Notes from Early "Nietzsche" upto ...

Notes from Early "Nietzsche" coinciding with my exprienced reflections and flashs frequently coming and going. -Further more with its association of the divided brain (Iain McGilChrist):

The Appolinian Genius for the Left Hemisphere of the Human Brain (LHHB)

The Dionysian Genius for the Right Hemisphere (RHHB)

 

Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/65

The Greek Woman

"He to whom now, by the hitherto given characteristic, the sense for
the two antagonistic and yet together-belonging worlds of the
Apollinian and the Dionysian has been opened [like an eye], he will
now go one step further and, from the point of view of that insight,
understand _the Hellenic life_ in its most important aspects as a
_preparation_ for the highest expressions of those drives, for _the
birth of the genius_. For whereas we have to think of those drives _as
forces of nature_ outside any connection with social, state-, and
religious orders and customs, there is yet a much more artistic and
more deliberately prepared, as it were indirect revelation of those
drives, through the individual _genius_, regarding whose nature and
highest significance I at this point have to allow myself a
semi-mystical speech of figures [Bilderrede]."

Birth of Tragedy

"The _human being_ [Mensch] and the _genius_ do in so far stand
opposite each other as the former is wholly a work of art, without
becoming aware of this, because the satisfaction at him as at a work
of art belongs wholly in a different sphere of knowledge and
observation: in this sense he belongs to Nature, which is nothing but
a vision-like reflection of the Primordial One. In the genius on the
other hand there exists - besides the significance inherent to him as
a human being - at the same time yet that power proper to the other
sphere, the power to feel the rapture at the vision himself. Whereas
the satisfaction the dreaming human being derives from himself only
opens itself to him in a dawning manner, the genius is at the same
time capable of the highest satisfaction at this state; even as he on
the other hand has control over this state and can induce it out of
himself alone. After what we have noted about the paramount
significance of the dream for the Primordial One, we may see the
totality of the _waking_ life of the individual human being as a
preparation for his dream; now we can add that _the totality of the
dream-life of many human beings_ is in turn the preparation of the
_genius_. In this world of non-being, of appearance, everything must
_become_: and thus the genius, too, _becomes_, when in a
humanity-complex, in a great individual, that dawning feeling of
pleasure of the dream builds up evermore, up to that enjoyment proper
to the genius: which phenomenon we can make visible to ourselves by
comparing it to the gradual rise of the sun, which announces itself
with red skies [Morgenröte] and light-beams sent ahead. Mankind, with
all of Nature as its to be presupposed womb [Mutterschooß], may in
this broadest sense be characterised as the continuous birth of the
genius: seen from that monstrous omnipresent perspective of the
Primordial One, the genius is attained at every moment, the whole
pyramid of appearance is perfect up to its apex. We, in the narrowness
of our view and within the perception-mechanism
[Vorstellungsmechanismus] of time, space, and causality, have to take
a back seat when we recognise the genius as one among many and after
many human beings; yea, we may be glad when we have recognized him at
all, which can at bottom only happen by coincidence and has in many
cases certainly never happened.

"The genius as the "not waking but only dreaming" man [Mensch] who, as
I said, is prepared and comes about in the at the same time waking and
dreaming man, is _Apollinian_ nature through and through: a truth
which, after the characteristic of the Apollinian which we have
observed in advance, becomes clear automatically. With that we are
urged toward defining the _Dionysian_ genius as the man who has, in
total abandon [völliger Selbstvergessenheit, literally "total
self-oblivion"], become one with the primordial ground of the world
and who now, from out of the primordial pain [i.e., the pain of the
"Primordial One"], creates the reverberation thereof for the sake of
his [own] redemption: as we have to venerate this process in the
_saint_ and the great _musician_, who are both simply replications and
second castings [as in a mould] of the world.

"When this artistic reverberation of the primordial pain brings forth
yet a second reflection, as a side-sun [Nebensonne], from out of
itself: then we have the conjoint _Dionysian-Apollinian work of art_,
to whose mystery we seek to come closer in this metaphorical language
[Bildersprache].

"For that single eye of the world, before which the empirical-real
world _together_ with its reverberation in the dream pours itself out,
that Dionysian-Apollinian union is consequently an eternal and
unchangeable, yea single form of enjoyment: [for that eye] there is no
Dionysian appearance [Schein] without an Apollinian reverberation
[Widerschein]. For our shortsighted, almost blind eyes, that
phenomenon falls apart into purely individual, partly Apollinian
partly Dionysian enjoyments, and only in the work of art that is the
tragedy do we hear that highest twin art which, in its union of the
Apollinian and the Dionysian, is the image [Abbild] of that primordial
enjoyment of the eye of the world. Even as the genius is the apex of
the pyramid of appearance for this eye, so we may regard the tragic
artwork as the apex of the pyramid of art that our eyes can reach."

*

I will now make a first, orienting study of the second paragraph.

"The _human being_ [Mensch] and the _genius_ do in so far stand
opposite each other as the former is wholly a work of art, without
becoming aware of this, because the satisfaction at him as at a work
of art belongs wholly in a different sphere of knowledge and
observation: in this sense he belongs to Nature, which is nothing but
a vision-like reflection of the Primordial One. In the genius on the
other hand there exists - besides the significance inherent to him as
a human being - at the same time yet that power proper to the other
sphere, the power to feel the rapture at the vision himself."

Here we have the idea that the whole of Nature, including man, "is
nothing but a vision-like reflection of the Primordial One." But
contrary to the average man, the genius is capable of regarding
Nature, including himself, as such. This already implies that the
genius can somehow put himself in the place of the Primordial One,
which idea is made explicit in paragraph 3:

"[W]e are urged toward defining the _Dionysian_ genius as the man who
has, in total abandon, become one with the primordial ground of the
world".

