World Day of Social Justice

"Social injustice is the result of the inability to recognize humanity - the world - reality itself - as a developing and integral whole."

Today we have the opportunity to reflect on what more we can do to ensure a good standard of living for all global citizens.

Social justice is an essential component for building a more equitable world in which every individual can thrive and feel safe.

Despite the advantages of technology and modernization for our society, many people in the world, through no fault of their own, live in unacceptable conditions for humans. They are deprived of basic amenities such as healthcare, housing, food, education, jobs, and equal opportunities, which are vital for a healthy life.

The Global IWRI team works in the paradigm of the formation of integral consciousness, attracting all the achievements of modern science to create a new foundation for the upbringing and education of people. This is where we see the most viable way to ensure a more just world. Social justice should be the norm of society in the near future.

Poverty begins in our consciousness, with our inability to take care of others, the way we would like others to take care of us. Actions to achieve justice, stability, and equal access to the use of social benefits are limited by the desires of leadership solving urgent and emerging problems at the expense of others, on a personal, collective or global scale. At the same time, the most important condition of integral social consciousness is ignored. Social injustice is the result of the inability to recognize humanity - the world - reality itself - as a developing and integral whole.

We invite our readers to join the discussion about ways to approach the realization of people's aspirations for justice and opportunities, to achieve such noble causes in our world.

Global IWRI Statement In Recognition of International Education Day 2023

Global IWRI (Integral World Research Institute) takes particular pride in saluting International Education Day, because for us -- this is every day.

The next-generation advancement of international education is the cause, which has drawn together, in love and devotion, volunteers from across the globe. We come in that common cause from every culture, every walk of life, from the education profession, as well as those of the natural and social sciences, the humanities, and the arts, and, also those from all manners of infrastructure professions, who are dedicated to our special vision of integral education.

In that vision, we see the future hope of humanity -- the solution of its global and local problems, and innovation of perceived opportunities. This will come through the adults of tomorrow, growing smarter and wiser, and crucially, more unified. This, in turn, will come through the collective intelligence prowess of humanity, advanced to full potential by modeling the communal evolutionary successes of nature, intensely studied over the past several decades, as well as integrating what has been learned in psychology, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence during this period, as well as from new knowledge, continuously unfolding.

"Intgrated" refers to belonging as a part to a whole, a bridge between the individual, families and friends, communities, nations, and global humanity. We see creative risk-taking and prudence, balanced at all levels. We see respect and support for differences in cultures, social, and governmental structures, and ways of life, while working unbiasedly, which is the only way that collective intelligence can succeed towards the objective common good -- coming to ideas and their implementation to get at the very roots to help our world find its way to a brighter future for all.

Multidisciplinary Group Project-based, ”Fractal-self” Directed Learning

Multidisciplinary group project-based, ”fractal-self” directed learning is one of two dynamics for which the fractal group structure was created. The goal here is as complex as the name, but studies of natural systems and human group psychology imply that it is possible to achieve – the question is only to what extent?

Here we begin, with the integration of the subject matter in literally the most natural way possible – the framework of scale-free network, Nature’s general abstract outline of “system.”

In broad strokes, this network structure corresponds to the general fractal geometry of nature (per Benoit Mandelbrot’s observation and book of the same title,THE FRACTAL GEOMETRY OF NATURE (1982)) – a structure, that when combined with its dynamic as a whole in “phase space,” takes the form of a fractal orbit in this space, known as a “strange attractor.” This is the signpost of the onset of deterministic chaos, and with this state comes integral communication. That, which is a part seen from above or a subsystem seen from below, no longer remains in isolation. Rather, it connects-communicates, down to within its own internal systems, but more significantly, up into higher holistic echelons – up to the system as a whole, and the system into its higher environment – of which it is actually a subsystem, or subsystem in development (R. Shaw, “Strange attractors, chaotic behavior and information flow,” Zeitschrift fur Naturforschung A (Astrophysik, Physik und Physikalische Chemie), v 36A, n 1, Jan. 1981, 80-112). This is a unification, as it were, of what Arthur Koestler’s termed from his book THE SOUL OF THE MACHINE (1967), the entire “holarchy,” and through which the part now even connects-communicates with other parts at its formerly independent reductionist level, inclusive of any reductionist outside perspective of such intra-level communication (Intra-Level and Inter-Level Interaction, PDF of Intra-Level and Inter-Level Interaction).

