A theory of everything

Through the discoveries of chaos theory, we are able to understand how systems which were once thought to be completely chaotic actually have predictable patterns. We live and we die, this a 100% certainty. I believe by examining the patterns of why we and others things begin and end, we can possibly gain some valuable insight on how everything began and how it will inevitably end.

As living beings we tend to focus on the active side of things. We don't say we are dying, we say we are living, but in fact are doing both. Both these opposites needs to be present for any life to actually exist. Similarly allot of other opposites are present in our lives like inhaling and exhaling when we breath. Two opposites will inevitably become one. This is probably the source of fundamentalism where we focus on only one side of an aspect, instead of seeing it as a whole.

When we look at a sun, it turns all the energy it gets from burning helium and hydrogen gas into harder metals. When we look at engineers, farmers and mothers they turn all their energy which they get from food into bridges, earth and children. But sooner or later all things have to come to an end. A sun explodes or becomes ash and a person dies. These processes are not fruitless, because in space and on earth, death which was preceded by life allowed energy to spread/move.

Stars and galaxies move away not only from us, but also from one another. The only conclusion that could be derived from a universe where everything moves away from everything else is that the universe constantly 'expands'. The same can be said about our organs and cells inside our body, they constantly move away form each other because as living beings we are growing. The Billions of cells in our body move to bring oxygen to our organs. The billions of galaxies move to probably do the same type of function.

Inside our bodies cells and organs experiences a dark place because of the boundary of our bodies. When there is no light, the universe also appears to be a very dark place, we are perhaps stuck in the same structure. The human body or other living beings make life for viruses possible, without living beings there wont be viruses. The same can be applied on a bigger scale, the living thing called “the universe” makes life possible for the virus called humanity. if a virus is going to survive it needs to find away to infect another human body or else it will die with its host. When all the lights in our universe inevitably goes out(entropy) humanity too will need to find a way to infect another universe or we will die with this one.

The inner workings of the universe is hard for us to fathom because of the size. 1 second for us is possibly a billions years in comparison to the life of a universe. We know nothing of the outside of the universe, because the darkness proves we are confined to its inner workings. The universes rich, lucid, pulsing, full of life appearance shows its is perhaps a giant living organism. Life beyond the universe is more than perhaps mere duality or our understanding of life and death. Our organs are made up of matter produced in a sun. It takes not even a small stretch of imagination to see for example a galaxy to also function like a organ or a cell, for it also contains all the matter we are made off and more.

Selfishness, our true nature.

I asked myself the question, why do I not go out and kill another person? Even though I'm not a religious person I believe myself to be a moral person, but is it really morality that keeps me from killing another person? Reason leads to self preservation, a potent force when decisions that may put me in danger needs to be taken. Even if you ask a person why he/she would not kill another person, the responses would be they are afraid of hell, jail, injury or perhaps the moral response, because it is wrong. But in times of war we gladly throw morality out the door in order to justify our killing. Even when our life is threatened we gladly throw morality out the door to protect our own dignity.

This leads me to think that all our actions in life are in fact selfish acts. Even if we look at selfless acts like helping others or love, it can be argued that these are selfish acts in itself. Why would you give your life for someone you love? It is because you are trying to protect a bond that was created. Even if you help others, you do it to get a warm fussy feeling inside. We only see two things in people, what we wanna see and what they wanna show us. With Self deception so rampant in human society, no matter how close we think we are to a person there will always be a infinite distance that separates us.

Any rational argument can only take place when it is based on a certain premise. Lets accept the premise that we are inherently selfish, what would this structure help us explain? If we look at western individualism, could there economic success perhaps not be because they nurtured the selfish nature of there population. Freedom of Self expression and self identity fuels innovation and diversity which in turns leads to great leaps of self discovery and awareness. These great personal achievements surely improves the welfare of the entire group.

There comes a point in life when you must realize that everything you know about yourself is just conditioning. It is the rare man who truly know who he is. Real self awareness is perhaps the closest we will ever get to some sort of freedom.

Traits, the structure of individual personality

Here are some personalities.

The theoretical person

The theoretical person is the intellectual person who values knowledge, seeking eternal truths rather than the deeper meaning in things. He or she tends to generalize, not noticing the particular in the general, which makes him or her wise, rather than clever, where the particular is concerned. He or she values objectivity, which makes true or false the real criteria for truth.

The economic person

The economic person is driven by a utility motive which is seldom satisfied because he or she is constantly in a state of striving to produce something visible. He or she sees work and income as synonymous. Both involve utility and sustained yields of products, which are the factors by which the economic person renews himself or herself psychologically.

The economic person is more in contact with reality than the theoretical person, in that knowledge is only valued if it has a practical purpose.
The economic person basic motive is to maintain himself or herself, which means that his or her ego is the most important aspect of life.

The social person

The social person is the selfless person who lives through other people. He or she only becomes a person in own right by giving and receiving love, and when the need to receive love becomes a need to give love, his or he genuine social nature evolves. A social person is not interested in theoretical or objective knowledge of people, but is focused on sympathy, empathy and acceptance of positive and the negative. If involved in economic activity , the social person has no concern with acquisitiveness, but only with service to others.


The power person

The power person finds meaning in life by experiencing himself or herself as power. His or her strongest motive is to confirm this life power by being superior to other people. The power orientation is an inner compulsion that the individual has to express. IT can be expressed by using theoretical knowledge. Economic utility, aesthetic beauty or religious piety as personal characteristics to rise above other people.

The religious person

all aspect of The religious persons life have a spiritual foundation. He or she sees nothing as existing in itself, because everything is part of the spiritual, of which god is the objective correlate. Belief is seen as the highest form of knowledge.
The religious value orientation is closely related tot the social orientation, because it involves love, but for god nto a person.

The aesthetics person

The aesthetics person gives form to his or her inner being by aesthetic experience. He or she can transform something from any sphere of life, be it intellectual. Spiritual, physical or emotional, to an experience of beauty.


Traits, The structure of personality.

Sociability, risk taking, impulsiveness, expressiveness, lack of reflection, lack of responsibility, low self esteem, unhappiness, anxiety, obsessiveness, lack of autonomy, hypochondria, guilt, aggressiveness, assertiveness, achievement orientation, manipulation, sensation seeking, dogmatism, masculinity, trusting, group orientated, imaginative, etc These are some traits that form a structure for a personality to manifest. Different environmental influences can cause changes in these traits, but these changes depends on the strength of the current personality and some traits already in the structure of the individual personality. This can have a variety of effects depending on the diversity and strength of traits. Some of these influencer's are : Friends, Family, Lovers, Intellectuals, The Self, Near death experience, etc A dominant trait will manifests itself with the help of influencer's. When for example a new trait like anxiety is introduced into the structure it can spiral out of control when a low self esteem or similar trait is already present in the structure. But when a dominant trait like risk taking is present in a structure, anxiety would have less of a dramatic impact on the structure and the personality. Why? Because Traits can be put into categories, Low self esteem and anxiety are emotion/neuroticism based traits while risk taking is extrovert/introvert based traits.

If we for example look at Knowledge structures from experience. Structural coupling is influenced by all types of perception form basic visual pattern to complex behavioral sequences which can become automatized with use. Decisions that initially require considerable conscious thought can, in fact, become effortless and occur with little or no awareness. For example a person who repeatedly “learn” through experience or through cultural teaching that a particular type of person e.g Atheist is a “threat' it can automatically perceive almost any action by a member of that group as dangerous and remain unaware of the multiple inference he or she made in coming to that perception. This dynamic can easily lead to a shot first ask questions later mentality. Indeed this is a form of automatized hatred, suspicion and preemptive aggression. Have you ever wondered why theists almost always attack the moral fiber of an atheist? These responses clearly indicate some dominant traits in the structure of a personality, Dogmatism and manipulation. These traits can be found in the tough-minded/psycotism category which makes it easy to identify the key influencer's of these type of traits, family and culture!

If you look at double personalities then logically 2 dominant traits from different categories can not be present in the same structure. So how can we go about explaining people who claim multiple personalities. Is it a scapegoat for the insanity plea?, is modern TV perhaps influencing this perceived state of altered consciousness? One psychiatric observer (Schafer, 1984) estimates a rapidly increasing incidence of people experiencing multiple personalities. This also reminds me of statistical increase in UFO sightings after the first alien movies of the 1920's How much of a influence does social happenings have on our perception of the world? Our perception of the world shapes our traits thus our personality. Religion and double personalities can easily be ego states in which the individual finds creative ways of expressively elaborating oneself in a psychotherapeutic setting. In a world where critical thinking can benefit the population, one would first need to decrease the impact of certain dominant traits in order to remove the magical, mystical, or pathological emphases which are a confounding source of these formations.

