cultural way.
Mhm Yeah and this is great evolutionary person. Well monster
lobby. Nice. Mhm
Right.
But in this
I am suggesting
nature of all the reality removes from matter into spirit and in this
process you have a personal genesis of biogenesis and former genesis and
each one of them has its own characteristics. One thing does genesis is
facing the water conservation.
The one of biogenesis has eluded all concerned about how
knowledgeable is the identity of nature to concentrate energy. Very dense
languages. Have you tell us in a bye lots of magic ordinary you see that
the law is not only more conservation or concentration its implementation
because state which is the other he is multiplying itself. It's by feeling
yes I would say levels of the life becomes national spirit which is what I
suggested here.
Do you have any questions you'd like to Yes,
never follow me this way.
Maybe not since
sterile
boy. What?
Well the more the more we moved from
so this that's a level of reality into this level of reality that more
decisions are conscious. So the response this universe because different
focus listen which is also different conditions. Yeah, vision of the
server response no matter mm. Total that and what you might call and get
totally your response. The total will Right.
Oh okay.
So in order to understand this idea of all or any or all your life without
the scene visions of the end the human and social scene or
Yeah. Place
what? Mhm mhm
It isn't an
explosive minute this. Yeah.
Mhm life also the most
That's it.
Oh sure.
With this fine.
The reasons why I believe that close to send. Mhm. You know what you're
dealing with leading plus, which we are Okay. I will say yes. You're not
the only way of an explosive prosecute any religion process
because of the sea sir. For the most difficult kind of open inclusive
process. It's a guy this can yeah, weigh the same. Should not mm hmm.
Hasn't been many of them
organization.
Okay.
Right. Mhm. Mhm.
Right. Process
exchange fine.
Okay. Are
Yeah. Yes.
Mhm
conception.
Mhm.
All right.
Well, they came together.
Well, All right. Yeah.
You're strong destruction.
Yeah,
structures
one I'm playing at most Yes.
Models. He is that what we better to be supported. Five which means being
the landscape of Just a two dimensional. Mhm. Action more to imagine
because not because action sorry guys. Yes.
What? All right.
What I'm suggesting is that we should be able to living for the very, very
for this around
thanks. Yeah.
Which means that we were we have and always
our civilization and so be very sweet. Yeah. Reached and use bye.
Doesn't tell me. Yeah. This
late night. Mhm.
A piece of art.
Mhm. By all the landscape into which
so Okay. His soul. Mhm. ST
into which.
Mhm Yeah.
Yeah. Mhm. Family in the scene.
Mhm. I'm sure. Mhm. A long time.
Mhm. Yes. The lunch. Yes.
Yes.
Four.
Mhm.
Your chance
show. Mhm.
Like going for them
parties. What kind?
Yeah, supposed. Yeah.
Person
we should. Oh all right good hey.
Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. 50.
What?
Yeah. Mhm
larger rooms please.
Right. Call us. Yeah.
Yes.
Mhm.
Yeah.
Ah Change
when we when we talk of change at least day and age which seems to be
concentrating
on what physically happens around us. And very often when that happens
what is a small connectivity is physical development has very little to do
with with the growth of the individual has very much to do with what I
call process which is just a transformation of matter into something else
into something in another kind of organized matter. But it's not really
going to in gross the spirit which is what I mean by by gossip
if we if we want to somehow grow instead of just change, we had to check
into our
society are the physical environment and we under and see how much what we
do is for the sake of change and how much is for the sake of the crossman.
And I think most of the things that we do now is for the sake change not
for the sake of England. And one has to do with the inner gross minister
with the inner man. The Minister with Alterman. And by more and more
sacrificing the inner or the outer. We are not being quite
materialistic oriented as well, quite superficial entered and as a
consequence we are dealing with the problem of waste of pollution. Two The
two most fashion mainly with the destruction the inner life.
Okay. So Mhm.
All right.
But changes changes much to do with physical alteration. So, you can say
that when you when you mind some material. Okay. Yeah.
You are policing and change and Grossman
quantum change somehow from metal into spirit. You can say it's still easy
transitional matters is still a special. That's it. Say that again.
