A cosmological study on the quirkyness of human behavior and a theory for our future evolution as mankind.

Our perspective on evolution might be hindered somewhat by our nature of being inside of and an integral part of evolution. The whole concept of evolution creating a brain which is able to observe evolution happening seems quite a feat. On that note it is equally amazing to think that if there was no observer around , (be it on this planet or any other supposed planet) for all we , as single observers would be concerned , there would not exist anything at all ! Therefore i would postulate that existence springs from evolution , not just life. Or to rephrase it , that existence is inherently an evolving process. This concept would also make away with the seemingly implied notion that this process is exclusive to our planet. (Or maybe any other planet where the conditions would be just right for life to pop into existence.) We can always ask the big "WHY?" And seeing where human inquiry has brought us so far , it would be a reasonable assumption that the same evolutionary processes we are susceptible to , will make sure humans keep posing that question for as long as they exist. It also stands to reasoning that numerous subjects will be the victim of our brains' scrutinizing for some time to come. Like time , which seems to be of the essence for any object to be able to change state , yet where is the past stored ? We can prove things have happened and reconstruct a probable theory of how it went down , but it's not here anymore is it ? We as humans seem to have a memory to prevent ourselves from going insane in what otherwise would seem to be an environment in which we have no reference of what is happening to us or what space we even occupy. So does the Universe have a memory ? Or are all events transpiring at the same time ? We can look back in time , we do it all the time ...In fact , we do it anytime we look or think ! That direction seem to be dictated by entropy which is sometimes also referred to as "the arrow of time". Which makes it a one way trip from our point of view. If one has an imaginative view on time , and sees time as inherently destroying it's past , (Like Steven King in his novel the Langoliers in which a group of people get stuck in a deserted past and end up fleeing for these weird creatures that devour what's left of the existence of the past.) it would make for a great incentive to get a move on ! One can note that the only things which seem static in this Universe are the natural laws and forces that dictate the behavior of our continuously evolving Universe. Maybe our present point of observation is a static one in which we seem to view the past and are just not wired to perceive the future , making our forward motion not actually a motion , but just a timed perception of more bits of the future. One can wonder if it is the point of view that changes over a human lifespan or if it's only thought , emotions and experiences that pass before it ? Beside our notion of it , it wouldn't have a dramatic change in our daily interactions , even though most people seem unaware these interactions and our notions on them comprise our reality. So for now it seems the past has happened and will not be changed from our present. (Not counting for educational writings.) What does that make of our future ? Would it be different just because we seem under the impression we have direct influence on it ? It's kinda hard to say something about area's we cannot directly perceive. It's also hard to fathom that there might be more of such gray area's that , at this point in time , seem non existent only because nobody has yet even thought of the theoretical probability!

Anyway , these contemplations , fascinating as they might be , usually have no direct practical implication in our daily lives. Our brain does , we use it to contemplate these things and it houses our biological clock. It doesn't bother too much on a subconscious level how certain directives work , yet it abides by them in the most amazing ways. Our "developed" brain even possesses specific functions that act as a brake to prevent this abiding , and other kinds of subconscious behavior. This implies we have another kind of conscious and , looking at our outside world , it seems it is one of those things which distinguishes us from most other lifeforms. (I will from here on stop explicitly implying this planet.) There seems to be some debate about what self consciousness actually comprises , yet it would seem highly logical that it is a function of thought. Our so called "intelligence" has made it possible to heighten our survival chances quite a bit , our human intelligence in this sense could be translated as the thought of the brain. So , do we see the intricate workings of the universe as intelligent or not ? Personally , a system which seems to be able to create a brain which sees itself as intelligent , seems quite intelligent to me. But that's just me.... Our human and other mammal's brains seem to posses something called mirror neurons , which theoretically , can make us empathic towards our fellow mammals.....and humans. These neurons do not seem to make us empathic towards the Universe itself. This strikes me as odd , because we have a symbiotic relationship with our environment , yet we seem hardwired not too care for it very much , or see it as intelligent for that matter. This notion of personalizing intelligence and the use of it as means to define ourselves with might also be the reason intelligent people sometimes do not see their environment as intelligent. Incomprehensible matters are sometimes explained by saying things like: It's just a coincidence. or That's just the way things work. Both answers usually provoke curiosity. (Mostly evident in children.) Logic would indicate there is an issue to solve which can be done in numerous ways , for instance: - A shift of perception is a viable option , yet it could make it hard to explain any possible understanding gained , or lost , coherently to someone with an alternate perception. Provoking the use of above statements like: That's just the way things work. - We can use these unanswered questions to provoke a persistence and curiosity which makes us relentlessly search for the answers. - One can see it as a limit of personal intelligence and by defining it as such , also limit the perception they have of themselves. (This includes I don't know/care.) - We could claim there is another type of person who possesses more personal intelligence. (I mention we because this notion is usually more convincing when there is majority claiming it.) - Magic Any of those is wholly valid and i consider them all intelligent. We could also take not we seem to poses an ability to make simple things very complex. Anyway , i am very grateful for the inherent curiosity that presided these simple remarks like: It's just a coincidence. , That's just the way things work. , and other ones like them. They have provided humanity a lot of information on our evolution as a species. And it is also makes it easy to see how obsessive/compulsive disorders come about. To continue. With the occurrence of thought there arises something some of us call: The mind/body problem

For thought to be of any use , it is necessary to be able to observe it. It seems only logical the brain has the processing power to pull this off , yet it can be quite disorienting for humans to try and grasp. See to think about it one places oneself outside of that thought. (This is something which can seem like a magic trick to people , and it seems most people in my surrounding usually place their entire attention span into their thought , never making use of our ability to observe ourselves like we can others. I myself may have overdone it in the observer mode seeing i get headaches if i focus my attention to long , my brain overheats easily these days! A healthy balance would seem the way to go , yet our environment seems to provoke a choice between on or the other , be it conscious or not. A shift in perception can make our attention be directed towards observing and anyone can attest that giving attention to anything is our reality. This is evidenced when one is trying to solve a problem and completely ignores their environment. Also this observer mode doesn't use much energy and can be described as effortless. ) Despite the outrageous qualities we sometimes give to consciousness , it would not make much sense to see it the other way round. The concept that consciousness would like to have something to be conscious of could also be a viable explanation , just like Nature likes to observe itself. (I haven't yet come across a living mammal that isn't inherently curious about it's surroundings!) But , seeing that does not fit well with our day to day reality , i think i have given a quite logical explanation for the mystery that seems to be our self consciousness. Or maybe i am just schizophrenic... ...which I would prefer if the other options means: Getting a concept dictated externally , make my own interpretation of it , and then take it so serious it would affect my daily reality. On that note , one could see logic as a human beings' hardwired sense of right and wrong instead of something like a set of commandments from above. Logic could also imply that there exists such a thing as truth , although looking at my experiences , it seems doubtful that this truth would let itself be grasped into the mere words we often use to conceptualize things and bring them in our understandable frame of reference. (....Maybe someone highly intelligent can think this through.) Back to that self bit... To some it can almost seem that the "self" is a miniature person sitting in the brain with this whole human body under it's command: The Cartesian view , which seems to be the idea most people adopt. (Without them being aware there is a name for it.) Here it can seem a mere victim of the breath of the body until the body goes to sleep or dies. (So much for the command part.) Thoughts pass before the self, and as soon as one of those electrical currents is taken serious enough the self commands their body into action. This action could be of the physical nature or the mental nature in which specific thoughts are repeated in an endless cycle. As i have described with the example of our attention focusing , which can also be observed when the operating of a vehicle has become automatized and one notices oneself to have arrived at their destination without having a memory of the actual journey. The self is only implied when there is attention , and attention is governed by our so called outside environment ! One could wonder what that makes of our body or self when there is no attention focused on it and what actually evokes our attention? This is also noticeable when one is asleep without dreams , which could be described as: - Non-existence. Only when one wakes can one assume they exist again. Also , using the automated example , the journey seems to have had a duration , and seeing without time we can make no sense of our environment or our placement in it , only at the moment of realizing ones arrival , the duration seems to be implied. Which again makes the point of our viewpoint being static.

(I would like to note that our inherent curiosity , our habit of making simple things very complex and the persistence to bring things in our understandable frame of reference can easily combine to make for a repeating cycle of thought which can drive a person insane. I would suggest to use any of the aforementioned options i have given to cure any urge that might arise to prevent such a thing. Where That's just the way things work and Magic should provide immediate relief and the Perception shift might be worthwhile on the longer term.) To continue. The way of functioning with a distinct notion of self has brought our species a lot of advantages to function in a community and shows this trait as a prominent difference between humans and most other mammals. Monkeys for instance still seem to exist , even without an idea of themselves , and , usually , they do not kill each other as much as humans tend to do. This should make the case for humans' persistence in having an idea of themselves , if one is convinced matters should be understood with personal intelligence and the self is not understood , it would be a bit like non existence , which goes against our prime directive of survival. So the thought of the brain enables the conception of idea's and it stands to reason that , like our own inherent curiosity , Nature shares this trait and has explored this concept of idea's with the same vigor and persistence we as humans seem to do. (Or see it as something different.) I might mention that for all our practical implications , we are still biological entities. Again , depending on our perception , we can personalize ourselves or naturalize ourselves. Depending on the outcome , the notion of an intelligent Universe could become irrefutable. (I do wonder if our mirror neurons would suddenly change function in that case. In my personal experience i couldn't hurt a fly if i wanted too , yet walking over grass poses no issue at all , water however.) So , back to exploring what our idea of ourselves has made possible so far. The ability to intuitively get an idea of what others seem to envision is a trait/survival skill. This gives us the ability to take on a role which could be beneficial to another , and prevent behavior that would get one's self excluded....or worse. This ability also enables us to function well in a group and our human specific group functioning has enhanced our survival rate greatly. (Despite the drawbacks.) This functioning has paved the way to be able to create a sense of morality and ethics , which seems to be an integral part of every seemingly functional society these days. These morals and ethics are dictated by our environment , and might give a hint that the thoughts we seem to posses are an integral part of our evolutionary process. Anyone can observe how one is affected directly by the behavior of others in their surroundings. Despite efforts , most healthy people cannot ignore the expectations of their peers. (Completely.) All this would not even be possible without first creating a clear sense of self. Here we could be compelled to pose the question: Why start ? (I mentioned we tend to do that.) And one would have to agree that it might not be explained satisfactory for our brains to deal with. Yet it should also be irrefutable by now that there is an inherent curiosity throughout nature. What we can bring into an understandable frame of reference and call life , we can observe , and the more we can relate to it , the more we observe this inherent curiosity in it's environment. We see this very prominently in dog's and children. One could argue that this is evoked to create a better chance of survival in this environment. Yet seeing i have hinted at things that seem static and our inability to make much sense of them. If there was no notion of non existence which we seem to fear , there would be no incentive to make sense of our environment since our survival would already be assured. Again depending on one's perception , survival could be seen as way of making things evolve. In essence making duality a product of evolution. ( I seem to have a way of turning things around.)

