01 – An Overarching Problem

As “unrest” continues to intensify (Worldwide) around the increasing number and severity of “critical” issues (see: http://www.edenorg.com/edp-08.htm) it has provoked a transition in identity from Nation States to smaller groups — many of which are now resorting to “violence” as a means to highlight need. Since “conflict resolution” is grounded in the relationship between Nation States, and not small groups, we have no prior game plan by which to deal with this growing threat. As a result, chaos is on the rise. To contain it, two things are necessary. First, it’s essential that we understand the “underlying cause” for why polarity exists — for without that insight conflict can’t be defused. This blog is dedicated to that objective. Second, we need to identify a tangible working solution to which EVERYONE can contribute (in “real” time) regardless of their station in life. Since this is a global problem, global involvement is absolutely essential. Next, we need a new “platform” by which to achieve this objective — because the ones that we now have DON’T work.

Existing “power structures” see all demands for change as problematic. To suppress them, they regularly play upon mankind’s insecurity. Currently, that involves focusing us upon imminent, indiscriminate, terrorism. This has resulted in a climate of “fear” behind which they can then hide while suppressing objectionable requests. Undeterred by this subterfuge, pockets of discontent continue to spring up everywhere (Worldwide) making it impossible to predict and control their activity. In the attempt to do so, economic systems are being compromised while the uninvolved get stripped of their freedoms. Both feed into existing unrest.

In attempting to identify the underlying cause for this unrest, it’s crucial that we begin with a point upon which ALL can agree. One thing that is undeniable is that the “thought process” by which we come to know that we are, thereafter constrains everything about which we are able to think. What is not self evident is that our use of it comes with a price. That’s because our potential and its potential are different. We’re temporally limited (due to our physicality) whereas our ‘thought process’ (being a modality) is not. This temporal disparity causes all of our ideas to be dichotomous — or, relative to two distinctly different determinates — one of which is temporally limited whereas the other is not. This difference makes us vulnerable to pushing idea beyond our capability to understand the implications hidden in it. When that happens, control is lost to circumstance. This results in indecision, which gives way to insecurity, which generates emotion, that instigates conflict. In a high tech environment this combination is potentially lethal. The only way to survive it is to reign in our predisposition to quantify thought ad-infinitum. If we prove unable to do that, then there is little hope that human life will survive the complexity that results.

In offering a means by which to make a difference, it’s important to understand what it can and can’t do. The Eden project (see: http://www.edenorg.com) is not a solution to the greater problem that our ‘thought process’ imposes upon us. However, it can buy us much needed time by which to try and figure out how to curtail our addiction to complexity. Endorsement for this project is already significant (see: http://www.edenorg.com/edp-001a.htm) — hence, the initial “leg work” is done. What remains missing is the commitment to become involved by those who are capable of making the needed difference. If that doesn’t materialize soon, it’s a pretty sure bet that “NOBODY” will survive the result.


Please Note: Human understanding is extraordinarily diverse thus making all well intentioned contributions important. For this reason you need to share your thinking with others. If you have “Social Media Skills,” you can help by disseminating this material. It’s extremely important that everyone has the opportunity to consider and contribute to this effort. Additional insight can be accessed under: “RECENT POSTS.” Topics are meant to be considered from the bottom up.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “01 – An Overarching Problem

  1. The Blogger brings up some good points and suggests that the influencing minds- brain trusts- need to act now, which is a valid point.
    The wealth inequality, global warming, conflicts in Syria and Ukraine, all these are issues that we need to tackle now. The Blogger is right we need to have a sense of urgency
    The Blogger does a great job of comparing Socrates theory of Illusion to the Eastern Philosophy of “Maya”
    On the subject of Singularity Scientists say that the universe got created because energy and matter are interchangeable. Scientists say that after the Big Bang, from the Singularity, matter and antimatter flickered in and out of existence before the universe was given birth to. Our earth and everything else exists in this universe. The science, which is used to explain the Big Bang theory, can also be used to explain how the quantum energies are able to give us a Material World based on what exists in the Subtle World Drama. T

    The Material World is created through the Wave-Particle Duality aspect of the quantum energies. Each atom has a quantum aspect to it where its energies can be in particle form or in wave form. Energy and matter are interchangeable.

