Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Climax Social Evolution Theory
02-08-2010, 12:15 AM
Post: #1
Climax Social Evolution Theory
Four years before I went through a three-day religious conversion experience at Easter of 1979 that converted me from atheism to lasting belief in God, my angelic guide which I did not know was there until after the religious experience, inspired me to formulate a new social evolution theory based on the biological climax succession pattern in Nature. I have yet to encounter a more succinct vision of how human societies actually evolve in a biologically predictable pattern.

Here is Climax Social Evolution Theory.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2010, 01:10 PM
Post: #2
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-08-2010 12:15 AM)biomystic Wrote:  Four years before I went through a three-day religious conversion experience at Easter of 1979 that converted me from atheism to lasting belief in God, my angelic guide which I did not know was there until after the religious experience, inspired me to formulate a new social evolution theory based on the biological climax succession pattern in Nature. I have yet to encounter a more succinct vision of how human societies actually evolve in a biologically predictable pattern.

Here is Climax Social Evolution Theory.


Can we get just the essentials?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2010, 03:23 PM
Post: #3
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-08-2010 01:10 PM)Parousia Wrote:  
(02-08-2010 12:15 AM)biomystic Wrote:  Four years before I went through a three-day religious conversion experience at Easter of 1979 that converted me from atheism to lasting belief in God, my angelic guide which I did not know was there until after the religious experience, inspired me to formulate a new social evolution theory based on the biological climax succession pattern in Nature. I have yet to encounter a more succinct vision of how human societies actually evolve in a biologically predictable pattern.

Here is Climax Social Evolution Theory.


Can we get just the essentials?

(gets huffy) I don't do sound-bite answers! You want the Classic Comic Book rendition when I write my Origin of the Species masterpiece? Oh, how could you! Ok, here goes: human social evolution follows the biological climax succession pattern which evolved in correspondence to changes in the natural environment. Because human social changes continually bring changes to that "natural" environment, the climax succession pattern in human society is never completely stabilized and creates its own demand for further adjustments for stabilization which never do bring stabilization about but as animals we humans are programmed to always try to do so. Stop me, I want to keep "explaining"..Angel
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2010, 04:00 PM
Post: #4
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-08-2010 03:23 PM)biomystic Wrote:  (gets huffy) I don't do sound-bite answers! You want the Classic Comic Book rendition when I write my Origin of the Species masterpiece? Oh, how could you! Ok, here goes: human social evolution follows the biological climax succession pattern which evolved in correspondence to changes in the natural environment. Because human social changes continually bring changes to that "natural" environment, the climax succession pattern in human society is never completely stabilized and creates its own demand for further adjustments for stabilization which never do bring stabilization about but as animals we humans are programmed to always try to do so. Stop me, I want to keep "explaining"..Angel

Hey, Classic Comics (and Classics Illustrated) had a good sense of story telling and great artwork. Your link has none of the latter and does not seem to have that much of the former either. I read the several articles and followed the chain of thought, albeit with some wrestling with overblown phraseology along the way. But I do understand your observations about the development of human society and the problem you wish to address.

What I was expecting, and what you seem to be indicating that you are going to offer, is a solution to the stated problem. But I did not find that. Surely it was not 'fade back into the woods' like the Mayans, was it?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2010, 06:47 PM
Post: #5
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-08-2010 04:00 PM)Parousia Wrote:  
(02-08-2010 03:23 PM)biomystic Wrote:  (gets huffy) I don't do sound-bite answers! You want the Classic Comic Book rendition when I write my Origin of the Species masterpiece? Oh, how could you! Ok, here goes: human social evolution follows the biological climax succession pattern which evolved in correspondence to changes in the natural environment. Because human social changes continually bring changes to that "natural" environment, the climax succession pattern in human society is never completely stabilized and creates its own demand for further adjustments for stabilization which never do bring stabilization about but as animals we humans are programmed to always try to do so. Stop me, I want to keep "explaining"..Angel

Hey, Classic Comics (and Classics Illustrated) had a good sense of story telling and great artwork. Your link has none of the latter and does not seem to have that much of the former either. I read the several articles and followed the chain of thought, albeit with some wrestling with overblown phraseology along the way. But I do understand your observations about the development of human society and the problem you wish to address.

What I was expecting, and what you seem to be indicating that you are going to offer, is a solution to the stated problem. But I did not find that. Surely it was not 'fade back into the woods' like the Mayans, was it?

