History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

WHEE: reading and interpretation…and NK comment

February 13th, 2017 · No Comments


Thanks for comment: you seem to be interpreting WHEE to some extent, and that’s good. However, reading and interpreting that text is treacherous and the book requires a patient reading process to attempt to assess the multiple different regions explored. I am afraid of my own attempted interpretations and they are distinct in the end from the neutral systems model. The model transcends even my own interpretations which are open to my own misgivings. Try an exercise: go to a university library, get access to stacks (??), find fifty books on the Greek Archaic period, then collate bibilographies form each book and check out those sub-bibliographies. Then do that for each of the regions of the Axial Age, then do that for the modern transition, and then Sumer/Egypt and then the Neolithic…and then returning to the general world histories to get the mideonic periods…
Clearly there is a problem here: the number of books escalates to tens of thousands. And yet that is necessary strictly speaking to visualize the ‘eonic effect’.
The partial solution starts at a thousand books, balanced between regions.

How about a hundred books? That’s obviously still too many for most: the whole game is a task for speed readers and bookworms, and people with access to university libraries (graduates of that university,usually). In a good university library, if it allows stack entry, the book referred to in a footnote is usually less than a quarter mile away and can be found in a matter of minutes. You can also use something like the New York Public Library, much slower…

I say this because you can hallucinate world history and humanity does little else.
Now at this point I can make the case that our ‘eonic model’ is at least a start at the task because it uncovers a structure that acts a crude overall ‘narrative’ or Table of Contents that allows a partial visualization at a top level. That’s not a substitute for exact study, but it is at least something and the dynamic indicated gives meaning to world history overall.

Your comment refers to my treatment of the idea of western civilization, and civilizations in general. In fact, the model ditches the concept of civilizations and deals instead with ‘transitions’ or ‘differential time-slices’ of civilizations, pegged to the clear evidence for periods of rapid evolution or development, e.g. the Greek Archaic. These transitions show a clear overall pattern, a stunning discovery.

The question of Western civilization, the object of so-much ethnocentric confusion, disappears and we are talking about the ‘modern transition zone’ as a frontier effect in the general macro-sequence.

There the US is not a member of the transition zone. It is good to consider this point, given the arrogance of the americans. It is however, in my reading, what I call a ‘sidewinder’. A good example of a sidewinder is ancient Rome in the period of the axial age onward, 900BCE to 600BCE. Somewhere near or after 600BCE (not doubt before if we had evidence) the Roman system begins to emerge as a republic, in the field of diffusion of the Greek transition zone, with many sidewinders in Southern Italy. A sidewinder then is an upstart in a transition zone’s immediate diffusion field.
The American case is very similar: it is a sidewinder in the Euro-English transition’s diffusion field and actually becomes a near member of the transition zone with its staging of a first democracy in the modern world: its inchoate character allowed this open field to surpass the somewhat clogged transition area.

Etc…the analysis of civilizations should be replaced with something like my model, and it works much much better if you can get the hang of it.

Your sense of the US then being somehow less creative than the source regions is correct, although the US rapidly becomes a field of technological innovations (not the same as the innovation process in the general macrosequence).

Americans need to be more humble: and aware of their lesser intelligence now perpretrating gross distortions on a planet with an overwheening power. The comparison to Rome is apt: the romans sensed they could not match the original transition zone, Greece, and yet rapidly degenerated into empire and domination.

The US should consider this effect and sense the doom they are fated to suffer unless they can break out of the momentum of their fragile then monumental history.

Good comment, but be wary of the larger model indicated: new agers generally are incompetent students of world history…

I hope the day will come soon, if the planet survives, when the equivalent of university libraries can be done on the internet. A glorious day, if it comes. Walking a quarter mile for a footnote requires a lot of protein bars…

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment