The best of all possible worlds

In my last blog I talked about how viruses and the like are our friends, not our enemies. This raises a whole, bigger issue. The idea was thoroughly ridiculed by Voltaire, in 'Candide', but one must take the attitude that:
Everything is for the best, in the best of all possible worlds.

This idea is embedded in all religions, where one is exhorted to 'worship' God, to 'have faith' in God, to 'thank God for all his gifts', to ,praise' God, and so on, and it ties up with the old saying: God moves in mysterious ways his wonders to perform.

The point is not that God, (or, in my terms, the Que) wants to be told how wonderful he is; the point is that in order to understand the world, one has to start from the premiss that: all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

The key concepts to grasp are:
1. the extreme complexity of the world (which makes it inaccessible, in all important respects, to the simple logic of science)
2. at bottom, it is designed to work --- for US. That is, it is designed to be an environment in which human beings can thrive.
3. because it is a virtual reality: a) it requires a creator, the Que, and
b) mind preceeds matter. ie, what we see in the world, shows us what is going on in our minds.

This issue is of extreme importance, because our culture is a culture of critics, of problem solvers, and this has seriously bad consequences --- one might say that this, in fact, IS our problem. We urgently need to let go of the idea that the world is a hot-bed of problems that need solving before we can be healthy and happy, because it is precisely because we focus on, and believe in, our problems that we are not healthy and happy!!

At the simplest of levels, so long as we 'thrive' on problem solving, then we require the Que to provide us with problems to solve. Yet, also, when we focus on problems we invite depression, and other illnesses. And, we create a counter-evolutionary situation, ie, a situation in which 'all good things must end'. (So, ask once more the old question: why did the Roman Empire colapse?)

The example of how to deal with a complex world has been provided: it is the natural world. Evolution is the answer to a complexity that is way beyond mathematical equations. Evolution picks up on what is good, and drops what is bad. So, for example, when nature is busy designing wings for birds, it ensures that birds that fly best breed best, and thus the best wings get bred into future generations.

So, if I want to design a new computer, the correct approach is to look at what is best in current computers. So, I would sit down with an array of computers, play with them for a while, and then make a list of all the things I like about the various models. These likes would include appearance, perhaps key-board design, as well as, say, the language used by a particular software designer, certain attributes of the way a particular word-processor works etc --- anything and everything one likes would go on the list.

One would them go down the route of 'enhancing' each of these attributes, even where that means that to enhance one particular attribute, one has to drop many others. (this is called diversification)

There are many important/interesting things going on here.

First, as I have pointed out, one is creating diversity, as nature does, but as our culture does not (--competition creates monocultures --- not good!!) What is so good about diverstiy --- simply, it is enriching, but also, 'not puting all one's eggs in one basket', and so on.

Second, one is always working with things one likes, and always enhancing the 'likability' factor. Thus one is always creating things one wants to use.

Third, we are always enhancing our own ability to see the beauty/good/usefulness in things. (Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!)

Notice form the above, that speed, being something we always fault computers for lacking, would not be on the list of likes, and therefore not something we would be pursuing. It is something that would 'evolve naturally', or not at all. Meanwhile, since we were not all transfixed by a desire for speed, technologists would not be 'blinkered' by a single-minded focus on that one goal. Chasing what they/we like would mean no competition, and lots of jobs for all!

Moving on form computers, life, 'your life', 'my life', wants to be treated in the same way. Life should not be seen as full of problems that need to be solved. It should be seen as full of good things. One should be making lists of all the things one likes about one's life, and going about trying to enhance those. (remember the bit about 'thanking' God? and remember virtual reality, and the fact that the Que is the creator of one's virtual world, the creator, in fact, of one's life? Do you want to throw its efforts back in its face, or do you want to say thank you, and motivate it to try to achieve bigger and better things for you?) And, more importantly, one should be trying to enhance one's ability to 'see the good in'. One's thoughts should be full of:'the good thing about this illness is....'; 'the good thing about that car crash was....';etc.

The point is that by doing this you are going down the route of evolving a healthier, happier and, in all ways better life.

Everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.