Humankind  and  knowledge  -  A new outset from scratch

To represent new insights is difficult.
 
• Because, new insights demand new means of representation.
   
• Because, designators have their defined meaning
   
  which is to be "changed".
   
• Because, we are integrated in a knowledge community
   
  and do not want to lose the ties to this community.
   

One insight is fundamental:

In order that our acting will be successful.

We phrase:

We want to use knowledge, if it is  useable und thereby usable, in order to apply it.

Our acting is part of nature, of the becoming. The becoming has developed more and more complex structures. We humans have developed to such a complexity that we are able

• to recognise, to document and to use the
   
  regularities of the fundamental processes  and
   
• to recognise, that nature has been growing
   
  in its complexity up and up.

But we humans did not yet recognise

that all processes of the becoming are
 
interlinked by  single  structural principle.

Man has learned  to use his mental abilities

• to survey nature, to document the discovered regularities
   
  and to use them  to control processes.
   
• to represent the natural reality  model emblematic
   
  and by means of these models to plan its own activities.
   
• to create innovative structures - and therewith - within the rules of nature - to create novel realities.
   
• to take the WHATFOR as a basis for the agreements of coexistence,
   
  which give the WHATFOR of everyone the same autonomy of decision.

We humans did not manage, to realise consciously

• that we keep ourselves prisoners of our thoughts
   

• that our thinking always has to take some sense, a WHATFOR as basis for our  knowledge.creating  as well as for our  acting.
   
  For this  WHATFOR  we have created various designators, e.g.
   
  objective, reason, cause, function, purpose, mission, charge and a lot more "synonyms".

We humans did not manage to realise consciously

• that different functions of activity call
   
  for different processes of knowledge.creating and acting.
   
• that there are four functionally totally different categories
   
  of knowledge.creating, which each of them is necessary
   
  for every acting and every knowledge.creating.
   
  •  •  •  •   Of course, you already know - which these four are?

Only when we have spotted this

as the brake load of our thinking

it will become possible to gather speed. The imprisonment of ones own thinking one doesn't notice. If one would notice, it wouldn't be imprisonment any more. The "best thing" you can do now, is:  Regard all these statements as rubbish - and do not go on reading here. And - you will be able to sleep in peace.

For, if you go on reading here, you will get into trouble.
 
This always took.place  when someone
 
was going to disturb someone's circles.

If you go on reading, I am getting into trouble:

• Either to point up the walls of imprisonment  or
   
• simply  to start  to present the new knowledge.

I decided to take to the second alternative as the walls  are walls only, because we did not have the means to break down these walls.

The tools are lying outside these walls!

Therefore, the only thing I can do  is, to present the new knowledge. You probably will have noticed:  I already started to do so. If we are bound to a mental community, the new knowledge

• may lead to reinforce, what we are believing and
   
  what we have internalised since we were born,  and
   
  may lead to bind us even closer to this mental community
   

or the new knowledge

• may lead us to remove the mental barriers, imposed
   
  by education and "put up" by an "unfinished evolution"
   
  preventing us to unfold our mental abilities and skills,
   
  and preventing us, to use our knowledge
   
  about and for knowledge.creating unhindered.

But only you yourself will be able to break down the barriers of your thinking. If our thinking is to become independent and selfcontained we have to try very hard:

We have to start by imagining, that we
 
do not know anything, absolutely nothing.
 
We do not have to worry, that we are going 
 
to waste knowledge.  Nothing will get lost.

To know nothing means to give up all our concepts and notions e.g. of "time", "space", "dimensions", ... This will not be easy. We are beings, which are - at least mentally - grown up in flat surroundings, which has influenced the way we think and the way we do research. And we have grown up with the natural impact of being forced to have a WHATFOR.

 •   The general principle of nature
 
        -  A pitfall of knowledge.creating

We have to start from scratch. By observations.

What is becoming, becomes to exist.

At the first hearing  this sound  -  dispensable.
 
At a second hearing, one feels unsettled.
 
One has to reflect on it. Physics might be helpful.

We act in order to exist. We are part of nature, of the becoming.  We are becoming. We have to act  in order to be able to exist. When born, we were willing to create knowledge and to act. We have to live as communities,  to be able to exist. The community imparts us with knowledge and coaches us for life. The community thinks  that we are going to act as the community acts. With the scientification of our research the community has split knowledge.creating into more and more specialised categories. Thereby it was not possible to recognise, that all becoming, the whole processing is a unity, an entity in which

all processes of the becoming are
 
hierarchically and functionally interlinked
 
by to a single structural principle.

This hierarchical-functional interlinking provided the basis for the growing of the complexity of the becoming. How this interlinking takes place, does not seem to be discovered. Observable is:

The interlinking of processes enables new functions.
 
Knowledge.creating is not possible without a WHATFOR.
 
(Which is not yet common knowledge.)
 
The principle of process interlinking to form a new function is
 
used in information processing to be able to control complexity.
 
Our economic system uses this principle universally.

The basis of  any becoming  and  of any knowledge.creating is the  functional principle of the becoming,  the  "WHATFOR",  for which we have created a variety of denominators in our languages. If we want to get active, we have to

provide a  WHATFOR  and
 
create knowledge about the becoming,
 
in order to be able to control the processes,
 
in order to achieve the  WHATFOR.

All  is processing.

All  is changing,  is becoming.

The structure of the processing has not been discovered, yet. For the time being, we assume

a multitude of interwoven, parallel running bundle of processes
 
influencing each other interactively
 
each bundle being a hierarchy of functional interlinked processes.

The points of the 'functional interlinking' are the interfaces in the becoming, which enable  functionality  and  flexibility  and thereby so that more and more complex structured processes emerge. The denominators

'processing structure of the becoming'  and
 
'functional principle of the becoming'

are tantamount, as

function  and  structure  are only different functional approaches to the same unity.

Our knowledge.creating is missing an insight. Namely that insight, that constitutes a "complete" step of our evolutionary development.

To understand this and to accept it,
 
will - as history proves - face strong resistance.
 
One has to learn to stand.

At present, we have not recognised  that

• there is knowledge with different functions  and that
   
  we may not intermingle knowledge of different categories
   
  when processing it.
  Partly, this problem has been recognised. We have tried
   
  to solve this problem, by developing meta-languages.

At present, we have not thoroughly recognised  that

• our knowledge  and  the becoming  cannot be regarded as identical.
   
  But even those, who state they know the difference
   
  do not apply these insights consistently and consequently.

One should refrain from calling our knowledge.creating as "medieval" or "stone-aged". As this probably would raise the barriers of thinking instead of razing them. Our knowledge.creating has to learn, that we have to discern our knowledge.creating by those functions  the knowledge is going to fulfil.

• Creating models of the becoming:  Creating knowledge
   
  about nature and about how to apply it, functionally.
   
• Creating moral concepts and precepts
   
  for a peaceful coexistence and acting.
   
• Creating structural systems, "logical realities",
   
  e.g. music, design, logics, counting, ...
   
• Generating possible ways, to represent, document and process knowledge, according to the above mentioned categories of knowledge.

Our knowledge.creating has to learn, to discern between logical  and  functional:

• Logical  is concerned with knowledge and rules, we have created ourselves.
   
• Functional is concerned with the knowledge about the processes of the becoming, which we discovered and represented as models, and is concerned with the knowledge, how these models can be applied.

To be able to create, apply and verify knowledge, we need functional methods, which conform to the field under research. The detected functional structure of the becoming is straightforward and will be recognised immediately. This structure is self-evident for us. As, if we had not acted pursuant to the general principle of becoming, we would not have survived. As the functional structure of becoming enables creativity, we can create new realities with and in our thinking.

But we did not realise, that we may not intermingle
 
knowledge of different categories when processing it.

New insights, even if scientific, had always been rejected. And it took some hundred years until they were generally accepted. This has never been a technical, but a profound human problem:

The "operational" necessity to have a WHATFOR,
 
made us  and  still makes us  defend,
 
in what we believe, tooth and nail.