You post as if you didn't read the second part which was the practical application of "Climax consciousness". Getting human beings to pay attention to the hidden climax succession pattern in human social evolution is the first step to reorganizing everything in recognition that only "climax" tools, and this includes social tools as well as physical ones, will become stable items and of enduring usefulness in human society. Non-climax items will eventually show their inappropriateness and become discarded. We are inevitably headed for a Climax Civilization because only a climax civilization will allow us to harmonize human society with the natural ecological systems needed to give it long term stability and endurance.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2010, 07:50 PM
Post: #6
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-08-2010 06:47 PM)biomystic Wrote:  You post as if you didn't read the second part which was the practical application of "Climax consciousness". Getting human beings to pay attention to the hidden climax succession pattern in human social evolution is the first step to reorganizing everything in recognition that only "climax" tools, and this includes social tools as well as physical ones, will become stable items and of enduring usefulness in human society. Non-climax items will eventually show their inappropriateness and become discarded. We are inevitably headed for a Climax Civilization because only a climax civilization will allow us to harmonize human society with the natural ecological systems needed to give it long term stability and endurance.

I think you are saying that we will inevitably fall back into the hunter-gatherer state and we should just be aware of it. If that is the case, I need to challenge your belief that the hunter-gatherer phase was stable. It was definitely not. We entered the current agriculture phase as a matter of necessity when we killed and ate all of the big game. The current absence of mega-fauna and the collapse of a civlization that facilitates the current level of agriculture (fertilizers, insecticides, motorized farm equipment, powered irrigation) would result in only a tiny fraction of today's population being supportable. And deciding which fraction that is is going to ensure a serious lack of stablity for a very long time. So is weeding out what gene sets are not that good for living in the wild. There is the distinct possibilty of extinction in this scenario. The DNA evidence points to a near extinction event (15,000 humans left on the planet) 70,000 years ago due to a simple drought.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2010, 11:25 PM
Post: #7
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-08-2010 07:50 PM)Parousia Wrote:  
(02-08-2010 06:47 PM)biomystic Wrote:  You post as if you didn't read the second part which was the practical application of "Climax consciousness". Getting human beings to pay attention to the hidden climax succession pattern in human social evolution is the first step to reorganizing everything in recognition that only "climax" tools, and this includes social tools as well as physical ones, will become stable items and of enduring usefulness in human society. Non-climax items will eventually show their inappropriateness and become discarded. We are inevitably headed for a Climax Civilization because only a climax civilization will allow us to harmonize human society with the natural ecological systems needed to give it long term stability and endurance.

I think you are saying that we will inevitably fall back into the hunter-gatherer state and we should just be aware of it. If that is the case, I need to challenge your belief that the hunter-gatherer phase was stable. It was definitely not.

Oh? Then you would call 100,000 years plus for the hunting and gathering lifestyle an unstable lifestyle vs. 10,000 years of civilized life complete with zero long term stability of any single civilization since the advent of agriculture a mark of "stability"? Egyptians and the ancient Chinese came the closest to long term stabilization of their societies but where are these societies now? China was forced to copy Western ideas like Japan in order to compete in the modern world. Climax social evolution theory does state that seeking a stabilized relationship with the environment is an inherent goal of humankind as an organic species but until the climax succession pattern is found underlying the rise and fall of civilizations we will be at the mercy of inappropriate responses by society seeking the wrong ways to stabilize themselves. Only climax social organization aims humankind in the right direction in my ever so humble opinion.

We entered the current agriculture phase as a matter of necessity when we killed and ate all of the big game. The current absence of mega-fauna and the collapse of a civlization that facilitates the current level of agriculture (fertilizers, insecticides, motorized farm equipment, powered irrigation) would result in only a tiny fraction of today's population being supportable. And deciding which fraction that is is going to ensure a serious lack of stablity for a very long time. So is weeding out what gene sets are not that good for living in the wild. There is the distinct possibilty of extinction in this scenario. The DNA evidence points to a near extinction event (15,000 humans left on the planet) 70,000 years ago due to a simple drought.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2010, 09:56 AM
Post: #8
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-08-2010 11:25 PM)biomystic Wrote:  Oh? Then you would call 100,000 years plus for the hunting and gathering lifestyle an unstable lifestyle vs. 10,000 years of civilized life complete with zero long term stability of any single civilization since the advent of agriculture a mark of "stability"? Egyptians and the ancient Chinese came the closest to long term stabilization of their societies but where are these societies now? China was forced to copy Western ideas like Japan in order to compete in the modern world. Climax social evolution theory does state that seeking a stabilized relationship with the environment is an inherent goal of humankind as an organic species but until the climax succession pattern is found underlying the rise and fall of civilizations we will be at the mercy of inappropriate responses by society seeking the wrong ways to stabilize themselves. Only climax social organization aims humankind in the right direction in my ever so humble opinion.

First, I never said the last 10,000 years were stable, so your comparison of the hunter-gather with the present phase is pointless. In addition you fail to explain why stability is a good thing. If it were, evolution would have left us in the primordial soup. If the Egyptian or ancient Chinese civilization had managed to thrive and spread throughout the world without evolving, would you really want to live in such a civilization?

