¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 The concept of a Catastrophic Climate Change leading to the extinction of humankind and a major scaring of Gaia concerns and disturbs me, but doesn’t frighten me. Nor do the personal madness of Trump, etc. the Tea Party and suicide bombers, ISIS, natural disasters or my own death frighten me.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 What frightens me is the awareness of the accelerating shift to madness in the whole human population. The dedicated followers of Trump and Cruz and of ISIS are what frighten me. And, not what they believe; but how difficult it will be to change how they believe – and – how, how-they-believe may lead to massacres as were witnessed in Rwanda and we observe today in the Shia/Sunnis hatred.
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 Strongly counter-intuitive are the scientific findings that no one directly experiences an objective/external world. What we experience in our so-called “consciousness” and the contexts for our behavior result from patterns of neural-molecular activity in our bodies, primarily our neural systems and brains.
¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 I could be argued that evolution chose an efficient means to manage this complexity, by creating the theater of a self, living in an external world, containing other selves. Believing that what-we-experience is objectively real is called Naive Realism. This is probably a deep mammalian (even vertebrate) trait, modulated by our unique human features. Until the rise of civilization and written languages, where all we had to attend to was in our immediate perceivable environments, Naive Realism was a useful approach.
¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 It is “natural” for humans to treat language terms and linked concepts associated with unobserables as observables. Quarks, electrons, cities, and corporations are treated as “material objects” in Naive Realism. In physics, the empirical studies of the unobservable very small has yielded a quantum weirdness, where the LAWS of Naive Realism no longer apply. I conjecture that we will encounter a societal weirdness when we are open to study the unobservable very large as we did for the unobservable very small.
It has been recently noted that humans are of two minds. The old/fast/mammalian/intuitive/emotional MIND, and the new/slow/human/conceptual/rational MIND. In this essay I will abbreviate and call them the mammal or human minds.
An earlier classification had us with a Triune Brain: Reptile/Mammal/Human, which we might be well to attend to. What we might be neglecting in all this is a CELLULAR “mind”.
to be continue 06/27/2016