This is described at length in The Birth of Tragedy:

"[The lyrical poet] is, first and foremost, a Dionysian artist, become
wholly identified with the original Oneness, its pain and
contradiction[. … He] himself becomes his images, his images are
objectified versions of himself. Being the active center of that world
he may boldly speak in the first person ["Ich" sagen], only his "I"
[Ichheit] is not that of the actual waking man, but the "I" dwelling,
truly and eternally, in the ground of being. It is through the
reflections of that "I" that the lyric poet beholds the ground of
being. Let us imagine, next, how he views _himself_ too among these
reflections - as non-genius, that is, as his own "subject" matter, the
whole teeming crowd of his passions and intentions directed toward a
definite goal[. …] The man Archilochus, with his passionate loves and
hates, is really only a vision of genius, a genius who is no longer
merely Archilochus but the genius of the universe, expressing its pain
through the similitude of Archilochus the man. Archilochus, on the
other hand, the subjectively willing and desiring human being, can
never be a poet. Nor is it at all necessary for the poet to see only
the phenomenon of the man Archilochus before him as a reflection of
Eternal Being: the world of tragedy shows us to what extent the vision
of the poet can remove itself from the urgent, immediate phenomenon.
[…
… T]o the extent that the subject is an artist he is already delivered
from individual will and has become a medium through which the true
subject celebrates his redemption in illusion. For better or worse,
one thing should be quite obvious to all of us: the entire comedy of
art is not played for our own sakes - for our betterment or education,
say - nor can we consider ourselves the true originators of that art
realm; while on the other hand we have every right to view ourselves
as aesthetic projections of the veritable creator and derive such
dignity as we possess from our status as art works. Only as _aesthetic
phenomenon_ can the world be _justified_ to all eternity—although our
consciousness of our own significance does scarcely exceed the
consciousness a painted soldier might have of the battle in which he
takes part. Thus our whole knowledge of art is at bottom illusory,
seeing that as mere _knowers_ we can never be fused with that
essential spirit, at the same time creator and spectator, who has
prepared the comedy of art for his own edification. Only as the genius
in the act of creation merges with the primal architect of the cosmos
can he truly know something of the eternal essence of art. For in that
condition he resembles the uncanny fairy tale image which is able to
see itself by turning its eyes. He is at once subject and object,
poet, actor, and audience."
[The Birth of Tragedy, Chapter 5, trans. Kaufmann.]

************************

Intersting stuff congruent to what I think:

The Appolinian Genius in light of the Left Hemisphere of the Human Brain(LHHB)

The Dionysian Genius through the lens of the Right Hemisphere (RHHB)

 FROM ILP

Nietzsche's Early Metaphysics.

by Sauwelios » Fri Mar 05, 2010 6:40 pm

The fundamental concept of Nietzsche's early metaphysics is the Primordial One. "One" is here a nominalised adjective and is neuter. It may be relevant to note that originally, the word "god", too, was neuter. The Primordial One is the 'God' of Nietzsche's early metaphysics. One should remember at all times though that It is immanent, not transcendent.

The Primordial One has Being (as opposed to "Becoming") and suffers from it. This suffering is a suffering from over-fulness, over-joyedness: the Primordial One aches for lack and woe. It therefore imagines a world of Becoming, lack, and woe. This imagined world, this vision, is not outside It, but It is immanent to it: it is the world as we know it---the world we are a part of. The world as we know it is an imaginary self-fragmentation of the Primordial One; we are really only imaginary fragments, and only have reality in being one with the Primordial One.

 

This world of Becoming, lack, and woe, which Nietzsche usually calls "Nature" (and which he personifies, hence the capital N), itself also aches for something. Contrary to the Primordial One, Whose ache's alleviation it is, it aches for Being, fulness, and joy. And this ache is again alleviated by imagination: by Apollinian illusion. This illusion is not only the alleviation of Nature, but also the complete redemption of the Primordial One. For the Primordial One delights in seeing Its 'creatures' (most notably human beings) at ease in the illusion of Being. This happiness of Nature/Becoming in the illusion of Being transfigures the Primordial One's own Being: Being now seems something desirable, indeed, the highest good. What delusion! This identication of the good, the beautiful, and the true in Being is the furthest away from the truth and therefore the most desirable. This illusion is truly the highest good and the most beautiful beloved. But only for the Primordial One. For us, it is beautiful and good, but only as a relief from Becoming, not as a transfiguration of Being. In order to partake in the delight of this transfiguration, we must put ourselves in the place of the Primordial One.

(my emphasis and italics; see SIDE)

The highest form of the illusion of Being in the midst of Becoming is attained by the Apollinian genius. It is for the sake of this genius that the State exists. All human organisations larger than the family ultimately exist solely for this purpose, and even the family ultimately derives its worth solely from compensating for any deficiencies the State may have (hence in Plato's perfect State, the family was to cease: for it would no longer have been of any use).

But there is also another kind of genius, and this has in itself nothing to do with the State. It is the Dionysian genius. The genius of the Dionysian genius consists in his being able to put himself in the place of the Primordial One. The supreme achievement of the exclusively Dionysian genius is experiencing the world as we know it as the Primordial One experiences it: as an alleviation of the torment of Being, overfulness, and overjoyedness in the illusion of Becoming, lack, and woe. But this achievement is not the supreme human achievement. The supreme human achievement is the supreme achievement of the both Dionysian and Apolllinian genius. This genius can at the same time put himself in the place of the Primordial One and create Apollinian images.

[N]ow Apollo approaches him and touches him with his laurel. The sleeper's enchantment through Dionysian music now begins to emit sparks of imagery, poems which, at their point of highest evolution, will bear the name of tragedies and dramatic dithyrambs.
[Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy, chapter 5.]

[O]nly in the work of art that is the tragedy do we hear that highest twin art which, in its union of the Apollinian and the Dionysian, is the image [Abbild] of that primordial enjoyment of the eye of the world.
[Nietzsche, fragment of an advanced form of The Birth of Tragedy.]

*

The Appolinian Genius for the Left Hemisphere of the Human Brain (LHHB)

The Dionysian Genius for the Right Hemisphere (RHHB)

*

A Big Reference:

http://www.inp.uw.edu.pl/mdsie/Political_Though/GeneologyofMorals.pdf

GeneologyofMorals.pdf Download this file

http://ia601206.us.archive.org/23/items/NietzscheHomersContestTheGreekState/Nietzsche-HomerThePolis.pdf

 

Nietzsche-HomerThePolis.pdf Download this file

"Lebensweisheiten" - The Wisdom of Living (2. contd.)

Normal 0 21 false false false DE X-NONE X-NONE

ቆም በል ላንድ አፍታ  

(2/ የቀጠለ)

 

ዛሬ ከኒቼ ጋር

 

(አንዳንድ ትርጉም)

*

 „Fröhlichen Wissenschaft“

 

Nietzsche‘s Lebensweisheiten

 

የኒቼ ዓለማዊ ብልሃት-ብልህነት

 

ለማስታወስ ያህል : - ኒቼን ለማንበብ መቼም ሆደ ሰፊነትና ከተቻለም ልዩ ርቀት ይጠይቃል፤ ኒቼ ሲያስብና ሲጽፍ እንደ ተፈጥሮ ሃይል ነውና። መበረቅና ዝናብ ጸደይና በጋ ሲመጣ ለሁሉም በሁሉም ላይ ነው፤ ከርስትያን አይለይ ፈላስፋ፣ ትላንት አይለይ አሁን፣ ዛሬ አይል ነገ፣ እንደ ዕለቱና ሁኔታው። ስለሆነም እዚህ ውስጥ ወደ አማርኛ  ለቀቅ ባለ መንገድ/ቃል በቃል ሳይሆን/ ተርጉሜ፣ እንዲያናግሩኝ የፈለግኋቸውና የመረጥኳቸው፣ የእኔን ነፈሰ ሥጋ የኮረኮሩትን ያህል ነው።

ኒቼን ማወቅ በብልሃት ለብልሃት፣ ሲሆን ብልህ፥ነት !

