C-260.8 Differentiation and explanation
The Expansion which we see more fully in our thought experiment, comprising two universes (of bodies, of steps), provides an explanatory account of the total human condition. It helps clarify the concept of “humanism” by providing more than an “instances” perspective on the relationship between two “human conditions”: what we bring (HC-1) and what we encounter (HC-2). More, for example, than “nature vs. nurture.”
Differences abound. Differences that make differences also abound. And then too there are all these collisions we experience: hundreds, hard and soft, in the course of a day. It joggles and boggles the mind to envision a One-ness (e.g., as in “laws of The Universe”) responsible (as ”agency” or otherwise) for all this differentiation and for all the faltering and failure of design and execution*. … differentiation clearly a matter of Slice and Splice – if not always of Swing, not a singular architectural masterpiece. A matter of principle, not of law (by human agency or not).
One-ness is more something to be achieved, as in needing and perfecting an operating system (e.g., James’ unities), than it is something waiting only to be found. There’s a reason why Merton finds no theory OF re the human condition beyond the “middle ground.”
Differentiation as a principle of the Expansion offers an explanation, our needed theory FOR. A matter of Accord, our meta-strategy, of a balanced proportion of Adopt, Adapt, and Adept strategies for our next step.
HC-2 circumstances may cancel any Forward chance for Humanity. But there is neither reason nor excuse for failing the challenge of HC-1 development.
***
* The casualties of differentiation, genus and species, to be seen in the Burgess Shale pale in light of human, individual and collective, casualties from our procedurally underdeveloped attempts at behavioral differentiation. How many more individuals and communities must die needlessly, for lack of needed functionality? Needed functionality for which functional equivalence is acceptable.
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2022 R. F. Carter
Differences abound. Differences that make differences also abound. And then too there are all these collisions we experience: hundreds, hard and soft, in the course of a day. It joggles and boggles the mind to envision a One-ness (e.g., as in “laws of The Universe”) responsible (as ”agency” or otherwise) for all this differentiation and for all the faltering and failure of design and execution*. … differentiation clearly a matter of Slice and Splice – if not always of Swing, not a singular architectural masterpiece. A matter of principle, not of law (by human agency or not).
One-ness is more something to be achieved, as in needing and perfecting an operating system (e.g., James’ unities), than it is something waiting only to be found. There’s a reason why Merton finds no theory OF re the human condition beyond the “middle ground.”
Differentiation as a principle of the Expansion offers an explanation, our needed theory FOR. A matter of Accord, our meta-strategy, of a balanced proportion of Adopt, Adapt, and Adept strategies for our next step.
HC-2 circumstances may cancel any Forward chance for Humanity. But there is neither reason nor excuse for failing the challenge of HC-1 development.
* The casualties of differentiation, genus and species, to be seen in the Burgess Shale pale in light of human, individual and collective, casualties from our procedurally underdeveloped attempts at behavioral differentiation. How many more individuals and communities must die needlessly, for lack of needed functionality? Needed functionality for which functional equivalence is acceptable.
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2022 R. F. Carter
S