Skip to content

Thesis on Sanity

May 27, 2013

Life is dead matter plus some vitalising principle

Man is an animal plus something

There is a practical side of all of the seemingly awkward and dysfunctional social organisation where thought bubbles invade reality and so we really need to start considering what it means to be sane. This is not an imposition by someone with “qualifications” but in fact an emerging process of negotiation and consensus that all people need to start thinking about and come to an agreement with each other. So far I have not seen this happen in any rational manner. People are talking AT each other instead of WITH each other, imposing their particular thought bubbles, and completely taking for granted what they think as being a common reality.

Thesis on Sanity

Life is dead matter plus some vitalising principle

Man is an animal plus something

There is a practical side of all of the seemingly awkward and dysfunctional social organisation where thought bubbles invade reality and so we really need to start considering what it means to be sane. This is not an imposition by someone with “qualifications” but in fact an emerging process of negotiation and consensus that all people need to start thinking about and come to an agreement with each other. So far I have not seen this happen in any rational manner. People are talking AT each other instead of WITH each other, imposing their particular thought bubbles, and completely taking for granted what they think as being a common reality.

My first point has to be with an individual’s understanding of what it means to be sane and then to step back and look at the consequences of that “sanity”. To look closely at all aspects of our current paradigm and it’s dysfunction,  the reality distortions, we can indeed come to the conclusion that there is no sanity there yet. Our uncivilised world needs a dose of sanity to become civilised.

So l shall look at the mechanisms of thought operation. When using terms like “mind” and “consciousness”, these are terms that (as yet) have not been adequately defined. So until that happens, we need (in order to communicate and find a consensus of understanding) to make sure all terms are defined and also make sure all are clear in their minds of a common understanding. Since all individual essences are uniquely different, this is something we cannot take for granted. Beings in competition see difference as a threat, whereas beings in cooperation should see difference as an asset.

So as far as we know, the human brain is the tool for thought and it is a chemical process. A human brain has 100 billion neurones, and each neurone can make between a thousand to ten thousand contacts with other neurones. Therefore, it has been calculated that the number of combinations of brain activity possibly exceeds the number of elementary particles in the universe. Another way of looking at this is to say that each human brain has the capacity of the entire universe; it is truly vast in its potential and the more we discover regarding its function the more fascinating it becomes.

These mind mechanics need to be understood. Human nature can best be described, perhaps, as a complex set of semantic reactions which can be ‘changed’ to a large extent. There needs to be a preventative psycho-physiological method of training the semantic reactions, because human life is becoming wrecked through the lack of a working structural education theory concerned with these reactions. The first thing that needs to happen is for humans to be aware of their abstractions. When non specific language is used, people can be offering instruction to each other, however not really communicating, because there is ambiguity or no information that the receiver can relate to.

Here is description of Five levels of sensory input and the transfer of abstractions.

1. The unspeakable event – the scientific object, including all the unseen biochemical activity on the subatomic level, that constitutes the stimuli that we recognise as the object

2. Also unspeakable of what our eyes see

3. The also unspeakable pictures created in the brain

4. The verbal description given to the facts (as we interpret them, according to our level of perceptions in that moment)

5. The inferences generated

It must be noted that everything outside of our brain, including the body and the brain itself, is in a constant state of change and variation, this is why things need to be recognised as events. They are emergent and different in every moment. The abstractions that come into the brain become permanent stores of information that are also emergent depending on how someone uses their brain. An organised brain wiil operate differently than a spontaneous one. The ideal observer will observe all forms of human behaviour at a given date, without leaving out facts, not confusing orders of abstractions, not confusing descriptions with inferences, and allows the arrival at the high order of abstraction without distortion. This describes a more structured thought process which hopefully encourages a more productive semantic evaluation and action.

There is a natural survival order in the understanding of the layers of structure. An event is observed and then identified as an object. This object is then given a label so all can relate to it, and understand what it means. Information is then gathered as a description, which will depend on the amount of attention given to it. The process of transforming an object into something useful to humans will then be evaluated by attaching inferences which is the human’s unique ability to create abstracts of thought. Lower order abstractions come from the lower centres of the brain and are unspeakable. They are ‘dynamic’, ‘continuous’, non-permanent, shifting, and unreliable. Once words are put onto them they have already gone to the higher centres. Animals deal with reality as it is i.e. they just react to it, and primitive humans identify with that reality. When they do that they can easily become morbid identifications delusional, illusions, and hallucinations. The best operation is to be silent both outwardly and inwardly. The higher order abstractions are of the high order nerve centres and are permanent and so can be studied.

There has been devised a process of language to bring us into the modern world where the abstracts of thought can be directed toward the the practical application of a functional society free form the distortions created by primitive minds which had not learned the advantages of sanity. An example of this primitive mindset is the entire system of law itself. Laws were devised as a solution to the symptoms of problems. The animal way of thinking prevented humans from understanding the causes of the symptoms, as the humans were simply reacting to the symptoms and not attempting to ever find the causes, or to even identify the problem itself. If someone was violent they just reacted and punished the perpetrator. No one would ask the questions: Why is it happening? What is causing the behaviour? Generally a cycle of violence has a priority chain where the stronger attack the weaker. This is also a demonstration of animal behaviour.

