• In this issue we focus on the relation between P2P and its relation to the wider notion of a 'participatory' worldview.
• See also references to an interesting podcast on 'the virtual economics of gaming', and items on the personal fabricator, internet radios, and more.
• John Heron has an interesting piece on coming to terms with the poststructuralist paradigm.

ISSUE 67, Table of Contents:

• Reactions to the P2P essay 2
• P2P Philosophical Foundations (1): David Skrbina on the Participatory Mind
• P2P Philosophical Foundations (2): The Eco-philosophy of Henry Skolimowski.
• P2P Philosophical Foundations (3): Gregory Bateson's Survival of the Fittest Mind
• P2P Philosophical Foundations (4): Heron: Precursors of the Participative Paradigm
• P2P (5): Towards Personal Fabrication tools
• Digital Revolution (1): Internet Radio Made Easy
• Digital Revolution (2): The virtual economics of Gaming
• Thinking (1): The Logic of the Included Middle
• Thinking (2): Beyond Brain Death
• Thinking (3): John Heron on going beyond the poststructural antiparadigm paradigm
• Cognitive Capitalism: Lifecycle of Technological Paradigms
• Miscellaneous

P/I: PLURALITIES/INTEGRATION

A newsletter about participation in multiple worlds, multiple visions, but one humanity ; a monitor of P2P developments

Compiler: Michel Bauwens, michel@noosphere.cc; P/I is an emanation of the FOUNDATION FOR PEER TO PEER ALTERNATIVES

ISSUE 67: April 25, 2005: Why this newsletter? Why the title?

The title refers to the enduring tension between a multitude of worldviews, and their eventual integration. For a full explanation of the rationale behind the newsletter, see issues 1 and 2. An alternative name could be "P2P and Empire" because in practice I mostly focus on a analysis of the crisis of the current system on the one hand, and the emergence of a more participative worldview, which I call "peer to peer", on the other.

Preferred themes: the networked society, cognitive capitalism, Empire and its discontents,emancipatory processes among the `multitudes' and the possible emergence of a peer to peer civilization, truth-building as a collective and `dialogical' effort, the challenges posed to traditional religions and humanism by spiritual P2P experiencing and technological transhumanism.

If you like this project, please suggest any interesting links! We would be very happy to list you as a contributor. Thanks to John Dermaut, Christophe Lestavel, John L. Petersen, George Dafermos, Jim Hightower, David Spillane, Larry Penslinger, Nik Baerten, Maurice Nsabimana, Tattoo Mabonzo, and the Multitudes mailing list for regular suggestions. Bloggers: JamesBurke.

How to subscribe: Write to compiler Michel Bauwens at michel@noosphere.cc or at michelsub2003@yahoo.com.

QUOTES

31.6 Million Hosted Blogs, Growing To 53.4 Million By Year End

4/8/2005 - Perseus Development Corp. randomly surveyed 10,000 blogs on twenty leading blog-hosting services to expand its model of blog populations, first documented in The Blogging Iceberg. Based on this research, Perseus estimates that 31.6 million blogs have been created on services such as BlogSpot, LiveJournal, Xanga and MSN Spaces, with 10 million created in the first quarter of 2005 alone.

(Source: http://www.perseus.com/blogsurvey/geyser.html)

2. The third era of knowledge management

"Intellectual order is entering a third age. In the first, we organized the things themselves: We put books on shelves and silverware into drawers. In the second, we physically separated the metadata from the data: We built card catalogs and drew diagrams. In the third, the data and the metadata are digital, untying organization from the strictures of the physical world. In response, we are rapidly inventing new principles and tools of organization. When it comes to innovation on the Internet, metadata is becoming the new content."

Source: Esther Dyson's Release newsletter, quoted in Joho

CONTENTS

Reactions to the P2P essay

-         The integral visioning site has decided to publish this newsletter online and also carries a version of the essay, as well as many interesting articles, at http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p

P2P Philosophical Foundations (1): David Skrbina on the Participatory Mind

http://www.bath.ac.uk/carpp/davidskrbina/summarycontents.htm

Very interesting online thesis which outlines the philosophical, spiritual, and scientific history of the participatory worldview, located respectively in its origins in certain strands of Greek philosophy, panpscychism, and recent non-mechanistic science such as quantum physics and especially chaos theory. I'm not convinced yet that participatory worldviews are necessarly panpsychic as well, but in any case, Prof. Skrbina has outlined a very useful history of earlier formulations. Some of the chapters are mathematical, but most of them concern the history of ideas and are eminently readable.

