MATTERS of CONSEQUENCE Possible Discussion and Essay Topics Author note: As one reviewer of this book said: “Though Macdonald writes in a relaxed style when the subject permits, overall the book requires concentration.” The purpose of this book is to take readers on a wide-ranging exploration of the human situation.  In doing that I share concepts, perspectives, interpretations, and explanatory schemata that I have found illuminating in my own quest for greater understanding.  A number of these explanatory tools will be unfamiliar to at least some students in the group — yet to get maximum value from the book they need to be grasped.  Getting the students involved in discussing what they have read is an important technique for deepening everyone’s understanding.  Obviously, when some students have grasped the material and some have not, discussion helps everyone to get on board. Although it is not necessary to work through the book chapter by chapter, starting with the Introduction, that is the approach I suggest.  Certainly, individual chapters are useful. But beyond that, there is a connective and explanatory thread that runs through the book — one that reveals itself when the whole book is explored.  For instance, the nature of the cosmic reality explored in the first four chapters has implications for the call in the last chapter to do what needs to be done to transform ourselves and world society.  And the discussion of our present social, economic, and biospheric situations in Part II of the book is intimately linked to the Chapter 14 vision of a year 2050 society that works in ways that our present society does not. However you choose to approach the material, I wish you and your students an exciting exploration. INTRODUCTION              The Evolution of Understanding                                        pages xx-xxxii The author contends that not only has humanity learned more as time went on, but that human societies have evolved new ways of seeing and interpreting the world.  He also contends that the former ways of seeing and understanding are not completely discarded, but are built upon and added to by the new ways. What evidence is there that magic-connected assumptions, appeals, and fears have not completely disappeared?  [Author: The Harry Potter phenomenon.  The appeal of films such as Lord of the Rings.  Good luck charms.  Superstitions about walking under ladders, breaking mirrors, and Friday the 13th.] Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate dictionary defines myth as “a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon.”  It also defines myth as “a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone, especially one embodying the ideals and institutions of a society or segment of society.” With these definitions in mind, let’s see if there are still with us some elements of mythic thought. What are some examples from religion?    What are some examples from our nation’s history that helped to form the way we see ourselves as a nation? Which of these continue to reinforce our national self-image? Are more recent events changing the national mythos? Can you think of other examples? Rationality has become the modern world’s primary lens for interpreting and understanding the world, as well as its main tool for guiding action within it.  As the rest of the book unfolds, the author will present a variety of views about the next stage in the evolution of human understanding.  But before we go further in the book: What are your thoughts about the limitations and deficiencies of rationality, and what might be added to rationality to give us a more effective way of understanding and dealing with what is going on? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 1                The Nature of Primal Reality                         pages 2-11 About this “true but partial” way of looking at our explanations and models of reality:  Is it true that no explanation or model completely reflects all aspects of the reality it seeks to illuminate?  Is it true that each explanation or model tends to answer only certain questions about a particular reality, and that a different explanation or model may be needed to answer other questions about it? Why in the world should we care about the nature of primal reality? [Author: Because everything depends on it, because from it everything arises, because it is the ultimate context for our lives.  Coming to understand the cosmic reality helps to understand ourselves and our role in the universe because our very identity is rooted in this primary reality.] In this section of the book certain key concepts were presented: information — not a thing in itself, but a pattern of significant differences, imposed upon, or carried by, something substantially real. carrier — a substantially real entity which is formed or patterned or encoded by information, thereby giving that information tangible existence. modulation — the process through which information is applied to a carrier algorithm — as generally used in this book: a logical procedure that transforms one informational pattern into another.  (The dictionary’s more general definition is: “A step-by-step procedure for solving a problem or accomplishing some end.”) energy — the primal stuff of the universe which “cannot be created or destroyed but only changed in form.” The primal carrier of information. A sense of these concepts will help the reader understand what follows, so discussing them as a group could be of value. A discussion of absolute reality and relative reality could also be helpful.  