Compass

I feel we are at a point where we can begin to address the questions posed in the first postings of the blog.  Namely, what do we make of a world that can accommodate a wide diversity of cultures and of ways of perceiving and engaging with it; and, since we can actually change our way of living in the world, is there any sense in which certain ways may be preferable?  The previous posts can be distilled into three main points, which I feel describe our common human experience of living in the world.

  1. First, we are aware of very little, of a tiny sliver, of the world.  This is of course commonplace, but this lack of awareness extends to our own bodies and what they are continuously doing to support and sustain our perception and actions.  Reality is in excess, here and now, always and everywhere.  And of the very little we are aware of, we can put into words even less, a point beautifully made by Bian the wheelwright.
  2. Second, all knowledge about the world is the result of hard work.  It involves the effort to learn to perceive and recognize specific patterns, so as to orient ourselves and guide our actions accordingly.  It also involves the effort to learn how to carry out specific activities successfully.  An important aspect of this hard work is the standardization of perception and performance, which provides the basis of our socialization into particular communities.  It is through this standardization that knowledge – and the work of multitudes that it is based upon – is transmitted across space and time.  A lot of related work goes into structuring and organizing the environment to support and guide our perceptions and conduct.  And it is the extension of standardization across times and places that the power of science emanates from.
  3. Third, our knowledge of the world defines us. Knowledge amounts to discipline of perception and conduct. This disciplining of our bodies makes us who we are – knowing amounts to being in a certain way.  Our knowledge rests on our abilities to perceive and act in specific ways, how we place and orient ourselves in the world and how we engage with it.  With knowledge being the result of hard work, the effort we expend on learning how to perceive and act is precisely the effort that disciplines our bodies and shapes us into particular beings.

I view the three points above as a compass with which to orient ourselves in the world we live in.  First, it is important to keep in mind that our knowledge about the world and about ourselves, even our awareness about what we do here and now, is very limited.  Second, when we consider what is presented as knowledge, including our own knowledge, a most relevant question is where did this knowledge come from, how, through what effort was it developed?  And third, that knowledge also reflects who the knower is, their understanding of themselves and in relation to the world, and how they conduct themselves.

One might feel that the compass lacks specifics, but specifics can only be the outcome of work, which is always particular to a place and time and associated with a way of being.  When we embark on learning something new or on developing new knowledge, this effort also shapes us in novel ways.  In future posts I will be shifting my focus to specifics, to maps, which by their nature will be particular to my own vantage point, my own place in the world.

3 thoughts on “Compass

  1. Michael Brün

    1) I find vivid illustration of what you say in in my relations with non-human animals, when then comparing those to my relations with humans.

    2) The ease in comparing and relative difficulty in contrasting yields to me the following hypothesis: so far human society can be described effectively in terms of the limits imposed on individual behavior, but hardly at all in terms of behavior or even imagined behavior (well, imagination is behavior too!) developed or promoted.

    3) That is why we until this moment have taken the root of ‘compassion’ to be ‘passion’ and not ‘compass’. But clearly this is about to change and ‘shared consciousness’ will no longer be tarnished as totalitarian–because it’s become a metaconsciousness.

    Reply
    1. Yiannis Post author

      Thank you for the comments Michael!
      Regarding your hypothesis under #2, my sense has been that communities actively promote particular behavior through socialization – the welfare of a community cannot rely only on placing limits on behavior, needs much more than that. Specific examples that come to mind include loyalty, humaneness, or respect for one’s parents. More generally, promotion of cooperative behavior abounds, and since it is seen in groups of animals as well, it is likely to have been around for a very long time.
      For your comment #3, my own experience with consciousness is that I cannot rely too much on it to get me through the day. Do you think the shared type will make a difference?

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *