The War and the Interaction Between Levels of Reality: a Transdisciplinary Approach to Peace

Adrian Mirel Petrariu, global education magazine, UNESCO, UNHCR, ACNUR, transdisciplinary

Adrian Mirel Petrariu

Teză de doctorat: UNIVERSITATEA BABEŞ-BOLYAI FACULTATEA DE STUDII EUROPENE, ŞCOALA DOCTORALĂ “PARADIGMA EUROPEANĂ”: Niveluri de Realitate în sistemele sociale

adrian.petrariu@gmail.com  /  Web: www.magisteria.ro

Abstract: What is the connection between war, human gender division, and personal evolution? Making new connections between things already known is a very interesting included third that reconciles the contradiction between the information already acquired and the new information, the inventions, the discoveries. The transdisciplinary methodology also refers to the principle of the included third, the projection of a phenomenon in at least three levels of Reality in order to understand it objectively and the continuous causal triangulation. In order to understand the phenomenon of peace and war we must, therefore, study the interactions between the most relevant levels of Reality regarding this matter and their consequences. A war or peace result in a certain level of Reality is a phenomenon composed of itself and its opposite in the adjacent level of Reality. Hence, from the perspective of circular causality, a war in the physical level has always as cause a war in another level. War between states belongs to a logical chain that ends with the comfort zone of the self-calming of the individual. The responsibility equates with inverting a contradiction: instead of war in a certain level we must have peace and instead of peace in a certain level we must have war. The circular causality specific to the animal level, when applied, triggers and projects within the human level a correspondent circularity between the emotional violence and physical violence, grounded on the contradiction, lacking the presence of the included middle of the mind, between masculine, physical power and feminine, emotional power. The failure to obtain peace, represented by the triggering of the physical or emotional conflicts, is, in reality, the general resultant of the failure of the personal relationships within the social system at a given time. However, the falling into the animal level is possible, only because there also exist the possibility of ascending to the cosmic level, of personal evolution. In conclusion, the recurrent war is just another price paid for the validity of the individual path. We cannot take the path for anyone else but ourselves. There is a contradiction between nothing can be done and anything is possible and its included third is that something can be done though. This something is a type of education that is able to provide the circumstances necessary for real personal experiences and understanding.

Keywords: transdisciplinarity, war, levels, peace, evolution, causality, education, coexistence, balance.

.

There must be war?

From a transdisciplinary point of view, when a certain result is desired, we must acknowledge that that result belongs to a certain level of Reality and this is the reason for which there is at least another level of Reality in which that result is projected at once as itself and its opposite. According to the logic of energy, this happens because a result is always an actualization obtained through a contradiction between an actualization and a potentialization and any included third means bringing peace to a contradiction and it contains the contradiction and its pacification simultaneously.

Therefore, a result of peace or a result of war shall always be composed from peace and war at once in another level of Reality. For instance, emotional peace is often the result of the reconciling the war between mind and body, and in the same time it is also true that without the contradiction between mind and body the human emotional level would not exist.

We can view peace as a stable relationship resultant of itself and its opposite in another level of Reality, due to the presence of a third factor. However, following the same transdisciplinary logic, for each win or advantage inside a relationship we can identify a loss or a disadvantage within the same relationship or outside it. Managing the disadvantages afferent to the advantages is a question of responsibility for the participants to that interaction.

When three levels of Reality interact at once, according to the above logic, we will have at least an advantage and at least a disadvantage. In this respect, peace can only be reached by purposely sacrificing the entirety or a part of the advantage of our level for the sake of good of others and the unavoidable disadvantage caused by the interaction of the levels of Reality to be distributed equitably between the participants to the relationship.

It’s the same with the “thinking positive” versus “thinking negative” trends; if we want to think positive instead of negative on a specific level, then we had better choose another certain negative thinking to back it up.

However, such a sacrifice cannot be performed without understanding that a gain in a lower level of Reality is less valuable than a loss in a higher level of Reality. It is the difference, if you want, between concord, which brings peace to everyone together with ascending in level, and compromise, which brings peace to everyone together with descending in level.