*

Source/German:

http://www.nietzschesource.org/#eKGWB/M

 (Seite 6 ff.)

English Version Source: http://archive.org/stream/completenietasch10nietuoft/completenietasch10nietuoft_djvu.txt

*

8. ሲገፈፍ ቆዳዬ፣ ለሶስተኛ ጊዜ

 

እንደገና ደግም ቆዳዬ ዓቆብቁቧል

ልወለድ እያለ ይጎተጉተኛል

የዋጠውን ሁሉ ዓይን አፈር አድርጓል

እባቡ የኔነት ሌላ ምድር ይሻል፤

 

እ ና ም፣  እሽሎኮሎካለሁ፣ ድንጋይ ሳር ምሃከል።

 

በጠማማው ጉዞ ተርቤ ለመብላት

የእባብን ጣፊጥ፣ ሁሌ እንደለመድኩት፣

አዎ ፣ አ ን ተ ው፣     እራስህን  መሬት ።

 

 

8.  B e i  d e r  d r i t t e n  H ä u t u n g .

 

Schon krümmt und bricht sich mir die Haut,

Schon giert mit neuem Drange,

So viel sie Erde schon verdaut,

Nach Erd’ in mir die Schlange.

Schon kriech’ ich zwischen Stein und Gras

Hungrig auf krummer Fährte,

Zu essen Das, was stets ich ass,

Dich, Schlangenkost, dich, Erde!

 

 

8. The Third Sloughing.

 

My skin bursts, breaks for fresh rebirth,

And new desires come thronging :

Much I've devoured, yet for more earth

The serpent in me's longing.

'Twixt stone and grass I crawl once more.

 

Hungry, by crooked ways.

To eat the food I ate before.

Earth-fare all serpents praise !

 

*

9. የኔ ጽጌ ረዶች

 

አዎ! እድሉስ የኔ ነው -  ልመርቅ ይላል ግን -

ሁሉም እድለኛ ፣ ካልለገሰ አይሆን፣

 

እናም ለመኮትኮት፣የኔን ጽጌረዶች፣ ትሻላችሁ ይሆን?

 

ማጎንበስ መሸሸግ  ይኖርባችኋል፣

ክጹብ ድንጋይና፣ እሾክ፥ግንዶች ምሃል፣

በርከት ላለ ጊዜም፣ ጣቲቷን ይመጧል!

 

የኔ ዕድል እንግዴህ- እንዲህ ስለሆነ፣ እየኮረኮረ፣ ካልነካካሁ ይላል፤

የኔ ዕድል እንግዲህ፣ ተንኮልም ይወዳል!

 

ታድያስ ! የኔን ጽጌረዶች፣  ማ  ን - ይኮተኩታል!?

 

9.  M e i n e R o s e n .

 

Ja! Mein Glück — es will beglücken —,

Alles Glück will ja beglücken!

Wollt ihr meine Rosen pflücken?

Müsst euch bücken und verstecken

Zwischen Fels und Dornenhecken,

Oft die Fingerchen euch lecken!

Denn mein Glück — es liebt das Necken!

Denn mein Glück — es liebt die Tücken! —

Wollt ihr meine Rosen pflücken?

 

Nietzsche-amh-02x.pdf Download this file

Nietzsche‘s Lebensweisheiten

ቆም በል ላንድ አፍታ  

(/ የቀጠለ/ 1)

 

ዛሬ ከኒቼ ጋር

 

(አንዳንድ ትርጉም) 

*

 „Die Fröhliche Wissenschaft“

 

Nietzsche‘s Lebensweisheiten

 

የኒቼ ዓለማዊ ብልሃት-ብልህነት

 

ለማስታወስ ያህል : - ኒቼን ለማንበብ መቼም ሆደ ሰፊነትና ከተቻለም ልዩ ርቀት ይጠይቃል፤ ኒቼ ሲያስብና ሲጽፍ እንደ ተፈጥሮ ሃይል ነውና። መበረቅና ዝናብ ጸደይና በጋ ሲመጣ ለሁሉም በሁሉም ላይ ነው፤ ከርስትያን አይለይ ፈላስፋ፣ ትላንት አይለይ አሁን፣ ዛሬ አይል ነገ፣ እንደ ዕለቱና ሁኔታው። ስለሆነም እዚህ ውስጥ ወደ አማርኛ  ለቀቅ ባለ መንገድ/ቃል በቃል ሳይሆን/ ተርጉሜ፣ እንዲያናግሩኝ የፈለግኋቸውና የመረጥኳቸው፣ የእኔን ነፈሰ ሥጋ የኮረኮሩትን ያህል ነው።

ኒቼን ማወቅ በብልሃት ለብልሃት፣ ሲሆን ብልህ፥ነት !

*

Source/German:

http://www.nietzschesource.org/#eKGWB/M

 (Seite 6 ff.)

English Version Source: http://archive.org/stream/completenietasch10nietuoft/completenietasch10nietuoft_djvu.txt 

*

28. አይዞኝ ለጀማሪ

 

ምስኪኑ ልጅ፣ ባሳማ ተከቦ ይድሃል

ከማልቀስ ሌላ አያውቅ፣ ዘላለም እሪሪ ይላል፣

ኧረ ለመሆኑ ቆሞስ ይራመዳል?

 

አይዞኝ  ነው! ግድ የለም፣ ረጋ በል ይሆናል

አምናለሁ በቅርቡ ፣ ዳንሱንም ይለዋል!

 

በሁለት እገሮቹ መቆም ሲችል፣

ይታያል ገና፣ በራሱ፣ ግልብጥ ሲል።

 

 

28. T r o s t f ü r A n f ä n g e r .

 

Seht das Kind umgrunzt von Schweinen,

Hülflos, mit verkrümmten Zeh’n!

Weinen kann es, Nichts als weinen —

Lernt es jemals stehn und gehn?

Unverzagt! Bald, sollt’ ich meinen,

Könnt das Kind ihr tanzen sehn!

Steht es erst auf beiden Beinen,

Wird’s auch auf dem Kopfe stehn.

28. Encouragement for Beginners.

 

See the infant, helpless creeping —

 

Swine around it grunt swine-talk —

Weeping always, naught but weeping,

 

Will it ever learn to walk ?

Never fear ! Just wait, I swear it

 

Soon to dance will be inclined,

And this babe, when two legs bear it,

 

Standing on its head you'll find.

