Learning, Theory, and Doctrine

If the definition of learning is a modification of behavior based upon either indirect or direct experience, then it could be suggested that many of these people would apply to socialism or communism have chosen not to acknowledge experience of those in the past.

This is a problem with revisionist history – it short circuits the ability to learn. Instead, perhaps it offers a surrogate of comfortable beliefs based upon theory of how people should be rather than are.

It’s extremely important to actually learn from history – to not learn from history would be to dismiss all the bad things that people have either perished or endured. The pain, the sorrow, the anger, the frustration… all of that is at risk for being negated simply because history can be uncomfortable.

This isn’t to say that all the bad parts of history should be celebrated and cherished; the most reprehensible acts are no cause for improper interpretation. Rather, they should be exactly what they are – indicators of how poorly things turned out based upon idealism. This could be fanatical religious idealism, corporate profiteering, identity politics, socioeconomic theory, or litany of other “justifications” that were adeptly used by charismatic – yet malevolent and/or megalomaniacal – figures in the cause of what was perceived to be “right.”

We are social creatures and we will always look to the path of least resistance. As a result, there is not any realistic way that there could be a social utopia – we just don’t work that way. We are way too complex to have a form of perfection that suits the needs of all and accommodates the desires of everyone.

Revisiting The Matrix yet again, one of Hugo Weaving’s monologues as “Agent Smith” resonates:

Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy… It was a disaster; no one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this: the peak of your civilization. I say your civilization, because as soon as we started thinking for you it really became our civilization, which is of course what this is all about. Evolution, Morpheus, evolution. Like the dinosaur. Look out that window. You’ve had your time. 

In writing to Dave, I mused over the idea that our perfection is actually because we are imperfect. This is the danger of theory – that it is often developed on a desired set of understandings, circumstances, and/or expectations without taking into account obvious or drastic variations which we will inevitably impart into any system being the humans that we are.

I don’t like theory; likewise and understandably, I don’t like doctrine. These enter the realm of absolutes, and while they may serve as effective guidelines, they tend to form an adhesive conceptual goo which often prevents people from deviating as needed – or even abandoning – as necessary. Strict adherence to theory and doctrine usually signify a lack of imagination; it is an expectation of what to expect and what the results are or will be; this is usually the undoing of both theory and doctrine. Therefore, it could be suggested that theory and doctrine are not conducive towards learning… But that is an idea that makes me laugh as much as it makes me grimace because it is more than likely wrong.

In “A Splendid Chimera,” Dave made an interesting comparison between the current shift in societal values/goals and the mythological creature of composite nihilism – the chimera. I particularly enjoyed his description:

It is a confused mass of conflicting values and ideas, and the only thing it is good for is destruction. And this is what the chimera does in mythology because it has no unity of purpose and no unity of existence… because it’s all these different animals that are competing at the same time. All it does is destroy things; all it does is breathe fire and wreak havoc.

However, his closing questions stuck in my mind – “where are we headed […] how long will it take to get there?”

My response was via text; while it may work its way into a future show, I am compelled to elaborate further:

There’s a lot of conflicting thoughts that I have about where we’re going and what that means.

You ask how long before the implosion?

I don’t think that’s an easy one to nail down because there’s too many variables involved – internal/external politics, food supply, global economy… How long before we hit a critical mass is more of a question of “have we already hit a soft critical mass and didn’t know it?”

Where are we headed from here?

You and I both know that history is full of horrors, but it is one of those aspects of our nature that we tend to overlook – the ability to thrive in the face of adversity and overcome the challenges that we built for ourselves.

This kind of goes into what happens after.

I would love to think that every stage in human development – at least societal in this sense – lead to us being better versions of our previous selves.

That isn’t the case unfortunately.

We seem to be repeating the same lessons but out of different books or using different mediums. You can have Plato’s allegory of the cave on parchment, but the lessons are just as ignored – even if it’s presented with the most up-to-date graphics and well-researched format… We just like repeating lessons; We love to think that our ideas are unlike anything else, but in the brutal reality of it all, somebody somewhere has probably already drafted that lesson plan.

However, I will remain the vicious optimist and the eternal inquisitor – how can we make this better? What is my role in the whole scheme of things?

Inevitably, and finally, I find the opportunity to insert yet another Battlestar Galactica quote- this one as beautifully simple as it is profound:

A closed system lacks the ability to renew itself.

We need challenge. We are imperfect, ever-changing, and never static. When we strive for one idea of “perfection,” we inflict untold harm upon others. When we become idle, we devise new and improved ways to entertain ourselves – and usually at the expense of others. Lastly, when we lack challenge… when we lull ourselves into the false reality that we have attained an ideal state or reached some intrinsic or extrinsic goal, we find that we have lost that one thing which serves as the foundation for philosophy, religion, politics, or parenting:

Purpose.

Purpose defines all – especially learning, theory, and doctrine. While I might disagree with the motivations and actions of all players in the present sociopolitical chaos, I marvel at the causality involved… I dwell on my own purpose… I ponder what my role in it may be… and I continue to laugh.