more time to do so.

.......

Chapter 6

Content

During a period of stress and turmoil, it is difficult to think clearly.
A sterile withdrawal from the world.
When we have come to grips with our drives and instincts.
Relativistic thought will be a poor vehicle to rationalise fanatic attitudes and behaviour-patterns.
Practical certainties.
What relativistic thought can do for us.
A slow, but thorough debate amongst concerned people.
Making it possible for people to come to a sober and balanced judgement.
Mis-conceptions about the consequences of a global pact of essential equality.
The willingness to abandon, cautiously and gradually, a position of privilege.
Steeling ourselves for a less wasteful and more frugal life-style.
The counter-productive results of fanatic and impatient attitudes.
When rational attitudes and relativistic thoughts are in trouble.
Is the loss of an attitude of fanatic resistance a loss?
Likely set-backs and reversals of the trend towards global integration.
A shift from rebuilding after a war, to preventing a war from taking place in the first place.
Working-out organisational details and conceptual refinements to make a pact of global justice a reality.
We will have to learn to see ourselves as a living organism with commonly shared existential needs.
Looking with a healthy dose of skepticism and criticism at the certainties and truths we are being asked to believe.

During periods of stress and turmoil, it is difficult to think clearly, but, at the same time, we feel, ever more strongly, the need to re-evaluate, thoroughly, our life and conditions of existence. This collective need to re-think the direction of our life-style in the consumerist oriented societies, will spur a flurry of questions and reviews, and, in particular, when we become more aware of the gigantic burdens and dangers that are associated with a military build-up, we will be inclined to ask ourselves, how, and where, these trends are going to end.

It is tempting to withdraw completely from the world of turmoil, in particular, if one lives in an area, where such a possibility exists, but, a mere withdrawal from the world is sterile, because, quickly, we feel useless, and, we feel, that we are not making any contribution. Certainly, if we explore a variety of nearly lost skills in search of a frugal and self-sufficient life-style, we are making a contribution to a more stable and saner world, but, ideally, after a period of rest, relaxation and reflection, we should again seek each other's company and discuss, not only, our personal and local problems, but, also, the problems that face our national leaderships and the direction the world seems to be drifting into.

Relativistic thought may have a chance, then, as its ideas are spread in print, and, perhaps, with the help of audio-visual techniques. The quietude of a secure but frugal existence will be a far better breeding-ground for sound ideas and broad vistas, than the emotional and instinctive struggle to make a living and search for an ever larger cash-flow.

Let us address your objection, or premise, that we need certainties in order to come to decisive behavioural choices, and, that, therefore, relativistic thought is "un-natural", and, that it will never be widely accepted or appreciated. It is certainly true, that relativistic thought will be a poor vehicle to rationalise fanatic behaviour-patterns, but, as we have discussed before, relativistic interpretations of reality, together with a sliding system of reference for the judgement of right and wrong, does not imply the absence, or impossibility, of working with "practical certainties".

We have seen, that, we all classify our sense-impressions in known and familar categories, and, we also know, from our studies about the living organisation and the workings of the human brain, that, many decisions are made, consciously and subconsciously, which rely completely upon the truthfulness and reliability of our sensory data. Relativistic thought is, therefore, not an attempt to philosophise about all the decisions that come to us "naturally", but, it is, primarily, a system of thought and a framework of attitudes, where we question, again and again, our judgements of right and wrong, our rationalisations in conflict-situations, as well as the justifiction for aggressive and defensive patterns of behaviour.

Relativistic thought will help us to formulate a generally acceptable code of living standards and conditions, where we acknowledge the basic similarities in existential needs between all human beings. Relativistic thought will provide the essential ideas and criteria for judging what is fair and what is unfair, and, it will show us, clearly, as an analogy of the evolution of the central nervous system in nature, how we have to design the information-gathering and executive channels through which our leaderships can function, We know, that these channels of government have to function fairly and efficiently, monitoring, carefully, all significant happenings in society, and corecting, swiftly and decisively, whenever a situation starts to deviate from a condition of justice.

I foresee, therefore, a slow but thorough debate amongst increasingly concerned people, who are becoming convinced, that the need for security and stability has to be found in a world-wide pact of justice and equality, and not, in the maintenance of pockets of privilege and advantage, with an ever more expensive, dangerous and burdensome arsenal of weapons. Once we agree amongst ourselves about a definition of justice, and, what sort of conditions qualify as "just" in a particular situation, at a particular time, we will have a framework by which to judge right and wrong, without having to resort to a divine authority.

All we need, is to make sure, that a large majority of the peoples all over the world, are educated and live in sufficiently satisfactory conditions to allow a sober and balanced judgement. Certainly, I realise, that this one sentence grasps a monumental change from present conditions, and, I know, that many people will scoff at the idea that such a situation can be realised, but, I remind anyone who scoffs at such ideas, that the alternative to a global situation of justice, is the need to perpetuate a particular position of privilege and advantage with an ever escalating race of building and designing new weapon-systems.

It is also erroneous and misleading to assume, that an agreement to a situation of global justice means, that, everyone, who has something now, has to give up his security and luxuries all of a sudden; in a spontaneous but blind and chaotic gesture of good-will. This is utter nonsense, because the principles of justice do not mean, that, I, or anyone else, who lives at a standard of living that is beyond a just global average, will have to be vulnerable to insecurity and exploitation as a result of misguided appeals to conscience or superficial logic. All we ask for is a genuine willingness to cooperate with a program of change, that will allow a more equitable distribution of food, facilities and opportunities. It may mean, from time to time, a consent to abandon, cautiously and gradually, a particular privilege, or advantage, which we have come to rely upon and treasure, and, our main contribution will come in a steadfast willingness to reduce, gradually and orderly, our abundances and superfluous luxuries, while we steel ourselves, voluntarily, in a way of life, that is less wasteful, more frugal, and healthier, than our contemporary life of affluence.

