The Way of the Future
The beauty of today’s technology, and the real meaning of the information and communication revolution, is that if one person knows something, it is possible for that information to become virtual knowledge for everyone else -- who simply knows how to access it. Because there are no longer physical (including, time) barriers to that information -- having to buy the book, storing and carrying around that material for the day one will eventually require it (if ever again) -- and so the mind and being is free to devote all resources to the totality of each moment.
What disturbs a lot of people who are perceived as having aging related problems, and maybe many of the younger people too, is the measure of mental and total functioning as exhibited by memory -- rather than the much more powerful ability to compute input freshly, without the burden of memory. That is the powerful computer information processing paradigm of real-time information -- as opposed to the older model of sequentially processed, stored information, reliant on memory (storage).
That shift was empowered by the growth of the Internet (Web) more than anything else, causing a rapid acceleration of all the possibilities of human functioning. Of course, that is not a favorable outlook for the old vested interests that may have even held prohibitive monopolies in their fields. That created the inflection point at which it truly was possible for the last to now be the first -- because they weren’t vested in the successful old ways, so had nothing to lose and everything to gain in embracing the new. Meanwhile, the Old Guard, could not evolve in their consciousness of the new realities -- and were permanently and henceforth retarded, demanding that the world not abandon them, but come back to regard them as leaders once again, just as they were in their memories, dreams and delusions.
The experiences of the new pioneers are thus shut out by the media of the old institutions (newspapers schools, universities) because they are the old -- rewarded and oriented to seniority, rather than the new. The only way they can maintain their value is by maintaining their claim to the superiority of the old ways -- because if it simply a matter of the best ways, and better ways, they have an inferior product -- that they refuse to “improve.” Instead, they steadfastly maintain, that the older product was perfected for its purpose -- of living in another time and age. But of course, they don’t tell you that.
So the literature and language of the reality unfolding, has yet to be written -- or is being written, as we speak. It is not the consciousness of the old world residing in the old books -- but is the living language being evolved to much greater purpose and effectiveness. In the past, the word was just words -- and not the essential tools of discovery of the unknown -- but only of the known. The language of the known is very familiar and taught; the language of finding out, discovery, is not the language of the known -- but of those who don’t want to find out for themselves, the truth of any matter.
In the past, that might have been the easier path to trod; now it is the most perilous. So one has to cultivate one simple skill -- and that is determining the authentic from the false, the deception, the manipulation, the contrivances. Because it has been the challenge of these times, those who have risen to it, have virtual intelligence -- not limited to just their own -- as in the old way of regarding it.
That has already profoundly changed the world and most people’s prospects for the future -- but most don’t know it yet and won’t, relying on the old media and institutions of knowledge. Knowledge is not as useful as the ability to find out -- no matter how much one knows.
posted by Mike Hu @ 12:32 PM
7 comments
7 Comments:
The new is not just the continuation of the old -- or the repetition of the old and familiar as though nothing else is possible. When everything is new, unprecedented, then an entirely new language and skills are required to discover what it is. Knowledge of the past is often an interference for experiencing the present -- as it is happening, which may have very little to do with knowledge of the past, of a generalized experience.
Most activities just reinforce that past -- so if one is badly out of condition, his activity reinforces that present condition -- instead of bringing about the desired change, which must disrupt the status quo, obviously. Change is something different -- and not simply more of the same. More of the same is not different. And that’s why people have inescapable problems -- thinking that the answer to their dilemma is simply, “More.”
What they desire is different -- and not more of the same. Yet in much of contemporary discussions, that is the answer for everything -- which is no solution at all, and can never be, and so they are trapped in this vicious, irresolvable vicious cycle. The relevant question is what they can do that is different to break out of that chain of suffering and being (the meditations of the Buddha) -- that makes a difference, and that is the discussion never heard. Yet that is the only thing that makes a difference.
The “more” mentality presumes to understand what should be done, without bothering to learn what is presently being done -- and in that understanding, is the obvious solution. But one never discovers that, if he is so sure he needs more as the answer to everything -- and that will be the answer to their prayers. As has been noted by some, one has to be careful what one wishes for because he may get it, and it may not be what he needs, wants, or is good for them.
That is the problem of education that begins with all the answers waiting to be taught -- rather than asking what the significant questions are at the very beginning. And not bothering with that, the conditioned reflex is always to learn more. But that more is not the answer.
The great leaps in human understanding and awareness is greater simplicity and not greater complexity. Better is less.
People who really don't know what they're talking about, mistake jargon for knowldege -- and when you ask them for a practical demonstration of their knowledge, recite more jargon -- having no idea that there is a difference, because that is all they know.
My favorite is when education professionals make kindergarten sound like rocket science -- and so they deserve to be paid as much as Bill Gates, who didn’t even get a bs degree in elementary education.
The urgent challenge of these times is precisely that people are living longer -- and many do so in marginal health, practically becoming a cash cow for the health care providers -- convinced often, that that is the only fate reserved for a long-living human.
