|
SOCIAL
EVOLUTION: NETWORKS
Social evolution transforms herds into organisms In the organic
Universe, there is a property common to all species: they gather
in herds, in waves and ecosystems. In other words: species socialize. Herds
are every where and as they gather they follow similar patterns, in
the form and functions performed by each cell, part of the herd.
Why all those herds have similar behavior? Social Evolution Vs Darwinian Devolution Indeed. What is the essence of all those Universal Organisms? A word for long denied by abstract scientists, opposed to all what remotely resembles the social ideals of Religion: organic evolution. We call Organic, or Social evolution to the process by which individual beings, become organized into herds and social organisms: It is a fact that individuals of similar form, from galaxies to cells, from humans to rats, come together and evolve into complex ecosystems, herds and organic forms, in which they share energy and information among themselves. Thus Social evolution is the most extended phenomena in the Universe. Indeed, for all what have been said, about organisms, nature proves ad infinitum that individuals of the same species evolve socially, and such strategies are superior strategies of survival, to the individual, selfish pursuit of energy and Information between elements of the same species. It follows that there are two Universal Mandates that all species follow. Two mandates that are opposed, and create the paradoxes of behavior we observe in the species of the Universe: The Darwinian mandate of 'feeding' that individuals of different species follow to feed into each other. The Social Mandate of 'Evolution' that individuals of the same species follow to become herds, able to hunt better other species. It is related to circular, and parallel movements, that allow communication between two forms. So we will often find both kind of relationships and forces. There will be cold fusion created by cyclical, parallel movement of hydrogen forms, and hot fusion caused by collision. There will be gravitational cycles of social evolution as in star systems and solar system, and there will be gravitational, Darwinian feeding, when perpendicular collisions destroy a mass that feeds into the other. There will be perpendicular magnetic fields that feed an electric fields of light, and parallel photons of different colors that shape a herd of light. Sciences however, have taken very long to accept this fact, influenced by the excessive importance that their founder, Darwin, gave to the fight between individuals, and the disdain physicists in general display for social ethics - given their often asocial job, designing weapons that exterminate humans. In Logic we call an error the part of reality that a certain theory is unable to explain. In that sense we can talk of Social Evolution as the Error of Darwin. That is, the part of biological behavior, he could not explain, and most evolutionist still deny. Again this dogmatic barrier is falling too slow. A decade ago, I hardly could explain the foundations of Theory of Organisms to any scientist. It is important however to become aware of the difference between the most simple, popular, Theory of Evolution (Darwinism, the fight between species); and the most recent and complex Theory of Evolution (Social Evolution, that deals with the symbiosis between individuals of the same species.) Social Evolution studies the way in which individuals of the same species, organize themselves into societies, stronger, fitter to survive than individuals. For example, today we know that individual all-powerful lions are far less successful capturing preys that dull hyenas and wild dogs that hunt in group (-25% of captures in lions Vs +80% of captures in wild dogs). Thus social evolution, contrary to common belief is much more efficient than dog-eat-dog Darwinian devolution. This means that Darwinism is a simple, partial theory. While Social Darwinism (the competence between human beings) is plainly wrong, as it confronts people of the same species against the natural, loving laws of the social Universe. Of course individuals fight among them, but the key to survival is not the individual fighter but the cohesion and organization of a group, fighting together against rival species. Take the case of Germany. In its nazi age, despite its ideology of social Darwinism, what really worked in that nation was the group, the German collective spirit, that made the German army better than individualistic Italians, or disorganized Russians. Yet his despise for the rest of Humanity, against the real laws of the Organic Universe, caused his demise and partial extinction as a nation. The example is relevant because it proves the way the Universe imposes his laws: not in a mechanical way, as a miracle natural to its species (abstract science) but in a organic way. If you do not obey as Germans and mankind as a whole does today, the laws of social evolution, and you kill your own species, you end up extinct. So you no longer can disturb the laws of the Universe. Extinction is indeed the way to reinforce any law, from human laws (death penalty), to universal laws, as harsh as it sounds. God is Just, and gives you certain freedom of behavior, but often is cruel with those who do not obey those laws, because God indeed plays with charged dices. The survival advantages of social evolution apply in fact to all species in the Universe, from herds of stars (galaxies) to herds of atoms (molecules), that capture lonely ones, to human societies, that should become a single planetary nation, in order to survive as a species (see last chapter.) Unfortunately Darwinism is very popular among economists, scientists and the military, in as much as it validates their abstract, lethal behavior with nature and mankind. So it has become the leading historic and economic theory and today reigns supreme in human behavior with the lethal consequences we all know. It is all wrong. In the XX century new discoveries in complexity sciences, ecology, and biology, have proved that the Universe is based in the social evolution of individuals into groups - the key to understand the entire Universe in a harmonic way. Since only Social evolution can explain the growth of species in the Universe, in scale and size, from micro to macro-organisms, from individuals into societies. The law of social evolution is the law of social religions When we apply those laws to human social organisms, it turns out that oddly enough for those who tend to ignore verbal theories of reality such as scientists do, that the law of social evolution is the same law spelt by all social religions: 'love=communicate with each other'. Love indeed, not competence is the law between cells of the same species. Something economists, and the military should remember, before using again their arguments in favor of human competence, based in the other Universal law of behavior, 'Darwinian fight', which however doesn't apply to human beings, but to humans Vs rival species, such as 'weapons' and other lethal machines. I remember a beautiful film called the '7 Samurai'. A group of peasants becomes organized and finally despite individual cowardice, together they are able to defeat the individual fighters. You can compare individuals with bacteria, which are stronger than social cells but become defeated by social organisms. So happens to the Homo bacteria Bandits, in that film. The individual 'bacterium' might be stronger than the social cell. As the warrior might be stronger than the community on which he preys. Yet when social cells organize they are stronger than individual bacteria. So happens in history when humans organize in societies based in social evolution, in love, in communication. They can defeat the primitive, arrogant, Homo warrior. That is in essence the way the Universe fights unruly individuals: through social evolution among similar species, able to communicate, isolate and exterminate the arrogant cells. The arrogance of science and human beings. That arrogance of the Scientist that wants to be the only willing, intelligent being in this Universe, similar to the arrogance of Vatican Priests that did not want to be moved from the center of creation, is probably the fundamental reason why science has not concluded earlier that the universe is made up of such organic systems. For one thing, man would not have the capacity to understand dogmatically the behavior of a organic Universe made of multiple organic parts, neither rule by mechanicism, or a shallow understanding of Evolution as a mere chemical, dog-eat-dog phenomena. Unlike a mechanical Universe in which there are not surprises of behavior, in an intelligent, multi-polar Universe there will be multiple points of view. And many decisions will be made by all the organisms out of human perception. In such Universe both perception and truth would be relative, to the different languages, and informative organs of each species (see chapter VIII). Such universe will not accept mechanical statements such as those typical of mathematical sciences. All laws would be probabilities, distributions of behavior proper of herds that act together. And so the pretension of absolute truths that scientists hold today would fall down. Neither the scientist could hold the fantasy of absolute knowledge and supreme intelligence that permeates science as a religion of truth, since Kepler compared his intelligence to that of God. And finally in a social Universe, the old ideas of western religions about love would be validated. This positive influence that understanding of social evolution could bring to mankind is paradoxically the key point that explains the enormous resistance I have found for a decade to explain the Universe in relativistic, organic, social terms. Since it would imply that science has social responsibility with the machines and consequences of his discoveries (see last chapter). Of course it should not surprise us at all that the mass of mankind, which do obey the laws of social evolution scorns such scientific high-minded despise for evident truths that favor our future as a species, as a prove of the callousness and indifference to people of abstract scientists. And it is difficult to deny that such callousness exists, when we hear the statements of physicists, Darwinian evolutionists and leading robotists (such as Mr. Teller, Mr. Moravec, or Mr. Minsky), playing God, talking about our extinction in the nearby future. And yet working in that extinction manufacturing the weapons and robots that they say will kill us. Yet in the real Universe the role of scientists is much more humble (see Chapter 12), and not so bright. In the real Universe the scientist is just another perceptive point, and one with great responsibility as he constructs the machines and most lethal species of the economic ecosystem. To avoid that responsibility it is far easier to adopt, as the priests did in the Middle ages, a dogmatic attitude about the Universe, and deny any non-abstract theory even if it explains better reality. We don't believe, what we don't see, and yet we see so little. Still I'm aware you'll find our proposal very difficult to accept, for 2 reasons: - The organicism and perceptive/informative capacity of any organism depends on the language of perception of that organism, which in many cases is invisible and very different to any human language. So as we do not perceive gravitation, it is for us "magic" to think that a black hole might be the central brain of a galaxy, perceiving gravitational waves of a star-like amplitude. So happens with many other organisms. How could it be the smelling mind/ intelligence/perception of an ant or a dog? We don't know as we have a visual mind. Yet those minds are the inner elements of organisms we are not concerned with: perception is relative to the species and language that perceives. Yet we can compare species, languages, forms and behavior and extract parallelisms on which our laws of Universal organisms will be based. Indeed, what matters to us is the organic consequences of those inner languages and virtual worlds of perception. This is much easier to grasp: if your virtual world of the universe is more complex, and scans very fast the Universe, your mind is more efficient and it will survive. So minds suffer also an external evolution and organic struggle for existence, based in their competence to scan faster, and understand better the world around them - in order to avoid enemy hunters and find energy food needed to survive. - The 2nd barrier for man to accept such living properties of universal species is the present superiority of mankind, over all other species of the planet due to his intelligence... Yet in the age of mental machines and computers that think millions of times faster than we do, in objective terms those myths no longer hold. Unfortunately man is not objective when assessing his real power. If the Vatican priests have taken centuries to recognize that the sun does not turn around the Earth, we might imagine how long it will take mankind to understand that we are not different in quality, but only in degree of evolution, to any other living species. To sustain our anthropocentrism we consider without any reason that our components are special, that our atoms are special, that our organisms are special, and cannot be homologous to other Universal organisms. Be aware though that the ultimate barrier for you to understand those properties is not reason but faith, an arrogant faith on your special role in the Universe, a myth so subconsciously built in your mind, that you will tend to reject any fact that contradicts it. Specially facts that downplay your importance, either because they upgrade other universal organisms to a level of natural intelligence you wish to have only for yourself; or because they downplay your scientific or religious dogmas and absolute truths, making them relative. Western thought Vs Eastern thought This self-centered opinion of man about himself, is also reinforced in Western civilization, our global civilization, by religious myths of human superiority. An Asian classic thinker may accept the concept of a living Universe, made of organisms of yin (information) and yang (energy), in a state of constant transformation. A Greek philosopher, (Plato or Aristotle), may affirm that all living things are organic, or depend on a organic, relative 'God'=brain of information that controls the movements of its surroundings (Plato affirmed that the Universe was one of such beings, gifted with a body and a soul). Yet a Western man considers organic phenomena from a personal point of view. For him, the only non-abstract being is himself: a special 'son of God' whatever that 'God' means to him. Here we ignore those myths of subjectivity. Rather, we adopt the Taoist and Biological belief that the Universe is a game of species, composed of organic energy-yang-body organs, and organic information-yin-brain, perceptive organs. Both together create a working organism in which the Informative organs of any species control the movements of its Energy organs. When we have the third element, the 'mother,' we have a species. Women (re)produce children. Company-mothers (re)produce products. DNA (re)produces through genetic assembly. So men, machines and DNA are organic species. Since, the amazing thing is that when we study the underlying logic of all those languages and the behavior of all those species, they display similar properties, that we can understand, and compare, (not necessarily measure), to have a wider, more complex, harmonic vision on how Organisms work as living systems; and what are the common laws of survival and extinction that create and destroy them. In this book we will explain you those basic laws, using all our languages of perception, from images to words, from numbers to logic. Since perceiving macrocosms, like galaxies or civilizations, and microcosms, such as cells and atoms, as organic systems, is the most logical way of "unifying" our understanding of the universe. In this manner we can create a new vision of the Universe in organic terms, describing all its species as herds with homogeneous properties. Networks create Organisms. Such herds
become organisms, because those forces of energy and information are
'organized' in networks, around which the cells of energy and information
gather. The difference between organisms, herds and ecosystems. All
species have Energy organs, information organs and reproductive organs
which allow the species to feed on energy, gather information, and reproduce.
We define an organism as a cellular herd able to gather energy and information,
and reproduce their cellular elements with reproductive networks. Yet
those three systems of all organisms - energy, information and reproductive
systems - do not have to be 'pegged' spatially, as they are in man,
to talk of an organism. Networks, the key element of organisms The
miracle of human life, the miracle of social behavior among men, as
something different from the life of other species, and organisms of
the universe such as cells, ant hills or robotic machines, is a myth.
The behavior of all species of the Universe can be perfectly explained
as a process of social evolution, caused by the existence of networks
of information, energy and reproduction. A living being, is a population
of social cells, joined by energy and information networks that create
the two elements of living organisms, the body and the brain.
In a cell the brain is the Nucleus of DNA, in an animal, the nervous
system, in a plant, the roots, in a carbohydrate the cycle of Carbon.
In our lab, we recharge those carbohydrate cycles with energy, and they
gather to shape the molecules of life. Yet those organic networks are
everywhere. Even a galaxy can be considered an organism, with a body-herd
of stars, and a black-hole brain that controls them with networks of
gravitational information. The key word is 'social network'. They are
the essence of life organisms. You need a herd of cells belonging to
the same species, DNA-cells, stars, atoms, molecules or human beings.
If we see them together we call it a body, if we see them loose, we
call it a wave, or society, but it is the same thing. Those herds will
create networks of information and hunt together as a group, stronger
than the individual preys. Those preys then are shared by the herd,
which builds a network of energy to give each cell a part of the capture.
So the individuals die away, and the social herds survive. Finally the
tightest herds, become Bodies, creating a new being, that no longer
feels as a herd but as a macro-individual. The process starts again.
So quarks gathered into Nucleons, nucleons into atoms, atoms into molecules,
molecules into cells, cells into bodies, and bodies into ecosystems,
and societies. A nation is one of such organisms. |
