Wonderful World of the World with Beautiful Beings
Evolution and Art / Evolución Arte / Evoluzione Arte / We are the World .... / definition evolution / paglalarawan pagbabago / definición evolución / definição evolução

[Anything which] is a living and not a dying body... will have to be an incarnate will to power, it will strive to grow, spread, seize, become predominant - not from any morality or immorality but because it is living and because life simply is will to power... 'Exploitation'... belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will to life.
from Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, s.259, Walter Kaufmann translation.

At the present increasing growth rate humans in say 10.000 years will be like dinosaurs.And travel in groups per kind of supertanker, or individually with private zeppelins. To survive in evolution the talking apes (humans) need to stop wasting energy with lies.
Humans are Beautiful but Tricky Animals Michael Jackson in "Earth Song": AHAAAAHAAHAAHAHAHA!! What have we done to the world?!

what a weird blue movie what a nice blue movie
Ape with Production Error (Lying Ape in Stone Jungle)
Life on earth contains overlapping models of evolution (biodiversity). Humans as superior to animals, is Roman Catholic arrogance. A HUGE waste is death of 1 part without heaving copied it's essential knowledge. Nature always wiped out killers of billions of years old knowledge. Even Law and Order Forces like the American Enterprise Institute, or with license to kill like the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the US National Security Agency.
A lot of earth life is unique. It is arrogant and EXTREMELY shortsighted to destroy parts of nature. Those easily could contain knowledge needed for survival in space. Spiders could for instance in many ways be better equipped than humans to tackle worlds that transport through air AND on surface. Plants and animal contain more wisdom then concrete beehives crowded with billions of dressed apes

Human animals might be seen as 'Dancers', redirecting the forces around, to move themselves.
And in expert way, creating the illusion that human animals move by themselves
web animated running spider
It's rational to divide animals in grades of extreme, they are ALL part of Earth life
Origin of Life: Evolution = Chance + Selection
dices from tc weidner
Evolution is a try-out process, so in denial of what often is said it can't bargain. But gambling and balancing is close to trying out. Evolution proceeds in 'gambling way' (trial and error) and passively saves surviving behavior (balancing).
That is: PHYSICAL intelligence changes fight in random way with as only criterium surviving. Surviving behavior becomes semi-permanent as 'physics'. All such surviving intelligence is stored as natural ethics in our body as DNA, causing intuition. These intuitions cause moods that trigger reactions

We human apes are poor swimmers because sharks easily catch olympic record holders. The survivors are happier than the sharkmenu, and evolution aims at with minimal energy maximizing enduring happiness. In evolution only what survives for a very long time is intelligent. And the success of abstract ideas can only be measured in our physical surviving. Being eaten by sharks in not intelligent. Being eaten with or without doping is unimportant. That is something like the best progressing random generator.
Computers are fine (nearly) random generators and promise an enormous increase in the ability to escape 'sharks'.

If humans don't stay successful (i.e. escape 'sharks' like 'global warming') than they will be dumped because of unsufficient intelligence. What are such evolutionary problems you might ask. That's not difficult, all questions concerning survival of life. The hole in the ozon-layer for instance is threatening life. Like an energy slurping Israel-Palestine Conflict. Evolution 'answers' with an increase in life-forms that can stand the particles out of space that enter through the ozon-hole. And are equipped with cultural relativism to avoid unnecessary energy loss.

But evolution is not in a hurry. Beings that can within a couple of ages repair a mistake, make a good chance to survive. By building on experience evolution seems to make a lousy engineer. SEEMS, but not really. A plus-point of humans seen through evolutionary criteria is that they are reasonable engineers, and start improving themselves. Humans are creatures of evolution, so in this way evolution handles engineering.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that humans can outrun 'gambling and balancing' (evolution). They might stay for the time being among the successful results in this paradigm, but they themselves are more and more changing conditions. That way a paradigm shift comes closer. There can come a time that evolution 'finds' a life-form that copes better than humans with the new conditions. Than anything may happen. Anyway, otherwise humans will slowly engineer the miraculously complex selves into awfully dum robots. Dum brute force (like capitalism) only temporarily survives. Realize though that evolution produced complex brains to save the body (mind body problem)

Balancing is a natural process, i.e. it happens everywhere in space. It the only thing that nature can 'actively' do, or in religious terms: what the gods do. There can be short term volcano-like outbursts, but on the long term everything smoothens (short term might be ages).