If one could see the Universe as one big infinite thing it would make sense to create duality for the sake of curiosity and playfulness. (And make you wonder at the same time who's looking !...and , if the Chinese word for evolution might be Tao ?) Anyway the concepts of ourselves we use as a guideline to move along our existence span has an advantage for an individual , and the ability to be emotionally attached to a group of atoms called human being and not with other groups of atoms called stars (which have created the individual atoms we are made of by exploding to pieces) seems the preferred way of nature / evolution. Another interesting subject that has to do with our perception is awareness. I tend to see it differently from consciousness because the latter implies someone possessing it. So for any interaction to be able to happen , some form of self awareness must comprise existence , if not , how could anything have a notion of it's existence? We have natural laws and forces which seem to dictate every interaction. The curiosity of scientists made it possible to discover many of them and then use them to see if we can enrich our experience somewhat. The same way i was implying our own seemingly static point of view , these natural laws and forces seem to be static. Yet our point of view seems to be aware. In our daily implications most are not able to deny: Something seems to be. I have also showed the difficulty in not understanding things outside our usual frame of reference. So one could argue there is awareness throughout everything that seems to exist. There is no reason to claim that any system , much like our brain , in which information is transmitted through , in essence , particles would be void of awareness just because our brain cannot conceptualize it as such. Can we envision for instance: - Magnetic forces as aware ? As i have implied , we usually see the Universe as information void of awareness. (Where physicists might take the information bit to a whole new level.) If one is content with their current perception it is logical that there seems to be no incentive to go beyond our common daily conceptualizations. (And unless we cannot help ourselves there is no reason to do such a thing!) I also mention that our Universe tends to be quite dualistic , which makes things naturally and inherently contradicting , contradictions create a distinct separation , which seems of the essence. Without a notion of non existence , - how to determine existence? And without a sharp contrast with it's surroundings , - how to make out any detail we seem to see? Sweet/sour and so fort. (To Infinity.....and Beyond , as Buzz Lightyear would say.) At least i should have determined by now that our brains as separate units are severely limited. And that people who have a notion of possessing one sometimes seem unaware of these limitations. (I also hope these attempts at explanation excuse me for any contradictio in terminus.) I have mentioned magic as a means to explain things that lie beyond our usual frame of reference. Some magical experiences might be explained with a shift of perception while keeping logic. These magical experiences can be of such a nature , that the impact they have can change our view on reality considerably because they are not understood in our conceptual framework , yet cannot be ignored either. Reincarnation for instance could be seen , not as the rebirth of an individual soul , but the interpretation of a certain information set by another brain. How this would actually come about is another issue. We seems to posses sensory perception and therefore any information that comes in without consciously being aware of it is , well... ...not noticed. We usually call this way of transmitting information extra sensory perception , or short ESP. And although the proof for it seems to be scarce it does seem it has to do with our perception.