We can not deny, that it is difficult to abandon a position of privilege and luxury, and, nobody can expect someone to abandon such a position, voluntarily, if the person or group in question is very likely to suffer abuse and ill-treatment, after a position of privilege has been relinquished. While, occasionally, slow, just and persistent reforms are indeed thwarted, generation after generation, by a stubborn and ruthless clinging to power, on many occasions, revolutionary reforms are hasty and premature, and, they are beset by many injustices of their own making.

Just as the Christians of the past, and to some extent the fanatic fundamentalists of today, were unable to see the incongruities between their creed and their behaviour, so are many, if not most revolutionary hot-heads guilty of trying to replace one form of despotism with another. This is not justice, and, if a revolutionary drive only galvanises the defensive anxieties of those who are in power, and, who will suffer a great deal if the revolution would be successful, we see, that, such a revolutionary effort is counter-productive, slowing-down the impetus to reform and justice, rather than advancing it.

Relativistic thought and attitudes are, indeed, a poor vehicle for revolutionary fervor, as well as for any sort of fanatic attitude. This means, that, indeed, in times of severe stress, such thoughts and attitudes are, not only, useless, but, they will be actively rejected as weakening and subversive. Relativistic thought is rational, par excellence, and, it is only effective, if it can be applied in situations that provide an opportunity to avoid severe stress. Once attitudes and opinions are polarised, and the winds of war have taken hold over the minds of the people and their leaderships, rational arguments and sophisticated relativistic reality perceptions will be powerless to avoid a fatal clash.

The time to think arises, when there is turmoil around us, but, we still should have an opportunity to find a quiet corner from where to observe it all; where we can digest the many thoughts and impulses we are aware of, until a better way of life, and the outlines of a more just and harmonious social environment, are starting to emerge. Once we have to fight for survival, we will be so absorbed by our strenuous efforts, that the quality of our thoughts begins to deteriorate. We become obsessed, or, at least, pre-occupied with primary existential goals and behaviour-patterns, and, we have no time, no inclination, and no opportunity, to think worthwhile, constructive thoughts.

Is the loss of fanatic or ultimate resistence a loss? Perhaps, on occasion, it could be a handicap, as a more doggedly determined attitude of hope and prayer could survive a particularly stressful period, where a more realistic and philosophical attitude would lead to despair and loss of life.

But, as we have seen, it is very likely, that, in a period of severe stress, attitudes and beliefs of a philosophical nature will be abandoned anyway, in favour of a more primitive, emotionally more comforting set of beliefs and attitudes, and, the major function of a rational approach, is the refinement of our behavioural responses; to the point, where we can clearly anticipate the development of a situation of stress and avoid its occurrence, or, at least, where we can avoid being caught, and prevent a situation where it will be too late to escape or adapt appropriately.

This has to be a cardinal characteristic of future behaviour on a collective, world-wide scale. We have to be able to avoid the many crises of war and disaster, of pollution and mis-calculations, which seem to pre-occupy our national leaders in an apparently un-ending stream of "news-worthy events". Rational thought and a relativistic, pragmatic, but, a sound scientific approach to our problems, may help us to achieve such a finely tuned, collective behaviour-pattern, but, we have to think, clearly and precisely, about all the pre-requisites. We have to think about all the organisational details, as well as all the conceptual refinements that are necessary, before such a pact of global justice and cooperation has a chance to refine our collective behaviour to the point, where this global organism of the society of man, behaves rationally and intelligently, as a viable organic entity.

We do not want to elaborate, here, on the many structures of social organisation that will be necessary for an efficient and just administration of a large and globally integrated society of mankind, because we have done so before. Here, we want to repeat the idea, that a relativistic interpretation of our perceptions, drives and existence, will flow, naturally, from a fully integrated view-point of the sciences, including a thorough but coherent view of the biological sciences, the evolution of life, and the emergence of man with his faculties of conscious thought and conceptual communication.

We will have to learn, slowly and patiently, to see our social environment as a behaving, living organism, with the many peculiar and particular existential needs that are associated, by necessity, with the living organisation. Only, if we learn to recognise the profound similarities that exist between us all, in spite of the apparent uniqueness of each human being, only, then, will we be able to place the value and the meaning of our beliefs and attitudes in a comprehensive and recognisable perspective that has relevance for us all. Let us learn, again, to think. Let us learn to think thoroughly, and, to look with a healthy dose of scepticism and criticism at the certainties and truths we are being asked to believe.

.......

Chapter 7

Content

Lessening our reliance upon the dictates of absolute authority.
Fitting bits of information into an overall framework of causal relationships.
The perceptive teacher will notice, when "learned material" has been poorly integrated and understood.
The pressure of authority shapes a fragmented and disjointed structure of reality perceptions into an apparent unity.
Differences in people's ability to assimilate conceptual structures.
Differences in genetic endowment.
Every "normal" individual should be able to find a useful activity in his or her social environment.
Intellectual capabilities are only one particular aspect of the range of skills.
Is there a trade-off between physical and mental skills?
Irrealistic expectations.
A review of the philosophy of teaching.
A relativistic reality perception can not be taught "in isolation" of specific scientific images.
Acquiring knowledge and skills.
The program of secondary education should be based on a relativistic summary of our collective cultural heritage.
Tools, to be acquired during primary education.
The development of a "professional skill" during post-secondary education.
An essential unity of knowledge and skill.
Skill is the excercise of a faculty.
Mastering a musical instrument.
The art of becoming and remaining an inspiring teacher.
A grasp over the mechanisms of learning.
Limitations of the teacher as a specific individual.
When a teacher has to rely upon a specific "school of thought".
The difficulties involved in presenting a variety of "schools of thought" to students.
Thinking in terms of constructing a coherent, large-scale framework of causal relationships for the correlation and classification of sensory data.
When there is a "mis-match" between teacher and pupils.
Many concerns may still remain unanswered.