So lets look at the violence. All violence is un-sane behaviour. All anti social behaviour is an product of an un-sane mind, and as such one of an individual who has not learned how to think. Similarly the term “Lazy” represents an illegitimate representation of high orders based on ignorance. Laziness represents a symptom of physio-biochemical, colloidal, or semantic disturbances. In all these sorts of disturbances people are unaware of their ability to form abstractions of thought and (in fact) think that all thought is real. Abstractions of thought are useful when a problem is conceptualised and processes of imagination are mixed with experience and knowledge to come to a solution which finishes the symptoms of the problem. Those symptoms may or may not be detrimental, and this is also a job for the higher cortex and it’s ability to form abstractions so that proper evaluation can take place. The un-sane behaviour which manifest as violence is a pathological condition and so can be fixed. The present un-sane paradigm is to punish this behaviour, a bit like trying to put a fire out with petrol. In today’s structurally unsound world, treating the person may be just treating a symptom.

Human psycho-logics projected on to animals can be then transferred onto humans and then they can assume that animals behaviour is normal for a human. This anthropomorphising by humans is detrimental to human sanity.  When humans behave like animals any process involving a human version of sanity cannot take place. Here I can make a reference to humans (monkeys with a language) just reacting to problems and never ever attempting to fix them. The common evidence of this is having to listen to people complain. The animals just do not have a higher cortex. The upper cortex gives the human the ability to maintain abstractions of thought indefinitely, i.e. live in complete fantasy. The animal cannot make anything up. The animal cannot intellectualise anything, it is merely reacting to stimuli. Some animals can abstract to a limited degree, however absolutely not for indefinite periods, as do humans. The animals simply react to each situation as it presents itself and cannot evaluate it or change it. The animal either survives or it doesn’t. The world of language demonstrates our ability to maintain abstractions of thought indefinitely. It then becomes detrimental when it is not connected with correct interpretations, and humans display psychotic and pathological behaviour as a result.

An example of the abstractions of thought and the confusing of inferences for descriptions can be seen in the dysfunction of the fiscal system. The fiscal system is suppose to represent the doing by humans, however this is so obscure and distorted by the abstraction of value, that the fiscal system no longer serves the life system. This is an example of un-sanity where actions do not support survival itself. People consider themselves as being slaves, and yet not many understand the complete process of the “doing” of anything. They do not understand the difference between doing what they enjoy, or enjoy what they are doing. They make value judgements and so create suffering, unable to tell the difference between being a slave and being motivated to do something that they love doing. These distortions are all imposed by the ultimate abstraction of thought, and that is “consumerism”. What a distortion, to turn the necessities of life into commodities, leaving some “invisible hand” in charge. This distorts something that is a simple technical challenge into something that does not (and can not) happen at all.

The next thing that can happen with humans is behaving like an infant. An infant, be it primitive or modern, begins its life with semantic reactions of identity and confusion of orders of abstractions, natural to his age, yet false in principle, and structurally false to facts. At this stage of life they are humans who have not learned how to be sane. The child is completely at the mercy of the parents, teachers and their, semantics, structure of language, doctrines, knowledge, understandings, attitudes and metaphysics. The level of human development takes several stages the first (9 months to 7 years) is auto erotic (becoming familiar with the physical self) the second (7 years to 14 years) is narcissistic (finding out what can be done with what they have and loving it), the third (14 years onwards) is social (discovering empathy). With our structurally violent system it is quite common for humans to retreat into the infantilism of the first two stages, after reaching puberty and having to experience so many distortions of sanity imposed, with no proper evaluation, within a totally dysfunctional society.

The primitive language that we have inherited from our ancestors, means that we have names for terms that we give objective values, when they are not separable. Below is a short summery of the first 6 principles that form a new language, of which there is an extensive list of corrections to the old primitive mode of thinking.

Old Aristotelian Orientations (350 b.c.)

1. Subject-Predicate methods

2. Symmetrical relations, (inadequate for proper evaluation – the world is asymmetrical)

3. Static ‘objective’, ‘permanent’ ‘substance’, ‘solid matter’, etc. orientations

4. ‘Properties’ of ‘substance’, ‘attributes’, ‘qualities’ of ‘matter’ etc.

5. Two-valued, ‘either-or’, inflexible dogmatic orientations

6, Static, finalistic ‘allness’; finite number of characteristics attitudes

New General Semantic Non-Aristotelian Orientations (1941 a.c.)

1. Relational methods

2. Asymmetrical relations, indispensable for proper evaluations

3. Dynamic, ever-changing, etc, electronic process orientations

4. Relative invariance of function, dynamic structure, etc.

5. Infinite- valued flexibility, degree orientations

6. Dynamic non-allness; infinite number of characteristics attitudes

We have objective terms for things that are not separable.

Matter – Space – Time

The old language of “space”, “matter” and “time” comes violently in conflict with the facts. This is because the structure of the old language is different than the structure of life itself. In all our experience, and all we know indicate definitely that ordinary materials, “objects” are extremely rare and very complex special cases of the beknottedness of the plenum. here is no “matter”, there is only plenum. Plenum is things of more density inside things of less density, i.e. there is no “glass half full”, it is always full. Space is not something that can be measured and so has no functional context. The only way we can prove something is to measure it. This why abstracts of thought cannot provide proof. Things can only be proven with mathematics. So space can be best expressed as “spread”. Time in any one moment is gone before we can detect it, so time cannot exist in the flow of moments moving into the next moment. We can only have “times”, that is, a measurement from one “time” to another “time”.

This demonstrates why the primitive A-system of language, which did not allow asymmetrical relations, proper evaluation, adjustment, and thus sanity in general was in principle, impossible. We need to embrace the Non-A system of language. The organic world and “life” represent extremely rare and still more complex cases of the material world. The “so called” intelligent life then represents increasingly complex and still rarer cases of life.

When we identify the members of this series, we disregard the asymmetrical character of this series, and transform it into a fictitious, or delusional, or false to facts relationship of identity. Newton thought that there were objects within “absolute” nothing. This has been recognised as nonsense. Body – Soul – Mind is an example of creating substance from a word where there is none. Rather than speak of language as a philosophy, language must be seen as a system with semantic influence. Human nature can best be described, perhaps, as a complex set of semantic reactions which can be ‘changed’ to a large extent. With the non-Aristotelian non-elemental education this process is much more easily accomplished. As we have progressed with scientific advances, the knowledge and structural methodology must be a part of the general theory of understanding, and so factored into a theory of sanity.

Time binding is only possible because we have evolved, or perfected, extra rural means, without  altering our nervous system, to expand it’s operations and expand its scope. This is the shared knowledge that we collect over generations. We can also extensionalise our operations and increase our potential externally. Not one person can claim “ownership” of any knowledge, for it is constantly emergent and dependant on all interactions, experience and thought process (which can be influenced by something else at any moment). It is the abstract of thought known as “ownership”, which gives us our most formidable distortion to functional living. This is because there is no understanding of the industrial community.

“Natural rights theory of property makes the creative effort of an isolated, self-sufficing individual the basis of ownership vested in him. In so doing it overlooks the fact that that there is no isolated, self-sufficing individual. Production takes place only through society – only through the cooperation of an industrial community. This industrial community may be large or small….but is always comprises a group large enough to contain and transmit the traditions, tools, technical knowledge, and usages without which there can be no industrial organisation and no economic relation of individuals to one and another or to their environment….There can be no product without technical knowledge; hens no accumulation and no wealth to be owned…. and there is no technical knowledge apart from an industrial community. Since there is no individual production and no individual productivity, the natural rights preconception… reduces itself to absurdity, even under the logic of its own assumptions.” Quote from Thorstein Veblen: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 4 1898

The problem of sanity is the ability to consider abstractions where all the characteristics may not be recognised, but the realities they represent have all properties included. Thus the use of the approximation. By using the word “and” implies an additive process, however sometimes there is a transformation that happens changing the linear parameters. When there is a lack of theory, and so lack of structural understanding, then follows a propensity of confusion of orders of abstractions, leading to false identification. Abandoning the “is” of identity requires having an actional functional language to describe ordered functioning, behaviour or operations. The problem of “is” becomes a discussion of the content of objects. It will depend on how deep an observer can see. So an “is-m” becomes the level of understanding about any individual’s [(a divided being)’s] comprehension of the details of the object in discussion. Thus the level of abstraction depends on the connection with the details of an object and what they are and how they function. So we have CAPITAL (which refers to wealth – whatever that is), or COMMUNE (common unity), or SOCIAL (the need for interaction with others – organisation – to be organised) – “ISMS”. These are examples of dysfunctional and misappropriated abstractions.

Sanity means adjustment, and without this understanding, any adjustment is impossible. It is the ability to adjust quickly to change that determines the survival of an individual. I am very inspired by the recent activity of the One People and the process that has been used here to dissolve destructive abstracts of thought, however I really feel that it is important to keep our feet on the ground or all that good work will be hijacked by the primitive and un-sane minds which seem to be in the majority. Most of my study here comes from Alfred Korzybksi – and his book “Science and Sanity” written in 1933. I find it unthinkable that we have survived this far despite the lack of general sanity. I have tried my best to simplify the language so as to be inclusive, and welcome any requests for clarification. I also welcome anyone wishing to add to this body of knowledge as this short essay barely touches the surface. Maybe we could put this somewhere and allow it to evolve, I imagine that to be a welcome process.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: