Cenocracy: A Declaration for Greater Independence
Let's Talk Peace LVIII


Let's face it, humanity has a lousy definition, accompanying practice, and analysis of peace.

Triple Process Thinking

This page not only deals with the topic of peace and its counter-part war illustrated as a dualism, dichotomy or pattern-of-two, but also as a contrast (which is another pattern-of-two) to the topic of "Dual Process Thinking" that some may recognize with the formula "Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow".

Human behavior, which includes thinking, can be subjected to analysis which uses enumeration. In other words, we can use numbers to identify patterns being exhibited in thoughts and actions, as expressed with or without the usage of symbols such as words. In dance routines, in the creation of a picture, painting, architectural draft, playing a board game, etc., we can pay witness to basic patterns that have been enumerated. For example, when a researcher cites cognition in terms of "bias", the word bias represents a contrast of at least two view or items. If they describe a difference in thinking related to content or context, they are again using a pattern-of-two. They may even frame multiple choice questions with an inclination to coincide with an unrealized underlying pattern-of-two contrast shaped in the placement of questions being asked or expectations of answers to be received. Those who are disposed to frame ideology in a given formula can be rather elaborate.

Because ideas can be enumerated to exhibit a pattern, and that the overall count of patterns displays a limited usage, it is of value to point out that this conservation may well be due to an imposition of the environment which is headed along a course of deterioration, and that this deterioration must be accounted for in the span of humanity and not the span of geological processes. In other words, humanity as we know it has had a relatively short life span thus far when looked at from the perspective of today representing a "zero", and this span may extend no further forward in time. While the following image is generous in describing the origination of humanity, even though some hominine examples are viewed as being little more than "human-like" creatures with no real ancestral lineage connection to present day humans, the illustration is useful in describing the presented idea. The length of time is not expected to be interpreted as a definitive representation.

Human timescale

When we have researcher after researcher indulging in an unrealized usage of a two-patterned frame of mind, be they from Sociology, Philosophy, or Psychology... and they amass a subject-specific literature to use as a tool of intimidation to force others to think as they do like a person increasing the size of a gang membership; how do those of us who recognize their own cognitive repetition convince them of their own bias? This is particularly important for our present discussion since the presence of a "peace-war" profile may well be an extention of a mentality humanity has difficulty growing out of because a pattern-of-two is environmentally based such as the dichotomies seen in hot/cold, winter/summer, up/down, north/south (agriculture), east/west (social culture), black/white (race), etc... How do we assist such researchers in seeing their two-patterned proclivity when all their testing and testing of testing has a similar two-patterned framework, even when they attempt to be objective?

Like alcoholics, drug users or those obsessed with their sexuality, every waking moment is collated in a pattern-of-two frame work, even though they may use alternative patterns in describing an unrecognized inclination to make a contrast! When they may pursue a course of activity whose basic underlying theme is little more than to make a comparison "between" two extremes, how do we convince them they are stuck in their thinking? When they can not recognize the lack of a recognition thereof or recognize a recognition thereof that is then placed into yet another two-patterned schema, how can Sociology, Philosophy and Psychology progress if all of their foremost proponents have difficulty in realizing the repetition of their own thoughts in terms of an enumerated profile?

Test after test after test with numerous populations reveals that very elaborate experiments can be set up so that some basic (two-patterned) contrast can be made, yet the formula is not of the three-patterned 1 + 2 = 3 variety. It is of a 1 + 1 = (1/1) ratio type that may be viewed as a standard mathematical structure to be offered as being arithmetically logical, but is a pattern-of-three cast into a two-patterned profile. It's an activity little more than an elaboration of the old Yin/Yang or Pythagorean ensemble of opposites set into the framework of singularities compiled into a list to give the impression of a large numerosity (quantity) to be used as a justification and validation... yet the idea of the human brain using different expressions of patterns of thinking that can be enumerated, does not come to mind to be applied to all thoughts and behaviors. Because humans can engage in self-deception, there is the common occasion such a psychological profile of personality enlists this activity to conceal basic patterns with embellishments of thought which conceal the true image of one's thinking taking place in an environment which is incrementally deteriorating and requires the person to adopt behavior which will afford a measure of adjustability in order to maintain an equalibrium.

If we analogically describe life in society or on the planet as being on a raft, there are those life forms (including humans) that live on the "fringes". Like on the corners of a raft or at its edge (perhaps in the water) hanging on because of over-population and a reduction of resources (which may include living space as described by the long waiting lists for housing kept by various social services departments); deterioration may first be seen by those who are perceptive enough to realize a change is taking place. Unfortunately, those who may see the changes may have been engaged in the adoption of ideas readily available to them in their personal circumstances that cause them to interpret the deteriorations according to the language and notions current with their adopted views, be it religion, new age, or other-wise. If it is a religious one, the person may well describe their impressions in term of a Judgment Day. Another person may claim it to be environmental due to human activities, and another may claim it as a cyclical change... though there are multiple other ideas one might imagine. However, most may use the perception of deterioration in personal terms as a means of disparaging themselves, when the deterioration is much larger than merely the circumstances in their personal life.

Society, the planet and the Solar system viewed as a raft

If most of humanity's social leaders live within the central part of the raft, they may be more focused on events and ideas within the majority group, all the while that the fringes of the raft continue to experience the deteriorations that are recognized by a few. The deteriorations taking place below the raft are not so easy to detect... nor is the surface because it is obscured by human activity which imposes multiple distractions. Hence, deteriorations which may reverberate throughout the raft may be differentially reacted to in different ways with different interpretations, one of which is to alter the definition of peace (and/or war) as fits the occasion. Indeed, the name of the flower which was once called a rose, may be altered so as to claim a suite of different perceptions, though the underlying pattern is no different than when the flower was named a rose. Even though different songs, poems and other commerciable enterprises may evolve due to a change in labeling and labeled interpretations thereof, the social-wide self-deception has not altered the course of the deterioration. Though different people may come to inhabit different portions of the raft's available real estate, claiming one selection is more important or valuable than another, the same type of basic overall mentality of the human species has not been changed... it has not evolved into what may be described has higher order thinking.

However, the usage of patterns-of-three to assert a "higher" thinking has not been achieved if patterns-of-three are being used to conceal the presence of an underlying pattern-of-two inclination such as towards using contrasts. For example, if one uses three questions or three choices on a test in order to develop an hypothesis to assert one position of a contrast, this ensemble may not be looked at like a one, two, three profile if the primary interest of the researcher or test giver is to distinguish one of two considerations foremost on their mind. For example, let's say a psychologist asks a person to count backwards from one hundred by threes (or sevens). The researcher may be more interested in whether the person makes an attempt in a fluid or interrupted manner more so than if the person's subtraction ability is correct. No less, the usage of these two number alternatives says something about the antiquity of thought processing being used by the psychologist when there are so many other numbers that one might use to subtract backward from one hundred, or fifty, or two hundred, etc...

If we analyze peace in conjunction with war or some other human behavior, the usage of a pattern-of-two may not be recognized as a research model that can be enumerated so as to compare it with other research models in order to identify repetitious occurrences of the same mental pattern being used by different researchers in different ways. "Comparing" can be described as "come, let us make one or more pairs". It is little more than an elaborate means of using a primitive two-based counting system. Like a person on an assembly line who packages items in groups-of-two even though the package may hold twenty total, they may never attempt to count by threes, fours, fives or otherwise. Even though some may learn to count in a proportion greater than two, the ability may be specific to the task and not easily transferable to other products. The usage of the labels "peace" and "war" are products that become socially packaged with given descriptions and definitions. This is what has happened with regards to how the United Nations and the Nobel Peace Prize committee view the topics of peace and war... not to mention other subjects. They have become labeled as certain types of products to be packaged in a certain way according to a measured formula of counting them, even if the "counting" of them is not being consciously acknowledged.

