-- / --
Part B of Climbing Elven Stairways: DNA as a macroscopic metaphor of polarized psychodynamics. For access convenience this paper has also been split into two parts.
Context of clashing cultures
Part A: Existential challenge of "The Other"
-- Contrast with framework of Spiral Dynamics
-- Possibility of an implicit pattern
-- Correspondences and complementarities: "moonshine connectivity"
-- A "hidden" stairway?
-- Spiral stairway -- threatening and/or broken?
-- Guarding the entrance: the "wisdom keepers"
-- Spiral stairwells and screw conveyors
-- Paradoxical existential dynamics of the spiral stairway
-- Fundamental knower-known relationship
Human relationships and "The Other"
Part B: Archetypal otherness: "DNA vs. I Ching"
-- Correspondences and complementarities: steps on the spiral way
-- Pattern replication
-- Process dynamics
-- "Broken symbols" exacerbating relationship failure?
-- Value polarities as archetypal bonds
-- Bonding: reification and petrification of significance
-- Relationship breakdown and civilizational collapse
For access convenience this paper has been split into two parts. The unsplit version is also available
The earlier exploration (Theories of Correspondences -- and potential equivalences between them in correlative thinking, 2007) did not immediately highlight the nature of different correspondences. It is therefore appropriate to explore the extremely well-researched nature of the base pairs to which it is suggested here that the correspondences may be in some way analogous. The exploration is guided by the recognition that, whether in terms of microbiological processes or with respect to psychodynamic relationships, both are essential to life as it is experienced -- and that therefore, as argued above, some degree of similarity is to be tentatively hypothesized between them.
As noted in the helpful Wikipedia entry, in molecular biology a base pair is the connection via hydrogen bonds of two nucleotides on the opposite/complementary helical DNA (or RNA) strands. The base pairs are of two kinds in DNA, through which four nucleotides are connected as indicated in Table 1 (with the letters that conventionally denote them).
|.Table 2: Bonding between nucleotide
(linking the separate helical strands)
|AT pairing via
2 hydrogen bonds
uracil (U) in RNA
|GC pairing via
3 hydrogen bonds
|adenine (A)||mismatch: the pattern of hydrogen donors and acceptors do not correspond in an AC pair.||cytosine (C)|
|guanine (G)||mismatch: the pattern of hydrogen donors and acceptors do not correspond in a GT pair.||thymine (T)|
|.||purine-purine pairings are energetically unfavorable because the molecules are too close, leading to electrostatic repulsion.||.|
|.||pyrimidine-pyrimidine pairings are energetically unfavorable because the molecules are too far apart for hydrogen bonding to be established||.|
As a template, the two types of viable base pairing will be related below to the systematic metaphorical representation of psychodynamics developed by the I Ching coding system. The "steps" on the spiral stairway are the two-fold or three-fold bonds which in that system would be equivalent to the yin and yang line coding.
The number of base pairs is therefore equal to the number of nucleotides on a single strand. The human genome is estimated to be about 3 billion base pairs in length and to contain 20,000-25,000 distinct genes. Distinctiveness, and information carrying capacity, arise from the sequencing of the four different nucleotides along one strand (complemented by the sequencing of the corresponding nucleotides on the other). A gene may then be described as a union of genomic sequences of nucleotides encoding a coherent set of potentially overlapping functional products.
The genetic code is the set of rules by which information encoded in genetic material (DNA or RNA sequences) is translated into proteins (amino acid sequences) by living cells. Specifically, the code defines a mapping between tri-nucleotide sequences (called codons) and amino acids; every such triplet of nucleotides in a nucleic acid sequence then corresponds to a single amino acid as indicated in Table 3.
|Table 3 : 20 different amino acids used by living
cells to encode proteins
that are directly encoded for protein synthesis by the standard genetic code
(originally hypothesized because 3 is the smallest n such that 4n is at least 20)
[Source: table on Gene expression and biochemistry in Wikipedia. Notes omitted]
|Amino Acid||Abbreviations||Codon(s) in RNA |
[triplets of 3 nucleotides from Table 2,
using U instead of T ]
| Essential (X) /
|Alanine||A||Ala||GCU, GCC, GCA, GCG||7.8||-|
|Aspartic acid||D||Asp||GAU, GAC||5.3||-|
|Glycine||G||Gly||GGU, GGC, GGA, GGG||7.2||C|
|Isoleucine||I||Ile||AUU, AUC, AUA||5.3||X|
|Leucine||L||Leu||UUA, UUG, CUU, CUC, CUA, CUG||9.1||X|
|Proline||P||Pro||CCU, CCC, CCA, CCG||5.2||-|
|Arginine||R||Arg||CGU, CGC, CGA, CGG, AGA, AGG||5.1||C|
|Serine||S||Ser||UCU, UCC, UCA, UCG, AGU, AGC||6.8||-|
|Threonine||T||Thr||ACU, ACC, ACA, ACG||5.9||X|
|Valine||V||Val||GUU, GUC, GUA, GUG||6.6||X|
|Stop codon||-||Term||UAA, UAG, UGA||-||-|
The above table may be represented in inverse form in Table 4. It is useful to recognize that each codon triplet in Table 3 or 4 is the representation on one strand of the ends of three base pairs. Implied by the nucleotides UAC, for example, is the existence of the corresponding nucleotides AUG with which they are bonded on the other strand -- thereby constituting three base pairs.
|Table 4: 64 codons and the
amino acid for which each codon codes
(direction is 5'
[Inverse of Table 3. Source RNA Codon table in Wikipedia. Notes omitted ]
|2nd base in codon triplet|
UCU (Ser/S) Serine
UAU (Tyr/Y) Tyrosine
CUU (Leu/L) Leucine
CCU (Pro/P) Proline
CGU (Arg/R) Arginine
ACU (Thr/T) Threonine
AGU (Ser/S) Serine
GUU (Val/V) Valine
GCU (Ala/A) Alanine
GGU (Gly/G) Glycine
This representation corresponds in a number of respects to that of the 64 hexagrams of the I Ching, as has been noted by several authors (Katya Walter, Tao of Chaos: merging East and West, 1996; Johnson F. Yan, DNA and the I Ching: the Tao of life, 1993; Martin Schonberger, The I Ching and the Genetic Code: the hidden key to life, 1979). Katya Walter has shown that the Fu Xi Earlier Heaven Ho Tu arrangement of the 64 hexagrams can represent the DNA genetic code:
|Table 5: Relationship between I Ching hexagrams
and amino acids
[Source: Katya Walter, Tao of Chaos: merging East and West, 1996]
The relationship of the codon triplets to the conventional hexagrams of the I Ching may be made in Table 6 by recognizing the implied corresponding half of the three base pairs represented in Table 4, and the 2 and 3-fold hydrogen bonding that distinguishes them. A single codon triplet (of three base pairs) in Table 4 is then equivalent as a code to a single I Ching hexagram. Note that conventionally the yin and yang elements are associated with the even and odd numbers, 2 and 3 -- matched here with the 2 and 3-fold base pair bonding.
|Table 6: Possible equivalence of RNA/DNA base pairs with I Ching digram coding|
|Representation of base pairs constituting codons||Conventional I Ching coding|
(explicit in Table 4)
(implicit in Table 4: other strand)
|double-ringed||A||2||U (or T)||single-
|single-ringed||U (or T)||2||A||double-
[In this respect note discussion in Conditions of Objective, Subjective and Embodied Cognition: mnemonic systems for memetic coding of complexity, 2007].
In the light of the above correspondences, Chris Lofting (The Book of Structures: wholes, aspects, and the genetic code, 2005) treats the I Ching as a metaphor for the brain's way of dealing with objects (wholes, parts) and relationships (static, dynamic). H notes:
What this leads to is a model of thought based on strings of hexagrams, just as a coding sequence for a protein is based on strings of codons... Using the DNA/RNA pattern, there is a suggestion that we can produce strings that map to thoughts... Using the normal generation of a hexagram, we find that a hexagram links to a specific codon and so we use hexagrams to map strings of codons.
