Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘paradigm

This myth that mystify: East vs. West?  Even Better, South vs. North

Depending on the context, depending on the outcome, choose your paradigm.

Both paradigms ( only one life or cyclical lives) are human constructions. 

They are cultural creations, not natural phenomena.

To understand the business of mythology and what a Chief Belief Officer is supposed to do, you have to hear a story of Ganesha, the elephant-headed god who is the scribe of storytellers, and his brother, the athletic warlord of the gods, Kartikeya.

The two brothers one day decided to go on a race, three times around the world. Kartikeya leapt on his peacock and flew around the continents and the mountains and the oceans. He went around once, he went around twice, he went around thrice.

But his brother, Ganesha, simply walked around his parents once, twice, thrice, and said, “I won.”

“How come?” said Kartikeya. And Ganesha said, “You went around ‘the world.’ I went around ‘my world.’”

What matters more?

Devdutt Pattanaik looks at business and modern life through the lens of mythology.
When he was Chief Belief Officer, he helped managers harness the power of myth to understand their employees, their companies and their customers.

He’s working to create a Retail Religion, to build deep, lasting ties between customers and brands.
 — the myths that mystify. ted.com|By Devdutt Pattanaik

If you understand the difference between ‘the world’ and ‘my world,’ you understand the difference between logos and mythos.

The world’ is objective, logical, universal, factual, scientific.  ‘The world’ tells us how the world functions, how the sun rises, how we are born.

My world’ is subjective. It’s emotional. It’s personal. It’s perceptions, thoughts, feelings, dreams. It is the belief system that we carry. It’s the myth that we live in. ‘My world’ tells us why the sun rises, why we were born. 

Every culture is trying to understand itself: Why do we exist?” And every culture comes up with its own understanding of life, its own customized version of mythology.

Culture is a reaction to nature, and this understanding of our ancestors is transmitted generation from generation in the form of stories, symbols and rituals, which are always indifferent to rationality.

When you study nature, you realize that different people of the world have a different understanding of the world. Different people see things differently — different viewpoints.

There is my world and there is your world, and my world is always better than your world, because my world, you see, is rational and yours is superstition. Yours is faith. Yours is illogical. This is the root of the clash of civilizations.

It took place in 326 B.C. on the banks of a river called the Indus, now in Pakistan. This river lends itself to India’s name. India. Indus.

Alexander, a young Macedonian, met there what he called a “gymnosophist,” which means “the naked, wise man.” We don’t know who he was. Perhaps he was a Jain monk, like Bahubali over here, the Gomateshwara Bahubali whose image is not far from Mysore. Or perhaps he was just a yogi who was sitting on a rock, staring at the sky and the sun and the moon.

Alexander asked, “What are you doing?” and the gymnosophist answered, “I’m experiencing nothingness.” Then the gymnosophist asked, “What are you doing?” and Alexander said, “I am conquering the world.”

And they both laughed. 

Each one thought that the other was a fool. The gymnosophist said, “Why is he conquering the world? It’s pointless.” And Alexander thought, “Why is he sitting around, doing nothing? What a waste of a life.”

To understand this difference in viewpoints, we have to understand the subjective truth of Alexander his myth, and the mythology that constructed it. 

Alexander’s mother, his parents, his teacher Aristotle told him the story of Homer’s “Iliad.” They told him of a great hero called Achilles, who, when he participated in battle, victory was assured, but when he withdrew from the battle, defeat was inevitable. 

“Achilles was a man who could shape history, a man of destiny, and this is what you should be, Alexander.” That’s what he heard.

 “What should you Not be? You should not be Sisyphus, who rolls a rock up a mountain all day only to find the boulder rolled down at night. Don’t live a life which is monotonous, mediocre, meaningless. Be spectacular! — like the Greek heroes, like Jason, who went across the sea with the Argonauts and fetched the Golden Fleece.

Be spectacular like Theseus, who entered the labyrinth and killed the bull-headed Minotaur. 

When you play in a race, win! — because when you win, the exhilaration of victory is the closest you will come to the ambrosia of the gods.”

The Greeks believed you live only once, and when you die, you have to cross the River Styx. And if you have lived an extraordinary life, you will be welcomed to Elysium, or what the French call “Champs-Élysées”, the heaven of the heroes.

But these are not the stories that the gymnosophist heard. He heard a very different story. 

He heard of a man called Bharat, after whom India is called Bhārata. Bharat also conquered the world. And then he went to the top-most peak of the greatest mountain of the center of the world called Meru. And he wanted to hoist his flag to say, I was here first.”

When he reached the mountain peak, he found the peak covered with countless flags of world-conquerors before him, each one claiming “‘I was here first’ … that’s what I thought until I came here.” And suddenly, in this canvas of infinity, Bharat felt insignificant. This was the mythology of the gymnosophist.

