¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 First, is a beautiful fable I found online. Second, is another fable, I composed, in analogy, sentence to sentence, on another theme.

CONVERSATION IN A MOTHER’S WOMB

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Karen Renegar Gentz is with Randy Gentz and Billie Renegar

¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 In a mother’s womb were two babies. One asked the other: “Do you believe in life after delivery?”The other replied, “Why, of course. There has to be something after delivery. Maybe we are here to prepare ourselves for what we will be later.”

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 “Nonsense” said the first. “There is no life after delivery. What kind of life would that be?”

¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 The second said, “I don’t know, but there will be more light than here. Maybe we will walk with our legs and eat from our mouths. Maybe we will have other senses that we can’t understand now.”

¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 The first replied, “That is absurd. Walking is impossible. And eating with our mouths? Ridiculous! The umbilical cord supplies nutrition and everything we need. But the umbilical cord is so short. Life after delivery is to be logically excluded.”

¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 The second insisted, “Well I think there is something and maybe it’s different than it is here. Maybe we won’t need this physical cord anymore.”

¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 The first replied, “Nonsense. And moreover if there is life, then why has no one ever come back from there? Delivery is the end of life, and in the after-delivery there is nothing but darkness and silence and oblivion. It takes us nowhere.”

¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 “Well, I don’t know,” said the second, “but certainly we will meet Mother and she will take care of us.”

¶ 10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 The first replied “Mother? You actually believe in Mother? That’s laughable. If Mother exists then where is She now?”

¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 The second said, “She is all around us. We are surrounded by her. We are of Her. It is in Her that we live. Without Her this world would not and could not exist.”

¶ 12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 Said the first: “Well I don’t see Her, so it is only logical that She doesn’t exist.”

¶ 13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 To which the second replied, “Sometimes, when you’re in silence and you focus and listen, you can perceive Her presence, and you can hear Her loving voice, calling down from above.”

¶ 14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 May be this was one of the best explanations to the concept of God.

¶ 15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 ===============================

¶ 16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 This beautiful fable contributes to my agnostic core, although a pragmatic atheist (I don’t anticipate sacred intervention for personal need or desire). My mind and personality is so entwined with the history of my body interacting with the world, that I comprehend no relevance for either mind or body in any after-life.

¶ 17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 My first reading of this fable catalyzed thoughts on our imminent epistemic shift, and the great difficulty humans have comprehending their potential futures.

¶ 18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 Is their an after-life for “Civilization”?
Can we engage in meaningful dialog on “Beyond Civilization”?
Can we comprehend our history as a sequence of epistemic shifts and accept that our current episteme (our “reality”) is temporary?
Can we not fear the next episteme (which will also be temporary)?

¶ 19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0 By comprehending (to some degree) epistemic shifts, can we significantly influence the shifting process? Not determine or chose the next episteme (which is beyond our best, collective competencies), but to be active participants/agents in the emergence of the next episteme. If so, we may be able to mitigate some of the suffering that will continue during the shift. This suffering is not caused by the shift, but by the failings of the old episteme. Actually, when the shifting gets underway, the net suffering should decrease.

¶ 20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 ================================

DIALOG AMONG FRIENDS

¶ 21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0 Larry/nuet

¶ 22 Leave a comment on paragraph 22 0  

¶ 23 Leave a comment on paragraph 23 0 Relaxing in a circle were a few friends. One asked: Can we comprehend our next episteme, our next “worldview”? Another responded, not really, we can’t forecast details about the features of our new “worldview”; but we can identify aspects of our current episteme that will be different, or even non existent. Maybe we can learn & organize (OLLO) to creatively influence the process – the emergence of the next episteme.

¶ 24 Leave a comment on paragraph 24 0 Impossible, said another. Our present system is far too complicated to fix or transform, and will suppress any movement the moment it hints to becoming effective. Until then, the elite surveils movements and obstructs them. Our future is destined to manifest collapse, and we can’t – now – influence what might “rise from the ashes”.