The correspondences of the previous section point to the importance of understanding that whatever the elusive "pattern that connects", those correspondences associated with modern understanding of DNA and those associated with traditional understanding of the I Ching are most fruitfully recognized as particular instances of it -- accessible to current human cognitive frameworks. This is succinctly articulated by Tony Smith as follows:
The nature of this underlying template is further clarified by Chris Lofting (I Ching Plus, 1997-2001) arguing that whenever maps are made of reality there is typically a failurel to recognize that the maps are metaphors for how "in here" interprets "out there" -- whether in the case of esoteric maps (e.g. I Ching, astrology) or for scientific maps (e.g. mathematics, physics):
underneath all of these maps is a neurologically-determined template which allows one to easily make analogies and create metaphors; it is a template of meaning that appears to be shared by all of these categorisation systems. Simply put, all maps of reality are metaphors for the way the brain categorises objects (wholes, parts) and relationships (static, dynamic), and the template emerges from this process.
Both the DNA and the I Ching instances are distinguished not so much by their static structure but by the dynamics associated with those patterns. In the case of DNA, this is the process of replication through which information is passed down the generations -- in biological terms. In the case of the I Ching (or Book of Changes), it is specifically claimed to be a means of holding the pattern of changes -- notably the psychodynamic changes that are the preoccupation here and which were the preoccupation of governance in imperial China. The question is how the former may offer new insights into the latter of value to the contemporary challenges of governance at all levels of society.
Considerable detail is available on the mechanisms of DNA replication at the cellular level. Many extensive commentaries are available on the manner in which the I Ching encodes the processes of change (cf Documents relating to Patterns of I Ching / Tao te Ching). Clearly extensive work could be undertaken in determining the extent of the match between them and isolating difficulties for further investigation.
Prior to any such investigation, it is important to clarify some of the issues in any such comparative process in the light of the preoccupation here regarding the psychodynamics of challenging relationships:
Curiously both DNA and the I Ching can be readily misunderstood, in ways that are somewhat similar:
The point to be made in both cases is with regard to the unfortunate predisposition of the human mind to seek premature collective closure on oversimplistic explanations. With regard to one "clash of civilizations", this has recently been seen in the case of the consensus formed, at the highest level and by the best and the brightest, regarding the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (cf Groupthink: the Search for Archaeoraptor as a Metaphoric Tale missing the link between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists", 2002).
The question to be asked, adapting the above words of The Economist, is whether the current "account" of psychodynamic relationships is "so satisfying" to the relevant disciplines and belief systems "that few bother to look beyond it". How ill advised was the assertion made by Bill Clinton, as President of the USA, that "no stone has been left unturned" in the search for solutions to the Middle East crisis?
Even more to the point is whether questions should be raised about the nature of any descriptive "account" as it might be sought within the dominant mindsets. Might it not be specifically inappropriate to the dynamic challenge posed by psychodynamic relationships -- as proved to be the case in nuclear physics?
Does such an "account" effectively denature the existential reality of those relationships and obscure understanding of how they fail so catastrophically? Is it with understanding of this quality that the dramatic "clashes of civilizations" are currently being addressed -- with an arrogance matching that of biologists in their earlier expectation of grasping the human genome as a kind of Theory of Everything? How was that misunderstanding nurtured and by whom? With what arrogant misunderstanding will genetic engineering now be undertaken for the benefit of humanity?
From RNA's previous assumed role as a passive carrier of genetic information (from DNA in the cell nucleus to the places in the cell where proteins are made, assembling the appropriate amino-acid units), it's role has now been dramatically promoted -- possibly even to the status of operating system (in computer terms). In the words of the The Economist leader article on the matter:
If RNA is controlling the complexity of the whole organism, that suggests the operating system of each cell is not only running the cell in question, but it is linking up with those of the other cells when a creature is developing. To push the analogy, organs such as the brain are the result of a biological internet. If that is right, the search for the essence of humanity has been looking in the wrong genetic direction.
The radical shift in understanding might be compared to that:
Any such comparison does of course raise the question of what it would take for humanity to play "better" music? (cf Authentic Grokking: emergence of Homo conjugens, 2003)
Necessarily The Economist focuses on the business opportunities relating to new classes of drugs that exploit the previously unsuspected varieties of RNA. Does this reflect a "silver bullet" mindset that is specifically a characteristic of the misunderstanding that delayed recognition of the role of RNA? How might this be completely inappropriate to the leader article's recognition that:
Many of the big problems facing humanity are biological, or are susceptible to biological intervention....At the moment, policymakers have inadequate technological tools to deal with these questions. But it is not hard to imagine such tools. Ageing is directly biological...knowing how cells work -- really knowing -- will allow the process to be transformed for the better...