From arguments presented in consciousness studies (Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff, Orchestrated Objective Reduction (“Orch OR”)) and investigations of microbial behavior (e.g. Learning from Bacteria about Social Networks- Google TechTalks - Oct 10, 2011 - Eshel Ben-Jacob), there is some evidence that consciousness is an entry point into nonlinearity. This appears to hold down even to a proto-consciousness level, as it were, of resonant quantum tunneling structure (the benzene ring) - an atomic level of “desire,” and this latter may actually be involved in directing this mechanism in the particular direction of communal growth.

Another more mundane possibility proposed for the initiation of evolution at the simple molecular level, is the mechanism of nonlinear thermodynamics proposed by Jeremy England that tends to develop more complex stable forms that more efficiently “eat” an information flow. Although there seems little evidence that such alone could proceed much beyond biochemical complexities of several atoms without branching too broadly into dead-end local solutions, and in this, appears to share the huge mathematical problems of neo-Darwinism. In fact as England himself points out, his theory is ultimately a fundamental, physicochemical generalization of the Darwinian approach. While this makes the mathematical issues even more extreme beyond the microevolutionary domain, in the case of England’s theory, the microevolution is at the nanolevel - the relatively simple inorganic to organic molecular level. Regarding the early Earth, this just may have been the kick the “soupy sea” needed to birth such sufficiently embodied quantum conscious actors as Hameroff suggests, that could take communal evolution on from there.

Such would seem to answer a puzzle realized by Michael Behe by a suggestion from a colleague after publication of his Book, Darwin’s Black Box challenging neo-Darwinian theory, that he claimed was more powerful than other arguments offered in his book. For this is not merely the establishment of irreducible complexity, but the doing so across electric fields in a manner that should be thermodynamically impossible. However, not so when, so-to-speak, a quantum computer is at work that has access to useful potential energy and a mechanism of tunneling. [The tunneling mechanism that is the true secret behind enzyme lock-and-key action, as discovered in 2006 - ten years after the publication of Behe’s book - may be a hint to a more general pattern in communal growth at the molecular biological level. As well this seems to dovetail with the endosymbiotic theory of Lynn Sagan (later Margulis) ("On the Origin of Mitosing Cells,'' Journal of Theoretical Biology, March 1967).

Karl Pribram’s holonomic brain model suggests a wavelike holographic in the brain (that has at least been justified as part if not all of brain function regarding sensory motor/consciousness interaction. Similarly, Stuart Hameroff’s particular studies on benzene structure quantum oscillation magnification (molecular->microtubule->neuronic cellular->nerve) have been experimentally verified and solved century-old mysteries of anesthesia action on the nervous system. Together these seem to indicate the communal evolutionary rising - of unifying global consciousness up to the most advanced (and certainly through personal experience) individual human level. It is noteworthy that the fractal nature of brain states - structurally and dynamically (which seems to also imply chaotic “integral education/communication”) may already be well-established. [The fractal brain: scale-invariance in structure and dynamics]

In any case, going still further up the communal evolutionary scale, integral education/communication (that is, self-directed, “multi-disciplinary” learning within a “neural network” of integral system connection) becomes clearly ubiquitous. It appears throughout communities in all five identified kingdoms of life, in fact integrating between kingdoms (as the case of fungi and plantae for example, the more than 450 quadrillion kilometers of mycorrhizal fungi across the Earth’s upper 10 centimeters of soil, that thread in colonies about the roots of trees and other plants to form a planetary-wide nutrient and information network - the “Earth’s Internet”). In the possible extreme is the entirety of life on the planet itself - with the notable exception of humanity.

[Hopefully as the most advanced living community on the planet takes the longest to mature -- but with the most profound result, the hopeful crowning achievement of Nature. IWRI is founded on the hope of playing some small part, acting as one enzyme as it were, in the interaction leading to its accomplishment.]

