Hello MoQ Focus
As the new topic is the follower of the old one
and my participation was passive exclusively, my
situation could be called a information
disadvantage. An accident forced me to keep my
legs at rest, so I tried to compensate my desire
for motion in space (sports-5h/week) by a motion
in mind (Its motion anyway!). What followed, was a
period of maniac reading of hundreds and hundres
of pages all over of quite a number of
disciplines( mainly psychological stuff),
including the rereading of ZAMM (the english
version) and partly Thoreaus Walden. It's a pity,
but I see myself unable to catch up with reading
(thoroughly) the rest of Sept.s contribution plus
the new ones. So I beg your pardon if I should
repeat anyones ideas in the following.
One idea, that vaguely appeared in the past,
became a clearer shape in the last weeks. In the
world of physics there exists a thing called the
'uncertainty principle'. It states, that we can
never measure the position AND the velocity of an
electron by means of light (which makes things
visible to us). Basically that is because of the
particle charakter of the light (light is both
particle and wave). Measuring a particles velocity
by shooting other particles against it looks a bit
odd, isn't it? It is like the police controlling
speed by crashing police cars in your car. It
takes not an too great effort to imagine, that the
object of measurement (your car) is very much
influenced by the medium of measurement (the
police car) and that the position and the velocity
of the object of measurement isn't still the same
after the measurement. Of course I simplified the
casual dependencys for my own purpose, I must
admit (I didn't say anything about the wave
charakter of light and this makes things a bit
more complicated) Stephen Hawking-A brief History
of time-chapt: The Uncertainty Principle. The
basically pattern, that becomes evident here seems
to me that: once the observer/means of observation
is almost of the same qualities as the object of
observation, the statement of what the object does
in that very moment is uncertain. Transferring
this pattern to psychological science, it can be
stated (really?) that as far as object of
observation and subject of observation (the
observer) are very much apart ( a human being
observes an inorganic being (perhaps a stone)) his
conclusions might be quite accurate, because the
interactions of a stone is neglectible compared
with interactions of a human being. Nobody would
doubt this I suppose, but if we apply this
hypothesis to the obsevation of a human being
through a human being (a
just-above-the-average-gifted psychologist
observes a highly gifted convict in a prison, in
effort to find out wether he is resocialised or
something like that -- Who observes whom? :-) ).
I call this the Psychological Uncertainty
Principle.This is very near to pirsigs critisim of
the SOM: Here are you and there is the motorcycle,
separated from you in time and space for eternity.
In consequence of that I see a great, a very great
methodically problem in this month topic. If there
is a level above the intellectual level, of which
man is the only carrier ( I believe, correct me
if I'm wrong), what is it, that is carrying out
the fifth level? My only guess in the moment, it
is the giant, this meta-structure of our national
societys, of which Pirsig is talking about in lila
(chapt 17). Well I say ' I guess...', not only
because I'm really uncertain, meaning: I have no
idea in the moment, but also apply the
Psychological Uncertainty Principle to the
development from the intellectual level to the
next one, the fifth one. If there exist a fifth
level, can man be able to recognize it? Only some
of us? People like William James Sidis (who has
really be called the next step of evolution)? The
'Übermensch',(superman) Nietzsche is talking about
in his Zarahustra? Bad, very bad reminiscences for
me as german I might say (Although Nietzsches
'Übermensch' had less to do with, what Hitler did
about that!)
IMO mans todays scientific achievements equals
his biological limit (roughly- there will be
developement, of course, but more in the sense of
gradual developement). Basically not much more
will happen, I believe. We would not be human
beings, if not wanting more,the program, that
makes us wanting things keep going on and on and
on.......We want more!!!
Maybe it is already there (The matrix), how could
we feel its existence? Although I could go on like
this for long, I leave it to you to wipe it out
the 'Psychological Uncertainty Principle'. I
suggest, we should get this clear, BEFORE talking
about the fith level. Come on!
So long, JoVo
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:36 BST