Albert Einstein..."No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.".
The deep key to the success of charities such as 'Every Family Matters', 'Choose, Change, Become' and 'International Youth Forum' is that they are run by youth for the world.
Other, lesser keys, include protecting the young people from impositions, traditions and adult mores; supporting resilience, courage, adventuresomeness, creativity; endorsing/supporting character, personality and individuality.
Vital contributive positions/skills of adults are professional mentoring, coaching and facilitation of powerful youth motivators of 'autonomy, challenge, making a difference/contribution' through which real and meaningful life experiences lead to awareness, judgement, skills and confidence - part of what we (whom apply Einstein, as above) call 'GLIP' learning, 'glipping'.
These young people have had great success in attracting resources to their initiatives - people, places, funding, projects. Perhaps this is because they are making a difference as they evolve themselves. I like that they will be responsible for my world later as I'm not proud of what I see we adults have done, but I do like what I see in our young people.
All whom acknowledge/help young people in any way do a fine thing.
Hi Ian
ReplyDeleteI got the link here from 23&me. I am also interested in Evolution. Here are my thought about it. I post here because that quote from Einstein is likely to be a consequence of Gödel's incompleteness theorem. As you may know, Einstein and Gödel were friends. Gödel's theorem said exactly that (your quote above) but in mathematical terms....which brings me to Roger Penrose. Penrose uses Gödel's theorem too, as it is explained in his book 'Shadow of the Mind" . Basically, Penrose takes the statement: "No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it" as a TRUE statement and adds : "...and since problems were solved, then it means that the human sphere of understanding is expanding" . He doesn't say it that way, but this is equivalent.
so now, about Evolution. Darwinian Evolution can be described with a set of rules, hence it is reducible to an algorithm that can be run on a computer. Penrose's conjecture is that the (Human) Mind is NOT reducible to a finite set of rules, or algorithm, that could run on a computer. When he Understands something, the Mind of the one who understands can NOT be simulated by any, ANY, algorithm running in a computer, in PRINCIPLE. How does it come then, that Darwinian Evolution, which can run and be perfectly simulated on a computer, can produce something that can NOT run on a computer (the human mind) ? either Penrose is wrong, or Darwinism is not a COMPLETE description of Evolution because Darwinism cannot produce the Mind, no more than any computer or algorithm could ever produce the human Mind.
The other aspect of Penrose discussion is to insist on the fact that the Mind, being not reducible to any algorithm, is NON-computational in nature. Said otherwise, no computer can simulate, or PREDICT, what could be the next output of a human mind. Computers can't, Darwinism can't.
Penrose and Gödel blew away Darwinism in my opinion.