As I conceive it, the concept of 'participation' is fundamentally a mental phenomenon, and therefore a key aspect of the Participatory Worldview is the idea of 'participatory mind'. In the Mechanistic Worldview mind is a mysterious entity, attributed only to humans and perhaps higher mammals. In the Participatory Worldview mind is a naturalistic, holistic, and universal phenomenon. Human mind is then seen as a particular manifestation of this universal nature. Philosophical systems in which mind is present in all things are considered versions of panpsychism, and hence I argue for a system that I call 'participatory panpsychism'. My particular articulation of participatory panpsychism is based on ideas from chaos theory and nonlinear dynamics, and is called 'hylonoism'. In support of my theory I draw from an extensive historical analysis, both philosophical and scientific. I explore the notion of participation in its historical context, from its beginnings in Platonic philosophy through modern-day usages. I also show that panpsychism has deep intellectual roots, and I demonstrate that many notable philosophers and scientists either endorsed or were sympathetic to it. Significantly, these panpsychist views often coexist and correspond quite closely to various aspects of participatory philosophy. Human society is viewed as an important instance of a dynamic physical system exhibiting properties of mind. These properties, based on the idea of participatory exchange of matter and energy, are argued to be universal properties of physical systems. They provide an articulation of the universal presence of participatory mind. Therefore I conclude that participation is the central ontological fact, and may be seen as the core of a new conception of nature and reality.

Thesis Title: Participation, Organization, and Mind: Toward a Participatory Worldview. David Skrbina

2. About his upcoming book: "Panpsychism in the West"

In Panpsychism in the West, David Skrbina argues for the importance of panpsychism -- the theory that mind exists, in some form, in all living and nonliving things -- when considering the nature of consciousness and mind. Despite recent advances in our knowledge of the brain and the increasing intricacy and sophistication of philosophical discussion, the nature of mind remains an enigma. Panpsychism, with its conception of mind as a general phenomenon of nature, uniquely links being and mind. More than a theory of mind, it is a meta-theory -- a statement about theories of mind rather than a theory in itself. Panpsychism can parallel almost every current theory of mind; it simply holds that in whatever way one conceives of mind, such mind applies to all things. In addition, panpsychism is one of the most ancient and enduring concepts of philosophy, beginning with its pre-historical forms, animism and polytheism. Its adherents in the West have included important thinkers from the very beginning of Greek philosophy through the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, to the present.

Skrbina argues that panpsychism is long overdue for detailed treatment, and with this book he proposes to add impetus to the discussion of panpsychism in serious philosophical inquiries. After a brief discussion of general issues surrounding philosophy of mind, he traces the panpsychist views of specific philosophers from the ancient Greeks and early Renaissance naturalist philosophers through the likes of William James, Josiah Royce, and Charles Sanders Peirce, among many others -- always with a strong emphasis on the original texts. In his concluding chapter, "A Panpsychist World View," Skrbina assesses panpsychist arguments and puts them in a larger context.

P2P Philosophical Foundations (2): The Eco-philosophy of Henry Skolimowski.

http://epc.eco-tea.com/articles/cosmocracy.html

Henryk Skolimosky wrote an early classic on the modern participatory worldview, The Participatory Mind, and went on to found "Eco-philosophy". With my European sensibility though, I strongly object to the use of the concept of secularism to denote what went wrong in the West.

"Our existing concepts have been in use for centuries and sometimes millennia. Many of them are worn out. We have extended the boundaries of our world and of our mind. In the process we have changed ourselves. We need new concepts to acknowledge the world we have created. Cosmocracy is one of such concepts -- one of the new windows through which we can look onto the new worlds.

In one sense, cosmocracy pre-dates the historic political systems, including Democracy. When humans lived in an essential unity with nature and cosmos, they governed themselves according to the principles of cosmocracy -- they knew that all powers come from the cosmos and reverentially obeyed the orders of the cosmos. Then they broke away from nature, created more anthropocentric forms, of which Democracy was one; and then they estranged themselves from nature. Cosmocracy, here proposed, closes the cycle and tunes us back to the essential unity of all things.

We need not only new concepts. We need concepts which are life-forms. Cosmocracy, which I am advocating, is not only a proposal for a new form of government but a proposal for re-arranging life in new life-forms -- out of which a suitable, life-enhancing, non-exploitive forms of government will naturally follow.

**

We are beginning to accept the idea of designing with nature rather than against nature. The acceptance of this idea leads to reverence for natural systems. Now the idea of reverence for natural systems, translated into the language of political science means ECO-CRACY. Ecocracy means recognizing the power of nature and of life itself, means observing the limits of nature, designing with nature, not against it, creating ecologically sustainable systems, reverence for the planet -- not its continuous plundering.  Let us put it succinctly. Technocracy and Ecocracy aim at fundamentally different goals. Technocracy aims at efficiency, control, manipulation and (so often) 'profit now'. Ecocracy aims at sustainable systems which can support and bring well being to human species and other species in the millennia to come.  In this interconnected and co-dependent world of ours, the notion of Democracy must take on a new meaning. Democracy can no longer be limited to the city-state (the polis); it can no longer be limited to one nation. Democracy must be so conceived that its execution in one nation does not harm (if only indirectly) other nations and does not harm Nature itself.

