The Dawn of the Suprasystem

No Paradigm

Convergence as a Technology of Social Production
The convergence we are witnessing in our social reality is not merely convergence of the media channels, content and technologies; it is even more so convergence of social technologies, infrastructures and entities. Convergence and like phenomena began the liberalization of the society and its process, however it seems the infrastructure which was supposed to liberalize the social infrastructure failed to accomplish its task, since yet again it collapsed back into the social contract and its rigid infrastructure.

Suppressed Infrastructure
Not only that the system that came out of six-degrees-ofseparation theory (social networking) is dead, it never utilized the power of network distribution, as well as idiosyncratic and whimsical property of the network/neural system. Furthermore, social media turned superior system into suppressed infrastructure, which turned social development retrograde instead of pushing it forward.

Zapped out Hypermodernizam
The medium as such, even with the trendy atomization of the audience and the hyper-multiplication of channels, accomplishes its prophet role and it religious provenience. If it is possible to turn any medium, or even any message into a format, what we have is not only the atomization of the channels, rendering the ideology of everyone is a prophet, we could have the utter deconstruction of all and any elements of the medium, format, metatext and even the text.

Can the message cancel itself if there is no motive to communicate it and there is no designated course of its distribution? Is there a chance for a hypermessage to gain a body, interaction and infrastructure? Can we claim that the (hyper)mutiplications of formats, channels and messages, contrary to Baudrillard’s mantra could actually be a method to cancel media and finally arrive at the bare information and the system without a reference? Can we actually emanate a hapax, a system with high level of entropy with no reference, which could endlessly reproduce without any recollection of the previous system?

Zero Point

Mutation

System that originated from media/technology/social convergence and network system(s) created a rupture in social infrastructure and social institutions, although pseudo, it brought to light or emanated a mutation as a possible technology for a social development and abatement of the social contract.

The media with no motive to communicate the message (as one of the technologies of the media thus social construction or a deconstruction) where possible implosion of value-chain occurs, is respectively creating an infrastructure wherein systems emanate constantly without any reference of recollection of the previously realized system; in such a system the information could be detected as an entity which has no relation to its interpretation, as it is recognized without a mediator, making the mediator obsolete.

Canceling the Media

Deconstruction
Deconstruction of the retrograde socio-political system should be accomplished through liberalization of the properties of the system, or via absolute realization of the network/neural systems through mutation of the social reality and revisiting the virtual environment and its interaction with the social. What we could see in such a scenario is not only the erasing or skewing of the borders between media and the social body, we could perceive the main elements of the both systems being deconstructed simultaneously.

The New Syntax
Creation of the new social infrastructure and canceling the social contract could be accomplished through the new syntax, or the new language (a subliminal one perhaps); furthermore via distribution of the information that is partial, but merely accomplishes comprehension through ad hoc grouping in a multifaceted environment (for the first phase), until the absolute cognition is accomplished.

(the excerpt for movie Waking Life)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vejSAt-MgAM

Free Will and Physics

.

If one chooses to be a gear in a deterministic machine (as the guy in the video does), one chooses to relinquish own free will, which does or does not constitutes a free will, since the only accomplishment of the free will is the decision to relinquish the free will in order to become a part of, if I may say so, rather retrograde system. On the other hand, if one “decides” to recognize oneself as a random swerving of the particles one could gain absolute freedom since such a choice deconstructs and abates identity, causality, and needless to say a Will as such. However, how could anything be created if there is no will to do so? Could we then shift the creation and the will to consciousness and the actualization of the random particles or entities. Furthermore, what if we say that so called “randomness” isn't randomness at all and it is executed by the complex system, which we couldn't even begin to comprehend?

Causality
Can we comprehend causality as a rigid infrastructure which stops the development of a humankind, and halts our understanding of the cosmos and our place in it? However, if the causality is not existent, how does it relate to particles or entities as well as their actualization? If all is just a random swerving without actualization, there is no consciousness which could be equipped for the creation of anything. Therefore there should be, or there is a system of immense complexity, which assumes selfconsciousness and self-actualization of its objects/particles/entities and in which the causality is the most restricted system.

The New System
The system has to be quirky and unstable, with the high level of entropy, in order to utilize all of the properties of the system.

Paradoxically, Suprasystem is not superordinate to any other system.

Properties:
Wobbly Fluid Infrastructure constantly evolves Intelligent enough to adapt to any number of variables and their interactions Able for constant (self)upgrade Able to create environments Able to create realities

Social and Cosmology

The connection between social reality and cosmology is in the phenomenon in which only some physicist gurus are leading the development and forcing the scientific community to comply with the dualism, measurement and other mantras; which means we could have some serious development in physics and cosmology if it weren’t for the social adaptation phenomenon, and if the science would care to go into ontology, and even more into cognition as such (as Heidegger calls it “fundamental ontology”, prior to logic, theory or thought). Thus the main Problems are: • • • • The scientific community became a bureaucratic apparatus The only way we could understand universe in this stage of development is through fundamental ontology. The syntax we use in creating our reality is inapt to give the answer to the question of Being (the leading questions of the ontology (Heidegger). Human development and the evolution are halted by the inadequate philological development, which respectively leads to a rigid social system (or falling back into the social contract) unable to employ all its productive, creative and intellectual forces, and vice verse. Clinging to causality, as its disappearance or transformation is an “uncomfortable” notion for the physicist and the humanity at large. The same goes for the quantum suppressed infrastructure, and the perception of the physical and simulational reality.

