(To the Century of a Fatal Flaw)
• NATURAL EGOISM
• HUMAN EGOISM
HUMANISM against EGOISM
MATERIALITY of INFORMATION
EFFICACY of PSYCHE
REALITY of REINCARNATION
BEYONDgenetic mechanism of HEREDITY
PREDEFINITENESS of the BIRTH
REFERENCE POINT for the FUTURE
PRACTICE of ALTRUISM
Tendencies of egoistical behaviour are a human being’s nature. We inherit them from our biological primogenitors, from phylogenetic ancestors. As applied to animals, egoism is the same that survival ability. That species has advantages, individuals of which are stronger, defter, more clever or artful. And use of the same advantages over one's congeners is just the egoism. If our ancestors were not egoists, they would perish as a species, lost the concurrent struggle in natural selection (by Ch. R. Darwin). At that egoism was cultivated during evolution develops: the same qualities provided advantages at a sexual partner choice, and, hence, provided transfer of just these egoistical properties to descendants.
essentially differs from the animal one. With occurrence of institute of the property, with occurrence of a civilization on this base, natural egoism, which essence can be presented with the formula
was inverted, has begun to correspond to the formula
I'm better – therefore I have,
Precisely enough, though without sharp borders, three modifications of this specifically human egoism are differentiated –
I have – therefore I'm better.
(1) – egoism of type I have more, better, than others makes greed, avidity, avarice, money-grubbing, hoarding, "narrow-minded consuming",
(2) – egoism of type others have less, worse, than I have makes enviousness, aspirations not only (or much than!) to increase value of own property, but also to reduce value of other's one; for example, by its misappropriation or destruction; vandalism may be included here too,
(3) – egoism of type only I have makes imperiousness, painful jealousy, aspiration to conquer, to subjugate all and everything.
So egoism which was initially a factor directed towards improvement of a species, increase of its suitability, vitality, viability, has turned into a factor harming to the species of Homo sapiens for it approves rough, low force to the detriment of subtle, specifically human properties.
HUMANISM against EGOISM
It is clear from this, that just opposite to egoism, the altruistic behaviour of each separate person corresponds to interests of whole species of Homo sapiens. And really, there are well-known efforts, attempts to get rid of an egoistical, animal heritage, and to get rid of it everybody too.
Humanistic institutes of our civilization – i.e. religious trends and humanitarian branches of the science – put forward altruistic, humane slogans of type “love your neighbour”. Possibly, this tendency of protection for a weak against an arbitrariness, against an injustice a strong, has arisen already before occurrence of the human egoism, still in the primitive society, irrespective of the individual property institute becoming, in those days, when experience and wisdom of an old age has become more appreciated than force and courage of a youth.
But humanitarian slogans mainly remain only slogans. Egoism dominates mainly at all levels: both at the personal, and at the collective – family, professional, regional ones etc. It is especially ugly at the state level, manifesting itself in the forms of military aggression, absolute monarchy etc.
Altruistic slogans badly work (or do not work at all) because the individual logic contradicts the public one. The individual logic speaks: even if my altruism is really in interests of the whole Homo sapiens species, in interests of its evolution, so all the same, evolution is the cause of future, but I live hic et nunc, and I live only ONCE.
This logic is based on natural sciences conception which is neutral concerning egoism, as it were above ethics, beyond ethics. By default, it recommends allegedly just practical approach: if you hope for impunity – you may act egoistically, if you do not hope – refrain.
Such is the situation today.
MATERIALITY of INFORMATION
The science about the Nature, natural sciences is completely based upon a concept of what's matter really.
If a mistake ingratiate itself into this concept, the whole building of the science turns out to stand on a curve base. Just in such a situation the science
consecutive in his innovation – just as Kopernik too, who has transferred the center of the Universe from the Earth onto the Sun, but has not refused this notion at all. Nevertheless we shouldn’t blame them for this: we learn children to speak thanks for a candy, but not give still more. Don't we?
remains already 100 years. The concept about matter is internally contradictory.
On the one hand, formally, any objective reality is admitted as matter, this is by Lenin, and this is correct. Exactly 100 years ago his ÌEC was published.
On the other hand, in fact, only a part of reality is admitted as matter, this is by Lenin too, but this is erroneous. Only substance and energy are admitted as matter, but not information in spite of it exists not less really and objectively.
Before this publication only substance has been admitted as matter, it was by Paul Holbach (1723-89). And still before, by Rene Descartes (1596-1650), also only substance has been admitted as matter, but the criterion of materiality was another, it was extent but not massiveness. Evidently, Descartes, being both the naturalist and the philosopher, was nevertheless the mathematician in a greater degree. And orthogonal coordinates are named cartesian. Just he is the author of analytical geometry.
