Nature

“I cannot remember the books I've read any more than the meals I have eaten; even so, they have made me.”

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

This will be a short article following a conversation I had recently this afternoon.

The whole is not an inexplicable enigma. It is the following complexity which appears enigmatic, but is deeply imbedded in a continuum which surrounds and becomes us.

It is in actuality the genesis of difference and complexity which unsettles smaller continuums which do not originate in the incipient stage of the universe. Consider language and its need for diversification and expansion; this is not because the world has become more complex, but because the point of genesis did not bear an accurate resemblance to the original language. It is hard to be entirely accurate in stating this because the point of origin for language is beyond my own personal cognition. However, it is clear that complexity expands and does not originate in itself. For human cognition to become more complex it simply perceives the diversity that it seeks to explain. And of course our on structure of thoughtand beliefs are bound to be challenged by the environment because they are framed through language which is merely developing as opposely to the already highly refined and highly attuned environment in which we live. More interesting consistencies are the medicines and the vegetation that surrounds us and relies on us for its own subsistence; existiting relationship which are conducive to our own growth.

Mathematics is the abstraction and then simplification of physical continuities which are beyond our direct experience but frame it. All physical and theoretical endeavour point to complexity residing in simplicity and a shared continuum so it is not impossible for us to understand ourselves as deeply indebted to the universe not only for its continuity but because of its diversity and mutability, which is yet again based in a continuum which we may not understand but which is apparent in geometry, mathematics and even in similarities found in human cognition.

Pushing this towards a more tangible area now, it is impossible to introduce our own laws and perpetuate them without damaging the environment which does not thrive on our petty household rules, as Alexander Herzen pronounces. Diversity in species and mutability in climate is conducive to change and subsistence, and to homogenise anything, whether economics, housing, ecology (consider genetic engineering and monoculture farming). The answer is not to be found in creating sense, but, rather finding it already in existence and actualised through a very consistent genesis. So what is at issue here? Only all of humanity's problems. And what is at stake? Humanity's subsistence on a finite but infinitely varied ecosystem. The variations are what count. Ask Charlie Darwin.

We can either perceive the species' unconscious destruction of itself as a senseless event or we can try to perceive the consistent aspects of it; innovation usually accompanies this destructive act, and the aftermath usually means several years of repression followed by spontenous growth and liberty; the appreciation of difference and the higher regard staked in variation and specialisation. Perhaps this bears similarity to the conflict being acted out between humanity and its environment at this very moment; difference and variation are not appreciated; even the transient, unsettled nature of other species and plants, and our incomprehension of a non-individualised array of species is the point of friction. People do not comprehend that only a working relationship with environment and a less Homo Sapien-central attitude towards life and environment if what leads to continuity and even breakthrough. Most  innovation occurs because of friction with linear approaches; it is breaking out of set structures and patterns in which we find answers and solutions.

On the subject of humanity, I feel obliged to state the obvious: that the structuring of life is an illusion, or at least the sort of structure which we fruitlessly seek to perpetuate. These include: private housing, homogenous careers, national boundaries, centralised government, anonymous medical and security services, the ownership of raw materials (what a loathsome and Anthropocentric vision; also incredibly destructive). The tip of the iceberg might be the education system which seeks to homogenize and level out a varied approach to areas of study. This is particularly incompatible with reality because everyone learns differently and the genesis of their thought can be based upon slow relase with broad outlook or quick release with specific outlook. The pattern is familiar to the reader I hope.

Anyway, the limitations of representation and the incomprehension of where creative or constructive thought begins is most likely due to the perpetuation of one language without allowing variation, and the restricted time frame, climate and structure of education. This stymies growth irreparably if there is not a looser curriculum and the less linear structure. The connection with environment and the recognition of similarity and dependence is a pivotal factor and is not one that will either confuse or break movement in children.

Housing is absolutely to be factored in. Careers, housing, education. These are not formal arrangements but arrangements which have been provided for by the surrounding environment: our career is life and the upkeep and understanding therof; our house is the earth and it is made more amenable and compatible with sustainability by a working relationship with other people and environment; our education should be pragmatic with an element of guidance, and if the logistic are problematic then we sure need more teachers or perhaps parents require more time. But this is another question, perhaps of a political sort.

The word I woud find suitable to conclude: recognition.


Post-script: spelling will be irrelevant in the next few entires though I recognise that I might have actually invented one or two words in this short article.