Guest guest Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 A human being can be seen as a subsystem within a larger system we call the world. Conflict is an indication that a subsystem is not functioning in harmony with the whole, or in the case of a human being that she or he is afraid of the world. This means that a human being in fear has no access to the supersystem's overall functioning. The principle of suboptimization states: " Optimizing each subsystem independently will not in general lead to a system optimum, or more strongly, improvement of a particular subsystem may actually worsen the overall system " . But this defition only looks at the optimization of the system as a whole and sets no criteria for how individual subsystems in that system are optimized. Thus, individual subsystems may be poorly optimized even though the supersystem, the system as a whole in which they are parts, is optimized. We can call this reversed suboptimization, which means that even though the larger system in which the subsystem funtions is optimized, the subsystem itself need not be optimized. Fear is the result of a reversed suboptimization, because fear implies conflict between a person and the world. We define strict optimization as the state where both the subsystem and its supersystem are optimized. If a person's behaviour would be strictly optimized, then there would be no conflict between the person and the world; hence no fear. Such strict optimization would have to include knowledge of not only the _total_ short-term effect of a person's action, but also the total set of consequences for the supersystem's, in this case the world's, future, inluding the future of the person her- or himself. Without such optimization there will be conflict between the subsystem (a human being) and its supersystem (the world). No logic or rational thinking can possible lead to strict optimization when there is fear. Why? Because strict optimization, as we have defined it, includes the optimization of the subsystem - not only the optimization of its supersystem - and a human being in fear is not functioning in harmony with the world, even when the world as seen from an overall perspective is functioning optimally. What does this mean? It means that a society that is functioning optimally need not nescessarily mean that the people in that society are functioning optimally, but rather could act as sacrificable parts in that society. An optimized society is not the same as a strictly optimized society. A society can be optimized even though its individual citzens are suffering as a result of being sacrificed for the benefit of the society as a whole. In a stricly optimized society none of its citizens can suffer to the expense of the society as a whole. Today's societies may be optimized, but not strictly optimized. A fear-based society may be optimized, but not strictly optimized. In a strictly optimized society the optimization of the individual is as important as the optimization of the society as a whole. In a strictly optimized society no person can be a slave to the society against her or his will. People talking about spirituality, enlightenment and unconditional love could benefit from using strict oprimization as an objectice metric. Fear in a society could be a measurement for how strictly that society is optimized. The less the fear in a society, the more it is strictly optimized. al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > >A human being can be seen as a subsystem within a larger system we >call the world. Conflict is an indication that a subsystem is not >functioning in harmony with the whole, or in the case of a human being that she or he is afraid of the world. Hi Anders, who is deciding what is harmony / conflict? If one invents such creteria no wonder that he starts to be affraid. >Fear is the result of a reversed suboptimization, >because fear implies conflict between a person and the world. When you speak about optimization you silently assume the existence of an optimum, be it as a fictive benchmark or an existing model. What would happen to Anders if he would assume that everything as it is is the optimum and there is no relation between any existing state and another ideal state because all there is is truth, which is what is and thus cannot have any relation to anything being otherwise? >Fear in a society could be a measurement for how >strictly that society is optimized. The less the fear in a society, >the more it is strictly optimized. Nono, fear in the society is the result of the idea, planted into poor mans head, that he is not good enough. The tradition of planting this idea into peoples head is as old as exploitation of man by man. The optimization of society in this sense is nothing than the adequate functioning of fear through the feeling of guilt, because one is not like, lets say, God. Stand up, Pete, you should know better! Become a rebel, no need to be afraid. Salute Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > >A human being can be seen as a subsystem within a larger system we > >call the world. Conflict is an indication that a subsystem is not > >functioning in harmony with the whole, or in the case of a human > being that she or he is afraid of the world. > > Hi Anders, > > who is deciding what is harmony / conflict? > If one invents such creteria no wonder that he starts to be affraid. You decide what is harmony and conflict by direct feeling. > > >Fear is the result of a reversed suboptimization, > >because fear implies conflict between a person and the world. > > When you speak about optimization you silently assume the existence of > an optimum, be it as a fictive benchmark or an existing model. > > What would happen to Anders if he would assume that everything as it > is is the optimum and there is no relation between any existing state > and another ideal state because all there is is truth, which is what > is and thus cannot have any relation to anything being otherwise? That is also my idea of what reality is, is _is_ already optimized in an extremely mind-boggling way. This optimal state is always in fluz optimizing itself as it evolves. > > >Fear in a society could be a measurement for how > >strictly that society is optimized. The less the fear in a society, > >the more it is strictly optimized. > > Nono, fear in the society is the result of the idea, planted into poor > mans head, that he is not good enough. The tradition of planting this > idea into peoples head is as old as exploitation of man by man. The > optimization of society in this sense is nothing than the adequate > functioning of fear through the feeling of guilt, because one is not > like, lets say, God. > > Stand up, Pete, you should know better! > Become a rebel, no need to be afraid. > > Salute > Stefan By planting fear into poor mans heads could be how a society optimized _itself_, while its poor citizens are neglected. Strict optimization of a society requires _both_ the society and the poor man to be optimized. al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > >A human being can be seen as a subsystem within a larger system we > >call the world. Conflict is an indication that a subsystem is not > >functioning in harmony with the whole, or in the case of a human > being that she or he is afraid of the world. > > Hi Anders, > > who is deciding what is harmony / conflict? > If one invents such creteria no wonder that he starts to be affraid. > > >Fear is the result of a reversed suboptimization, > >because fear implies conflict between a person and the world. > > When you speak about optimization you silently assume the existence of > an optimum, be it as a fictive benchmark or an existing model. > > What would happen to Anders if he would assume that everything as it > is is the optimum and there is no relation between any existing state > and another ideal state because all there is is truth, which is what > is and thus cannot have any relation to anything being otherwise? > > >Fear in a society could be a measurement for how > >strictly that society is optimized. The less the fear in a society, > >the more it is strictly optimized. > > Nono, fear in the society is the result of the idea, planted into poor > mans head, that he is not good enough. The tradition of planting this > idea into peoples head is as old as exploitation of man by man. The > optimization of society in this sense is nothing than the adequate > functioning of fear through the feeling of guilt, because one is not > like, lets say, God. > > Stand up, Pete, you should know better! > Become a rebel, no need to be afraid. > > Salute > Stefan sam: well said again stefan. You do have a way with expressing words to describe it all in a way that is simple and makes sense. Perhaps you are practising to hone up your skills and write it down in a book or a website for others who are seeking? I particularly liked: The optimization of society in this sense is nothing than the adequate functioning of fear through the feeling of guilt, because one is not like, lets say, God. This fear perpetuates the seeking, the endless seeking after something. Then the fear of survival of the ego nature rubs back and forth against the fearful God seeker into, well, what we have today on planet earth. much love, sam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sam_t_7 " <sam_t_7> wrote: >sam: well said again stefan. You do have a way with expressing >words to describe it all in a way that is simple and makes sense. >Perhaps you are practising to hone up your skills and write it down >in a book or a website for others who are seeking? Well, thanks for your compliments and your regards. I am a musician, you know, what I write here just comes spontaniously, triggered by some Petes, Anders and Werners... whom I owe so very much for their inspiration... Much love Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.