Let us put it in positive terms: Democracy in our times must be conceived as such a form of government that benefits all nations in the long run, and which at the same time, respects and enhances natural systems. This inter-nation and inter-species Democracy, I call Ecocracy or Eco-democracy. When we think how global and interconnected our problems are nowadays, this notion of Democracy impresses itself on us as almost obvious. Moreover, a system which I describe as Ecodemocracy, or a very similar one, is a necessity for our survival.

After we have explained the notion of Ecodemocracy or Ecocracy, the road to Cosmocracy is now open. Cosmocracy emerges as we generalize the idea of Ecodemocracy. Cosmocracy is a generalized idea of Democracy in yet another way. Universal Democracy, when it is extended to all beings, becomes Cosmocracy. Cosmocracy simply signifies the recognition that all powers come from the cosmos. Celebrating the cosmos as the power-giver leads to a political system which is rooted not in a one-sided notion of physical power, nor in the idea of Democracy for a select few (as the Greeks conceived of it), but in those tremendous forces which brought life and human societies to existence. Our global ecumenical thinking must inform us that we are all connected within the stupendous tapestry of the evolving cosmos. This recognition must inform us that seeking justice, freedom and good life cannot be confined to a few select societies. Cosmocracy is Democracy for the entire cosmos.  Some semantic purists might argue that "Democracy for the entire cosmos" is a meaningless phrase. Let us see whether they are right. The expression simply conveys the idea that all forms of being are entitled to their existence. It furthermore conveys the idea that all beings are entitled to their respective forms of self-actualization. This last point is important and needs to be commented upon further.

**

The astrophysicist John Archibald Wheeler may have been the first to announce, in an articulate way (in the early 1970s), the idea of the Participatory Universe. He wrote, "The universe does not exist 'out there' independent of us. We are inescapably involved in bringing about that which appears to be happening. We are participators. In some strange sense this is a Participatory Universe."

In the early 1980s, drawing from the insights of Wheeler, on the one hand ("In some strange sense this is a participatory universe"), and building on the insights of Teilhard de Chardin ("We are evolution conscious of itself"), I have developed the theory of the Participatory Mind. This theory, on the one hand, attempts to vindicate the claims of the New Physics about the participatory nature of the universe; and, on the other hand, attempts to fill the missing dimension in Teilhard's opus -- which wonderfully describes the unfoldment of evolution but misses the role of the mind in the whole process. Consciousness is one of the key terms in Teilhard's story. But strangely, it is consciousness as if there were no minds. The theory of the Participatory mind provides an epistemological foundation to Teilhard's cosmology.  The participatory theory of mind maintains that our world is the creation of our mind. But not in a solipsistic manner a la Berkeley (esse-percipi), but in a participatory manner: we have become aware that we can elicit from reality only that much as our mind is capable of conceiving. This is precisely the sense in which we say that we dwell in a participatory universe.

We elicit what is potentially 'out there' in continuous acts of participation. Participation is of the essence not only in our cognitive acts but also in our social activities and political endeavors. Tell me what you participate in and I will tell you who you are; and what the meaning of your life is.

We become that in which we participate. As we participate so we become. If we participate all the time in trivial matters, we become trivial persons. These ideas are anticipated by the ancient teachings of the Hindu philosophy and of Buddhism. Thus we read in the Upanishads: "In truth who knows God becomes God." (Mundaka Upanishad). The matter is even more strikingly expressed in Dhammapada, one of the chief texts of Buddhism: "What we are today comes from our thoughts of yesterday, and our

present thoughts build our life of tomorrow. Life is the creation of our mind."

**

All political systems are about participation. All Democracies are about participation. But the nature of this participation -- its depth and ramifications -- are different in different epochs. The Athenians of the 5th century B.C. enjoyed a great Democracy. Their participation in the affairs of the state, and of the cosmos at large was deep, multifarious and intense. They thought themselves large people, and indeed cosmic people, and participated in the cosmos accordingly. To this very day the word 'cosmos' is used in everyday Greek language to designate that in which we partake and of which we are a part.

In the industrial world, we have reduced the meaning of Democracy to a much narrower scope precisely because we have diminished our forms of participation in it. We are consumers, not participators. It can be granted that consumption is a form of participation. And here is the rub: it is such a lowly and diminished form of participation that it cannot lead to genuine fulfillment. Self realization through consumption is a parody of older spiritual quests."

2. Book: Technology and Human Destiny  (1983)  124 pgs, paperback.  Price: $6.00

"A concise and insightful analysis of the role of technology in the modern world.  Even more relevant now than when it was written.  Chapters include:  " Philosophy of Technology Conceived as Philosophy of Man", "Myths Behind the Reality", "Scientific World-View and the Illusions of Progress", and "A Philosophy of Needs"."