Do readers understand the four points in bold on pages 9 and 10, and the ocean/wave metaphor on page 10?  Again, a group discussion could be of value. MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 2                  The Development of Complexity                  pages 12-27 The “hierarchy of systems” or “hierarchy of holons” perspective is introduced in this chapter. Because it will be referred to many times throughout the book, it would be helpful to get it firmly established at this point.  The author talks about systems or holons at one level “getting together,” “combining,” “joining,” “interconnecting,” “interacting,” or “communicating” to form systems at the next level of complexity.  Could we view these various kinds of interaction as forms of cooperation?  Does it appear, then, that cooperation is a built-in requirement for creating “next-level” systems that hold together? Do you think that this complexity-creating, hierarchy-of-holons process has gone as far as it can go?  If not, where might it go in the future?  MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 3             Understanding Human Mentality                      pages 28-48 The author recognizes that the final word is not yet in on the nature of mind and its relationship to brain, but in this chapter he leads the reader through a forest of possibilities to what he feels is the simplest, most likely, explanation — which he then explains in detail.  The core assumption here is that the ground of mind, the carrier of mental information, is fundamental.  In this view energy is not just proto-physical but also proto-mental.  That is, energy is the parent of not only everything physical, but also of everything mental. Why is it important to understand human mentality? [Author: First, we hang out in a mental world.  We tend to think of ourselves as physical beings, and tend to be preoccupied with the physical side of life. But aren’t most of our goals really mental ones?  Aren’t most of the physical things we do aimed at creating enjoyable states of mind (pleasure, happiness, understanding, inner peace) and eliminating distressful ones such as fear, anxiety, and pain.  Mind is central to human existence, and understanding human mentality gives us a leg up on life.  Second, human minds now guide and control what is happening on our planet.  So, if we want positive things to happen in our personal lives and in our world, we need to understand the origin, nature, and functioning of our minds.] Did you understand the author’s explanation of mind? Where does the author’s favored explanation rank with the others that he mentions or that you might know about?  Is his explanation plausible?  Is there any other explanation that strikes you as more plausible?  If so, why? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 4             The Question of Cosmic Purpose                       pages 49-66 The author’s conclusion that the universe has certain built-in values and purposes was arrived at inductively from what we know about the behavior of the cosmic process during the past 15 billion years.  This might be a good opportunity for a general discussion of induction and deduction and their application to various situations. What does the universal process value? [Author: Among other things:  The establishment of informational patterns.  The progressive increase of informational complexity.  Cooperation.  Life.  Mentality and its progressive refinement.  Creativity.  Productivity.] In assessing the question of cosmic purpose, the author is drawn to the metaphors of adventure and game.  What is your feeling about the cosmos having a built-in purpose?  No purpose?  Adventure and/or game?  Some other? How do you see your relationship to the cosmos?  As separated from it?  One with it?  Distant?  Close?  Would you like that relationship to be something other than it presently is? PART I AS A WHOLE  —  Big–Picture Reality  (Matters 1-4) In reading the book’s first four chapters, the question “What about God?” will pop into the minds of some readers.  Individual reactions are likely to vary from “he left God out completely” to “it’s all about God.”  For some groups this might be a useful discussion or essay topic.  Below is a statement by the author in which he says how he feels about the issue. With some groups it might be a useful addition; with others, counterproductive. [Author:  Some people find the term God helpful. Some don’t. (I tend not to use it because it means different things to different people.) For me, it’s not the label or lack of a label that matters it’s the underlying reality. Western cultures and religions have conditioned us to associate the term God with a person–like super being who embodies humanity’s highest values and has superhuman and supernatural powers. Christianity, in particular, has proposed a God who knows everything that is going on, listens to personal entreaties, and on occasion overrides the natural order of things to grant personal wishes. It is a God–image that is not scientifically supportable, and in the view of many reflects the wishful thinking of humanity rather than the reality in which humanity is immersed. During the past century (and to some extent even before), many who found the idea of a personal God unsatisfactory dropped