Nature does not discriminate

This knol is 2nd part of the "Pure rationalism is destined to failure"

I guess, almost all know something about Dinosaurs, some know about Trilobites and few know about Archaeopteris trees. These were majestic and hegemonic organisms of their environments and  have left impressive imprints of their existence in the rocks records but went extinct. There could be disagreements on the causes of their extinction but no one can disagree that, they no more exist. Nature has laws and do not discriminate no matter how majestic, beautiful and great is a creature. When organs worn out, Nature has one solution for all and that is death either they are great Scientist like Einstein, Newton or Geber (Jabir ibn Hayyan) , great Philosophers like Socrates, Plato or Mulla Sadra, great Kings like Cyrus, Alexander or Genghis Khan, great Prophets like Abraham (P.B.U.H), Moses (P.B.U.H) or Muhammad (P.B.U.H) or just an ordinary person. My purpose, from bringing the names of the few extinct  organisms and the names of  few historical figures are to stress that yes, men and man-made systems have impacted greatly on their environments but so are the creature before them and at the end, it is the nature that decides, which one has to continue and which one has to go into fossil records. 

"Nothing in Biology makes sense except in the light of Evolution",  Theodosius Dobzhansky... I agree with Dobzhansky except that, the traditional definitions of the evolution by Darwin and Modern evolutionary synthesis are reductionist and give a sense that evolution is an alien system (Natural Selections keep house in order) that does not follow general laws . So, we need an extensional definition to make them compatible with other systems. In the the introduction of his book,'Terrestrial Paleoecology and Global Change'1, Krassilove writes, 

"Evolution of functional systems is governed by general system laws, which, for closed systems, are the classical thermodynamic laws. Closed systems evolve in the direction of a maximal entropy production. Conversely, an open system minimizes its entropy production by drawing matter and energy from external sources and by exporting wastes. Each open system thus affects the neighboring systems and is in turn affected by them. Any talk of biotic evolution going on independently of any environmental change is therefore meaningless."

As a rational creature, all human systems have their rationales but it appears that almost all of them have a common fate. Initially, when they arise, they are open systems and hence revolutionary to previous closed systems but once they grow to become dominant, they slowly grow xenophobic and turn into closed systems. If we look to the movements that began among weak and ordinary people and spread so rapidly  due to their revolutionary appeals that, we can confidently categorize them as punctuated equilibrium  in universal  human culture. I count Christianity, Islam, Mongolian campaigns and Western modernity in this category. It would be a repetition but again just to clear my point; when Christianity appeared, it was revolutionary to both earlier religious systems and to secular Roman empire. Because it was a liberating force to masses, it spread so fast that Roman emperors could not ignore it and adapted it to embed into power structure of Roman empire. Ruling classes have their own mechanisms; they need identity more than  revolutionary forces. Islam was also appeared as a revolutionary movement with promises of equality to oppressed masses and it spread so rapidly that almost ran over Persian and Byzantine empires. Soon the caliphates adapted the power structures of Persian and Byzantine empires and identity replaced the teachings.  Although, Mongols came out as a secular force just to conquer other nations but their openness  and eagerness to learn and respect for learning was in itself a revolutionary attitude that broke the chains of identities for a while and let the learning of Middle East, Central Asia, Far East and West interact with each other. South Asia, Central Asia and Europe were the beneficiaries of these conquests. As the Mongols didn't have a cultural movements of their own, these fusion couldn't evolve further. The Scientific and cultural movements of the modern West was however, the first revolutionary movement that were based on public participation and it really swept across the cultures. It is an open system and hence have a liberating appeal to masses. Again, there is no exception to natural laws as it is evident from the fate of communism. Communism was part of modern western scientific and cultural movement. It rose as a popular movement with a revolutionary ideology but it also couldn't survive once it reduced to a confrontational and reactionary force. Currently, libertarianism is the only force that still have public appeal and spreading but the economic meltdown of US and Europe and hegemonic attitudes are revealing some big cracks in it. These cracks are serious because once people lose hope in a system and they do not have alternatives, they turn into their roots and create their own version of fascist movements. I think, it is better that I define, what I mean by fascism to reduce the risk of confusion. I recognize a fascist movement by its three basic characteristics; xenophobia, fundamentalism and supremacist appeals. I think, there can't be clash of civilizations without spread of fascism. Unfortunately, due to poverty, ill education systems and failure to catch with rest of world, Islamic world was hopeless and Salafism as a religious fascist movement are spreading fast to turn most of Muslim countries into hell. Nationalistic fascism is also growing and I don't see these fires will soon extinguish without widespread destruction. I hope and pray that my judgments prove to be wrong, but all indicators appear to me, pointing to not a  promising future.