P2P Philosophical Foundations (3): Gregory Bateson's Survival of the Fittest Mind

http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge149.html#ab

The following excerpt, shows that Bateson, another pioneer of the participatory worldview, was also essentially a 'panpsychist' in the sense outlined above by David Skrbina.

 

"At  that time, Bateson contended that as a result of advances in  cybernetics and fundamental mathematics, many other areas of  thought  have shifted. In The Evolutionary Idea, a proposed  new book, he planned to gather together those new advances to  present an alternative to then current orthodox theories of evolution.  This alternative view was to

stress the role of information, that  is, of mind, in all levels of biology from genetics to ecology  and from human culture to the pathology of schizophrenia. In  place of natural selection of organisms, Bateson considered the survival of patterns, ideas, and forms of interaction.

 

"Any  descriptive proposition," he said, "which remains true longer will out-survive other propositions which do not survive so long.  This switch from the survival of the creatures to the survival  of ideas which are immanent in the creatures (in their anatomical  forms and in their interrelationships) gives a totally new slant  to evolutionary ethics and philosophy. Adaptation, purpose, homology,  somatic change, and mutation all take on new meaning with this  shift in theory."

 

2. Key books by Gregory Bateson:

 

-          Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. New York: Bantam Books, 1980; Hampton Press, 2002.

-          A Sacred Unity: Further Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1991.

-          Steps to An Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology. New York: Ballantine Books, 1972; University of Chicago Press, 2000.

 

P2P Philosophical Foundations (4): Heron: Precursors of the Participative Paradigm

http://www.human-inquiry.com/doculist.htm

John Heron has also written overviews and histories of the participatory worldview. I've asked how to locate the right excerpts, and here is his reply:

"About your Foundations request. I attach a file with the text of the whole of Chapter 1 of my book Co-operative Inquiry (1996). The key sections on Foundations are The fifth paradigm  and especially Precursors of the participative paradigm (p.10 of attached file).  Some parts of this Chapter - but not the all-important Precursors section - are online at www.human-inquiry.com/doculist.htm , click on Exploring the context. I attach another file with all the references of the whole book so that you can trace any reference mentioned in Chapter 1."

"Inquiry paradigm

Co-operative inquiry rests on an inquiry paradigm of participative reality. This holds that there is a given cosmos in which the mind creatively participates, and which it can only know in terms of its constructs, whether affective, imaginal, conceptual or practical. We know through this active participation of mind that we are in touch with what is other, but only as articulated by all our mental sensibilities. Reality is always subjective-objective: our own constructs clothe a felt participation in what is present. Worlds and people are what we meet, but the meeting is shaped by our own terms of reference. (Merleau-Ponty, 1962; Bateson, 1979; Reason and Rowan, 1981c; Spretnak, 1991; Heron, 1992; Varela et al, 1993; Skolimowski, 1994; Reason, 1994a).

In meeting people, there is the possibility of reciprocal participative knowing, and unless this is truly mutual, we don't properly know the other. The reality of the other is found in the fulness of our open relation (Buber, 1937), when we each engage in our mutual participation. Hence the importance of co-operative inquiry with other persons involving dialogue, parity and reciprocity in all its phases.

This participative paradigm has two wings, the epistemic introduced above, and the political. The epistemic wing, concerned with truth-values, is formed by:

·         An ontology that affirms a mind-shaped reality which is subjective-objective: it is subjective because it is only known through the form the mind gives it; and it is objective because the mind interpenetrates the given cosmos which it shapes.

·         An epistemology that asserts the participative relation between the knower and the known, and, where the known is also a knower, between knower and knower. Knower and known are not separate in this interactive relation. They also transcend it, the degree of participation being partial and open to change. Participative knowing is bipolar: empathic communion with the inward experience of a being; and enactment of its form of appearing through the imaging and shaping process of perceiving it

·         A methodology that commends the validation of outcomes through the congruence of practical, conceptual, imaginal and empathic forms of knowing among co-operative knowers, and the cultivation of skills that deepen these forms. It sees inquiry as an intersubjective space, a common culture, in which the use of language is grounded in a deep context of nonlinguistic meanings, the lifeworld of shared experience, necessarily presupposed by agreement about the use of language itself

The political wing of the participative paradigm, concerned with being-values, is formed by an axiology, a theory of value which holds that:

·         Human flourishing is intrinsically worthwhile: it is valuable as an end in itself. It is construed as a process of social participation in which there is a mutually enabling balance, within and between people, of autonomy, co-operation and hierarchy. It is conceived as interdependent with the flourishing of the planetary ecosystem.