To put it simply; the crux of learning is the construction of a coherent framework for the perception and classification of our sense-impressions and experiences. In doing so, we lessen our reliance upon "blind authority", whenever we are faced with the decision, how to fit-in a particular "truth" or concept that is being taught to us. If we do not have such a coherent framework, where most of the things we know seem to be related to each other by a network of causes and their effects, our reality perceptions are incoherent and fragmentary, and, we lose the ability, or, we never develop the ability, to see, whether or not a new bit of information, a new idea or concept, fits-in, somewhere, into this overall framework of causal relationships.

If a particular item of information, or learning, "makes sense", we can fit it into a pre-existing scheme of relationships, and, the new information actually strengthens the coherence of this framework. In such a situation, we have few difficulties comprehending what we are trying to learn, or, what is being taught to us, and, even, a single exposure to a new idea or concept may be sufficient to let it find a permanent place, somewhere, in this framework of relationships.

If we can not fit a particular item into a scheme of causal relationships, it does not make sense, and, we have to make a special and strenuous effort to retain the information as a separate item of knowledge. The absence of a clear and coherent relationship with other bits of information, makes it, not only, much more difficult to retain it in our memory, but, our inability to relate it to other pieces of evidence makes it impossible to "discuss" the knowledge or information we have been trying to acquire. If we are asked to show evidence to our teachers, that we have done our homework, we may be able to convey the fact, that we have made a valiant and genuine effort "to learn it", but, we also show, at least, to a perceptive teacher, that the material has been poorly integrated.

The retention of an item of information in our memory, as well as the efforts to retain such information, are, then, exclusively, the result of our desire to do well in school; to please our parents and teachers, or, to placate the strong social forces of condemnation and scorn, which will be unleashed if we fail. Here, we see the role of authority and pressure in shaping the accent of importance. The pressure of authority shapes, then, not only, the content of our reality perceptions, but, also, a somewhat fragmented and disjointed structure of beliefs.

What is the reason, you may ask, why some people learn easily, while others seem to struggle, almost endlessly, and, never really succeed in forming a coherent and confident structure of conceptual relationships? Is this a matter of endowment, of exposure, or, a combination of both? Certainly, there is a range of aptitudes and capabilities, even, amongst those, who can be classified, without hesitation, as "normal people". We know the difficulties that are associated with a definition of normality, and, we have argued, on previous occasions, how the members of every species show a wide spectrum of potentials and aptitudes. Some are born with an obvious defect, but, even so, we see, that, apparently normal children, who are exposed to comparable conditions of education and home environment, still show a wide range of learning abilities.

Some excell in physical and athletic capabilities, others are intensely artistic or musical; some seem to absorb intellectual belief structures and concepts with a remarkable ease, while, again others, show an extra-ordinary capability in manipulative skills; using tools, making objects, playing an instrument, etc.

We may state, with confidence, that the members of a "normal population" have, at least, some skills and aptitudes that can be developed and stimulated to such an extent, that a useful and satisfactory degree of social integration can be accomplished. Those, who fall below the norm, may still be successfully integrated into some sort of a capacity, but, they will always require a measure of protection or special attention, because they are incapable of participating, at par, with the normal population in the competitive search for jobs. A job, after all, is a successful competition with others for a position in society, where a skill, plus time, is given, in return for a salary, or a wage, allowing the individual to live, more or less independently, and, to provide for his needs, wishes and luxuries.

The skill of intellectual capabilities is only one particular aspect of this range of skills, and, we see, often, a striking trade-off between physical and mental skills. This does not imply, that we are always dealing with one or the other, but, as a rule, it seems, that, intellectually gifted people, are physically average and vice versa.

Occasionally, we see an individual, who has a wide and abundant range of aptitudes, but, such a promising start in life is, often, followed by disappointment; partly, because irrealistic expectations are created; partly, because a normal and healthy psychological development is disturbed by a premature attention to specific, promising potentials, and, partly, because people still do not realise, that, from the many promising potentials, only a few can come to full fruition, even under the best of circumstances.

Even so, a true flowering of a potential into something really great and exceptional, requires a careful program of guidance and stimulation, highly intelligent and expert teaching, as well as an abundance of common-sense, in order to prevent a promising youngster from being pushed to the limits, or, into an unhealthy and unbalanced psychological development.

Perhaps, then, it is worthwhile to conclude this essay with a review of the philosophy of teaching, where we will try to delineate the essential principles upon which good and efficient teaching has to be based. Let us, therefore, abandon the more specific consideration, how to teach a relativistic reality perception, because, as we have discussed, a relativistic approach and appreciation will follow, naturally, once we get a good grasp over, and feeling for, the implications, which flow from our biological and scientific imagery. Besides, we have also seen, that we can not teach a relativistic approach apart from our reality perceptions and a specific framework of scientific knowledge. Indeed, what, then, is the essence of good teaching, and a good teacher?

If we take a look, again, at our own behaviour, we see, that the process of learning can be divided, at least, to some extent, into acquiring a knowledge or a skill. The emphasis upon knowledge stresses the fact, that a particular idea or concept is designed to give us a better grasp over reality; by improving the quality of our framework of understanding and coherent relationships. Most of the knowledge we are taught at school, is designed to give us a more coherent grasp over the realities around us, and, I am thinking, here, in particular, about the general program of secondary education, where we are exposed to an introduction of most of the subjects of knowledge we will be confronted with throughout our adult lives.

