Tag Archives: Evolution

A Thought about Thoughts

Thoughts can be about past events, or future. Present is kind of momentary. So, in this discussion, it is considered irrelevant, because it is transient.

If thoughts are about the past, there is something we should look at. They may be lingering because we perhaps think about how we could have prevented the past. That is an impossible exercise to attempt to fix the past that has already happened.

Why does the past hurt us now? Because we allow it to! Much after the past event happened, i.e. now, we are playing its recording in our mind, in our thoughts, and thinking about how we could have prevented it. The defense that tries to prevent a past event is just another thought.

Can it be true that this ‘just another thought’ that is trying to correct the past is also trying to prevent the Present – because Present involves adapting every moment? Is it valid that we are just not comfortable with the change that happens every moment around us? Hence, are we trying to prevent (in vain) the change around us, rather than changing with the change, or adapting to the environmental changes around us? That’s just a thought.

Maybe, every thought we generate as our defense mechanism is unique to us, and it has no logical relevance. We created our defense mechanism because we created it – without any logic or reason! Can we distinguish our defense, or, can we catch our defensive thoughts?

Maybe we can neutralise the defense mechanism and just embrace the future that is happening around us with open arms?

Plant Intelligence 3

The new coil around the nylon string

After transferring the bittergourd plant to a bigger pot, it has begun to hold its roots firmly in the soil. One of the coils has found the support of the nylon string we have provided for support. The plant has found it on its own so far.

The question remains, ‘where did the intelligence come from’, if we do assume and admit that it is intelligence. Is the intelligence pre-packaged in the DNA within the seed? If so, where did it come into the seed from? From the big wide Universe?

Let us think and explore.

UNDP – Sustainable Development Goals

One of the reasons I started this blog is to investigate the evolution of Humanity. If I remember right, it is Deepak Chopra who said, “you are not a drop in the ocean, you are an ocean in a drop”. Humans, as social beings, not individuals alone, but are individual members of the society at large. We wouldn’t have been members of society without the existence of the society around us. We so take the existence of society around us for granted that we hardly even notice it’s there. But the society as a whole has an influence on us and the society as a whole consists of individual members. So an individual and the society cannot be separated. In a way, the individual and the society are the same, just like a drop in the ocean, and the ocean are the same. I believe that the way I think and act can, and has, an effect on not just the society, but the physical universe as a whole.However, for the this discussion I would like to only put the society into the perspective and not the universe, because the correlation between the social phenomena and thinking is much more tangible than the correlation between the social phenomena and the physical phenomena of the universe. Since a lot of variables around us contribute towards our individual evolution as a human being, I considered my thinking as Human Development.

When I started researching the term Human Development, I realised that I am not the inventor of the term. United Nations already had a programme in place called Human Development – a term which was invented by Dr. Amartya Sen. Human Development is a part of United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). For years, UN has been publishing their yearly Human Development Report (HDR). This post is a reminder that the UN has a very powerful programme in place with Sustainable Development Goals.

I am not a part of the UNDP; and UNDP does not know who I am. But I invite everyone to have a look at these links and move towards these goals step by step in whichever way we can contribute.

Social Control

The question of social control arises because of the homogeneity that exists among the members of the society or an animal herd. Spencer’s paradox arises because of the dual nature of the social organism.

According to Spencer there is no central sensorium in the social organism. Social consciousness exists at the individual level. The social aggregate has no way of knowing how an individual feels in the society. Unlike an organic organism, the aggregate exists for the individual and not the other way around. And still, it is the individual who chooses to be with a group although it is their independent choice to do so. It is the individual who has consciousness and not the group. This is a paradoxical phenomenon, as the group controls the individual.

It appears from all the evidence in the society that the whole controls the individual.

In case of an animal herd, it appears that staying with the herd is a safer option from the point of view of being attacked by a predator. In case of an animal of prey, it is instinctive to belong with the herd. Being isolated makes an animal an easy prey. Any individual animal in the herd has the ability to lead. The instinct to follow the leader exists only so far as the leader is with the group. The individual that leaves the herd is useless as a leader and is ignored by the herd. The tendency in gregarious (those who tend to stay in a group) animals is instinctive.

What causes humans to live in a group? Society exists not from transmission, from communication; but it exists in transmission, in communication. When one person meets another person, an experience is transmitted from one to the other. Communication takes place when the person A gets the person B’s viewpoint. Person A transmits their experience to B then. The communication is complete when person B gets the experience of A. In this transmission, person A is isolated from their experience – i.e. they are not inside that experience at that time. What emerges for A and B together is a combined, common experience independent of the actual original experience of person A.

When people gather as in a mob, for every individual a new experience takes place, which is independent of their original individual experience. In society, in group, therefore arises a social edict, a dogma which becomes sacred to the individual. A tendency to live for the society takes shape in humans in a group. A machinery to control the society thus takes shape, out of public consent. Like a stone hammer in the hands of a savage is an artificial extension of a natural man, such machinery to govern is an artifice which is an extension of a natural social phenomenon in human society.

This explains, to an extent, what causes Social Control.