TOP Quarterly Update #11: 3 January 2014

Dear Member,

I trust everyone has had an enjoyable Christmas and New Year. I have had a tranquil time in uplifting Alpine surroundings. Among other things, it gave me a chance to reflect further on the survey I sent out in October. Although there have been some exciting scientific developments, they can wait. I would like to devote this Newsletter to sharing some of these reflections.

Technology & Navigation

Many asked for help in navigating and keeping track of chains of links.

Your favourite browser will have its own quirks. For example, hovering over a link reveals the destination URL along the bottom left margin in Chrome, Firefox and Internet Explorer (but not in Safari). So please get to know these. The website will stop duplicating standard browser functions e.g. going backward or forward along a chain of links, zooming &c.

However, there will be more help with links. First, for anyone who is colour blind: be assured that you will never miss a link, because links are identified by underlining, and underlining is never used for anything else.

Over time, we will provide additional information about the links via icons. I am considering something like this: when there is no icon, the link will take you to another Topic within the same framework and replace the contents of the current frame—but you can use control+click or right-click (depending on your browser) if you want to force a new tab/window. If you see a link icon, a new browser tab/window will always result: perhaps a blue icon To another Framework in this Satellite to take you to another Topic or framework within the same Satellite; an orange icon To a different part of thee-online.com to take you to a Topic in another Satellite; and a black icon External website to take you to a third-party website.

As for the myriad of other technology issues, I assure you that we take these seriously. There are so many issues and trade-offs, and the multiplicity of browsers and versions makes it harder. Please contact the webmaster if you have a specific difficulty, and we will reply directly.

Now on to the substantive issues.

Concept of the Website

While the website seeks to meet the needs of its users, those needs must be relevant to the rationale of the website. The website exists for the development of the Taxonomy as well as to communicate useful frameworks. By development, I mean refinement and removal of errors, extension in coverage, investigation of scientific conjectures, &c. It is evident that my preoccupation with the validity of the frameworks and the architecture of the taxonomy has taken precedence over goals to disseminate and educate.

I have thought hard about this and come to the conclusion that I cannot alter the balance as many, very reasonably, would like. My obsession with scientific issues is just too intense, and my resources too limited. In any case, I believe that popular communication needs a stronger marketing orientation and a different skill set from mine. Probably an entirely different type of website is needed. One survey respondent reminded me that visitors are consumers and narcissistic: the website should touch their pain. My natural tendency is to assert, Buddhist-like, that pain is the human condition, and to focus on what I sense is needed: impersonal frameworks to put personal views in perspective.

It was suggested that introductory summaries for each framework might help readers engage and see their significance and usefulness. I thought that I had attempted to do this, but I will review systematically as I go through the Satellites in 2014-15.

Rather than do what I cannot, I will do more of what I can. I intend to revise the general pages in a new «About» section. I want to harmonize them with the more dispassionate style of the taxonomic pages. I will also remove suggestions that it is easy to benefit from the taxonomy. That was always wrong of me: it takes determination, focus, contemplation and persistence, to get to grips with the fundamentals of our own nature and social environment.

One of the original guiding notions of the website was to get contributions from members of wider society to shape and correct my formulations, or at least identify writing that is obscure or clumsy. But comments have been minimal, and input less. The only occasional criticism has been of the sweepingly dismissive variety which is difficult to address. I imagined the website might assist small groups of members who shared interests to engage in independent inquiry or develop applications. But all such notions have proved chimerical or perhaps just grandiose. I continue to welcome input from any and all visitors. But I am reviewing interactivity with the aim to simplify and streamline.

The log-in requirement is being removed, with registration being, in future, simply a way to get TOP news by email. No action is needed on your part.

Fundamentals or Applications

Some survey respondents felt inhibited because they saw the website as close to pure science. Many asked for more examples and applications. It will take time, but I think it possible to do something about illustrative examples. Applications of frameworks, however, are another matter. In this regard, I would encourage everyone to visit this topic showing how usefulness moves from theoretical abstraction to concrete application. You will see there that I focus the website at the more abstract end, dealing with general applications.

