Philosophy...
most people think of it as a luxury of the educated – but it is much more, because the science called “Philosophy” is nothing else than the description of what people think, believe and hold for truth – the description of the foundation of their minds, of the philosophy of everbody, on which (s)he decides everything in life, the big and the small, the important and the forgettable.
That’s why i couldn’t stop to write in reply to Robert’s post “The American/Israeli War Against Islam”. But making too many words kills each comment (except for the brave mannning, defending the genuine american superiority) i decided to reply on my own blog – where the flood of words doesn’t wash away Roberts readers...
Robert said:
Will it always be this way?
Will it always be that even the peaceful and the innocent will become twisted by the violence they are forced to commit to simply keep their homes and keep their families alive?
Why is it that mankind's history is one of conquest?
that's the myth they tell us – since our birthday, that's called "train the pavlov-dogs". Why they tell it to us? Because if you believe that something is "natural", you simply think that you cannot change it
as i was young i thought it to be "natural", too – that man kills man, that the strong hurts the weak and grows fat of their work while their children have to starve – and so you are handicapped, because if you can't see how to win you mostly will not start to fight...
but then i stumbled across books about early humankind – and i realized that all what we are made to think wasn't valid at that time – and that simply means: it is not natural to kill each other, it is not natural, that the strong beat the weak, it is not natural that one commands and the others obey.
Actually, that is our Original Sin – to have allowed it because it was so convenient. We need someone to judge between us, we need someone to teach us and the best and brightest did it for us – alas, only in those long forgotten times it were the best and the brightest (because they were chosen due to their mathematical skills) – nowadays only the “pathological personalities”, attracted by power (Frank Herbert), are the big bosses...
and so, nowadays we have to pay the price
Robert said:
Why is it that mankind's history is one of conquest?
conquest needs defense – needs “ministries of defense”, needs warriors and commanders-in-chief, needs elites to be paid by the peasants – that's why "mankind's history is one of conquest?" – and it needs fortresses: walls, strong, high walls of stone.
so you see, it had a beginning, because the first cities had no walls.
Accept it, that humankind could be peaceful once! Sure, there were always private struggles or thieves, but all in a tit-for-tat-manner. You can see it in the Egyptian Maat – the ancient principle of justice higher than the Pharao...
but as time goes by, Pharao "grew up" and in the end, the power had won and Maat had lost.
Robert, i can tell words and words and words and will probably never be able to make someone else understand what a huge difference it was for me simply to see the existence of another world: that neither brutality nor the law of the strongest are natural.
Because “self-evidence” doesn’t exist.
At least it is not natural for humans – the banana-heap-behavior of the greedy alpha-male and the obedient whores (either male and female) is a behavior of chimps and lesser apes, but not humans
you can see it everywhere when you look beyond the Iron Curtain of the Warmongers – the winners, who write history, as you know. But there are so many hints that they are not the natural way for humans – and looking back it seems to me that the great progress of humankind ended at the time of the Original Sin...
because the only lasting inventions of the “modern” cultures were weapons – and our time may soon be gone equally, as any other high peaceful culture, the only ones creating knowledge via science.
Greece? Was divided – a more peaceful part, where math and philosophy prospered – and the part our culture particularly loves: the winners and warriors.
Rome? Most of her inventions were known long before, at least in the Indian reagion (which wasn’t as far away at those times than later in the Middle Age).
Egypt? The Pharao, Ramses III, we so heartily adore because of his “great wars” – was nearly the last one, not able to create a survivable dynasty. The high culture, lasting for thousands of years, consumed mostly the knowledge of the early times – it simply ended with “the greatest warrior” – the last step of the decline.
War is destruction – it will never create something, the only thing, you can say about it is, that scorched earth forces people to create things new, to try another way of life.
There never was a good war or a bad peace. – Benjamin Franklin
Robert said:
Yeah, these are all freshman-year-sitting-around-the-bong sorts of questions, but they are on my mind these days. It's hard to be optimistic when everything on the international scene seems to be going to shit.
that’s the reason why they tell us the story of the “natural winners” – you see?
but you also can see, that your brain knows exactly, that this myth isn’t true – because it is “on your mind these days”. There is a big contradiction and your brain is optimized to solve problems, particularly by analyzing contradictions...
to let you survive. It is its job – and if it cannot solve the problem within a given system, it has to change it. And that is, to question everything.