The big bang was one enormous outburst. After it smoothening or balancing started, and on earth shows beautiful results. Balancing is not a quiet process, it can be steered by local outbursts. These can be hardware outburst or software outbursts (sense-results of advanced beings = paradigm shifts). In my overview of 20th century philosophy I call it wrinkles in the water.

Software outbursts in robots will result in something similar as what got known as paradigm shifts. It will in the end lead to improvement of robots. Just like in roulette the green field finally will fall.

Like we know evolution is a chance-process so you never know what direction it takes. On other planets in space we therefore will meet weird looking life-forms.

Evolution develops by two major forces: semi-continuous change (puzzling) and discontinuous change (paradigm shifts).
The fact that Thomas Kuhn spoke about 'puzzling scientists' shows that he somehow grasped this process.
There is also the balance individual skill versus collective skill.

To finish this first part let's give one example and balancing in evolution. In general evolution is indifferent to time (or age, despite the age-industry). But is values effectivity, which often comes with youth. A way to 'trick' evolution into appreciating age is when the effectivity during youth partly comes from puzzling with the experiences of the aged. This is exactly what we see in the common sense of many cultures; showing respect for elder people and valuing their judgment. It is a way to get older.

And let's try to predict near future. Seen 'from a distance' on Earth the culture Buddhism is most fertile, followed by Christianity and Islam. Christianity got based on dubious ethics. Islam, though a muslim copy of ROMAN Christianity and having preserved valuable properties, is in an ethics and authority crisis.
So Buddhism seems the way of the future, and especially Christianity and Buddhism must come to some balance.
China, India, Thailand and The Phillippines look future center of power. Christian rationalism for technical skill is brought in by Taiwan and Hong Kong. Muslim traits come in through Indonesia.
Physics, Philosophy and Art

Everything existing in the universe is the fruit of chance - Democrites

Three on the first eye very different cultural views on happenings on the earth. And different they are, but similar in being views.

In the influential 20th century novel Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance the author Robert Pirsig (born 1928) tried in a inspirating way to create an understanding between these worlds. This by showing that driving motorbike is a philosophy of life that is related to own art (i.e. given in tattoos), and takes knowledge of the formal science physics. He wrote a very fine book, but his thinking is quite academic. I'll try to do the same in another more understandible way .

(Definition) Physics is daydreaming within the RULES that are dominant in a society. In Western Christian civilizations within the "Ten Commandmends", in Buddhism within the "Eightfold Path".
Try to imagine playing with cricket rules against a team that uses rugby law. That would make a mess.
All physic theories are based on basic concepts, and used to fill in a general LOCAL world of thought.

Physics became puzzling with rules in local 'reality'. Formal Physics became quite 'rational' and religious.

(Definition) Philosophy is slightly less formal. Here more often than in physics dreams are challenging, and contrary  to most physics dreams can start as mainly individual. Philosophy is daydreaming in the languages that are caused by 'reality'. It is a shape of Art, and sometimes completely Abstract Art. Already Ludwig Wittgenstein in his Philosophical Investigations pointed to the importance and relativity of languages seen as logic. In this article I communicate my 'dream' hopefully in a way that is attractive in all 3 major worlds. I.e. I'm able to use 3 major 'languages'. I can do this because I'm like a French cricket player who knows how to play rugby. And I think in the basic logic 'common sense', instead of using the branch 'rational thought'. Dreams in 'rational' formal Philosophy became monotonous like religious 'recitals' (dogmatic).

(Definition) Art usually is not formal at all. In poetry it daydreams in usual languages (usually not only 'rational' at all) to try to find a way that the mood of a pictured experience is caught well. Art can be seen as free dreaming. Art's main interesm are the moods caused by reality, whatever a mood may be. It tries with all kinds of means to evoke those moods. The moods 'love', 'respect' and 'creativity' are closely related, that's why efforts to portray love are common in art.
Only artists should realize that pure abstract thinking should be used VERY careful (it showed to be able to cause Nazism), and should be recognizably aimed at an ethically accepted goal (but a RELATIVE ethics).
Beauty is made in the Mind.

Love/Respect is Universal

Since European Enlightenment both physics and philosophy have become ever more based on only rational logic. That was perfect for industrialism, but proved disastrous for emotions and intuition. Friedrich Nietzsche in his biblical satire Also sprach Zarathustra already impregnantly pointed to this mistake in human evolution. Mind, the this way realized technical miracles should be cherished. But it's about time to change direction. Luckily emotions were preserved in Art and in the parallel total paradigms (cultures) Buddhism and Islam. You're lucky if you're in a colorful class with mixed cultures.

