This Man that favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...

[Ahmed]

You write:

limitless thinking is the weak point that man has to work for in order to grow -> widening of consciousness.

It is not a question of enlargement: thought is alienated from a system which works for our destruction (as well as to other forms of life), it is a question of freeing itself from this system, of repudiating the economy. As long as the challenges are made within this operating model (immanent critiques), they will be futile and the "exit" will be by the collapse of the system when it no longer manages to overcome its growing contradictions. The weak point of this colossus with feet of clay is indeed that if he is "armored" against possible retaliations of his agents (those who work for him [all of us]), he has however in his "genes" contradictions that it overcomes at the expense of the world in which it operates, but its success increases its contradictions until the possibility of its functioning disappears ...
It is up to us to understand it and to emancipate ourselves from it before it takes us with it, because contrary to what was written above, it will then be too late to act and probably even (it is my conviction) to understand.

Aside from these considerations, yes, this is a magnificent century since it has undergone completely new (and perilous!) Evolutions, although not really perceived in terms of trivial concerns of everyday life ...

[eclectron]

It is not a question of enlargement: thought is alienated from a system that works for our destruction (as well as other forms of life), it is a question of getting rid of this system, of repudiating the economy.

Good if you want, each one his level of perception.
but it must be borne in mind that the system was not built on its own, nor was it dropped from Mars.
It is our ancestors who are at the origin and we who perpetuate it.
The system is an exact reflection of what we ALL are inside of us.
not to see this is to take responsibility.
You and I have the right not to appreciate parts of ourselves, or to be aware of these negative parts in ourselves.
to see the problem as negative outside oneself is denied the root of the problem.
Root that is in each of us, since it is the sum of "us" that creates the society, the system.
As long as this is not seen and accepted by each of us, the mess will continue, since this is the mess: our unconsciousness of what we are.

[eclectron]

The individual cannot be at the origin of society, since society preexists the individual: he cannot conceive of an individual outside of society ... (I am not talking about biology or evolution. ..)

scousi but total nonsense!
How can society preexist without any individual?
it is the individual who is the source of society.
several individuals who form a group and group called society.

[sen-no-sen]

I do not think that animals are strictly speaking endowed with an ego.

the human being has the mania to take himself as a reference in all things. For centuries the animal has been assumed not to be this, not to have that, like we "the higher race". These clichés fall as we observe other forms of life, which should teach us the humility and not the vanity that feeds this ego in great waves.

I did speak of ego and no conscience.
And I don't think I am wrong in saying that most animals per se lack (even if forms of archaic ego can exist in animals close to humans).
It is generally the appearance of Memes which largely consolidate the appearance of the self.
All spiritualities agree on the fact of muzzle ...


eclectron you write:

the definition of the ego can be broad, one should not stop at the restrictive definition of a motel or a motel.
for me, it's the idea to be someone which has nothing to do with being someone, even if there is a connection.

Very fair, you give the answer!
The ego is above all an idea.
What is an idea? It is information stored in the brain.
In science we will talk about even.
Our mind, our self, that is to say the deepest part of our being (in appearance ...) is a gigantic assembly of ideas (we talk about memeplex), from this emerges the famous "little voice", this strange observer who seems to comment on our life and which we qualify by "I".

the ego is an evolution, a perfecting, of the animal instinct.
the animal defends things for its benefit as I said above.
Man does nothing else in principle.
I do not doubt that it is neuro psychic for the man as for the animal.

I would not speak of an improvement, but rather of an evolution.
It is difficult to consider it as being instinctive, because its seat would rather place it on the side of the neo-cortex, for proof, the animals being deprived of it do not seem to show any characteristics egotistic *.

technologization resulting from human thought, which amplifies the primary instincts camouflaged by the polishing of civilization.

Question: is the technology derived from human thought, or vice versa?
In reality the facts tend to be quite the opposite ...
Homo sapiens is only a vector.


* I have noted egoistic and not selfish.

[Ahmed]

How could a human individual exist outside of society? Reproduction supposes at least two individuals ... (which does not explain their existence, nor the possibility of their survival).

You write:

but it must be borne in mind that the system was not built on its own, nor was it dropped from Mars.

We agree on this point, however the system once set up (three centuries, and it succeeded others based on different bases, but less efficient in terms of energy dissipation *) behaves like an autonomous unit which reverses the roles: occurs what I call the hypostasis of the value: the men are forced to obey a fetish created by themselves and it is thus this last which controls its " service agents ". As rightly said Sen-no-sen, man is only a vector ...

* I often use "accumulation of abstract value" and "maximization of energy dissipation" as equivalents: this is obviously only true for the period of capitalism; for earlier periods it is necessary to return to the second, more general formulation.

[eclectron]

How could a human individual exist outside of society? Reproduction supposes at least two individuals ... (which does not explain their existence, nor the possibility of their survival).

so there were indeed 2 individuals at the origin to create a micro-family society and the worst, we know them: Adam and Eve!

More seriously you take a stranded man on a desert island, what society will influence these relationships to what surrounds him?
he is free to act as he sees fit.
certainly it does not arrive virgin in its spirit, it conveys the diagram of the society in which it lived.
here we are again with the chicken and egg problem!
but I prefer to stay on an association of individuals creates a society than a society formats the individual. both being true!

