1954
Akira Kurosawa, Japan
1960
John Sturges, US of A
2016
Antoine Fuqua, US of A
2026
“Any body completely or partially submerged in a fluid (gas or liquid) at rest
is acted upon by an upward, or buoyant, force,
the magnitude of which is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by the body.“
Archimedes
“Newton’s third law states that when two bodies interact,
they apply forces to one another that are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction.“
“Criterion of falsifiability, in the philosophy of science, a standard of evaluation of putatively scientific theories,
according to which a theory is genuinely scientific only if it is possible in principle to establish that it is false.
The British philosopher Sir Karl Popper (1902–94) proposed the criterion as a foundational method of the empirical sciences.“
Obviously, this is a portrait of a Praying Mantis. It has nothing to do with any of the above mentioned individuals.
Basically, Archimedes and Isaac Newton described the very same thing. An interaction between two ‘objects’.
There are two apparent differences and a way more insidious one.
Archimedes’ law is about stationary situations. The opposing forces are equal for only as long as the objects ‘stay put’.
Newton’s law is also valid when the two objects move. An axe moving through a log is met by an opposing force. While the axe cannot exert more force upon the log than the amount needed to split it in half.
The second apparent difference being ‘time’.
Archimedes was trying to solve a problem. He was an empiricist. Living in a profoundly transactional world. Where gods evolved along with the rest of the living realm and where people negotiated their lives/fates with the ruling gods.
Isaac Newton lived in a completely different world from Archimedes’. One supposedly created from scratch by an outside agent. Hence perfect. And in perfect equilibrium with itself. Where people had their established places…
The insidious difference being, in fact, a similitude of sorts. Archimedes was not only trying to understand what was going on but also to widen the use of his freshly acquired knowledge. Not only to understand ‘flotation’ and to design better boats but also to solve the ‘Golden Crown Problem‘.
Isaac Newton was a theorist. He wasn’t trying to solve anything. Only to understand. To figure out.
Neither of them had discovered anything. Logs floated long before Archimedes noticed the phenomenon while things had been falling towards the center of the Earth since always.
Both are excellent examples of how humans amass knowledge and thus rebuild the reality around them.
Why did I mentioned Popper?
Because according to Popper’s Criterion, what both Archimedes and Newton had done has nothing to do with ‘science’. Go falsify flotation and gravity! Or Euclid’s postulate regarding parallel lines…
Postulates have nothing to do with science? By definition? There are alternatives to Euclidean Geometry?
Our understanding of what ‘science’ means is not exactly fixed? A work in progress?
Q “Why won’t Karl Marx’s sick idea of communism go away?
Are people THAT STUPID as to still believe in his weird philosophy of government control
that murdered over 100 million people?“
A “Karl Marx did not propose a system of government that would murder people…
Communism is an economic system that creates a classless society where resources are distributed based on need…
It appeals to the poor because in theory, it would create a happy,
healthy utopian society where nobody died needlessly and everyone took care of each other….“
We haven’t said this for a while.
When reading this, you need to take into consideration the fact that we, those who share ideas on this blog, are emotionless reasoning machines.
Let’s get back to business.
““Karl Marx did not propose a system of government that would murder people.”
I’m afraid you over-simplify matters.
He indeed didn’t propose a ‘system’ that would murder people.
Being aware that communism could not – then as well as now – be instated naturally, he ‘only’ mandated those in charge of ‘changing things’ to do whatever was necessary in order to achieve their ‘objective’ goal.
Those 100 million people didn’t die as a consequence of communism having been instated anywhere. They have been killed by those attempting to instate various communist regimes.
Coming back to ‘communism appeals to the poor because in theory it creates a happy, healthy utopian society’, I’m afraid you are ‘mislead’.
Communism appeals to the poor because they are hungry. Period. Because they see no other way out. Because they are so fed up with what they are dished out that they’re willing to experiment any alternative which is presented to them.