Is thinking regarding breakdown in psychodynamic relationships -- in dealing with "big problems facing humanity" such as "terrorism" for example -- similarly conditioned by such "silver bullet" expectations? Have policymakers been looking in the "wrong psychodynamic direction"?
The leader article compares the paradigm shift in biology with the "neutron moment" of nuclear physics in 1932 -- enabling development of the atomic bomb:
But physics gave the 20th century a more subtle boon than mere power. It also brought an understanding of the vastness of the universe and humanity's insignificant place in it. It allowed people, in William Blake's phrase, to hold infinity in the palm of a hand, and eternity in an hour.
Is there not a case for expecting a "neutron moment", analogous to those described for physics and biology, in relation to psychodynamics? What, or who, is inhibiting recognition of such a moment -- despite appeals at the highest level for "new thinking"? How may it be inappropriately distorted by the misunderstandings of faith-based intuitions whose claims have so dramatically and consistently undermined relationships between faiths down the centuries?
However limited the understanding of it through instances such as DNA or the I Ching, can the psychodynamic dimension of the "pattern that connects" be appropriately comprehended and embodied through such instances in ways that enable more meaningful engagement with catastrophic relationship failure? Do the emerging characteristics of the dynamic complexities of the RNA "operating system" offer insights into the possibilities and requirements of governance?
Symbols have always offered a powerful means of "repairing" relationship damage, notably through their capacity to "re-mind" and to enable "re-membering":
As noted earlier there is necessarily a real challenge to symbolizing the larger integrating whole of the "pattern that connects".
As specifically argued in the case of religion by Robert Cummings Neville (The Truth of Broken Symbols, 1996), it is the challenge of the limitations of the finite being used to symbolize the infinite. As he shows through a cross-cultural analysis, religious symbols can be true in various qualified senses. There is however the curious necessity that they must be "broken" specifically in order not to be perceived as idolatrous or demonic. His treatment of reference, meaning, and interpretation, offers insights into the challenge of properly understanding symbols in order to engage transcendental realities while internally exhibiting semiotic structures of reference, meaning, and interpretation.
For religions the representation of the integrating unity of the divine is therefore necessarily poorly represented through symbols -- readily to be rejected as distortions and idolatrous. The "design challenge", addressed by Barry L. Davis (Broken Symbols, 2006) is deliberately to incorporate a sense of brokenness into the religious symbol itself. It is in this sense that it is useful to look at both helical DNA and the I Ching, both of which incorporate different forms of brokenness -- the former in the separation of the helical strands (and the incidence of "lesions") and the latter in the contrasting unbroken and broken lines (and the incidence of "misfortune"). Arguably it is this feature that allows both to encode to a greater degree the dynamics of a larger whole capable of engendering the new.
Nancy K Frankenberry (On the Very Idea of Symbolic Meaning. In: Interpreting Neville, 1999 by J Harley Chapman and Nancy Frankenberry, 1999) offers a contrasting view to that put forward by Neville:
For us postmoderns, broken religious symbols are so many shards whose jagged edges trace the shape of the absent complement, itself another symbol. We study the shape and pattern of each jagged edge to find the direction or "sense" in which to hold the symbols so as to "read" their complement. We conjure an image of broken symbols and, when joined, able to form a seamless whole, rather than "fitting with" or "corresponding to" some (undescribed) reality. The meshing of our meanings is holistic, leaving no referential edges, and thus suggesting an alternative to conventional extensionalist semantics. The "meaning" of the broken religious symbols that litter the postmodern landscape cannot be equated with "reference".
As the previous section highlighted, it is clear that the ability of religions to recognize the merit of "broken" symbols, as indicative of the partiality of the representation of higher order, has its limitations in practice. Religions have been significantly unable to bridge the broken relationships which separate them -- or to recognize them as a reminder of a higher unity. Token wisdom -- such as "a thousand ways to the top of a hill, but the view of the top is the same" -- has proven to be of very little significance to relationships between the Abrahamic faiths, for example.
It may also be asked to what extent the masonic symbolism of the winding stairs-- presumably significant for the male leadership of western society -- is really understood in ways that address the issues of relationship failure. In all such cases the question is to what extent the symbol is inactive or "dead", namely without any meaningful psychoactive function.
Reference was made above to the Human Values Project.with respect to the possibility that values might necessarily be related to the peculiar, counter-intuitive dynamics associated with the cognitive steps on the spiral stairway -- especially in the light of insights from the complexity sciences (Human Values as Strange Attractors: coevolution of classes of governance principles, 1993).
That project identified 987 "constructive" (examples), and 1992 "destructive" (examples), value words. It then used their antonymic relationship to cluster them as 225 "value polarities": Pleasantness-Unpleasantness; Resolution-Irresolution; etc. These included: Goodness-Badness; Truth-Error; Love-Hate; etc.
In the light of the argument above, it is such polarities that constitute a dynamic cognitive challenge in any relationship. One is "positive" and the other "negative", and much token commitment is given to eliminating the latter. The existential challenge in reality is how to navigate the middle way between them -- representing as they do a form of "broken symbol". The set of constructive values is then understood as associated with one strand (in DNA terms) and the destructive values with the other -- its "shadow". Any examination of the destructive values clarifies how problematic it would be to live in a world without them -- in the light of humanity's current understanding.
The question that then arose in that project was how to configure the value polarities in a more meaningful way. The approach taken then was to cluster them tentatively into a (5x9) matrix of 45 "value types":
Formally, as a matrix, this bears some resemblance to the 8x8 matrix of Levels of Existence of Clare W. Graves (Human Nature Prepares for a Momentous Leap. The Futurist, April 1974). However it should be stressed that the associated database of of the Human Values Project was integrated, to reflect the dilemmas the polarities constituted, in terms of the words underlying the "value types" and "value polarities", with two other databases profiling and linking:
Without getting locked into particular numbers and levels (or any justification for them), the question that might now be asked is how such "psychoactive" information about incommensurables might be designed into some form of helical structure -- as suggested by DNA -- that would give greater coherence to challenging relationship dynamics.
Interesting questions for brainstorming purposes might then include:
of Man by
Michelangelo (Sistine Chapel)
as an indicative representation of the subtlest relationship bond
(as discussed below with respect to base-pair hydrogen bonding and the "kiss touch")
It is important to reiterate the earlier argument that polarization of relationships, whether value polarities (as described above), strategic dilemmas, or "disagreement" necessarily implies the impossibility of containing that dynamic within a framework based on compatibility and commensurability -- on "common ground" (cf Documents relating to Polarization, Dilemmas and Duality). The nature of the dynamic makes the ground distinctly "uncommon" and characterized by paradox and counter-intuitive insight -- as exemplifed cognitively by the Zen koan. Such is the challenge of "bonding".
Indeed, if (as argued above) a "spiral staircase" (modelled by DNA) is to be understood as a powerful symbol of the challenge of psychodynamic relations, how might one expect to engage with it:
It is not with ordinary vision that the "steps" can can be rendered visible. This is the challenge of the "visions" elaborated by policymakers. The steps are only to be enactivated and sensed otherwise -- through subtler modalities of all the senses together (Walking Elven Pathways: enactivating the pattern that connects, 2006). It is in this that is to be recognized the challenge of the traditionally unfortunate relationships between the wise (Epistemological Challenge of Cognitive Body Odour: exploring the underside of dialogue, 2006)
How helpful are the paradoxical allusions of metaphorical articulation in the I Ching in giving experiential meaning to this engagement? How well do the lesions of DNA reflect the varieties of relationship failure -- and the potential for repair? What might the emerging insights regarding RNA evoke in this regard? Are these echoed in the I Ching in some way?
Curiously the terms "bond" and "bonding" are fundamental to both the molecular bonding associated with DNA and to the psychodynamics of relationships. It is these bonds which in each case enable complex structures to be built and which may be damaged, possibly beyond repair.
In both cases, however, they are readily misrepresented in a simplistic manner which obscures their subtle nature:
A seemingly quite different interpretation of Fuller's architectural tensegrity has been made by anthropologist Carlos Castaneda as a way of understanding traditional " magical passes" as the interplay of tensing and relaxing in a way that contributes to the overall integrity of the body as a physical and an energetic unit. Tensegrity is then seen as an art: "the art of adapting to one's own energy, and to each other's energy in a way that contributes to the integrity of the community that we are". [more]
Such misrepresentation is completely inappropriate to the experiential "ethereal" quality of complementarity and psychodynamic relationships -- and of how they "work", sustain and support. Here lies the challenge of "climbing" such "elven" stairways -- and of comprehending the nature of their breakdown.
There is therefore a strong case for accepting that the uncertainties of meaningful psychodynamic relationships are as complex and challenging to comprehension as is the hydrogen bonding "described" by quantum electrodynamics. Their reification into depictions as mechanical "bonds" clearly obscures what those involved experience as most essential to any human relationship -- or even to that with animals and nature. There is therefore a case for learning from the complexity and subtlety considered completely credible in the case of DNA hydrogen bonding. It is the very subtlety of such bonding that is the basis for the cognitive spiral stairway essential to the development of human understanding -- hence the "elven" sensitivity required for climbing it.
Is the Tower of Babel to be understood as an indication of the consequences of the petrification of significance, namely of inattentiveness to the subtler understanding regarding relationships (consistent with the argument above regarding DNA)? Is the Tower of Babel then an inappropriate representation of DNA -- "destroyed by God" as an inappropriate representation of the "means for mankind to reach Heaven"?
Given the earlier argument regarding the importance in the masonic tradition of the "winding stair" in King Solomon's Temple, it is curious to note that the "challenging" (Spiral) Tower card in the Tarot deck is traditionally associated with the Tower of Babel (The History of the Tower (Fire) Card). And, given that the steps on the masonic "winding stair" (mentioned earlier) number 3, 5 and 7, as the Tarot card numbered XVI, is the inappropriateness symbolically indicated by the association of the first prime number with that sequence pointing in the "wrong" direction?
Curiously, given that the arrangement of DNA strands is termed antiparallel, the asymmetric ends of DNA strands are referred to as the 5′ (five prime) and 3′ (three prime) ends. As noted above, the two strands twist around the helical axis once every 10.6 base pairs of sequence. There is a Heptad Repeat of the Coiled-coil Structure. Proceeding beyond 3, 5, and 7, the next prime is 11 (included in one version of the masonic stair), totalling then to 26, thereby offering some interesting resonances with fundamental patterns (cf Patterns of N-foldness: comparison of integrated multi-set concept schemes as forms of presentation, 1980):
An indication was provided earlier as to the nature of "DNA damage", whether of an endogenous or exogenous variety. It was described in terms of the failure of certain bonds, whose severity (and challenge to repair) might be roughly ordered as follows:
The most severe damage is associated with diseases such as cancer and their progressively fatal systemic consequences as in metastasis. Ageing might itself be considered one such "disease".
The challenge to comprehension and remedial action in the case of DNA might be usefully recognized as analogous to that in psychodynamic relationships:
Whilst these different degrees of relationship are more readily recognizable in the case of individuals, and by them with respect to their experience, equivalent patterns are also evident between groups. On a larger scale they are also evident in the breakdown of relationships between much larger groups -- whether schools of thought (notably academic disciplines), ideological movements or religious belief systems (heresies and schisms).
Contrasting examples of relationship breakdown and repair are provided by the following:
Of special interest is the possible relevance of this approach to understanding the kinds of processes which bring about civilizational collapse as explored by Jared Diamond (Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed, 2005). But of course part of the capacity to "break down" is intimately associated with pattern replication and renewal -- through reproduction. The challenge is how to distinguish fruitful from unfruitful breakdown.
|Contrasting "genetic" exacerbation of societal relationships|
Wherever modern humans, living outside the narrow social mores of
the clan, are allowed to pursue their genetic interests without constraint,
they will hurt other people. They will grab other people's resources,
they will dump their waste in other people's habitats, they will cheat,
lie, steal and kill. And if they have power and weapons, no one will
be able to stop them except those with more power and better weapons.
|If you've never heard of synbio, you will hear plenty in the next decade....
In this brave new world, they talk of a future in which synthetic biologists
will work much like graphic designers, building new organisms on their
laptops and emailing them off to the gene foundry for construction....
So beware of how we are being sold this scientific revolution with pledges to help Africa's poor and ease global warming.... creating fantastic bacteria in a contained laboratory is one thing, but what happens when they get out and cross with their wild cousins, mutating into organisms we had never foreseen?
The whole point of this science is the development of large-scale use outside a lab, but can we predict what consequences releasing these new organisms could have? The answer is a resounding no....
We might have a "new, improved nature" which is more efficient in meeting our needs and ensuring the survival of future generations: is that a threat or a promise of salvation? And who are we going to trust to make that judgment call? (Madeleine Bunting, Scientists have a new way to reshape nature, but none can predict the cost, Guardian, 22 October 2007)
|What do these together imply regarding the corresponding psychodynamic insights necessary for any adequate response?|
Gregory Bateson. Mind and Nature: a necessary unity. Hampton Press, 1979 (Advances in Systems Theory, Complexity, and the Human Sciences).
Gregory Bateson and Mary Catherine Bateson. Angels Fear: towards an epistemology of the sacred. University of Chicago Press, 1988
Gregory Bateson and Rodney E Donaldson. A Sacred Unity: Further Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Harper Collins, 1991
Michel Bauwens. A Critique of Wilber and Beck's SD-Integral. P/I: Pluralities/Integration, March 2005, # 61 [text]
Don Edward Beck and Chris C. Cowan. Spiral Dynamics: mastering values, leadership, and change. Blackwell, 1996
Carlo Bonomi and Franco Borgogno. The Broken Symbol: the fear of the mind of the Other in the symbolic history of the individual. International Forum of Psychoanalysis, 15, 2006, pp. 169-177 [abstract]
J Harley Chapman and Nancy Frankenberry. Interpreting Neville, SUNY, 1999 [extracts]
Luc de Brabandère:
Joël de Rosnay. The Macroscope. Harper and Row, 1979 [text]
Jared Diamond. Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. New York, Viking Books, 2005
A. P. Elkin. Aboriginal Men of High Degree: initiation and sorcery in the world's oldest tradition. Inner Traditions, 1993
Grazyna Fosar and Franz Bludorf. Spiritual Science: DNA is influenced by words and frequencies. In: Vernetzte Intelligenz: Die Natur geht online. Gruppenbewusstsein, Genetik, Gravitation. Omega Verlag Bongart-Meier . [text]
Susantha Goonatilake. Toward a Global Science: mining civilizational knowledge. Indiana University Press, 1999
Clare W Graves:
George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. Philosophy in the Flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought, Basic Books, 1999
Albert G. Mackey. The Masonic Legend of the Winding Stairs. Kessinger Publishing, 1882/2005
Thomas Moore. Planets Within: the astrological psychology of Marsilio Ficino. Lindisfarne Books, 1990 (Studies in Imagination Series)
Jeremy Narby. The Cosmic Serpent: DNA and the origins of knowledge. Tarcher: 1999 [summary]
Echol Nix. Ernst Troeltsch and Robert Neville: two methodologies for discerning Christian normativity. Comparative Theology Engaging Particularities Conference Papers, Boston College, 2007 [text]
Robert Cummings Neville. The Truth of Broken Symbols. New York, State University of New York Press, 1996
Darrell A. Posey. Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity: a complementary contribution to Global Biodiversity Assessment. Intermediate Technology, 1999 (for the United Nations Environment Programme)
Sutton Pub and D. P. Walker. Spiritual and Demonic Magic: from Ficino to Campanella. Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000
John Ralston Saul. The Unconscious Civilization. House of Anansi, 1995
Martin Schonberger. The I Ching and the Genetic Code: the hidden key to life. New York, ASI Publishers Inc., 1979
Henryk Skolimowski. Participatory Mind: a new theory of knowledge and of the universe. Arkana/Penguin, 1994
Katya McCall Walter. Tao of Chaos: merging East and West, Element Books, 1996
Kuang-ming Wu. On Metaphoring: a cultural hermeneutic. Brill, 2001 [extracts]
Johnson F. Yan. DNA and the I Ching: the Tao of life. North Atlantic Books, 1993
Frances A Yates. The Art of Memory. Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966
Homer L. Zurrwalt. A Study of the Winding Staircase. [From the 1989 Transactions (Illinois Lodge of Research), 1989; Southern California Research Lodge, May 1990 [text]
Connie Zweig and Jeremiah Abrams (Eds). Meeting the Shadow: the hidden power of the dark side of human nature. Los Angeles, Jeremy P Tarcher, 1991
Connie Zweig. The Holy Longing: the hidden power of spiritual yearning. Jeremy P Tarcher, 2003
For further updates on this site, subscribe here