Again, it is quite rational to have a strong identity but it is equally rational to have respect for identity of others. It is only open systems that are able to take energy from outside, grow and take waste out of system. When the doors are shut and a system becomes a closed one, it die out in its poisonous accumulating wastes. Evolution is always at work and closed systems that lose the evolvability go extinct and nature does not discriminate. 

End of Part 2

Reference,

1. Krassilov, V.A, 2003. Terrestrial Paleoecology. 1st ed. Sofia, Moscow: pensoft publishers. p. xiii.

Pure Rationalism is destined to failure

If you learn that, something will kill your confidence in yourself, what would be your reaction to it? The reason, that I am asking this question is to question what we usually do not question; The Logic. While logic has been the cornerstone of the human understanding and the progress of Sciences but the fundamental flaw in it have turned many of human successes into historical failures. I will give examples to support my argument but first let me illustrate the fundamental flaw in logic;

- Logic basically talks about "relationship" of things based on their properties not "nature" of things... (A)

- Causes and effects are endless chains that limit predictability.... (B)

- Cause and effects are non-linear on long run.... (C)

- Competing rationalities are deleterious.... (D)

Why these assumptions are fundamental flaws in logic?

Before, I go into details, I like to define "Failure" first, so it becomes clear, what I mean by failure and why pure rationalism is destined to failure.

"Anything that promises certain outcomes/results or certain goals to be accomplished and it fails to achieve those goals, it is simply failure. Yes, there are a lot of rooms for rationalizing the failures by excuses but excuses do not improve anything. One of the frequently used excuse is a "future promise (s)".

Some may argue that, by this measure everything is destined to failure as nothing is perfect and everything grows. Yes, that is a totally different thing and definition and that is not something "purely rational". Constant growth and leaning from failures are something organic not rational.

Let me explain it by an example from population growth;

Everyone knows that the resources are limited and the populations are growing exponentially. So, it is a common sense's logic that population growth is not sustainable forever. It is going to reach its limits. So what logic asks for? Population control, right?

Population control has now a history to see the results in some countries like China. The gender disparity (preference of male over female child) has outbalanced the population with increasing ratio of male to female population. The ratio of young have reduced to old people and even in countries with no population control but simply better life expectancy the uneven aging (population of old people are growing and young people are reducing)  and it is becoming a bigger issue in areas that fail to maintain economic attraction for young population and young population are migrating to cosmopolitan cities. The uneven aging are putting more pressure on younger generation. There is no need to detail the social and economic outcome of this as everybody knows, what it means.

Winner in Egypt

Winner in Saudi Arabia

Just for contrast; Egypt wasn't resourceful so the dictator had to step down and the Saudi Arabia was resourceful and she killed "Arab Spring" in the bud.

On other hand, countries that have not controlled the population, the outburst of young population with not as much job opportunities have become politically and economically unstable. The "Arab Spring" and the spread of instability in the Middle East are an illustration of outcome of unbalanced population.

Now,

We know, three dominant systems that revolves around distinct entities; Libertarianism around Man (individual), Socialism around State and Religion around God. The rest are either offshoots of these or composite of them. If one reads their literature and listens and watches their scholars, each of these three systems speak of rationalism and logic and promises humans certain things. Have they been successful to accomplish their promises? None of these three systems have been successful to accomplish any of their promises and their promises are still for future.

Socialism came as the most rational system with sound philosophical and historical reasoning (historical dialectic) and promised classless societies. Although, I don't believe in its fundamentals but I have respect for this system because right in times when communism movements were strong and spreading, Marxist intellectuals and philosophers accepted its failures and started to revise its fundamentals. The Frankfurt school is well known Philosophical movement. Both China and Russia have revised their systems. Although, they haven't found an alternative but they didn't insist on the absolutism of their systems. This is an attitude of growth.

Religions in general promises brotherhood, equality of humans and paradise in return for good deeds. Ironically, the more religious a place or a country is, the deeper are the hatred, prejudices and discrimination of all kinds and all these are justified by name of God. When passengers, laborers and students are killed because they were infidel to God, shrines are destroyed because they are signs of infidelity, historical statues are bombed because they challenge the status of God then no doubt, everybody understands, what they mean when they shout "God is the greatest". All those stories of brotherhood, equality and justice appear no more than fairy tales as everyday we watch on our screens slaughtering of people, hate speeches, insults and offensive attacks on each other beliefs and determinations to cleanse the earth of infidels. The absence of brotherhood and equality are clear failure of religion but I know, it doesn't makes difference as there is no room for thinking and there are endless excuses and justifications.