Since the counting is typically taking place with a pattern-of-two grouping (peace/war), just because we can speak of a "triple process thinking" doesn't mean we can actually employ such a pattern very easily. The usage of "twos" may be so well embedded in the psyche of social leaders and leading researchers that trying to get them to adopt three-patterned thinking would be like trying to ween a child off of a bottle or an alcoholic away from alcohol or a sports fan of football to alter their interest to stamp collecting, bird watching or chasing butterflies. If a researcher develops the opinion that there can never be sustained peace, is this conclusion little more than a statement about the type of cognition they are using to make their assessment? If they are inclined towards pessimism and utilize a learned pattern-of-two profile in their thinking, then their pessimism might well adopt self-convincing two-patterned themes that their conclusion is correct. Their life model of survival utilizes such a pattern in accord with their presence of mind in relation to their distance from death observed through the lens of personal experiences. If they have a life-style of thinking which affords them a relatively short span of life according to some personal philosophy related to a family genealogy in which most family members died before their 70th birthday, the criteria of their thinking may be in accord therewith.

Because we do not know of people who customarily live to be 150 years old, much less 30,000 years old, we are subjected to a scientific and popular literature compiled by those whose mentality is geared towards an adopted formula of thinking commensurate with their life-span. However, this is not to say that those who would live to be several centuries or eons old would have a different philosophy of life corresponding to the nature of their required equilibrium maintenance. Nonetheless, it can be assumed that the short life spans humans presently live forces their brain to exhibit the pattern of mentality which best fits the length of existence to be experienced. A pattern-of-three "profile of thought" in genetics portrayed in the triple coding of DNA and RNA, suits not only variability of life form but also duration. If we look upon DNA and RNA as organisms designed for longevity, their "strategy" of multiplicity (diversity) in multiple environmental niches attests to the viability for using a pattern- of-three as opposed to a pattern-of-two or some other pattern we could relate to a numerical designation... though patterns-of-two abound in atoms, molecules and overall biology. While one may argue that humans need not be alive to perpetuate the presence of DNA, RNA and/or proteins, it is humanity which best offers the present possibility for increasing the range of viability through the adoption of a space program in order to transplant DNA, RNA and Proteins beyond the confinement of Earth. While earthworms also grow from three Germ layers (Endoderm- Mesoderm- Ectoderm), worms nor other three-germ layer animals seek to explore into the realm of space. Their "mentality" is geared for living on the planet within the space of a given life span.

The fact that some of us think about leaving the Earth on a permanent basis and establishing life far beyond the Milky Way Galaxy is a testament to the existence of an underlying change in human cognition having taken place. We have a different mindset and this mentality may well be the foundation for a type of three-patterned thinking which realizes that a two-patterned frame of mind may be little more than a product of the recurring patterns being displayed by environmental circumstances. The fact that different people in different walks of life have come to this realization on their own, though different levels and types of realization are evident, attests to the confirmation that developmental changes in thinking can arize in the species who then must apply the changes in accord with where they are and the type(s) of information readily available to them. Those reading this and cognizant of the experience will no doubt be able to surmise their own evalutions and accept the present introduction as a plausible reference... even if they remain a bit skeptical and hold open the door for any other explanation they may encounter at a future date if no other explanation has as yet been entertained.