What I call the hypostasis of value occurs: men force themselves to obey a fetish created by themselves and it is therefore this latter which controls its "service agents". As rightly said Sen-no-sen, man is only a vector ...

OK
Free man * is not welcome in society because it would destabilize the whole house of cards
* free of his own thoughts.

[eclectron]

Question: is the technology derived from human thought, or vice versa?
In reality the facts tend to be quite the opposite ...
Homo sapiens is only a vector.

I feel that you have a cultural background on the issue, which I don't have. I learned "differently" about the functioning of the human psyche.
Physiological, I know absolutely nothing and therefore do not get involved!
All this to say that you are undoubtedly much more riding on the vocabulary used since for you it is normalized.
For my part I know and understand everything you say but without the associated scientific vocabulary, so try to be cool on the vocabulary that I can use and rather try to grasp the general meaning

Certainly technology, a pebble for example, can arrive before the thought that it is possible to use it to crack a nut for example. it is "chance" that brings about the discovery. It takes a spark of intelligence to realize that this primary tool is interesting to use and memorize this useful experience-> memory-> the thought which later will use this experience to improve it for example.

I, who am more in the conception, I see that the idea emerges without the knowledge of my own free will and that I capture it, keep it or not, it is in this selection process that the ego intervenes. class with good or bad idea.
the original idea may come unconsciously from my accumulated thought stock or elsewhere, let's say some ... the brain being partly a receptor of the collective unconscious *, or even beyond for most believers

* I have already noted that inter-person exchanges of ideas take place outside of the physical senses.

[sen-no-sen]

Certainly technology, a pebble for example, can arrive before the thought that it is possible to use it to crack a nut for example. it is "chance" that brings about the discovery. It takes a spark of intelligence to realize that this primary tool is interesting to use and memorize this useful experience-> memory-> the thought which later will use this experience to improve it for example.

Yes, actually it’s what scientists call evolutionary algorithm, in this case a by-product: the memetic algorithm:for simplicity:pass / fail, if successful memorizing.
To this is added the notion imitation. When an individual obtains an advantage through some discovery, he is very quickly imitated by others who in turn develop discoveries which are in turn imitated and so on, the process once initiated leads to a technological boom subject to acceleration phases (industrial revolution type).
(Pre-) historically technical development is prior to our species, the worse it is probably the trigger!
In fact the "spark of intelligence" is itself part of the evolutionary process, there is basically no difference between the latter and human thought, just a difference in the processing of information (more than 3,7 billion years on one side, against a few milliseconds on the other).

I have already noticed that interpersonal exchanges of ideas take place outside of the physical senses.

Can you develop?

[eclectron]

Can you develop?

Not really !

I will not tell specific details of my life here ... but for example dream in advance of potentially annoying facts for me.
The thing is already advanced in life, actors are aware but not me yet. I dream about it and then get physical warning from people the next day. In practice, dreaming of this is useless, if not to worry even more when people contact me!
Or, during extensive discussions with people on the net, people I have never met physically in my life, and have the premonition of answers or proposals that were going to be made to me.
Synchronicity let's say some.
It takes a certain degree of affection (positive or negative) towards these people for this to happen.

I think information is exchanged day and night. It always concerns subjects that are close to my heart.

for example for the climate I have had the dream answer for a while ... and the IPCC is worried about not much (I did not say anything!), I cannot be more precise, I am unable to get out of the evidence.
It is difficult to decipher precisely this kind of information which comes in dream, in a symbolic way for me but the tendency is clearly interpretable. There are people for whom this kind of message is sharper where then they take everything in the first degree, I do not know, I am not in their head.

I know when it's info and when it's normal dream, sometimes it's nested and there I only know afterwards ...
but hey I begin in the awareness of this kind of perceptions.

Normal dream: rehabilitation of the brain following my unconsciousness of what I live the day, to start a new day with a "new" brain.
I think that it is one of the functionalities of the dream to classify, to reorganize the unconsciousness of the day and there are many.
Unconsciousness, because everything that is lived in consciousness is automatically classified and is no longer a problem and is not the object of dreams.
What I call consciousness goes beyond superficial consciousness, called consciousness by the psychic world. it is even deeper and it is towards this that humanity must move to get out of the current slump, more consciousness.
it is done slowly for everyone

this is my spiritual couplet of the day
Isn't that the place to talk about all of this maybe? and then i don't have much more to say on the subject

[Ahmed]

If you have "preferences" for a man-made society (or an explanation for the climate), you are free; it was the scheme of Hobbes, but in a completely different context.
You write:

Free man * is not welcome in society because it would destabilize the whole house of cards

It does not destabilize anything at all and its freedom is very limited, all the more reason to use it! Admittedly it can exert an influence on society (which does not necessarily appreciate), but this influence only works in a direction favorable to the system.

And also:

Certainly technology, a pebble for example, can happen before the thought that a use is possible to crack a nut for example.

I suppose you did not express yourself well, because a rock does not belong to the technique, only its use.