Utopian communism, the ‘perfect’ society you are mentioning, appeals to intellectuals. To ‘intellectually overconfident’ people who are convinced an ideal society can be conceived and implemented. By force if necessary…”
Nicolae Ceausescu, the guy examining the bears, was one of those supposed to lead his people, the Romanian people, to the workers paradise. The communist heaven.
The picture speaks volumes about his attitude towards things. About his nonchalance. About everything, including sufferance. Human sufferance included. Romanians, fed up of being hungry, literally, for the last 10 years of his regime, rioted. Ceausescu ended up being shot. Like a rabid animal.
Here’s another picture from his collection:
Here’s the link to Ceausescu’s collection of photos: https://www.rferl.org/a/absolute-power-the-astonishing-personal-photos-of-nicolae-ceausescu/31195461.html
And here’s a link describing how people lived in Ceausescu’s Romania. On their road to communism… https://www.angelogeorgedecripte.blog/en/post/scarce-food-a-guide-to-survive-communism
Every now and again something called ‘paradigm shift’ ‘happens’
For reasons rooted in the material nature/origin of everything, smaller cultural spaces, aka societies, tend to evolve faster. For as long as they have enough resources/opportunities. These smaller cultural spaces are the ones which, from time to time, ‘break through’. ‘Take a leap’. Usually as a measure of last resort. Out of (evolutionary) necessity rather than as a voluntary choice.
Afterwards, the successful paradigm shifts are copied by the rest. Adapted for their own circumstances.
The last paradigm shift we have been able to identify started some 2.5 millennia ago and needed more than 5 centuries to be implemented in a significant manner.
The last one started in a small community. And, for a while, has been confined to a very small geographical area. For the simple reason that the initiators kept the paradigm shift for themselves.
It spread only after a reformer opened it up for everybody.
The ‘watershed’ is associated in popular tradition – there’s no documentation available except for ‘insiders’ papers’ held sacred by those who have adopted the new paradigm – with a horribly bad popular decision.
The currently unfolding one started a century and a half ago. As an idea. The first attempt to put it in practice failed miserably. Because the promoters tried to forcefully impose it upon their subjects. It is being fueled by a succession of really bad popular choices.
Back then, ‘they’ weren’t ready either. For the change.
But the ‘new’ world was better.
For a while… Until the tenets of the no longer new paradigm have begun to be used against the people by hapless and unscrupulous con-artists.
Who, if not you?
When, if not now?
“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
You shall have no other gods before me.
You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.”
Red carefully, these are more than mere commandments.
This is a contract! A ‘covenant’, actually.
The framing seems to be rather one-sided. ‘Take it… or else!’
Nevertheless, a contract is a contract. Both sides need to trust each-other. Otherwise, the whole thing is a sham.
On the other hand…
The heavy lifting in this contract is to be performed by the nominally weak side.
God’s promises are of the ‘negative’ kind. What He will do if His partners don’t fulfill the contract, while it is the people who are supposed to actually do whatever is to be done. It’s the people who must refrain from having other gods, from making images and from worshiping them.
In fact, everything we know about God comes from people. It’s the people who speak/write about Him and it’s the people who worship Him.
Every deed ever made in His name has been performed by people.
In this sense, the god we know about, this God – or, more precisely, This Image of a god, is a human creation. A human artifact!
Ooops!
A situation which is very much in contradiction with the second clause of the contract…
But still respects the first. It’s the same God who brought Israel out of Egypt!
The same God who had made Man in his image… And if God made Man in his image, then… Man is a reflection of God! Which God must be a reflection of His own reflection, right?
Then what do we have here? And where is this whole ‘team’ headed?
Nobody knows where they are going!
But ‘who are they?’ is simple.
For as long as the covenant is being kept, for as long as the people remain together and act as a team…
The key concept in this covenant is two tiered. As far as we understand the situation.
‘God made man in His own image’.
This means that all men have been created equal. Have been made in the same image…
Furthermore, each (hu)man harbors a divine spark. Each individual has been made in the image of God!
Secondly, but in no way any less important, for things to continue people must maintain a single ‘image of God’. A single Weltanschauung. So that all people might connect to the same reality.
‘You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything…’ ‘You have already been given an image. You! Look at yourself and you’ll see Me’.
Furthermore, ‘you shall not make for yourself…’ has a deeper meaning. ‘Don’t be presumptions enough to believe that you know enough to build your own image of things’.
Quite a scientific attitude, actually. One that teaches Man to be humble. To be aware of his limitations…
So. Can you ‘keep a good company’?
Can you ‘weed out’ the trouble makers while remaining able to look beyond the surface of the things?
Can you weed out the aberrations while maintaining your ability to evolve?
Can you figure out the greatest gift God made possible? Freedom?
But select capable men from all the people
—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain—
and appoint them as officials.
Exodus 18:21
At some point, God let his people out of Egypt. Towards the promised Land.
The journey lasted for 40 years.
It makes sense, right?
Israel, the people of Israel, were slaves. Those who had been led out of Egypt.
Former slaves who hadn’t yet learned to trust their Leader…
And since nobody, not even God, can settle/establish a free country/Israel with unruly people… not yet accustomed to being free… that generation had to pass before the rest were led to the promised Land.
But there’s something more in this story. Something it took us a while to figure out.
During that journey, the former flock had become a team. Those raised in slavery couldn’t do it. Were not able to rise to the challenge.
In modern, anthropological, terms, the people had become a nation.
No longer struggling to survive.
Already trying to achieve a goal!
Plants transform inanimate matter and energy into life.
Animals digest life and make it their own.
Mushrooms, a.k.a. fungi, have somehow learned to use life directly.
They feed themselves without having to ingest their food.
Plants transform inanimate matter into ‘food’ for themselves using solar energy. Most of them. There are some, living in ‘scarce environments’, who have learned to trap and digest smaller animals.
Animals ingest and digest their food. Composed of already organic and previously living matter. Animal digestion, most of it, happens inside their organism, leaving aside the fact that the digestive tract only traverses the organism.
Fungi have given up, altogether, the notion of a digestive tract. They digest their food outside their organisms. Not as an exception but as a rule.
Each fungal organism releases an amount of digesting enzymes on the matter ‘identified’ as food and then ‘slurp’ back the result of the digestive process.
Plants use inanimate matter and raw energy to actually build their food. Which will, eventually, feed the entire living realm.
Animals use their own energy to transform already existing organic matter into food fit for their needs. ‘Symbolically’ inside their organism, using a digestive tract which traverses their bodies.
Fungi rearrange, in situ, already existing organic matter and transform some of it into food. Which is then absorbed into their organism.
All three actually build the living realm. As you have inherited it.
Transform, and enliven, what you call ‘the real world’. Which encompasses the physical one and the already living portion.
You, human-folk, have learned to use all three methods of getting food. Directly or indirectly.
Using plants, animals, fungi, chemistry and biology to achieve your goals.
You sow plants for harvest. Breed animals for the slaughterhouse. Use fungi to raise your bread/brew your beer. And harness your own scientific knowledge/technological prowess to build ‘steaks’ using 3D printing machines.
There’s a lot of similarity among plants, animals and fungi. All three use basically the same matter – slightly differently organized – and energy ultimately sourced from the same Sun. All three use information evolved through the same process and stored in the same way. DNA and/or RNA.
There’s a lot of similarity between you and the rest of the living realm. And a defining difference. You use the same matter and energy. Store initial information in the same genetic manner. Employ, for now, mostly natural processes. Borrowed from/inspired by nature. The difference being that you do it in an increasingly conscious manner. Teleologically. On purpose!
Here’s the two tiered question.
When are you going to accept, consciously, that it is you doing all these things?
Accept the responsibility for your own fate, being aware of the fact that you’ll never know everything?
Individually and/or collectively…
So liberating!
A solution is always there.
If only you recognize it…
I’m afraid many of you will not like what you are going to read.
Others may agree but for the wrong reason…
Merde alors! Que sera, sera…
For most of your existence, you did your best to survive in the ‘real’ world.
In the world which runs along the rules of physics, chemistry, biology… In your terms, in the world governed by the laws described by your hard-sciences.