As i mentioned earlier , there is still enough we haven't dumbed down to the level of human experience to get curious about. On that note i hereby postulate that we change the name of Dark Matter and Dark Energy into "Dumb Matter" and "Dumb Energy" , seeing that , from what there is understood about it , (by humans) it comprises more then 95% of the mass and energy of our Universe but it cannot even be bothered to be aware of it's existence so that it can interact with the rest of our particle party. (I actually hope that eventually there will be a more elegant way the Universe will explain itself and that nobody notices my logical fallacy of giving only importance to what i can directly relate with.) Back to our daily implications. Thought as the human brain seems capable of seems something quite magical for empirical science. Because it is not easily measured as more than electrical current in the material sense and , although a lot of us are quite insane and keep thinking the same thoughts over and over , it would seem unlikely that measurements would be easily reproducible. Although mankind has quite some understanding of the brain and has made great strides in mapping it's functions , i dread the day it is possible for humans to read and control other humans' thoughts. (Directly.) However , if a human brain would decide to press a certain (usually red) button , thereby launching a couple of rockets , the results of something which could be considered esoteric would have some dramatic biological , repeatable and measurable implications. These implications , as everyone has acutely become aware of since the implementation of our knowledge concerning nuclear fission , could potentially have effects on our evolution. (And i don't exclusively imply the possible mutations of the radioactive fallout.) In this sense , and the stuff i talked about earlier , it would be highly illogical to claim human thoughts are not an integral part of the evolutionary process. Any solid man made object has at some point started as an idea.... (Maybe inspiration is a form of ESP ?) It may not seem like it , but the other way of looking at it would be to observe this whole process of evolution and then at one particular point a single creation of this process would proclaim itself outside of it , just because it has become an observer to the process. Everyone seems free to enjoy this concept for their whole human experience though. When that experience is over , the atoms this seemingly separate entity is comprised of will return in the natural recycling process of the Universe. Like Schrodinger pointed out with his thought experiment involving a certain type of cat , it seems it is impossible to observe an experiment without becoming an integral part of it. The Universe seems to have solved this paradox by making humans and then make them think they are distinct separate entities who are observing something they are not an integral part of. (It would be playing one fascinating game of hide and seek in that case.) Seeing i am spoiling our particle party anyway....on to the subject of Free Will. Anyone with half a functioning brain would already be able to see the improbability of this concept. The concept does not survive logic. The biggest argument for it is our daily observation. So we might be wise to look at our perception as a resolution for this seeming paradox. One can take not that , in my daily observations i do not hear many people complain that the possession of free will seems highly unrealistic to them , so for daily practically it seems to be simulated to a satisfactory degree and , without thinking about it , there seems to be no paradox. (This goes for a lot of issues.)

It seems our "on the ground" view of thoughts can differ quite a bit from a bigger perspective. A lot of people go happily though life without a grander view of things , yet the grander view seen by some has in many instances dictated the course of many such "on the ground views". I guess it's the way evolution seems to work. As i mentioned earlier we can prevent / control our own "instinctual behavior" at times. Our brains have very specific functionality to pull this off. Instinctual behavior is for a great part dictated by emotions , which i see as Nature's way of getting things done through humans , along with thought.... (Anyone who has ever had one can attest that orgasms are a good example.) Like consciousness , we tend to overemphasize emotions. In a lot of instances we chose to physically harm our fellow beings or make our self go insane before we let our emotions get to their final destination. Usually they both end up in tears though. Much like thought , emotions can be observed and it is usually not necessary to act upon them. Most humans can attest that if nature really wants something to happen , our emotions will make us lose our selves and get things done. (Did i mentioned free will already?) I will admit that it is no easy feat (impartially observing ones' own emotions) seeing the addiction rate to emotion is probably much higher than cigarettes or alcohol. If i would take into account the reasonings behind these addictions , i would say the addiction rate is near total.... I have read (former) heroine addicts describe their experience as: - A never ending search to get close to their first high , which was overwhelmingly pleasant. Taking this description into account , it should be clear that our inherent curiosity in combination with our natural addictions to , usually pleasurable , emotions could clearly be a recipe for a habit that is hard to kick. Most of our emotions can be traced back to our prime directive of survival. Yet if one is able to observe their emotions and sees how they come about in certain situations , they can also act as a guide through ones continuous evolving experience as a human being. A bit like the karmic inclination in reincarnation. (This would be a good time to make one take a good look at ones life and see if there is a reoccurring pattern with certain emotions , and what conclusions might be drawn.) A lot of things in our existence which could be labeled as wrong come about through emotion. I might mention that any judgment would first need an opinion and a self to posses an opinion. There is no inherent right or wrong which , like truth , can be translated coherently into something the brain can comprehend in a way which resembles our ordinary daily means of understanding. Nature has taken care of it through emotions and logic. (in any order.) The way some things in our daily practical experience might seem highly illogical and create emotional states which could be described as in disagreement with are usually easy to explain. Our prime directive seems to be survival so there is an inherent fear of non existence. Depending on one's outlook , the concept of non existence can be quite realistic. To be able to play a convincing role as a separate entity which can seize to exist , one usually takes on as many opinions , beliefs , emotional attachments , objects and other concepts. The more of these concepts , the more strongly there is implied there is a self possessing them. So anything that is detrimental , to say an idea , is in fact seen as an existence threatening hazard. Everyone is able to see for themselves how this process works in their own environment. And if anyone is a bit distraught about my clinic analyzing of emotions , what does that tell you about your own idea's ? (I would like to mention i am in now way impervious to emotions. Also my clinic logical view of human behavior could make it seem i would dislike them , yet i am never able to pull it of when it comes to direct interaction....damn those mirror neurons !)

