This is getting good, I have a graphical analysis of the rate of change that
you talk about, it produces a double helixical shape with the base (youth)
being of tighter make up than the top (aged). An interesting thing about
this is if you transpose it onto a 2 dimensional U shaped graph, which has
'time available for making change' at the bottom left hand corner, and
leading to death, which is the top right corner, and experience that starts
at the bottom left hand corner (birth) and goes to the top right hand corner
(death) the intersection of these 2 places, or middle aged, around about the
45 age bracket, is the place where the "power" of society is held, the
demograph that holds the most current power (There are few examples of big
business CEO's and Heads of state that deviate from this) This makes
intrinsic evolutionary sense. I would like to clarify my response to my
original response to 'some various thoughts' I believe that quality is
BEFORE evolution, not the other way 'round as skutvik implied. Quallity is
the cause of evolution, however evolution is the quantification of quality
to some extent, that is it shows where quality has been and offers insights
into where it might be going. The double helixical shape I talk about is
important. The rotation of such shapes produces upward rotation, a screw
like effect, more poronounced if you incorporate bars running from one helix
to the next, as time progresses, the bottom 'rungs' of this helixical ladder
are moved up and then take position as the power demograph, while the
current power demograph are forced up into the semi static demograph of the
aged. The tighter at the bottom aspect of this helix is what you talk about
with your rate of change, and is needed in order for dynamic quality to
really take hold. This provides the momentum so to speak to allow the
upwards thrust. The People in this demograph are the youth, around 23 years
old, this is also approximately the time when opposition to the power
demograph is at its highest - the addage of 'you cant fight against the
youth' is thus realised. This opposition comes about through evolutionary
processes, which I propose is driven by quality, pretty much what pirsig has
shown us, and creates dynamicism of the highest order - conflict. There is
no way at all that the older demographs (power/control, semi static) can
stop this, as the youth, or maximum propensity for change demograph will by
the motion of the helix be necesarraly be forced up into the power/control
demograph and once again have opposition from the more dynamic PFC
demograph, which will supercede it. The exponential rate of change is
neccesarry to prevent the power/control demograph from achieveing a static
state of power, as the power/control demograph already has achieved its goal
(that is control) it is able to impart more force upon the other demographs.
This creates a situation where an incremental change is insufficient to
dislodge the P/Cd, as in in the interests of self preservation, these people
do not want to give up control and set up barriers to prevent them from
being dislodged before they feel ready to 'retire', therefore an exponential
rate of change is required. These control devices have happened to be very
successful in some countries and corrodes the workings of society until a
revolution, which is the most dynamic change possible, an emergancy measure
if you like, to ensure dynamicism. As long as the evolutionary process
holds true, that is each generation is by necessity more advanced than the
next this will continue forever (as quality can probably never be reached).
This effect can be seen at any time, look at the youth today, far more
proficiant in most areas than our parents, even when using the same
benchmarks (I have seen a study in my sociology class to prove this
statement) Look further still at the elderly and these people are barely
able to cope, "it wasnt like that in my day" they say, still trying to cling
onto the power that they had set up for themselves when they themselves were
in the PFCd. I will admit that there are also biological degregation
matters that influence the elderly, however I dont think that this is all
that important in the big picture.
You can prove this theory further still. Look at the P/C demograph now, the
45-60 age group, this makes them the PFCd in 1960 - 1970's. What was
happening in the youth? The cold war was in full swing, so there was
immediately a desire to end communism (the opposite is capitalism) science
and technology were really starting to come of age with the help of the
space race and early supercomputers, environmental issues were starting to
be raised.
Look further back, the P/Cd of the 1960 -70's, making them the PFCd in the
1930 - 1940's what were their influences, War to a great number of them,
massive production as a result of this enforced changed provider (war)
massive increase in technological prowess (look at the aircraft at the
begginning of WW2 compared to the end). These influences in turn created
the first mass destruction of environments, and created the left vs right
cold war as a result of aquiring the spoils of war and need to prevent
another world war. This is a definate correlation to what they introduced
as the P/Cd, just as their spawn furthered their own PFCd ideals,
culminating in the society you see today. The influnces of the P/Cd are
neccesarry for the reason of experience, however this experience is then
seen in a new light by the PFCd and they add their own bits to it, based on
the experiences of the past, the influences of the present and their goals
for the future, intrinsically knowing that they will one day hold the reigns
of power. Each Cycle of the double helix lasts about 50 years, that is the
time it takes for the PFCd to take control and then die, the increased rate
of change each successive generation brings adds up untill it reaches a
zenith, which brings forth a fundamental shift in society, and the start of
a new cycle (this cycle can be slowed by walls placed by the P/Cd). We are
approaching the beggining of the next cycle, this can be shown by the
following
1750 - 1800 major effect colonialism
1800 - 1850 major effect mass industrialisation
1850 - 1900 major effect mass production
1900 - 1950 major effect war, (Left vs Right politics)
1950 - 2000 major effect Consumerism from capitalism
2000 - 2050 major effect Sustainability?
