Whoever Defines the Argument Has Already Won (Part 4)

How did we come to see things the way we do? What events defined us? How are we informed? How do the defining forces and information contained within nature influence what we experience now as being? What role can and do we play in participating in the defining process?

If we trace the meaning of the English word “order” backward in time as far as the murky depths of history will allow, we see its early modern “subjective life” was a description of persons living as a group under a shared religious discipline. Religious orders were (and are) communities living apart from the rest of society, separated by devotion to certain rituals and practices believed to be sacred by the group. The behaviors and ideas that define an order of this type were typically laid out by a founder and later preserved by a committed group of devotees who would preserve the activity through time.

Further back in time, the word order can be traced to an earlier French word ordre. This meant “position, estate, rule, regulation, or religious order” Still earlier was the word “ordene”. This emerged from a still older Latin word; “ordinem”, which meant “row, line, rank; series, pattern, arrangement, or routine. The earliest roots are thought to mean a row of threads in a loom. The origin story of order gets fuzzier from there.

The meaning of words transforms over time. All descriptive words are an attempt to identify a certain domain of persistent patterns – a coherent object of some particular type – an order. We distinguish various “things” from their surroundings by way of the self-similar patterns that differentiate one ordered structure from another. A body of water is distinguished from the landscape and atmosphere that surrounds it by way of specific patterns. The objective forms we see expressed as objects in the natural world are identified by patterns. Unlike verbs which describe the animated relationship between objects, nouns originate from the naming of objective forms.

The word order is now generally associated with the condition of logical, coherent, or comprehensible arrangements of parts operating together as a whole. Related parts centered on a unified purpose are “ordered”. The shared purpose can be built of ideas, people, physical parts, or any combination. Ordered systems are built on relationship bonds that form a coherent whole – a pattern in the mist. This is not to say all orders are constructive. Order makes large-scale integrity of objective forms possible. Along with planets and stars which are ordered systems, businesses, organizations, organisms, and societies are organized by way of specific order.

Agreement on which side of the road to drive and so on are the roots of coherent social bodies. Order is when separate elements relate to each other in a specifically patterned way. This pattern – this agreement between parts – is what we sense as coherent. Ordered forms express coherent reliable expressions. They have a predictable quality that persists through time as long as the rules that govern the order nourish and protect it as a coherent form. We are products of order. The essence of the idea of order involves the emergence of relationships that contribute to the property of coherence.

Order is the means by which structures persist in the context of their local environment. Nature is a selection matrix that favors relationships that contribute to persistent coherence. This natural economics of relationships defines the patterns of relationships that emerge as coherent forms from the environmental womb. These patterns persist by way of contributing value as nourishing and protective agents of form. A membrane of coherence is how we sense distinct objects. Over time a development process of increasingly complex coherent patterns occurs. Patterns join with others to produce more layered and complex forms of order. These are still built around the principle value of nourishing and protecting coherence. The principle economic currency of relationships that emerge in nature is based on whether the return of coherence value is greater than the cost of generating it. This is the birthplace of the current state of patterns that have emerged so far, including us.

If the scientific map of past cosmological history is correct, base elements like hydrogen and helium were formed from an energetic field. This foundation of order led to stars that produced higher elements. This generated a platform for more complex relationship environments such as clusters, galaxies, and nebulae. This matrix of relationships is the one we now dwell in and of which we are made. This directional flow toward order is based on the relationships that contribute most to coherence in the context of their local environment. We are part of this grand developmental story.

Relationships that form in the past become the defining womb that makes the present possible. This transformational journey of emergence sets the stage for the future. The constant in the ever-changing forms we experience as nature is relationships that are able to produce persistent patterns are what persist as coherent objects. Objects are born of the defining properties of the environmental womb from which they emerge. The environment is the governing body that gives rise to form. There is a parent-child aspect to this development process. Depending on perspective, the environment and objects within them are intertwined in a parent-child relationship. Necessity really is the mother of invention.

What does nature say about our place? Who are we, where did we come from, and where are we going? What is our story and what role, if any, do we play in it? Questions like these have typically been the domain of religious narratives – explanatory stories that differ widely from culture to culture but share common plot narrative structures within them. These culture-orienting maps formed and propagated in the context of local social and cultural environments and blended as humans began developing trade routes, serving as a way of explaining place, origin, and destination. They are the lens through which we understand ourselves. Although the maps differ on the surface, they share a common root. Nature is the source of the story. We will explore this connection deeper in part 5.

Whoever Defines the Argument Has Already Won (Part 3)

Nature is a relationship economy built on a currency of coherence. It is self-evident that some relationship expressions work in nature and some don’t. The relationships that work, persist and tend to replicate. This favoritism of the patterns of relationship that contribute coherence value over those that do not generate self-similar patterns of behavior. These cyclic patterns of relationship are expressions of nature’s value system. We see this expression of patterned forms as objects. The currency of value in nature is coherence.

Biologically speaking, we are defined by a set of chemical and electric signals and responses. These relationships are centered on nourishing and defending the continuation of our coherent form in the context of the environment. The local biological relationship economy we call “human” requires a certain threshold of devotion to responding effectively to the necessities of remaining coherent in the context of the local environment. Like all organisms, indeed all objects, we are defined by our place. The environment is the defining womb in which objective forms are born and develop. We are one of the many story arcs of development expressed by nature.

Repeating patterns of environmental influence are responded to with patterns of perception and response centered on the value of coherence. Environments make defining statements about what is necessary to exist. Objects in these contexts become resonant responses to these necessities. This “statement and resonant reply” pattern expressed through nature may be why we are so tickled by music as a species. Music is composed of patterns of statements and resonant responses.

For an object to exist over time a resonant response to the regular patterns expressed by the environment must be present for an objective form to remain coherent. Because the environment is an expression of ordered patterns as well as a certain amount of random (chaos), a devotion to resonant patterns must be coupled with attendance to less cyclic and or novel environmental conditions. Objects must occasionally contend with discord to remain coherent. When the need for novel adaptation arises, as organisms, we are tuned to search for novel ways to adapt – we are driven to participate in a quest to defend and or restore equilibrium when it is threatened by antagonistic expressions of value. We are compelled at times to find our place again – to contend effectively with remaining coherent under new conditions.

Nature expresses more than process. Meaning is conveyed through the structure. Our story, for instance, is one of a journey of discovery and participation in the necessary devotion to a proportional blend of ritual and adaptation to novelty. This meaning expressed through our objective form is because we are a coherent expression of nature. The natural womb that conceived and fed us is what we reflect. It was and is our guide and instructor. As a blend of order and chaos, we are patterns interspersed with a specific attendance to novelty. We see this reflected in our individual and community stories. If we sample organized systems on various scales we see the defining marks of nature’s shaping hand. Objects contend with whatever is necessary to remain coherent in their environmental context. We are defined by our place.

Because biological organisms are tuned to resonate with the necessities of remaining coherent, our form is a reflection of both the regular patterns of expression of varying cyclic length in the environment as well as a certain capacity to perceive and respond to comparatively unique, random influences. Since this pattern of regularity and novelty is what the current environment looks like, we are a mirror image of these defining necessities. When we harmonically resonate with the defining call of the environment, the reward is continuing coherence. When our behavioral expressions drift too far from harmonic resonance, we become incoherent.

Because organisms must be a blend of consistency and adaptability to exist in nature’s defining matrix, a consistent pattern of properties in objective structure emerges. For instance; a stratified system of well-conserved patterns at the core of coherent organized structures. The relationships between these core structures is based on mutual benefit. They need to respond to each other’s needs in order for each to exist. This core architecture is surrounded by increasingly more flexible adaptive expressions that persist based on their coherence value. This blend of qualities defines coherent objects. Nature is the womb that defines objective forms. The more harmonic the objective response to the defining properties of the environment we are baptized in, the more persistent our coherence.

In developmental biology, local groups of cells that are fine-tuned to perceive a range of signals and respond in specific ways give rise to the various cell types, organs, and systems that contribute to what we know as a fully formed human. The development of specific morphological structures such as organs, the vascular and immune systems emerge from this defining matrix. This perception and response engine tuned to the local necessities of coherence is the grammar on which the language of objects is expressed. What is coherent or incoherent is based on a relationship economy with a central currency of value. That value is based on denominations of coherence. That which lends itself to serving coherence best is valued most. Evidence of this is how frequent and persistent the form is across space and time.

Quarks and atoms of the first order like hydrogen and helium were nature’s first fruits. These objective seeds gave rise to stars which gave rise to higher elemental forms. This led to the language of chemical evolution and eventually resulted in biological evolution. This includes us. We are a testament to the way nature’s developmental process produces structures built on the currency of coherence. The nested architectures in service of coherence from which we are composed is an expression of this value system. It also signals a way forward that depends on how aligned our expressions are with the necessities of coherence. Do we nourish and defend the environmental womb that nourishes and defends us? The response to this question determines whether we will persist or not.

Whoever Defines the Argument Has Already Won (Part 2)

Organisms have a conceptual map of the internal and external world etched into the fabric of the biological rhythms that define their being. It is coupled with a response engine oriented toward effectively negotiating the environment over time. The map is inclined to be useful more so than accurate. The relationship matrix that defines organisms is based on a currency of coherence. Whatever perception-response combination lends itself to enabling a relationship body to persist over time is valued over those without this contributory value.

Each species is tuned by the relationship between its existing structure and the environment. A pattern of evaluating events in terms of their constructive, neutral, or destructive value emerges. This spectrum of perception values motivates a response engine aimed at nourishing and or defending the continuation of the pattern. Long before our species developed the ability to map objects and properties with words, we already had a well-developed non-verbal map. Our objective perception and response engine is based on serving the continuation of existing patterns, in the same way, our symbolic perception and response maps are also oriented around this same utility. If accuracy is not useful, we tend to perceive what is useful as valuable. This value bias is often confused with what is true.

The biochemical and energetic signal pathways orchestrated between atoms and molecules within a coherent biological system use the same perception and response motif we see at large scales like multicellular organisms and ecosystems. Short-term perception and response architectures at micro scales differ only in the interval and frequency of occurrence, not in their tendency to gravitate toward support of continuing coherence. These small-scale relationship patterns are situated in larger-scale communities. At all levels perception and response engines favor coherence as the central value. Relationship behaviors that do not contribute to coherence in local environmental contexts are either rejected by the existing coherent system, or that influence diminishes and or destroys that existing system in favor of a new paradigm. In the latter case, the system is redefined by the new formative agent.

The relationship dynamics required to nourish and defend coherent systems in the context of the local natural environment is the mandate of all coherent objects in nature. We are no exception. Because of this, constructive and destructive are relative perspectives. What is constructive to one system may be destructive to another. Each system also has some necessity to sacrificially redefine portions of itself and or the local environment in order to maintain its coherence. Whatever leads to a more coherent and sustained pattern in the context of the local environment is favored over that which does not and the redefinition that occurs in this process of being spawns change over time. We see this as a developmental arc, a story of a seminal form that progresses to a mature state. We are living monuments to this natural fact. This is the essence of our story as told by nature.

In the case of humans, local biological perceptions and responses define internal relationship economies inside and between cells. These small-scale expressions produce external behavioral expressions at large scales. Cells perceive and respond to their local environment and this gives rise to large-scale expressions. The complex set of attraction and repulsion senses involved in what we classify as mate selection and reproduction behaviors is one example. Along with these longer interval expressions built on patterns in shorter ones is the way we are driven to nourish and protect our young to maturity. Forging community social bodies as a membrane of nourishment and defense is another expression of these wide cycling orbit patterns. The entire relationship engine is oriented toward continuation. Coherence in the context of the environment is nature’s currency of value.

Longer-term cyclic patterns like mating and raising young coexist with increasingly more frequent patterns of expression. Wake and sleep, breathing, eating, and drinking are some examples of this. Under these patterns is a foundation of rapid-fire intricate chemical electrical patterns. These short-cycle patterns support the structure and function of cells and organ systems, species, and ecosystems. Together, the varied intervals of perception and response form a synchronized dance we see as an organism. We experience this symphonic expression of harmony with the necessities of coherence as a “human being”. Humans are one of many local relationship symphonies that relate to each other. We see and embody this necessity of survival expressed as patterned arrangements of behavior in search of continuing coherence. Comparatively stable repetitious behavior patterns are the essence of what we know as coherent objects.

We see coherence as the central value expressed through biology in many ways. The most useful relationship patterns are embedded in the form of DNA, molecules that keep a record of how to reconstruct biological body parts. These informational strands are wrapped around proteins called histones. This information library is surrounded by various structural triggers that determine the frequency-specific segments of DNA that are expressed and converted to RNA, and then proteins. This is “act one” of a much greater play of coordinated patterns that transport finished proteins to their functional locations and install them to serve a local role in nourishing and defending the integrity of the larger relationship economy. This fantastically sophisticated choreographed pattern of perceptions and responses orbit the central theme of coherence. Nature values and conserves relationship patterns that enable objective forms to persist over time.

The rules by which things are possible in the physical world is governed by nature. As children defined by this environmental womb, we are governed by the necessity to search for relationships that nourish and protect the patterns of behavior that will enable us to persist over time. Without a sufficient perception and response engine to satisfy the demands of remaining coherent, we would cease to exist. We see this objective necessity echoed and expressed through our biology and our cultural story-myth structures. Repeating themes, such as stories of being freed from bondage and suffering followed by a redemptive journey to a better place is one example of a cultural story that represents the hunger satisfaction process we see in biology.

Story patterns involving hunger, sacrifice, savior, and redemption themes are threaded throughout the world’s cultural myth maps. Overcoming the adversarial agent, the exploratory quest, and the return with riches, death, and birth, comedy, and tragedy… these are some of the common themes. These stories in patterns of varying intervals define what we experience because they are part of the necessity of negotiating the variables of the environment in which we dwell. Nature has been telling this story with a developmental arc long before we began mapping it with word concepts that symbolically call out the patterns.

The concept of animism dominated human’s first abstract conceptual maps. The belief that all natural objects, places, and creatures are infused with a spiritual essence was an understandable perspective. Nature was like us and we were like nature. A child in the womb is indistinguishable from its mother, in the same way, we were at one time one with the defining womb of influences that formed our experience. This conceptual map later developed into origin myths and gods with various powers. Still later this map was followed by more formal religious story structures. These became useful in outlining the shared story that enables us to live in larger-scale communities. The shared story was an increasingly important currency of group integrity after we crossed local populations above about 150 members. It enabled us to recognize each other through the symbolic map rather than the less endowed facial recognition mechanics and so on of our biological systems.

In our infancy as organisms that use symbolic architectures as a means of establishing and maintaining coherence, we were unable to distinguish between ourselves and the environmental womb that gave rise to us. It was all one. As we developed we began a process of differentiation between self and that defining environment. We began modifying the environmental relationship economy that defined our experience and as a result, began to see ourselves as separate entities. The notion of self and society was born out of this developing matrix.

Abstract stories gave communities a shared map of the world. They began to act as a bonding agent and a prescription for how to behave. This later developed into concepts like government and law, and more recently concepts like human rights. We are attempting to develop a higher-resolution map of who we are. It’s a fitful and error-prone journey laced with portions of calm flows, rapids, and falls. It is pulled in a certain developmental direction by the persistent nudge of necessity for coherence. That which is most valuable in contributing to coherence over time persists.