    When the dimension of a particle is small, like that of an electron, it is easy to observe its wave-form. Though matter also has the quantum aspects; the material world does exist. We see a Material World because the quantum energies provide the Material World for us. The quantum energies are part and parcel of the corporeal world. Thus, one day or the other, they will have to become something or the other in the Material World. What they become is based on the roles which we play on earth. If we do not have a role to play, they would not provide anything. This was also being portrayed through the ‘Night of Brahma’ in the Hindu cycle

    Liked by 1 person

    • The issue of what we can and can’t know about the nature of light (energy) is obviously an important one to many. But, as a number of reviewers have noted, a consideration of it successfully detracts from the main objective of this post. So, I’ve elected to withdraw my comments of February 21st. In place of it, I offer the following:

      In short, consciousness doesn’t know where it came from, where it is, or where it is going in the unknowability of space and time. As a result, the best it can do is to try and place itself within its own function (see Man’s Predicament at: http://edenorg.com/edp-001c.htm .To do that it must first insure its own function. That is what it has been busy trying to do — by way of us — during its short stay within us on this planet. In our over zealousness to contribute to its continuance, and thereby our own, we have managed to overstep our bounds. As a result, we are now flirting with our own destruction. For those who want more information on the issues that Sunny D raised regarding the nature of energy, I have elected to post it off line. It can be considered at: http://sharetext.org/s7ct . For additional clarification, I can be contacted directly by email at: eden1@localnet.com

      Like

  2. Finally, an explanation of what is really going on. Thank you Mr. Sagar. For countless years we have been led to believe that the constant progression of idea would inevitably lead to a greater realization of what life was all about. And, once in hand, that realization would lead to a harmony that would usher in a golden age for mankind. What no one ever realized, was that in reality, this progression in idea was destined to inevitably lead to a complexity that now threatens life itself. In short, it’s pretty obvious that we were deceived, just like you indicate. Instead of the harmony we sought, we have wound up with division that now permeates every aspect of society, including the wise who continue to speculate on the cause. What has somehow escaped everyone is the fact that our thought process is actually responsible for the situation we find ourselves in. With this realization finally in hand, it’s evident what needs to be done. Either we find a way to constrain our tendency to quantify information ad-infinitum or we die by way of it.

    How dire is our situation? Nothing quite prepares one for the list of critical issues that Mr. Sagar provides. And, the projections he has included quickly drives home the IMMEDIACY of our situation. Everybody needs to become aware of this information as quickly as possible so that a unified effort can be mounted to make the needed difference.

    Given the amount of approval that Mr. Sagar has garnered for his proposal, to create a “new” platform for the consideration of problem and its solution, it would be foolish not to get behind this effort.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Wow! Original thought. Now that’s refreshing. To think that we’ve been trying to solve problems with the same thought process that is creating them is mind blowing. No wonder we haven’t been able to make any progress. We’re still struggling with the same problems today, that mankind was struggling with when society first assumed to primal importance. Just thinking about all the people whose lives have been ruined by this deception is mind blowing. I don’t know if Mr. Sagar’s proposal can make the difference that some of his endorsers think it might, but since we don’t have any other options, it’s sure worth a try. The only thing I would add is that before you begin a consideration of the “critical issues” to which he links, you should make sure that you’re having a good day. They’re a real downer just like Irish says.

    Like

  4. I’ve long wondered why the earth is becoming more and more chaotic. After all, isn’t education supposed to be the answer to this problem? To listen to its proponents you would sure think so. They tout it as holding the key to the realization of a utopia wherein equity and mutual respect results in peace and prosperity for everyone. Yet, in spite of the many promises and the continuing push for everyone to absorb greater and greater complexity, education has failed to deliver. As the author has clearly shown, there is more unrest in the world today than ever before. There is also greater injustice. Conflict is in evidence everywhere. Why? The statistics provided are truly frightening (see: http://www.edenorg.com/edp-08.htm). When confronted with them, educators quickly circumvent the issue. Could that be because they somehow feel that they will be immune from the result. If so, that’s delusional. Human annihilation is all exclusive in case anyone was wondering.

    Due to all the subterfuge coming out of academia no one seems inclined to look at the progression of technology to which education is unholy committed. Major corporations have now set up facilities on a majority of campuses where they conscript the best and brightest with empty promises, in order to advance their money making potential. And, as far as the humanities are concerned, their importance is all but forgotten. So if we don’t instruct our youth in what it means to be human, how can we expect them to know it. Obviously they don’t. All one has to do is look at the result.

    Unfortunately technology is a two headed beast. From one head comes “things” that sometimes makes life easier and more predictable. And, they are used as a carrot to persuade and justify unnatural commitment. From the other head comes an ever increasing stream of destructive devices, some of which (as the author indicates) can now destroy all sentient life on earth. This threat should impose an immediacy upon us to try and find a way to circumvent it, if we appreciate living. But, to be able to circumvent what is rapidly becoming out eventuality, we need to be able to understand the underlying cause for divisiveness in thought. Here is where Mr. Sagar’s contribution is truly unique. For, who would have ever thought that the very process that allows us to know that we are is inherently destructive to us, IF we don’t find a way to constrain our usage of it.

    I like the Eden project. And, I can see where others have found hope from its consideration. Endorsement (as indicated) is already significant. Will it work? A lot depends upon whether a modality for implementation can be identified by which to achieve the desired result in the time left to do so. However, since no other options of global magnitude, that don’t incorporate forced compliance have yet to be proffered, it seems that all we have is Mr. Sagar’s proposal. Hence, it only makes sense that we need to get behind it and at least give it a try.
    ___________________________________________________________________________

    Like

  5. Throughout my life, I have been subjected to opposing arguments with regard to every issue of any importance. In the beginning, I simply gravitated to whatever position mirrored what I had been taught. However, with the institution of any particular belief, there always proved to be a downside. Well intentioned people got hurt. Try as I may, I could never reconcile this. That caused me to want to understand the middle (neutral) ground that separated opposing ideas. The problem with doing this is that a middle ground doesn’t actually exist. Instead, it only reflects varying degrees of difference between opposing positions. Hence, I remained separated from the idealism (certainty) that I intuitively craved. Over time, I developed apathy that tended to suppress my motivation.

    It wasn’t until I read and reread the material that Mr. Sagar posted here, that the cause of my dilemma finally became obvious. As he explains it, it wasn’t any intended shortcoming on my part that separated me from the “truth” I sought; but rather, I was a victim of a thought process whose potential conflicted with that of my own. As a result, I was preconditioned to seeing everything in two opposing ways, whether I liked it or not. Mr. Sagar refers to this contrast in thought as “dichotomy” — or, the underlying basis for relevance by which we construct a belief in our own existence. It would be naive of me to try and paraphrase the subtlety of linkages contained in “The Problem with Knowing” — since, they are many and exceedingly intricate. So instead, I will tell you what I got out of this material. I got the missing understanding that exonerates me from any guilt regarding my “heartfelt” attempt to qualify thought. For, if I’m the victim of a temporal mismatch between myself and my thought process, then I can feel complete in the ‘intent’ to try and understand, as opposed to the knowing of truth itself. For lifting that burden from me, I profusely thank you Mr. Sagar. Never have I ever experienced a release from guilt like this before.

    With regard to what this temporal mismatch spawns (between the human person and their thought process) we are now faced with an impending threat of monumental proportion — it’s called self annihilation. And, the resolution to it is totally obscured by the complexity of thought that has been generated by this mismatch. That deception doesn’t leave us very many options. If we’re going to stem our “march to the sea,” then we’re going to have to learn to control our addiction to information. It is in this regard that Mr. Sagar has proposed a most noble and unique idea. Instead of trying to make sense out of conclusions that are forever divisive, he is suggesting that we try and find the indelible linkage (that must exist within idea) through our ability to formulate questions. This is the value of what I believe the people endorsing the Eden project saw in his thinking. The idea of creating a “global standard” for questioning division within thought, is truly ground breaking. For within every question of merit there exists new and untried solutions to problem solving. And, this option is becoming increasingly more important as we run out of innovative ways to make the needed difference. In the final analysis, whatever we wind up doing with regard to stemming impending threat, it is absolutely essential that we do it IMMEDIATELY. For, the “critical issues” to which Mr. Sagar points, are only going to get worse, if nothing changes. So, I again thank you for this succinct overview and may your project become a reality ASAP.

    Like

  6. I’ve got an amazing wife and extraordinary kids. And, I’m worried about what I see going on in the World. But, try as I may, I haven’t managed to figure out why it’s happening. It wasn’t until I read this blog and looked at the Eden project that the whole thing finally became clear. Somehow, we’ve wound up with a “thought process” that provides equal doses of good and bad. Therefore, whenever we push it to an extreme in search of the good, we expose ourselves to the bad. Unaware of this liability, we’ve explored the atom looking to harness its potential and wound up with a “bomb” that can now obliterate us. And, the only thing that further exploration is yielding is more and more efficient forms of self destruction — not a solution to the threat. If we can’t turn this thing around we’re fundamentally doomed. As Mr. Sagar points out, we need to back away from this thing called “progress” immediately, and rationally access the risks involved with continuing to move full speed ahead. For, excessive complexity is not something that we are geared to deal with, due to our limitations. So, how do we proceed?

    To my knowledge, there is no globally accepted approach to anything. That’s because conclusions are basically divisive, just like Mr. Sagar indicates. Hence, there will be those that see advantage in them while others see disadvantage. Thus, conflict is always in evidence. This is where the Eden project has something exceptional to offer. Instead of seeking solutions, it’s focused on understanding the “questions” that surround controversial issues. In this respect, everyone in the World has something meaningful to contribute from their personal understanding of problem, based upon who and what they are. And no one, regardless of who they think they are, can fault even the most elemental from among us from asking “their” questions. Hence, by fixating on question, as opposed to solutions, the Eden project finally provides a format for a cooperative process that all belief systems (worldwide) can engage in — equally and without bias. In doing so, it elevates the importance of “intent” above the importance of action. And, it is only here where the process of healing can begin. For ‘intent’ underlies all else. I therefore thank Mr. Sagar for this contribution to my understanding and I can only hope that it proves to be as insightful to others. We need to get behind the Eden project and allow it to provide whatever promise lies in the uniqueness of its approach. If we don’t, there’s little doubt where all of this is heading. And, it ain’t good.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s