On the subject of emotions , music can give some great insight into human nature. Clinically , it is a transfer of information , a language of some sort. A language we usually translate through emotions or states of mind instead of our intelligence. I can point out that music is still aurally transferred and usually it is understood in a way which seems to bear little resemblance with our more usual way's of understanding. Maybe this creates some sympathy for what i am trying to do here , i am trying to bring over a logical concept with the use of mere words! Words as we tend to use them are always a means of expression of something else , it stands to reason we as human beings have come up with something like language for that reason. If you notice your thought is mostly in words , what does that say about your possibilities of understanding , or the value one might give to those thoughts? And how could we ever describe the intentions that preside our communication coherently? To continue with using music to create insights into human nature. We tend to have a preference for a certain kind of music and that is due to our environment. If you are brought up in the west it is quite likely that microtonal or Gamelan music is not exactly to your tastes. This is caused by the environment we tend to grow out of. I could explain it technically but i'd suggest anyone interested to explore and listen for themselves. Beside simple preferences as a mood maker and (i suspect) as a means to define themselves with , music is used quite extensively as interference. (In the sense of noise cancellation by means of creating an equal but opposing sound wave , effectively canceling the other out.) This can be observed when a person who feels great distress seems to prefer loud music , and we all know what songs we tend to play when we suffer from a broken heart. I assume everyone has some familiarity with the concept. If one turns it around , what does modern western music tell us about society? Besides the , at times , seemingly desperate urge to be someone special , the interference concept would make one think , since it is to cancel out noise , that quiet would be the thing that is craved. Yet observations would make it seem that , in our modern western world , everything is set up to prevent any quiet. One could wonder why every moment of their day people seem to strive to distract themselves with radio , tv , games , relationships , activities and so forth. (The repetitiveness of these actions would make one exclude curiosity.) Even people who meditate sometimes seem to be hard at work accomplishing something. It stands to reason that anyone can take a moment of quiet and find out for themselves. It should be clear for anyone to see by now that the way we function is a bit quirky. If one sees a human life cycle as an evolutionary process , it seems there is something distinctly lacking when one's experience evolves. I would say that there seems to be a lack in curiosity and playfulness , the daily reality is taking at face value en it seems a lot of people are avoiding facing parts of their reality. I wouldn't describe it as wrong , yet my curiosity (or obsessive tendencies if you will) has led me to investigate in something which seemed to defy my logic. It didn't take long before a general picture started to emerge. Usually children are very curious and playful , it would stand to reason a lot of parents can attest that it can be quite an effort to subdue these traits when they are shaping another human experience. I would estimate that around age 10 / 12 the general idea's are solidly in place due to indoctrination of their environment. (This might sound bad , but it's merely the way evolution works.) The first years of exploring their solid sense of self seem endlessly entertaining. Then rises the age of puberty where in there is a hardwired tendency to rebel against the norm. And when that subdues most see no other option than to go along with the general population. (I would like to point out this is usually not a conscious choice.)

When at the age of about 24 / 25 the brain has fully matured and most people should be capable of controlling their general emotions en observing those , and their own thoughts , impartially. At that point they also tend to find themselves in a situation where they have acquired a lot of responsibilities and a level of material comforts which are hard to do without. In effect rendering them helpless in being forced to use their new found abilities to subdue their curiosity and playfulness. (Also many times without being consciously aware of it.) (I am overly generalizing here as i am with most i am writing because it is easy to get totally lost in making things to complicated and getting stuck in nuancing everything i say here. Instead i am trying to make an attempt at reduction for the sake of comprehension purposes. ..And i am quite certain i will fail.) So in effect their environment forces a lot of people to evolve the only way which is still possible. Solidifying there idea's of themselves and their idea's of reality by expounding on their idea's. Our current way of functioning might be becoming more of a hindrance then a benefit though. As a species we are more and more capable of creating our own environment while at the same time we seem to be a bit unaware that we are a product of our environment. On that note it is easy to see why many people seem to lack some sort of motivation in the resolving of an evident issue due to the seemingly futile prospects of their ability to change it. Nature sometimes has the elegant way of starting from scratch again , but for most people , despite grand efforts , it is usually not a realistic option. (And there is quite a taboo on suicide.) So to change , either the environment takes the initiative like it has done (and still is !) in most of the existence span of life on earth , or the general population changes their idea's / concepts. Which is the way human societies have come and gone for what seems our whole written history. (I would like to make the point that , although i seem to argue that we have no actual say in our so called destiny , it would seem detrimental to anyone's human experience to use this as a concept to define themselves with in , what sometimes can be perceived as , a futile existence. I mentioned i am not impervious to emotion and it breaks my heart to even think about it. Yet even the role of not playing is still playing , so all is always well. Personally I would suggest to try and find a healthy balance , and the shift of perception could cure any futility.) In creating our own "improved" environment we seem to disregard the notion that we need certain aspects of our original environment to sustain ourselves with. (One could take our developing taste concerning foodstuff's as an example.) Looking from a slightly grander view , our earth is at this point a closed system pertaining the material side of things , and although the notion that humans are here seems to imply that that's the way things should be , there is no logical reason to assume that humans must exist per se. (We tend to romanticize human awareness because well.....we're having the human experience!) Again , taking into account there is no inherent right or wrong , i could argue everything is evolving as it should be. (How can it be any other way?) And nature , it seems , is not spared from quite a bit of self indulgence. It also seems to make the point of human existence to function as an observer even better. Observing again that , what has sprung out of it and is doing so well , is something which is able to observe nature itself and seems hardwired to be endlessly curious about itself. Also the way in which the Universe has formed atoms , galaxies , stars , planets and eventually ..us , is exactly right for us as a species to be able to observe how all these magical happenings came about. (Along with that bit about time, direction and , uhm, stuff etc.) We seem to reside on a small balance point where on the one hand , galaxies would never have formed , and the other hand where galaxies would be so far apart already , that for all we would be able to observe , everything outside our own galaxy would be redshifted* into infinity.

