Posts Tagged ‘ James S. Hans ’

The Objective World

The discovery of the Objective World, was one of the things that made the Modern World. The two worlds were practically synonymous with each other.

And, as I keep remarking, the Latin American world is still operating in the Subjective World, and as a result remains undeveloped. For those of you in the North, this may be hard to grasp, so let me expand on this. The Objective World has developed concepts of space and time – they extended infinitely in all directions. You cannot imagine how important this is – so let me give you an example.

I just completed my weekly shopping trip to the nearest large town: Cartago. It has a much better selection of nearly everything – and better prices too – so I stock up on all kinds of things, and take them back to the small town of Orosi where I live. Today I loaded two large bags into the overhead rack over the seats. The driver is used to my strange behavior, and gave me time to assemble all my stuff and to stumble off of the bus in Orosi with my treasures.

This did not used to be the case. In the two years I have lived here, I have never seen anyone else carry shopping back from Cartago to Orosi. The Tico mind just does not work that way. It is unacquainted with the Objective World, with its expanded concepts of space and time – which includes the spaces and the times of both Cartago and Orosi (and everything else). For them, these are two different subjective worlds – not part of the same thing.

I hardly need tell you the advantages the Modern World gave us – all one has to do is make the five minute walk from San Diego to Tijuana to be struck by the difference. It’s like going back in time five hundred years. At the same time, a perceptive person cannot also notice that the Modern World has ended. What happened? Why did this happen?

James S. Hans – an intellectual, not a social activist – who, as an intellectual, is interested in the thinking process – says the assumptions and procedures we used to explore the Objective World have taken us to a dead-end - and we need to radically change the way we do our problem-solving.

I cannot explain his theory, I can barely understand it myself – but stay tuned.

Things are Taking On a Life of Their Own

Few would disagree with this statement – but few have any idea what it means. This certainly included me – until recently. I am reading a book by James S. Hans, The Question of Value. I had never heard of him before I got this book – why I cannot remember. The guy simply boggles my mind – and stretches it four ways to Sunday. I now understand so much more I have lost interest in things that used to fascinate me.

Today I came across this phrase in his book (on page 91), and it struck me strongly. I had just been reading about the same thing on the Net:

The moment the “net neutrality” debate began was the moment the net neutrality debate was lost. For once the fate of a network -  its fairness, its rule set, its capacity for social or economic reformation – is in the hands of policymakers and the corporations funding them – that network loses its power to effect change. The mere fact that lawmakers and lobbyists now control the future of the net should be enough to turn us elsewhere.

He wants us to design a new Net – but is savvy enough to realize we also need to know what went wrong with the one we have now, before we try to do it right.

Things had taken on a life of their own – but these things are in a form new to us – a complex as studied by Complexity Science. A combination of the latest technologies (computers and the Internet) and the power structure it enabled. This has been going for some time – ourselves and the automobile, for example have formed their own complex – where each is dependent on the other. But this complex is really something new.

Hans patiently explains how this all happened. I am not smart enough to pass his knowledge. But it will be coming out, a bit at a time, on my blog.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 361 other followers