logical gap between Tao level 0-1 and Tao level 2

In the subdivision of hierarchical levels the different context classes of systems were divided according to their extension:

In this division level n+1 has an extension of description/application greater than the level n, and includes all lower sublevels n-1 etc.

With the introduction of logical levels it is necessary to separate the hierarchical levels from those that are also logical/hierarchical.

While the level 1 - chemical and level 0 - physical are on the same logical level, level 3 - cell-biology, has a higher logical level, as well as a greater extension. The main reason is that from level 2 to 3 was born a unique emergent behavior , that is life.

In the living systems theory proposed in 1978 by James Grier Miller are highlighted at least 8 levels of hierarchy from level 2 to 4:

 

The transition from one level to another, from the physical to biological to social, follows the evolution of life on earth:

(here the authors are very optimistic, and assume that there will be a far future post-technological and not KaliYuga)

summerTao

Solo Tribute The 100th Performance In Japan, 1987 - Keith Jarrett: Piano

progress and development in the Tao

There are two words that come back frequently in our conversations: in fact, are the key words of our conversation. These two words are "development" and "progress." There are two synonyms? Or, if you two are not synonymous, indicating two different times of the same phenomenon? Or show two different phenomena but necessarily complement each other? Or, again, point to two phenomena are similar or only partially sync? Finally, two phenomena indicate 'opposed' each other, which only appears to coincide and complement each other? It is imperative to clarify the meaning of these two words and their relationship, if we understand each other in a discussion that relates very closely to our everyday life and even physics.

Let's see: the word "development" now has a network of references that relate to a context of doubt "right." Who wants the 'development'? I mean, who wants it, and ideally not in the abstract, but in practice and for reasons of immediate economic interest? Is clear: to want the 'development' in this sense is the producer, ie they are the industrialists. And since the 'development', in Italy, this development are to be exact, in this case, manufacturers that produce goods unnecessary. The technology (the application of science) has created the possibility of industrialization virtually unlimited, and whose characters have become transnational in practice. The consumer of luxuries, they are for their part, irrational and will unknowingly agree to the 'development' (this 'development'). For them it means for social advancement and liberation, with consequent renunciation of cultural values that had provided them with models of 'poor', 'workers', of 'savings' of "soldiers" of "believers." The "mass" is therefore for the 'development' but that his ideology lives only existentially, and existentially embodies new values of consumption. This does not mean that his choice is decisive, relentless and triumphant.

Who wants, instead, the "progress"? They want those who have no immediate interests to satisfy, precisely through the "progress": they want the workers, peasants, intellectuals on the left. He wants those who work and who is thus exploited. When I say "I want" I mean that true meaning and value (there may also be some "producer" who wants, above all, and perhaps sincerely, progress, but his case is no text). The "progress" is therefore an ideal concept (social policy) where the 'development' is a pragmatic and economic fact.

Now is this dissociation that requires a "sync" between 'development' and 'progress', since it is not conceivable (apparently) a real progress unless we create the economic preconditions necessary to implement it.

What was the watchword of Lenin after you have won the Revolution? It was a slogan inviting immediate and grandiose "development" of an underdeveloped country. Soviet electrical industry and ... Won the great class struggle for the "progress" needed to win a fight now, perhaps more gray, but certainly not least great for the 'development'. I would add, however - not without hesitation - that this is not a requirement to apply the Marxist revolutionary and implement a communist society. The total industry and industrialization have not invented neither Marx nor Lenin: he invented the bourgeoisie. Industrializing a communist country is to enter into competition with peasant bourgeois countries already industrialized. This is what, in this case, did Stalin. And the rest had no choice.

So: the Right wants the 'development' (for the simple reason that it does), the Left wants to "progress."

 

But if the Left wins the power struggle, that's also wants - to really make progress socially and politically - the 'development'. A 'development', however, that figure has now been formed and set in the context of industrialization, the bourgeoisie.

However here in Italy, the case is historically different. It is not no revolution was won. Here the Left that wants to "progress" in the case agree that the 'development', it must accept its 'development' means development for the economic and technological bourgeois.

Is this a contradiction? It is a choice that poses a problem of conscience? Probably. But it is at least an issue to be asked clearly: that is, without ever confusing, even for a moment, the idea of "progress" with the reality of this 'development'. As for the base of the left (let's say the electoral base, to speak in the millions of citizens), the situation is this: an employee lives in the consciousness of the Marxist ideology, and therefore, among its other values He lives in the consciousness of the idea of "progress", while at the same time, he lives in existence, the ideology of consumerism, and therefore, a fortiori, the values of 'development'. The worker is therefore dissociated. But it is not the only one to be. The classic bourgeois power is completely dissociated at this time for us Italians this classic bourgeois power (ie practically fascist) is the Christian Democrats.

At this point, but I want to abandon the terminology that I (artista!) use a little 'arm and get a lively exemplification. The dissociation that now splits in two the old clerical-fascist power, may be represented by two symbols of opposites, and, indeed, irreconcilable, "Jesus" (in this case the Jesus of the Vatican) on the one hand, and "blue-jeans Jesus' [1] on the other. Two forms of power facing each other: this side of the great crowd of priests, soldiers, murderers, and right-thinking, beyond the "industrial" manufacturing companies and large masses of unnecessary consumption, and secular, maybe idiot, irreligious. Between the 'Jesus' of the Vatican and the 'Jesus' of blue jeans, there was a struggle. In the Vatican - the appearance of this product and its posters - you are uplifted loud lamentations. High to complain that usually follow the action of the hand by removing the age-old enemies that the Church might not named, but merely just to complain. But this time nothing to complain is not followed. The long arm has been unaccountably inert. Italy is plastered with posters representatives bottoms with the words "who loves me follow me" and covered for the note of blue jeans Jesus. The Vatican has lost Jesus.

Now the Democrat power clerical-fascist, is torn between these two 'Jesus': the old form of power and the new realities of power ...

--------------

[1] Pasolini here refers to "Jesus Jeans" advertised in his days with the slogan "he who loves me follow me"

(by Walter Siti) - Pasolini. Saggi sulla politica e sulla società [Scritti corsari], in Meridiani Mondadori, Milano 1999

"Why I've never been in the place where Pasolini was killed?

top Tao is like down Tao

Tabula Smaragdina Hermetis

Verum sine mendacio, certum et verissimum.
Quod est inferius est sicut quod est superius, et quod est superius est sicut quod est inferius ad perpetranda miracola Rei Unius.

Et sicut omnes res fuerunt Uno, meditatione Unius: sic omnes res natae fuerunt ab hac Una re adaptatione.

Pater eius est Sol, mater eius Luna. Portavit illud ventus in ventre suo. Nutrix eius terra est.

Pater omnis telesmi totius mundi est hic. Vis eius integra est, si versa fuerit in terram.

Separabis terram ab igne, subtile a spisso, suaviter cum magno ingenio.

Ascendit a terra in coelum, iterumque descendit in terram, et recipit vim superiorum et inferiorum.

Sic habes gloriam totius mundi. Ideo fugiet a te omnis obscuritas.

Hic est totius fortitudinis fortitudo fortis, quia vincet omnem rem subtilem; omnemque solidam penetrabit: SIC MUNDUS CREATUS EST. Hinc erunt adaptationes mirabiles, quarum modus hic est.

Itaque vocatus sum Hermes Trismegistus, habens tres partes philosophiae totius mundi. Completum est quod dixi de operatione solis.