Because of the taxonomy’s breadth, more concrete applications are extremely diverse. An application that speaks to one person may be meaningless to another. It has to be up to those in touch with specific social realities to provide pertinent applications. I can understand that everyone wants to get benefit for themselves, and that is right and proper. But that means someone has to put in the time and effort. Where is that to come from if not from you? This work should be remunerated and I will certainly support any effort within the limits of what is possible.

Wrestling with the ideas and making the frameworks personally relevant and applicable is your part of the challenge. Once you do, you should find that the taxonomic frameworks slot into the way your mind wants to flow—especially when your «better self» is in play; that is a core taxonomic proposition so, if they don't, please let me know.

Now that I have both conviction about the unification of the taxonomy and enough diverse frameworks to suggest its comprehensiveness, strengthening the scientific aspects has become my most pressing concern. This is the only way that THEE can survive and eventually be recognized and incorporated into the canon (perhaps long after I’m dead). As I see it, specific applications and case studies carry almost no scientific weight in themselves. Science comes first, engineering comes after. Of course, before engineering or science, people did things based on an intuitive understanding plus trial-and-error. But a bridge that stays up is proof of little more than the skill of the builder.

Resourcing the Project

No one mentioned the resourcing required for the website, which is increasingly significant. I once imagined that many diverse visitors would lead to various forms of contribution and methods for monetization. Those possibilities must now be regarded as pipe-dreams. One effect is that I have to become more alert to anything that could provide direct or even indirect support for the website and my taxonomic inquiries. If you know any person or group who might value what is emerging here as part of their wider social concerns, then please put them in touch.

Respondents noted the need for book-type writing. If I am inspired to do so, I can imagine in due course a book-length analysis of recent conjectures regarding biology and evolution. However, I am most unlikely to write another Working for Values because of the time economics. Also, please recognize that a website is the only way to publish and disseminate new findings that can be quickly corrected and continually updated without exorbitant costs. A scientific community can depend on conventional publications for its debates and developments; but that option is not open as long as a paradigm lacks its own community.

Academia used to ignore the mind: which led to my need to become an independent researcher. More recently, it has been moving back my way with advances and new journals in cognition, consciousness and neuroscience. Engaging this resource is a challenge because of divergent expectations. I have missed discussions with like-minded colleagues and debates with those holding different perspectives, and so I have hopes that this may now become possible.

Eric Kandel, winner of the Nobel Prize for Physiology in 2000, reflects on the study of consciousness in Ch 28 of his “In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind” (2007). He acknowledges that most neural scientists, supported by philosophers like John Searle, believe that they can make progress without having to account for individual experience. However, I was gratified to note his respect for Freud and preference for the views of Thomas Nagel, who disagrees strongly.

In order to understand how brain processes engage with our subjective reality, Kandel paraphrases, “we will first have to discover [those subjective] elements [of experience]” and “this discovery will be enormous in its magnitude and its implications, requiring a revolution in biology and most likely a complete transformation of scientific thought.”

Where else but on thee-online.com is a formal account of these elements being developed? Nowhere: as far as I know. On that note, let's remember what is so special about the Taxonomy of Human Elements in Endeavour:

It deals directly and comprehensively with the fundamentals of how we experience and live our lives, including our work, our relationships and the functioning of our societies.
It is a scientific model developed by direct observation and open to correction and refinement. This model is now producing findings that did not go into its construction, and that suggest roots in our biological evolution.
It recognizes diversity and appreciates human frailty, while enabling and supporting personal autonomy, personal responsibility and reflective awareness.
It is non-ideological and requires no theoretical commitments: all perennial ideologies and paradigms, from the most mundane to the most mystical, are found within it.
It leads naturally to strategies and technologies, experiential and intellectual, that are of practical use.
Finally, it embraces all humanity, providing an independent ethical perspective on our societies, whose claims and customs can be so often excessive and frightening.

Thanks for your support during 2013, and best wishes for a healthy, enjoyable and productive 2014.

Warren

Return to Newsletter Archive.
You can receive these occasional Bulletins by registering here.