This for me is the primary reason why a debate between atheists and theists are so fruitless and pointless. It is impossible to change someones personality, because a theist would not see an atheist as a trusted source who can influence his/her dominant traits.

The Structure of Nature

Every cell in all living organisms is enclosed in a membrane. Even our entire human body is encased in a membrane (our skin). Membranes can be seen as a gateway to what is inside and what is outside. Even our psychological processes and societal systems have “membranes” our habits, culture, attitudes and social customs define “us”� as different from “them.”� We are free to move between the outside and the inside of membranes, thus causing growth. Without the Structure that membranes provide nothing would exist. All our cells in our human body form part of a system in order to allow us to survive. That is why ideologies form naturally, because it is the structure that allows communities to survive.

When all our cells come together, it forms a human body. When all human thoughts come together it forms a ideology. This is the nature of membranes, to provide a structure for everything. We like to believe that we are free thinkers. But in fact all that we are free to do is to move from one known structure to another, to recognize a opposite in known structures, or to recognize a pattern between multiple structures and create a group structure for them. Our thoughts are doing exactly what biological processes in nature is doing. Thoughts are evolving because of interactions with other thoughts and they are forming groups, thus clumping together just like our cells. This would make logical sense because after all our thoughts is a product of biology and thus not free to think it can function outside a realm of its structure.

Two predators hunting the same game can not exist peacefully side by side in nature. Thus two thoughts Atheism and theism hunting for the same answer also cant live side by side peacefully. In nature the strongest predator will survive the longest, in society the same will apply to the two thoughts. The only way for both thoughts to survive is to recognize a common pattern between them and thus group them together in one structure. But the battle for dominance wont stop in the collective structure, new evidence for example would cause one thought in the structure to become more dominant thus overpowering the other thoughts and destroying the structure in order to create a new Structure. The same thing happens in nature when a new trait among species evolve after thousands of years of interaction with new environmental influences a better equipped organism can then become dominant or be better suited for the environment .

Critical Thinking allows us to see flaws in structures. Thus Weeding out the weaker structures. The law of nature is that the strongest will survive. Those organism that has a weakness will not survive. Thoughts are doing the exact same thing, in order to survive they are naturally creating a perfect structure without weaknesses.

Labels in atheism, philosophy and science.

Have you ever noticed how in a debate we often direct the discussion by labeling the participants? For example in a intelligent design vs. evolution debate. Issue of atheism always seems to crawl to the service. An Atheist label says hardly anything about a person, but this looks to be the most effective way of discrediting any opponent amongst Christian fundamentalists. Labeling seems to have its advantages and disadvantages. It can be helpful to understand a person background, knowledge and authority on a matter. On the other hand it causes a them vs. us mentality

An Atheist does not believe in god because of the lack of evidence there is to support his existence. That does not mean atheists are completely unreasonable to not even consider the possibility of God. Here is one of the Ten Commandments “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.” This is a commandment which an atheist is technically following, with the lack of evidence there is for God there is no reason to make a Idol out of any religious God because there book written thousands of year says so.
There is a great number of things we believe without evidence. We believe our senses give us accurate information about the world, that knowledge can only be acquired through evidence, that knowledge is even possible. We are all people of faith in a sense. Will my car explode if I start it? Is my food safe to eat? Atheists as much as theists base allot of their decisions on faith. All Humans carry the necessary philosophical presuppositions in order to be considered rational. Thus do we as atheists have the right to criticize other people for sticking to their belief based on faith? A preoccupation with an ideological label can mean that really important information is ignored.



It’s interesting how we are always so eager to point to a person bias, while we in fact come with biases of our own. The scientific process is there to try and sort out what’s true without being misled by our own and other people’s personal biases and beliefs. So often in a search for empirical evidence people use philosophical arguments to support their unscientific positions, such as intelligent design? Philosophical arguments play a central role in theology after all. Objective reality is what keeps science honest. But even objectivism gets abused when it gets sticker slapped onto reality. Philosophy and logic are used dishonestly when the discussion is just to justify our own preconceived positions, or to ’shoot down’ opponents arguments. Arguments are just ways of avoiding the real evidence. And there is always the way that words are used. Philosophical categories are usually not defined and very often participants will understand them differently. Without common meanings discussions become irrelevant.

How often do we hear science being criticized as ‘materialist’ where ‘matter’ is assumed to be only something with physical substance? Criticism is not relevant to modern science as any simple consideration of the history of science will show.

Mediation, Consciousness, Sleep and Awareness.

For the past 3 years I have examined several sources and practiced several forms of meditation in an attempt to understand the relationship between consciousness, awareness and sleep. It is hard to find a point to systematically explain my thoughts on this matter, but I will try my best.

First I am going to explain Awareness. In mediation awareness is classified as a point where you are detached from your thoughts, but your thoughts flow like water. This simply means you are actually listening to your thoughts instead of thinking them. We are a sum of our parts, so awareness on this level simply means we are tuning into a part of ourselves. Our brain actually has a build in spam filter. The activities in the brain happen so fast, that we do not notice them. Meditation builds focus and thus makes it possible to observe a certain functions of our brain.

Adult dreams for example differ in degrees of self-awareness into full lucidity. Psychologically and biologically we advance in a dream state. First your consciousness shuts down, your body relaxes. You do dream in this stage, because the part of your brain that is responsible for thoughts is still active. We just don’t remember it, because our brain is in a slow wave pattern which causes the conscious part not to register it. It is in REM sleep when our brain waves speed up and our heart rate increases that we start to register the thoughts. I have easily achieved extremely lucid scenarios while meditating. This mainly happens because my consciousness was active thus I was able to register the thought and evolve them thus be lucid. When you are asleep it is allot harder to register and follow thoughts. l\Lucid dreaming is, at its simplest, the emergence of consciousness in "unconsciousness".

Higher states of consciousness is that the "self" transcends the limits, what limits you ask? The obvious limits, its opposite! For example in above mentioned scenario, awareness is turned back on itself and is aware only of itself. A mental technology like meditation can be used in order to recognize and utilize more opposites. Meditation and REM sleep are the same in its effect on waking activities, these activities are enhancement on both physiological and psychological functioning. Thus theoretically we are increasing our brain capacity by using more (opposite) analyzing techniques that we don’t normally use. This psychological and biological enhancement of REM is especially evident with the further de-embedding from lucid dreaming to the sleep consciousness of "witnessing", where the silent, blissful experience of pure consciousness is experienced.

L. Ron Hubbard, yes I know he is a science fiction writer. He wrote a book called Dianetics, Great book. But what really got me thinking was something he mentioned. We have an unconscious desire to return to the womb. The pre-birth state of safety and comfort when we were one with the mother. This state of pre-existence (before the pain of birth and the agony of a separate existence) can be considered the unconscious source of religious myths about a lost paradise. Conditions like alcoholism, violence, and suicide can thus be viewed as psychoanalytically stemming from the unresolved desire to return to this "oneness." The point I am trying to make is that we are perhaps more connected to our awareness of things and that we function in boundaries that were unconsciously created to protect us. Our evolution surely depends in our abilities to overcome these boundaries.

Freedom

Self-efficacy, need for achievement, how easily you get distracted and impulsiveness are all factors we need to consider, work on, and improve if you want to achieve any big goals you set in life. The thing is we try to achieve the things in life that we expect we will succeed in. This of course is because we do not want to harm the ego. The ego is a big part of our self worth concepts. Ego is of course also a greedy fucker; it prefers to get rewarded now instead of delaying a reward. The bigger your tolerance for delays the more you keep it in check and thus open yourself up to bigger rewards. The concept we are talking about here is motivation over time.

A significant number of top chess players throughout history have gone a little crazy including the famous world champion Bobby Fisher. Even Einstein who occasionally forgot where he lived was seen as a little crazy. Could it be that these great men in history had abnormal minds or does going a little crazy work in our favor perhaps? If you have a goal and focus in life then petty things start having no purpose. Our comfortable routines prohibit us from dedication. Now I ask, what is the difference between dedication and crazy? Both will give you the focus you need, but a sense of understanding of these emotions is needed if you are to use them for motivation over time.