Bharat had heroes, like Ram — Raghupati Ram and Krishna, Govinda Hari. But they were not two characters on two different adventures. They were two lifetimes of the same hero.

When the Ramayana ends the Mahabharata begins. When Ram dies, Krishna is born. When Krishna dies, eventually he will be back as Ram.

The Indians also had a river that separates the land of the living from the land of the dead. But you don’t cross it once. You go to and fro endlessly. It was called the Vaitarani. You go again and again and again.

Nothing lasts forever in India, not even death. 

And so, you have these grand rituals where great images of mother goddesses are built and worshiped for 10 days … And what do you do at the end of 10 days? You dunk it in the river. Because it has to end. And next year, she will come back.

What goes around always comes around, and this rule applies not just to man, but also the gods. (But at a lesser energy and power? Like entropy?)

Even the gods have to come back again and again as Ram, as Krishna. Not only do they live infinite lives, but the same life is lived infinite times till you get to the point of it all. “Groundhog Day.” (Laughter)

Two different mythologies. Which is right? Two different mythologies, two different ways of looking at the world.

One linear, one cyclical. One believes this is the one and only life. The other believes this is one of many lives.

The denominator of Alexander’s life was one. So, the value of his life was the sum total of his achievements. 

The denominator of the gymnosophist life was infinity. So, no matter what he did, it was always zero. 

And I believe it is this mythological paradigm that inspired Indian mathematicians to discover the number zero. Who knows?

That brings us to the mythology of business.

If Alexander’s belief influenced his behavior, if the gymnosophist belief influences his behavior, then it was bound to influence the business they were in. 

What is business but the result of how the market behaves and how the organization behaves?

And if you look at cultures around the world, all you have to do is understand the mythology and you will see how they behave and how they do business.

Take a look. If you live only once, in one-life cultures around the world, you will see an obsession with binary logic, absolute truth, standardization, absoluteness, linear patterns in design.

But if you look at cultures which have cyclical and based on infinite lives, you will see a comfort with fuzzy logic, with opinion, with contextual thinking, with everything is relative, sort of mostly. (And what is the mythology of the Chinese? Are they bound to conquer the world as the US evangelists has been doing?)

You look at art. Look at the ballerina, how linear she is in her performance. And then look at the Indian classical dancer, the Kuchipudi dancer, the Bharatanatyam dancer, curvaceous. (Laughter)

And then look at business. Standard business model: vision, mission, values, processes. Sounds very much like the journey through the wilderness to the promised land, with the commandments held by the leader. And if you comply, you will go to heaven.

In India there is no “the promised land”. There are many promised lands, depending on your station in society, depending on your stage of life. You see, businesses are not run as institutions, by the idiosyncrasies of individuals. It’s always about taste. It’s always about my taste. (Is it still true in capitalist India?) 

Indian music, for example, does not have the concept of harmony. There is no orchestra conductor. There is one performer standing there, and everybody follows. 

And you can never replicate that performance twice. It is not about documentation and contract. It’s about conversation and faith. 

It’s not about compliance. It’s about setting, getting the job done, by bending or breaking the rules — just look at your Indian people around here, you’ll see them smile; they know what it is. (Laughter) And then look at people who have done business in India, you’ll see the exasperation on their faces.

This is what India is today.

The ground reality is based on a cyclical worldview. So, it’s rapidly changing, highly diverse, chaotic, ambiguous, unpredictable. And people are okay with it. 

And then globalization is taking place. The demands of modern institutional thinking is coming in. Which is rooted in one-life culture. And a clash is going to take place, like on the banks of the Indus. It is bound to happen.

I have personally experienced it.

I’m trained as a medical doctor. I did not want to study surgery. Don’t ask me why. I love mythology too much. I wanted to learn mythology. But there is nowhere you can study. So, I had to teach it to myself. And mythology does not pay, well, until now.

I had to take up a job. And I worked in the pharma industry. And I worked in the healthcare industry. And I worked as a marketing guy, and a sales guy, and a knowledge guy, and a content guy, and a training guy. 

I even was a business consultant, doing strategies and tactics. And I would see the exasperation between my American and European colleagues, when they were dealing with India.

Example: Please tell us the process to invoice hospitals. Step A. Step B. Step C. Mostly. (Laughter) How do you parameterize “mostly”? How do you put it in a nice little software? You can’t.

I would give my viewpoints to people. But nobody was interested in listening to it, you see, until I met Kishore Biyani of the Future group. he has established the largest retail chain, called Big Bazaar.

And there are more than 200 formats, across 50 cities and towns of India. 

And he was dealing with diverse and dynamic markets. And he knew very intuitively, that best practices, developed in Japan and China and Europe and America will not work in India.