(*This would make it so that we would not be able to see anything floating around beside our own galaxy , or be able to pickup the background radiation which is an integral part of our big bang theory. And probably a whole lot more interesting bits......) Yet at the same time it seems illogical to think humankind , a species which has evolved to this point , would keep having traits which would eventually harm their chances of survival. We have created systems on which a great part of humanity seems dependent for their survival. (Although the Dark Ages make a valid point for devolving , which would be likely to happen if these systems would suddenly crash and burn.) These systems have become so complex , a great part of our species is surviving on this planet by assuming a role in which they maintain them. (One could also see this the other way around.) The more complex these systems get , the more vulnerable they become to influences we have no direct control over. These systems are naturally susceptible to evolutionary processes which can eventually become one of those influences we have no control over. Our financial system is a great example of such a system. It is a system which almost everyone is dependent on to provide a means of exchange to participate in our trading systems. These trading systems facilitate our means of livelihood , in essence: survival. And now this complex system seems to be at a point where it cannot be allowed to fail , no matter how inefficient and faulty it seems to be functioning. (Ignoring it also seems unrealistic.) If mankind would have kept in mind they are dependent on their environment , maybe we would/could not have made such a system.(?) Another system we created called "governing" , in which a majority of the people let themselves be governed by a small elite minority on a distinct area of our planet called nation, is called upon to solve the issues with our financial system we are so interdependent on. Yet we seem to be expecting the solution not to have radical implications on our environment. This same issue seems to be prevalent even more so from the governments point of view. These governments (should) posses more responsibilities than the governed , yet it seems they have let their own positions be even more interdependent on their investments in this financial system. Even our nations , which can be seen by the financial system as separate entities , have become wholly interdependent on this complex system we have created. (Or again , Nature's creation.) Most individuals seem quite unaware of their interdependence on this system. (And who can blame anyone not being able to comprehend the complexities of it) So which part of our human functioning has to do most with the way we function as a society and thereby creating these issues without being aware of them? Our notion of ourselves. This concept of our brain seems to have been expanded upon to great lengths , maybe even so far that at a future point in our evolution it will become more proficient for us individuals to not see our selves as such distinct separate beings. (Another option would be for some sort of indoctrination which would make everyone highly altruistic to others and their environment.) In modern society humans are taught very early on they are distinct from their environment , and their environment then provides the means to evolve this distinct separateness. These so called roles , which are assumed , supposedly being beneficial to society. We have created set benchmarks to chose from. (Or concepts if you will.) These benchmarks act as a guide to determine which roles are considered to be preferable. In this sense it can create an ambition to become a certain kind of distinct person. (Person as a word is derived from the ancient Greek word prosopon which referred to the masks actors wore on stage. Also in a lot of constitutions of nations it is how a biological entity is considered , and it is in this capacity the person is given rights and duties. By whom they are given is usually indeterminable.)

