Communication... It takes many forms, and has created many more. Communication has forged alliances and broken them, The communication of Xerxes in Greece, through force. The communication of the Declaration of Independence through direct defiance of English rule. The communication amongst animals that encourages daily life for some, and ends it for others.
I have always found it fascinating that some creatures on earth are classified as social (although admittedly there is a blurry line as far as domestic animals are concerned) and some as solitary. Studies have been done to indicate that in many cases social animals (humans, of course, not excluded) have larger brains than other solitary animals and indeed, I could see how this might occur, especially in the animal kingdom. A human, without communication,
will in many cases go insane, or at least assume a state that socialized beings of his/her same species might assume insane. Because, in many cases of the insane, they have either lost the ability to communicate with others or it has been damaged or altered in such a way that the only form of communication they are able to understand (or choose to accept/understand) is the musings of their own brain. Not to call them insane but the expansiveness and creativity of socially rejected ideas has, in fact, produced some of the better ideas ever invented such as Jefferson and the light bulb or the caveman who figured out fire. My meaning pertains to folk who have defie the collectives view of impossible.
It seems obvious that those who communicate will allow greater coordination, which will inherently 'open the door' to perform vastly more activities. Logically, any who perform a greater number of activities will thusly have a wider range of knowledge. A solitary being will naturally tend to settle into a routine in order to survive and without any outside stimulation,
will be much slower in growing any kind of extraneous knowledge base, if at all. I am not trying to prove that a social lifestyle or being is any more impressive than a solitary one, only that communication, and the ability to enact it or not can create vastly fluctuating outcomes. Take the cat for instance, it is one of the domestic animals that science is hesitant to label conclusively. A cat in a house will form bonds with other cats or even with other species, perhaps because of their communicative nature or perhaps because it is an unusual circumstance (there is much debate on this subject). When compared with wild lions, house cats share many of the same hierarchical and social underpinnings. The very fact that we know some portion of the communication of cats or any other form of exchanging views to enable coordination proves that communication has led to, loosely, the greater understanding of other forms. Wild cats of many genera are, when seen in the wild, often considered automatically to be solitary creatures. (Although admittedly perhaps wild cats are not the best of examples since humans are (generally speaking) aware that, in fact, most breeds of wild cat have social backgrounds). The communication between animals has always been a mystery of almost insoluble complexity. It is still wondered whether the subsonic oscillations emitted by elephants are actually communication among the herd or arbitrary noise, or perhaps it serves another purpose that we simply haven't conceived, coming from the understanding basis of an outside genetic development path.
I have always found it curious, the methods that man has chosen to communicate, and honestly, it is beyond me to prove conclusively that there are more effective options than what we have. Writing and talking seem to me to be so clumsy at times. The very fact that we so often stumble over words (that are written or spoken) to express a concept or item says to me that we picked imperfect systems to translate our thoughts. Perhaps that is the very thing that
prevents us from becoming perfect beings, or at least one reason. It is often widely fathomed that 'God' speaks to his/her believers by way of mental telepathy, which seems a very pure way of sharing ones desires and ideas. It is also imagined that perhaps someday man will effect an ability to allow this type of communication and that in doing so will make himself the equivalent of gods or some higher race. This does not seem the case to me... upon rational
thinking, it would appear that telepathy would indeed allow 'perfect' cross-communication, however it would still not heighten our ability to conceive ideas beyond mortal ability to enact. Humans are, quite frankly, the most physically incapable species ever to walk the earth, so we have invented machines and oddments that allow us to do things that would not biologically be possible. We have drawn on math and science to create buildings, astronomy to defend against asteroids from space, anatomy and biology to learn the inner workings of ourselves and others who inhabit the earth. Perhaps someday, utilizing these natural laws of existence we will learn how to, and be able to, synthesize a planet and subsequently be able to live forever as a species. Such a civilization seems possible yet the most likely downfall of these plans is the inherent selfishness and general imperfection that is the human condition. The ability to communicate can only go so far, if a man wants something and another man is not willing to give it, no amount of communication, no matter how clear or effective, will convince the other not to kill him for it if desperation holds strong enough. This brings us along the wayside of another topic: emotion, and how it can affect communication and action. That, however, is a topic even less clearly defined than that which I speak to you about.
Yet I feel I should summarize quickly: emotion is integral in the deciding of action, and/or method of communication and therefore communication itself. In fact, these 3 are the basis of all human interaction (loosely, from a certain viewpoint): emotion, communication, and action (I have excluded conscious decision because it is such a slippery concept in relation to all of the others). We seem to be unique in that we are able to perceive communication in very complex and abstract ways; for example: an artist hangs a black canvas in an art gallery and signs his name at the bottom. The next day a patron comes into the gallery and says to the artist “This painting is about depression is it not? Or perhaps life itself?” To which the painter then replies “Yes indeed, it is about life, because we live surrounded by blackness, yes? Then why should it's representation not surround the eye (the method of perceiving) with blackness, in order to present the correct picture? Look behind your eyelids and what do you see? Exactly. We imagine things to have color, color is only light and light comes from science.. in a manner of speaking, it also comes from the sun and fire and other various sources of heat. My point is, without the principles of science that are the creation of light what have you?” Now if you can understand that, which I'm betting most of you readers followed at leasy elementarily, then you can see, when you think for a moment, that your powers of communication are very great indeed to be able to comprehend my meaning so roundly.
Through technology, perhaps someday we will achieve the ability, through communication, or at least vastly due to its influences, to think and act on the level of a higher race, and from there perhaps infinitely on from that until the universe deigns to collapse... Who can tell? Maybe we will have gained sufficient intelligence by that point to stop such a thing from happening. What then would humanity become? I certainly cannot tell you, after all, I'm
still writing.