However, the emphasis of our education can lie, just as easy, on a particular skill; e.g. the skills of reading, writing and arithmetic, as well as the basic skills of communicating in our native language, or, perhaps, of communicating in a "foreign" language. These are the most important skills and knowledge structures we have to master during the period of primary education, because, without these skills, the records of the subjects in our secondary program of education will not be accessible.

In a University or academic training, the emphasis has shifted, increasingly, to the acquisition of a "professional skill", in spite of the fact, that the name "University" refers to a period, when this type of education was designed to broaden even further, the erudition and scholastic achievements of those, who showed great promise in their studies at a secondary level. The complexity of our modern societies, as well as the great need for highly specialised and complex skills for our industries and administrative functions, have led to a shift in emphasis, and, for this reason, the final, or "higher" educational level of our Universities and other academic institutions, is used, increasingly, to prepare people for a specific job in industry or government.

Yet, the main point we want to emphasise, here, is the essential and inextricable unity of knowledge and skill in any sort of subject that has become the focus of a teaching effort. For example, even, the highly abstract, conceptual knowledge of mathematics, is translated into a number of "problems", where students can excercise their skill in understanding and manipulating the principles of mathematics, while the teaching of a skill, such as the playing of a musical instrument, goes far beyond a mere demonstration of the way certain sounds can and have to be produced on a particular instrument. In order for a pupil to understand the possibilities of a particular instrument, it is important to have some idea about the construction and development of this instrument, and, in particular, if an individual wants to explore, fully, his or her particular abilities in mastering an instrument, it is important, that an intelligent and patient teacher explains, carefully and lucidly, how particular difficulties or short-comings can be overcome or corrected.

As an example of a third layer of knowledge and a final stratum of responsibility for the art of teaching music, or the playing of a particular instrument, the teacher has to be able to convey, accurately and with conviction, the meaning and intention of a musical composition, so that a pupil can supplement his own affinity and appreciation for a work of art, with a lucid analysis and a clear exposition of recognisable stylistic techniques that make-up a particular composition.

Let us not delve any further, here, into the philosophy of music, because we will devote an entire essay to it. Let us again state, clearly, that the art of being a good teacher, is based, first of all, on a clear conceptualisation and a profound mastery of the subject to be taught, but, the art of being a good teacher is founded, just as much, on a good grasp of the learning processes taking place in a pupil. Certainly, in addition to a clear concept about the mechanisms of learning, conceptual learning as well as "skill learning", the teacher has to have a good feel for the personality of the students and the conditions under which they live.

Unfortunately, these obvious pre-requisites are not easily satisfied. First of all, the teacher him- or herself, is a human being with limited capabilities and potentials, and, it is obvious that a teacher can never be clearer than his or her understanding of the subject. If, therefore, the framework for a coherent perception of reality has not been formed as well as it could have been, or should have been, it is obvious, that the teacher, as well as the pupils, will be saddled with a serious short-coming in their efforts to teach or learn something.

In addition to the lack of a coherent framework of understanding, usually, as the result of a faulty assimilation of the subject-material, we see, also, that the subject may be fragmented "socially"; as many different people or groups of people have divergent opinions about a particular subject. Especially, subjects dealing with human behaviour are subject to a strong tendency towards fragmentation, and, this means, that a particular teacher can, at best, only reflect a particular school of thought, or training. He or she reflects, then, his or her own educational background, or, if the teacher is exceptionally gifted, he will have a clear perception of the many contradictory view-points and hypotheses that are current, and, he will try to present a fair cross-section or spectrum of these divergent opinions. However, most teachers will find, that an attempt to teach in such a profound manner, is not well received, as few student have the patience, or the insight, to appreciate the meaning of such a varied approach to reality. Students want to know, first of all, "what is true and what is not", and, any attempt to make them understand a variety of hypotheses, will be resisted, in particular, if the students have to master a number of different and demanding subjects.

We are still vague in our concepts about ourselves, and, as we have pointed-out on so many occasions, this vagueness is a severe handicap in our ability to communicate with each other. Because teaching is nothing more, and nothing less, than a specific form of communication, with unequal levels of authority, it is clear, that a teacher's ability to understand and appreciate the mental and psychological mechanisms involved in a teaching-situation, is quite limited. Therefore, teachers do not think, by and large, in terms of constructing a coherent framework of causal relationships for the correlation and classification of sense-data, experiences or knowledge "tid-bits".

By and large, teachers work entirely "empirically", describing or explaining a subject to the best of their knowledge, and, according to accepted teaching techniques, which they have been taught themselves. The proof of success will come with the examination. If a majority does poorly, it is obvious, that there is some sort of a mis-match between teacher and pupils, and, the teacher will go over the material again, more slowly, leaving out the finer details, until a majority of the pupils is able to "regurgitate" the facts or ideas satisfactorily.

Why some pupils fail, even, then; what is happening in their minds, or, how this material relates to other subjects or the concerns of everyday life, are questions that are largely left unanswered.  Usually, these questions are pushed aside as esoteric and philosophical speculations for which there seems to be little need, and, certainly, not much time.

.......