Over and over again the mentality of humanity is practicing a counting system in different ways. Whereas many people don't evolve into using a dominant orientation of one... of singularity, others get stuck in a pattern-of-two frame of mind, while still others appear to be preoccupied with acknowledging the presence of a three-patterned existence. However, like those skilled with an ancient abacus, they can be quite adept at using their singular, dual or triple orientation with great dexterity. Yet many of them only use their orientation in the application of entertainment or diversion, or distraction to manipulate one or more others for personal reasons. A person skilled in using a pattern-of-two thinking in a given context such as a scientific research endeavour may well be able to convince others that they are more intelligent than someone who utilizes a pattern-of-three orientation as a pastime of amusement or general compilation without an application to a specific scientific endeavour. Some can effectively use an underlying pattern-of-two (such as Major/Minor Premises) cast into an assumed three-patterned formula (Major Premise-Minor Premise + Conclusion) and offer it as a three-based example when it is actually a representation of a transitional stage between a two and three- patterned orientation.


Plural: abaci or abacuses

(The abacus is a) calculating device, probably of Babylonian origin, that was long important in commerce. It is the ancestor of the modern calculating machine and computer.

The earliest "abacus" likely was a board or slab on which a Babylonian spread sand so he could trace letters for general writing purposes. The word abacus is probably derived, through its Greek form abakos, from a Semitic word such as the Hebrew ibeq ("to wipe the dust"; noun abaq, "dust"). As the abacus came to be used solely for counting and computing, its form was changed and improved. The sand ("dust") surface is thought to have evolved into the board marked with lines and equipped with counters whose positions indicated numerical values—i.e., ones, tens, hundreds, and so on. In the Roman abacus the board was given grooves to facilitate moving the counters in the proper files. Another form, common today, has the counters strung on wires.

The abacus, generally in the form of a large calculating board, was in universal use in Europe in the Middle Ages, as well as in the Arab world and in Asia. It reached Japan in the 16th century. The introduction of the Hindu-Arabic notation, with its place value and zero, gradually replaced the abacus, though it was still widely used in Europe as late as the 17th century and survives today in the Middle East, China, and Japan; an expert practitioner can compete against many modern mechanical calculating machines.

Chinese wooden abacus
Source: "Abacus." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013.

If most or many of the researchers in a given field of study (such as anthropology, archaeology, biology, cognition, philosophy, physics, politics, psychology, sociology, etc.,) present their views using unrealized or deliberate patterns-of-two, then this will be the standard by which others try to emulate because it represents a current of foremost scientific thinking presented in this format. To do otherwise is to "speak in a foreign tongue" that one or another researcher may view as being non-sensical. You are expected to speak the language of the group and belong to the associations which many make their acquaintance with as a member. The same goes for those with an interest in an analysis of peace, even if there is no formal "peace" association in the public sector beyond the purview of political control. The study of peace very often includes an attention to war. While some readers may think this is "common sense", this is the same type of thinking which is used by researchers in different fields when they resort to the usage of patterns-of-two and yet remain oblivious of the pattern as a component of basic cognition that should be incorporated into the arena of considerations of proclivities in their assessments.

In other words, millions of people are thinking about one or another subject area but have not as yet acknowledged the realization that their mentality is engaged in a type of reasoning involving a basic formula of counting used in a marketplace. Their reasoning is like an active abacus whose chief calculations are being constrained by the form and functionality of the abacus in a commercialized form of application. Again and again and again they are thinking in terms of variously symbolized ones, twos, and sometimes threes. In the forms of words, diagrams, experimental procedures and results, we can see the same patterns cropping up like a person counting out a marketplace item... even though the said "marketplace" is labeled a laboratory, research center, university study program, etc... Like merchants making a pitch to sell or purchase a given idea, different calculations involving basic numbers is being used... and many of those calculations or costs are repetitious. One of these repetitions is a pattern-of-two. In a marketplace where buyers and sellers are predisposed to a "two" value, the topic of peace set into a two-patterned package ensemble may be bought or traded for some other good such as a research grant, or reputation of honesty to be used as a commodity elsewhere.