Oh,
oh,
spiritual touch
steel. It's such a such a testimony change that you're still dealing with
pretty much
determination and statistical kind
reality. So in order to so it is deterministic
sector into a less willful self. You must try to work out not just change
call of course,
I mean
alert.
You know, these.
Okay, they used
you
besides you. Yes.
Maybe it's not like
Mhm.
Is your arm? Hi.
Well, I'm not advocating a community at all. Very I consider my privacy
very important. So, I consider your privacy at the same time is that there
is a public life which is which really makes civilization without public
life. You know, because we are as we are cooperative animals. We are by
definition public. Yes. So, we need we need to be able from the pilot into
the public and vice versa. And both of those has to be to be rich and
groceries. So that's what we need is a certain physical structure that can
allow this what we're doing now. We love defining such as should take some
good food. Typical kind of say environment where the public. Mhm. Just
about zero.
So the need for the introduction in the contest enforcement and
man's structural system which are quite okay. And this is very at the end.
It's a very question. You don't have to go into metaphysics, understand
that. Yes, you must have to the eastern forms seeking if you don't have.
Okay,
the bottle called music. If you don't have a pipeline paint mistake, you
don't have. Right? So you always need a certain system. I'm sorry. And the
instruments that we have now society is so
this is so unfit the society itself is. Mhm. Momentum
the heart you. Mhm.
Yeah. Was how
I mean,
Yes. So
mary at the end, the difference will be I'm not saying because I think
that we will succeed. But the main difference would be the anchored ah
okay. Matter yet whisper. I'm not saying that it would be succeeding, but
that would be different if it was succeeded
because I really believe that the most subtle but the most powerful
process that is going eyes, his love to make life to survive matter into
spirit.
Mm hmm. Mhm.
Yes.
Yeah.
Right.
Mhm. I think that the answer will be in adding up the cost of friends
phoenix and then compare discussed with phoenix, which would be let's say
containing one cubic miles just to to say it quickly and then we might
find out that it's the opposite. It's not that phoenix the phoenix of
today, allows that much change. I think the finish of today is a gigantic
structure, but at the same time it's a very rigid structure and it's very
rigid mainly because it's so expensive that it paralyzes life. So I think
we can come up with the phoenix which has which is much more,
can be more swiftly rearranged and it can be much cheaper in its own
physical cost. The other aspect is that the phoenix of today is very much
of a segregated kind of environment. And one reason is just a very
physical question of matter and energy being organized and transported and
tied together and interconnected and so on. If we forget that we are, we
are coming from matter, and we depend very much on physical
demands. We are putting ourselves in thinking that we can do things that
we cannot do and matter, and energy are very fundamental to whatever we do
biologically socially, culturally and so on. And evidently phoenix is one
of the last one of the ways that nature would never choose to subside and
to develop and to somehow become better. If nature had a choice, you will
not be phoenix, it would be a solid phoenix
and that doesn't mean that this is a simple thing of piling up phoenix, it
becomes more complex because the results would have to be more lively in
order to be positive, But it's quite evident that the Phoenix of 200 or
300 square miles is not going to be functioning. It's not going to give
the answer that we as a phoenix wells, after I to ask from this machine,
we call phoenix. So the slogan ish and the party and dreadful nous of
phoenix is in part caused by the gigantic structure. This tends to try to
sustain phoenix and doesn't succeed.
You have to think of what phoenix is not just in terms of housing offices
and production center markets and so on, but the asphalt concrete, the
underground networks and so on. But basically this fact that the
communication channels are interrupted and the transportation channels are
becoming worse and worse.
Yes.
What
you,
well, you're doing more than with more than physical space is now, you're
dealing with social problems, political problems, and moral problems. My
suggestion is that through a certain structural system, you can suggest
better ways of going about social, political and economic problems. But
there is a those that I was suggesting here, we're not sufficient reason
or sufficient condition when they were necessary conditions. I think that
is necessary if we want to have a better society to have a better
container for society definitely because also because it tends to
desegregated society physically Instrumentally functional. But the
decision of not being segregated is finally and moral decision, an ethical
decision in other physical decision, but the physical can do can go quite
far into desegregating the non physical.
Yes.
Huh. Well it would depend you know, somehow
in the definition of freedom, I tend to define what we call freedom now
license in a sense that I do my own business and never mind your business.
That's none of your business. Well this is hardly you know, it's not
really freedom. It's the indifference of one center of life toward the
north central like that supposedly is with him or with her or with it on
the same
spaceship as fuller because it and this indifference is not very realistic
evidently. So I'm not suggesting that we should take communism or
socialism that you know as a total doctrine and go on from there, it's
quite evident and the free enterprise needs revision in a very drastic way
because it's not working.
Free enterprise has to be freed from many things including greed. Mhm.
Self centeredness
feel
who knows what? So we're free enterprise is not free for the moment his
slave or many of the less enticing aspect of the soul man I guess.
Yes
there right
mm they wouldn't need
well there is an aspect of pride for what you belong to which is evidently
has a very thing. There's a very clean separation between the positive
aspect of being having a pride for what you belong to and an ancient again
antagonism with other institutions with other groups that they don't
belong to your group but at the same time, I think it's very important to
believe in what you are and what you do and what you belong to. Otherwise
we're value where the values of life, if everything is gray and to be
there, to be here, to be elsewhere is the same thing. So I think that a
town that believes in what stands for, I think it's very important. It's
also a dangerous thing if this town becomes a to ingrain into its own
pride and it starts to fight the next town because it believes that it's
better. But to be able to identify with the community and to be able to
identify the community with assumption with physical and I didn't see it
in post
Yes,
yes, if I don't think we can start by destroying what we have because
that's the only thing we have and we should try to keep it up and improve
it if we can, at the same time, we were starting to realize that what we
have is not good enough for the future. We cannot really see phoenix as
the great
at the end of the line as far as the position goes. So I think we should
do both try to maintain what we have and to improve it as much as we can
at the same time, we should try to come up with new things which are
probably going to be better. So it would be a question of two, Two ways of
approaching the environment for society. One is to develop, keep going
with what we have a narrow needs to develop new ideas and the best one
would succeed. So as you were saying, suppose that you build an oncology,
it works better well then people will start to demand environments of that
kind. So you would have a slow evolution from one system to a radio system.
So it would be an evolutionary process will not be a revolution or a
bloody revolution would just be that instead of having developments as we
have to know, we would have developments which would be quite different.
Yes,
I didn't.
Now, I think there should be limited to the, to the, to the size of any
community. Anyhow, this limit can be part of the building ability to
develop to up to a point and then the ability to create a new a new baby
so that you, if a community fills up a certain structural system, then it
can moving part of the population into a new community, share linear
linear developments, then you can somehow go on into into two dimensions
as far as developing geographically and then plug in, You're three
dimensional structures, which would be new cities, let's say your new
communities.
But I don't think we can say that a community can develop from 10,000, and
200,000 and then millions and billions. I don't think that's uh, that's
going to be good for us or for the earth for anything
size doesn't have to do very much with intensity of quality comes the
moment when the size is against those things. And as we know, there are
very different sizes for biological systems just because of this.
Well many of those structures are, as I was saying a little far out but
many of them are feasible right now.
And then the the other side of the man of the mental is that we should be
asking technology demanding from technology, what we need and not be told
by technology, what we technology things is is able to deliver for
purposes which are very often not very you made.
Mhm. Ah There are,
it's quite evident that if you if you are able to do more with less, there
might be a tendency of saying well the earth has this much so we can if we
can do more with what the earth connect can afford, we're going to
increase the population but I don't think that's how things work really.
Mhm. Yeah, population increase don't depend so much on what's available.
But other
presence, so much so that most of the population explosions are happening
where the means of lively quite limited.
But having a Probably five or six billions of people to serve in the next
decades, 20 years or so. We better find ways of serving them better and
the way we are using now are certainly the most west.
Yeah,
no there are there are you know, buildings, sizable buildings
that have been constructed and we're standing some of those things. But I
would not suggest a very large ecology in a very cystic, very dangerous
seismic. But at the same time we build now large structure, especially in
steel that we're standing,
that kind of natural phenomena.
Yes,
killed.
Mhm.
Well, I make a distinction between what I call environmental information
and I call electronic information and one environmental information I
think has been with us for unions and has been really defining us more
biologically biologically physiologically and also mentally. The
electronic information has been with us a very short time and evidently is
very powerful and very important and very useful. But it should not take
the place of the environmental information. We need both of them at this
point. But definitely what we need desperately not to be here somehow.