The merit of Lenin, who has changed conception about matter, is not less than the merit of Kopernik, who has changed conception about space. But Lenin was not
EFFICACY of PSYCHE
The falsity of the concept which does not admit materiality of information, idea,
psyche as a whole, is revealed not only by logic, by the inner contradiction, but also by practice. Psyche is a working reality, a reality influencing upon physical objects.
There is a great number of the facts proving it. We’ll be limit ourselves to three cases.
(1) a patient’s AP can be measured by the character of a pendulum movements above its hand. This method works just because –
• the information about the measured magnitude exists objectively irrespective of whether someone is interested in this information or not, whether this information became someone's knowledge or not
• an operator’s psyche influences upon a pendulum, upon a physical object, the psyche regulates its movement.
(2) An American psychiatrist Stanislav Grof notices (1976): it is interesting from the theoretical point of view, that it is possible to experience pains and other sensations concerning to earlier operations made under a deep general narcosis [ 31, pp. 37], – i.e. in condition when the brain has been reliably blocked from receipt of any information by physical channels.
However, S. Grof (born 1931) has not explain this phenomenon just from the theoretical point of view just because he investigates a brain, its functions, but not psyche as such, not memory.
It is interesting to observe, how a researcher, runing into a barest necessity to draw a conclusion, stops – and does NOT do it. Similarly V.I. Vernadsky/Â.È. Âåðíàäñêèé (1863-1945) has stopped. Discussing the questions connected with a problem of the noosphere, admitting efficiency of a thought (1944), he has noticed as a paradox [ 20b ]: Thought is not a form of energy. So how can it change material processes?
The thought direction is quite right: only something material can influence upon matter. It would seem, the only necessary is to unite these two phrases: An idea can change material processes, and therefore ...]
REALITY of REINCARNATION
(3) Researches of another American psychiatrist, Ian Stevenson, (1918-2007) have exterminated any opportunity to doubt of reality of reincarnation. He has revealed more than 200 cases when people who remember their previous embodiments/incarnations have inborn anatomic anomalies – skeleton and/or skin features, precisely corresponding to damages (fatal or not), received during their previous incarnations/embodiment [ 163-4 ].
Three of these cases are seemed to us the most convincing.
Photo ISt-1: a rough cicatricial growth of novus (from Homo novus – a new person, in the current life) skin in the place, corresponding to the fatal trauma received by him as a senex (from Homo senex – a previous person).
Photo ISt-2: senex fingers were cut off in an agricultural machine of a guillotine type.
Photo ISt-3: senex was perished under a train wheels, and the first of several traumas was just amputation of the right leg.
Reliability of all (210) such cases is confirmed by the methods, considered as incontestable presently in our society – by testimonies and documents (1), and also (2) by a method of evident demonstration which is used to statement of the most elementary, but also the most doubtless (!) trues, type of 2õ2=4.
BEYONDgenetic mechanism of HEREDITY /ÍÀÑËÅÄÑÒÂÅÍÍÎÑÒÜ
The reality of reincarnation is evidence of existence of two (but not one!) mechanisms of transfer of the hereditary information, working simultaneously and mutually independently.
The other mechanism is beyond-genetic (LS-mechanism), individual, additional to the species one; it is new for TAS. By this way information –
One of them is genetic, basic, main (or the M-mechanism), which is well-known to MAS (the modern academic science), it is studied by genetics. By this way the
information is transferred –
• peculiar to ALL individuals (representatives) a biological species
• saved up in time and course of evolution
• coded into physical carriers, DNA molecules
• using a direct contact, i.e. physical carrying of DNA from an organisms of alive ancestors (parents) into a descendant’s organism.
Decoding of this information occurs –
• according to natural laws,,
•• revealed by the author beyond the reincarnation problem, and
•• registered by ÌÀÀÍÎ/IAASD (International Academy of Authors of Scientific Discoveries) in 1999 [20à].
• continuously during a life course (both at ancestors, and descendants – the same) from the
conception and up to the death, that is brightly shown stage by stage (periodically), for example (at the species of Homo sapiens) per change of the dairy teeth by the constant ones and per practically full organism reorganization at the pubertal period.
• from an already dead organism, from senex to a growing one, to novus is passed (without any intermediate transferring agent!) with time interval from the senex death to the novus conception
• unique, peculiar to a senex and only to him, in particular – information about traits not inherited from his ancestors but got in his lifetime, for example – about traumatic damages of his body.
• without coding, directly, in “cleanly” metaphysical, properly informational form, and
• without any physical contact (distantly, by only informational contacts),
• which is overlapped (can be overlapped) on the species information after its decoding, at the first ontogenesis stages (at the prenatal period), though cases of later intrusionsand even short-term intrusions are known too, both of them both spontaneous and provoked by special methods.
