My initial thought is that there may be an important aspect of scale involved: how (from where/by whom) the experience(s) of life are being observed may flush out the details of explaining how and why things happen in the lives of humans. For example the rise and fall of a civilization may come about from reason or randomness depending on what scale you are observing it from -- there may be "real" causes to explain the collapse of a civilization at one level; however, when taking a look from a different perspective it may be that civilizations simply come and go without there being reasons (that the behaviors of humans in effect become like the cosmic dust of matter separated into ever smaller parts . . . cantor dust of behavior and perhaps even emotion). If there is a sensation that can be broken down into smaller parts -- let's say a feeling of good/bad and you break down the components of the experience does the meeting point between good/bad become as significant as the sensation itself -- what I am trying to get at here is the examination of concepts like good and bad? like matter in physics they become ever more illusory as you begin breaking them down . . . It may be that from "our" perspective a civilization rose and fell (rises and falls) because of relatively clear causes: i.e. lack/abundance of natural resources; however, when looked at from an alien sociologist's perspective looking at the patterns of civilizations across the universe it turns out that the rise and fall of any civilization ends up being part of a pattern that has both randomness and order swirling about it . . . Part of my notion is taken from the idea of shifting perspective and how this might effect dimension the other part is taken from the idea that as you look at something on a larger/smaller scale there may be evidences of both order and randomness at play . . . does that make any sense? . . . and that patterns of order and randomness are involved in behavior . . .
Part of this simply looks Zen to me . . . i.e. the idea that the "emotional" concept -- hell moral concept -- of something like GOOD may shift depending both on perspective and scale is not that far removed from the Zen notion that our labels construct our experience of things . . . but considering human relations within the framework of history and "large" scale human organizations in particular there seems to be something else at play as well -- history need not be seen as simply ordered nor need it be seen as simply the product of its actors . . . what if within order there is chaos? again within chaos might not order exist? an individual goes crazy and kills a bunch of people -- order and chaos intertwine -- shows up as a random dot on the overall map of human behavior . . . what if things as painfully absurd as genocide are caught up within these universal patterns? what if there is a certain randomness and order to human atrocities? on a smaller scale how about a fight taking place between two people suddenly becoming violent? is it possible that their argument/their fight are intertwined into the behaviors of the universe through both order and chaos? what does this say for/against free will? are their actions that (going towards the infinite) are examples of free will? could these same actions from the point of observation also seem like prime examples of a deterministic universe? can a universe be simultaneously free and determined? chaotic and ordered? even emotional states like love could be looked at within this framework, highlighting the potential for order and randomness to effect us directly as humans . . . I'm not even thinking about the more abstract idea that we are both matter and space, both finite and infinite within our physical/mental construct (that is the human construct) . . . the physical and mental construct which classifies us as human nothing more than an abstract concept depending on the observers' perspective (I am starting to get the feeling that Berkeley's singular observer may have been overly simplistic -- multiple observers, multiple perspectives, and we and our behaviors are changed by the varied perspectives: we are both a dot and a line depending on the view, we have both chosen and had our choices made for us depending on the perspective) . . . how about the interplay between the "purely" physical and the "purely" emotional/mental? if we are space then what is thought? is thought confined? could "we" by shifting perspective become lost in the haze? as the social understanding of the universe changes how does this effect life? what I mean roughly is that as revolutions in science drift from the scientific world to the "world as a whole" how is the "world as a whole" effected? are patterns of behavior that appear to represent the breaking down of social order in actuality symptomatic of a changing universe or at least a changing view of the universe?
in particular how might a perspective of the world that moves away from the traditional sciences change our "human" understanding of ourselves? even guilt and innocence (or at least how we phrase these terms) might change . . . this isn't necessarily a new concept (Darwin not only changed human understanding of the world but he in effect changed how we view ourselves within the world, Einstein's relativity changed not only physics but in effect the very fabric of how humans saw the universe) but there needs to be an awakening to the way in which this process continues on . . . these scientific revolutions weren't one time events they continue to ripple throughout our experience . . . we literally live in a different universe from our parents . . . once you start "seeing" things from a new perspective, that new perspective will help shape your understandings and behaviors . . . again I can't help but flash back to "mental" concepts like morality and how our very judgements might be changed by our changed views of the universe . . . but what I am most intrigued by is the notion that we are a species in the process of being transformed by our own experiences and our shifting judgements made in regards to these experiences . . .
