The Wheels of Time
The Wheels of Time is a unifying theory of nature. It is based on the idea that there are fundamental forces within nature that exist in a constant relationship with one another. This relationship creates a pattern. That pattern has shape that we can use as a map for understanding nature. The Wheels of Time is that shape.
The Wheels of Time is widely applicable, looking across the range of the natural sciences. As you will see, it offers a new way of understanding the world that, with any luck, will help change the direction that we have all been heading for too long.
Basically the Wheels of Time is about polarity. Specifically, it looks at the fundamental forces of nature existing as three pairs of polar relationships. These are called the Three Great Energy Splits.
Above is a picture of the Wheels of Time. I hope the labels aren't too small to read. It looks pretty complex but it's quite simple really. If it doesn't all sink in the first time around, it doesn't really matter anyway. I'll just go over it quickly here before I move onto some easier stuff about how the Wheels of Time is applicable.
The plus and minus signs are yang and yin respectively. The big circles are matter (top) and energy (bottom). The darkened bit is any thing or self while the thin lines are everything else. So in effect, I am saying that each thing has a material and an energetic aspect with a creative and a receptive function in each.
The two smaller circles relate to conscious beings and are the storehouses of experience. The upper stores energetic experience and relates to the mind. The lower stores physical experience and relates to the body. So the Wheels of Time is a map of the nature of consciousness.
The Human Condition
You can probably see how the darkened part of the shape resembles the human body, with two arms, two legs a head and a torso. The two smaller circles are the heart and the groin. They are the dual centres of life force and are the centres for motivation and emotion.
The groin is the centre for separateness and motivates a person toward controlling their surrounds. The heart is the centre for connectedness and motivates us toward communing with our surrounds. It's important for us to find a balance. The groin is our strength while our heart is our benevolence. If the two work together, great things happen but if one works without the other it will cause either weakness or aggression.
Other Applications
Evolution Theory
We have heard that the driving force behind the evolutionary process is something called 'survival of the fittest'. Mr Darwin's thought has left a remarkable legacy that is still (and rightly so) respected. Unfortunately, Mr Darwin fits into the mould of someone I call a separatist philosopher. He told us that it is all about competition, if you compete well you survive to populate the earth.
Some time later, a less well known naturalist and political philosopher, Peter Kropotkin, challenged Darwin's theory with a book titled 'Mutual Aid'. He suggested that it is not competition that is the driving force behind evolution, but cooperation. If you can live harmoniously as part of a community, you might be a big woosy, but the community as a whole will survive. I call Mr Kropotkin a collectivist philosopher.
The Wheels of Time stresses that there are dual drivers to the evolutionary process; survival of the fittest (separateness) and mutual aid (connectedness).
Psychology
Sigmund Freud influence is not so direct these days as it was, but it is still pervasive. With his assertion that the groin is the sole centre for human motivation, he is effectively telling us that love is not a genuine emotion. Mr Freud is another separatist philosopher who unfortunately has failed to see that as well as the centre for separateness within the human psyche (groin) there is a centre for connectedness (heart).
Economics
In 1776, Adam Smith released a book that's influence has hardly diminished to this day. His central idea was that competition is the driving force behind a healthy economy.
Karl Marx on the other hand suggested that a healthy economy was largely the result of cooperation.
The Wheels of Time tells us that there is a dual nature to economics. It's about cooperation and competition. We need to look for a balance.
Cheers Everyone
That's it for now. This is a very simple overview to get you started on thinking about the Wheels of Time and it's possible application in the world today.
Please feel free to contact me in Australia if you would like to know more.
gilbert@inorbit.com
The Wheels of Time is widely applicable, looking across the range of the natural sciences. As you will see, it offers a new way of understanding the world that, with any luck, will help change the direction that we have all been heading for too long.
Basically the Wheels of Time is about polarity. Specifically, it looks at the fundamental forces of nature existing as three pairs of polar relationships. These are called the Three Great Energy Splits.
- Yin and Yang- Archtypal receptive and creative forces that together provide the polarity that underlies everything.
- Something and Nothing- Relating to the nature of the material world, these two together define substance and form.
- Separate and Connected- With the split between the separate and the connected, a thing became a self and consciousness was born.
Above is a picture of the Wheels of Time. I hope the labels aren't too small to read. It looks pretty complex but it's quite simple really. If it doesn't all sink in the first time around, it doesn't really matter anyway. I'll just go over it quickly here before I move onto some easier stuff about how the Wheels of Time is applicable.
The plus and minus signs are yang and yin respectively. The big circles are matter (top) and energy (bottom). The darkened bit is any thing or self while the thin lines are everything else. So in effect, I am saying that each thing has a material and an energetic aspect with a creative and a receptive function in each.
The two smaller circles relate to conscious beings and are the storehouses of experience. The upper stores energetic experience and relates to the mind. The lower stores physical experience and relates to the body. So the Wheels of Time is a map of the nature of consciousness.
The Human Condition
You can probably see how the darkened part of the shape resembles the human body, with two arms, two legs a head and a torso. The two smaller circles are the heart and the groin. They are the dual centres of life force and are the centres for motivation and emotion.
The groin is the centre for separateness and motivates a person toward controlling their surrounds. The heart is the centre for connectedness and motivates us toward communing with our surrounds. It's important for us to find a balance. The groin is our strength while our heart is our benevolence. If the two work together, great things happen but if one works without the other it will cause either weakness or aggression.
Other Applications
Evolution Theory
We have heard that the driving force behind the evolutionary process is something called 'survival of the fittest'. Mr Darwin's thought has left a remarkable legacy that is still (and rightly so) respected. Unfortunately, Mr Darwin fits into the mould of someone I call a separatist philosopher. He told us that it is all about competition, if you compete well you survive to populate the earth.
Some time later, a less well known naturalist and political philosopher, Peter Kropotkin, challenged Darwin's theory with a book titled 'Mutual Aid'. He suggested that it is not competition that is the driving force behind evolution, but cooperation. If you can live harmoniously as part of a community, you might be a big woosy, but the community as a whole will survive. I call Mr Kropotkin a collectivist philosopher.
The Wheels of Time stresses that there are dual drivers to the evolutionary process; survival of the fittest (separateness) and mutual aid (connectedness).
Psychology
Sigmund Freud influence is not so direct these days as it was, but it is still pervasive. With his assertion that the groin is the sole centre for human motivation, he is effectively telling us that love is not a genuine emotion. Mr Freud is another separatist philosopher who unfortunately has failed to see that as well as the centre for separateness within the human psyche (groin) there is a centre for connectedness (heart).
Economics
In 1776, Adam Smith released a book that's influence has hardly diminished to this day. His central idea was that competition is the driving force behind a healthy economy.
Karl Marx on the other hand suggested that a healthy economy was largely the result of cooperation.
The Wheels of Time tells us that there is a dual nature to economics. It's about cooperation and competition. We need to look for a balance.
Cheers Everyone
That's it for now. This is a very simple overview to get you started on thinking about the Wheels of Time and it's possible application in the world today.
Please feel free to contact me in Australia if you would like to know more.
gilbert@inorbit.com
5 comments:
There is something beautiful in your work.
Something together and bountiful in your writing.
There is a reasoning underlying it that can create changes to the positive in peoples lives.
I believe this is important for me to hear.
You are important.
The wheels is an energy of its own.
How you drive it is important.
I feel like it has been beneficial to learn from you and understand what you say.
It will always be that it relates differently to everyone as we are all separate from one another in our experiences and perceptions.
Your work is beautiful Gilbert Holmes.
There is always room for improving communication and interpretation.
When you write about separate and connected, could it be that you are also suggesting we separate from emotional baggage in communication
and connect to our surroundings in love?
I question how to do this in myself everyday.
Would love to hear your comments.
You have a good journey,
Enjoy it.
Catherine Stark
Cooperation and competition are not the real duals in economics.
In practice Marx's system is one of ruthless competition - for dominance and control. Competition within government produces worse results than any genuine (i.e. free) competition in business. The only cooperation is that which is enforced for the benefit of the regime.
Even with the best intentions, abolishing private property and trying to run the economy cooperatively does not remove the problem of deciding what is the best way to cooperate - the best way to use the collective property. Disagreement is inevitable, followed by competition, dominance and repression.
Free enterprise, although it is based on competition, does not exclude cooperation. It was intended to work in an ethical (Christian) society, not the jungle. It does not operate in a moral vacuum. Any society is based on cooperation of some kind. Different types of business depend on each other, e.g. as suppliers or buyers. Businesses need customers and consumers need producers. Employers and employees need each other. People cooperate because of both necessity and ethics.
Communism in practice is not about cooperation, and free enterprise does not exclude cooperation; so they cannot be opposed as extremes of cooperation and competition.
The opposite ends of the spectrum for economics are total freedom and total control. Free enterprise is on one side and both socialism and monopoly are on the other.
Yes, monopoly capitalism and free enterprise capitalism are opposites. They are not just different types of capitalism - they are exclusive, opposite systems. Free enterprise requires competition. Monopoly is the absence of competition.
And socialism and monopoly capitalism are the same thing. Socialism is total government control. Monopoly is total corporate control. Total government forbids competition in business. Monopoly is the absence of competition in business. Both are forms of minority control. In either system, everyone is both emloyee and customer of the one boss.
Ownership is just recognition of the right of control; so total ownership (monopoly) and total control (socialism) are effectively the same thing. The richest always rule and rulers are always richest.
Allan Moorhead
Allan,
I like what you write about total freedom and total control being the opposite ends of the spectrum in economics. Neither is actually possible in reality. A healthy society will balance individual freedom against group cohesiveness. I think in your comment, you have left out reference to the role that can be played by community ownership as distinct from state ownership. Cooperation naturally will occur on many levels within society if the institutions of society are structured to allow it. On the neighbourhood, village, bio-region and right up to the global level. Competition also can occur within and between each of these levels of society. Both of these are healthy so long as a balance is maintained. Competitive processes are ok unless they cause the discintegration of the community. Cooperative functions are cool until they destroy the freedom of the individual.
So in response to your comment, I suggest that a society built of communities within communities from the neighbourhood to the global scale is the answer. Power structures are decentralized so that each community is to a large degree locally autonomous and self-reliant while still being bound within the (limiting and facilitating) institutions of the broader community. Both the cooperative and competitive aspects of the economy are encouraged to the degree that they neither damage community nor discourage individual freedom.
Gilbert
A slight correction to my comment:
The point I meant to make in paragraph 5 is that since natural competition and natural cooperation both exist alongside each other in free enterprise, and competition (with only enforced cooperation) also exists in Marxism (in practice) then competition and cooperation can't the (practical) extremes of the economic spectrum.
Allan Moorhead
26 Jan 06 11:38 am
Gilbert -
I don't see why the natural type of cooperation I described is not enough to provide balance and cohesiveness. Do we need institutions to facilitate cooperation if it happens on its own?
The institutions are themselves a form of cooperation. What maintains them but the will of members of society to cooperate? If the will is already there, why have the institutions?
I left out community ownership because I don't see a need for it, and because of the problems with it I described.
Nor do I see a difference between community and state ownership. The state is just a system of institutions for managing society. If the community owns something, they need some sort of administration - government - to run it.
Otherwise individual members of the community would do as they please with that property, independently, free of any governing laws or institutions. In which case competition would result. Effectively it would just be treated as private property.
Perhaps I am just missing details of how your proposed society works, or don't properly understand what you have explained.
Marx predicted that free enterprise would lead to dominance, but historically it did not happen that way, and the reasonning behind his prediction has long since, many times been shown to be faulty.
Monopoly was able to succeed - and is succeeding - only with the help of government, in fact, with the type of legislation recommended by Marx, such as progressive income tax, central banking and the varieties of business regulation.
Monopoly and socialism (government) go hand in hand. Socialism (including Marxism) has always been an elite movement, not a 'workers' movement. It serves the interests of the elite.
It is actually difficult to dominate a large free enterprise market - one in which the government does not intervene. When the government does intervene, however, it does so on behalf of the wealthiest capitalists, which does help them to dominate.
Post a Comment