 He knew that institutional thinking doesn’t work in India. Individual thinking does. He had an intuitive understanding of the mythic structure of India.

So, he had asked me to be the Chief Belief Officer, and said, “All I want to do is align belief.” 

Sounds so simple. But belief is not measurable. You can’t measure it. You can’t manage it. So, how do you construct belief? How do you enhance the sensitivity of people to Indian-ness. Even if you are Indian, it is not very explicit, it is not very obvious.

I tried to work on the standard model of culture, which is, develop stories, symbols and rituals. And I will share one of the rituals with you.  it is based on the Hindu ritual of Darshan.

Hindus don’t have the concept of commandments. 

So, there is nothing right or wrong in what you do in life. (And the judicial system?)

So, you’re not really sure how you stand in front of God. when you go to the temple, all you seek is an audience with God. You want to see God. And you want God to see you, and hence the gods have very large eyes, large unblinking eyes, sometimes made of silver, so they look at you.

Because you don’t know whether you’re right or wrong, and so all you seek is divine empathy. “Just know where I came from, why I did the Jugaad.” (Laughter) “Why did I do the setting, why I don’t care for the processes. Just understand me, please.”

Based on this, we created a ritual for leaders. 

After a leader completes his training and is about to take over the store, we blindfold him, we surround him with the stakeholders, the customer, his family, his team, his boss. You read out his KRA, his KPI, you give him the keys, and then you remove the blindfold.

And invariably, you see a tear, because the penny has dropped. He realizes that to succeed, he does not have to be a “professional,” he does not have to cut out his emotions, he has to include all these people in his world to succeed, to make them happy, to make the boss happy, to make everyone happy.

The customer is happy, because the customer is God.

That sensitivity is what we need. Once this belief enters, behavior will happen, business will happen. And it has. 

So, then we come back to Alexander and to the gymnosophist. And everybody asks me, “Which is the better way, this way or that way?”

And it’s a very dangerous question, because it leads you to the path of fundamentalism and violence. So, I will not answer the question. What I will give you is an Indian answer, the Indian head-shake.

Depending on the context, depending on the outcome, choose your paradigm.

And so the next time you meet someone, a stranger, one request: Understand that you live in the subjective truth, and so does he. Understand it. 

And when you understand it you will discover something spectacular. You will discover that within infinite myths lies the eternal truth. 

Who sees it all? Varuna has but a thousand eyes. Indra, a hundred. You and I, only two. Thank you. Namaste.

Notes and comments on FB and Twitter. Part 30

Ce n’est pas de folie d’amour que tu rêves: c’est d’un mari, d’une femme lesbienne…

Et s’il n’est homme qui supporte moins la contrainte d’une femme, il n’est personne qui sache se contraindre plus qu’une femme pour montrer son amour

Les hommes et les femmes ne sont pas plus sage les uns que les autres: un amour manqué et l’on devient moine/soeur, abandonne le pays, ou se laisser mourire.

C’est en jouant le jeu de l’ aimée, qu’un beau jour elle est éprise et prise au jeu.

La folie est la compagne et le guide de la creation et de l’amour.

Aujourd’hui on dit: “les génes sont les folles activateurs”

Quand je n’arrive pas a m’imaginer une bête ou une plante, alors ca m’est indifferent de tuer les poules.

Les tisserants de la ville lui confient leurs enfants en nourrice: et leur propres enfants en patissent

Je suis allé en Suede, a la poursuite de ma garce de bien-aimé, que je trouve marriée. Les arrangements avec le mari mon prouver qu’il n’avait pas de coeur. Il n’avait pas de savoir-faire.

J’étais éleve et entouré de tendresse feminine: Je ‘étais pas capable de haine soutenue. (Et portant, la haine feminine perdure: il etait chanceux)

C’est un effort prodigieux de bêtise pour etre capable de croire sérieusement á la guerre et accepter l’éventualité

Lorsequ’il s’agit de tuer mes semblables, je ne suis plus assez poête. Et je tue sans panache

Experimental mind testing: give a subject/researcher a peer-reviewed paper of Another discipline and test his comprehension

In the USA, going bankrupt is a way of doing business: No shame or blame attached to it. Except if a US financial company own your “foreign” business, then you are a very bad person, and your entire family owe the company.

Someone self-sufficient in his utter egotistic shyness, who refrains from communicating and asking questions, it is normal he views Injustice Not emanating from men, but victims and tools

Anyone knows of a taxonomy for mathematics? The shared axioms, the applied fields, the algorithmic natures…

Anyone in any rank of power, cognizant of the Injustices surrounding his work environment, is source of injustice if he doesn’t whistle-blow or come to the rescue of the hapless. He is liable of undue cruelty and you don’t need to give much weight to his excuses,

Décidé a faire dans le génie, je n’arrivais qu’a manqur de talent

Un jeune recrue, entendant ma mére crier “Vive la France” et seule a porter un drapeau tricolore, grommelea: “Ca se voit bien qu’elle n’est pas Francaise”

Je me reconnais dans tous mes ennemis: une veritable infirmité

Quelques bêtes meurent de honte. Notre espéce meurt du Destin stupid.

