Much of the credit must go to Science and her daughter Technology for the improvements in many areas of daily life over the last 100 years or so. Therefore it is not too surprising – despite the obvious ecological and personal ‘side effects’ of these times – that much of the scientific establishment believes that our best hope is continue to build upon the assumptions that brought us to this point. I’m interested to explore whether this is one-sided and also, therefore, part of the problem.
My hunch is that a major factor in the ongoing destruction of Nature and our own dehumanisation is inherent in the weave of this otherwise successful project. If this is right, to press on without reconsidering how to proceed would actually hasten our demise.
The tools of science – open minds, free collaboration, clear and free thinking and disinterested investigation – are the treasures to retain. The assumptions – that life and consciousness can be explained from the basis of matter, matter is not created or destroyed, science has achieved objectivity and only by ignoring our inner life can we stick to the narrow way – these assumptions are to be reassessed with those tools. Such a reassessment might flesh out our unbalanced culture. Perhaps, in this way, what is one-sided can be seen in the round and, where appropriate, dismantled before catastrophic collapse.
To flesh out this heresy requires background-reading on the theme. Some of that reading was not available in English – Hugo Erbe, Enzo Nastati & The Wheatsmith – or not collected together – Flowforms & Kaviraj. Such a ‘new’ approach needs to be tested in practice because results are the arbiter between different paradigms, so all of the books here, directly or indirectly, are practical ones. They are about things that can be done. Nothing would please me more than if collaborators were spurred to activity by these publications. Please report back.