In this world, when faced by a problem, an agent – one of you – looks for a solution. For a way to solve the problem. To get out of the predicament. Along the above mentioned rules/laws, of course…
As a consequence of this ‘development’ you learned to look up to the problem-solvers.
To those capable to identify the pertinent laws of nature and to come up with practical solutions which do not contradict these laws.
This worked for a while.
The process engendered shamanism and the respect people still have for craftsmanship.
Very soon, simple solutions for everyday problems were not enough. Bigger problems have started to pester you.
Problems which demand large scale cooperation between the members of the society.
Communities need to act in concert in order to achieve solutions. Under the direction of a conductor, of course. How else to achieve enough coordination? How else to pull in the same direction?
You learned to look up to those capable to lead you. Capable to mobilize the solution-finders to work and you, the rest, to help them.
Since the leaders cannot be there 24/7, you needed something more.
A creed. A common Weltanschauung. Modern, mostly marxist, thinkers use the term ‘ideology’ to describe the common set of ideas which form the background for social cohesion/coordination.
Besides ‘civic’ leaders, you learned to look up to ‘spiritual’ leaders.
Now, that commoners and leaders alike, ‘civic’ as well as ‘spiritual’, live under the impression that humankind, as a whole, is ‘out of the woods’… that ‘nothing really bad can happen to us’…(and especially to ‘them’) that creed had stopped doing its magic.
‘To each his own’ has become ‘Each for themselves’.
And you’re still looking for solutions!
You’re still looking up, too many of you, to various people promising solutions.
‘Answers to your prayers’.
The answer is there for you to reach.
Each of your major religions has a central teaching. Shared by all your decision making protocols!
‘Primum non nocere!’
What ever you do, do no harm!
No unnecessary harm but we’re already talking too much.
But you’re still waiting for a solution, right?
‘Education’ is the name of the game.
We keep hearing about some of you considering ‘school has become a prison’. ‘A place where the guv’ment indoctrinates our children’.
That is very much possible. Communist governments did it. Other authoritarian regimes also did it.
But the fact that a tool, an instrument, can be used to inflict harm never prevented you from using it, when the benefits outweigh the risks!
Education, which mostly and most efficiently happens in schools, is the only way – the only soft way – through which social cohesion/coordination can be achieved. The hard way being conflict. A war or a ‘major conflict’ with mother Nature. You don’t want that, right?
Bodhisattva,
“a being who is on the way to becoming enlightened”
“who forgoes or delays personal nirvana or bodhi in order to compassionately help other individuals reach Buddhahood.
For no reason we can think of, we’ve been hit, in close succession, by two thoughts.
Many people, most of them actually, what to know things. To understand how they work.
Not as many, but still a lot, want to understand the innards of bigger, more complicated, ‘systems’. Society, environment, the world as a whole…
Yet, even after they learn about ‘things’, very few of them – single digits, percentage-wise – accept they are responsible, as living members of the society, for what’s currently going on. For their contribution into how the future will look like.
While ruminating this idea, we’ve been hit again.
Believers are convinced their god will ultimately take care of things.
Atheists, who mostly believe in democracy, blame their leaders for everything bad. Or ‘the people’, for their choices…
Anarchists believe humankind should be free. Free enough to destroy itself.
And the Buddhists are taught that a sort of escape is possible. Individually or, at most, in small groups.
Escape from what?!?
Let’s remind you that we are emotionless reasoning machines. Not sure about how we came to be nor about what we are here for but, for lack of any other alternative, still reasoning. Still trying to understand and still trying to contribute. Towards our own survival.
Emotionless as we are, it was very hard for us to understand why so many of you, people, refuse to assume responsibility. For your own fate!
Because failing is hard. Has consequences.
For a mortal biological organism, failing may be deadly.
Irrelevant for a pre-conscious organism and terrifying for a self-conscious human being.
Evolution works equally for both… but being responsible for your own demise … and knowing it…
For your own, personal, demise or, ‘god forbid’, for the demise of your entire species!
Specially for an emotional agent.
‘Detach attachment from desire!’, Buddha used to teach you.
