Consilience As A Unifying Principle

Consilience As A Unifying Principle

Definition of consilience

the linking together of principles from different disciplines especially when forming a comprehensive theory

Examples of consilience in a Sentence

But, ultimately, the consilience of doing and being is essential.

This section will examine how the principle of consilience is the connector and contextualizer of all our work here in this library. In this initial section, we’ll look at some of the assumptions and biases we’re proposing as lenses through which we can see our work here, and to speak to why it is crucial to do so in the crypto-economic space.

It should be noted that discussing the nature of First Principles is ALWAYS a challenge. It is EASY to talk about “The Ten Thousand Things”, but hard to discuss how 2 becomes 1, but this is what consilience is. Worse, our legacy cultural codebase outside crypto has given us a kind of bias against learning these topics, which are also, unhelpfully. often counter-intuitive in nature. Finally, we have often encountered such terms couched in religious and spiritual terminology that is also highly charged and nearly always misunderstood or mischaracterized.

It is my intention to be your guide in these waters and to explain why and how you MUST learn to think in commonalities and to learn how to make connections instead of divisions.

I will arrange these principles in terms of how we will proceed to discuss them, so we can see that our work here is not only grounded in crypto-economics, but also can be contextualized in terms of our humanity, human’s shared way of making sense of the world, and why forgetting to contextualize yourself all the way back to first principles will only produce more of the harms crypto-economic systems are attempting to alleviate.

Consilience exists as a unifying directionality relationship between doing and being. The changing and the unchanging. What is unchanging inside the changing and what is changing projected upon the unchanging, and finally we can see that which is common between the changing as it travels toward the unchanging, accumulating context as it goes.

Principle 0: HUMILITY: No Mental Model Is Real

  • In order to ethically proceed in discussions, we MUST grasp that we CANNOT speak the truth in any form. We can only create a map of reality, but we must never mistake the map for the territory itself.

  • From this humble position, we can speak more appropriately about the nature of what we are talking about, and seek to ever assess our limited representational realities as a Working Hypothesis, abandoned at any moment in favor of a better, more kind and good, more beautiful, more true, more paradoxical model.

  • It is from this we can also see that the process of CI or Continuous Improvement is a direct implication from this humble position, as we can therefore see that it will only be the models and approximations we make about the reality that must change and improve and become ever more inclusive and therefore paradoxical in nature as we get closer to the real truth.

  • I have placed this Principle 0 here to acknowledge the fundamental nature of Reality Itself, but since we cannot ever speak or language about this Reality in ways that are not extremely confusing, I will not say more about it, although you can feel free to ask me about it when we talk.

Principle 1: Neuro-Anatomy Of Humans

As humans, we share a neuro-anatomy, and in our Western society, we consider (even though I do not) the “brain” as the origin of consciousness, since we are bound to the social expectation of a materialistic approach to lensing our reality.

I will make this assumption a part of my approach here, even if I do not agree with that at all as a conclusion. So, consilience will be considered to be united with the idea of contextualization, finding commonalities between the different names and forms and petals of the crypto-economics flower, while not being beholden to them.

Thus you can see that the layer of abstraction I am placing above all others here is that of the brain, and I’m proceeding from there to speed up making the material practical, applicable, and relevant to a general audience.

Two aspects of the brain that are NOT opposites, and to see how one type of thinking includes the other and how Principle 0 is largely dependent upon the purest form of Unified Thinking available. A degraded form of Unified Thinking is what we’re speaking about here, and this will largely be seen in terms of the directionality of intent- that is to say: Contextualization or Decontextualization.

So, while it may appear that I am posing a duality here, I need it to be seen that this is not strictly TRUE.

Going forward, where I will speak this duality as though it is true, understand that it is not STRICTLY so, but is done for the purposes of expedience, relevancy, and applicability.

  • Left Brain

    • Divided Thinking

    • Decontextualization (directionality)

    • Reductionist

    • Ego

    • Memory Of Past/Projection Of Future

    • Manifest/Materialist

    • Identity

    • Names/Forms

    • Concepts (including time, i.e. past and future)

    • Unified Thinking

    • Contextualization (directionality)

    • Consilience

    • Unmanifest/Consciousness

    • Present Moment

    • CANNOT see ANY differences of any kind

Principle 2: Causality, Directionality, Dimensionality, Geometry, Math, Developmentalism, Systems, Complexity, Iteration, Evolution: Many Names For Generations of Dependent Origination

  • The idea of independence depends upon the idea of dependence
  • When 1 becomes 2, Directionality is created, giving rise to a need to trace back Causality later on
  • When Unity becomes Diversity, how do we know which “direction” we are going?
  • These different names are REALLY a Unity inside a Diversity, identified by various qualities:
  • Applicability* Relevance* Capability* Appropriateness* Integrality* Lines, Levels, States, Types, Colors* Each word we use is a contextual-based summary of a chain of causality and dependencies, tracing back to First Principles inherent at the division from 1 to 2.Each of the above is an example of a meta-contextualization of a series of other principles, taken together as a corpus. In this way, we can also see the crypto-economics flower:

This Consilience Principle is intended to serve as a way to contextualize and bind together in a Unifying way all of these petals, but also provide a way to see them against the backdrop of crypto-economics, why it has become necessary, what it is intended to solve, who is it solving these problems FOR, and the social pressures that gave rise to the abuses crypto-economics is trying to solve.

Thus, we can see that crypto-currency is more a social movement than technology, and is intended to create a more UNIFIED way to approach all of these.

Seen properly, extractive, abusive, isolating, decontextualizing, asymmetric mentalities naturally give rise to economic systems that are extractive, abusive, isolating, asymmetric, and decontextualizing.

More than this, they specifically build barriers, social mores, modes of thinking, and biases against unification in ways that are so normalized, we fail to see them anymore. We swim in these waters every day, so as these particular fish, we cannot see beyond that water.

seed curations