And...

What can we get if we break loose from the mentioned categories? For Baudrillard dialectical stage is already empty! Can we arrive to the pure information, essence, Being, with absolute cognition; and/or can we finally indulge the Being in environments of high level of entropy, parallel universes and multiple existences.

We should reassess Kantian necessity, possibility, actuality and causality rigid infrastructure, as well as the categories which define time and space as inner and outer perception of the “world”. Furthermore, we need to abate Cartesian or any other dualism, and try not to divide the Being from its environment and its actualization.

Definite need for the new syntax we can find in the fact that the leading question in philosophy and ontology by Heidegger; - What is Being of Being?, has many philological problems, especially in English. In which one definition of Being stands for what is the Being as is, and the other for what is the understanding of Being as is; bringing us to the conclusion that the Heidegger’s main question is not ontological but a predominantly philological one. It is interesting that some “small” languages (e.g. Croatian), have the distinction between those two Beings, not only greatly conveyed but respectively offer almost instantaneous cognition or a recognition of the differences of the two idioms/entities.

The Reason

The Arbitrariness and the Absolute
• The other night when watching a show on Discovery channel, the series on parallel universes, my friend and me were screaming of laughter hearing the theories of the cosmologists; the first comment my friend had was – our drunken friend has better theories. My comment was: oh yeah, the universe is a pile of membranes that float in pure reason. It was a joke, however, the theories physicists are trying to convey are completely arbitrary, and the measurements inadequate and even more so, redundant, yet they are programmed not to go into fundamental ontology or cognition. Thus my joke: the universe is a pile of membranes which float in pure reason, could be a plausible theory. The same as: the universe is an idea, a thought, and became by the cognition of self, which is undividable either from its environment either from its actualization. Nikola Tesla calls it the Cosmic Reason, Absolute that created everything and at the same time it doesn’t assume any action. But still we need to arrive at the Cosmic Reason without theory, logic, dialectics etc., and become the one with it.

The Solution
Although the solution for the evolutionary quantum leap cannot be administered as a cough syrup, we cannot move forward without cognition. Is it a new syntax which is able to transcend math symbols and philological ones the tool that could bring us to pure information, and a hapax, a system without a reference, a new language, a subliminal one, that makes recognition and cognition instant? Sumerian language, as well as their comprehension of the syntax, symbols, cosmos and their relation, came close to that ideal. No matter if the new syntax is a cause or result (or both) of the brain-to-brain communication, it could lead to instant cognition and an evolutionary quantum leap and the fulfillment of human and neohuman potential as the first phase of the new evolution.

Evolution – the excerpt for the movie Waking Life
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93JkzfCW2yA

“The new evolution stems from information, and it stems from two types of information: digital and analog. The digital is artificial intelligence. The analog results from molecular biology, the cloning of the organism. And you knit the two together with neurobiology. Before on the old evolutionary paradigm, one would die and the other would grow and dominate. But under the new paradigm, they would exist as a mutually supportive, noncompetitive grouping...”

In the theory mentioned in the previous slide the evolutionary quantum leap is assumed through the information; DNA as an analogue information and AI as the digital information, and its intertwining through neurobiology in order to achieve superior social system (at least in the first phase of development). The theory assumed in this presentation presupposes generating the new syntax which would bring us to instant cognition (without gene or other manipulation), and a suprasystem which is going to make us achieve the fulfillment of cosmic potential, or an actualization per se.

hapax

References
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Systems theory (von Foerster, 1960) Chaos theory (Gleick, 1991) Network Theory (Buchanan, 2003; Newman, Barabasi, Watts, 2006) Media extension of human body (McLuhan, 1964) Network vs. Hierarchical infrastructure (Galloway, 2002; PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2002) Hyperreality (Baudrillard, 1981) The Mirror of Production (Baudrillard, 1975) The Attention Economy (Davenport & Beck, 2001; Goldhaber, 1997; Barbrook, 1997; Berman & McClellan, 2001; Ghosh, 1997) Mass vs. Individual media (Kompare, 2002) Convergence (Forman & Saint John, 2000) Autopoiesis (Maturana & Varela, 1987) Knowledge Economy (Leadbeater, 2000) Gift Economy (Barbrook, 1997) Self-management (Petras & Veltmeyer, 2002) And much, much more

1/4/2013

One of Three LLC / The New Paradigm

20

Author

Ana Soric / MA in Communications / CEO @ One of Three LLC / / +385 91 9080666 / +385 92 1475491 / ceo@oneofthree.biz / www.oneofthree.biz / mindbanking.co

1/4/2013

One of Three LLC / The New Paradigm

21