In music Art took already the lead. And it seems quite revolutional, 95 out of 100 creative people in the Western World are into music or dance. In all kinds of ways it sends the message: We Love Everybody!.
But working together is the way to use all available energy. Physics, Philosophy and Art could very well work together.
In that case a particular mistake should be corrected. Seeing intelligence only as capability in abstract is awfully limited. It helps to be creative if one is skilled in pure imagination, BUT certainly this is not sufficient, and not even necessary.

A well written physical or philosophic  article can be a piece of art, because it establishes the right kind of mood.

A painting, or a physical view can give rise to philosophic feelings.

And last but not least a piece of art or philosophic thoughts may evoke the mood for inventing a new physical theory.

All three ways seem to elevate human sense, and inspire it to make a jump. Such jumps in a physical view may be slight changes in the DNA-chain. In philosophy this became known as paradigm shift. And in art it is in some way realizing a new mood. Possibly all three are true, and it is not necessary to devaluate any view.

Back to Positive Action

Physics and Art could together try to find out what is a mood, and what establishes this?

Philosophy and Poetry (Art) could together study the evolution of languages

Physics and Philosophy could together design artificial languages, fit for a special purpose (like 'rational thinking' for technology).

If you look at people, then all of them have a view on their environment. You could say all of them are busy as physician, or in a philosophic or artistic way, only some more as a way of living.

It is a pity that in the present world the rational views got so dominant as to overshadow other ones. That means losing a lot of interesting ways to picture our surroundings. That's why the Critical Theory philosopher Herbert Marcuse mid 20th century spoke about a One-Dimensional World. In the book with this name he wrote in the school English of a former German, but very impregnant: The web of domination has become the web of Reason itself, and this society is fatally entangled in it. That appears to be of the wall, but it's worrying that he wrote this in 1964. See my article Web of Reason, placing the thoughts of Marcuse in the present.
The growing addiction to rationality should not be underestimated. What Critical Theory called 'legitimation crisis', is a still very thin top layer of society that got addicted to the dangerous hard drug rational behavior. And these local, national and international top-politicians, top-managers and top-scientists started acting as dealers.

In the past the many different ways of reacting to danger always saved us in time of crises. It gets increasingly easier for a virus (meant for computers or natural) to erase most of  human effort. That danger is much more probable than the earth being struck by a comet or a sun flare. (see my description of myths as having a potential destructiveness similar to viruses)

Richard Dawkins and Making Easy Things Difficult

Richard Dawkins around 1970 triggered the 'nature or nurture' debate among biologists. Dawkins was born and raised in East Africa.
His rational personal science priest (no offense) on university became Nico Tinbergen, a Dutch behavioral biologist. Tinbergen asked essential questions, but in 'rational' formulation. That is he presumes the existence of 'understanding'. So he askes a lot of difficult 'what is' questions, instead of easy 'how do' questions. Like what IS instinct instead of how do we recognize differences in behavior. What is learned (behavior) instead of how do we learn? What is the difference between instinctive and learned behavior, instead of how do we recognize differences in behavior. Why do animals cooperate instead of how do we recognize shapes of cooperation
But also: How does behavior change? How do animals communicate? How do animals behave differently in groups than they do as individuals? How do they compete?

Tinbergen was 'rationally brilliant. That is also the 'problem' of Tinbergen and Dawkins: making easy things difficult. On television Tinbergen proved to be a wise and nice guy, but his scientific articles were hard to read stuff. Not his 'fault', that was what scientists expected of a Nobel Prize winner. Common sense: science = creating fog.
In South Africa Nelson Mandela for sure is a unique person. Rationally educated on university. But already right now the apartheid black-white is changing in the new shape uneducated-educated. Things like molecular biology are just myths that make most people think that biology in main lines is difficult. It is awfully simple.
Dawkins made the view of Tinbergen his spectacles with VERY thick glasses for looking at the world.

Essential questions by Richard Dawkins: How do genes communicate? How do genes behave differently in groups than they do as individuals? Why do genes cooperate? He SEEMS to undervalue though that the genes only produce input for selection in the brain. It is in the brain where passive but lightning fast shuffling of sense-info takes place. Genes are quite essential, but behavior is made in the brain. If gene input is replaced by abstract manipulating, then genes lose. That is exactly what causes today's 'problems'.
Dawkins himself freely acknowledged that genes alone did not to explain evolution. That's why he invented the idea 'Memes' or "viruses of the mind". With 'memes' Dawkins points at 'cultural inheritance'. Dawkins uses many difficult concepts, as if life is 'scientific'.