I will start explaining on how to understand these emotions physically by first looking at Persuasion.
People develop certain responses to certain stimuli. It is because of these responses to certain stimuli that make it possible to predict behavior and therefore persuade others. Unfortunately it is the same responses that make it possible to manipulate or be manipulated by. Persuasion influences thoughts and action through specific strategies. In Psychology Pleasure and pain can be strong motivators for persuasion but your values will determine how you will interpret it. Persuasion is simply leading people down a path to their most logical conclusion. The thing we need to understand here is that there comes a time when you need to persuade yourself. If you can’t persuade yourself or open yourself up to the “music” then words like dedication and focus are nothing more than words. You need to convince, imagine and feel the pleasure of where your determination can lead you. There is only one person standing in your way, and that person is you. If you are happy with average or are already dead in your comfortable routine then perhaps you need to start building on your imagination first, or else you will never escape the mud that you created. Once you are on your way to your goal and you can actually see the blocks fall in place because of your hard work you open yourself up to some of life’s most beautiful “music” and that is true Freedom.

Revolution Vs Evolution

In society when we want to implement a change we go through all the legal and peaceful means of trying to achieve it, but sometimes we engage in a revolution against a regime when above methods fail or we are on our last resort. It is in these times of stagnation that unrest overflows and a revolution becomes more likely.

In nature if we equate evolution with adaption and random interaction with the environment like dna mutation etc. Evolution clearly depends on competition. Where does a revolution fit into? If we look at the above mentioned pattern then technology is obviously a revolution in nature. Humanity stagnated, we did not evolve anymore, but there was still other planets and solar systems to feed on. A revolution was needed. Evolution in society and even in nature seems to be predictable. A revolution on the other hand destroys any pattern.

Nature and society form two parts of a single historical process. But they are basically different, contradictory parts. Other living beings have history made for them; we make our own history.
Animals depend upon the available food and other features of their environment for survival; they cannot alter or discard their specialized organs and ways of life to cope with sudden changes. Entire species can perish when their habitats change too rapidly and radically. Humans, on the other hand, are not subjected to any particular environment or mode of adaptation. We can adjust to new conditions, meet changes, and even institute them by inventing new tools and techniques and producing what we need. Clearly humanity was part of some sort of revolution in nature since we do not form part of the predictable part of nature. We consciously plan humanities further growth.


What if life is nothing special? if there are trees or any life on a planet there will be its opposite that would consume it. This is nature, opposites will always attract. As long as the opposing forces are in balance the totality appears stable, harmonious, at rest. But this is a transient condition. Sooner or later, alterations in the inner relation of forces, and interactions with other processes in the environment, upset the achieved equilibrium, generate instability, and can eventuate in the disruption and destruction of the most hard-and-fast formations.

In predictable evolutionary terms humanity could terraform other planets. find new sources of food etc. But surely another revolution is afoot. Something that would drastically change everything as we know it or will come to know it!

The Pattern

What is the difference between humanity and a burning piece of wood?

Both needs oxygen to survive.
Both needs something to consume to stay alive.
Both turns gray
as time fades away.
Both have byproduct, because of consumption.
Both needs to spread as a primary function.

A fire is perhaps nothing more than a chemical reaction, thus humanity is nothing more than a more complex chemical reaction. The variety of matter that forms part of our body simply means we will burn or react differently than a simple piece of wood.

Billions of cells can be found in one body.
Billions of people can be found on one planet.
Billions of planets can be found in one galaxy.
Billions of galaxies can be found in one ?

Before life could evolve it needed allot of oxygen. Oxygen gave movement to the cells.
Before planets could evolve it needed allot of space. Space gave movement to planets.
I am a firm believer than even space evolved in a sense. If you imagine a positive and negative force that attracts each other. Almost like two magnets against each other. What would happen if both the positive and negative force constantly got more and more. Sooner than later those forces would not withstand the pressure anymore and it would start break in the middle were there is the most pressure. The entire "magnet" would not break. Those particles of the broken positive and negative sides would now be able to roam free in the space that was created because of the fracture. Now the question is, how do you increase the positive and negative force? If we look at the 4 forces of the universe, one of them is electromagnetic. Thus the answer could be electricity.

Thus anyone else have some theories on how life could have evolved from 1 thing?