Trust no one, especially don’t trust the strong in our days – they are only PPs, as Kurt Vonnegut called them: “the medical term for smart, personable people who have no consciences” or Prostitutes of Power, as i call them.
Robert said:
How does this violence in Iraq and Palestine affect us here?
You know the answer – some years ago i watched a report about Nepal, as far as i remember. Those people used domesticated animals for milk and wool, but usually didn’t kill them for food, except in hard winters, when nothing was left to eat, neither for the humans nor for the animals.
Suddenly i asked myself if there could be a connection.
A connection between how you treat life in general and how you treat humans. I asked myself if a person who can feed an animal and then easily can kill it hasn’t sold some of the ancient wisdom of humanity – and without understanding it, has sold the respect for life in general. I asked myself if a person “professionally” slaugthering animals isn’t as easily able to “professionally” slaughtering humans (except maybe for the ones the butcher knows)...
Justice.
It is not a myth. It is an equilibrium of physical actions, surely complex in human relationships, but nevertheless – in principle – measurable.
Simply because of that, simply because justice is a physical state with clear physical conditions, Mother Nature was able to program it in our brains to protect the human society, the stabilizing Uber-Body of the weak species of losers, needing creativity and intelligence to survive.
And that’s the reason why everybody pays if (s)he deranges the equilibrium, dares to upset the balance – because the brain knows how important it is to have a just society and only three kinds of brains can ignore that: the ruthless, the stupid or the sick.
Any other will know that something went wrong and will wait for the punishment, getting more and more paranoid...
and Robert, isn’t it true, that all those “People keep looking at me like I have three eyes because these things concern me”, as you call them, really do that? Get more and more paranoid?
Because...
Robert said:
Do they think the violence done in their names will go unpunished?
No, they don’t. It’s even so, that they clearly know, they will not go unpunished – and so they try hard not to think about, but it’s always somewhere beyond the consciousness, waiting....
making them fearful for anything and anybody, because they know
– it (fate, physics, justice) will hit back.
Robert said:
No, I'm not happy about it. No person with anything to lose should be happy. I would dearly love for our nation to turn itself around, and for the first time in history become that beacon that it claims to be. But I'm a realist. I think the time for learning is past us. Now is the time of the gun and the blade and there's little you or I can do about it but watch.
Me, too.
But looking at history and at the sad state of Earth, it’s much more at stake than only America, Robert.
We talk about life as we know it, exactly as Prof. Lovelack said. “civilisation as we know it is now unlikely to survive”
Robert said:
It doesn't depress me anymore. The transparent lies still enrage me because so many of my fellow citizens believe them. But the actual facts, understanding that this is all going to end very, very badly.....it's only the cold, inescapable truth.
Yes, problem is, that it is inevitable – because no system can progress forever. It’s one of the myths of the non-thinking alpha-apes they tell us to make us the “dumb livestock” eager to feed them and obey them, that progression will always continue, that the way of humankind always leads upwards...
that’s not true.
Each and every system of information processing has its inherent limits. Limits, kids, not just something fading away while whispering the mantra: “i can do it, i will succeed”.
And the only way to overcome the limits is to change the system.
Mother Nature started it long ago.
How?
Look at the true difference between humans and apes: the language.
It is the competence to intensify the communication between individuals to create the Uber-body “Human Culture”. Mother Nature went this way once ago.
From the single cell to the multicellular organisms, even sacrificing individual immortality.
But as complex as this step might be – the architecture of passive intelligence is much easier than the architecture of active intelligence, based on unique experiences. And because Mother Nature would not waste the definite advance of the individual intelligence, the Uber-Body of Humankind will be of nearly infinite complexity, i fear.
And therefore there are many reasons to think that we, humankind, with the fast pace downwards to chimp-behavior, back to non-intelligent violence with only counterproductive results simply are no longer be capable of reaching that point.
Every day, we ignore the laws of Nature, the decency and justice, Mother Nature tried to program in our brains (our human brains), every day, we prefer the more older, more deeper and so, alas, more stronger apish behavior in our interbrain...
each of those days we lose a little more capability to manage the needed complexity of the Uber-Body, which would allow us to survive...
and to develop further...
