- The authors of this site have spent their lives searching for universals, that is, for common processes in the phenomena at all scales of the natural world as well as the symbolic world of computers and mathematics, and beyond in religion and philosophy that bear the marks of a possible universal. This means we have ignored the boundaries between the Secular and the Sacred exploring both for universals. To us, expression and understanding of universals constitutes our most fundamental “working position.” Taken together, they are our “attitude” or “perspective” on the world. Could these candidate universals be used as a general set of values for designing our systems and for our behaviors? In what way does (or could) moving natural science findings to the value category abuse science, or help it communicate with or integrate with the sacred? [83F/W’13]
- We suggest that features of a candidate universal include: (i) discipline-independent; (ii) domain-independent; (iii) culture-indepenent; (iv) religion-independent; (v) scale-independent; and ???? you supply more. Each of these has to be explored and explained individually. [84F/W’13]
- Focus on the universals seems to us to be the best foundation for a bridge between the secular and the sacred aspects of human existence. It might provide the best return on investment of lifeforce and effort for any conscious being. Why merely suffer the particulars when you can engage the universals that supersede and precede all of the particulars? They must be universal for some reason, by some mechanism, or by some efficiency. Consider that we find these isomorphies by comparing a multitude of real systems to find similarities – some that have existed for billions of years. Each scale of reality arose from different parts, by different mechanisms, at different mass scales, at dramatically different origin times in our universe. Yet they all settled down into the same patterns of systems behaviors. Can’t be a coincidence. [138Sm’14]
- But the alert reader will note that this scenario is decidedly one that arises from putting together and comparing the knowledge bases of all of the natural sciences. How does this bridge the natural and supernatural, the secular and the sacred? Isn’t it favoring the secular? [139Sm’14]
- Our current list of universals may be described as isomorphies (abstract-level processes, patterns, structures, mediators that remain constant across all systems studied. Our current list contains more than 100 such isomorphic universals and comprises a general theory of natural and human systems. We detest overly simplified diagrams of four poles or quadrants or raising one of the isomorphies to contain all the others. We maintain that they are ALL equal and axiomatic and all impact each other. [140Sm’14]
- Except humans have a relatively free will and so their systems often do not follow these tested and proven universals. Also all other natural systems have existed for millions to billions of years and human consciousness is only a couple of hundred thousand years old. Our systems may be too immature to have achieved all of the isomorphs of the others. [141Sm’14]
Recent Comments
- Dcn Jim Allgaier on WORKING POSITIONS
Archives
Categories
- No categories
Meta