The stories we tell ourselves are a means of mapping the greater story in which we are embedded. Our narratives differ in superficial ways, but the patterns that govern their emergence and persistence is the same. We mirror the story patterns told by physical reality. Governments, for instance, are a symbolic stand-in for the physical womb of reality that governs who we are and what is possible. Just as objective nature governs what is possible, we mirror this expression with subjective social institutions that attempt to assert themselves as the greater power under which we all must live.

From a certain perspective, organisms are time-testers. Whatever relationship networks have the utility to carry a cell, organ, organism, species, and or ecosystem forward in time are accumulated, conserved, and expressed at specific intervals according to their relative value. That value is determined by the ability of a relationship between a coherent object and the larger environmental womb to nourish and or defend coherence. We are both a monument of and a testament to the structural realities expressed through this natural matrix of defining forces.

We see the principle of coherence expressed on many scales. At small scales, we see the dance between molecules and chemical processes that compose our various organelles, cells, organs, and biological transportation networks. On larger scales, we see things like heartbeat, breathing, eating, and eliminating waste. These are the nested rhythms that define us in the same way music is an audio structure of nested rhythms of various intervals. We now exist as a symphony of living fire with themes of expression with varying intervals dovetailed to negotiate our way forward in time. The most persistent and long-lasting of these themes is the necessity to value the relationships that nourish and defend our continuing coherence in the context of the environment over time. Our experience, indeed our very existence depends on how we relate to this vital necessity.

Whoever Defines the Argument Has Already Won (Part 1)

Whoever Defines the Argument Has Already Won (Part 1)

Storytellers have a large amount of control in the human social economy. Although we don’t define the influence of things like gravity, light, atomic bonds, and heat on our experience, we do influence is the way this matrix of objective defining forces is interpreted. This has powerful implications. Brute force is not as powerful a defining influence in human social systems as faith is. The stories we come to believe about ourselves and the world become the tool by which we see and decide how to act.

The defining influences that shape the maps we use as a lens emerges from many sources. Among these is the broad-based communication inherent in the natural world. This physical matrix is an objective form of communication. It informs us who we are, what context we’re in, and what the opportunities and dangers are as we navigate this space. We infuse this natural-born map with our own emphasis using abstract methods for various reasons. How this blended map is structured determines how we frame the world. This influences how we act.

How we decipher raw data into action is the primary means of influence we have on nature’s broader defining matrix. It is our voice. Even if we never come to recognize our role it is still there as a latent possibility. This power to influence by way of story is so important that the contest for control over the map that governs us has been a preoccupation of humans ever since we crossed the population threshold of about 150 persons. Tribes are stitched together by a story. Stories are the currency of relationships within and between groups. Whether we forge mutually beneficial bonds between each other and the groups we encounter or take an antagonistic tone is governed by the stories we embrace.

It is not money, but stories that define how modern human social bodies operate. Money is just one of the many subplots swirling in a much broader galaxy of ideas. Governments, laws, businesses, and notions like justice and injustice – race, identity, citizenship, caste systems, and so on are all stories. So is how we view our place in the context of the broader natural world. How we treat each other and other organisms, what side of the road we travel on, and what authority structures we bow to are all based on the currency of stories. What we consider important, what we ignore, our name, our entire identity from that which we are seen as, to the way we see ourselves, is a story.

Exploring the basis of this defining narrative as well as some of the mechanisms and motivations by which our particular participation in the grander story happens is of value. By unveiling the engine of experience we can strategically apply that information to meaningful effect. We can become better equipped to define what we experience from within. The alternative to this is to be carried on the currents of defining forces imposed solely from the outside – to ride from womb to tomb a defined being, having never developed the capacity to define. We can become participants with a voice but it’s not a birthright. We have to work hard toward specific discoveries and practice the disciplines that can bring these discoveries to a mature state of fruition.