Thus, two hereditary mechanisms – (M) and (LS) – control transfer of the hereditary information from two different sources to a person WHO inherits it, to the individual perceiving it, but it’s better to name him differently to prevent mess of (M) and (LS):
with reference to the M-mechanism we name him a child (of alive parents),
with reference to the LS-mechanism – a novus (more strictly: so may be named only the one who spontaneously – without using any special techniques – recollects himself as the senex).
It is possible to interpret both of the mechanisms similarly as mechanisms of memory:
the M-mechanism uses collective memory of a whole species;
the LS-mechanism uses a unique memory of an individual who has left or lost a body of his senex, and has got a body of his novus.
In the rest they differ entirely –
(1) – by the source of the inherited material, i.e. FROM WHOM the information is transferred;
(2) – by the way of transfer the inherited material i.e. HOW the information is transferred – per contact or distantly;
(3) – by presence (M) or absence (LS) of a physical code (or process of coding-decoding), i.e. by the FORM of transfer of the information; its coding on DNA occurs during of the evolution course, phylogenesis, and decoding – during ontogenesis;
(4) – by object of inheritance, i.e. by WHAT is transferred and inherited –
by the LS-mechanism the individual information, not inherited by a senex from his ancestors, got by him during his life, additional to the species information passes (at least it can pass) from the senex to himself as the novus;
by the M-mechanism the hereditary information of a species (and all its traits, attributes) is transferred: an ape is born with four hands, but a human being – with only two, but with feet;
LS-mechanism can be associated with the name of Lamarck (Jean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, Chevalier de Lamarck, 1744-1829), the French aristocrat, the professional scientist, the academician who has essentially enriched the science, the author of the first evolutionary theory and of the term biology itself. But with two clauses:
Just a foot but not hand (as it is generally accepted today) has allowed to an ape to turn into a person. Beginnings of a heel, development of a calcaneal/heel bone, has transformed a hand into a foot, that has given the sufficient stability for the body, and that has allowed to liberate hands for creative activity. ]
• Lamarck wrongly believed that individual traits are transferred (and are inherited) so the same as also the species’, i.e. from ancestors to descendants by direct (physical) contact; and
• the subject of his explorations were the individual traits arising as reaction to change of environment and of a way of life (which were just the cause of evolution by his opinion), but not at all traits caused by vicissitudes of life, not such as traumatic or disease damages.
Only now, owing to Stevenson's (S) works, it becomes clear how much close Lamarck (L) was to understanding of laws, but not of mechanisms of a heredity-variability.
The first (the statistical) laws of the M-mechanism functioning were revealed by Gregor Johann MENDEL (1822-84), the Austrian monk (Gregor is his spiritual name); he was from peasant family, was an abbey of the St. Avgustin monastery in Brün (Dual Monarchy; nowadays Brno, Czechia); he was one of founders of a local (Brün) societies of naturalists; he has made his discovery checking the statements which have been put forward by Lamarck; at that Mendel has outstripped his time over approximately half a century: his publication – Experiences on vegetative hybrids / Versuche über den Pflanzenhybriden (1866) – have been recollected only in the beginning of the XX century when technical capabilities were arose to peep into a cell, to observe how it is divided, and when rapid develop of genetics has begun; (just then time has come and "the idea soared in air" already) and then three (!) scientists have repeated his discovery (everyone of them independently!).
PREDEFINITENESS of the BIRTH
Ian Stevenson's finds are unique by their evident persuasiveness, but they are not unique inherently at all. More likely it is on the opposite. More likely each person bears in himself (sometimes hidden till a time) both the weight of traumas of former embodiments (including physical traumas), and a stock (an arsenal or an inventory) of skills got then (congenital, natural talents and/or propensities).
Probably (the author has no experimental data, confirming this), the higher senex intelligence level was, the more degree of influence of his individuality upon novus development is.
On the other hand, ideas of eugenics are seemed hopeless. Only properties and traits which are characteristic to ALL individuals of a species – including Homo sapiens – can be inherited by biological material.
This is supported by joint analysis of facts concerning three separated (at the first sight) data bodies – of astrology, chirology and bio-medicine.
(1). Tendencies, and often concrete circumstances too, of vital situations are interconnected with a birth horoscope of a person. How much precisely these tendencies are deciphered and interpreted – it depends on a level of abilities of an astrologist-interpreter, but the interrelation itself is doubtless.
A horoscope is unequivocally connected with a place and moment of a birth.
(2). The horoscope is precisely enough interconnected with chirological (or chiromantical) figure (on a palm). This figure is actually described by astrology terms.
(3). This figure on a palm is formed BEFORE (not after!) the birth.
Hence as far back as a child birth the information exists
about parameters of his (future!) horoscope,
about the moment and place of his (future!) birth,
hence the moment and place of his birth are predetermined, i.e. they are not casual,
hence there are tendencies providing this predefiniteness.