GRAPH I: A war or peace result in a certain level of Reality is a phenomenon composed of itself and its opposite in the adjacent level of Reality

graph 1, Adrian_Mirel_Petrariu, transdisciplinarity, level of reality, global education magazine

According to the said principle, a war result in a certain level will be projected, like the peace result, still to a war-peace contradiction in an adjacent level of Reality. Nevertheless, if the peace result is an ascendant included third caused by the intervention of a presence factor, the war result in its turn is a descendant included third caused by the intervention of an absence factor.

Hence, from the perspective of circular causality, a war in the physical level has always as cause a war in another level.

The ternary fundamental structure of the human being becomes in this way the first parameter to be taken into account. Alike with the ternary structure of the Reality, it includes the physical component, the intellectual component and the emotional component.

Nicolescu (2007):

Any thinking grounded on the ternary structure of Reality is of immediate actuality” (p. 305).

An essential epistemological transdisciplinary principle states that the Reality cannot be understood objectively from the point of view of a single level of Reality, but from the perspective of three levels at once. This is why, in order to study the level of Reality of the normal human being we have to connect it to other two adjacent levels: one with a binary structure and one with a quaternary structure.

GRAPH II: The interaction between various interior and exterior levels of Reality: individual, social, cosmic, mind, emotion, body

graph 2, Adrian_Mirel_Petrariu, transdisciplinarity, level of reality, global education magazine

We notice that the usual level of man is one structured ternary, but if these three components of his take part to Reality under a general state of awareness, a four dimensioned level result becomes possible.

As for war, no matter how strange this may sound, the reason for its existence is its avoidance in another level of Reality. The idea that we cannot obtain peace by means of war, widely spread as political argument today, implies the confusion of levels. We cannot indeed obtain peace in the same level as war by means of war, but it is mandatory, for peace to exist, war to exist someplace.

So, the unwanted war at planetary scale appears because conflict is being avoided at state scale, like the political conflict. Peace between political parties regarding the foreign action makes possible foreign violence. Avoiding conflicts between individuals is what makes possible the social action or party action. At last, the avoidance of inner conflict, the constant looking for inner peace leads to war between individuals. The avoidance of individual war, both interior and exterior, which is often the way by which an individual should find the proper place in the world, can be, in fact, avoiding responsibility. The conclusion of the transdisciplinary logic is that war between states belongs to a logical chain that ends with the comfort zone of the self-calming of the individual.

What was said above is not an approval of the war per se, but an emphasis on the importance of choosing the type and level of war we must endure. This corresponds with a certain method described by some spiritual traditions, the payment in advance, through which a man can learn to become responsible.

In this respect, the responsibility equates with inverting a contradiction: instead of war in a certain level we must have peace and instead of peace in a certain level we must have war. The relevant question remains, therefore, in what level should war be endured?

Why is war even possible?

Starting with the fundamental contradiction of life systems (Petrariu, 2013) between life and death, projected in the dynamics of interdependent systems as the contextualized contradiction between to eat and to be eaten, we must state that by enduring the war in a certain level of Reality we understand consuming the energy of that level in order to power up the other levels participant to interaction.

For instance, in the case of the animal level containing bi-dimensional or even single dimensional organisms, the social level, which is the level of animal coexistence, can only feed on the energy coming from their physical or physical-emotional level of interactions. That means that the entire social life of the animals, i.e. the animal food chain system, depends on emotional hierarchy and/or the consummation of their physical bodies in order to obtain the necessary energy to function.

The human individual level, having the reason dimension added, and therefore being a level of a higher complexity, knows more possibilities. The human social level can feed itself on the level of the contradiction between emotions and reason. That means that the human hierarchy is characteristically of an emotional-intellectual nature, instead of physical-emotional nature like the animal hierarchy, while the consummation of the emotional-intellectual level, represented by image, social position, reputation, is the one that can provide the necessary energy for the interdependent life of the systems.

However, in case the ternary contradiction between body-mind-emotion is reduced to a binary one, like that between body and emotions, the laws of the animal level take over and the annihilation of the physical body of the human being becomes the main option in order to solve problems, conflicts, establish hierarchy, provide resources.

Lorenz (1998):

Let us suppose that an objective etiologist would be on another planet, like Mars, and would observe the social behavior of man with a telescope too weak to recognize and follow individuals, but still capable of seeing big phenomena, like migrations, wars, etc. This researcher would never guess that the human behavior could be driven by reason or even a responsible moral […] – he should without doubt arrive to the conclusion that the human society is very alike with the society of rats, which are also peaceful within the close tribe, but transform into true demons when fighting any species colleague which does not belong to their own party. And if our Mars observer would also have knowledge about the explosive population growth, about the weapons’ power of destruction more and more perfected and about the division of humankind into a few political sides, he wouldn’t probably forecast for us a future any brighter than that of a few rat societies being at war on a foodless boat” (p. 256).

The animal level of Reality is characterized by a type of order induced by the social level, by external competition, because there must be an order and it will appear in any way possible. In case of animals the external competition is therefore perfectly legitimate, as it’s the maximum possibility of that level. This situation corresponds to general order of the levels of Reality, including the cosmic level of Reality, but applying animal order to human level means degeneration: the descendant direction of traversing the levels of Reality.

The circular causality specific to the animal level, when applied, triggers and projects within the human level a correspondent circularity between the emotional violence and physical violence, grounded on the contradiction, lacking the presence of the included middle of the mind, between masculine, physical power and feminine, emotional power (Petrariu, 2013). In the field of the interaction between the levels of Reality of the relationship, i.e. the individual level, the social level and the special level of relationship, the circular causality lacking included third manifests under the form of utility or meaning crisis. The circular causality is fueled by the contradiction between the individual and social levels, which means that the failure to obtain peace, represented by the triggering of the physical or emotional conflicts, is, in reality, the general resultant of the failure of the personal relationships within the social system at a given time.1

GRAPH III: Various circular social phenomena caused by the absence of the included third of special relationships meaning for the contradiction between the individual level and the general level of relationship, all deriving from the projection of the causal pair of emotional war and physical war

graph 3, Adrian_Mirel_Petrariu, transdisciplinarity, level of reality, global education magazine

If the result of the ternary contradiction between body, emotion and mind is a dimension of both conscience and consciousness, then the contradiction between the latter two can become a source of energy for the social level. This can lead to hierarchies established according to consciousness and powered by the consciences of the individuals taking part in the social system.

Taking into account that the level of Reality of special relationships is, from the Object’s point of view, correspondent to the cosmic level of Reality, we can establish that the degeneration of the personal relationships is, in fact, the absence in interaction of the cosmic level of Reality, while the four-dimensional level said above is precisely determined by the presence of the interaction with the cosmic level of Reality.

The human being has, therefore, two natures: an animal nature and a divine nature, trans-connected and inseparable (Nicolescu, 2009). We notice accordingly that the human being lives at once in the level of Reality specific to animal kingdom, (subjected mainly to the structure- destruction circular laws), in the level of Reality of the human society, (subjected mainly to effectiveness-affectivity circular laws) and also has the possibility of a third level of Reality under which, through spiritual evolution, to actualize the potentiality of the human being having true feelings and reason.

Observing the distinction between automatic actions and conscious actions (Wegner, 2013) as well, we can say that while the animals are at their place, according to specific level complexity, the human being often isn’t. The general manifestation of the laws of the animal level of Reality within the human level of Reality is an example of inverted order; the animal laws must manifest in the human level only specifically, as much as the animal part of man is involved and they must be also subjected accordingly to the higher laws.

According to the cosmic bootstrap principle projected in the level of human communities, the more evolved communities exist because there are also less evolved communities and vice versa. The less evolved communities are more likely to fall under the laws of the animal level and to use physical reductionism in order to solve problems, and that means that the situation when an evolved society confronts a less evolved one is recurrent and also is crime, death penalty or violence against violence.

Lorenz (1998):

…how is it possible that a so called rational being to behave so irrationally? It is obvious that overwhelming powerful factors are acting, capable to tear away completely the leadership of the man individual reason, who by the way is totally not capable to learn from experience. […] All these amazing contradictions find an explanation and can cope with each other perfectly since we have established that not even today the behavior of man is not exclusively directed by reason and cultural tradition, but is still subject to all those laws that govern any instinctual behavior born on phylogenetic path, laws that we know very well from studying the animal behavior.” (p. 255).

Nevertheless, we must stress that this falling into the animal level is possible, according to the transdisciplinary logic, only because there also exist the possibility of ascending to the superior level.

How come we never learn?