 

33. ብቸኛው 

ይጣላኛል እኔን መከተልም መምራት

መታዘዝም እምቢ፣ እምቢኝም ለመግዛት

ራሱ እማይሸበር፣ መችስ ሊሆንለት ሌላስ ለማሸበር፤

አሸባሪው ብቻ፣  ይችላል ለመስጠት ለሌላው አመራር።

 

የገዛ ራሴንም፣ ይጣላኛል መምራት

እኔስ እወዳለሁ፣ መሆን ወዲያውኑ፣ባህር፥ዱር አራዊት፤

 

ህሊናዬን ትንሸ እንደመሳት ብዬ

በችግር በልፋት ስንከራተት ውዬ፣

 

ከራሴው በራሴ፣

ዳግም ወደ ራሴ፣

 

ቤቴ፣ ከዚያ ማዶ ፣ በናፍቆት ሲጠራኝ

ወደ ቤቴ ማምራት፣ አ ቤ ት! እንዴት ሲያምረኝ።

 

 

33. D e r  E i n s a m e  

 

Verhasst ist mir das Folgen und das Führen.

Gehorchen? Nein! Und aber nein — Regieren!

Wer s i c h nicht schrecklich ist, macht Niemand Schrecken:

Und nur wer Schrecken macht, kann Andre führen.

Verhasst ist mir’s schon, selber mich zu führen!

Ich liebe es, gleich Wald- und Meeresthieren,

Mich für ein gutes Weilchen zu verlieren,

In holder Irrniss grüblerisch zu hocken,

Von ferne her mich endlich heimzulocken,

Mich selber zu mir selber — zu verführen.

 

33.The Lone One. 

 

I hate to follow and I hate to lead.

Obedience ? no ! and ruling ? no, indeed !

 

Wouldst fearful be in others' sight ?

 

Then e'en thyself thou must affright :

The people but the Terror's guidance heed.

I hate to guide myself, I hate the fray.

Like the wild beasts I'll wander far afield.

 

In Error's pleasing toils I'll roam

 

Awhile, then lure myself back home,

Back home, and — to my self-seduction yield.

*

 

More:

 

Nietzsche-amh-01+02+03.pdf Download this file

 

A HUMAN SINGULARITY

"A man is more complex than a social group or society, since its nonlinearity is higher".

 

Above all, this a "sine qua non" for the legitimacy of a community leadership, be it a state, a nation or any relative coherent social group!

*

THE RIDDLE OF A HUMAN BEING: A HUMAN SINGULARITY OF CO-EVOLUTIONARY PROCESSES

http://www.cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/106/211

‘Each man has a hole in his soul whose measure is God’.
Jean-Paul Sartre

Helena Knyazeva

Abstract:

The theory of self-organization of complex systems studies laws of sustainable coevolutionary development of structures having different speeds of development as well as laws of assembling of a complex evolutionary whole from parts when some elements of “memory” (the biological memory, i.e. DNA, the memory of culture, i.e. the cultural and historical traditions, etc.) must be included. The theory reveals general rules of nonlinear synthesis of complex evolutionary structures. The most important and paradoxical consequences of the holistic view, including an approach to solving the riddle of human personality, are as follows: 1) the explanation why and under what conditions a part (a human) can be more complex than a whole (society); 2) in order to reconstruct society it is necessary to change an individual but not by cutting off the supposed undesirable past, since a human being as a microcosm is the synthesis of all previous stages of evolution, and as a result of repression of, it would seem, the wild past one can extinguish a “divine spark” in his soul; 3) in the physical sense, singularity denotes a moment of instability, phase transition; one can talk about the human singularity of co-evolutionary processes, since in such a moment of instability individual actions of a human can play a key role in determining a channel of further development as well as in appearance of a new pattern of collective behavior in society; 4) as the models of nonlinear dynamics, elaborated at the Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow, show, there is a possibility of a direct influence of the future and even a touch of an infinitely remote future in certain evolutionary regimes and under rigorously definite conditions, more over, it turns out that such a possibility exists only for a human (admittedly, through a specific state of being inherent to him—the sleep without dreams) but not for the human society.

Keywords: co-evolution, human being, nonlinearity, self-organization, tempo-worlds

http://www.cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/106/211

Man-is-complexer.pdf Download this file

A valuable further reference on "The Theory of Complexity" :

http://spkurdyumov.narod.ru/20Nonline.htm

http://www.apeironcentre.org/html/docs/NuovaCritica.pdf

"From the standpoint of synergetics, the changing of emphasis in approaching global problems is required: not arm-twisting and power policy but the search of ways of co-evolution of complex social and geopolitical systems in the world. The pursuit of policy by power methods is too dangerous in the modern complex and nonlinearly developing world, where even random bugs in the branching informational and computer nets can bring to a world catastrophe. The more complex a system is, the more functions it performs, the more unstable it is. Therefore, the understanding of forms of common life of heterogeneous structures which are situated on different levels of development and of the paths of their sustainable co-evolutionary development becomes a constructive alternative of today's policy."

Helena Knyazeva

"One should develop a holistic vision. “Think globally in order to efficiently act locally” – this is a slogan of the present time. One needs to understand ways of integration and mutually coordinated and harmonious development of various complex structures in the world"...

http://www.apeironcentre.org/html/knyazeva.php

http://www.apeironcentre.org/index.php

ON Singularity & complexity (Deleuze elaborated):

http://pcp.vub.ac.be/ECCO/ECCO-Papers/Weaver-ComplexityPhilosophy.pdf

Weaver-ComplexityPhilosophy.pdf Download this file

FOCUS: Complexity on European Review

Focus: Complexity

Challenges of Complexity in the 21st Century. An Interdisciplinary Introduction

Klaus Mainzer ^a1

^a1  Chair for Philosophy of Science, Carl von Linde Academy, Technical University of Munich, Arcisstr. 21, D-80333 Munich, Germany. E-mail: mainzer@cvl-a.tum.de

Abstract

The theory of nonlinear complex systems has become a proven problem-solving approach in the natural sciences from cosmic and quantum systems to cellular organisms and the brain. Even in modern engineering science self-organizing systems are developed to manage complex networks and processes. It is now recognized that many of our ecological, social, economic, and political problems are also of a global, complex, and nonlinear nature. Modern evolutionary economics can be modelled in the framework of complex systems and nonlinear dynamics. Historically, evolutionary economics was inspired by Schumpeterian concepts of business cycles and innovation dynamics. What are the laws of sociodynamics? What can we learn from nonlinear dynamics for complexity management in social, economic, financial and political systems? Is self-organization an acceptable strategy to handle the complexity in firms, institutions and organizations? The world-wide crisis of financial markets and economies is a challenge for complexity research. Misleading concepts of linear thinking and mild randomness (e.g. Gaussian distributions of Brownian motion) must be overcome by new approaches of nonlinear mathematics (e.g. non-Gaussian distribution), modelling the wild randomness of turbulence at the stock markets. Systemic crises need systemic answers. Nevertheless, human cognitive capabilities are often overwhelmed by the complexity of nonlinear systems they are forced to manage. Traditional mathematical decision theory assumed perfect rationality of economic agents (homo oeconomicus). Herbert Simon, Nobel Prize laureate of economics and one of the leading pioneers of systems science and cognitive science, introduced the principle of bounded rationality. Therefore, we need new insights into the factual microeconomic behaviour of economic agents by methods of humanities, cognitive and social sciences, which are sometimes called ‘experimental economics’. Social and economic dynamics are interdisciplinary challenges of modern complexity research.

