T. S. Kuhn's "Paradigm Shift" - why it's 'difficult'

KP_PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Tue Sep 2 21:21:14 EST 2003

"KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:w0j4b.120770$0v4.8679065 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| "KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
| news:Eph4b.122190$3o3.8574717 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| | [...]
| | [...]
| [...]

| Where such comes into play in the 'difficulty' that
| I'm discussing in this thread is that the haphazardly
| accumulated, intergenerationally handed down stuff
| includes the stuff of 'taboos', which, in the absence
| of generalized understanding of how nervous
| systems process information, serve as 'blindly'-
| automated 'rules' with respect to conflict 'avoidance'
| within societal groups who learn them.
| [...]

The essence of a "taboo" derives in the way
that its embedded 'ruleset' is "inductively learned"
[AoK, Ap5], during which, through sanctioned
repitition that directs the developmental mapping
of TD E/I with respect to the 'ruleset' of the "taboo",
a nervous becomes 'blindly' and automatically
aligned, not with the information content of the
"taboos" 'rulesets', but 'simply' with respect to
the mapping of repetitively sanctioned  'moving
away from' the stuff of the "taboos'" 'rulesets'.

In other words, affect is subtly, but strongly,
coersed via these dynamics, which, through 'blindly'-
automated TD E/I-minimization, become self-

There are a lot of difficulties that stem from these
dynamics, but the most-encompassing difficulty is
that they tend strongly to be greatly biased with
respect to an individual's personal [local experi-
ential] circumstances, and, be-cause affect tends
strongly to be tightly aligned [coupled] via 'blindly'-
automated global TD E/I-minimization, this is
hierarchically-Deadly with respect to all manner
of extra-experiential interactive dynamics. [The
hierarchy is straightforward, correlating to relative
'familiarity' as it has been discussed with respect
to the "continuum of relative familiarities". The
greater the relative 'familiarity' or 'unfamiliarity',
the greater will be the tendency toward 'blindly'-
automated 'moving toward' or 'moving away from',
respectively, with aligned affect of commensurate

All of this happens without any necessary correla-
tion to any absolute external experiential reality.

What it comes down to is that Humanity has been
Ravaging itself be-cause of its lack of under-
standing with respect to these nervous system

This one glaring-emptiness is the wellspring of
all interactive Tragedy amongst Humans.

What makes it so exceedingly-Tragic is that
there is nothing in Human nervous systems
that requires its existence.

It's only the absence-of-understanding - the
glaring-emptiness - that, through the 'blindly'-
automated, haphazardly-accumulated, inter-
generationally-handed-down experience,
gains physically-real existence within nervous
systems, which inflicts the Ravaging upon

The only 'difficulty' with respect to such has been
that be-cause of the way that nervous systems
'blindly' and automatically 'move toward' TD E/I-
minimization, the absence-of-understanding
tends strongly to be 'moved toward' and the
understanding that would fill the glaring-empti-
ness tends strongly to be 'moved away from'.

It's easy to see the exceedingly-great Tragedy

It's life 'moving away from' Life.

It's why I refer to the learned 'moving away from'
understanding as "the beast".

It's like a merciless predator - a hate-filled parasite -
that, with 'blindly'-automated stealth, takes up
physically-real existence within nervous systems,
not only inducing 'humans' to inflict slaughter and
deastation upon one another, but simultaneously
'blinding' folks to the understanding that can
free Humanity from it's Savagery.

The other part of the Tragedy is that, although there
is some =temporary= difficulty involved in filling our
collective absence-of-understanding [rendering
useless", AoK, Ap8], that difficulty pales in signific-
ance when it is juxtaposed with the interminability
of the self-inflicted Tragedy that befalls 'humanity'
while it remains in its 'state' of emptiness with
respect to understanding how nervous systems
process information.

What will folks Choose?

Interminable Devastation which will, with Certainty,
'lead' to the premature demise of 'humanity'?

Or doing the information-processing work, mapped
and laid at folks' feet, of becoming Trulyhuman at
last - that Humanity may have its Birth, Life, and
maximally-enduring Prosperity-in-fullness?

k. p. collins [ken]

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list