I often ponder about Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. "A nation of millions of people, spread over an area of some 1,250,000 km²...The culture's sudden appearance appears to have been the result of planned, deliberate effort" – creating well-planned, well-constructed cities for tens of thousands of individuals, bigger than Egypt and Sumer, but caring for anybody. Each house had access to fresh water, all the “houses were protected from noise, odors, and thieves”, the “urban plan included the world's first urban sanitation systems, ... far more advanced than any found in contemporary urban sites in the Middle East and even more efficient than those in some areas of modern India and Pakistan today”....
there were no temples, no palaces...
There is no conclusive evidence of palaces or temples—or, indeed, of kings, armies, or priests.
but wealth for everybody.
Although some houses were larger than others, Indus civilization cities were remarkable for their apparent egalitarianism. All houses had access to water and drainage facilities. This gives the impression of a vast middle-class society.
How could they do so?
How did they escape the Alpha-males, the ones full of greed and violence, grabbing all the wealth, creating poverty for others to get rich themselves, creating suffering for others to be able to dominate?
"The people of the Indus Civilization achieved great accuracy in measuring length, mass, and time. They were among the first to develop a system of uniform weights and measures. Their measurements were extremely precise. ...Brick sizes were in a perfect ratio of 4:2:1, and the decimal system was used...In addition, Harappans evolved new techniques in metallurgy, and produced copper, bronze, lead, and tin. The engineering skill of the Harappans was remarkable, especially in building docks after a careful study of tides, waves, and currents....that the people of Indus Valley Civilization, even from the early Harappan periods, had knowledge of medicine and dentistry"
How did they escape the death of science and democracy, so often be seen in ancient cultures? How could they do it? How could they protect peace and science and humanity and wealth without regressing into barbarian chimps, as all others had done?
Our predecessors included.
If we can solve that riddle, we may have a chance to survive.
And my bet – it was their philosophy.
They didn’t believe in the strongest – they can’t have done it and all their relics show, they didn’t do it.
And they are the most developed ancient culture of all – more developed than Egyt, more developed than Sumer, far, far more developed than the warmongering younger cultures later on.
Remember the myth of the strong leaders, who “where needed to trigger the stupid masses to high cultures”?
The Indus civilization appears to contradict the hydraulic despotism hypothesis of the origin of urban civilization and the state. According to this hypothesis, all early, large-scale civilizations arose as by-product of irrigation systems capable of generating massive agricultural surpluses. To build, maintain and coordinate the operations of these systems, one or several despotic, centralized states emerged that was able to suppress the social status of thousands of people and harness their labor as slaves. It is very difficult to square this hypothesis with what is known about the Indus civilization. There is no evidence of kings, slaves, or forced mobilization of labor.
You see it?
Fact is: The Philosophy of the Strongest is less capable of anything than the Philosophy of Decency.
And so, Robert...
don’t support the Alpha-Apes by believing their myths, that humankind was “always” a race of “slaves and victims”. It’s just not true, it’s only convenient for the slavemakers and victimizers.
Cui Bono: This myth has just one reason: “Resistance is futile” - to make you accept your “inferiority”, to stop resistance. Like the snake hypnotizing its victim before it strikes.
Like the Borgs.
Btw: You see the dominance of philosophy over the human brains in an earlier version of the above article as well: It is, as if modern people aren’t capable of accepting anything else than the law of the chimps:
“Unlike other ancient civilizations, the archaeological record of the Indus civilization provides practically no evidence of armies, kings, slaves, social conflict, prisons, and other oft-negative traits that we traditionally associate with early civilization, although this could simply be due to the sheer completeness of its collapse and subsequent disappearance.”
... although this could simply be due to the sheer completeness of its collapse and subsequent disappearance...
We found little toys and bathrooms, knifes and tools – but the proofs of the all-conquering armies, kings, slaves, prisons with their eagerness to build the strongest and biggest things should be vanished?
You see, those words don’t make sense (and i guess, that's the reason why they were deleted) – they are only proof for the power of philosophy.
“What must not be, cannot be.”
We have to go back to the roots, to the basic foundation of all our convictions and “truths” to find the concept of a true civilization.
And the first thing to do so – is to realize, that the law of the strongest is not a human law – and to obey it and to accept it is to regress to our animal history.
We cannot create a humankind with apish rules – forget it.