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayIssue?jid=ERW&volumeId=17&issueId=02

complexity-for-The-21st.century-collected-papers.pdf Download this file

***

ON Complexity & The Brain

 

From European Review

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=5485576&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S1062798709000751

on

The Brain, a Complex Self-organizing System

Wolf Singer^a1

concludes with the ...

" ..

OUTLOOK:

...we will have to consider more and more that the brain is a member of a socio-cultural network and that some of the phenomena that seem to be so difficult to explain in pure neuronal terms will have their explanation only when considering interactions among brains, or networks of brains. This widened perspective is probably necessary to close the explanatory gaps between first and third person perspective. We shall have to consider the fact that our brains are the product of their embedding in a complex cultural environment and that many of the constructs that are so difficult to relate to brain processes, such as value systems, consciousness, intentionality and so forth, have only come into the world because brains mirror themselves reciprocally in other brains and assign properties to the then gained experiences. We are just at the beginning of social brain research but there are already first investigations on phenomena that exist only in the realm of social interactions, such as empathy, greediness and jealousy. Obviously, the complexity of these networks formed by interacting brains by far exceeds the complexity of individual brains."

****************************************

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS

It amounts to know how we could quantify the Harmony Model within the scope of complexity Theory:

 

The Harmony Model as THE IDEA....

 

  ***

The Idea ie. The Word of HARMONY (H)

 

The Godly Sphere

In your material plane

You belong to mankind

You belong to nature

You belong to the universe

That makes up

The mass of your Mind (m)

*

In your spiritual plane

You have your faith

You have your religion

You have your conscience

That makes up

The spiritual light of your mind (c)

The cumulated integration of your material and spiritual planes makes up the

Energy of your mind (E) 

*

The Human Sphere

In your social plane

You live in a state

You live in a community

You live in a family

That makes up the humanity of your mind (h)

*

In your cultural plane

You have your rule of law

You have your community ethics

You have your family love

That makes up the aesthetic quality of your mind (q)

The cumulated integration of your social and cultural planes makes up the

Intelligence of your Mind (I)

*

The Energy (E) & Intelligence (I) of your mind in your godly & human spheres make up the resonance of your being, which is the Idea, ie.

The word of the Harmony

H == {E =mc²   ++ I=hq²}

 

ONE88

*

 

 

...

The Correlation of the IPNB of the Brain with the DofHM

The Inter-Personal Neuro-Biology (IPNB) of the brain as researched by Daniel J. Siegel has a rather fitting correlation with the Dimensions of the Harmony Model (DofHM):

On the IPNB it is suggested:

"A review of the anatomy of the middle prefrontal cortex reveals that it has a major integrative function, linking body-proper, brainstem, limbic circuits, and cortex to each other. In this manner these middle prefrontal circuits may carry out what we are labeling as vertical integration. What does this term really mean? This idea means that fibers literally physically connect the input of somatic and vertically distributed neural structures with one another. A wide array of independent studies in basic brain research reveals that these middle prefrontal areas are crucial for generating nine aspects of life:

1. Body regulation:

Balance of the sympathetic (accelerator) and parasympathetic (brakes) branches of the autonomic nervous system.

2. Attuned communication:

Enables us to tune into others’ states and link minds.

3. Emotional balance:

Permits the lower limbic regions to become aroused enough so life has meaning, but not too aroused that we become flooded.

4. Response flexibility:

The opposite of a “knee-jerk” reaction, this capacity enables us to pause before acting and inhibit impulses giving us enough time to reflect on our various options for response.

5. Empathy:

Considering the mental perspective of another person.

6. Insight:

Self-knowing awareness, the gateway to our autobiographical narratives and self-understanding.

7. Fear extinction:

GABA (an inhibitory neurotransmitter) fibers project down to the amygdala and enable fearful responses to be calmed.

8. Intuition:

Being aware of the input of our body, especially information from the neural networks surrounding intestines (a “gut feeling”) and our heart (“heartfelt feelings”) enables us to be open to the wisdom of our non-conceptual selves.

9. Morality:

 The capacity to think of the larger good, and to act on these pro-social ideas, even when alone, appears to depend on an intact middle prefrontal region."

http://www.lifespanlearn.org/documents/Siegel-IPApproachtoPTdraft2.pdf 

interpersonal-biology-of-the-mind.pdf Download this file

 

The Harmony Model synthesizing the purpose of life enumerates the following 8 dimensions:

There are eight Dimensions making the Backbone of these Planes (Planes, which are: 1. The social; 2. the cultural; 3. the material; 4. the spiritual; 4. the human & 6. the Absolute)

(Dimensions: “the connective syntheses”/2)

1. The State & Laws
2. Community & Ethics
3. Family & Love
4. The Human Being & Hope
5. Mankind & Conscience
6. Nature & Religion
7. The Universe & Faith
8. God, The Absolute & Deliverance

We can consider the abstract, dimensionless -“Beyond Human Dimension” - encompassing all dimensions as the 9th "unknown-X-dimension" of the Harmony Model!

9. Beyond-Dimension

This-is-just_-AN-IDEA-The-Model-only.pdf Download this file

http://side.posterous.com/the-idea

I believe it is not far-fetched to identify the micro-element -here the IPNB -iological functions of the brain- having  its congruent counterparts in the macro dimensions of life suggested in the Harmony Model:

IPNB                                           DofHM

1. Body Regulation                   1. The State & Laws

2. Attuned Communication      2. Community & Ethics

3. Emotional Balance               3. Family & Love

4. Response flexibility             4. The Human Being & Hope

5. Empathy                                5. Mankind & Conscience

6. Insight                                   6. Nature & Religion

7. Fear extinction                     7. The Universe & Faith

8. Intuition                                8. God, The Absolute & Deliverance

9. Morality                                 9. Beyond Dimension

 

Is this correlation of the IPNB of the Human Brain with its possible collective counterpart from a macro perspective of Life accidental? These intricate, implicit, virual and actual interrelations of the micro and macro-substance of life will be, for sure the theme of science in the 21 st century when complexity theory, which is at the moment in its early cherups period comes to its prime age! Towards this effect, BIG DATA has already begun being collected in the science community! Grand Projects like   - FuturICT-  are being launched.

*

"The Mind is the embodied and relational process that regulates the flow of energy and information" . (Daniel J. Siegel; Pocket guide to IPNB) 

Given this understanding of the MIND; I can go further defining Intelligence to be the art of grasping complex information in their intricate multi-dimensional relationships! The Mind is in other words an embodiment of Energy (E) and Intelligence (I) 

The Harmony Model suggests that Harmony,

H ;  i.e.
 

The Energy (E) & Intelligence (I) of your mind in your godly & human spheres make up the resonance of your being, which is the Idea, ie.

 

H == {E =mc^{^2}   ++ I=hq^{^2}}

*

See more in the "The Word of the Harmony"

*

The IDEA Astro-correlated

(the strangest attractor of attractors)
- ONE88 -

 

Astro-harmony.pdf Download this file

*

More on IPNB:

http://www.robsilvermancounseling.com/images/siegel-interpersonal-neurobiology.pdf

BOOK:

Pocket Guide to Interpersonal Neurobiology

 

EDGE Annual Question :

2013 : WHAT *SHOULD* WE BE WORRIED ABOUT? 

 

TWO Responses reproduced here:

1. On Chinese Eugenics

2. On "a measure of what we call "fat tails"" and the

- Immoral scientific communty

3. On Free Will

  Contributors [ 152 ]   |   View All Responses [ 151 ]

Chinese Eugenics

Geoffrey Miller

Evolutionary psychologist, NYU Stern Business School and University of New Mexico; author of The Mating Mind and Spent

China has been running the world's largest and most successful eugenics program for more than thirty years, driving China's ever-faster rise as the global superpower. I worry that this poses some existential threat to Western civilization. Yet the most likely result is that America and Europe linger around a few hundred more years as also-rans on the world-historical stage, nursing our anti-hereditarian political correctness to the bitter end.

When I learned about Chinese eugenics this summer, I was astonished that its population policies had received so little attention. China makes no secret of its eugenic ambitions, in either its cultural history or its government policies.

For generations, Chinese intellectuals have emphasized close ties between the state (guojia), the nation (minzu), the population (renkou), the Han race (zhongzu), and, more recently, the Chinese gene-pool (jiyinku). Traditional Chinese medicine focused on preventing birth defects, promoting maternal health and "fetal education" (taijiao) during pregnancy, and nourishing the father's semen (yangjing) and mother's blood (pingxue) to produce bright, healthy babies (see Frank Dikötter's book Imperfect Conceptions). Many scientists and reformers of Republican China (1912-1949) were ardent Darwinians and Galtonians. They worried about racial extinction (miezhong) and "the science of deformed fetuses" (jitaixue), and saw eugenics as a way to restore China's rightful place as the world's leading civilization after a century of humiliation by European colonialism. The Communist revolution kept these eugenic ideals from having much policy impact for a few decades though. Mao Zedong was too obsessed with promoting military and manufacturing power, and too terrified of peasant revolt, to interfere with traditional Chinese reproductive practices.

But then Deng Xiaoping took power after Mao's death. Deng had long understood that China would succeed only if the Communist Party shifted its attention from economic policy to population policy. He liberalized markets, but implemented the one-child policy —partly to curtail China's population explosion, but also to reduce dysgenic fertility among rural peasants. Throughout the 1980s, Chinese propaganda urges couples to have children "later, longer, fewer, better"—at a later age, with a longer interval between birth, resulting in fewer children of higher quality. With the 1995 Maternal and Infant Health Law (known as the Eugenic Law until Western opposition forced a name change), China forbade people carrying heritable mental or physical disorders from marrying, and promoted mass prenatal ultrasound testing for birth defects. Deng also encouraged assortative mating through promoting urbanization and higher education, so bright, hard-working young people could meet each other more easily, increasing the proportion of children who would be at the upper extremes of intelligence and conscientiousness.

One of Deng's legacies is China's current strategy of maximizing "Comprehensive National Power". This includes economic power (GDP, natural resources, energy, manufacturing, infrastructure, owning America's national debt), military power (cyberwarfare, anti-aircraft-carrier ballistic missiles, anti-satellite missiles), and 'soft power' (cultural prestige, the Beijing Olympics, tourism, Chinese films and contemporary art, Confucius Institutes, Shanghai's skyscrapers). But crucially, Comprehensive National Power also includes "biopower": creating the world's highest-quality human capital in terms of the Chinese population's genes, health, and education (see Governing China's Population by Susan Greenhalgh and Edwin Winkler).

Chinese biopower has ancient roots in the concept of "yousheng" ("good birth"—which has the same literal meaning as "eugenics"). For a thousand years, China has been ruled by a cognitive meritocracy selected through the highly competitive imperial exams. The brightest young men became the scholar-officials who ruled the masses, amassed wealth, attracted multiple wives, and had more children. The current "gaokao" exams for university admission, taken by more than 10 million young Chinese per year, are just the updated version of these imperial exams—the route to educational, occupation, financial, and marital success. With the relaxation of the one-child policy, wealthier couples can now pay a "social fostering fee" (shehui fuyangfei) to have an extra child, restoring China's traditional link between intelligence, education, wealth, and reproductive success.

Chinese eugenics will quickly become even more effective, given its massive investment in genomic research on human mental and physical traits. BGI-Shenzhen employs more than 4,000 researchers. It has far more "next-generation" DNA sequencers that anywhere else in the world, and is sequencing more than 50,000 genomes per year. It recently acquired the California firm Complete Genomics to become a major rival to Illumina.

The BGI Cognitive Genomics Project is currently doing whole-genome sequencing of 1,000 very-high-IQ people around the world, hunting for sets of sets of IQ-predicting alleles. I know because I recently contributed my DNA to the project, not fully understanding the implications. These IQ gene-sets will be found eventually—but will probably be used mostly in China, for China. Potentially, the results would allow all Chinese couples to maximize the intelligence of their offspring by selecting among their own fertilized eggs for the one or two that include the highest likelihood of the highest intelligence. Given the Mendelian genetic lottery, the kids produced by any one couple typically differ by 5 to 15 IQ points. So this method of "preimplantation embryo selection" might allow IQ within every Chinese family to increase by 5 to 15 IQ points per generation. After a couple of generations, it would be game over for Western global competitiveness.

There is unusually close cooperation in China between government, academia, medicine, education, media, parents, and consumerism in promoting a utopian Han ethno-state. Given what I understand of evolutionary behavior genetics, I expect—and hope—that they will succeed. The welfare and happiness of the world's most populous country depends upon it.