Besides creating ambition , this concept also creates a great distinction between biological entities and can also create a profound difference in self worth. It seems someone who is able to manage well is more highly respected then a garbage man , while for the whole they are both of equal worth. (...maybe the garbage man wins out in this respect.) I have earlier described a human experience as a continuous solidifying of the idea of self/reality. One takes on opinions , preferences , responsibilities , material possessions and so forth. Usually , in social interactions , a person is spending a lot of time expressing these distinctions to others to identify themselves as such. (Distinct from other.) Beside the inherent natural need to be part of a group , it seems humans seek out others with whom they share similar traits , not only for the sense of belonging , but , also for the affirmation of all the traits they use to define themselves with as a distinct separate entity/person. Our traits of "instinctual behavior" are also put to good use to distinguish our separateness. I must however admit , that there are sports i enjoy to watch / participate in. For biological behavior as a means of procreation only , check Darwin out. (I might mention again , the theory of Darwin is a biological based view on things which does not incorporate the thoughts these biological entities posses. I have also indicated that thought can become a factor of concern in the biological sense. Yet as with a lot of things we tend to overlook these highly logical concepts , maybe we are hardwired for logical fallacies instead ?) Even our offspring is often used as a means for humans to give themselves a form of self identity. So in essence procreation / survival is probably still our main directive as a purely natural animal. And the way we can accomplish this is through the creation of elaborate separate identities / roles. Again we do not easily see this happen because we have created our own environment , which we spring out of and live right in the middle of. However , our current western environment differs quite a bit from ancient Chinese and Indian ones , making it easier to pick up on these notions. (Personally a lot of my daily experience i could describe as straight out of a B movie.) It would stand to reason to have a more realsitic view on subjects we tend to give a separate field of science. (Even though we seem to excel in complexing and distincting things.) I will challenge psychiatry to take my observations and put them to the test , i would put all psychiatric patients into a few categories: - One in which the brain is actually biologically compromised. - One where the issue at hand is created by a distorted sense of self. (Usually the role is not a generally accepted one , or not in line with one's own expectations.) - And one where in the patient defines their self as such ,being a psychiatric patient. (The latter two could be merged , yet the trait of attention seeking should be easier to pick up on for psychiatrists.) This would make psychiatry fall under anthropology , which falls under biology (which now houses natural sciences seeing our thoughts should be included ) , which , seeing the earth cannot exist without it surroundings , falls under cosmology ( which now houses physics......). Also this might be the moment to point out that , although i seem not so scientific , any argument i seem to be making should be easily verifiable. I challenge anyone to observe their environment and draw the same conclusions. Repeating experiments have the same outcome everyday for anyone to observe , there is no setting up experiments required in any way , they happen spontaneously. Yet , as i have found out myself , when i mention environment in this case it includes one's self. The thoughts one has on their self and any interaction should also be included in the observation. The only thing that is required is an objective and honest curiosity. Which unfortunately translates into a willingness to be crucified.

Anyone with a functioning brain is able to come to the exact same conclusions i have. These conclusions usually fall in the realm of realization that makes one sh*t bricks. If one takes up this challenge in their personal experience , they will also notice that , although the underlying concepts are exactly the same , every expression tends to have it's own unique flavor. And in the end i have not determined if it was me trying to make sense of my surroundings or the other way round. Luckily that doesn't disturb me much , It's just the way things work. (Both , like breathing , seem a natural thing to do.) What i am trying to bring over is that it might be becoming beneficial instead of detrimental for us , from an evolutionary point of view , to give up on our notions of ourselves. (And other idea's?) (Personally , i just couldn't help myself , maybe my brain is compromised.) In what seems to me like a logical evolution of a human experience , concepts which have been overly romanticized seem mere byproducts. Enlightenment for instance. As societies we tend to make it into a concept to aim for , and a hard one to attain at that. There seems to be a lot of reverence for certain people who supposedly attained it. From what i have observed and the feedback i have gotten so far on these writings , i feel sympathetic for the ones who try to bring over something that seems self-evident to them , to a flocking herd of people from which there is no escape . They can only enjoy to fail. The ones that claim enlightenment as a means to define themselves with as a distinct separate being make my heart ache by their apparent lack in noticing the uniqueness of every human experience on this planet. (Fortunately they are still having one.) The funny thing about so called enlightened ones is that the curiosity they seemed to posses makes a shift , in essence making them a quirk of nature...... .which is then playfully and persistently explored by their environment. Even though these humans usually claim they had nothing to do with anything , it seems that there is no mountain to be found on this planet where they can seclude themselves from this curiosity. To continue.... What seems to have been created then without us being aware of it in this point of our journey , is a society in which the positions of the most power and influence are automatically taken up by the humans with a great sense of self , wholly made possible by our environment. Paradoxically we find ourselves in an environment where a great sense of self is the goal while , at the same time , we seem to renounce the traits that go with it. (Creating paradoxes and contradiction is also inherent in western language opposed to eastern.) I assume there is no need to describe these traits , i'd suggest anyone to look around and observe. So to conclude , for almost any human being nowadays , basic survival depends on being able to play a good role. Most humans can also attest playing isn't much fun when it's forced. Such societies , which seem most prevalent in the western civilized world , have thus created their own environment. (Or so it seems.) An environment which is at the same time a system with low regard for it's natural environment and creates traits in human beings which make humans able to wreak havoc in other systems we have become interdependent on. This works through individual persons taking up assets and influence for the sake of benefiting themselves in systems which have become vital for the livelihood of large groups of humans . Personally it seems these traits become less and less beneficial to society as a whole.