Discovering the mysteries of life and the Universe might not be attainable: for the simple reason that any paradigm would not stick long enough to capture the mind of any generation.

Dans toutes les organism sociaux malades, l’espionnism sévisse.

Le plus grand effort de ma vie est de désespérer totallement. Rien n’y fait: je suis trop lent pour que le désespoir accélere suffisamment.

Les militaires des nations vaincues sont méprisés óu ils séjournent. Il faudrait que toutes les armés soient vaincues simultanément pour avoir la paix

Apprendre a ne se laisser plus aveuglé par le drapeau: Reconnaitre les visages honnetes et réflechis

Avec le temps, je rougis plus facilement de la colére que de modestie

Elle aime les jolie histoires, ma mere. Je n’en connait pas de jolies: les series a la TV n’offrent pas de supplement romantiques.  On suit les coups, les vociferations, les ennuis de rage et de désespoires

For a piece of shit, it’s a real piece

Dans toutes les forêts du monde, j’ai su reconnoitre la voie de la bête-femelle qui a perdu son petit

Savoir que l’humain est une tentation impossible, ne doit pas etre accompagné et accueilli avec la resignation du désesperé

Cette chaude camomille empoisonnée de l’habitude, qui se verse dans notre gosier avec son gout de renoncement et d’acceptation

Ils étaient trop installés dans leurs meubles, leur condition humaine

Je choisis pour errer sur la terre les lieux oú il y a assez de place pour tous ceux qui ne sont plus lá. (Fauchés par les guerres)

Can we let Capitalism Die and Move On?

By Joe Brewer / medium.com

Death can be very painful and confusing. This is true for economic systems just as it is for personal loved ones.

Moving on is just a hard thing to do.

It’s really tough to work through all the difficult feelings we have about loss. Will I see my grandmother again? What am I to do now that my father is gone? How does this change who I am as a person?

The same struggles we feel losing a family member are present — in their own way — as a society goes through the deep rifts of change when a paradigm comes to an end.

How will I find work now that there are no living-wage jobs? What should I study in school? Should I even go to college? Does it make sense to start a family in a world where global warming is changing everything?

Questions like these are painfully real. And every single one of us alive today has to find our own answers.

So let me ask:  will the 7.4 billion humans alive today be capable of letting capitalism die with dignity?

 I’ve been writing a lot lately about how the pain we feel is capitalism dying, that the mental disease of shame and humiliation is due to late-stage capitalism, how a healing process is needed, and the brokenness we feel in our own lives is what makes it possible to seed a better future.

What I haven’t written about  is the flip side of this massive upheaval. In order to create something new, we have to let go of a dying world order. And death is painful. It hurts a lot.

Many people aren’t ready to admit to themselves that the capitalist system we are living in has created mass povertyunprecedented wealth inequality, systemic corruption, and is damaging the ecological systems of the Earth so much that our civilization is in peril.

The drive for monetary profits — greed in its purest form — is literally killing us. So we have a choice to make. We either cling to the death and decay within ourselves and go down with the sinking ship.

Or we do the hard spiritual work of facing death with loving grace and let it go, freeing ourselves to begin the long process of building a new life for ourselves.

The harsh truth is that there is no turning back now. It’s too late to “get back to better days”, a pattern of denial that refuses to acknowledge that things have fundamentally changed.

While many people still cling to the past — as we can see in the current US election where many want to keep outsiders at bay, hold onto outdated ideals, and return to a prior time that only exists in their minds — it is essential for us all to wake up and look around.

Everything has changed. And it is only changing faster, with an intensity unlike anything that has come before. None of our ancestors lived on a planet at ecological capacity.

No one has seen the collapse of ocean fisheries, or watched global markets crash with spectacular consequences, as we are seeing today.

We are now in the crucible of change. Natural disasters strike urban centers that grew exponentially in the last hundred years. Our feet are stomped down on the accelerator as we race into the future whose past will not be an adequate guide.

Can we do it? I believe we can.

My optimism is hard-won. I have stood next to my dying mother and held her hand as the last quiver of life faded away. I have buried family and friends, standing over cold graves on frozen earth.

My heart has broken many times before and somehow in those dark trials I’ve found new resolve to carry on that I scarcely suspected might hide deep inside of me.

I suspect that many of you have felt this too. We have all experienced loss.

It is this part of our lives that can guide us forward. We can feel into the uncertainty and pain.