My real worry is the Western response. The most likely response, given Euro-American ideological biases, would be a bioethical panic that leads to criticism of Chinese population policy with the same self-righteous hypocrisy that we have shown in criticizing various Chinese socio-cultural policies. But the global stakes are too high for us to act that stupidly and short-sightedly. A more mature response would be based on mutual civilizational respect, asking—what can we learn from what the Chinese are doing, how can we help them, and how can they help us to keep up as they create their brave new world? 

What We Learn From Firefighters

Nassim Nicholas Taleb

Distinguished Professor of Risk Engineering, NYU-Poly; Author, Antifragile

How Fat Are the Fat Tails?

Eight years ago, I showed, using twenty million pieces of data from socioeconomic variables (about all the data that was available at the time), that current tools in economics and econometrics don't work, whenever there is an exposure to a large deviations, or "Black Swans". There was a gigantic mammoth in the middle of the classroom. Simply, one observation in 10,000, that is, on day in 40 years, can explain the bulk of the "kurtosis", a measure of what we call "fat tails", that is, how much the distribution under consideration departs from the standard Gaussian, or the role of remote events in determining the total properties. For the U.S. stock market, a single day, the crash of 1987, determined 80% of the kurtosis. The same problem is found with interest and exchange rates, commodities, and other variables. The problem is not just that the data had "fat tails", something people knew but sort of wanted to forget; it was that we would never be able to determine "how fat" the tails were. Never.

The implication is that those tools used in economics that are based on squaring variables (more technically, the Euclidian, or L-2 norm), such as standard deviation, variance, correlation, regression, or value-at-risk, the kind of stuff you find in textbooks, are not valid scientifically (except in some rare cases where the variable is bounded). The so-called "p values" you find in studies have no meaning with economic and financial variables. Even the more sophisticated techniques of stochastic calculus used in mathematical finance do not work in economics except in selected pockets.

The results of most papers in economics based on these standard statistical methods—the kind of stuff people learn in statistics class—are thus not expected to replicate, and they effectively don't. Further, these tools invite foolish risk taking. Neither do alternative techniques yield reliable measures of rare events, except that we can tell if a remote event is underpriced, without assigning an exact value.

The Evidence

The story took a depressing turn, as follows. I put together this evidence—in addition to a priori mathematical derivations showing the impossibility of some statistical claims—as a companion for The Black Swan. The papers sat for years on the web, were posted on this site, Edge (ironically the Edge posting took place only a few hours before the announcement of the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers). They were downloaded tens of thousands of times on SSRN (the Social Science Research Network). For good measure, a technical version was published in a peer-reviewed statistical journal.

I thought that the story had ended there and that people would pay attention to the evidence; after all I played by the exact rules of scientific revelation, communication and transmission of evidence. Nothing happened. To make things worse, I sold millions of copies of The Black Swan and nothing happened so it cannot be that the results were not properly disseminated. I even testified in front of a Congressional Committee (twice). There was even a model-caused financial crisis, for Baal's sake, and nothing happened. The only counters I received was that I was "repetitive", "egocentric", "arrogant", "angry" or something even more insubstantial, meant to demonize the messenger. Nobody has managed to explain why it is not charlatanism, downright scientifically fraudulent to use these techniques.

Absence of Skin in the Game

It all became clear when, one day, I received the following message from a firefighter. His point was that he found my ideas on tail risk extremely easy to understand. His question was: How come risk gurus, academics, and financial modelers don't get it?

Well, the answer was right there, staring at me, in the message itself. The fellow as a firefighter could not afford to misunderstand risk and statistical properties. He would be directly harmed by his error. In other words, he has skin in the game. And, in addition, he is honorable, risking his life for others not making others take risks for his sake.

So the root cause of this model fraud has to be absence of skin-in-the game, combined with too much money and power at stake. Had the modelers and predictors been harmed by their own mistakes, they would have exited the gene pool—or raised their level of morality. Someone else (society) pays the price of the mistakes. Clearly, the academics profession consists in playing a game, pleasing the editors of "prestigious" journals, or be "highly cited". When confronted, they offer the nihilistic fallacy that "we got to start somewhere"—which could justify using astrology as a basis for science. And the business is unbelievably circular: a "successful PhD program" is one that has "good results" on the "job market" for academic positions. I was told bluntly at a certain business school where I refused to teach risk models and "modern portfolio theory" that my mission as a professor was to help students get jobs. I find all of this highly immoral—immoral to create harm for profit. Primum non nocer.

Only a rule of skin in the game, that is, direct harm from one's errors, can puncture the game aspect of such research and establish some form of contact with reality.

*

 

[ print ]

Robert Sapolsky

Neuroscientist, Stanford University; Author, Monkeyluv

"ON FREE WILL" (my note)

The Danger Of Inadvertently Praising Zygomatic Arches

I don't think that there is Free will. The conclusion first hit me in some sort of primordial ooze of insight when I was about 13-years old, and that conclusion has only become stronger since then. What worries me is that despite the fact that I think this without hesitation, there are times that it is simply too hard to feel as if there is no free will, to believe that, to act accordingly. What really worries me is that it is so hard for virtually anyone to truly act as if there is no free will. And that this can have some pretty bad consequences.

If you're a neuroscientist, you might be able think there's free will if you spend your time solely thinking about, say, the kinetics of one enzyme in the brain, or the structure of an ion channel, or how some molecule is transported down an axon. But if you devote your time instead to thinking about what the brain, hormones, genes, evolution, childhood, fetal environment, and so on, have to do with behavior, as I do, it seems simply impossible to think that there is free will.

The evidence is broad and varied. Raising the levels of testosterone in someone makes him more likely to interpret an emotionally ambiguous face as a threatening one (and perhaps act accordingly). Having a mutation in a particular gene increases the odds that she will be sexually disinhibited in middle age. Spending fetal life in a particularly stressful prenatal environment increases the likelihood of overeating as an adult. Transiently inactivating a region of the frontal cortex in someone and she acts more cold-hearted and utilitarian when making decisions in an economics game. Being a psychiatrically healthy first-order relative of a schizophrenic increases the odds of believing in "metamagical" things like UFOs, extrasensory perception, or literalist interpretations of the Bible. Having a normal variant of the gene for the vasopressin receptor makes a guy more likely to have stable romantic relationships. The list goes on and on (and just to make a point that should be obvious from this paragraph, but which still can't be emphasized too frequently, lack of free will doesn't remotely equal anything about genetic determinism).

The free will concept requires one to subscribe to the idea that despite there being a swirl of biological yuck and squishy brain parts filled with genes and hormones and neurotransmitters, nonetheless, there's an underground bunker in a secluded corner of the brain, a command center containing a little homunculus who chooses your behavior. In that view, the homunculus might be made of nanochips or ancient, dusty vacuum tubes, of old crinkly parchment, stalactites of your mother's admonishing voice, of streaks of brimstone, or rivets made out of gumption. And, in this view of behavior, whatever the homunculus is made of, it ain't made of something biological. But there is no homunculus and no free will.

