UNITY through DIVERSITY might be also applicable to INFORMATION (10)

It seems advisable to start summarizing the reflection that I began
to structure three weeks ago and even to imagine some preliminary
conclusions. At present in one conventional year 2002, it Is indeed
evident that some of our ancestors who were descendants from ancient
primates could develop their gregariousness, by means of thoughts
that they managed to transfer from one mind to several other brains
using for such a purpose words which were gradually invented through
the symbolic meaning assigned to some of the arbitrary noises that
they could produce individually through his or her mouth. In fact and
due to causes that will remain unknown forever it seems that they
discovered first their possibilities to communicate and invented
afterwards what became the linguistic tool that allowed every
individual to give certain information of various aspects of the
reality and to receive another information of the same or other
aspects of the reality. It is the basic human communication -
constituted by words complemented with other signs and symbols that
can be basically expressed orally or visually and consequently may be
perceived through ears and eyes - what presumably helped most of our
first ancestors to survive individually through cooperation needed
for making first of all better tools with their hands, while trying
each one to identify and develop his or her personality through
competition. It is the transfer of knowledge acquired of causal
interactions that are determining the dynamical features of things
and events located in the surroundings, which suddenly became in the
human mind something that could be usefully employed.

Consequently it can be argued that the development of language -
which has taken place interactively with the development of
capabilities for making tools needed for assuring the manifestation
of a generalized utilitarianism - has caused the development of human
features.

Therefore I dare to assume that INFORMATION is nothing less and also
nothing more than a CONCEPTUAL POTENTIALITY invented by the human
mind and used as an INTELLECTUAL TOOL by every relatively normal
person, who is trying continuously to assure the functionality of his
or her mind, while searching how to organize his or her
physiological, psychological, and social performance for improving
his or her survival concern after realizing that he or she may
increase his or her possibilities and develop better his or her
capabilities and even overcome some limitations learning to
comprehend the reality perceived through diverse perspectives.

So far so good, but it is not proper to simply idealized the human
nature. Today, while trying to comprehend:

* why the trajectory of the whole civilizing adventure has been
always sanguinary;

* why its assumed evolvement has caused always the emergence of
painful circumstances that generated tragical conditions in the
living of the vast majority of people;

* why at the dawn of the conventional 3rd millennium of our age
humankind is confronted to more and more and larger local, regional
and global problems that altogether constitute the worst crisis ever
faced by humankind, in spite of magnificent scientific achievements,
superb technological devices and processes, very significant artistic
realizations

it has become indispensable to recognize explicitly that due to the
way the civilizing adventure could emerged and has been evolving
(along a very short lapse of ONLY 6 or 8 millennia compared with the
many millennia of nomadic life that our ancestors needed for making
possible, though unconsciously, the emergence of human features) the
presence of humans in time and in space tends to be, almost
inevitably, more and more a controversial contradiction. Such a
conflict is a growing danger generated by the narrow minded and
shortsighted course assigned and not only de facto to one powerful
and compulsively implemented decision making that has always aimed at
INVENTING CAUSAL INTERACTIONS that are presented as MODERN
INFORMATION needed for maintaining the civilizing trends which have
been always seriously inconsistent with the needs of most humans and
dangerously incongruous with the dynamics of the biosphere.

In fact it seems evident that this enormous inconvenience has been
maintained from the very beginning (since around eight millennia ago)
until today by some relatively few cleverer humans who have learnt
quite effectively to produce INFORMATION for making possible a
selfish evolvement of the personality of every one of them, who aims
exclusively at taking unilateral advantage of utilitarian
possibilities discovered in all those natural, man-made and human
beings which are considered no more than objects or resources for the
progress of HUMANKIND.

The perspective for humankind during the last century has become
increasingly risky first of all because the prevailing
decision-making, which has aimed at maintaining the trends of the
superb Western civilization, has caused everywhere the deterioration
of essential features of the terrestrial environments. Some features
of the Ecosphere have been also continuously disrupted. In addition,
due to the explosive proliferation of humans (1 billion in 1830, 2
billion in 1930, 3 billion in 1960, 6 billion in 2000) it cannot
longer be ignored that the planetary resources for the subsistence of
more and more humans won't be available forever.

The whole problem aggravates day after day because the causes of this
crisis are ignored by most decision-makers who continue arguing that
the only perspective for humankind is the Globalized Free Marketing
supported by the automatized production managed by large corporations.
Will the scientific community recognize soon that a Top � Down
approach for recognizing holistically the whole crisis, as it was
suggested by Ludwig von Bertalanffy in the 1960s might lead
researchers, experts, scholars and educators to conceive how to play
a responsible role

The 2nd millennium has finished rather recently, but the effects of
the decision making that has been traditionally implemented will
remain affecting the dynamics of civilizing intentions, UNLESS THE
SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY FINDS ON ITS OWN HOW TO PLAY A RESPONSIBLE ROLE
ON THE PLANET ON BEHALF OF THE MASSES, CREATING THE NECESSARY
CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE EMERGENCE OF DISSIDENTS in the sense that was
suggested by Anatol Rapoport around 50 years ago: "the scientist must
subscribe to certain values (and discard others) not because he is a
'good citizen' or a product of a [particular] culture or a member of
a [particular] church, but because he is a scientist." "The
scientist, in order to be consistent with himself, cannot remain
neutral, when confronted with a variety of competing ideologies and
value-systems".

-- 
elohimjl