it in favor of God as ultimate reality or the ground of being. In this view, God does not use power; God is power. God does not ignore the natural order; God is the natural order. God is not at odds with scientific understanding; God is the reality out of which that understanding arises. Among the cosmic givens that some have chosen to associate with this kind of God are: ·        Primal somethingness. There is something rather than nothing. Isn’t that amazing? Instead of nothing, instead of a cosmic naught, a cipher, a void, there is actuality, a primal something, a cosmic YES! ·        Primal capability, the ground of physicality. The primal something has an active, proto-physical aspect. We call it energy. The ancients called it yang and Brahman. ·        Primal receptivity, the ground of mentality. The primal something also has a receptive, proto-mental aspect. We call it sentience or awareness. The ancients called it yin and Atman. ·        Process guidance in the form of laws–of–nature algorithms that guide the functioning and evolution of the universal process—a process which allows primal activity and sentience to modulate themselves with informational overlays varying from the elegantly simple to the unimaginably complex. ·        Primal intention as manifested in the trends and tendencies of the universal process. The cosmic YES! is both adventurous and directional. This God is not going to save selected individuals (or all humanity, for that matter) from their own stupidity. This God, through actions taken during past billions of years, has shown us its intentions, the directions in which it wants to go, and the rules by which the going forth is accomplished. Each of us has the opportunity to align our own intentions and life direction with that of the cosmos. Each of us can, if we choose, act in this corner of the universe to further God’s massive project.] MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 5                   Sociocultural Context                                 pages 68-91 It might be useful to discuss the holonic relationship between people today and the societal institutions to which they belong.  Can you give some examples of person-institution relationships that benefit both the individual and the institution?  Can you think of situations where the individual benefits but the institution (and perhaps other people) are harmed?  Can you think of situations where the institution benefits but component individuals are harmed?  How about situations where both individual and institution benefit to some extent, but one benefits much more than the other?  What is the ideal? The author refers to evolution occurring in three domains: physical, biological, and societal, and in this chapter presents his view of societal evolution from hunter-gatherer times to the present.  In what ways has life gotten better during this period?  Are there any ways in which it has gotten worse?  Where do you think it will go from here?  Why?  The author presents the view that there is no single “human nature,” but rather a wide range of possible human natures that are determined largely by societal influences.  In our society, what would you consider the ten strongest influences we are subjected to as we develop?  On balance, which of these would you consider to be positive influences, and which negative? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 6                   Economic Context                                      pages 92-129 What is your reaction to the author’s comments about markets on pages 99-100? One of the author’s main ideas in this chapter is that economies came into being as subsystems of societal systems to help people meet their provisioning needs. This he sees as appropriate. However, economic forces have become increasingly powerful over time, and the focus of economic systems has shifted from provisioning society to maximizing the wealth of the financial stakeholders.  This he sees as inappropriate.  What do you think?  Do you agree with the author that the present relationship between economic power and political power undermines democracy? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 7                   Biospheric Context                                   pages 130-149 The author is clearly concerned about a number of threats to the environment and the sustainability of a healthy biosphere. Is he overly concerned?  With regard to which issues? Can this group come to a consensus about how the threats should be ranked, from most serious to least serious? (After doing the above ranking of threats)  If we put ourselves in the position of a person living 100 years from now who could reach back in time to influence the way we rank the threats today, in what ways might their ranking be different? PART II AS A WHOLE  —  Humanity’s Contextual Reality   (Matters 5-7) The book to this point has examined realms of context in which we humans exist:  cosmic, societal, economic, and biospheric.   Are there other contexts that significantly influence our lives?  We have looked at the meaning which these contexts have for us personally.  Let’s now look in the other direction.  What is the present meaning of our individual lives to each of these contexts?  What would we like it to be? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 8       Self–Knowledge and Other Bad News                 pages 151-159 On pages 153-54, the author lists twelve “unhelpful” mental characteristics that are part of evolution’s legacy.  