A far more controversial suggestion (though perhaps still applicable to some limited extent even if largely incorrect or perhaps we are yet too early in geological history), is the Gaia hypothesis. This was first proposed by James Lovelock in 1972, joined in further development by the same Lynn Margulis (formally Sagan) who, as noted earlier, was already thinking in integral system terms at the molecular biological end of the spectrum just a few years earlier. Gaia proposes that not only does all terrestrial life form a single integral education/communication system, but rather that just as fungi are incorporated with the plantae into a single such network, so the entire ecosystem including water, terrain, atmosphere, and climate, are incorporated into the global life network as though the Earth - including its nonliving majority, were a single living thing. Now it is true that living things do form such systems, the enamel on our teeth and calcium of our bones for example. However in the extreme case under discussion, there are many difficulties regarding a number of known realities. Yet again to keep in mind, there are also some indications that there could be limited islands of truth to the suggestions of the Gaia hypothesis, even if not contiguously global.

---

A Still Deeper Dive: However, a still deeper reworking of perspective comes from Donald Hoffman’s work leading to his Multimodal User Interface theory that is so strongly supported by evidence of how perception works in nature. More to the point, by a large body of genetic algorithm simulations, he demonstrated that without fail, any organism not coming on the scene immediately with a vast number of modifications to summarize perception into sufficiently simple models of reality (like the icons on a computer screen’s user interface), was so far from the “fittest” as to die off immediately without any hope of evolving into something that could survive. The implication was astounding -- that perception of reality in this world was already a vast simplification from the start, and that actual reality is based on the interrelationships - combination into single entities, and divergence into separate entities. The care taken in the analysis was so good that Hoffman states the in private discussions, as staunch a neo-Darwinist as Richard Dawkins has granted the possibility the Hoffman is correct and stated that he could see evolutionary principles being backed up into higher levels of abstraction (which would likely solve the mathematical problems that, again neo-Darwinism has struggled with for decades, only worsening as the intricate complexities of actual life forms and their communal hierarchical systems became evermore embarrassingly more apparent. In the context of this theory, the development suggested above is merely a storyline that works within the rules required for an artificial reality where space and time don’t exist. Realizations over the past 8 decades, from the 1949 “Gödel (time loop) universe” claimed to disprove the existence of time, to demonstration of the 1935 Einstein, Podalsky, and Rosen’s impossible entanglement effect decades later (that have, in 2022, been recognized by a Nobel prize in physics) - notably as a statistical after effect (could the logical impossibly be “seen” any other way?), the holographic principle that has rendered the world two-dimensional with general Relativity and gravity rendered as the mere entropy after-effect of the breakdown of quantum entanglement, and most recently the analysis behind the Amplituhedron theory rendering a clear admission that physicists have avoided for years as neo-Darwinists their own mathematical paradoxes, that space and time are only illusions of the consciousness.

Hoffman’s approach also seems to coincide with Robert Lanza’s Theory of Biocentrism.

Whatever the actual mix of deterministic chaos, consciousness, light energy stored in extended water surface tension, nonlinear thermodynamics, or other yet unconsidered mechanisms, working with, or around nonlinearity towards some universal drive towards scale-free (fractal) networks appears to be the key to system interaction/communication. - The result appears to be the principle of “emergence”.

This result of this is two-fold:

Regarding the immediately emergent system, it provides the inter-scale feedback required for homeostasis – that is stability. It is, as it were, a local minimum-well in information space (Wikipedia: Information space).

On the other hand, the interaction with what is still just “the environment,” and so-to-speak, is not yet recognized as an upper system towards it, slowly – statistically – moves the homeostasis away from its “comfort zone” (that stable well in solution space), evolving it through another chaotic – communal evolutionary process – up into a higher system, expanding the integral communication into that and its related subsystem branches. [One might see this as analogous to the moon-earth interaction tidal effect that draws water up out of the ocean bed onto the beach at high tide.]

From the perspective of the upper system, that on a higher scale “sees itself” already in a normative state of homeostasis – a root system recovering a distanced subsystem – like some lost organ - as part of an extremum recovery within the framework of a greater homeostasis.

A middle line view might be to see this as the relationship developing between a gestating fetus and its mother. In the virtual classroom, the instructor(s) will play the role of that “mother,”and the students, the fetus.