¶ 25 Leave a comment on paragraph 25 0 Another said, “I don’t know, there are things we can do now, to prepare for our future; even to influence the changes. Maybe, with the aid of our new technology and better knowledge about how humans function, we can learn/develop better means to Communicate, Cooperate, Coordinate, with empathy. We have difficulty imagining how different we can be. Imagine we are early tribal humans sitting around a fire. Could we imagine an airplane or a smart phone, let alone corporations and capitalism.

¶ 26 Leave a comment on paragraph 26 0 Another replied, This is absurd. Changing the minds of people is impossible, both the elites (who have too much to lose) and the masses (buried deep in indoctrination and propaganda). Everyone is too dependent in their short supply lines, not knowing of alternatives, and fearful of negatives. Positive change is impossible and should be excluded as magical thinking, blocking realism.

¶ 27 Leave a comment on paragraph 27 0 Another insisted, “Well, I think there are things we have yet to discover, new knowledge and ideas that are missing in our discourse. We are locked into our indoctrinated beliefs about alternative means to survive/thrive. We have been engineered into becoming too dependent on large corporate systems for essentials, such as corporate farms. There are seeds and sprouting of alternatives, so we won’t be dependent on corporations.

¶ 28 Leave a comment on paragraph 28 0 “Nonsense”, was a reply. No culture has ever chosen its future. Even efforts to improve often fail. We are trapped in our present. We can fantasize on alternative futures, both utopian and dystopian. But, we behave to a sacred presentism. Our personal wrlds are now too complicated and the world too complex for us to individually imagine both alternative future “states” and future “paths”. We “bury our heads in the sands of fantasy and delusion”.

¶ 29 Leave a comment on paragraph 29 0 “Well, I don’t know”, said another. I’m sure Cosmos is not a deterministic machine, “creativity” is an essential process that continually disrupts the deterministic theme. I believe the emergence of humankind within Gaia has “intention” in context with the essence of Cosmos/Universe/Gaia.

¶ 30 Leave a comment on paragraph 30 0 “What is your scientific evidence?” “It appears to me, and many others, that humans have become a malignant cancer on the biosphere and is destined to extinction. A failed experiment.

¶ 31 Leave a comment on paragraph 31 0 It may be that we fail to comprehend our unique relationship to Gaia and our joint future. Gaia may be our “mother”, and we remain dependent on her, but we have features and assets beyond Gaia and all her other creatures.

¶ 32 Leave a comment on paragraph 32 0 The experiment on Planet Earth within Gaia to emerge humankind (the embryonic form of humanity) was a risk, as Cosmos & Gaia aren’t strictly deterministic. The evolution of life within Gaia witnessed many “failures to thrive”, and all life-forms eventually die. Most species that “lived” are now extinct.

¶ 33 Leave a comment on paragraph 33 0 If the experiment with “information liberated from matter/energy/ material forms – as emerges within human digital language & consequences” fails to succeed on Earth, it may be tried elsewhere in this immense universe. Yet, the emergence of a viable humanity, integrated with Gaia, still has good opportunity here on Planet Earth. Most humans are oblivious to this ready potential, blocked by humankind’s strong resistance to accept that their current vision of themselves (their current episteme) is not only false, but currently very dangerous. Reality is well beyond human beliefs and conceptions. The elegance and beauty of life in Gaia is evidence of the power of Cosmos.

¶ 34 Leave a comment on paragraph 34 0 Skepticism resists: Most humans are locked-into their beliefs, and strongly reinforced by their immediate cultures and indoctrinating media. They can’t be transformed. We are doomed.

¶ 35 Leave a comment on paragraph 35 0 Confident Hope replies: Sometimes, when you distance yourself from “the system”, and let your mind soar in guided imagination, you can detect hints of a future radically different from all our trend projections. Identify and free yourself, with the help of colleagues, from the “false truths” of our current episteme. Of the many changes there will be the hopeful conceptual schemes of UPLIFT and Up2Met, alternative visions and strategies. The truly awesome elegance and beauty of an imagined uplifting humanity, healing Gaia is a “Song from Within” moving us to considered actions.

¶ 36 Leave a comment on paragraph 36 0 May this be one of the best explanations of the concept of EMERGENCE.