We can find ourselves in the most unexpected of places. And we can carry on.

When we do this, we might even discover that the future is better than the past.

That a world that doesn’t hoard money confused for wealth, a world that doesn’t see nature as a body to be raped and spoiled, a world that treats all human beings as worthy of dignity (not just those in our own tribe)… such a world is possible.

Yet it is not inevitable. It must be intentionally built brick by brick.

And that work of building a new world cannot properly begin until we let go of a dying past and move on.

Onward, fellow humans.

Nature is worth a set of equations; (Nov. 17, 2009)

I have been reading speeches and comments of Albert Einstein, a great theoretical physicist in the 20th century.

Einstein is persuaded that mathematics, exclusively, can describe and represent nature’s phenomena; that all nature’s complexities can be comprehend and imagined as the simplest system in concepts and principles.

The fundamental creative principle resides in mathematics.  And formulas have to be the simplest and most beautifully general. Mathematical concepts can be suggested by experience, the unique criteria of utilization of a mathematical construct.

I got into thinking.

I read this dictum when I was graduating in physics and I have been appreciating this recurring philosophy ever since. The basic goal in theoretical physics for over a century was to discover the all encompassing field of energy that can unite the varieties of fields that experiments have been popping up to describing particular phenomena in nature, such as electrical and magnetic fields as well as all these “weak” and “stronger” fields of energy emanating from atoms, protons, and all the varieties of smaller elements.

I got into thinking.

Up until the first quarter of the 20th century most experiments in natural sciences were done by varying one factor at a time; experiments never used more than one independent variable and more than one dependent variable (objective measuring variable or the data).  Even today, most engineers perform these kinds of totally inefficient and worthless experiments: no interactions among variables can be analyzed, the most important and fundamental intelligences in all kinds of sciences. These engineers have simply not been exposed to experimental designs in their required curriculum!

Although the theory of probability was very advanced, the field of practical statistical analysis of data was not yet developed; it was real pain and very time consuming doing all the computations by hand for slightly complex experimental designs.

Sophisticated and specialized statistical packages constructs for different fields of research evolved after the mass number crunchers of computers were invented.

Consequently, early theoretical scientists refrained from complicating their constructs simply because they had to solve their exercises and compute them by hand in order to verify their contentious theories.

Thus, theoretical scientists knew that the experimental scientists could not practically deal with complex mathematical constructs and would refrain from undertaking complex experiments in order to confirm or refute any complex construct.

The trend, paradigm, or philosophy for the theoretical scientists was to promoting the concept that theories should be the simplest with the least numbers of axioms (fundamental principles); they did their best to imagining one general causative factor that affected the behavior of natural phenomena or would be applicable to most natural phenomena.

When Einstein mentioned that equations should be beautiful in their simplicity he had not in mind graphic design; he meant they should be simple for computations.

This is no longer the case.

Nature is complex; no matter how you control and restrict the scope of an  experiment in order to reducing the numbers of manipulated variables to a minimum there are always more than one causative factor that are interrelated and interacting to producing effects.

Currently, physicist and natural scientists can observe many independent variables and several dependent variables and analyze huge number of data points.

Still, nature variables are countable and pretty steady over the experiment. Unlike experiments involving” human subjects” that are in the hundreds and hard and sensitive to control.

Man is far more complex than nature to study his behavior.

Psychologists and sociologists have been using complex experimental designs for decades in order to study man’s behavior and his hundreds of physical and mental characteristics and variability.

All kinds of mathematical constructs were developed to aid “human scientists” perform experiments commensurate in complexity with the subject matter.

The dependent variables had no longer to be objectively measurable and many subjective criteria were adopted.

Certainly, “human scientists” did not have to know the mathematical constructs that the statistical packages were using, just the premises that justified their appropriate use for their particular field.

Anyway, these mathematical models were pretty straightforward and no sophisticated mathematical concepts were used: the human scientists should be able to understand the construct if they desired to go deeper into the program without continuing higher mathematical education.

Nature is complex, though far less complex than human variability.

Theoretical natural scientists should acknowledge that complexity. And studying nature is worth a set of equations!

Simple and beautiful general equations are out the window.  There are no excuses for engineers and natural scientists for not expanding their imagination and focusing their intuition on complex constructs that may account for many causative factors and analyzing simultaneously many variables for their interactions.

There are no excuses that experimental designs are not set up to handle three independent variables (factors) and two dependent variables; the human brain is capable of visualizing the interactions of 9 combinations of variables two at a time. 

Certainly, scientists can throw in as many variables as they need and the powerful computers will crunch the numbers as easily and as quickly as simple designs; the problem is the interpretation part of the reams and reams of results.

Worst, how your audience is to comprehend your study?

A set of coherent series of relatively complex experiments can be designed to answer most complex phenomena and yet be intelligibly interpreted.