War as organized violence at a large scale between states or other political units is indeed a recurrent phenomenon in international politics (Levy, 2011). And until today there is no consensus on the causes that triggers wars and each time the causes look different regarding circumstances and details, varying from ideological causes to economic, political, social causes.

In our opinion, it is not the causes that trigger wars, but rather the fact that in those circumstances war is the only result possible. We can always synthesize war as the result of an infernal ternary formed out of an inverted order within the interaction of the levels of Reality, of lack of responsibility and external competition. But the causes are, and they should be, always circumstantial, and that is why there cannot be any historical solution to war, but always a solution contextualized.

No matter where it originates from2, we can say that the tension of the contradiction is an influence with constraint value for those who are experiencing it and this tension must be suffered, otherwise it will discharge itself into economic collapse, war and reductionism. The consequences of collapse, war and reductionism are never known before and this means that everyone prefers the randomness of the results, even if it means their own disappearance, to bearing the uncertainty and the constraint of the tension.

Taleb (2009):

What is surprising is not the magnitude of the prognoses’ errors but our lack of consciousness on the matter. This is even more worrying when we engage in mortal conflicts: wars are fundamentally unpredictable and we know it.” (p.24)

Transdisciplinary speaking, the bearing must be suffered long enough until the energy that can be supported by the system reaches its maximal possibility, and then the third state, the T state appears, reconciling in a principle of coexistence what has appeared before to be irreconcilable. And this attitude of patience must appear at the level of states or political units, but since all of those are composed ultimately out of individuals, we arrive again at the personal responsibility and the war towards oneself, so we have again a circular causality along several levels of Reality.

Having this circularity in mind, although the war is considered to be an important factor in the social and political evolution of the human society, if we consider that from the beginning of mankind there have been wars, that there have always been try-outs to prevent them and until today it hasn’t been found a way to stop them for good or such a way is inapplicable, we can question the very meaning of evolution. In other words, the evolution must be contextualized to the proper level of Reality.

It is also true that the systems need energy to survive and conflicts are a source of energy. The polarization between two political, economical, ethical causes creates the energy needed for the movement of the social systems. However, if this movement is stabilized by a descendant included third- a third of reduction instead of a third of coexistence– then the circular causality becomes degenerative for the social systems, thus often leading to wars. This is not evolution.

From the point of view of transdisciplinary logic, we cannot speak about evolution unless we speak about the vertical movement throughout levels of Reality, from the animal level to the cosmic level. The response to our own abilities, i.e. our own responsibility, is the ascendant included third for the contradiction between our own abilities and the payment due to the fact that we posses them. As any ascendant included third, it is an evolution factor towards the cosmic level of Reality, and it can only be self-imposed.

History teaches us that it is futile to expect from people to evolve or to self-impose things, varying from striving to understand to love or even to work. This may lead to an interesting conclusion: in the general interdependence of systems there is something more important even then preserving life itself and that something must be connected with the fundamental contradiction of the action, namely the one between the realism of the fact that nothing can really be done and the idealism of the fact that anything can really be done.

Șerban (2013):

“In society, everything seems to deteriorate, to fall apart (as it is happening right now), it’s easiest, it’s the most convenient to do nothing, only just complain and being negative. This requires no effort whatsoever. But the truth is that, no matter how difficult it is, in any moment there is available a positive action, we can do something to make things better” (p.15).

We must never forget though that the possibility to make things better comes together with the possibility to make things worse. The possibility of evolution required by the cosmic level of Reality comes together with the risk of war and the redundant need of evolution induced periodically through the interaction with the cosmic level comes together with the redundant possibility of war itself. That something that can be done eventually is therefore related to a personal choice, a personal understanding which leads to the affirmation of the validity of the personal path.

This importance of the personal path explains very well one important metarule, which states that we do not learn that we do not learn (Taleb, 2009). Besides, in this field of emotional understanding, the information cannot even be passed away from one human being to another, as it is possible more or less with the intellectual knowledge (like scientific knowledge). And that is because, by its own nature, this type of emotional knowledge is only reachable through real, personal, contradictory experience.3

The said individuality of knowledge makes absolutely mandatory for the individual energy alloted within each human being in order to understand the world to be consumed precisely to that end. In this case, its proper consumption is more important then the results, because its consumption is a question of responsibility while the knowledge results are not.