Taking them one at a time: In what way is this characteristic “unhelpful?” Is it a serious deficiency, or not so serious?  In what circumstances? What could we do to deal with this characteristic so it is no longer a problem, or is at least a less serious one? Do you agree with the author’s assessment that the first four on the list are the most likely to cause us problems? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 9    Freedom, Responsibility, and Ethical Sensibility     pages 160-167 In our culture, ethics are often considered to be arbitrary, and not grounded in anything but social convention.  Does the holonic view bring some logic and clarity to this issue for you?  Do you get some inkling that there are ethical imperatives rooted in a reality that consists of a hierarchy of holons?  Is cooperation and some level of commitment perhaps mandated by reality for things to function well, and not an arbitrary choice? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 10           Developing Deep Understanding                   pages 168-182 A useful written assignment could be an essay on the nature and/or development of wisdom which included some research on the perspectives of others plus the student’s own feelings on the subject.  This might be followed by a group discussion of the topic. Discussion questions involving inner, psychological/spiritual, development might include: Are there any circumstances in your life in which discursive thinking stops and you find yourself simply paying attention? If any of you have personal experience with meditation, could you tell us about it? Should you be drawn to work on the kind of inner development the author talks about, what opportunities are there, either on campus or nearby, for doing that? A useful essay assignment might involve thinking through the acquisition of relevant intellectual knowledge.  What do individual students feel they need to learn more about?  How much of that can be met through the course of study they will be taking?  How will they go about acquiring the rest? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 11               Significant Doing                                        pages 183-191 The author talks about personal significance and our life having a lasting effect on the world process through the ripples of cause and effect that we create as we live.  What do you think about this?  Which is the greater memorial, to have people think about you after you dead, or to have had a positive, ripple-producing influence on things while you are alive? This matter of creating a personal vision, living toward it, and refining it as our interests and life circumstances change, could be a topic for discussion or an essay.  Relevant questions: Do we create a life purpose or do we discover one? Is there one life purpose for me, or several? How do I know if I’ve found it? Where do I start? Might a quest for deep understanding also be a helpful vehicle for discovering our life purpose? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 12             The Art of Predicting the Future                    pages 193-202 What are some examples of how we use prediction in our daily lives? Political leaders frequently make wrong predictions.  Can you think of some examples, and why they turned out to be wrong? Do you agree with the author’s conclusion that our ability to predict the distant future is quite limited? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 13            The Art of Creating the Future                       pages 203-222 Do you think that high social synergy should be a cornerstone principle in the society of the future?  Should another cornerstone principle be that the pain involved in making the essential changes be equitably shared?  What mechanisms might be used for doing this? When it comes to turning the vision of a better future into reality, the author feels that the following personal qualities will be needed:  integrity, a caring attitude, good communication with others involved in the task, commitment, and patience.  What would you say about each of these?  Would you add anything to this list? MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 14               The Year 2050 Vision                                 pages 223-292 Essay assignment:  Write a critique of the Year 2050 Vision presented by the author.  It should be a response to the following questions: Is the vision desirable from a human standpoint?  If not completely so, what features are undesirable and why?  Are all the changes he advocates necessary?  If not, which ones are not, and why aren’t they necessary?  Do any of the recommended changes seem impossible to achieve?  Which ones, and why?  Once the essays are written, the group could share their conclusions in a group discussion. MATTER OF CONSEQUENCE 15           Doing What Needs To Be Done                     pages 293-318 Using Figure 2 on page 315 (or preferably a large blowup of it) to refer to, have a group discussion about each of the figure’s six transformational tasks.  In each of the six areas, what specific actions might be attempted? Have you picked out one or more task areas that you are personally drawn to?  Why the pull toward these? Are all of these task areas equally important? Would you add any new areas?  Delete any?   Copyright © 2004 by Copthorne Macdonald