Yet, the portrayal of the basic pattern(s) must be packaged according to the standards of a given marketplace, be it physics, cognition, biology, psychology, or what have you. For example, for those who are involved with the concept of "threeking", (a form of exploration in human cognition and epistemology), an interest in acknowledging the value of tabulating basic patterns... set into an enumerated profile... of all subject areas, is a requirement for contemplating human cognitive processes. Hence, establishing the study of peace into such a context of contemplation is but another subject to be added to the list for providing alternative assessments of how a particular subject is being studied; or is not being studied as this series of article on "peace" has pointed out. "Threenking" is a way of studying any and all subjects with a very basic tool that can enable more in depth analysis once the basic language has been grasped. Enumerating human cognition permits us to pay witness to a very small vocabulary based on a limited alphabet. In other words, instead of 26 letters or 20 amino acids, there are ten (0-9), though some may prefer not to use the zero. Human thought seen from such a perspective shows the same universal language though the type of packaging used in presenting the patterns in different cultures or subjects can act as a barrier to initial interpretation. Personal individuality of a given subject or language belies the fact that there are basic underlying commonalities... and that these commonalities represent constraints occurring in an incrementally decaying environment that poses a great risk for life if we want to preserve it deep into the future instead of relinquishing the human species to a definitive life-scale of only a few million years before becoming extinct.

Researchers invariably look for basic patterns in order to grasp the existence of any basic code which may be present. Though some researchers unknowingly prefer to play the part of being a writer of a given scientific genre who may tell the tales of the search for basic commonalities, they themselves do not actively engage in such a pursuit. They are quite satisfied being a writer of the tales of others because it affords them with either an income or a level of recognition which they can use to acquire this or that social commodity. Other researchers play the part of being a detective, or a fan of the genre they are involved in. And even though the top researchers in a given field may have all the relevant information needed to decipher the code, they don't themselves exercise the requisite mental associations of the materials at hand. They simply provide what they have and their interpretation thereof, but do not actually further the understanding so many of them seek to unravel and provide in a coherent and comprehensive way. Then again, they may have "the" answer but no one else reading the same literature with the same interest can comprehend the formula being presented. Indeed, a researcher may be ahead of their time or that their reasoning is not being evaluated by those who could comprehend it because such people are not those currently interested in the subject at hand. Analogously, one can have a collection of all the (self defined) greatest detective stories from throughout the world from all time periods in all languages, but still not be a detective themselves or able to conduct research on a specific subject with all the tools at their disposal... by way of research conducted with a methodology that does not yet fully exist anyway. (It is difficult to expect a detective to make usage of fingerprints if they have not understanding of fingerprint patterns... though amongst their peers they are consider to be an expert detective or crime scene analyst.) Common themes can be overlooked even when one has all the relevant data and most up-to-date tools of detection at one's disposal. Nonetheless, while biological models can be useful, they can be wrongly used to confer a universality tied to infinity. In other words, the following biological analogy to present comments can be useful, it is not meant to suggest that the present biology of humanity or that to be found on Earth is the ultimate aim of biology or existence, and nor that existence is forever in some type of biological sense.

The Unity of Life

At the cellular level of organization, the main chemical processes of all living matter are similar, if not identical. This is true for animals, plants, fungi, or bacteria; where variations occur (such as, for example, in the secretion of antibodies by some molds), the variant processes are but variations on common themes. Thus, all living matter is made up of large molecules called proteins, which provide support and coordinated movement, as well as storage and transport of small molecules, and, as catalysts, enable chemical reactions to take place rapidly and specifically under mild temperature, relatively low concentration, and neutral conditions (i.e., neither acidic nor basic). Proteins are assembled from some 20 amino acids, and, just as the 26 letters of the alphabet can be assembled in specific ways to form words of various lengths and meanings, so may tens or even hundreds of the 20 amino-acid "letters" be joined to form specific proteins. Moreover, those portions of protein molecules involved in performing similar functions in different organisms often comprise the same sequences of amino acids.