Fortunately, we're seeing a few pioneers actualizing the life never lived before -- because it was not possible for so many previously. That's the first wave -- in just increasing the gene pool vastly. Then one day one notices a mutation -- an individual who breaks the mold of our expectations of everything we thought to be true about what it is to be human.
That would be the person who lives to be 100 with no signs of aging. Before then, one will notice the divergence, beginning at 50. Some already look prematurely old and worn. Eventually 50 will be the new 30 -- or even 20. The vibrant life of 100 is much more realistic than a life of 1,000, which a lot more tout, particularly through the miracle of some kind of miracle cure undiscovered and even unsuspected yet.
But the life of a 100 lived fairly robustly, would certainly have to come before -- or the life of 1,000 in agonizing, perpetual deterioration is not an attractive prospect. Either there is growth or there is deterioration -- while no change is not life. Knowing that, we have to program growth into our lives -- or face the alternative.
Sustainable growth is usually slow, persistent growth -- without the setbacks and risks of injury and exhaustion of recovery ability. So it is not simply enough to do as much exercise as possible -- but has to be just enough not to exceed one's recovery ability, which is also energy becoming an increasingly scarce resource with age.
That's why long, exhausting workouts are not sustainable for very long. But five minutes a day -- for the rest of one's life, is quite fathomable, quite acceptable, quite sustainable. The best conceived exercise program is useless if one never does it -- or stops doing it, sensing decline.
Many think that desiring (intending) to do so, is the same as doing so. This is particularly true of those prone to wishful-thinking. They have a cognition problem -- a disconnect between actuality and thought. They think good intentions are the same as its execution in actual performance. Such people absolutely require supervision; a gifted few will not.
The latter are out of touch with their bodies, and are predominately those who tend intellectuals in the old dichotomy between intellectuals and those less inclined. The presumption is that most of the physical “jock” types are not prone to intellectual development when in fact, those highest actualizations of full potential are more easily found in those -- particularly among the older specimens.
In fact, age becomes a qualifier. A lot of people are robust at 20 -- but only a rare few are so at higher ages. Of course, such people are not “normal” in the usual sense but are the examples we wish to emulate and engineer. “Abnormal” is not only the undesirable deviations but include the desirable ones also. The normal is not the ideal. The abnormally good is. That’s where society should place their attention -- and especially the media influencing tastes and sensibilities.
Correction:
Paragraph 8 of Comment 4 should read:
"The former"
The latter are out of touch with their bodies, and are predominately those who tend intellectuals in the old dichotomy between intellectuals and those less inclined.
The LAST thing people will do in a weakened condition, is to increase their heart rate, sweating, extraordinary effort -- so that notion of traditional/conventional exercise is useless and impractical for those who need and can benefit from it the most.
What is the minimal effort that can produce enhanced circulatory effects -- keeping the heart as a constant? What enhances the circulatory effect with LESS or the same effort and expenditure of energy?
I've witnessed a motionless person lying in bed while the physical therapist yelled louder to get to get them to respond in the manner they wanted them to -- in producing vigorous movements that would be difficult for the average person to perform. If that is not ridiculous, I don't know what is.
It is often presumed that one of the requirements of proper exercise is to burn as many calories as possible -- which in the case of the most weakened people, hanging on to life, probably needing to conserve their energy and other resources as much as possible, would speed death -- and so they will not do it for that obvious good reason.
Those who put on weight just looking at food are gastrointestinally efficient -- just as others may be cardiovascularly or neuromuscularly advantaged. That’s not to be overlooked -- as many people’s decline in health is accompanied with a decline in their gastrointestinal abilities -- as witnessed by the explosive growth of products that treat symptoms of gastric distress/dysfunction. The atrophying of the body is characteristic of the aging process more than corpulence at the oldest ages. The obesity problem is more characteristic of an aging but not yet declining population -- when the alarming concern is the realization that one is shrinking -- and can’t consume enough food to reverse that balance. The realization of that change is a frightful experience for many.
People who are complain of tiredness, won’t be convinced that doubling their energy expenditure, will increase their energy level -- particularly at doing something they’re not particularly interested in. “Exercise” is not that driving interest in all, that is is for a few -- who invariably teach exercise, and therefore should not project their own proclivities in instructing those less inclined, facing different challenges. And therefore there is a need to identify what exercise is critically essential from that which is the entertainment of choice for a few.
The five-minute workout of taking inventory of full-range movement each day at the extremities, is the critical benchmark. That is not to say that more cannot be done. But this minimum is a true minimum -- rather than the often prescribed wishful thinking of 30 minutes 5 times a day of certain fairly rigorous achievements -- while also lacking an infrequent higher intensity experience that stimulates growth beyond maintaining the status quo. It is possible to get used to anything so that it no longer functions as a growth stimulus but becomes merely an unnecessary drain on energy -- that people get used to.
These are the events -- at which one time a week may serve the same purpose as seven days a week. Eating out might be an example. Dining out once a week may be a growth experience while eating out seven days a week is not a novelty that expands one’s horizons. However, the “more” mentality thinks that anything that is good cannot be overdone to excess.
On this score, the “average person” gets the right amount of exercise -- but a few get far too much, and a few get way too little.
Post a Comment
<< Home