---

1. [It is] true, without error, certain and most true,
2. That which is below is as that which is above, and that which is above is as that which is below, to perform the miracles of the one thing.
3. And as all things were from the one, by means of the meditation of the one, thus all things were born from the one, by means of adaptation.
4. Its father is the Sun, its mother is the Moon, the Wind carried it in its belly, its nurse is the earth.
5. The father of the whole world [or "of all of the initiates"?] is here.
6. Its power is whole if it has been turned into earth.
7. You will separate the earth from the fire, the subtle from the dense, sweetly, with great skill.
8. It ascends from earth into heaven and again it descends to the earth, and receives the power of higher and of lower things.
9. Thus you will have the Glory of the whole world.
10. Therefore will all obscurity flee from you.
11. Of all strength this is true strength, because it will conquer all that is subtle, and penetrate all that is solid.
12. Thus was the world created.
13. From this were wonderful adaptations, of which this is the means. Therefore am I named Thrice-Great Hermes, having the three parts of the philosophy of the whole world.
14. It is finished, what I have said about the working[s] of the Sun.

The Emerald Tablet, attributed to a legendary figure as Hermes Trismegistus, is a text of Hermeticism translated from Arabic into Latin around 1250. In many ways expresses in summary form some of the concepts of Tao Te Ching, and mainly the invariance and scalability of complexity from small to large, from macrocosm and microcosm.

I've seen the Taooo!!!

Chilmark cemetery, Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts

	Dan Aykroyd (Elwood Blues):		... it's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses ...
	John Belushi (Jake Blues):		... hit it ...

the razor of Tao

"The simplest answer is usually the correct answer." 
William of Ockham (XIV century)

This principle, at the basis of modern scientific thought, in its simplest form suggests that it is useless to make more assumptions than those strictly necessary to explain a given phenomenon: Ockham's razor requires choosing among the many causes, one that explains easiest way to the event, and is an essential tool in order not to have a description that is more complex than the complexity that one is describing.

« Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem. »

«Concepts are not to be multiplied beyond necessity »

« Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate. »

« Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity. »

For example, if after parking on the outskirts of Minneapolis a canary-yellow Rolls Royce with the keys in place, and returning after a week and not having found it any more, it is legitimate to assume that this is the proof that aliens exist because they undoubtedly have taken it for their studying. Ockham's Razor, however, likely an explanation simpler and ordinary...it should be noted that while this hypothesis nothing say about the cause of disappearance or on the presence or less of aliens it tells much about the person that says it...

Ockham's razor gives a guideline in the situation where different descriptions are possible, it does not encourage the choice most banal, often the simplest description is far from trivial, as Einstein pointed out:

    "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler"

---

proposition 3.328 If a sign is not necessary then it is meaningless. That is the meaning of Occam's razor.

(If everything in the symbolism works as though a sign had meaning, then it has meaning.)

proposition 5.47321 Ockham's razor is, of course, not an arbitrary rule nor one justified by its practical success. It simply says that unnecessary elements in a symbolism mean nothing.

Signs which serve one purpose are logically equivalent, signs which serve no purpose are logically meaningless.

Tao: the Path of flowing water

©2009 Hougaard Malan

The supreme good is like water,
which nourishes all things without trying to.
It is content with the low places that people disdain.
Thus it is like the Tao.

The word Tao means "the path". You can not say anything about the goal: it remains elusive, indescribable, ineffable. But you can say something on the way. The Buddha said: "The Buddha can only show you the way. If you follow the path, you get to the truth. " The truth must be your own experience. No one can define the truth, but you can define the path, you can clear the path. The teacher can not give you the truth, but it can give you away. And when you know the way there, all you have to do is follow it.

The word Tao means simply "the way". We are in the Tao, where else could we be? To live is to be on the road. To live is to live in the divine. Breathing is breathing in the divine. How else could we be? But just as the fish lives in the ocean and is totally unaware of the ocean, we live in and are totally unaware of the Tao Tao. In fact it is so obvious, that's why we are totally unaware. We are on the way, we are in God, we live in and through the Tao Tao, but we are not aware. The Tao exists, because without the Tao trees do not grow, the stars do not move, the blood does not circulate and we could not breathe. Life would disappear.