This is the only conclusion that I can reach. But still, it is so hard to really believe that, to feel that. I am willing to admit that I have acted egregiously at times as a result of that limitation. My wife and I get together with a friend for brunch who serves some fruit salad. We proclaim, Wow, the pineapple is delicious. They're out of season, our host smugly responds, but I lucked out and was able to find a couple of good ones. And in response to this, the faces of my wife and I communicate awestruck worship—you really know how to pick fruit, you are a better person than we are. We are praising the host for this display of free will, for the choice made at the split in the road that is Pineapple Choosing. But we're wrong. Genes have something to do with the olfactory receptors our host has that help out in detecting ripeness. Maybe our host comes from a people whose deep and ancient cultural values include learning how to feel up a pineapple to tell if it's good. The sheer luck of the socioeconomic trajectory of our host's life has provided the resources to prowl around an overpriced organic market that plays Peruvian folk Muzak.

It is so hard to truly feel as if there is no free will, to not fall for this falsehood of accepting that there is a biological substrate of potentials and constraints, but that there is homunculus-ish separation in what the person has done with that substrate—"Well it's not the person's fault if nature has given them a face that isn't the loveliest, but after all, whose brain is it that chose to get that hideous nose ring?"

This transcends mere talk of nose rings and pineapples. As a father, I am immersed in the community of neurotic parents frantically trying to point our children in the direction of the most perfect adulthoods imaginable. When considering our kids' schooling, there is a body of wonderful research by a colleague of mine, Carol Dweck that we always cite. To wildly summarize and simplify, take a child who has just done something laudable academically, and indeed laud her, saying, Wow, that's great, you must be so smart. Alternatively, in the same circumstance, praise her instead with, Wow, that's great, you must have worked so hard. And saying the latter is a better route for improving academic performance in the future – don't praise the child's intrinsic intellectual gifts; praise the effort and discipline they chose to put into the task.

Well, what's wrong with that? Nothing if that research simply produces value-free prescription— "'You must have worked so hard' is a more effective approach for enhancing academic performance than 'You're so smart.'" But it is wrong if you are patting the homunculus on the head, concluding that a child who has achieved something through effort is a better, more praiseworthy producer of choice than a child running on plain raw smarts. That is because free will even falls by the wayside when considering self-discipline, executive function, emotional regulation and gratification postponement. For example, damage to the frontal cortex, the brain region most intimately involved in those functions, produces someone who knows the difference between right and wrong yet still can't control their behavior, even their murderous behavior. Different versions of a subtype of dopamine receptor influences how risk taking and sensation seeking a person is. If someone is infected with the protozoan parasite Toxoplasma gondii, they are likely to become subtly more impulsive. There's a class of stress hormones that can atrophy neurons in the frontal cortex; by early elementary school, a child raised amid the duress of poverty tends to lag behind in the maturation of the frontal cortex

Maybe we can get to the point of truly realizing that when we say, "What beautiful cheekbones you have," we are congratulating the person based on the unstated belief that they chose the shape of their zygomatic arches. But it's not that big of a problem if we can't achieve that mindset. But it is a big one if when, say, considering that six-year old whose frontocortical development has been hammered by early life stress, we mistake his crummy impulse control for lack of some moral virtue. Or to do the same in any other realm of the foibles and failures, even the monstrosities of human behavior. This is extremely relevant to the world of the criminal justice system. And to anyone who would say that it is dehumanizing to claim that criminal behavior is the end product of a broken biological machine, the answer must be that it is a hell of a lot better than damning the behavior as the end product of a rotten soul. And it is equally not a great thing to think in terms of praise, of good character, of good choice, when looking at the end products of lucky, salutary biology.

But it is so difficult to really believe that there is no free will, when so many of the threads of causality are not yet known, or are as intellectually inaccessible as having to automatically think about the behavioral consequences of everything from the selective pressures of hominid evolution to what someone had for breakfast. This difficulty is something that we should all worry about.

***

Howard Gardner on FREE WILL

Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education, Harvard Graduate School of Education; Author,Truth, Beauty, and Goodness Reframed

The Belief Or Lack Of Belief In Free Will Is Not A Scientific Matter

Over more drinks and more meals that I care to remember, I have argued with colleagues and friends about the existence of free will.

Drawing on recent findings in neuroscience, about delayed conscious awareness of actions and reactions, but also on a determinist view of causality, most of my conversationalists have insisted that there is no such thing as free will.

For my part, looking at events in ancient and recent history and reflecting on the sometimes surprising conscious life decisions made by others and myself (Martin Luther!), I argue with equal vigor that human beings have free will and that exercising it is what distinguishes us from other animals.

Of course there are various compromises possible: Daniel Dennett-type views that we should act "as if" there were free will and treat others the same way; William James; 'My first act of free will shall be to believe in free will:" Or Daniel Kahneman's implication that System 1 is automatic, while System 2 involves conscious reflecting.

But I've come to the conclusion that the belief or lack of belief in free will is not a scientific matter. Rather, to use the term created by the historian of science Gerald Holton, we are dealing here with 'themata'—fundamental assumptions that scientists and other scholars bring to the work that they do. And as such, the existence or the denial of free will, like the question of whether human nature is basically universal or inherently varied, is not one that will ever be settled. And so I have stopped worrying about it.

 

Joseph LeDoux on Anxiety

Neuroscientist, New York University; Author, Synaptic Self

Putting Our Anxieties To Work

 

What should we be worried about? Pick your poison, or poisons. There's no shortage: just read the front page of any major newspaper or watch the network and cable news shows. And if you are concerned that you haven't worried about the right things, or enough things, stop fretting. There are surely others who have it covered.

Ever since the phrase "the age of anxiety" entered the lexicon, each generation has claimed they have more to worry about than the previous one. But the fact is, anxiety is part of the human condition. It's the price we pay for having brain that makes predictions about things that haven't happened, the ability to see a future that is not necessarily foretold by the past.

Though we are an anxious species, we aren't all equally anxious. We each have our set point of anxiety—a point towards which we gravitate. Ever notice how short lived is the calm that results from eliminating a source of worry? Get rid of one, and pretty soon something else takes its place, keeping each of us hovering around our special level of worry.

Anxiety can be debilitating. But even those who don't have an anxiety disorder still have stuff circling through their synapses that sometimes interferes with life's simplest chores. We don't necessarily want to get rid of anxiety altogether, as it serves a purpose—it allows us to focus our energy on the future. What we should worry about is finding some way to use rather than be used by our anxiety.

MORE:

http://www.edge.org/annual-question/q2013