·         What is valuable as a means to this end is participative decision-making, which enables people to be involved in the making of decisions, in every social context, which affect their flourishing in any way. And through which people speak on behalf of the wider ecosystem of which they are part.

Co-operative inquiry seeks to integrate these two wings by using participative decision-making to implement the methodology. Also by acknowledging that the quest for validity in terms of well-grounded truth-values, is interdependent with another process which transcends it. This is the celebration of being-values in terms of flourishing human practice.

 

P2P (5): Towards Personal Fabrication tools

http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail460.html

 

The following can be read as an update to Eric von Hippel's book on The Democratisation of Innovation. If such a tool would become available it would empower a lot more of this type of innovation.

"What if you could design and produce your own products, in your own home, with a machine that can be used to make almost anything? Imagine if you didn't have to wait for a company to sell the product you wanted but could use your own personal fabricator to create it instead.

Neil Gershenfeld, Director of MIT's Center for Bits and Atoms, believes that personal fabricators will allow us to do just that and revolutionize our world just as personal computers did a generation ago. He highlights the need for a micro-VC investment model in order to encourage the adoption of Fab Lab type initiatives and promote the concept of personal fabrication. Dr. Gershenfeld is then joined by Dale Dougherty from O'Reilly Media, Bran Ferren from Applied Minds and Saul Griffith from Squid:Labs to discuss what it really means have a workshop where you can build your own tools and hack your own stuff. They consider aesign and creativity in science and engineering, sharing designs using iFabricate, "hands on" workshops, and just-in-time versus just-in-case education.

His most recent book, FAB: The Coming Revolution on Your Desktop--From Personal Computers to Personal Fabrication, explores the ability to design and produce your own products, in your own home, with a machine that combines consumer electronics with industrial tools. Such machines, Personal fabricators, offer the promise of making almost anything-including new personal fabricators and as a result revolutionize the world just as personal computers did a generation ago."

 

Digital Revolution (1): Internet Radio Made Easy w/ Audiofeast

http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/22/cx_ah_1122tentech.html

"It's a subscription service, created by a startup based in Mountain View, Calif., that acts like a TiVo box for Internet radio. There are a few basic offerings available for the free level of service--some music, basic business news--but if you subscribe for about $8 you get access to a wide range of audio content, including some good programs from public radio (which is curious because nearly everything from public radio is available for free on the Web if you're willing to look for it) programs from the Discovery Channel, the BBC, and a respectable list of others.

The best thing the AudioFeast software does is keep track of your favorite programs and sees to it that they remain fresh so that the latest episode of the program is downloaded to your PC.  Beyond that, it allows you to synchronize those programs with a portable MP3 player. For my tests, AudioFeast came furnished with an iRiver IFP-880, which has 128 megabytes of memory."

 

Digital Revolution (2): The virtual economics of Gaming

http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail377.html

The following podcast was recommended by James Burke of Lifesized.

"This debate will clue you in to one of the biggest new emergences that most of us haven't yet heard of: virtual property markets and their intellectual property issues. The interchange may produce a few new business plans and should also be a whole lot of fun. The participants make legal, dollar, behavioral, and design forecasts for the virtual property markets within massively multi-player games, debating the practice from seller and designer viewpoints, and business vs. gaming intentions.

Some background: First listen to Bill Gurley's massively multi-player market talk from O'Reilly's Web 2.0 Conference for one recent overview. In late 2001, economist Edward Castronova published a landmark paper entitled "Virtual Worlds: A First-Hand Account of Market Society on the Cyberian Frontier" describing how new trading markets for virtual items produced within the massively multi-user virtual world of EverQuest were translating into real dollars, on auction sites (such as eBay, at the time). Castronova's paper became the most downloaded paper on the Social Science Research Network. Since then, such worlds have become increasingly popular, complex, and connected to a number of real world economic systems, including secondary market sellers like IGE and Gaming Open Market. Some gamers today are making a living offering virtual services (eg., avatar creation), goods (producing or trading goods) and currency market development and arbitrage. There is now an annual conference at New York Law School dedicated to sorting out the legal implications of these new physical-virtual relationships (State of Play). Dr. Castronova now has a tenured professorship at Indiana University where he will be focusing on virtual worlds studies."

Sony launches the first marketplace for such virtual goods, at http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,67280,00.html?

Thinking (1): The Logic of the Included Middle

http://www31.brinkster.com/yewtree/resources/inclusionality.htm; http://people.bath.ac.uk/bssadmr/inclusionality/

For those readers who had difficulty grasping the topic of the special issue 59, here is a very clear explanation of what Inclusionality means. This article also clearly shows the cognitive and spiritual import of realizing the dynamic aspects of space. I've given the topic of inclusionality quite some room in this newsletter. With this, I give the topic some rest, and refer the readers to either or special issue 59, for Ted Lumley's vision, or to the website with the writings of Alan Rayner.

Below is a reply by Ted Lumley responding to John Heron's point in issue 65, hereby closing the debate.

"Prelude

`Inclusionality' expresses the idea that space, far from passively surrounding and isolating discrete massy objects, is a vital, dynamic inclusion within, around and permeating natural form across all scales of organization, allowing diverse possibilities for movement and communication. This way of understanding natural form radically affects not only the way we interpret all kinds of irreversible dynamic processes, but also the fundamental meaning of `self' as a complex identity comprising inner, outer and intermediary domains, rather than an independent, single-centred entity. Correspondingly, boundaries that from an orthodox perspective are regarded as discrete, fixed limits (smooth, space-excluding, Euclidean lines or surfaces) of isolated objects or systems, are seen inclusionally as pivotal, relational places. Here, complex, dynamic arrays of voids and relief both emerge from and pattern the co-creative togetherness of inner and outer domains, as in the banks of a river that simultaneously express and mould both flowing stream and receptive landscape.

Shifting the Logical Premise - From Orthodox Imposition to Heterodox Inclusion: At the heart of inclusionality, then, is a simple shift in the way we frame reality, from absolutely fixed to relationally dynamic. This shift arises from perceiving space and boundaries as connective, reflective and co-creative, rather than severing, in their vital role of producing heterogeneous form and local identity within a featured rather than featureless, dynamic rather than static, Universe.  We hence move from perceiving space as `an absence of presence' - an emptiness that we exclude from our focus on material things - to appreciating space as a `presence of absence', an inductive  `attractor' whose ever-transforming shape provides the coherence and creative potential for evolutionary processes of all kinds to occur. Correspondingly, we extend beyond orthodox impositional logic based on the notion of discrete objects transacting within pre-set limits of Cartesian space, to the heterodox inclusional logic of distinct, ever-transforming relational places with reciprocally coupled insides and outsides communicating through intermediary domains. In other words, we move from the `logic of the excluded middle' to the `logic of the included middle'. To make this shift does not depend on new scientific knowledge or conjecture about supernatural forces, extraterrestrial life or whatever. All it requires is awareness and assimilation into understanding of the spatial possibility that permeates within, around and through natural features from sub-atomic to Universal in scale. We can then see through the illusion of `solidity' that has made us prone to regard `matter' as `everything' and `space' as `nothing', and hence get caught in the conceptual addiction and affliction of `either/or' `dualism'. An addiction that so powerfully and insidiously restricts our philosophical horizons and undermines our compassionate human spirit and creativity.

Another take on Inclusionality comes from Alan Rayner, at http://www.bath.ac.uk/~bssadmr/inclusionality/

1. Comparison of 3 worldviews: rationalist, inclusional, holistic

rationalist/reductionist

  visual space   Perceive what is "out there" as separate   Euclidian geometry

  time is linear and detached from space   Logical/rational   "Objective" transcendent observer

  Edges   Static objects

inclusionality

  acoustic space   What is out there is also in here   Relativity

  Time is immersed non-linearly in space   Mythopoetic   Community/constituent codynamic

  Resonance   Flow, transformation

holistic/primordial

  `touchy-feely'   There is no boundary between out there and in here   Holism: all is one

  Time and space are one   Myth is reality   No individuality   Stillness   Stasis

2. Response to John Heron and Remi Sussan (issue 59), by Ted Lumley:

"The point (proposition) is that we are included in space and there are no `objects' in space other than those we impose with our mathematics and our mental models, ... a point well made by henri poincaré and others.   the very notion of an `object' is an imposed abstraction.   in other words, the very notion of `being' is an imposed abstraction.  that was the big philosophical debate back in the time of heraclitus who maintained that everything was in flux, ... all there was was `becoming'.  therefore, there is no room in this model for `objects' such as those things that `exist' (embody `being') and get interconnected in webs.   so no, ...when i speak of the inclusional self, and the primacy of the `hostspace dynamic', i am speaking of the purely spatial-relational, as, for example, the pressure distribution in the atmosphere that defines a hurricane.  `pressure' is purely inner-outer relational, ... just like the energy distribution in relativity.  it doesn't depend on the particles, pressure waves pass through a matrix of particles but the wave is not `made of particles'.   similarly for gravity waves and electromagnetic waves.   the transforming `field' is primary and the particulate objects are secondary.thus john heron's comment and his citation of sretnak both miss the point; i.e. heron speaks of "an unitive field of interconnected beings" (object-dependent model) while spretnak speaks of " intersubjectivity and interbeing" and "a dynamic web of relationships". there are no `objects' in the model, ... there is no `being', no webs of being, no interconnected beings, only pure becoming, ... it is a model true to relativity (poincaré's) and to heraclitus' (everything is in flux).  instead of `objects' or `being' we have self-centered spatial-relational flow-features. why not try it on?"