The last part of this post is pretty 'far out' but the base of it is
interesting.
david wilkinson evolve
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: MD Toffler waves or Q-intellectual "evolution"?
>Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 20:36:43 +0200
>
>Thracian, David and Discussion.
>In my last visit to the MD I spoke of this site looking more and
>more like other Internet general dicussions with a �quality� thrown
>in for appearances sake. I don�t deviate from that, but found
>Thracian Bard�s �Some thoughts on various ...�. and David
>Wilkinson�s response highly interesting even if the quality
>connection is a bit obscure. It touches an idea of mine with strong
>Q-connection! It stems from long before LILA, but soon got its
>quality coating. I labelled it �the rate of change curve� and is why
>these posts struck me. If I have spoken about this before - privately
>or on the forum - please forgive, but it goes like this:
>
>If we use a hundred-year yardstick and imagine a person from 1900
>being "transported" to 2000 he/she would be completely lost. One
>from 1800 would find many things familiar in 1900, and a 1700er
>would be still more at home in 1800, and so on backwards with
>smaller and smaller differences until none would be detected
>(except for the faces). A year 700 person would have had trouble
>finding anything new in the year 800 (this in the western world,
>there may still be places where it still applies). However, returning
>to our time one need not be a hundred-yearling to be lost, those
>who passed away in - say - the fifties would have been equally
>disoriented, my mother-in-law who left just recently did not have an
>inkling of the digital revolution, and I read somewhere about a
>young person in the info-tech business who was sacked after a
>sick-leave because he was outdated! It is said that more newness
>has been created over the last decade than over the entire previous
>history! That�s how fast the pace is ...and still growing.
>
>Now, to Bard�s approach. I may not have got his message right,
>but at first he seems to se it all as progress: human rights, legal
>protection, political power from the kings and nobility to the people,
>emocracy ... and link socialism with progress. At the end he takes
>an even grander view, but still cantered on socialism and
>capitalism and sees a new "nobility" in the capitalists ....
>
> >If we view time as a never ending, yet slowly expanding spiral, we
> >see that the Industrial Revolution is the beginning of a new cycle.
> >It's beginning is more obvious than previous cycles, because so
>much
> >more documentation exists. This new cycle produced a new set
>of
> >monarchs - venture capitalists. It is not the capitalism that is in
> >contradiction to socialism (or quality), it is this new power
> >structure that resulted from the Industrial Revolution. Socialism, in
> >its naturally dynamic way has now
>
>this triggered David to launch his Toffler-based wave theory. I have
>read both message thoroughly and don�t disagree with either, but
>will concentrate a bit more on David�s because here the �rate of
>change� aspect is more pronounced. My only objection to the wave
>picture is that it sounds like a sudden surge and then calm until
>the next one, while I prefer to view it like a sinus curve almost flat
>from the beginning of history, then slowly rising (the agricultural
>revolution is a good start) growing steeper at the industrial age, and
>since then becoming ever more precipitous. Maybe it's no great
>difference, a curve can be broken down to incremental steps, but it
>is something ominous in this development that the �sinus curve�
>analogy makes us see better. According to my limited
>mathemathical knowledge such an exponential curve can find no
>stable angle: it must keep rising or start falling, but vertical is also
>�forbidden�, there can�t be infinite change over no time.
>
>It can be discussed how steep the angle is by now, but as I tried to
>show it�s quite dizzying. What will happen? If my sinus curve
>analogy is valid no abatement is possible and isn�t that exactly
>what we see: Change for change�s sake is what stokes the
>economy - IS THE ECONOMY IN A SELF-STOKING MANNER -
>the smallest sign of relaxation sends shock waves into the stock
>exchanges.
>
>NB! An acceleration analogy is also useful. If a spacecraft keeps
>up a permanent increase in speed an earth gravity (1G) can be
>obtained, but this eventually bring the craft�s speed up to that of
>light, yet, turning off engines immediately brings on weightlessness
>whatever the speed. Braking will however bring back gravity, but
>where/what are the brakes?
>
>Now enter the MoQ. David speaks as if evolution is the driving force
>and 'quality' a by-product - and sounds like a good socio-darwinist
>in the process :-) - but according to Pirsig it's the other way round
>and finally my point: The Q-biological level's evolution which would
>have filled the earth was arrested by the Q-social level which in turn
>threatened to suffocate existence and was halted by the Q-
>intellectual level ....whose "evolution" now is going amok and only
>can be brought under control by a new Q-development. A groping
>5th level?
>
>Phew, Bard spoke about a tome.
>
>Bo Skutvik
>
>
>
>MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
>http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
