Monday, July 21, 2014

A Brief History of the Future

It may be noted in the far distant future that the arc of existence for the human species was a rather short one.  On the grand scale of earth’s time frame, our kind will be considered a blip.  The question will be, if there’s any creature capable of asking, was it inevitably so?

In the brief period of our development, the human brain has grown into a capacity for enjoying the luxury of mental activity we call “the mind”.  An imaginative brain was certainly a survival advantage in its early stages because it led to innovation beyond innate capabilities.  To beat the odds in the struggle for survival means to flourish.  Within any biosphere, a flourishing species is a threat to balance, and balance will always, ultimately, prevail. 

Unlike many other constructs we grasp with our minds, balance is not a mythological one; it is fundamental physics.  The mythologies that persist among our species, according to Joseph Campbell, are all defunct and dangerous.  These dominant narratives are driven by two primal, emotional themes: fear and desire.  Despite our advanced cognitive abilities and marvelous technological achievements, we persist with motivations keyed to our pre-historic struggle for survival.  Ironically, by not moving past these base motivations designed to ensure survival, we are ensuring our demise.

Clinically speaking, we collectively exhibit the self-destructive, self-delusional behaviors of addiction.  The object of our collective addiction is our story-based life.

Throughout our short tenure on the planet we have crafted stories that reinforce these base emotional responses of fear and desire and these stories are pushed hard, beyond mere proselytizing.  We use the full weight of our economic and military means to force these imaginings on each other and on a disinterested planet.  Our struggle for survival could and would be over entirely if our stories had evolved along with our imaginations.  We certainly have many examples of sustainable narratives, but they do not prevail over those promoted by the greedy that are modeled on scarcity.  

Story-based life is a definitive aspect of a tribe or cult, and the larger human experience can’t seem to move past its tribal machinations.  Although the dominant culture in our lifetime is essentially that of a warring tribe or death cult, we popularly use labels such as “pro-life” with intentional deception, and recast morality exemplars into schemers for convenience.  The examples of labeling chicanery in use today are too many to list.  It is not merely convenient to re-name things or re-write history, instead of consulting the record, it is the basis for our tribal existence. In all likelihood, we will cling ever-tighter to the myths that have all-but-certainly determined and hastened our fate.  

Because we now prevail in a biosphere that was formerly balanced in all its diversity, we are faced with an inevitable reality: a major "correction" is headed our way.  This much is indeed certain.  But the question remains for consideration, although it will be purely academic, inspired by the fossil record in a million years: was it inevitable that the short-lived human species had to be so urgently self-limiting?  It would perhaps be romantic to think otherwise, but with a strong will to survive and a clever, developing imagination, it's possible we could have gone down a different and longer road.  And, there still could be an alternate course correction we design ourselves.

So, if we catch a few breaks from a biosphere seeking balance, and if we can creatively use new technological tools to craft new, sustainable narratives before they are also co-opted by the greedy, we might have a slim chance at a breakthrough to escape the downhill portion of a short arc of existence.




Making Sense

In the realm we call the human experience, nothing makes sense - including the human need for things to make sense.  A witness to the Boston marathon bombing was quoted as saying that it didn't make sense.  In the coming days, months, or years, it may dawn on her that nothing in her life will make sense, as she nows apparently believes that things must.  (It is understandable if her trauma has left her with only raw observations to share at this early point - only sympathy is appropriate and no criticism is intended here.)

I can hear all sorts of arguments against this assertion.  One argument might take the position that it makes sense when, for example, fitting consequences manifest for good or bad behavior.  For example, a child does his chores and, as agreed, he receives an allowance as compensation for the tasks.  It makes perfect sense - from a limited perspective.  A very limited perspective.

From a much broader perspective, it makes no sense that the parent or the child are even here in the first place; that they have the privilege of being born at all.  They have defied enormous numerical odds that are impossible to calculate just to be able to say they exist.  A mathematician might argue that it makes sense, considering someone had to be born.  That it was this or that particular individual is beside the point, and so the assertion is ridiculous.

Narrowing the view a bit, away from the extreme, it still makes no sense that any given group of indigenous people, who were living lives of many generations in relative balance with the available resources ("sustainable"), should be supplanted by others whose life patterns are the opposite of sustainable.  It would make far more sense, from the perspective of a balanced biosphere, to favor the continued harmonious existence of the former group.  A biologist might argue that it makes sense, because parasitic species, who necessarily consume resources unsustainably, inhabit their niches - if only briefly - and are part of a larger balance.  Parasites appear and disappear in short time frames, but their existence overall is part of the big picture.

This counter argument has some merit, insofar as it assumes the current, parasitic model for the human race is a 'flash in the pan' in the geologic record.  This does make sense, except that the current version of the human race has evolved along with a story that asserts its own divine right to occupy its niche.  This accompanying narrative part makes no sense at all.  An anthropologist or archeologist might argue that it does make sense, because homo sapiens evolved to a dominant position because of their ability for abstract thinking, or storytelling.  Their story must include extraordinary justification for parasitic behavior, because it would otherwise be plain that the parasitic model is unsustainable.