This is the old problem about repeating the mistakes of people around us, of our parents, of history, in spite of any intellectual advices or information available. The emotional knowledge is knowledge of maturity and each and every individual follows or at least could follow the same path, from immature to mature, from infantile to wisdom. It is the nature of life indeed and also a question of cosmic equity4.

In conclusion, the recurrent war is just another price paid for the validity of the individual path. We cannot take the path for anyone else but ourselves. However, returning to the contradiction between nothing can be done and anything is possible, we must again say that something can be done though, and in our opinion, this something is a type of education that is able to provide the circumstances necessary for real personal experiences and understanding.

This special kind of education needs to help obtain ternary balance between the physical component of the interaction, the emotional one and the intellectual one. Without emotion, the ends begin to justify the means. Without reason, the emotional reaction becomes absurd. Without the participation of the body, we cannot have real contact with Reality. This individual contradiction corresponds in the social level of Reality to the contradiction between effectiveness and affectivity and the balance in interaction depends on the balance inside the participants to interaction. In this respect, the balance between body, mind and emotion is tightly connected to the interaction of the levels of the Reality of the relationship: relation to oneself, relation to all others, relation to an affective partner, and these are correspondent to the levels of Reality individual, social and cosmic.

Obviously, the education model widely spread today is not capable to prevent war or it may even cause it (Lorenz, 1998). The alternative we propose is the transdisciplinary education: an education in vivo, which places a man under the situation out of which he learns, determines him to be creative, interrogative, reflexive and helps him find answers by himself. (Nicolescu, 2009).

References

Levy, Jack S. (2011) „Theories and Causes of War in Christofer J. Coyne, Rachel L. Mathers (editors), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar.

Lorenz, Konrad (1998), Așa zisul rău- despre istoria naturală a agresiunii, București, Humanitas.

Nicolescu, Basarab (2007), Noi, particula și lumea, Iași, Junimea.

Nicolescu, Basarab (2009), Ce este realitatea?, Iași, Junimea.

Petrariu, Adrian Mirel (2013), Levels of Reality in social systems, (Unpublished doctorate), Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Wegner, Daniel M. (2013), Iluzia voinței conștiente, București, Humanitas.

Saner, Emine (2013), Kids obsessed with Call of Duty? Cure them with a trip to a real war zone, The Guardian, 13 August 2014. Retrieved in http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2014/aug/13/kids-call-of-duty-cure-with-trip-to-real-war-zone

Șerban, Andrei (2013), Cartea Atelierelor, București, Nemira.

Taleb, Nassim Nicholas (2009), Lebăda neagră, Impactul foarte puțin probabilului, București, Curtea Veche.

NOTES

1 From this point of view, the relationship between genders becomes extremely meaningful, as representing the relation between the human emotional power, specific to women, and the human physical power, specific to men. If the particular relationships between genders fail, then the circular causality is being spawned between physical violence and emotional domination, and that triggers periodically armed conflicts. More precisely, one cannot avoid masculine physical violence in time of war if during time of peace the emotional, feminine violence develops freely.

2 We can define the origin of a tension as the specific contradictory interaction between the levels of Reality that causes it. Thus the tension may have as causes from the individual level of Reality till the cosmic level of Reality and even the interaction between these two extremes.

3 A very interesting debate about exactly this kind of experience has taken place recently in the international media when the Swedish journalist Carl-Magnus Helgregren wanted to counter the lure of video war games, so he took his children to Israel to see the effects of conflict for themselves.

4 As a personal experience, I have taken recently a two-week trip to Japan and I was amazed by the dedication of the Japanese people to showing visitors the implications of the atomic bombing. I have learned as well that Japan is one country in recent history that hasn’t been engaged in armed conflict with any foreign state unit for the last 70 years. Their commitment to peace is now remarkable. However, since the new generation of politicians is the first one that hasn’t been exposed directly to the shock of war and the atomic explosion, for the first time after WWII, Japan seems inclined to reconsider its constitutional provisions regarding the involvement in armed conflicts.

This article was published on 21stSeptember International Day of Peace, in Global Education Magazine.

 

Supported by


Edited by:

Enjoy Our Newsletters!

navegacion-segura-google navegacion-segura-mcafee-siteadvisor navegacion-segura-norton