Would you really want to live in a hunter-gatherer society?

The last hunter gatherers to achieve non-trivial population levels were the Native Americans. As documented in the several links below, they engaged in almost continuous warfare with each other, ranging from back and forth blood feud raids with small but continuous casualty rates, to large scale wars of conquest and enslavement.

http://www.answers.com/topic/native-amer...-societies
http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/na...c_war.html
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2536600186.html
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2536600187.html

The effect of the influx of Native Americans on the environment was discussed in an earlier link. Here is some more.

Quote:America’s Ancient Forests provides persuasive evidence that Native American activities had at least some consequences for North American ecosystems. Perhaps the most dramatic example is the extinction of most large mammal species in North America between 10,800 and 10,000 years ago, which was probably a result of the effective (and perhaps wasteful) hunting practices of Paleoindians, coupled with rapid environmental changes. Fire is another clear example of how Native Americans may have significantly changed forest composition and openness. Bonnicksen documents the intentional setting of fires for hunting, land clearance, warfare, and signaling, as well as the likelihood of accidental fires started from campfires. Other activities, such as hunting, logging, and agriculture, may have had secondary effects on prey populations and local frequencies of disturbance.

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol4/iss2/art2/

The disastrous extinction of large game animals and the sudden consequences for a previously burgeoning population led necessarily to an understanding of ecology. But this meant a whole lot more than “Earth Day” and “going green”. It meant among other things to risk starving to death in the winter to avoid killing the last of the game.

Quote:[T]he Natives and Europeans both distinctly altered the environment. However, the “Indian” relationship to the ecosystem was decisively less volatile. Having a far greater familiarity with the New England ecosystem, Native Americans understood the cyclical nature of the seasons. They moved and responded to the need for food. Without agriculture in the North, Indians depended on this understanding of the ecosystem since they lived chiefly as hunters and gatherers.

The northern Indians refusal to “squirrel away” and store food for the winter was seen in Chapter Three as the great paradox of, “Want in the Land of Plenty.” Europeans could not understand the Indians willingness to go hungry during the winter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changes_in_..._ecosystem

But let us not forget the idea of stability in the hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Remember that in that 100,000 year epoch, our ancestors came very close to extinction, as previously described, and our cousins the Neanderthals did go extinct. But I guess going extinct is as stable as it gets.

What is the alternative? Fusion power sounds like a start. Potentially unlimited and much less polluting. Could make electric cars and trucks more economically feasible than fossil fuels, and right there we are talking about the majority of CO2 production.

We can throw around trillions of dollars on essentially undefined programs. But we spend much less on fusion power research than on chewing gum

Fusion power research in US, less than $1B/year and that is an all time high.

Chewing gum sales in US, over $2B/year
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2010, 02:58 PM (This post was last modified: 02-09-2010 02:59 PM by biomystic.)
Post: #9
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
(02-09-2010 09:56 AM)Parousia Wrote:  
(02-08-2010 11:25 PM)biomystic Wrote:  Oh? Then you would call 100,000 years plus for the hunting and gathering lifestyle an unstable lifestyle vs. 10,000 years of civilized life complete with zero long term stability of any single civilization since the advent of agriculture a mark of "stability"? Egyptians and the ancient Chinese came the closest to long term stabilization of their societies but where are these societies now? China was forced to copy Western ideas like Japan in order to compete in the modern world. Climax social evolution theory does state that seeking a stabilized relationship with the environment is an inherent goal of humankind as an organic species but until the climax succession pattern is found underlying the rise and fall of civilizations we will be at the mercy of inappropriate responses by society seeking the wrong ways to stabilize themselves. Only climax social organization aims humankind in the right direction in my ever so humble opinion.

First, I never said the last 10,000 years were stable, so your comparison of the hunter-gather with the present phase is pointless.

No, not pointless. My answer was in direct response to you statement or implication that the hunting and gathering lifestyle was not a stable lifestyle. You threw in the near-extinction example to prove it and it does no such thing. Hunting and gathering lifestyle remained virtually unchanged for tens of thousands of years.

In addition you fail to explain why stability is a good thing.

If you had comprehended the point of Climax Social Evolution Theory you would know that it theorizes that human beings, as a species are acting under the same biological influences that all living forms must conform to or go extinct and that that same biological impetus is operating unseen in the rise and fall of succeeding civilizations, each trying to gain long term stability. It is a "good" in that, like the homeostasis response pattern of the body to illnesses, it wants to pay attention to problems that keep human communities from long term stability. And that's not a bad thing. I think that's why evolutionary philosophical ideas have developed.

If it were, evolution would have left us in the primordial soup. If the Egyptian or ancient Chinese civilization had managed to thrive and spread throughout the world without evolving, would you really want to live in such a civilization?

Failure is the only way to learn how to fix something right.
Would you really want to live in a hunter-gatherer society?

Nope. I like watching movies too much and I probably wouldn't be alive now at age 66 (day after tomorrow-I expect presents from all you, btw..) as my teeth would have been worn down to nubbins chewing through acorn meal and venison.


The last hunter gatherers to achieve non-trivial population levels were the Native Americans. As documented in the several links below, they engaged in almost continuous warfare with each other, ranging from back and forth blood feud raids with small but continuous casualty rates, to large scale wars of conquest and enslavement.

http://www.answers.com/topic/native-amer...-societies
http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/na...c_war.html
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2536600186.html
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2536600187.html

The effect of the influx of Native Americans on the environment was discussed in an earlier link. Here is some more.

Quote:America’s Ancient Forests provides persuasive evidence that Native American activities had at least some consequences for North American ecosystems. Perhaps the most dramatic example is the extinction of most large mammal species in North America between 10,800 and 10,000 years ago, which was probably a result of the effective (and perhaps wasteful) hunting practices of Paleoindians, coupled with rapid environmental changes. Fire is another clear example of how Native Americans may have significantly changed forest composition and openness. Bonnicksen documents the intentional setting of fires for hunting, land clearance, warfare, and signaling, as well as the likelihood of accidental fires started from campfires. Other activities, such as hunting, logging, and agriculture, may have had secondary effects on prey populations and local frequencies of disturbance.

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol4/iss2/art2/

The disastrous extinction of large game animals and the sudden consequences for a previously burgeoning population led necessarily to an understanding of ecology. But this meant a whole lot more than “Earth Day” and “going green”. It meant among other things to risk starving to death in the winter to avoid killing the last of the game.

Quote:[T]he Natives and Europeans both distinctly altered the environment. However, the “Indian” relationship to the ecosystem was decisively less volatile. Having a far greater familiarity with the New England ecosystem, Native Americans understood the cyclical nature of the seasons. They moved and responded to the need for food. Without agriculture in the North, Indians depended on this understanding of the ecosystem since they lived chiefly as hunters and gatherers.

The northern Indians refusal to “squirrel away” and store food for the winter was seen in Chapter Three as the great paradox of, “Want in the Land of Plenty.” Europeans could not understand the Indians willingness to go hungry during the winter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changes_in_..._ecosystem

Native Americans learned ecology the hard way but they are way ahead of the majority of industrialized nations now in ecological sensitivity. In our area, NAs used to set fire to the douglas fir forests to get rid of them (they are the dominant tree species in the hills--redwoods are the dominant species in the flat lands) so that oak forests and meadows could be established that were better habitat for deer and elk species.


But let us not forget the idea of stability in the hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Remember that in that 100,000 year epoch, our ancestors came very close to extinction, as previously described, and our cousins the Neanderthals did go extinct. But I guess going extinct is as stable as it gets.

What is the alternative? Fusion power sounds like a start. Potentially unlimited and much less polluting. Could make electric cars and trucks more economically feasible than fossil fuels, and right there we are talking about the majority of CO2 production.

Decentralization of manufacturing and a return to Nature's most efficient economy: local production using local renewable energy sources for local consumption. Eliminating all the mass transport of goods and services that come with centralized mfg and distribution will help immensely in reducing material and energy needs of every community. Having a universal long term stability standard for all tool developed and used by human beings that climax consciousness gives will reduce waste that now goes into R & D for worthless products that will be need replacement while climax tools last a lifetime.

We can throw around trillions of dollars on essentially undefined programs. But we spend much less on fusion power research than on chewing gum

Fusion power research in US, less than $1B/year and that is an all time high.

Chewing gum sales in US, over $2B/year

Looking for clean energy sources is good but is not good if it is to be used for keeping existing inefficient systems going. What happened to Cold Fusion? Is it dead in the water?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2010, 03:17 PM
Post: #10
RE: Climax Social Evolution Theory
Biomystic,

I have been reneging on my promise of something entirely different and need to let this one go. I think we have both fully expressed our viewpoints and are on the verge of repeating ourselves. And yes I do now understand what you are saying, which was my original question. Smile

Just one last comment.

(02-09-2010 02:58 PM)biomystic Wrote:  Looking for clean energy sources is good but is not good if it is to be used for keeping existing inefficient systems going. What happened to Cold Fusion? Is it dead in the water?

Not exactly dead. But IMO, very sick and unlikely to recover.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Cyclic Universe Theory And Multiverse Theory Inception 3 732 12-07-2014 02:20 PM
Last Post: shiverleaf15



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)