On the interconnectedness of things

Posted by Etan on Monday, November 29, 2004 at 11:15 PM. Read 3516 times. Tags:
{name} pic

Throughout the past year interconnectedness has been a recurring concept in many pieces of film and literature which I have come across. In its simplest form interconnectedness breaks down into the idea that everything is connected together.

Why God Won’t Go Away states that every religion relies on a form of interconnectedness. Andrew Newberg, et al, claims that there are two forms of interconnectedness found in different religions. There is either a union of mankind with the rest of the world or a union of the individual with a greater individual.

The former is found in religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. Hinduism explains the interconnectedness of self or Atman with others through Brahman. The latter form of interconnectedness is more complicated. This form is found in religions such as Christianity. Through intense prayer individuals feel a profound connection with Christ. Through this connection with Christ individuals realize a connection with all of humanity.

In I ♥ Huckabees we find a form of existential interconnectedness which is very similar to that of Buddhism. Bernard Jaffe presents us with a blanket which he says represents the universe.

Say this blanket represents all the matter and energy in the universe, okay? This is me, this is you, and over here, this is the Eiffel Tower, right, it’s Paris!

Bernard’s blanket is eerily familiar to the Buddhist analogy of Indra’s Net. Indra’s Net is an infinitely long net. Within each knot of the net is a multifaceted jewel which reflects each other jewel. This analogy is made in order to show that everything in the universe exists in a complex relationship with all other beings. Like Jaffe’s blanket, we are all connected to each other and while we may feel like individuals in reality we can’t tell where my nose stops and space begins.

Interconnectedness is not only found in religions. Atheists also believe in the interconnectedness of everything, this time it comes in the form of energy. One of the foundations of modern physics is that energy cannot be created or destroyed. The first law of thermodynamics says that the total inflow of energy into a system must equal the total outflow of energy from the system, plus the change in the energy contained within the system.

When I cease to exist, whether I go to Heaven or Hell or back to Earth in the form of another being, my energy must go somewhere. Like the Buddhist concept of reincarnation, my actions as a living being will have an effect on the future. Whether my karma results in a reincarnation or I have a reincarnation through scientific means (i.e. my carcass turns to soil from which a tree sprouts), my energy will have an effect on future life.

The atheistic concept of interconnectedness is summed up well through a scene in Waking Life. A purely scientific outlook upon the world leaves us with a problem of free will. If we are all physical systems then we all rely on the rules which govern these systems. We are all part of a system of cause and effect. This system of cause and effect leaves us with the question of how we make decisions, how we can truly choose to do anything.

This is a problem which has faced humanity since we have been philosophizing. Freedom of will versus determinism first took shape in the form of God making decisions for us, but even without an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being deciding our fate, we have this casual relationship between all beings which can remove our true freedom.

This causal relationship is the basis for human interconnectedness. An atheist may not believe that there is a soul or Atman at the root of our essence. Even without this belief we run into the concept of energy which has always existed and cannot be destroyed, we also are presented with a form of Buddhist conditioned genesis through causal relationships between all beings.

Interconnectedness is a concept which seems to reoccur in all social sciences. Sociology, archeology, religions, (and anti-religions) all come back to this concept of cause and effect. This link between all of us may not be psychic but it definitely seems to exist, whether through energy or some greater being.

Comments:

Page 8 of 8 pages « First  <  6 7 8

Bodi United States Posted on 02/19/2007 at 02:49 PM

Bahamat Great Britain (UK) Posted on 02/19/2007 at 03:07 PM

Bahamat pic

I’m curious as to why the mind is as it is and why there should be any barrier to understanding if there need not be one.

Anyway, they all lead the same place – nowhere

I also ask myself what’s the point in trying, if all it counts for is nothing (either in terms of fundamental reasoning or final effect when facing possible oblivion). How important can it be if we mess up? There is a limit as to how much one person has the capacity to suffer from their own mistakes or incompetance, so it might be the easier route - there is no shame in that as long as there is an understanding and acceptance of possible consequence between all concerned parties

 Signature 

You don’t need to end all existence to end all suffering

Bodi United States Posted on 02/19/2007 at 04:49 PM

Bodi pic

saying that all these path lead nowhere is not the same thing as saying that it all counts for nothing.

LuckyJohn19 Australia Posted on 02/19/2007 at 07:29 PM

LuckyJohn19 pic

I can only talk for me because I am unique ... just like everybody else. wink

DC: ... and why there should be any barrier to understanding if there need not be one.

My only barrier is me and self-imposed limitations, and yours are yours, etc.
Many of these limitations are bound up with what I ‘know’ when all that I know has been filtered through or by other things I know ... all going back to my earliest lessons learnt between the ages of zero and 6 or 7 when all my truths were learned.
No matter how enlightened (or free) I become from myself (my ego?) there is always (usually) gonna be some residual essence of the original left to ‘muddy the waters’.

How important can it be if we mess up?

There is none.
I attach as much importance as I have leaned to attach to success or failure and I am usually my worst and most unfair critic in the case of failure.
For some weird reason I am not comfortable with (my) successes although they do make me smile.
I think I’ve leaned (incorrectly it seems) not to treat any success as success of my own making although I know it is – right place right time – there’s no god to organise it although the Goddess of Fortune does occasionally smile smile upon me - for fear it’ll be taken away. It’s the optimistic pessimist in me.
I am trying to be constantly aware, to learn the lesson of, Shakespeare’s “there is nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so”.

Bodi: saying that all these path[s] lead nowhere is not the same thing as saying that it all counts for nothing.

Although ‘nothing matters’ is a good place to start.
And when I say ‘nothing matters’ I don’t need someone to say: what about murder? However, and still, nothing matters. wink
Homo Sapien will continue to replicate itself, eventually to fall back into some sort of barbarism from which we will, once again, emerge.
The breath of Brahman is infinite ... all we can do is try to connect with ALL things.
Cool. I was able to get back on track. smile

 Signature 

I’ve discovered that it all boils down to brain wiring: your brain is wired to worship magic or it isn’t, either it’s wired to utilize logic or it isn’t, either it’s analytical of myths or it isn’t.

Bodi United States Posted on 02/20/2007 at 02:29 AM

Bodi pic

Although ‘nothing matters’ is a good place to start.

A zen poem I wrote a few years ago…

We see with our mind, not with our eye
So many crawl, so few fly
Because they fail to see, and so fail to See
All that they are, and all they could be
Understanding everything, realizing nothing
Can you see past duality and reach for totality?
Realizing Nothing, understanding Everything

Nothing matters.
It certainly does…

zilch Austria Posted on 02/20/2007 at 10:41 AM

zilch pic

Bodi, you didn’t say anything I really disagree with.  As a musician, I understand perfectly well that you won’t get very far just by understanding the theory- you gotta play.  I don’t object to using the left/right differences in the brain, or holism/reductionism, as a working model, or symbol, for some ways of looking at the world.  This is very interesting and important stuff:  how is the way we perceive the world colored by the evolutionary pressures our brains developed under?  How can we Pleistocene savanna dwellers survive in the modern world without killing ourselves? Looking at things like the difference between left and right hemisphere modes of cognition could give us clues on how to deal with things evolution didn’t design us for.

What I do object to- and this is part and parcel of my problems with SD and its kin, and indeed with all religions (and most of politics, philosophy, and sociology) is when some genuinely important and complicated phenomenon is thrust rudely into a mold that it doesn’t fit, usually some relatively simple structure that purportedly explains the relationships of many such phenomena.  Examples of such molds are the Bible, Spiral Dynamics, Marxism, Freudianism…

Of course, there’s no hard and fast line that can be drawn between such attempts to explain the world (or some part of it) and any science: all descriptions and models we make are, of course, doomed to incompleteness.  And it’s also true that we have to choose some way of modeling the world to live by- that is, if we don’t want to end up dead or sedated.

If people are inspired to make the planet a better place because of their belief in Spiral Dynamics, or the Bible, more power to ‘em.  But if they believe the all-but-intractably complex world of human interactions can really be described by spirals, or sins, they’re mistaken.

 Signature 

You were born.  And so you’re free.  So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson

Bahamat Great Britain (UK) Posted on 02/20/2007 at 04:02 PM

Bahamat pic

I don’t really understand all this - I analyse but I don’t analyse analysis, too restrictive to order thought, that’s why I don’t like regimented scientific method - I at least can’t be creative when my mind isn’t allowed to roam.

In some ways incomplete thought might be part of why we can innovate in ways computers can’t, thinking a little more outside the box - we need to make mistakes and need incomplete thought in order to develop something new - you can build up an increasingly complete idea from lots of incomplete scraps from the environment - because what we take in isn’t really complete anyway

Also if nothing matters, I really struggle to see any point in doing anything other than short term self serving options all the time - that would be if my thought was complete - however my reason breaks down somewhere before then and I sometimes make illogical choices knowingly, and I can’t figure out why. Indeed if everyone did follow short term self-serving logic many fewer people would be alive today - it might be an evolutanary adaption to break down the reason as a safeguard but, even if you can see past that, few people will put 100% determination behind it; somehow the psychological inhibitions (ie to killing to survive for some) can be a high ‘wall’, and yet one you could walk straight through

 Signature 

You don’t need to end all existence to end all suffering

Page 8 of 8 pages « First  <  6 7 8

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys


Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


<< Back to main