Chapter 8

Content

The purpose of all knowledge, and every skill, is to let us respond more appropriately to the situation we find ourselves in.
Helping us to survive with a better quality of life.
Let us not emphasise, only, immediate benefits.
It is, not only, useful, but, beautiful, to know something well.
A sense of confidence and mastery.
When the demand for "relevance", means, only, a request for unjustified simplifications.
The search for relevance indicates an elaborate and arduous learning effort, in order to trace broad but significant correlations.
The dangers of too narrow a specialisation in skills and knowledge.
The development of unhealthy dependencies.
A series of pertinent questions.
We have to know, how to interpret our own existence.
Are some correlations far-fetched?
Showing our youngsters how back-breaking work can be, without proper equipment.
Teaching youngsters a "feel" for the processes of change and development.
The joy of increasing one's mobility.
We can learn and teach throughout our entire life.
Education and understanding alone will not make man into an ethical being.
Teaching social and psychological mechanisms should be a central and indispensible core of all teaching programs.
We have to know, what social integration means.
A paralysing atmosphere of deep fear.
The courage to admit frankly, when we are wrong.
Abandoning the hope of finding an immutable, inalienable, absolute truth, be it of a divine or a philosophical-scientific nature.
The attribute of common-sense.
The need for an all-out struggle against our primary impulse to settle a dispute with force.
It is often tiring and discouraging to fight for rational behaviour.
Working towards the objective of survival, according to the talents we have, and the situation we find ourselves in.
Waiting, patiently, for favourable conditions to experiment, once again, with the solution of social integration.

The purpose of all knowledge, and every skill, is to let us respond more appropriately to the situations we find ourselves in; to respond, more appropriately to the demands that are made upon us by our fellow human beings, or the pressures and stresses we happen to be exposed to. In the final analysis, knowledge and skills are only meaningful, if they help us to survive and live a better quality of life, in particular, if the focus of our well-being is, not only, ego-centric, but takes also into account the well-being of others, including the future generations.

Therefore, the notion that knowledge is only useful, if it has an immediate benefit for us, is short-sighted, because we may fail to appreciate long-term benefits, as well as the need for short-term sacrifices, or, we may fail to appreciate the need for ethical concerns and social considerations. On the other hand, the notion, that knowledge should be gained for the sake of knowledge itself, is also somewhat superficial, and is a partial truth only. Certainly, it implies, vaguely, an awareness, that it is, not only, useful, but, also, beautiful to know. To know something clearly and precisely may give us an intense feeling of satisfaction, beauty and mastery, but, if we consider knowledge to be a goal in itself, we fail to acknowledge the existential advantages that follow, when we acquire a reality perception to the point that we experience a sense of mastery. Almost automatically, we are then considered an expert, and, our ability to express ourselves clearly and convincingly adds an aura of prestige and authority to our existence, enhancing our security.

In the final analysis, our knowledge and skills have always an existential significance, even, if this existential significance is expressed as an increased ability to understand ourselves and our adversaries, or the complexities of the observable world around us, rather than an explicit increase in prestige and authority.

Certainly, most people within and outside the teaching professions realise, at least, vaguely, that teaching and knowledge has to be "relevant", but, the demand for relevance becomes, so easily, a superficial slogan, where the propagators for relevance and curriculum-reform, do not consider what relevance means. In practical terms, the request seems to mean an ever further simplification and easement of the teaching curriculum, in the mistaken belief, that knowledge and skills can be acquired satisfactorily with a minimum of effort. If a search for relevance means nothing more than a demand for making it "easier", dropping material that is not immediately "useful", the yielding to such demands will lead to an ever greater deterioration in the standards of teaching.

On the contrary; the search for relevance means an elaborate and arduous intellectual learning-effort in order to trace broad but significant correlations, which are not, as yet, apparent to us, and, which would be even harder to obtain, if we give-in to the temptation to narrow our vision even more, as we search for the laziest ways to reach our objectives.

Too narrow a specialisation, as well as any form of specialised knowledge, where we lose sight of the relationships of a specialised field of knowledge with the entire realm of human existence, will do more harm than good, because, often, we have little control over the direction of such specialised skills and knowledge, as it seeks blindly a possibility to exist. For example, if we train people, narrowly, in a field of producing dangerous weapons, and, if we make their position in society dependent upon the question, whether or not they can find work, then, we should not be surprised to see, that a handful of powerful people with plenty of financial resources are able to build-up an army of professional scientists and soldiers, who can only function in the preparation for war. Similarly, if we make many people dependent upon the selling or manufacture of numerous superfluous consumer goods, we should not be surprised to see, that the existential needs of these people develop an enormous advertising industry and monopolise our mass-communications, as they desperately try to make a living and function in the only way they know.

The grasp over our own mental and psychological realities and needs is still very poor, and, this is the reason, why we are largely in the dark, whenever we contemplate such questions as; how do we learn; why are some people learning well, while others learn poorly; what are our pupils thinking about. Why is it sometimes so difficult to generate any enthousiasm for the curriculum that has to be taught? Why is it so difficult to keep some youngsters away from the path of crime? Do we really understand what influences the judgement of right and wrong and the perception of reality? What is the role of the home environment of these youngsters? Do we really know, what we should teach? What does relevance really mean? Is it possible to relate all these scientific fields into a coherent framework of knowledge and causal relationships? Is it, indeed, true, that knowledge and skills serve existential purposes?

As you see, in order to find coherent and convincing answers to many of these questions, we have to know, where man came from. We have to know, how he functions; whether he is a product of natural evolution, or a creature of God. We have to know, how we function and why we have friends and enemies. Not only, do we have to have some answers for the fundamental perceptions that are associated with conscious human existence, but, we have to have, also, some idea what the function of a social organisation is; how far or widespread the social solution has to go; how far and far-reaching we have to pursue the solution of social integration, before we can overcome the threats of war, destruction, impoverishment and needless suffering.

Unless we know, to some extent, who we are, and, what society is all about, we will not be able to design a meaningful and relevant curriculum that emphasises the growth of a human personality into a useful member of the social environment. We would not know, how to prevent the human being from becoming an expert, but introvert and egocentric robot. Unless we can relate everything we learn and know, to the existental needs of mankind in general, as well as our own existence in particular, the learning experience, as well as the teaching effort, will continue to be somewhat fragmentary, empirical and searching, as well as somewhat sterile and frustrating.

You may find this view somewhat exaggerated, because you may point-out, that it seems far-fetched to relate the teaching of a skill, such as riding a bicycle, to the existential needs of mankind, or the existential needs of an individual. Certainly, teaching the pure mechanics of riding a bike is possible without any reference to such wider questions, but would it not be interesting, if we could show our youngsters, who are eagerly awaiting the opportunity to learn to ride a bicycle or any other vehicle, how it developed; how man searched for ways to ease the burdens of carrying and transportation; how important it was, when man invented the wheel and learned other techniques to make the chores of survival less back-breaking? Why do we not teach our youngsters, how back-breaking work can be without proper equipment, and, they all may have a little more respect for the food their parents put before them on the table, several times a day, every day of the year.

Would it not be better, if we taught our youngsters, at the same time, the dangers of riding a bicycle or any other vehicle, and, do we not touch, here, upon existential concerns? Concerns, that apply, not only, to the learning youngsters, but, also, to others, who may be hurt in case of an accident? We see, then, that, properly taught, riding a bike may give the youngsters a feel for the history of the vehicle, the importance of tools to help man with necessary chores, the joy of increasing one's mobility and range of travel, as well as an expanded range of responsibilities, as the youngsters learn, often after hard personal experience, that the operation of a vehicle requires care, in order to avoid accidents and injuries.

There are good reasons to believe, that we can learn and teach almost continuously, throughout our life-span. We can learn about the many aspects of reality we are confronted with, and, if we are taught properly and comprehensively, such a program will lead to a level of understanding and an attitude of global responsibility and concern, which is, at the present time, completely beyond our imagination.

Education and understanding, alone, will not make man into an ethical being, because, even, the clever individual may become a cruel opportunist, if circumstances permit, especially, if such an individual has been the victim of injustice or neglect. A sound program of teaching is, therefore, dependent upon a sound social structure, as well as a set of carefully but explicitly worked-out guidelines for social inter-actions, which will help to establish and maintain an atmosphere of justice, openness and mutual trust.

The requirements for individual and social well-being, as well as the social and psychological mechanisms that are at play in the complex inter-actions between human beings, are, therefore, a central and indispendible core of all teaching programs. What is the use of a specialised skill and knowledge, if society is falling-apart and the people equipped with such special skills become dangerous predators, preying upon the ignorance, dependence or gullibility of others?

What is the point of educating our youngsters, if we can not teach them what justice and socialisation mean? Why should they learn anything, if we can not teach them, that there has to be a correlation between a decent wage and a decent work-effort? What is the point of teaching our youngsters about the wonders of the Universe and the beauty of living existence, if our politicians and scientists are engaged in a mad rush to destroy each other with nuclear weapons? Why should any youngster believe in his teachers, his parents, or the society he is born into, if he believes, that the older generations are on the verge of destroying the world, and all life with it?

If an atmosphere of deep fear and mistrust is settling over all of us; if we are watching over our shoulders, who may be stabbing us in the back, or, who is planning to rob or destroy us; if we can not believe, anymore, what our officials and politicians are telling us, and, in particular, if we do not believe, that our leaders have the competence, or the insight, to lead society for the benefit of everyone, no amount of education or propaganda will help us overcome the malaise of a fractured and frightened society.

The world of conscious awareness, including our personal existence and the nature of the social environment, has to be thought-through again, from the ground up. There is a lot of information available, and a rational, common-sense approach will show us many different avenues that are worthwhile to develop, and, such a rational evaluation will show us the fallacies of many popular notions and practices. We have to have the courage to acknowledge, frankly, when, and where, we are wrong, and, we have to believe in, and search for, a solution that will bring us out of the predicament we are in, regardless, how painful, startling or radical such a solution may be.

The first and, perhaps, most important task, is the search for, and discussion of, a relativistic reality perception, where we try-out the coherence of a flexible but rational approach to classifying our observations; where we abandon the hope of finding an immutable, in-alienable, absolute truth, be it of a divine or a philosophic-scientific nature. We need an approach, where we come to a common-sense and practical acceptance of the fact, that our beliefs, as well as our attitudes and behavioural responses, are guided, primarily, by a well-developed instinct for self-preservation, tempered by a precious, but less well-developed impulse to seek an alternative solution to our competitive strife; a solution, that makes use of the mechanisms of social integration, rather than violent combat.

In a way, we have to wage an all-out struggle against our primary impulse to settle a conflict-situation with an all-out confrontation, but, unlike a primitive and emotionally satisfying, primordial battle with our arch-enemies, where we can fight under the banner of our God, the struggle against the tendency to fight, is tiring, vague, frustrating, nebulous and, often, hopeless. Yet, our rational insights keep telling us, again and again, that the trend towards the social solution has to be continued, if we want to survive. Unfortunately, our instincts fail to tell us, that our penchant for armed combat to settle a dispute, is likely to turn into an orgy of mass-suicide.

It is often tiring to fight for rationality, and, many times, we fail miserably, as we are swept-up by our emotions and throw all caution aside, pitching into the battle ourselves. It is often tempting to withdraw into the quietude of a forgotten corner, where we can rest, think and relax, fighting the battles on paper, rather than in real life.

Let us all work towards the goals of human survival; according to our talents, as well as the particular situation we find ourselves in. During the long preparatory period when a relativistic approach needs contemplation and thought to be formulated as clearly as possible, rest, relaxation and a forgotten corner way well be justified. Later, it may be necessary to form active discussion groups, in order to simplify and propagate the basic ideas, so that most people have, at least, a chance to be exposed to the concepts and ideas of a relativistic reality perception.

Perhaps, in times of great turmoil, the climate and atmosphere will be so belligerent and polarised, that, any ideas about a relativistic approach will only cause howls of scorn and ridicule. Then, of course, it is useless to talk to people about the merits of the social solution. Let nature take its course, then, and, let us hope, that a remnant will be left to try to begin the work of reconstruction. All we can do in the mean time, is to think about these ideas, and, to keep them alive, from one generation to the next, until the times are more favourable to experiment, once again, with the solution of socialisation or social integration.

.......

Summary

1. There is turmoil all around us.
   There is turmoil and frustration, because there is injustice, weakness and indecision.
   When the experiences of war-fare have failed to find a meaningful cultural tradition.
   When disparity and hunger, injustice and poverty, continue to feed the festering sores of hatred.
   The momentum of fear, and the facade of "peace".
   Is the threat of nuclear retaliation, really, a viable option?
   We, the people, have too little influence on the decisions of our leaders.
   A plea for the voice of a coherent public opinion.
   When we do not want peace, but the preservation of a favourable status-quo.
   Are we burying our heads in the sand?
   A paralysing fear that may kill us.
   The search for an alternative form of security.
   Can we forego the methods of forceful persuasion all-together?
   
   
   
2. The search for "truth", in a relativistic sense, of course.
   Coming to grips with our natural defense-mechanisms.
   The entire animal kingdom is "obligatory predatorial" in its behaviour.
   Competitive and predatorial behaviour-patterns characterise animal existence.
   We have not grasped the whole story of natural evolution, if we forget to look at the phenomena of "symbiosis".
   Territorial dispersion and hierarchical positioning.
   The mechanisms of yielding and adaptating to a superior force, whenever possible.
   Divergence in form and function; the development of mutual inter-dependence.
   The monumental developments of "cellular symbiosis" and multi-cellular existence.
   The never-ending arms-race is, also, one of nature's solutions in the search for survival and possibilities of existence.
   An essential differentiation in function that goes back to pre-cellular evolutionary mechanisms.
   Possibilities of existence have a chance to "jump" to a new level of performance with the solution of inter-dependence.
   The stalemate of competitive strife always returns.
   The price of a specific adaptation to existing pressures and opportunities.
   Why it is vulnerable to specialise.
   The quick development of "obligatory inter-dependence" by a symbiotic unit.
   Many individual members of a symbiotic unit become "dispensible", and are often "deliberately sacrificed" for the survival of the unit as a whole.
   A shift in emphasis by the mechanisms of natural selection towards the survival of a larger social entity.
   Behavioural flexibility, and the mechanisms of socialisation.
   The emergence of a "cultural code".
   The arms-race between nations is a reflection of an old stalemate.
   The route of finding security in a state of cooperation and inter-dependence between ever larger social units.
   The "nation-state" is only one step on the ladder of progressive social integration.
   The level of social integration is dictated by our existential needs.
   War-fare used to benefit a neutral "third party", who would carry-out the major elements of reconstruction and rejuvenation, after the conflict came to an end.
   Is it possible to lower, deliberately, the barriers of suspicion and hostility in a desperate attempt to stay alive?
   
   
   
3. A deceptive rethoric.
   Leaderships are tacitly admitting, that they can not trust their neighbours, because they, themselves, would abuse, treacherously, a position of military superiority to obtain an opportunistic advantage.
   We have to reduce the level of competitive strife and territorial ambitions by encouraging a trend towards inter-dependence.
   A complete freedom of opinion and movement.
   The need for regulatory mechanisms.
   The common bonds of a shared, Christian reality perception in the Middle-Ages prepared the way for the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the much larger political unit.
   The possibilities for a globally shared perception of reality, based on the insights of evolutionary developments.
   A network of "monasteries", based on a relativistic interpretation of reality?
   Why we have a tendency to remain captive to a posture of suspicious defensiveness and aggressive opportunism.
   The Philosophic Order of Relativistic Thought.
   No "walling-off" from the rest of the world, but, we need time to study, reflect and recuperate.
   The danger of elitist attitudes.
   When we become an object of scorn and ridicule.
   
   
   
4. An outline of the essential features of a relativistic reality perception.
   Mankind is one of many species', developed by the mechanisms of natural selection.
   The faculty of conscious awareness is a product of natural evolution.
   God is "created" in man's own image.
   The importance of physiological and psychological mechanisms.
   No reason to equate our perception of reality with a "reality, as it really exists".
   The many specifically human factors that play a role in the perception of reality.
   A relativistic interpretation of reality does not mean, that all perceptions are equally valid.
   Observations that are based on physiological capabilities, rather than on cultural pre-conceptions.
   The value of the quality of "verifiability".
   The importance of the factor of "agreement".
   A particular point in the "curve", or historical profile of scientific understanding and mastery.
   Relativistic considerations apply, also, to the relativistic interpretations themselves.
   Conscious awareness; seen as a tool in the struggle for survival.
   The classifying functions of the brain and the mind.
   The importance of the quality of "familiarity".
   The fragility of our reality experiences.
   The existential nature of our beliefs is clearly demonstrated in a situation of conflict.
   When rational thought becomes an instrument for justifying existential needs and emotional decisions.
   The observations of an impartial onlooker.
   The problem of enlarging the sphere of our concerns.
   Ethical concerns are always centered around the well-being of a specific social entity.
   There is no superior power, or authority, to make nations and their leaders behave according to a common set of guidelines.
   The judgement of right and wrong is always strongly influenced by existential needs.
   When strife becomes a primitive and lawless struggle for survival.
   
   
   
5. A strong instinct to seek security in military might.
   Counter-arguments.
   A philosophy that runs counter to our intuitive needs.
   Predictability and manipulability; are they proofs of reality?
   Why would a slippery and sophisticated philosophy succeed, where so many simpler and more dogmatic beliefs have failed?
   When a belief is treated as a "prized possession".
   The influence of a relativistic reality perception will, probably, remain "in the background".
   A slow coloration of existing beliefs, rather than an independent ideology.
   Relativism, seen as a method to present scientific concepts and ideas.
   An emphasis on the phenomenon of human existence.
   We have to know more about motivations, instincts and psychological mechanisms.
   Why Marxism is psychologically inadequate.
   The importance of a proper and illuminating perspective.
   An emphasis on the theories of knowledge and perception.
   Relativism may help to prevent scientific fragmentation.
   Looking forward to the time when people will be turning-away from the mad rat-race for consumerist gratifications or prestigious ambitions.
   When there is more time to reflect.
   When deteriorating environmental conditions will re-direct our attention and activities.
   An optimistic outlook.
   
   
   
6. During a period of stress and turmoil, it is difficult to think clearly.
   A sterile withdrawal from the world.
   When we have come to grips with our drives and instincts.
   Relativistic thought will be a poor vehicle to rationalise fanatic attitudes and behaviour-patterns.
   Practical certainties.
   What relativistic thought can do for us.
   A slow, but thorough debate amongst concerned people.
   Making it possible for people to come to a sober and balanced judgement.
   Mis-conceptions about the consequences of a global pact of essential equality.
   The willingness to abandon, cautiously and gradually, a position of privilege.
   Steeling ourselves for a less wasteful and more frugal life-style.
   The counter-productive results of fanatic and impatient attitudes.
   When rational attitudes and relativistic thoughts are in trouble.
   Is the loss of an attitude of fanatic resistance a loss?
   Likely set-backs and reversals of the trend towards global integration.
   A shift from rebuilding after a war, to preventing a war from taking place in the first place.
   Working-out organisational details and conceptual refinements to make a pact of global justice a reality.
   We will have to learn to see ourselves as a living organism with commonly shared existential needs.
   Looking with a healthy dose of skepticism and criticism at the certainties and truths we are being asked to believe.
   
   
   
7. Lessening our reliance upon the dictates of absolute authority.
   Fitting bits of information into an overall framework of causal relationships.
   The perceptive teacher will notice, when "learned material" has been poorly integrated and understood.
   The pressure of authority shapes a fragmented and disjointed structure of reality perceptions into an apparent unity.
   Differences in people's ability to assimilate conceptual structures.
   Differences in genetic endowment.
   Every "normal" individual should be able to find a useful activity in his or her social environment.
   Intellectual capabilities are only one particular aspect of the range of skills.
   Is there a trade-off between physical and mental skills?
   Irrealistic expectations.
   A review of the philosophy of teaching.
   A relativistic reality perception can not be taught "in isolation" of specific scientific images.
   Acquiring knowledge and skills.
   The program of secondary education should be based on a relativistic summary of our collective cultural heritage.
   Tools, to be acquired during primary education.
   The development of a "professional skill" during post-secondary education.
   An essential unity of knowledge and skill.
   Skill is the excercise of a faculty.
   Mastering a musical instrument.
   The art of becoming and remaining an inspiring teacher.
   A grasp over the mechanisms of learning.
   Limitations of the teacher as a specific individual.
   When a teacher has to rely upon a specific "school of thought".
   The difficulties involved in presenting a variety of "schools of thought" to students.
   Thinking in terms of constructing a coherent, large-scale framework of causal relationships for the correlation and classification of sensory data.
   When there is a "mis-match" between teacher and pupils.
   Many concerns may still remain unanswered.
   
   
   
8. The purpose of all knowledge, and every skill, is to let us respond more appropriately to the situation we find ourselves in.
   Helping us to survive with a better quality of life.
   Let us not emphasise, only, immediate benefits.
   It is, not only, useful, but, beautiful, to know something well.
   A sense of confidence and mastery.
   When the demand for "relevance", means, only, a request for unjustified simplifications.
   The search for relevance indicates an elaborate and arduous learning effort, in order to trace broad but significant correlations.
   The dangers of too narrow a specialisation in skills and knowledge.
   The development of unhealthy dependencies.
   A series of pertinent questions.
   We have to know, how to interpret our own existence.
   Are some correlations far-fetched?
   Showing our youngsters how back-breaking work can be, without proper equipment.
   Teaching youngsters a "feel" for the processes of change and development.
   The joy of increasing one's mobility.
   We can learn and teach throughout our entire life.
   Education and understanding alone will not make man into an ethical being.
   Teaching social and psychological mechanisms should be a central and indispensible core of all teaching programs.
   We have to know, what social integration means.
   A paralysing atmosphere of deep fear.
   The courage to admit frankly, when we are wrong.
   Abandoning the hope of finding an immutable, inalienable, absolute truth, be it of a divine or a philosophical-scientific nature.
   The attribute of common-sense.
   The need for an all-out struggle against our primary impulse to settle a dispute with force.
   It is often tiring and discouraging to fight for rational behaviour.
   Working towards the objective of survival, according to the talents we have, and the situation we find ourselves in.
   Waiting, patiently, for favourable conditions to experiment, once again, with the solution of social integration.

.......