 

3.     Ted Lumley on Inclusionality as it affects P2P

"meanwhile, there are profound differences in how we would think about p2p self-organization if we do go with assertive-accommodative mutual defining, since this model implies that our actions relative to one another is the source of the shape of the accommodative back-pressure that co-defines the actualizing of our assertive potentials.   this fits our data too.  if the starving single mother with child wants to actualize her assertive potentials to earn some nourishment, if the accommodative backpressure in the hostspace is resistant to her actualizing by washing clothes, cooking, cleaning etc. and only lowers the accommodative backpressure for actualizing her assertive potentials by giving sexual favours, our view in terms of what we visually see, the post-actualization results, are the reduced reality.  consistent with the `relativity of space' (non homogeneity of space), it is clear that her behaviour was space-guided, and it is trivial-because-radically incomplete to speak of her behaviour as being internally-driven.  models based on objects that interact in time depend upon `what things do' and they can never get to such simultaneous mutually defining dynamics as can be modeled when we suspend objectification and assume `inclusionality'.   did the woman intend to be a prostitute or was the accommodative backpressure of the hostspace she was included in resistive to the actualizing of her assertive potentials (to earn money to feed/clothe/shelter herself and baby) everywhere except in actualizing through sexual services?  there is an answer to this question, but there is no answer `in the visual data' which reports only on the post-actualization dynamic.  is it important to an understanding of p2p self-organization?  i would say it is of fundamental importance, and it is not possible to get there with object-oriented, interactive-webs-of-beings models (they explain what happens, the visual data on the post-actualization assertive behaviours, ... but not how the accommodative quality of space shapes the actualization of the assertive potentials).

 the success of p2p teams is often in their ethic of realizing that everyone is trying to actualize their different assertive potentials and that everyone is operating in a common living space,... further, that as a social collective they exert an accommodative backpressure on any individual included in the collective with respect to his attempt to actualize his assertive potentials.  teams with this ethic, rather than focusing one-sidedly on perfecting what they do within the team as driven by their internal purpose,... sustain dialogue with their peers outside of the team and within the general social collective they are included in, to allow the rhythms and operational patterns of the outsiders to reflect back and influence their inside operations so as sustain mutual phase coupling or resonance between the inside-outward-team-asserting and the outside-inward hostspace (peer collective operating space) accommodating.  this approach equates to the designing of a ship at its cruising speed so that its assertive intrusion of the ship and the characteristic accommodating of the hydrodynamical space are in resonance sustaining phase-lock.  the same applies to the inverted `V' formation of wildgeese in flight.  in modeling this realworld dynamic, the individuals are not treated as objects capable of behaviour in their own right, but centers of assertive potential included within an accommodative hostspace, ... the challenge being to allow the two to mutually define in such a way that `inside-outward-outside-inward resonance' is cultivated and sustained. in other words, p2p collectives have the opportunity to simultaneously play the roles of the assertive enterprise and the accommodating hostcommunity, to understand that they are `assertive insiders' and `accommodative outsiders' at the same time, allowing for a mutual defining that sustains assertive accommodative resonance for all participants.   some models are capable of describing this `inclusional' situation but most are not.  those that have dependency on abstraction such as `objects' or `being' are not."

 

Thinking (2): Beyond Brain Death

http://changesurfer.com/BD/2004/deathofdeath.htm

Thanks to Philippe Van Nedervelde for the suggestion. This article details advances in reviving braindead patients.

"The current definitions of brain death are predicated on the prognostic observation that brain dead patients would quickly die even with intensive care. But this is now shown to be untrue[1],[2],[3],[4].  Neuroremediation technologies and advances in intensive care will make it increasingly possible to keep alive the bodies of patients who would currently be classified as brain dead, and recover much of the memories and capabilities that we currently consider irrecoverable.

The on-going redefinition of death is the result of the technological deconstruction of dying. Instead of a relatively instantaneous, binary process, death is now more like a "syndrome," a cluster of related attributes, with a probabilistic diagnosis.[5] This disaggregation requires that we decide how many of these attributes are required before we begin treating someone as "dead," just as physicians must decide how many psychiatric traits are required before making a diagnosis of "schizophrenia." Electroencephalograms can only determine if there is a cessation of electrical activity on the surface of the brain, not in the deeper structures, and cannot determine if the electrically quiescent brain tissue is irrecoverable. Many of those who are diagnosed as brain dead in fact have clear evidence of functioning midbrains and brainstems, and are not necessarily irreversible.[6]  A key argument in favor of whole brain death criteria over neo-cortical death, that the brain provides integrative functions that the body needs to survive, has also been shown to be fallacious since patients meeting the current clinical criteria for whole brain death have survived for years. Below I review some of the emergent technologies which will allow us to not only keep "brain dead" patients alive, but also repair their brain damage, requiring a re-specification of death from the whole-brain standard to the neo-cortical standard and beyond. The development of these life support and neuroremediation technologies will force us to finally accept a personhood-based "neo-cortical" position on brain death.

