Human societies all over the world have always faced forces undermining their sustainable present and future. Today, societies and individuals face a myriad variety of problems and the list of problems without any available solutions continues to grow. Our choice of tools and paths yesterday determine what we are today and will be the basis of our future tomorrow. Today’s problems were yesterday’s mistakes. Given the current state of our world, mostly everyone would agree that the current path is unsustainable and a drastic rethink is needed to stop, introspect and assess our choice of tools and paths of yesterday; work out a plan to be followed today for a sustainable tomorrow. To continue on the same path with the same choice of tools and paths would be foolish, dangerous and suicidal.
“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."-Albert Einstein
For example, the most visible application of science in this age is technology. Since the dawn of the industrial age, we have increasingly used technology to address society’s problems. Current approaches to sustainability involve technology and more of technological developments. But ‘Social problems created by technology overuse cannot be solved by the application of yet more technology’. Today we have descriptions galore of all kinds of health, economic, social, environmental problems in modern science, but no permanent answers. Each technological 'quick fix' is only temporary and results in a plethora of 'side effects'.
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." –Albert Einstein
A problem created and aided by technology abuse cannot be solved with the application of more technology . In choosing technology to solve our problems, we have created more problems and continue creating more complex ones . Today we have to ashamedly admit that our greatest technological breakthroughs, confined only to the material realm, have no answers in solving mankind’s problems. Gene technology, space exploration, robots-have no answer to human greed, lust, addictions and moral inadequacies. All the mainstream ‘scientific breakthroughs’ which are funded by public money and which promise to end disease, pain and suffering are ‘just around the corner’ but never deliver.
'The advancement of machines is mistaken for the advancement of man'.
Technology has made it easier to consume more, giving rise to a host of problems including obesity, climate change, environmental resource depletion, competition and strife. (I= P x A x T is the (in) famous Ehrlich and Holdren equation which shows the relationship between Impact on environment, Population , Affluence, Technology and Consumption of natural resources). We are addicted to our thought habits. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking. The greatest intelligence and knowledge bites the dust before human addictions. So knowledge and technology are not the answers to the bane of addiction to material consumption. Any plan to combat these need to include an understanding of the human being and his place in the universe. An illustrative example would be the communications of today. Technology has grown by leaps and bounds and the gadgetry is impressive. But communication among family members has decreased. What use all the fancy wizardry if it cannot hold relationships, nations, neighbors and family together? Aren’t we profoundly missing something?
Technology is not bad, but it is only a product of humanity and is therefore secondary. Using secondary technological tools to solve primary human problems is hugely inadequate. Primary problems need primary solutions that go to the very root of the problem. Human problems need human solutions. Humanity can use technology to grow higher and become better, but technology by itself is not the solution. In short, technology is humanity’s endeavor to become better. But focusing only on technology, as we have done for the past few decades, mistaking the growth in technology and consumption of matter as progress and development, is irrational. Now has the time come to put technology on the back burner and focus on the hu`man’ part of life for reasons of plain ‘survivability’? This is because the direction of technology use/abuse is determined by the human being and therefore the root of the problem (and also the solution) is not technology (or better technology), but the human being (The “Guns don’t kill people, people do…” line of logic). Technology is thus only a mute spectator and its use/abuse is determined by the human user. The current burning need is a change in the soul of the human being, but not devising more technology which will only make it easier to consume more, creating competition, strife and more imbalance. Currently, the technology we have for our needs is very much enough many times over. What is needed is the attitude for this technology to be diverted to human welfare instead of self-profiteering, competition and dominance. This needs a fundamental game-changing shift in thinking and attitudes.
"The great benefit of science is that it can make a tremendous contribution to the alleviation of suffering on a physical level, but it is only by cultivating the qualities of the human heart and transforming our attitudes that we can begin to address and overcome our mental suffering. We need both, since the alleviation of suffering must take place on both a physical and a psychological level."-The Dalai Lama
Societies, especially the so-called developed nations, are addicted to the habit of material consumption, reliance on material technology and the illusion of permanence of matter and 'external' technological solutions instead of 'internal' personality changes. To break out of this vicious circle of dependence and addiction to matter, does Consciousness hold the key? The changes should be from inside- ‘internal’(soul); resorting to and making ‘external’ (technological) changes will only be cosmetic and reversible. The ancient practice of the science of Yoga offers a voluntary, self-restraining, self-disciplining technique of liberating oneself from the clutches of material addiction during which the individual ascends from a lower individual/personality/selfish oriented state to a higher universal/altruistic/unselfish state. Here material(body) is disciplined and used only to the extent of 'needs' and the hunger for 'luxuries' drops away voluntarily with the discovery of a higher universal self.
Question: Given the plethora of Societal, Health, Environmental and Sustainability problems faced by humanity and individuals alike, is it wise to continue to follow the beaten technological path or seek a technique like Yoga for individual voluntary self transformation from a lower selfish personality oriented state to a higher state of universal Consciousness, resulting in compassion and benevolence instead of competition and strife? Isn't the so-called sustainability problem not a material problem of resource availability, but a moral problem of resource consumption, conscious awareness and right action which can be achieved by achieving the higher state of Universal Consciousness?
Dear Raveendra,
Thank you for taking the time to may such a profound response to my inquiries. I have often heard the designation of Shiva as being in 3 aspects of creator, sustainer, and destroyer, yet never transferred that concept to each individual. I think that I see how an infinite number of permutations can be derived from 3 universal aspects when the circumstances of one's existence is considered as well as the level of each aspect's development within the individual at their given point on total development. These are very powerful ideas; thank you for sharing this.
I think that most can see life as a progressing and in continuous flux. Some refer to this progressive notion as evolution. As time proceeds and humans develop, there seems to be periods of quantum leaps in progress which some consider revolutionary.
Taking these two terms, evolutionary and revolutionary, and thinking about human development, I wonder if the technological advances achieved during revolutionary times may actually affect the way humans develops from that point in history. Does technical development change the nature of human development? If as you have said, that technology is an illusion, does a deluded understanding (non-understanding) of technical advancements cause a de-evolutionary or counter-evolutionary effect on humans?
In the West, we tend to consider things as dualistic, and not having the third aspect in our paradigm. To consider that which creates as the same entity that destroys is incongruent in Western thought to a large degree. I think that the Westerner could see a creator and sustainer, but not the aspect of destroyer. Yet, if there is a destroying aspect, it may remain unnoticed by Westerners as part of the same that creates. This force or aspect could and mostly does cause angst for those attempting to follow and understand advances.
Of late, I have been mulling over the ideas of people that have an evolutionary or slower adaptation to change, and see them as what I call evolutionaries. The bigger steps in advancement I see accepted by those I refer to as revolutionaries. In the Western mode of thinking, I have attempted to place in opposition those who reject slower changes and not wanting advances as counter-evolutionaries, and those who attempt to move backwards to recapture the past as counter-revolutionaries when radical is too much for them. This seems to fit the Western dualistic paradigm. However, if one makes another consideration that there is a third aspect at work, that which destroys as it creates, then resistance or counter-evolutionary and counter-revolutionary thinking can be seen as the suffering caused by this illusion of understanding new technology. As Arjuna said to Krishna, “My illusions are dissolved.” I see the third aspect as allowing for understanding of undifferentiated existence where the aspects of creating, sustaining, and destroying are actually one. This oneness removes the sting and confusion cause by not including the clearing away of pervious illusions created by non-understanding. The old technology is not destroyed by new technology because the understanding of the old technology was illusionary, and it is the illusion that one understood the old technology in the first place.
I hope my rambling is not too disjointed. My thoughts seem to be brought together as I respond to you. I probably should have thought a little more before writing so much.
Please forgive
Neal
Hi, I think it is a proper, nevertheless wide question. Depending on environmental/social/economic problem, and depending on the scale of the problem, you will have different approaches - some more technological pushing, some less. Cases of absolute poverty or infrastructure lacking will require technology, for sure, and cases of consumption behavior misguide will require intuitive/subjective approach rather than techno-rational. I guess you could narrow the focus of your question, as it is quite philosophical. It is about levels of awareness on technology and human behavior's reach. If we take a glance at the history of main technologies (cars, computers...), we will realise that they usually aim at ease life and earn profits while creating new forms of dpendency - and health problems we have not had before. However, it is easier to change technology (and impose it) than change habits and behaviors. Individual and inner changes are quite difficult, and depending on the extent of environmental problems, behaviors changes won't have effective outcome in short term - unless they become rules. Surely technology has limited range to solve environmental problems, and surely, behaviors changes has wider range than technology does, but the process of each one (change) is very different in terms of rationality and constraints.
Hi, I agree with you, Claudia, it is a crucial and wide question.
In my opinion, the problem you highlight, Raveendra, is closely related to Habermas' distinction between communicative and instrumental reason. When the latter prevails, there is no possibility for "consciousness" to come into the debate. Nevertheless, if a personal and socially complementary equilibrium between both is achieved, new ways to deal with global sustainability issues emerge.
In my opinion, the transdisciplinarity paradigm is a good starting point.
To Claudia Viegas:
"However, it is easier to change technology (and impose it) than change habits and behaviors.".Exactly!
What use coming up with all kinds of technology when habits & behavior cannot be changed? A dictator holds the world to ransom with high-end technology,while all that is needed is behavior change.Modern Science has been barking up the wrong tree, trying to develop technology to solve man made problems, while behavior modification is the key. As you said, all our technological developments have created hitherto unknown problems. Intelligence, Knowledge, Science, Technology are laid waste in the face of human behavior.
"Intelligence never saves you. Even the intelligent man behaves according to to his own nature and not according to his own knowledge" -BG 3:33
I might be a renowned scientist knowing all the intricacies of the effect of drugs/alcohol on the human body, but all this knowledge does not save me if I am addicted to substance abuse.
Knowing fully well that technology has its limitations, the masters of Yoga have devised unique solutions based on Human behavior. A half-dressed Gandhi understood the human psyche to drive out the mighty British Empire from India, which sparked off freedom movements all over the world. A earth shaking game-changer on the world stage.Did he use technology? No, He understood people and human behavior better.
I beg to disagree when my question is labelled as "Philosophical". I am talking of pure science here when insisting that human behavior change is the key to Human sustainability than Technology.
"Be the Change you want to see in the world"-Gandhi
"Our studies must begin with our selves and not with the heavens."-Ouspensky
"Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself"- Leo Tolstoy
"You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals”-Marie Curie
To Jose Carlos:
A well documented, highly effective and most cheapest science is available for human behavior rectification. It is Yoga, The Science of Man, which has stood the test of time through millenia. Its not a philosophy but a practical and highly scientific technology of human behavior modification from Lower states of Consciousness to Higher states. It is labelled as a philosophy by those who have not explored it. In reality, its a profound science and the only science in the world, integrating and juxtaposing the "anatomy of the Universe with the anatomy of the Human body" to achieve sustainability and later, Immortality.
Current orthodoxy in scientific circles refuse to acknowledge its effects, but the effects among those who practice this science is well documented in public life. As you said, this inter/trans disciplinary science needs to be researched and its effects on human behavior modification studied to be implemented wherever needed. Empirical studies are irrelevant here as the results are "experienced" by the practitioner and cannot be objectified. This needs a whole new "Subjective" approach/science without reliance on objective data and material proofs. Cognitive studies, brain mapping, Neural Images and responses are useless, because the "Observer is part of the experiment". All the knowledge and technology in the world is laid low if the morality of the observer of the phenomena belongs to a lower state of Consciousness. The observer him/herself is the guinea pig in Yoga. He/she needs to be morally true, because he/she IS the experiment itself.
The key is to conquer ourselves, not the external world with Technology. Its very difficult, but the only way.
The struggles on the battlefield pale into insignificance before the struggles in the mind.-Parahamsa Yogananda
Bring back the horse and buggy! Technology is undermining human sustainability.
Our reliance on machines (autos, trucks, aircraft, ships and now robots) is destroying our self-reliance and making us subservient to technology.
James:
Technology per se isn't the culprit, It is only a mute spectator. The real cause is the human nature which can devise technology to make other lives better or use it selfishly to create luxury which makes humans subservient to technology. It cuts both ways.
Modern man has become addicted to matter, and its offspring technology. To what end? Unless we recognise our human nature, we will continue to get sucked into the whirlpool of matter and technology abuse. Otherwise Obesity, untimely deaths, substance abuse and infertilty will do the job for us.
The Universe is the Lock and the Mind is the Key.
Raveendra,
Your point is valid. I agree that technology is a sort of mute spectator, subservient to the whims of humans.
I like to think it terms of left and right hemisphere of our brain. Left hemisphere is rather western. Technology, mathematics, and all that are the basis of a modern society comes from the west. The right hemisphere is rather eastern. It is connected with music, phantasy, geometry, and of course yoga!
The brain works using both hemispheres. Similarly, humans should pay attention to both: West and east. There are many western scientists and philosophers that have been initiated into yoga, Buddhism, Zen, etc.The problem is about this synthesis. Extreme cases do not help. Science and meditation should go hand-by-hand.
Dear Costas,
Does this right-left divide and co-existing situation have any link to the divine 'androgyne', the hermaphrodite or 'Ardhanarishwara' concepts of male-female popular in many eastern cultures? Pic attached.
Dear Raveendra, usually left brain is regarded as "male" hemisphere and "right" as female. You know ying-yang. In any human both male and female coexists and in some persons one is the dominating one. This is recognised by western and eastern cults.
Hello to all,
I am taken by your comments. This is a most fascination forum. For many years, I have been asking a question for which I have not heard a good answer. In my limited understanding, I see no good answer forthcoming. The question is simple, but most complex.
"What does it mean to be human?"
In my work, teaching business, religion, and criminal justice, I ask in every class session, "What does it mean to be human?" In times of sharing with friends and other social contacts, I ask, but hear nothing to convince me that anyone has the answer. I certainly do not have the answer. With the discovery of new knowledge, development of new technology, and the 'advancements' in society, the question remains and seems to become more unanswerable for me?
All of the comments that I have read in this forum have spoken to my quest of what it means to be human. We have theories, we have beliefs, but we have little ability to articulate what humanness is or to prove our opinions to be correct. It may be that my Western paradigm locks me out of being open to the understanding I seek. However, I will continue to ask.
I am often met with expressions of 'who cares' as my students and colleagues roll their eyes when I ask for help with this quest. It seems that in the USA we are culture bound with pragmatic philosophy, and tend to ignore the finer understanding of what any discovery or development does to the nature of humans, as long as the discovery is useful, especially if it makes money for someone.
Does technology make the human--is advancement evolution, and are we becoming? Is the advancement we embrace evolving or decaying our humanness? I see so many people hiding behind computers and cell phones not wanting face-to-face communications. I know of students so intimidated by speaking to others that they e-mail or text question to the classroom instructor. When confronted (in a nice way) with questions about their work, they shrink away, and often will withdraw from a class rather than stand up for their scholarship.
Please do not think me a Luddite. I know that attacking technology is a losing position. From talking to my older relatives (unfortunately most are now deceased), I have learned that the 'good old days' were not. Extreme hardship in manual labor to barely eke out an existence, disease killing millions as people watched helplessly, and isolation because of geographic conditions are mostly in the passed. With some of the former limits gone, we are able to feed more people and with that advancement come more people. Technology and discovery of knowledge seems to cause expansion for humans, but does it expand humanness?
Thank you all for this great discussion forum.
Neal
Dear Neal,
Your question is a very fundamental and important one, and ignored every time because no one knows the answer or do not want to address the issue. Your zeal to get at the very root of the matter is admirable. Please know that all those who 'roll their eyes' and say 'who cares' will need to find out answers to the same question later.
Please refer to my reply on another RG thread where I point out the merits and demerits of technology.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Human_evolution_how_technology_influenced_our_evolution?_sg=B4t0A4zNgSxdIZXeRf60C5GxdlNFTtOhv1HMfmb3D4kedAEqrg%2BhQE8LnTbYtaMA_Bapl%2BC8zcjWAQPLFsw6l4vJBVIQ5sB40pfWEomrgcp0SKt3jVZwgudmcxBngGBhX#view=535700cad4c118d2298b4659
IMHO, technology serves as a instrument for higher evolution at a lower stage. It impacts us in two ways: The inventor of technology evolves higher because he exerts against odds. The end user of the technology declines in evolution because someone else has exerted on his behalf. Technology doesnt impact one who has reached a higher stage of evolution in Consciousness. Only lower stage individuals misuse technology and reap the negative consequences. Ultimately, technology is an illusion. It appears to deliver a lot, but the happiness is short lived. And again the quest for newer technology starts.
The ultimate answer lies in your question-Human nature. This is a touchy subject for many and many do not care/want to broach the subject.
According to Yoga, we are all rightfully equal, but on the scale of evolution of Consciousness, every individual is unique, having no equal. Accordingly, Creation has three 'strands' which permeate all through it. Every unit in the universe has three aspects to it, three interwoven strands. The first strand is "Inertia", the quality of matter/sleep, which destroys. The second is 'Activity/Dynamism/Force' which creates. The third is 'Poise or Consciousness' which sustains.
Activity creates, Inertia destroys and Poise maintains balance. This triad exists in every unit of the universe and is the basic building block of the universe
It also exists in the human being, because the human being is the unit of the universe(Man is created in the image of...)
Thus every human being has this triad in a definite proportion which is unique to him/her. And this makes him/her unique and different from others. It influences his health, thinking, actions, choice of words and deeds, food, diseases, health....in fact it is omnipresent throughout. This aspect is presented here, please go through:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Can_anyone_help_with_my_understanding_definition_of_class2?_sg=cmNkKUX14g7hns%2BsgMJN7O%2FnbQUIEjpUB5ZLeWMuclzsSMDBof05iN8F%2F1DOD7HB_vfXt0JZoF8M6me%2BeU%2BxHBzTjMq1EITq8UOdmZSiSTT%2FYwqCGJjCny%2BXnD0aSHtrp#view=5359711cd5a3f2dd548b4651
Accordingly, a person dominated by inertia, behaves in a particular manner, unique to him/her and so on for the other two strands. These three 'strands' combine in infinite ways to give out infinite examples of human nature, but all of these can be broadly classified into four 'castes' or classes, as mentioned in the above post. Each Caste generally behaves in a manner typical of the 'strand' that dominates in that caste.
All your questions about human nature can be addressed by using this model.
"people hiding behind computers and cell phones not wanting face-to-face communications. "students so intimidated by speaking to others" all are attributed to these three strands. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says that the person is not responsible for his behavior, but rather it is the work of the three strands, acting through him.
Technology is an attribute of the 'Activity/dynamism' strand. Here the individual tries to solve problems with the aid of 'technology'. He seeks 'external' material solutions to problems and invents technology, which solves problems in the short term, but the problems re-appear. The problems make man introspect and take the leap into the next level of Consciousness-Poise. Here man realizes that all problems are self-made and introspects 'internally' to solve problems by correcting his own actions, in contrast to seeking 'external' solutions like technology.
A knowledge of the three strands is thus invaluable to recognizing the two dualistic and opposite poles in ourselves(Activity=Desire and Inertia=Hate) influencing our Thoughts, Words and Deeds and striving/exerting consciously to eliminate these and reach the middle way, Poise=Neutrality. This produces a large leap in evolution of consciousness.
It is also called Yoga.
Regards
Dear Raveendra,
Thank you for taking the time to may such a profound response to my inquiries. I have often heard the designation of Shiva as being in 3 aspects of creator, sustainer, and destroyer, yet never transferred that concept to each individual. I think that I see how an infinite number of permutations can be derived from 3 universal aspects when the circumstances of one's existence is considered as well as the level of each aspect's development within the individual at their given point on total development. These are very powerful ideas; thank you for sharing this.
I think that most can see life as a progressing and in continuous flux. Some refer to this progressive notion as evolution. As time proceeds and humans develop, there seems to be periods of quantum leaps in progress which some consider revolutionary.
Taking these two terms, evolutionary and revolutionary, and thinking about human development, I wonder if the technological advances achieved during revolutionary times may actually affect the way humans develops from that point in history. Does technical development change the nature of human development? If as you have said, that technology is an illusion, does a deluded understanding (non-understanding) of technical advancements cause a de-evolutionary or counter-evolutionary effect on humans?
In the West, we tend to consider things as dualistic, and not having the third aspect in our paradigm. To consider that which creates as the same entity that destroys is incongruent in Western thought to a large degree. I think that the Westerner could see a creator and sustainer, but not the aspect of destroyer. Yet, if there is a destroying aspect, it may remain unnoticed by Westerners as part of the same that creates. This force or aspect could and mostly does cause angst for those attempting to follow and understand advances.
Of late, I have been mulling over the ideas of people that have an evolutionary or slower adaptation to change, and see them as what I call evolutionaries. The bigger steps in advancement I see accepted by those I refer to as revolutionaries. In the Western mode of thinking, I have attempted to place in opposition those who reject slower changes and not wanting advances as counter-evolutionaries, and those who attempt to move backwards to recapture the past as counter-revolutionaries when radical is too much for them. This seems to fit the Western dualistic paradigm. However, if one makes another consideration that there is a third aspect at work, that which destroys as it creates, then resistance or counter-evolutionary and counter-revolutionary thinking can be seen as the suffering caused by this illusion of understanding new technology. As Arjuna said to Krishna, “My illusions are dissolved.” I see the third aspect as allowing for understanding of undifferentiated existence where the aspects of creating, sustaining, and destroying are actually one. This oneness removes the sting and confusion cause by not including the clearing away of pervious illusions created by non-understanding. The old technology is not destroyed by new technology because the understanding of the old technology was illusionary, and it is the illusion that one understood the old technology in the first place.
I hope my rambling is not too disjointed. My thoughts seem to be brought together as I respond to you. I probably should have thought a little more before writing so much.
Please forgive
Neal
Dear Neal,
The three strands are the basic building blocks of the universe, existing in all. Brahma creates, Shiva destroys and Vishnu maintains balance. In the human physical body, the Kapha centre creates tissues, the Pitta centre uses the created tissues to break them down and provide energy on all levels, while the Vata centre maintains balance. In the human mind, the Rajas centre creates /attraction/desire, the Tamas centre creates hate/repulsion and the Sattva centre maintains balance and health.
When evolution of consciousness is finished, the universe is destroyed by Shiva only to be brought back by Brahma and sustained by Vishnu. There are bigger time cycles involved than we know.
Technical development is necessary and has a profound effect at lower levels of evolution where lower minds first blame 'external'/other things for their problems and look for 'external solutions like technology. At higher levels, there is no reliance on technology. The greatest technology humanity has ever known, the Human mind, is employed to discriminate and seek 'internal' solutions rather than 'external'. It is in this sense that I termed technology as an 'illusion'. Technology has thus no effect or is of any use to a highly evolved Yoga /Zen Master. Their chief aim is to go beyond the three strands of Force-Matter-Consciousness and reach the One beyond all attributes.
Regards
P.S: Your thoughts are always welcome. Striving/exerting is better than being in inactive darkness and stupor .
Dear Raveendra,
Thank you for the explanation. It is certainly more than I have ever had before this forum, and it creates a desire to fine more understanding.
Namaste
Dear Neal,
You are most welcome.
Regards
"Let Noble Ideas Flow in from All Directions".
Thanks Raveendra and Neal for your very insightful questions and comments. It seems to me that technology must be intentionally guided by an evolved or maturely developed and consciously awakened heart of love and compassion if it is to be constructive rather than destructive for human beings and the natural environment. The energy pulse of the heart must first be transformed or attuned to a harmonic vibratory energy pulse of harmony and integrity before the thinking of the mind, the behavior of the body, and the functioning of technology can correspondingly become more harmonious and regenerative, rather than toxic, reflecting the vibratory energy pulse of the emotional heart or feeling center of the human being, as the causal level of our being that patterns or influences the other extended levels of mind, body, and technological development. The vibratory energy pulse of true love or unselfish warmhearted caring is a distinctive energy pattern of harmony and regeneration that can guide the development of new technologies, as well as new patterns of thinking and behavior, that are regenerative rather than degenerative, and which replenish and preserve rather than degrade and destroy the natural environment.
The development of more sustainable, healthy technologies must necessarily involve encouraging individuals, personal relationships, groups, and society as a whole to make a shift in consciousness or attitude from egocentric, narcissistic, divisive, antagonistic modes of perception, thinking, and functioning to more relational, contextual, holistic, integral, orientations. The ego's divisive orientation produces toxic disharmony and degenerative fragmentation at all levels, including producing technologies and ways of functioning that degrade the natural environment and material resources, whereas the holistic relational view of love, communion, spirit, or integrity restores harmony by aligning human feeling, thinking, behavior, and technologies with energy patterns that are regenerative rather than degenerative, cooperative rather than antagonistic, including the development of greater cooperative harmony between manmade technologies and the material environment. Some technologies that are designed to be helpful rather than harmful to the material environment include Green Chemistry, Waste to Energy processes, and the Bioneer.org movement.
In my books and blogs, I discuss how individuals, human personal relationships, and society can be transformed from egocentric conflict into a greater consciousness of loving relational harmony, empathy, compassion, and genuine integrity. I emphasize the process of caring communion between individuals (similar to Martin Buber's view of the I-Thou relationship) much more than introversive processes of meditation, which can also be very helpful if they promote rather than impede overcoming narcissistic self-preoccupation in caring communion with other individuals and with the natural environment. As attachments to this reply, I am enclosing an Appendix (Appendix K) to one of my books, which discusses the development of a truly compassionate society and more benign technologies, and am also enclosing information about my books and blogs; samples of my work are also posted on my Research Gate profile page.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Cognitive Science
- Mind