This can become a starting point for essentially new direction of researches, for a new branch of natural sciences, of biology (? an astrobiology).
REFERENCE POINT for the FUTURE
As far as the urgency of the problems which have arisen in the previous life (in the previous lives) can be kept in the present one, so problems produced today can pass into the subsequent one (ones) too. This logic conclusion has practical confirmation in works of the same S. Grof.
Conflicts are firm. In order to destroy or to neutralize their material, informational base efforts are required which are not less painful (in principle) than the conflicts itself: Every time when traumatic event includes an interpersonal situation, a person, experiencing it under LSD influence, should apparently pass and experience [roles of] all its participants. So, if the basic theme is an aggressive attack, he should go through both roles of a victim, including all emotional and physical feelings, and of an aggressor. If the person was an observer of such event, he should as a result go through all the three roles [ 31 , ñòð. 75, ðàçäåë "Ïðîÿâëåíèå ÑÊÎ (ñèñòåìû êîíäåíñèðîâàííîãî îïûòà) â ËÑÄ-ñåàíñàõ"].
The combination of probability of reincarnation for you (for each separate person), and probability of your future experience of sufferings of a victim of your egoism, , and probability of your future experience of sufferings of a victim of your egoism, pushes (not simply allows to come to, but pushes!) to the conclusion about expediency of tactical altruism – to the conclusion from a position of NOT another's interests, but from one's own interests, from the positions of concrete-practical egoism, but strategic egoism, for prospect, not for this very moment, not tactical egoism.
As it has been shown, human egoism (not animal, natural) is based on possession of some property. But a person takes along for a new life not any property (he is born naked and dog-poor), but anther luggage – the informational one. And the less conflicts will be arisen in it through his fault, because of his egoism, the more favorable tendencies of the following (those very predetermining) embodiment will be.
WANDERING and a WAY
So the position of that natural sciences (in relation to egoism) which admits materiality of information, the position of HYPERphysical materialism draws together with the religious position, gives the scientific substantiation to religious altruistic recommendations.
Here a principle possibility arises of beginnings of a civilization of the new type based not on a shaky support of the faith, but a strong one of the knowledge, but the knowledge based not on physical, limited materialism, but on HYPERphysical one.
A mother is orientated for the welfare of her children before (in a greater measure, than) for herself. It is natural, it is peculiar to animals too – as well as the natural egoism. If ALL society members – not only mothers, not only women – being intentionally guided by principles of the tactical altruism, of type “love your neighbour”, would be disposed motherly to the society and to other society members, so a civilization will rise of the conscious-, ideological-matriarchy type.
Just such a society providing general security, based on (mutual) encouragement, instead of on suppression (dictatorship – whether it would be of a class, or of a person – any), would correlate to the concept of "communistic", and at that irrespective of a level of its economic and technical progress. To construct such a society on the basis of the today's society of the ideologically-patriarchal type, by means of only material abundance, is impossible: in it there will never be something enough for somebody.
The conscious-matriarchal society is not expected as at all non-conflict one, but character of conflicts will change. There will become impossible troublemaking-household, harmful, ill-intentioned conflicts.
All offered till now ideas of transition to a such a kind of society – of general security and benevolence were utopian, because they defined only a final goal, but not a way to it. Movement without a certain way is an infinite, unpromising wandering. To move in a correct direction is more important, than to move quickly. The conscious-matriarchal society intended/marked as an intermediate, a support aim, as a reference point, transforms an infinite way into a final one. Though the purpose is seemed the same immeasurably far, there is a principle difference. Wanderings turn into a way. Though also the way is seemed the same immeasurably long, but time starts to work in favour of a going one. It concerns society as a whole.
PRACTICE of ALTRUISM
About each member of a society – it is easier. Human egoism (not natural, not animal) is overcome by reason. To bring an idea of responsibility for the one’s behaviour to his consciousness, to acceptance it as the one’s own idea – it is a business of pedagogics.
And if such comprehension is not enough, if atavistic instincts (natural, animal egoism), habits, psyche dependences/obsessions are too strong, if a person wishes but cannot to operate reasonably – so this is already a business of Fundamental psychology (a part, a section of HYPERphysical materialism). It’s methods can be used passively and actively. They allow
(1) in a few minutes to receive (passively) liberation from an obsession – not only from egoistical one, and
(2) to possess (active) methods of (active) struggle against the egoism, by means of (active) help to other people, in particular, methods of healing – improving by direct influence mental, without help of physical agents.
Instead of CONCLUSION.
Unfortunately, this material cannot be presented for wide discussion otherwise, but through Networks (in electronic form): the degree of its scientific novelty is so high, that it does not allow to get opinions-recommendations necessary for the publication at the order existing now in the academic press.
It is one of those cases when too well – is badly too.