It is time to account for all the possible causatives factors, especially those that are rare in probability of occurrence (at the very end tail of probability graphs) or for their imagined little contributing effects: it is those rare events that have surprised man with catastrophic consequences.

If complex human was studied with simple sets of equations THEN nature is also worth sets of equations.

Be bold and make these equations as complex as you want; the computer would not care as long as you understand them for communication sake.

Human Factors in Engineering (Article #29)

“How objective and scientific are research?”

Friend, allow me just a side explanation on experimentation.  Psychologists, sociologists and marketing graduates are trained to apply various experimentation methods and not just cause and effects designs.

There are many statistical packages oriented to provide dimensions and models to the set of data dumped into the experiment, so that a preliminary understanding of the system behavior is comprehended qualitatively.

Every applied science has gone through many qualitative models or schema, using various qualitative methods, before attempting to quantify their models. However, many chairmen of engineering departments, especially those who have no understanding of the discipline of Human Factors or were never exposed to designing experiments, have a conception that this field is mostly qualitative in nature.

They would ask me to concentrate in my courses on the quantitative aspects such as the environmental factors of lighting, noise, heat and any topic that requires computation or has well defined physics equations.

We have 3 concepts in the title: objectivity, scientific and research that are related in people’s mind as connoting the same concept.

However, the opposite meanings for these concepts are hard to come by without philosophical divergences or assumptions.

If we define science as a set of historical paradigms, a set of concepts, truths, facts and methods that most of them keep changing as new technologies and new methodologies enlarge the boundaries of knowledge, then you might be more inclined to discuss notions with a freer mind.

Could subjectivity be accepted as the opposite of objectivity without agreeing on a number of axioms and assumptions that are not tenable in many cases?  Any agreement in the meanings of objectivity in scientific research procedures and results are basically consensual among the professionals in a discipline, for a period, until the advent of a new paradigm that changes the meaning or orientation of the previous consensus among the professionals.

Could opinions, personal experiences, recalled facts or events not be accepted in the domain of research even if they could be found in written documents but not thoroughly investigated by a researcher? 

So what if you refer to an accredited research article and then it turned out that the article was fraught with errors, misleading facts with borderline results and untenable interpretations?  Would the research be thrown in the dust bin as unscientific or non objective and thus not worth further investigations?

Research in Physics, Chemistry and engineering deal with objects and are related to studying the behavior of the physical nature; these kind of research can arrive to well establish mathematical models because the factors are countable, could be well controlled in experimental settings and the variability in errors are connected to the technology of the measuring instruments once the procedure is well defined and established according to experimental standards.

It is when research has to deal with the variability in the human nature such as in psychology, psychometric, sociology, marketing, business management and econometric that the notions of objectivity, research and science become complex and confusing.

The main problem is to boldly discriminate among research and admit that not every research is necessarily scientific or objective and that a research has an intrinsic value if the investigator is candid about the purpose and nature of his research.

We need to admit that every research is subjective in nature because it is the responsibility of the investigator to select his topic, his intentions, his structured theory, references, fund providers, the hypotheses, the design, the methodology, the sample size, the populations, the data collection techniques, the statistical package, emphasis on either error type I or error type II, the interpretation of results and so on.

By admitting prior subjective environment to a research endeavor, we can proffer the qualitative term of objectivity to the research only and only when the investigators provide full rationales to every subjective choices in the research process.

Every step in the research process is a variation on an accepted paradigm at one point in the history of science and the mixing of paradigms with no conscious realization of the mixing process should set a warning alarm on the validity of the research and the many pitfalls it is running through.

Acknowledging the role of subjectivity in the methodology, the data and its interpretation could open the way for more accurate and flexible judgments as to the extent of objectivity and scientific tendencies of the research.

Foundations and history of the monolithic religions (written on May 15, 2008)

Discovering the mysteries of life and the Universe might not be attainable: for the simple reason that any paradigm would not stick long enough to capture the mind of any generation.

This article is intended for those who accept the validity of the hypothesis that

1. earth is billions years old and that a form of mankind emerged over at least more than one million years ago;

2. that human kind was on the verge of extinction several times due to drastic climatic changes and the eruption of monster volcanoes.

Thus, prior civilizations, which may have been as developed as today, could have vanished with no traces left.

We need to accept the fact that if the number of the world population was far less than it should have been at the beginning of the 19th century, from simple mathematical computation in the last 2,000 years, it is because most of our ancestors were the product of incest and not from couples of different families, even after accounting for the casualties of wars, pestilence, famine and climate calamities.

I also would like to state that mythologies were based on real events and the transmitted verbal stories accounted for their longevity:  the verbal communication of these stories extended the imagination and gave the various mythologies the religious power and the dimension that are interpreted nowadays.

When dealing with religions, people feel the need to contrast faith versus facts and logic.

People who have sincere faith must have experienced supernatural revelations or gone through a moment of irrational state of out-of-body exposure.

I believe that faith cannot be acquired by reason or logic and those who repeat frequently the word “truth” in their conversations are not sincere in their belief because truth is plainly, simply and absolutely a subjective attitude and it means “do not bother using facts, science or logic. All those reasoning principles do not mean a thing and would not change my mind”.

Truth is for me the most dangerous term that man has invented:  Truth blocks any consensus or negotiation or meaningful conversation and it connote an extremist disposition based on ignorance and lack of intellectual interactions.  Thus, the concept of truth is practically opposite to faith, although people positively correlate it with faith.

            Logic is a construct, a system of the mind used to expose a coherent hypothesis, hopefully based on some facts, or a story that hold a convincing alternative.  Logic can be used in science, in rhetoric and as well in religion.

Institutionalized religions heavily make use of logic, though they hammer out the concept of faith because its concept is not founded on anything tangible or can be proved rationally.

Religion is basically a theological philosophy that has been manipulated to be grounded in myths, symbols, and secrecy to satisfy the initiated High Priests and generates its power through scare tactics within the psychic of man.

Let me offer a logical story, one of the alternative stories, of the monotheist religions of the Jewish, Christian, and Moslem religions.

The root of these three religions is the religion practiced in the Kingdom of Sumer, in southern Iraq, 6,000 years ago.  This ancient religion believed in a trinity and its mythology stated that out of space creatures, arriving from the tenth dying planet, landed on earth to exploit gold and oil because the environment of their planet required abundant quantities of gold to be pulverized and injected in their outer atmosphere to rejuvenate the deteriorating environment of their planet.

These creatures created human artificially (test tube for example) to serve as cheap and mechanical slaves in the mines.  After many centuries, the created human revolted against their masters and fled from the Eden of the super cruel creatures and had to fend for themselves to survive and develop their intelligence.

            The Kingdom of Sumer and its far developed civilization that discovered the existence of ten planets (there is nine in our solar system so far, and lately this year the tenth planet was discovered) and their rotations; the Sumerians divided the day into 24 hours, the hours into minutes and minutes into seconds.

Ancient mythologies mention that this kingdom was destroyed by a natural calamity (resembling to an atomic explosion used by the outer space creatures). The Sumerian mythology had ramifications into all the neighboring civilizations that came after it when it was weakened.

It is narrated that Abraham left the Kingdom of Sumer with his tribe during a period of famine and carried with him the verbal mythology of the country.

Moses was a High Priest in Egypt and fled persecution because he adhered to the Akhenaton new religion of the one God the Sun and carried with him the ten laws and the secrets of the Egyptian religion.

Jesus was initiated by the Essen sect (indirectly related to Jewish religion), located in upper Galilee by Mount Carmel and had their Great Temple on the Mount.

The members of the Essen sect believed in knowledge and spirituality and shared the resources in common.  It is also narrated that Jesus lived for a time in Sidon teaching in its famous law school.  Mary, his mother and part of her family were from the town of Qana (closer to the main port of Tyr that was the administrative district of Upper Galilee) and lived there when Jesus was a lecturer in the law school.

It is no fluke of an incident that Jesus and Mary attended a wedding in Qana; it is also very rational that Jesus decided to start his message after Qana when his mother removed the cover of secrecy and exposed his supernatural gifts of turning water to wine.

Jesus was a high priest in the Essen sect and preached a message based in symbolism and fables and was highly spiritual and staunchly anti-Pharisee, this Jewish sect that believed that adhering to the Laws was sufficient to be saved.

The Jewish cabala sect is a branch of the Essen sect and is founded on the Sumerian theology and myths.

Albert Schweitzer, a theologian, physician, thinker, organ player and Nobel Peace laureate offered his version on Jesus.  He said, based on the first two testaments of Mathew and Marc, that Jesus preached his message to the general public in the last year before his crucifixion.

Just six months, all in all, Jesus was accompanied with the public and the remaining months he spent them among his close disciple around Caesarea of Philippi.

In the beginning, Jesus accepted the label of a prophet among the prophets but then he reached the belief that he is the Messiah of the Jews.  Thus, he sent his disciples two by two to preach the message of the end of time.  Jesus was very surprised when all his disciples returned safe and sound; he expected his disciples to suffer terribly and be put to death in order for the prophesy to be accomplished.

Jesus then decided that God would accept his sacrifice and save his close disciples from atrocious deaths before the first coming of the Messiah.

The apostles and disciples of Jesus believed that Christ would return to Jerusalem during their life time and thus they stayed in Jerusalem for as long as they could before they were forced to leave that city out of persecution by the Jews.

The Christian-Jews would not relinquish the Jewish Laws and they harassed and even persecuted St. Paul for preaching to the gentiles and establishing Christian communities based on faith in Christ who came to absolve our sins and who was resurrected from death.

St. Paul insisted that without the belief that Christ resurrected there would be  no foundations for Christianity.  That is true because Christianity would be another extremist and salafist Orthodox Jewish sect.

The Council of Nicea in 325 adopted only four out of the hundreds of testaments that were written and accounted for more credible eye-witness testimonies before four testaments were adopted as not apocryphal (teaching of wisdom).

The authors of the four testaments were biased toward the message of their respective gurus.

For example, Marc followed Paul for a while and then he proselytized with Peter and wrote the biography of Peter; Luca stuck with Paul for the longest parts of his trips and the foundations of Christian communities.  The Talmudic Mathew outdid himself forcing the genealogy of Jesus to descend from David.  The educated Jean was of a noble family and wrote his testament when he was already senile at the age of 95; he had acquired the Hellenistic culture and symbolism.

It is unfortunate that Jean had to write the apocalyptic hallucination that is wrecking havoc at the beginning of every millennium.  Apparently, the apocalypse is not from the same Jean the disciple.

The Arab Prophet Mohammad was not illiterate and he was initiated to the Jewish-Christian sect (the Ebionites) located in Mecca with his uncle as Patriarch of the sect.

Mohammad read the Books and listened to the proselytism of the Eastern Christian sects during his caravan commerce to and within Syria.  These Christian sects believed in the monophysism of Jesus (no divine spiritual identity, in contrast to other monophysism sects that believed Jesus was spiritual, for example the Orthodox Church of Byzantium) and were staunchly adhering to the Jewish Laws, the Jewish prophets and their books.

Consequently, the religion of Mohammad during its first 13 years was almost a duplicate of these Christian sects with strong Jewish foundations in their religions.

At that period of his message, Mohammad had decreed that Moslems should face toward Jerusalem for prayer; when Mohammad had to fight the Jewish tribes in Yathreb  he changed the direction for prayer to facing Al Ka3ba (the Black Stone) in Mecca. Mohammad had to flee to Medina after the Kureich tribe decided to terminate him; he then endeavored to establish firmly his community of Moslems in Yathreb (Medina).

The next phase of taking up the civil social responsibilities and politics for maintaining this community forced upon Mohammad to linking the spiritual dogma with the civil laws and regulations. It was while strengthening the community of Islam in Medina that Mohammad had to wage many wars against a few Jewish communities who ended siding with Mohammad’s archenemy the Kureich tribe in Mecca.

Mohammad thus learned to discriminate between the practices of the Jews and the Jewish religion and hundreds of Jews were displaced.

After Mohammad showed clemency twice with Jewish rebellions he finally ordered the beheading of 700 members of the Jewish Khyber tribe.  For some reason, Mohammad selected his nephew and son-in-law Ali to have the honor of the decapitation; it is no wonder that the Jews have an animal hatred for Ali and his followers.

To comprehend the nature of Islam it would be beneficial to collect the revealed verses before relocating to Yathreb or Medina.  Most of the verses generated in Medina were generally rules and laws designed for managing the daily lives of the believers.  You will realize that most of these laws are identical to the desert and Bedouin customs of the Jews before and long after they got established in Palestine.

Personal hypothesis:

The ancestor of all the Gods that were created since antiquity is this scary total Silence before a coming major natural cataclysm.  It is the silence of death when the whole earth is still and the atmosphere suffocating, no breezes of any kinds, that generates in all living creature a terrible reaction of wholesome anger of pure revolt against the sense of death in this universal silence.

It is the silence and quietude before tornadoes, cyclones, sand desert storms and all the kinds of whirling at great magnitude in the atmosphere, the seas, deserts and the bowel of earth in volcanoes. There is no avoiding the silence of coming cataclysms as there is no avoiding death, a correlation that people noticed and prayed for their own God of Total Silence to keep chatting through winds, birds, animals, rains, thunderstorms, shouting, crying and anything that can be heard lest miseries, devastations and evil spirits hovering over the land befall their region.

The same behavior is applied to the starting of wars and their ending. It is no wonder that men shout stupid songs, curse loudly at fictional enemies like if drunk, bang on batteries and metals, light and heavy metals, blow on air instruments and all the hysterical trepidation at the announcement of a major war, an ancient psychic custom within our deepest pre-historic brain to ward off the cataclysm wrapped into maddening songs of patriotism and cursing at the evil enemies.

Indeed, heavy silence is the root of our fundamental fear and dealing with fear should pass through learning to accept silence as a necessary step to investigating our soul.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

September 2020
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Blog Stats

  • 1,418,646 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 770 other followers

%d bloggers like this: