IDEAS, SUGGESTIONS

 

WHY NO-ONE WILL EVER POSSESS THE TRUTH

 

Deutsch: http://peters-peter.info/

Espanol: http://02p.info/   

 

Information about our World comes to creatures in a first step by evolution, a genetic process that has shaped the hardware, our senses and our brain. In a second step, by means of this hardware and signals as light, sound, etc. information comes to individuals. In mankind language is the main tool for the distribution of this second step information among individuals. Every individual constitutes a very abstract representation of our World from this first step and second step information in his brain, and the naives of us are ever taking this representation for the Real Thing, we others only most time. This abstract representation of our World is different in every individual and depends mainly on the actual and overall information-input. In every individual open to the world the actual information-input is changing continuously, and so the abstract representation of the World in his brain is changing continuously. We can hope to improve this abstract representation of the World in our brain more and more by improving our information more and more, especially by means of science, but it will ever be impossible to reach identity with the Real World.

 

 

10 008 Years ago: Anonymous

10 009 Years ago: Anonymous     28 February 2009

10 010  Years ago: Anonymous    (Now, 05 February 2010)

10 011  Years ago: Anonymous    12 January 2011

10012   Years ago: Anonymous    (Now, 03 April 2012)

 

Reproduction is free

 

Responsible: Peter Peters

                    m@peter-peters.info

 

 

Welcome at peter-peters.info

 

 

 

THREE (Unless in the state of emergency) VERY RECOMMENDABLE WORKING HYPOTHESES:

 

‘What others are able to do, I as well am able to do’: This can be a mistake. However, it is a recommendable working hypothesis.

 

‘What others are able to do, you don’t have to be able to do’: Anyone who tells this to me is my enemy: This can be a mistake. However, it is a recommendable working hypothesis.

 

‘You shall not ask questions’: Anyone who tells this to me wants to deceive me: This can not be a mistake; this is always a very recommendable working hypothesis.

 

 

 

SUGGESTION ON A CONSISTENT PICTURE OF OUR WORLD

 

The aim of this article is to give an understandable description, with some explanations, of the point of view that our picture of the World has an in principle hypothetical, not dogmatic, character in respect to the Real World; that we do have a lot of information about this Real World but that it is impossible for us to have knowledge about this Real World:  The word knowledge, a dogmatic word that signifies certainty too, can not be applied to the relationship of our information to the Real World. If referring to the Real World, many inconsistencies can be avoided by using not dogmatic words instead of dogmatic ones, e.g. extent of information or information instead of knowledge. 

 

 

The only objective unit is the entire Universe.

 

Living beings (And possibly still hypothetical technical structures with similar dealing with information), are dividing this unit, according to subjective points of view, up into subjective subunits. These subjective subunits are constructed, in the broadest sense, according to usefulness points of view. These subjective subunits are subject to change concerning their number, size and content: The change is driven by the flow of information.

 

The aim of the division of the Universe into subjective subunits according to usefulness points of view is the construction of a picture of the World that enables the most economic use of the World. This aim is an intrinsic part of the process of evolution.

 

The fundamental acquisition of information is carried out genetically. Useful hypotheses manifesting themselves in individuals are often passed on to their descendants and accumulate, as genetic information, in a gene pool. The harmful hypotheses and the ones that, at that time, are less useful to the individual only seldom make it into the gene pool: The hypotheses not falsified are kept in use and the hypotheses falsified are rejected.

 

Particularly because of the randomness of the hypotheses and of the randomness of the environment of the selection there are many sorts of gene pools: The one of the fruit fly, humans, the blue whale; of all types of beings with exchange of genetic information. A somewhat different picture of the World manifests itself in every gene pool and his individuals.

 

A gene pool can, according to its function, be regarded as a dynamic information package and his individuals as partial manifestations and sense organs of this information package.

 

The genetic information is in a process of constant change. By means of random changes in the genes new hypotheses are generated again and again, even ones concerning e.g. the ears, the eyes, the brain. Usually a gene pool develops itself and adapts itself to the actual environment by means of these random changes in the genes and selection of the individuals. This selection is very uncomfortable for us individuals, but to turn off selection without replacement is not recommendable. However, this selection can be replaced, saving us individuals, by selective passing on of genes, and this with methods already existing or coming soon. By this selective passing on of genes the gene pool can be supplied with the information he needs to maintain the quality of his sense organs, the individuals, avoiding the law of the jungle to do the work for us. However, without thorough control and discussion and without comprehensive strategies against the trap of intraspecific selection, the danger remains that an accumulation of too many harmful hypotheses may, as without selection of the individuals, lead to the decline of the gene pool or even to our extinction.

 

We enlarge our individual and super individual or collective extent of information by means of manifestations of our genetic information, our sense organs, our brain, again and again checking new hypotheses on their usefulness. The expansion of our extent of information reveals new possible aims to us and pursuing new aims we enlarge our extent of information.

 

Some ways to new aims require us to leave some concepts or subunits we took for granted because this concepts or subunits have come to us mainly genetically. The fact that this concepts, like matter, space, time do have limited applicability to our World shows us that they do have an in principle hypothetical character.

 

What we believe to be our World is our picture of Something represented by this picture. This Something we can only approach by building hypotheses and testing these hypotheses. What we believe to be our World is a very abstract representation of our World in our brain, a manifestation of a collection of information coming from genetic, individual and super individual or collective sources. And this information is generated testing random hypotheses by selection of these random hypotheses according to their usefulness in random situations. It is important to be aware of the fact that this information is not knowledge: Because knowledge is a dogmatic concept that signifies certainty too it can not be applied to the relation of our information to our World.

 

The more comprehensive our picture of the World, the nearer we are at what is represented by means of this picture. But the identity of our picture of the World with this World is in principle impossible and therefore our picture of the World can never be perfect; it can never be true. Only the Universe itself can be the whole truth about the Universe. With respect to the Universe our picture of the Universe can only have the quality of a picture.

 

The emotionally controlled irrational assumption of the identity of our picture of the World with this World is a useful working hypothesis in the practical weekday and in some other areas. However, using this hypothesis in some border areas, some of the best minds have lost much time and strength: In science the working hypothesis of the identity of our picture of the World with this World is not recommendable.

 

Whether a part of our picture of the World is true or only a hypothesis, this is not a recommendable question. But the assumption that every part of our picture of the World can be improved or replaced, this is a very recommendable working hypothesis: To adopt ones picture of the World at the appearance of new information is one of the billions year old strategies of life on earth to which we owe our existence.

 

Among other, the sentence ascribed to Socrates: ’I know that I do not know’ and the sentence ascribed to Heraclites the Ephesians’: ‘Everything flows’, can be interpreted as a reference to their assumption of an in principle hypothetical character of our picture of the World.

 

 

01 November 2007, Peter Peters       28 February 2009, Peter Peters;   05 February 2010, Peter Peters;  12 January 2011, Peter Peters;      03 April 2012

                                m@peter-peters.info

 

 

 

 

 

 

On occasion a very recommendable link: http://google.com/