More: In this fascinating interview Ray Kurzweil discusses birth, death, and non-biological thinking processes, at http://www.fastcompany.com/articles/2005/03/kurzweil.html (thanks to Russ Volckman)

Thinking (3): John Heron on going beyond the poststructural antiparadigm paradigm

http://www.human-inquiry.com/partreal.htm

Coming to terms with the poststructuralist epistemological critiques of grand narratives is essential for those who are attempting, as I do, to be 'integrative' in their approach. Heron's remarks on "the poststructural antiparadigm paradigm" are right on the mark:

Over against this and any other paradigm, there is to be considered the antiparadigm stance of extreme poststructuralism (Denzin, 1994; Lincoln and Denzin, 1994). From this position, any metaphysical paradigm, with the epistemology that follows from it, is an attempt to set up rules outside a piece of research, so that these rules can then be called up to validate it. And these rules are only a mask for the researcher's desire for political authority, a desire to assert power over the reader and the wider world. Poststructural thought, deriving from the deconstruction of Derrida (1976, 1981), rejects the view that any text can have any kind of claim to epistemological validity, on the grounds that 'any text can be undone in terms of its internal structural logic' (Lincoln and Denzin, 1994: 579).  This account is itself is a paradigm, a sceptics' paradigm, a poststructural antiparadigm paradigm (PAP), which asserts that all claims to truth in a text can be undone and thus all claims to truth are disguised bids for power over the reader. The trouble is that this statement of PAP presumably applies to itself. Any truth that it claims to have can be undone and exposed as a hidden bid for power. Hence it is suicidal and nihilistic, reducing itself and all other forms of textual discourse to competing bids for raw, purposeless power. Kincheloe and McLaren point out that while all claims to truth are implicated in relations of power, truth cannot simply be equated with an effect of power:

Otherwise, truth becomes meaningless and, if this is the case, liberatory praxis has no purpose other than to win for the sake of winning. (1994: 153)  And Culler (1982) has asserted that deconstruction does not reject propositional truth but just stresses its contextuality. Wilber, too, has recently had his say on the matter:

The postmodern poststructuralists, for example, have gone from saying that no context, no perspective, is final, to saying that no perspective has any advantage over any other, at which point they careen uncontrollably in their own labyrinth of ever-receding holons, lost in aperspectival space. (1995: 188) Poststructural social science seeks its 'external grounding...in a commitment to a post-Marxism and a feminism with hope' (Lincoln and Denzin, 1994: 579), in 'morally informed social criticism' (Denzin, 1994: 511). This presupposes moral principles which inform the commitment and the criticism. If moral principles constitute 'external grounding', this means they are somehow valid, justifiable, not arbitrary. So the issue of epistemological validity has simply moved over from scientific discourse, where it has been rejected, to moral discourse, where it is tacitly invoked.  Poststructural social science still has to answer the question how it can justify, validate, find worthy of belief, the moral principles which inform its commitment to social justice and empowerment. The problem here is that any answer it gives will be subject to demolition by its adherence to PAP, and then morality as well as science will have been crushed in its nihilistic grip."

Cognitive Capitalism: Lifecycle of Technological Paradigms

http://www.salvaggio.net/index.php?page=Posts&section=5&cat=&mode=fulltxt&nid=21

At the above link are comments by Salvino A. Salvaggio on a recent Booz Hamilton report on the link between technological innovation and production and wealth creation. Note especially the speeding up of the rhythms of innovation in the table below.

Miscellaneous

EMPIRE

-          Good introduction to capitalist 'globalisation' and its alternatives, at http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/guide/

-          Jeffrey Sachs and his solution to extreme povery, at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/24/books/review/24DREZNER.html?

P2P

-          An appeal for a new approach to intellectual property, by Greg London, at http://www.greglondon.com/bountyhunters/BountyHunters.htm

-          The BBC and other media groups unveil new Creative Commons-inspired licenses that will allow the public to use footage from the archives as raw material for new creative works, at http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,67239,00.html?tw=wn_story_mailer

-          Tracking the impact of online activism, at http://forwardtrack.eyebeamresearch.org/

" ForwardTrack is a new system created by Eyebeam R&D designed to promote on-line activism. The system tracks and maps the diffusion of email forwards, political calls-to-action, and online petitions. It can trace email forwards, map the impact of blogs, and facilitate web-based sign-ups and social networking. Our goal is to help people understand decentralized networks and see the power of "6 degrees of separation." ForwardTrack technology helps prove that one person can make a difference.

-          Many links to the 'dark side' of Tibetan Buddhism, at http://www.american-buddha.com/site.map.htm