Same mentally is the environmental information because the information
that comes through all our senses, including our skins and it's the one
that somehow makes us into all around wholesome creatures.
Because if we if we take the two kinds of information to extremes, we can
see that the environmental information has made us up to let's say to the
inception of civilization, if we take the training information purely
assad, we can imagine of a creature being born put into into a white box,
plugged in with all the plug ins that we want to and then made into a
something that I tend to call a savage mind and the savage mind is because
this creature would have would know everything theoretically. It would be
a beastly kind of creature because we know anything environmentally. So
the meaning of anything would be very very strange for this creature. So
if we insist as McLuhan somehow seems to be insisting that the electronic
information is the answer, I think we're going to define a very savage
kind of humanity. So what we have to do is to balance this information
which is becoming more and more elaborate and more and more intensified
but also more segregated. It were too small. Re integrate this information
into the environment which means integrate it with this kind of condition
whereby each individual is really fed information not through his own eyes
or his own here's only but all the senses including the sense of touch
including the the awareness of what danger in
pleasure and so on and on. He is connected with our physical being
biologically speaking, not just mentally speaking.
So I think that unless environment becomes a very rich experience in its
own right we will tend to make very abstract human beings and we know what
the abstract mike can do. Vietnam is a typical example of the absolute
mind working out solutions of paper mm coming up with what you know we
came up with and
yes.
Yeah
I
mhm
stop
all the
I don't think so. Not necessarily. So definitely. And the reason is that
I'm not suggesting that we should build thousands of little homes. You
know, plugged in here and there but really produce a three dimensional
topography where you can build your own environment at the same time. This
topography because it's wrapped around the institutions of society. It
would plug you directly into those institutions so that when you want to
participate, you are able to participate. When you don't want to
participate. You close that door and you open your door on your side.
Which is let's say the open landscape.
You're
Yeah, I would I would call them more skeletal
landscapes where you can build your own home, cite your own private
landscape. Okay, At the same time, we can't see the natural man of today
is not the natural man of 5000 years ago. What's natural? It was it was
natural then. And we cannot really assume or presume that restaurant
Colombia are going to be the answers. That's a very melancholy kind of
perspective, I think. And the reason is really the basic reason which is
that in order to come up with events which are making life more lively
automatically, we're going to come up with events which are more complex.
He's not working. You're aware on that's the way it goes because a fish
is more complex than protozoa. And as a cat is more complex than a fish.
And we are more complex than the cat and society is more complex than
individual. Inasmuch as this is the sum of many individuals. So that this
complex ification is part of the evolution of life.
Yes. When when something is really it's really complex, let's say
beautifully complex. It performs simply. But this simplicity is not the
over simplification of technology is something quite different because as
the complicated is different from the complex. Technology tends to be
complicated. Life tends to be complex and there is a big difference. The
difference again between process and growth.
I would tend to say, yes, what what we are doing now. I think in this
country is really the withdrawal of society from itself. And withdrawal
comes about by using the complete the complicated machinery and technology.
So, because we failed in our complexity, let's say what we're doing.
We're trying to over simplify our problems by asking technology to solve
them what technology do does he is go about this problem through
processing? Through change. What we have to ask is too good to regain the
simplicity of complexity. Through growth and development.
Yeah.
Okay, I have some some information here. If anyone wants. Thank you. Last
question.
Mhm.
Yeah. Well, the models somehow trying to suggest the final structure, as
you were saying, if there is a final structure, but evidently there will
be phases. So, up to the point of the representation of the model of the
community and the structure would develop.
Yeah,
well, I'm not I'm not speaking of a simple, you know, solution of a
problem with what I'm suggesting is that you can increment, you can come
up with implementations of all the elements that are making from going
from a small community, they say to a larger one that's part of planning,
because if we really do not accept the idea that planning is possible than
very few things are possible. Planning is part it's part and parcel of
life. I'm planning what I'm going through this afternoon and tomorrow, so
planning is really the texture of life itself, especially when when life
becomes conscious and subconscious like it is for us. So if we accept the
idea of planning, which I don't think we can reject, then we must we'll
try to play better and what we are planning now.
Mhm. It's
Yeah,
yeah. Mhm, mm. Thank you.