I have always found it fascinating that some creatures on earth are classified as social (although admittedly there is a blurry line as far as domestic animals are concerned) and some as solitary. Studies have been done to indicate that in many cases social animals (humans, of course, not excluded) have larger brains than other solitary animals and indeed, I could see how this might occur, especially in the animal kingdom. A human, without communication,
will in many cases go insane, or at least assume a state that socialized beings of his/her same species might assume insane. Because, in many cases of the insane, they have either lost the ability to communicate with others or it has been damaged or altered in such a way that the only form of communication they are able to understand (or choose to accept/understand) is the musings of their own brain. Not to call them insane but the expansiveness and creativity of socially rejected ideas has, in fact, produced some of the better ideas ever invented such as Jefferson and the light bulb or the caveman who figured out fire. My meaning pertains to folk who have defie the collectives view of impossible.
It seems obvious that those who communicate will allow greater coordination, which will inherently 'open the door' to perform vastly more activities. Logically, any who perform a greater number of activities will thusly have a wider range of knowledge. A solitary being will naturally tend to settle into a routine in order to survive and without any outside stimulation,
will be much slower in growing any kind of extraneous knowledge base, if at all. I am not trying to prove that a social lifestyle or being is any more impressive than a solitary one, only that communication, and the ability to enact it or not can create vastly fluctuating outcomes. Take the cat for instance, it is one of the domestic animals that science is hesitant to label conclusively. A cat in a house will form bonds with other cats or even with other species, perhaps because of their communicative nature or perhaps because it is an unusual circumstance (there is much debate on this subject). When compared with wild lions, house cats share many of the same hierarchical and social underpinnings. The very fact that we know some portion of the communication of cats or any other form of exchanging views to enable coordination proves that communication has led to, loosely, the greater understanding of other forms. Wild cats of many genera are, when seen in the wild, often considered automatically to be solitary creatures. (Although admittedly perhaps wild cats are not the best of examples since humans are (generally speaking) aware that, in fact, most breeds of wild cat have social backgrounds). The communication between animals has always been a mystery of almost insoluble complexity. It is still wondered whether the subsonic oscillations emitted by elephants are actually communication among the herd or arbitrary noise, or perhaps it serves another purpose that we simply haven't conceived, coming from the understanding basis of an outside genetic development path.
I have always found it curious, the methods that man has chosen to communicate, and honestly, it is beyond me to prove conclusively that there are more effective options than what we have. Writing and talking seem to me to be so clumsy at times. The very fact that we so often stumble over words (that are written or spoken) to express a concept or item says to me that we picked imperfect systems to translate our thoughts. Perhaps that is the very thing that
prevents us from becoming perfect beings, or at least one reason. It is often widely fathomed that 'God' speaks to his/her believers by way of mental telepathy, which seems a very pure way of sharing ones desires and ideas. It is also imagined that perhaps someday man will effect an ability to allow this type of communication and that in doing so will make himself the equivalent of gods or some higher race. This does not seem the case to me... upon rational
thinking, it would appear that telepathy would indeed allow 'perfect' cross-communication, however it would still not heighten our ability to conceive ideas beyond mortal ability to enact. Humans are, quite frankly, the most physically incapable species ever to walk the earth, so we have invented machines and oddments that allow us to do things that would not biologically be possible. We have drawn on math and science to create buildings, astronomy to defend against asteroids from space, anatomy and biology to learn the inner workings of ourselves and others who inhabit the earth. Perhaps someday, utilizing these natural laws of existence we will learn how to, and be able to, synthesize a planet and subsequently be able to live forever as a species. Such a civilization seems possible yet the most likely downfall of these plans is the inherent selfishness and general imperfection that is the human condition. The ability to communicate can only go so far, if a man wants something and another man is not willing to give it, no amount of communication, no matter how clear or effective, will convince the other not to kill him for it if desperation holds strong enough. This brings us along the wayside of another topic: emotion, and how it can affect communication and action. That, however, is a topic even less clearly defined than that which I speak to you about.
Yet I feel I should summarize quickly: emotion is integral in the deciding of action, and/or method of communication and therefore communication itself. In fact, these 3 are the basis of all human interaction (loosely, from a certain viewpoint): emotion, communication, and action (I have excluded conscious decision because it is such a slippery concept in relation to all of the others). We seem to be unique in that we are able to perceive communication in very complex and abstract ways; for example: an artist hangs a black canvas in an art gallery and signs his name at the bottom. The next day a patron comes into the gallery and says to the artist “This painting is about depression is it not? Or perhaps life itself?” To which the painter then replies “Yes indeed, it is about life, because we live surrounded by blackness, yes? Then why should it's representation not surround the eye (the method of perceiving) with blackness, in order to present the correct picture? Look behind your eyelids and what do you see? Exactly. We imagine things to have color, color is only light and light comes from science.. in a manner of speaking, it also comes from the sun and fire and other various sources of heat. My point is, without the principles of science that are the creation of light what have you?” Now if you can understand that, which I'm betting most of you readers followed at leasy elementarily, then you can see, when you think for a moment, that your powers of communication are very great indeed to be able to comprehend my meaning so roundly.
Through technology, perhaps someday we will achieve the ability, through communication, or at least vastly due to its influences, to think and act on the level of a higher race, and from there perhaps infinitely on from that until the universe deigns to collapse... Who can tell? Maybe we will have gained sufficient intelligence by that point to stop such a thing from happening. What then would humanity become? I certainly cannot tell you, after all, I'm
still writing.
RSS Feed