sspostlinearity

 It helps to clarify if one frames “consciousness”, “awareness”  “mind” as Verbs. “Conciousness” is what allows a Being to being conscious, “awareness” is what allows a Being to be “aware” and “mind” is what allows a Being to be mindful.

Brain, on other hand, is something that exists in the real world. Cognitive science is now allowing us to see the connections and how the connections play out. The Brain – like the Gut – are now visible at the appropriate scales to clarify the mechanisms that organize the activities of the cells.

The other thing that helps is to frame “being” as pointing to social systems as well as individuals. Family, Clans, Tribes are sufficient social systems that can also be made visible and measured. Once above the levels of Tribes, organizations, states and nation states are constructs. While they seem very visible, the real action in the real world can be better clarified as interactions of families, clans and tribes.

Consider:  “awareness/mind is the use of it” (by who? a person, a family, a clan, a tribe, an organization?”

Also consider disconnecting the Brain from the rest of the Body as a source of “thinking” has always been an error. The tradition had it’s highpoint in the west with Descartes, but it’s pretty clear now that Mind/Body dichotomy is no longer helpful as the patterns of complexity are now becoming visible.

We see a similar things about mystics.

But I think its’ worth looking at the “nemiTubes” – intellectual – traditions – in the West that have pointed to the same insights. Goes all the way back to Aristotle, Plato and under appreciated Heraclitus.  Aristotle looking at evidence, Plato looking for the reality of Forms, but Heraclitus focusing on motion.

The thread continues in the 20th century. Idealists of various sorts. “I think therefore I am.” On the other side are the Materialists. In the 20th century various strands.. at the turn of the century Dewey in the States, others in Europe. Emerged in the late 60′s with C Wright Mills, Jane Jacobs and others. my fav is Herbert Marcuse in “Eros and Civilization” where he brings Eros back into a serious “nTanglement” with previous materialist traditions.

Meanwhile what I think I’ve seen is that purest nemiTubes focused on Subjectivity may come from the Native Peoples in the West and within the religious philosophers in every tradition.

Given the best science emerging in psychology, medicine and communication, I think it’s fair to say that we already in the early stages of a huge “nemeshift” that are bringing the words we use to describe our realities into synch with old wisdom. The oldest wisdom and the newest science have been converging for at least ten years.

Similar to how evolution “neme’ or “quantum mechanics neme’ had to gestate in protected “nemiSpheres’ until they became “just the way things are.’

Interesting time to be alive, No?

I like to think about Descartes as it should be “I am therefore I think.” If you are curious @ddrrnt:disqus  did a “nemetics” glossary at http://ilnk.me/8345 . It’s a “language in development” to be able to transfer insights from Complex Adaptive Systems at one level eg. inside of the skin of humans to any level of Complex Adaptive Systems eg. educational and political systems. And back again.

On twitter it’s being spun out via  @Edkare &  @Ebdish  Just to share, different takes from different perspectives is just what we are hoping to trigger.

does it matter ? (now that’s 8 comments nice and binary)