Life can exist only if it is supported by a fundamental law. Life can exist only if it is supported by something. Notice the order in this vast existence. It is not chaos, it is a cosmos. What makes a cosmos? Why is there such harmony? There must be a law that maintains this harmony, which makes it flow, which keeps everything in tune. But we do not know anything. We know nothing even of our own being and through our being are united with Tao. It is the ocean of life around us. It is outside and inside of us, the pure essence. It is the existence, spirit is primary. No name can contain it. All names may be his and no form belongs to him, because all forms are forms. The Tao exists in millions of forms. The tree is green and the flower is red. Man is man, fish and seafood. It is the same law.

Tao believes that you have to put up with the existence, allowing things to happen spontaneously, without in any way to force your way, without pushing in any way the river flowing. The Tao says, "You do not have to hurry because you have available to eternity. Sowing the seeds at the right time and wait, come spring, as well as get along. When spring arrives, the flowers will bloom. But wait, do not rush! Do not start to pull the tree up, to grow more rapidly. Do not enter into the mentality which claims that everything happens as instant coffee. Learn to wait, because nature is moving very very slowly. Nature has its own grace to this his move slowly. " Nature is very feminine moves like a woman. Not running, not in a hurry, you do not jumping to conclusions. It moves very slowly, it is a silent music. In nature there is very patient and believe in the Tao way of being in nature. The Tao never in a hurry: you have to understand it. The fundamental teaching of the Tao is: learn to be patient. If you can wait forever, it could also happen instantly. But do not expect that to happen to you at once: if you claim, it could never happen. Your own claim would become an obstacle, your own desire to create a distance between you and nature. Stay in tune with nature, let nature take its course. At any moment you arrive, it is good, at any moment you arrive, you soon: At any moment you arrive, even if used for centuries to come, would never late, never too late. Always comes at the time the right time. In Taoism, the water is the supreme course of things, is the Tao itself. Lao Tzu called it his way, "the way of flowing water", for many reasons. First, the water is soft, humble, look for the lowest places. Water seeks the lowest place, the lowest levels for. It rains on Everest, but the rain does not stop there; starts flowing in the valleys and even in the valleys, reach the deeper layers. Water remains the last, is the lack of ambition. It has no ambition to be the first place. Be like water means to feel totally happy to be a nobody. Secondly, the water is movement: it is in perpetual motion. Every time he is not moving, it becomes dirty, rotten, even venomous: dies. His life is in the movement, the dynamism in the flux. All of life is a stream, has no static.

The Tao is a natural bloom. Follow nature. Nobody wants to be unhappy and all they are, do not follow nature. Everyone wants to be blessed and no one is. Listen to your aspiration, your deepest desire will tell you the right way. Your desire tends towards the bliss and beauty to something that can overwhelm you, something that can take you to the other side, to something so wonderful and incredible, able to remove yourself from the past and the future, to let in quieora. This is the Tao: the immediate, that is alive and pulsating in the present moment. The Tao does not know the past, does not know the future. The Tao knows only once: the present, known only quieora. Let your mind and you will not disappear in the past or the future. The past and future are creations of the mind: in reality there is only the present. And when you no longer the past or the future, how can you call it "present"? This makes sense only when referring to past or future. This is an interval between the past and the future: if you have taken away the past and the future, this will also disappear. When time is gone, what will be the time of the Tao. When you're totally in the immediate, in quieora, if not more of the vague ghosts of the past, nor between the images of the unborn future, what will be the moment of illumination: for the time you will no longer exist here and you will be totally , nowhere else. When time is no more, the mind does not exist anymore, mind and time are synonymous. The more your mind is present and the more you are conscious of the time.

The Tao is not a doctrine: it is a special path to become aware. It is the path of awakening, enlightenment, the way to go home. "Tao" means simply "the way". Remember that is not the meaning of the word. Every time I hear the expression "the way", you think of a destination somewhere far away, where the road takes you. Not at all, "Tao" means simply "the way", without reference to a goal! So what does this mean? It means: the way in which things are what they are. Indicates just the way things are ... I have already, are just as they are. You should not get anything, everything is already pouring into you. Just be hereandnow and celebrate!

image courtesy by: