Survival of the fittest through natural selection, or adaptations to fit through natural selection?
Merely a changing perspective, showing the power of focused chance.
Not making arguments -designed to sway your opinion- not designed to show the truth, but creating perspective -one does not gain the gross understanding- the personal impact deepens perspective.
One sees through personal perspective, which is not an error to correct, but a truth to be used.
Writing with depth does not seek to give fact, it seeks to give a perspective, if you are not willing to suspend your structure -pre-disposition of opinion and belief- you cannot understand the words within the words.
Not what is right, but how do you see?
Imagine that the universe exists without any worlds -nor ‘life’ as we know it- only a chemical soup exists, we may call it water, but better is fluid in gradual flux -what is the core of desire and rejection?- the awareness of such a realm is vibrational sense.
Within this realm of fluid is something, it cannot yet be called a star, planets do not arise, instead a form ancestral to viruses arises -the first form of life beyond the chemical fluid- not merely at a cellular level, but a form of life among scales.
These forms group and create complexity, developing an environment, not merely by their existence, but also by their death -decay builds the basis- amongst continual growth and emergence, the virus reaches a form of perfection.
Continual growth and decay continues (this flux mirrors the chemical, never ceasing its motion) the environment arising in cascading complexities, leaving packets of chemicals, specially formed to support the life, the deepening of chemical to mineral.
Within the perfection of the virus -itself still a volatile extension- born of the chemical flux, an entirely unique form arises -adapting to fit the environment- the progenitor of DNA, yet the form is only primitive.
The DNA follows the same rules as the virus, yet has become far more volatile, the rules that so fit the virus, they no longer uphold the DNA beyond its physical basis -but what is awareness and what has it?- soon the DNA does not simply adapt to surviving the world, it begins to adapt the environment, in order to house it.
These rudimentary houses effect the virus -not merely the DNA alone- shifts come as the mineral from continual decay builds, the sustained functioning of the DNA, this finds the adaptation of the cell (did life arise on planets -or as Chardin partially imagines- is there a pre-life, not only as chemical but as viral) did planets create life, or did life create planets?
This is a literal change in perspective, it is gross and obvious (reading Thoreau one hear’s of the evils of newpapers -the continual talk of murders/cotton/disasters- in Rome one finds great disparity -despite the ability of any human to find happiness- the cities teem with slavery as natural) there is nothing wrong with the virus, but the evolution stemming from it, this cannot remain at the same level, or it is dysfunctional.
One looks to the marching armies of ants -do they feel fear/suffering/love?- to the rise and fall of animals (the lynx and the rabbit, what family trees do they hold, what communities do they rely upon?) to the life of a crocodile -it displays a perfection ages old- and yet the human is already an evolution, despite lacking the development of the full refinement, the cortex is already a jump to another level.
Still, the interiority has nothing to develop from, it adapts to the world to survive, but cannot rest on this -the cortex demands a new reality- more than two thousand years ago the problems existed, each exploration of depth reveals a new insight, pieces of a greater whole.
Is the cortex slave to DNA, or merely an extension, delving further into the awareness, our paradigms developed from viewing nature, or as yet haphazard and misunderstood explorations, delving into the noos (the deep explorers like Jung/Chardin/Tesla, all possessed massive faults in the imagination -as Pascal complains of- yet they reveal a core) Kierkegaard/Mill/Socrates and Jung, each spoke of the same thing -a perspective diverging from the common one- each spoke of one thing.
Not as a fact, but as a perspective, they sought and were thus misunderstood, by those who read and thus know (not any truth revealed, but the personal impact revealed, if one is willing to approach chaos).
The human can follow the animal, for we extend from this, yet holding to this alone is mere dysfunction, neither can one hold to the learning of another -one way to find level ground- seeking an environment to allow us to be ourselves -a fair playground- when we must build our environment ourselves.
There is nothing wrong with the animal, but the cortex is already an evolution, in a race that alone is not born complete -for a decade or more- we are incomplete beyond any other animal, still looking to ancients -without understanding. - this race crawls forward through self-inflicted cuts.
Where are we going to, mimicking DNA or a virus, we move forward as if, we were unnatural, but blazing paths is no easy task, too often explorers are their own demise, before any danger may befall!
I wish that I could be death and destruction, the death and destruction of this time -a forerunner- for that time which could be called heaven on earth, or simple competence!