Throughout history there have been numerous attempts to create an idea which is then spread into as many brains as possible with the intention to create a movement in which a great commonality can be shared and a lot of benefits of that commonality can be reaped. Usually forcing an idea openly upon others creates resistance , the use of fear based tactics like we see and have seen in societies / periods of christianity , communism and other kinds of dictatorships seem not very successful for extended periods. Democracies and our current neo liberal capitalist system , in which the common idea might seem something like "everyone as a free independent individual person", (which is still an idea which has created a movement in which there is a great commonality among the many for the sake of sharing the benefits) seems also not sustainable for extended periods. The idea also seems to create a lack of awareness that we are a product of our environment. Again , for the moment it is my personal observation that cracks seem to be appearing. If people take their idea of self to far , it seems to become hazardous for their environment. Also , humans seem (to me) like the only mammals which defy logic when looking at their behavior , although i have done my best in a role of cosmologist to explain things. So what would seem a logical step in the evolution of a species in which this idea of self , which has made for a mighty entertaining evolving trip so far , seems to become a hindrance to evolution itself? Should we just expand upon it? Eventually being able to digitize ourselves to live forever maybe ? Or expanding our physical traits , making ourselves adapt to space travel or creating cyborgs to enhance our competitive abilities? (This does evoke my curiosity.) Try to separate humanity in distinct races again where one would be elite and the other no more than a simple worker bee ? (It seems Nature has tried already , and it failed.) Or we could do away with letting ourselves be governed by idea's. If there is no self to believe in so vigorously , there is no need to take one's "self" serious. That would imply that for instance , opinions we use to define ourselves with , would not have to be defended so rashly. This would end a lot of conflict. (Not to mention the humor it would create!) If there would be a greater realistic view that we are not separate from our environment but an integral part of it , maybe our "mirror neurons" would be more empathic towards our environment and we would not seek to dominate it so that we can decorate it to our tastes. (I will imply again that the tastes and preferences which we use to scape our environment with are a product of that same environment we came out of , making it a vicious cycle of some sort.) If we were not so occupied with defining ourselves we might have the time to notice nature springs forth very unique individuals all by itself. Instead of proving ourselves better then others and let the goal of dominating others be the thing that provides the means to create the most advanced technology , maybe we should realize that the Universe likes to explore itself and we seem created just for that. (Looking at our sciences , it seems we are partially moving on the right track.) Maybe , just maybe , instead of seeking our true self in ideas and concepts created by our brain , We should seek to find that our true self is the same for everyone and we were never apart from it. You are merely an idea of yourself, created by processes of an evolving Universe. If you think otherwise , go figure it out and you will realize the journey was the destination. There is lots to explore. The Universe is one big dualistic playground.

(Also if anyone has a better explanation for the continuous bickering between proponents of atheism and proponents of intelligent design i would like to hear it. And mentioning the dualistic paradoxical nature of our Universe doesn't count in this case !!! I mean , if everyone would start using the logic i use to enrich my daily perception , we would never get anywhere , so i consider that cheating in this case.)

Note: I have tried to bring over my observations because i felt compelled to do so. In doing so i have tried to expound as little as possible for the sake of getting people to figure things out for themselves. In all honesty , it is probable that most people will not do such a thing for quite some time . So i couldn't help but putting in some suggestions , for if anyone must take on idea's or be the victim of suggestibility , i'd better set forth some idea's i consider worthwhile. (I suspect Gautama Buddha being guilty of this same thing , maybe some others also.) I have changed the capital letters pointing to I ,TV and Christianity into small ones and put a capital one when mentioning Universe and Nature to emphasize them. So if one must have an idea , the concept that our Universe is one single , curious , playful thingy , and that one is not separate from their environment might be an idea i would like to put forth. Still , people will always have an inherent ability to misuse any idea because the concept of possession implies that here actually is someone there that can do such a thing. And although it may seem like that , the logical evidence for it is hard to find. So if one is bound to mistake the finger for the moon while i try to point at it , i might as well make the finger a bit more enticing. Much of what i might be saying here would be quite evident in other cultures and i cannot say with certainty if our culture is a cause or an effect. Other than There seems to be some sort of experience going on, there's not much to be sure of. Again i would like to emphasize that everything can be easily understood by anyone who desires it , the only thing standing in the way seems to be our inherent desire to try and understand it. (What a dualistic paradox.) One could also dissect our western language and compare it to most eastern languages and the emphasizes and pointing to an inherent I could make one sh*t bricks.... I hereby would like to thank everyone i have ever interacted with for making this experience possible , without you it just wouldn't have been so much fun. And i would like to send out a special mentioning to all the ones who have given honest feedback and played / are playing their roles convincingly. (Not to mention putting up with me !) A special thanks goes out to the whole Universe , which in my case , is like masturbating. (Which is nice.....)

About the author: For any one curious to find out i can honestly say that: I have no idea who has written this.

The End......

...and Beginning.