The 'replicator' concept of Richard Dawkins is making easy things complex.. Dawkins is a typical scientist, and scientific local fantasies were the forces behind apartheid, slavery, world wars and 'management'. This by using ever more complex concepts to validate 'prejudices'.
Apart from being rational scientist though the obviously brilliant Dawkins makes many fine points.
Serious is that the brilliant scientific approach of Dawkins creates a subtile complex dense 'fog'. AND reduces earth life to machinery run by 'genes' and 'memes'.
But machines need a DECISION process and that is the ACTIVE 'selection virus' evolution. The 'selection virus' MIGHT have reached the earth by meteor. Anyway it turned a dead planet into a place of beauty. It created all pieces of the puzzle 'mammal', from bacteria to human brains. If anything deserves the name God, then for the time being it is this miniscule 'selection virus'. Inherently this is what Friedrich Nietzsche called will to power.

Dawkins is a fine guy, and brilliant. But ''science' is a disappearing paradigm. Not as technological tool, but as description of social reality. That's why it is better to replace the notion 'science' with 'wizardry'. Science became a way of creating fog. And of hiding that young humans between 12 and 18 are mentally adult. This by using complex abstract notions to make easy things difficult. Driven by being based on mind body split. Better from now on refer to a new breed of researchers as 'wizards', or 'ghostbusters'. Human intuition needs trust to develop 'wisdom'. Rational logic is fine to make intuition more reliable, but stand alone it is like a VERY dangerous infective virus. Changing shape all of the time.

As the very beginning of life on earth there arrived from space the invisibly tiny selection virus Will to Power, and in billions of years by using earth resources this life-unit kept changing earth reality by selection....

Evolution endlesly aims for maxizing happiness at minimal energy costs.
Human views should do the same.
Power is not similar to happiness, a mistake caused by Darwin's 'Law of the Fittest'.
That way only the strongest kid in the class sees the 'fata morgana' of getting wat it needs.
Having all liberty, BUT being terribly lonely. Even an Exterminator you wish a better destiny.
Scientists should come down their holy mountain, and learn from common sense as expressed in art.

The production error that made humans develop from apes, proved a lucky mistake. It gave humans talents that apes don't have. Although women use it much more integrated in the total brain, and more smoothly combine in their moods both ant and tiger behavior . Nevertheless if not all humans learn to combine both talentsthat might easily result in a total 'miscrop'.
That means: back again to level ape.

Observations: (1) Using mineral resources, based on the TEMPORARY value money is like using gasoline to drive 200 mph on the highway.
(2) So called OBJECTIVE morals only make sense within some absolute ethics (religion' like Roman Christianity).
Evolution built beings out of basic units. That way humans are a lot like ants (reptile behavior or collectivism) and also like tigers (individualism). Both awfully complex. Imagine a lame ant with hearing device crossing around in a teeny weeny 4 wheel drive wheelchair, that's the complexity of human technology. Some periods reptile behavior becomes dominating. Intuition is pure ant behavior, and awfully sophisticated. Armies are like ant colonies.That results in defensive attitude and ferocious wars.
Ant cultures renew by now and then finding a new queen. Sometimes near queens are born but missing some characteristic. Then some subcultures don't accept this poor queen, and destroy its influence some way. But be sure new queens will be born.

In comparison, in human culture Jesus was such a 'queen human', killed by power defending Pharisees and political thinking Romans. The French mythical person Joan of Arc had amazing talents, but ended on the stakes. Friedrich Nietzsche though mentally obviously one had the bad luck of not being sensed as a queen. Queens are genetically almost undistinguishable from other beings, but cultural behavior seems to trigger new queens being born. I.e. they love everybody of own culture unconditionally, and only this tiny difference makes them awfully 'smart'.

AIDS solution (not aiming at AIDS Cure): Evolution already cracked AIDS. The HIV-virus might be close to the 'evolution virus' (elementary creativity). That would mean that destroying it is as difficult as destroying 'life'. Easier and less destructive might be to find ways to cooperate. Humans are full of 'domesticated' viruses. Females for offspring better have sex with the postman, WHEN that produces HIV-immune babies. Common Sense aid that makes a difference would be: sending planeloads of HIV-immune potent postmen (peace soldiers). Even less energy costs than clever Artificial Insemination (AI).
'Love' and 'respect' and 'acting as individual' are terribly sophisticated mammal additions to 'life'. Balancing techno talent with respectful behavior is the challenge for the 21st century 'love generations'. It means recognizing and ignoring the roots for egoism, that is 'greed' and the fantasy 'spirit'.
Western World ethically returned to Dark Middle Ages

western world ethically returned to Dark Middle Ages; thanks for picture to Scroogle

A warning: In evolution temporarily unfulgrown animals can get dinosaurus strength while still using rat ethics, eating environment.
It helps to recognize capitalist USA as such a smart but destructive giant rodent, with even more agressive baby the state of Israel

The "Star Trek" Law Don't interfere with Evolution (Science Fiction), is awfully arrogant. It places Earth Humans outside Evolution, on level 'God'. Evolution is about Interference, or would someone prefer an Earth dominated by Dinosaurs. Interference is Decision Making. Decisions are discrete direction changes, not 'continous.

Jungles are MUCH MUCH more than fields with a lot of trees ('rational' production units).
Jungles are extremely complex living systems. Humans are only tiny pieces of a total jungle, only pieces are always in pace a bit 'faster' than the total puzzle. But even if pieces produce a complex computer toy like 'GMail', then still compared to the overall puzzle the puzzle-parts are elementary simple.
Jungles protect the life environment of all living beings. Some egoistic emotionless killerbee-humans 'rationally' considering jungles as mines for wood act like considering suicide, not recognized as such because jungles act in irrational pace.
Earth life is a culture of social jungles. One of these jungles is a rapidly growing 'rational' jungle, run by addicts of the hard drug 'rationality'. This more and more abstract drug-scene forces participant humans ethically back into virtual worlds (daydreaming in ethics as in the Middle Ages), and is nearly too empty to generate new life .....

During The Dark Middles Ages Catholicism did not succeed to introduce the Catholic idea I am designed by The Creator, and in suppressing the common sense wisdom: earth life consists of in long term surviving random mutations in evolution.
Life is Geology, Human Geography.

Earth is a ball, hot and fluid in the center, hard and massive on the surface, and with some meters of semi-hard biological life.
In the earth-soup different continental plates glide around.
Fluid earth moves very 'slow', biological life moves 'swift' like microbes or viruses.
Biological life sometimes jumps from plate to plate, unless there are temporary geological or cultural barriers.
The European microbe 'Alexander the Great' of strand 'Aristotelian' annihilates the benign Asian mind-virus Zoroastrianism in Persia.

On the European plate now the 'egoist' Aristotelian virus Roman Catholicism could develop instead of Zoroastrian Gnosticism.
The agressive virus 'Mohammedanism' as Muslim variant of 'Catholicism' blocked Buddhism (variant of Zoroastrianism) from the European plate.
Later Catholicism got an aggressive variant, called 'Protestantism'.
Protestantism jumped to the American plate, and after 'WWII' jumped back to Europe.
Agressive European Protestantism (British Empire) had meanwhile annihilated most competitors worldwide.
These 2 viruses merged become variant 'facism'.
'Fascism' now attacks Mohammedanism in Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq and also Asian Buddhism in China.
But it seems that in Asia a lot of cultures though infected are also largely resistant.
A mutant microbe Henk Tuten as kathalysator stimulates the Polynesian virus and the related Buddhist virus.
Now the movement reverses. The almost extinct Asian Polynesian common sense virus together with the Buddhist common sense virus rapidly expand.
Just wait ...
Life is a Unity.

Split of reality in immaterial 'spirits' and material 'flesh (split of 'Mind' and Body) or belief in 'souls' was introduced by biologer Aristotle (the tutor of Iskander the Cursed [also called Alexander the Great]). It is the arrogance of giving Greek humans a special place in Evolution, being chosen as carriers of 'spirits' or the immaterial 'children' of The Super Spirit = The Designer of Earth-Life.

Instead of realizing that abstract 'spirits' are brainwaves (wishful dreams), and that life on earth is a unity that is result of 'selection' following DECISIONS in 'evolution. This also inherently causes splits in sense experience like 'objective' and 'subjective and good and evil.
Every individual observation is 'subjective'.To see own individual local 'subjectivity' as 'objective' (abstract value) and 'good' (another abstract value) is hilarious arrogance, that started with Aristotle and many ages later was made 'definitive' in a dense fog of 'rational' hallucinations by Immanuel Kant.
Human life is only a tiny part of total life, in some ways 'smart', in many ways a failure.

Life of 5 billion of humans mainly is controlled by 3 Western dollar collectors (MULTI billionares).
The Challenge for the evolving 'Love Generations' is to create a world based on Respect.
Or Evolution will be pushed by conditions towards a next Ice Age in Europe and America.
queen human