How do you analyze environmental determinism and possibilitism?

Answer 1

Let's start with Euclidean geometry as a major influence for environmental determinism. From an airplane, one looks down on geometric farms and cityscapes and suburban environments the world over now, wherever man dwells. I have read that Euclid's "Elements" is the second bestselling book in history, behind The Bible. I do not mean to assume here that Euclid is the only environmental determinant, as surely he did not comprehend sea travel and trigonometric navigation, nor the travels of the Hawaiians and other Polynesians; however, his straight lines, roots, proportions, study of angles and triangles and other geometric figures, as well as his logical method of proof which is deterministic in and of itself, even in the case of reductio ad absurdum proofs, demonstrates a ubiquity that presaged him perhaps but which followed upon his collecting geometric work into a standard academic course of study, of which the rudiments are today taught in grammar school still.

On the other hand, we might take for "possibilitism" the irrational, erroneous, haphazard, random, best-suited, niche-style(d) designs of people who are subject to rationalizing and delusion, and here I include schizophrenics and their like, of which I am one, so that I speak from experience. To rationalize is to distort the ratio of how things ought to be per human needs and culture versus how they ought to be ALL THINGS CONSIDERED. For example, I might wish for lunch and kill a bird on a deserted island instead of letting that bird mate and populate, which would be more rational were I to know all the information in the situation perhaps, but my survivalist ego tells me I am more important than the holistic pattern of life in its entirety, and my senses take in only slivers of the entire electromagnetic spectrum over relatively short distances, so I am forced to rationalize my behaviors constantly and delude myself into thinking that what is best for me is best, period. That is the limited view of "possibilitism", of course. A more holistic view would consider the planet as a whole and what is sustainable and best in terms of biodiversity in terms of providing the best chances of survival for the greatest number of species, as seems to be Nature's goal, as I attempt to subjectively judge her.

Therefore, let us start again, this time with a more universal view: the universe we are currently informed, is made up of about 3% matter. How much of this is neutrons is currently unanswered but only hydrogen in its natural state is free of neutrons, and since there is a lot of hydrogen plasma and gas in stars, let's guesstimate a lowball figure and say that neutrons make up the rest of the Periodic Table of element's atomic nuclei with protons, add in electrons, grant photons a large share and say that all other particles account for the rest of "matter." On that basis, let's guess that neutrons make up 20% of the total of the matter in the universe.

Now, from this viewpoint, materialism's a good thing, because matter, being only 3% of creation, is rare andc attractive and beautiful and useful. And it provides a place for spirit to abide let's also suppose, with the majority opinion of humanity.

From this new viewpoint, we can see that property rights are a good thing, desirable, and logical. However, animals and vegetables and minerals, etc. enjoy no property rights, only humans and collectives of humans enjoy such rights. Were we to assign properly to each species of animate and inanimate matter its destiny of change and involvement with other matter somehow with property rights along the "lifepath" or term the said entity was extant, we might approach something "fair."

And if consciousness of prey was transferred to the predator, beyond its amino acids being useful or whatever, but I mean its life experience becoming accumulated with the life experience of the survivor, we'd have a universe that made much more sense, at least to me, personally.

But the universe apparently cannot coexist with the total memory of itself simultaneously, so my wish is apparently wishful thinking, and that is why I am not God, "apparently." Heh, heh, heh.

But energy, of the entire electromagnetic spectrum, IS what we use for memory's conveyance, and so we may safely assume that energy is not only conducive to memory, and contains it via patterning and signal-structures, but energy may have boundless intelligence. We do not know where Human Mind comes from, and it is only our egos that tell us that humans invented Mind, rather than the Universe inventing Universal Mind first. Or at least niches of it?

I have experienced conversing mentally with the sun and having it burn my toe through my shoe and the next day Florida, the "toe" of the US, was in flames. You may call that coincidence, but I was of the mind of a boddhisattva at the time, or buddha-consciousness, and felt very much connected to the entire planet. It is a FACT that I told my daughter to be cautious of a great quake "that would move New Zealand 6 feet north" and that is exactly what happened with the great tsunami off Cambodia that killed 250,000 people. I am not lying. I am not delusiional. I am not on drugs. She will swear to the truth of that warning, and that I told her to stay out of New Zealand's geothermal pools for exactly that reason. Such "possibilitists" are possible within "Possibilitism", which is a word and philosophy I thought I had invented. Well, I listen to a lot of late night radio, with a worldwide audience, and may have picked up the word on coasttocoastam. It's possible. Or my mind may have braodcast it; it's possible. Or the net collected it from my email. Whatever!

The point is, super-consciousness is desirable if we are going to save the planet and coexist with aliens from other worlds, who might get here fastest by imagining their flights instead of physically travelling, since the speed of thought may be faster than lightspeed squared. I am referring to tachyons.

I have a theory I have called "Neutral Operations" for some time now, though other mathematics uses that term for other theory.

Within Neutral Operations, I hold two or more values constant, and alter the operators. For example, a+b = a*b neutralizes the operation of addition versus multiplication for the two constants, a and b.

Let a = 4 and b = a/(a-1) or 4/3.

Then 4 + 4/3 = 4 * 4/3 because

12/3 + 4/3 = 16/3; check√.

Just so, let us apply it to Einstein:

mc^2 = m+c^2 = e

mc^2 - m = m - m + c^2

m(c^2 - 1) = c^2

m = c^2 / (c^2 - 1)

and

mc^2 = m+c^2

mc^2 - c^2 = m + c^2 - c^2

c^2(m - 1) = m

c^2 = m/(m-1)

Since mc^2 = e and m = c^2 / (c^2 - 1), then

c^4 / (c^2 - 1) = e

and

m^2 /(m-1) = e as well.

If yu google "How are neutrons created?", you can find a Physics Forum discussion in which you will find the equation p^2 + m^2 = E^2, where p is a photon. They are talking about pair-production of new particles and hadronization.

But looking at the equatin again in simple terms, it is the Pythagorean Theorem,

a^2 + b^2 = c^2.

Well, Neutral Operations applies. So a^2 + b^ = c^2 = a^2 * b^2 or a^2/b^2, etc. before we even get into adding negative signs.

That's Possibilitism, currently. It shall also be environmental determinism in Minkowski spacetime.

I believe that is enough of an answer to give you PAUSE-ABILITY.

You can reach me at bozito@sbcglobal.net

Chris G.