There is the same unity among cells of all types in the manner in which living organisms preserve their individuality and transmit it to their offspring. For example, hereditary information is encoded in a specific sequence of bases that make up the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) molecule in the nucleus of each cell. Only four bases are used in synthesizing DNA: adenine, guanine, cytosine, and thymine. Just as the Morse Code consists of three simple signals—a dash, a dot, and a space—the precise arrangement of which suffices to convey coded messages, so the precise arrangement of the bases in DNA contains and conveys the information for the synthesis and assembly of cell components. Some primitive life-forms, however, use RNA (ribonucleic acid; a nucleic acid differing from DNA in containing the sugar ribose instead of the sugar deoxyribose and the base uracil instead of the base thymine) in place of DNA as a primary carrier of genetic information. The replication of the genetic material in these organisms must, however, pass through a DNA phase. With minor exceptions, the genetic code used by all living organisms is the same.

The chemical reactions that take place in living cells are similar as well. Green plants use the energy of sunlight to convert water (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2) to carbohydrates (sugars and starches), other organic (carbon-containing) compounds, and molecular oxygen (O2). The process of photosynthesis requires energy, in the form of sunlight, to split one water molecule into one-half of an oxygen molecule (O2; the oxidizing agent) and two hydrogen atoms (H; the reducing agent), each of which dissociates to one hydrogen ion (H+) and one electron. Through a series of oxidation-reduction reactions, electrons (denoted e-) are transferred from a donating molecule (oxidation), in this case water, to an accepting molecule (reduction) by a series of chemical reactions; this "reducing power" may be coupled ultimately to the reduction of carbon dioxide to the level of carbohydrate. In effect, carbon dioxide accepts and bonds with hydrogen, forming carbohydrates (Cn[H2O]n).

Living organisms that require oxygen reverse this process: they consume carbohydrates and other organic materials, using oxygen synthesized by plants to form water, carbon dioxide, and energy. The process that removes hydrogen atoms (containing electrons) from the carbohydrates and passes them to the oxygen is an energy-yielding series of reactions.

In plants, all but two of the steps in the process that converts carbon dioxide to carbohydrates are the same as those steps that synthesize sugars from simpler starting materials in animals, fungi, and bacteria. Similarly, the series of reactions that take a given starting material and synthesize certain molecules that will be used in other synthetic pathways are similar, or identical, among all cell types. From a metabolic point of view, the cellular processes that take place in a lion are only marginally different from those that take place in a dandelion.

Source: "Metabolism." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013.

If a person skilled in basic detection is in the presence of a detective skilled in detection using electronic equipment knock out of commission by an electro-magnetic pulse, the latter detective may be handicapped unless their abilities can quickly adept themselves to a model of detection where information culled from electronic equipment can not be derived. Similarly, an understanding of basic patterns in thinking, in an out of specific contexts is helpful in establishing a specificity of generality... even if the person is intentionally trying to present the image of different patterns. While increasing the number of players and moves that can occur in relation to the contextual personality of a given player can afford some relative camouflage, all possible moves in all possible directions can be catalogued like those of a Chess game because there are a limited number of pieces, squares and directions that can be utilized. And even though deliberate attempts to increase faults can be accomplished by subjecting different players to stresses such as time and place requirements, the application of such does not change the basic overall compilation of limitation. In other words, the number of pieces, squares and directions are not altered. Speed of play does not mean superiority unless it is being used as the criteria for establishing superiority.

Likewise, irrespective of what direction we take the analysis of peace, how do we wish to define it? As an absence of war? What about an absence of pain and suffering? An absence of poverty? An absence of religion, science or politics? Or some other absence... or gain? Are peace and war basic patterns of thought or embellishments thereof? Are either at all important or do we only make use of them as such because of the current state of affairs in human evolution? When we hear the words peace or war, what are we actually hearing? Is it an unrecognized numerical value?

— End of page 58 —

Date of Origination: Monday, 17-April-2017... 02:13 AM
Date of initial posting: Tuesday, 25-April-2017... 11:32 AM l>l>