Libertarianism, although relatively more humane but still have failed. It has failed because it assumes that all individuals have equal capabilities and out-competing others are fair enough.  The results are amassing of excessive wealth, political power, control on information (main stream media) and privacy of people in the hands of top competitors that are small percentage of society. These have hindered effectively the economic mobility, health, education and active participation of majority. The excessive amassing of wealth and political power have been used more for destructive purposes than constructive purposes (The World is over-armed and peace is underfunded.. Ban Ki-Moon) and this have affected millions of civilians across the globe who don't care about politics at all and their lives revolve around their ordinary joys. The increasing limitation of freedoms and powerlessness of billions of people over their fates are nothing but the failure of this system.

Each of this systems are assumed to be based on some fundamental truths and ask for submission to them. When one submits, he/she put his/her confidence to the thing he/she has submitted and he/she no more speaks for himself/herself but rather rationalizes and provides explanations for what he/she has submitted to.

End of Part I 

They do not mince their words

If it is true that, higher rate of saying words per second increase the Freudian slip (Parapraxis/ slip of the tongue)   then we should expect more Freudian slips from dwellers of larger cities compared to small towns and villages as people of larger cities tend to speak faster than relaxed and sit back towns, where people enjoy detailed chats. I don't have any statistics to either confirm or reject it  but one thing, I can tell with confidence and that is, the drivers in the crowded cities curse more frequently than drivers of less crowded towns. Unlike, the rest of society where it is emphasized to think before saying anything (means to keep a constant check on unconscious mind) drivers in large do not mince their words. Perhaps one of the reasons is that, they meet people of different attitudes on daily basis, deal and talk to them and it makes them more open but opinionated.

If you let water to flow freely or round objects to roll freely, they rest in the lowest area. That is the nature of gravity. The nature of conceptions and beliefs are 180 degree in the opposite. Humans in general tend to have the highest of the concepts/worldviews/beliefs, that is packed in a single word; Truth. Very BIG events, very radical set of concepts and practices that challenge the very basic fundamentals of the world views/beliefs  that have been perceived as truth come as shocks. If you are conditioned by your situations to experience it again and again like drivers do, you will become more open but very opinionated. I call this phenomenon as "driver's condition". Two popular philosophers of the previous century, Ayn Rand and Jean Paul Sartre gave the world very rebellious philosophies after their experiences of their "driver's condition". Frankly, they are driver's condition philosophers. Ayn Rand was born in Russia, had witnessed the Bolshevik Revolution and bitter outcomes of it in the form of confiscation of her father's pharmacy by communists and near starvation periods. Writers have sensitive souls and if they discover the tendency to write very early, that is the indication of the super-sensitive souls. Ayn Rand is said to have decided to become a novelist at age 9. Bolshevik Revolution was her "driver condition" and it made her to become an extreme individualist  thinker and develop her philosophy of "Objectivism" that, if put in one phrase is best expressed as, "Man is an end in itself".

Jean Paul Sartre was born almost at the same time as Ayn Rand but things went smooth for him and he got opportunity to study philosophy at Germany besides his own country, France. His early works were mostly on psychological topics like emotions and imaginations. The bitter experiences of Second World War in general and occupation of his country, France by Nazi Germany particularly became his "driver's condition" with a big change in his thinking. He became obsessed with freedom and wanted to let men free from all kinds of social constructs and that is basically what "Existentialism"; it rejects all sorts of determinism (Existence precedes essence). Freedom and taking responsibility for one's own fate was his core idea, "As far as men go, it is not what they are that interests me, but what they can become".

In the current century, confidence on both religious and secular values are deeply shaken. It is shaken because the world have been witnessing again and again, the violations of the very basic Human Rights by secular forces and the violations of the basic Islamic principles by Jihaddists and Salafists. What have become a trend is "winning at all costs" and as it is known popularly ;  "values" are the first victims of war. This is definitely a driver's condition for any thinking mind, that has the ability of thinking and have the courage of expressing them in a coherent manner. It is possible that a Rand might escape from heart of Salafism or Sartre escape from prison of occupation to voice for "neo-objectivism" and "neo-existentialism"...

Non-Aligned Movement; A perspective

History and philosophy go hand in hand, and the most current proof is the claims and counter claims,  expressions of confidences and frustrations  over Non-Aligned Movement conference in Tehran. With the come back of cold war scenario (Cold War 2.0), the Non-Aligned Movement's philosophy became relevant again and in a sense became revitalized. This event also supports the belief of the people who believe that "history repeats itself". Anyone with a philosophical tendency can't ignore important historical events. Almost all analysts accept that, the current NAM conference is a historical event. It is historical not just because it is happening in a time that, the fate of the "Arab Spring" has become evident OR it is the high time for Iran-West tension OR the Security Council of UN is divided and have been stalled over Syrian civil war but instead, because it is a movement of nations following a philosophy; dividing the world into blocks are dangerous to world peace with highest costs for smaller nations.

Founding Fathers of Non-Aligned Movement

While some call the Non-Aligned Movement as a "sac of potatoes" and it might have some truth in it as the movement have not been able to take some solid steps but in fact, their inactivity have done much good to the world than their actions would have done. Simply, the voicing of 2/3rd of world's nations against the politics of "us versus them" and their passive roles in the world affairs had stopped the prolongation of cold war 1.0 and possibility of large scale escalations. Now, that the world is apparently moving towards neo-polarization (this time, it is going to be multi-polarized), the strong come back of Non-Alignment Movement is a source of hope and hopefully, it would slow the cold war 2.0 and the save the world from repetition of WWI and WWII scenario.

Ever since, I became familiar with Allama Muhammad Iqbal's poetry (The ideological father of Pakistan), this line from his poetry made me really puzzled, Translation; "If only Tehran could take the place of Geneva for the Oriental world; Then hopefully the fortune of this good earth might turn for the better". Whenever I hear it or read it, it only refreshes my puzzlement. Why Iqbal did say that? What is special about Tehran, especially that, at the time Iqbal wrote these lines, Tehran was not in good shape and there were struggles between traditionalists and modernists with no clear direction for the nation? The only explanation, that I can give is that, Iranians are most civilized, resilient and self-aware nation in the Muslims world and Iqbal was well aware of the impact that Iran had on Islamic civilizations. Muslims had conquered both Persian and Byzantine empires almost in same time but the Iranian imprints can be seen on every aspects of Islamic civilizations. Now that, Tehran has taken the leadership of NAM, the hope is that she behaves more responsibly and helps reducing the tensions that surrounds her. Iqbal was a visionary philosopher with a deep knowledge of history, so lets hope that the revitalized NAM and Tehran with a new role help in not letting Cold War 2.0 grow into a big disaster. 

Eid and Movies

Tomorrow morning, I am not expecting to see wrinkled finger tips and tonight, I am going to sleep well without waking up several times during the night to check the time. That is a big change in the tradition. The night before Eid was used to be a restless night. Our fists were wrapped up in a piece of cloth while holding henna paste. It was really hard to wait till morning to wash our hands and see the richness of colors, compare it with others and see ourselves totally anew in our new dresses, shoes and haircut and ready to go for collecting our Eidi. Nobody talks about it anymore as if there weren't a time like that. The crowd of tidy boys and girls were going up and down and the first place to check out was the "circus" to ride a camel, a donkey cart, a  pickup car, enjoy a wave swinger with wooden horses, egg tapping, shooting air guns at balloons, eat something from food carts, to buy plastic toys there or if totally run out of money then you could just walk to cantonment area that was well maintained and had some small road side parks. But most important thing was to back at home at 1 pm  or 3 pm for movie. For three consecutive days, there were Pakistani movie shows on each day of Eid at noon. That was not something to miss at all (At least for me). But then, there came a change in me. By time, I was big enough to ride a bicycle, I started to go and watch movies on big screen at Eid days however, there was a big danger and it was to be discovered by others. It was definitely a punishable crime and what is a bigger punishment than falling from grace. It was really hard to sneak out and go to watch a movie and someone does not see you. One day, someone living a few street down of our house saw us and for a few days, I had really uneasy days fearing that he might inform my father but thankfully nothing happened :)

How could I miss egg tapping on Eid? I boiled to color them for Eid :)

Here Eid comes again, and I can have all those movies and games on my screen within minutes but it doesn't match at all with the excitements of those three movies, that we were watching on Eid days. I am ready to trade my whole week for one of those days.

Even in normal days, the TV transmission was ending by 12 pm  . The national anthem at 12 pm was the last  thing to watch on TV. One of my favorite TV series was "Combat" that was starting at 11 pm and ending at 12 pm. That was really late at those days. One of our guests, once commented, "You guys watch TV till the national anthem". That was really offensive but was true for "combat" nights.

Amid the sad news of on going killings, on this Eid, I just wanted to have a break from usual topics, so I dedicated this page to the time, when Quetta was peaceful and elegantly simple. Wish you all a very happy Eid :)

A short supplementary note;

                            Media saturation and sometimes super-saturation takes a toll on human imagination and human psyche. The abundance of the energetic food spread obesity and associated mishaps as human biology was slow to catch up with human discoveries and inventions. It is still too early to tell that, whether human psyche is going to catch up with the rate at which media saturation and super-saturation happening or it will also cause a problem similar to obesity and associated mishaps. Most of theories on the evolution of human psyche come from distant and selective environments of past (from pre-historic hunters-gatherers social groups) that weren't connected well. Here comes a modern phenomenon that is directly observable and posing practical challenges to human's psyche. I think, most the studies are focused on hard science of the brain instead of observing directly the adaptations of the human psyche to rapid saturation of media  that are creating new cultural environments by rapid development of the technology. Just in my life time, I have seen a rapid shift from Radio to TV and to internet, with each had created its own specific cultural environments.