Fearologist, RMF tells in his new video of "why" the concept of fearism likely evolved in the 1990s onward and is here to stay.
Fearologist, RMF tells in his new video of "why" the concept of fearism likely evolved in the 1990s onward and is here to stay.
Dr. Darcia Narvaez, psychologist of child development, the evolutionary nest concept, and moral development. She comes at the ways to better understand what is human nature and healthy development from an evolutionary and neurobiological, psychological, anthropological and Indigenous worldview lens. This interdisciplinary thinker was recently giving a presentation and having a discussion with the gift economy (motherer) experts, and at one point she starts to talk about "fear" per se and how difficult it is to make the shift to a feminine-based gift economy and new paradigm of holistic health and sustainable sanity.
She says, "There's a lot of people who are afraid in the United States, and when you are afraid it can lead you into directions that are good or not so good...not so helpful. So, I think getting through the fear is something...the fear of pain I think...if we suffered as a young child our...it's in our body, our body remembers the trauma, the pain and we don't want to go back there, we have some resistance to it....we need ways to help people not be so afraid of feeling the pain, because once you feel the pain it's actually quite liberating...it wasn't so bad. People go to therapy for this." [she then says once we do this a few times] "a whole new life [is possible], it's like being reborn. [to help people through pain and fear we have a responsibility of] "reassuring people that you can pass through this...primal wounds...you pull them off, and its painful at the moment at the time, but then once you pull them off you can be yourself...unlock your heart." [I takes a lot of support from others too].
Then she concludes with a hope she has: "Hopefully, somebody out there is going to come up with...a great way to help people get through the fear."
My quick comments are critiques of this explication and hope Dr. Narvaez offers, although, in basic idea and with experiences, she is talking of the truth, I have no doubt. It is just that her discourse on fear management here is so conformist and 'normal' as to be nothing outside of the domination worldview and paradigm basically. There are so many who have offered the same advice as she and the same hope as she. I was really looking for something more radical from her in this discussion especially in light of being in conversation on the radical shift of an exchange (capitalist) paradigm to a gifting paradigm that was the theme of the entire conversation. But what this shows me is that even the radical gift economy types have not yet got "fear" figured out or configured out is more accurate. They have no radical vision of a new paradigm of fear management/education. Sadly, I have seen this also in the feminist movement, and most spiritual movements, etc. over the decades. The thinking about fear is still back in the old paradigm (what Narvaez herself is concerned about and has critiqued in part as "colonized psychology") they wish to leave and transform and so on. The fear thinking hasn't changed and they don't seem to look at the literature that is out there on new 'Fear' Studies and Fearlessness Paradigm.
In particular, one can recognize the same "individualist" psychology and morality within Narvaez's discourse that she falls back on, basically a kind of existential modernist philosophy, and practicality, because she says we really need to deal with fear differently in our society--okay, that's great--and yet, her answer to that fear problem is her immediate default to talk about "fears" (i.e., she mentions the core "fear of pain" problem)--and she then proceeds her diagnostic and prescriptions from there. As I said, there is nothing new paradigm at all about that, even if she is offering a weak medicine better than not for fear management.
Narvaez, defaults into her trained psychological and rather individualistic mind re: fear discouse. Even though, all her research is on interdisciplinary studies and community and social relationality as so important in the healthy development of humans and ecosystems etc. Her actual knowledge and theorizing on fear is however individualistic and typical of the modernist paradigm and of patriarchy (more or less) itself. So, why(?), I ask, over all these years of her knowing my work on fear and fearlessness, and knowing I am a fearologist with a transdisciplinary lens I bring radically to the topic of fear management/education, has she not engaged directly with my work with any depth and understanding , if she is saying that "fear" is one of the most important factors in a human beings life and a society (e.g., the USA)? Why has she thrown out a hope that "somebody out there" is going to find a solution to the fear problem--and, she is like waiting or something(?). That amazes me she seems dissociated from the vast literature and my work (including Four Arrows' work) on fear ('fear'), fearism, fearlessness, etc. I have found that she is like so many. There is a denial/blindness still operating even in the most sophisticated and mature academics and professionals in general (Dr. Narvaez is top-notch and very wise in my opinion)--and, "psychologists" have continually shown to be in this state of learning and training that they cannot receive the vast wisdom out there on fear already available. There is no need to hope for someone to come along with a magic bullet, Dr. Narvaez, there is only an opportunity and willingness to actually engage and study what is available already and then apply it sincerely.
So, my first agenda as a fearologist has always been to question and critique the very way we (especially psychologists) frame the discourse on fear itself, never mind trying to figure out which fears are most important (e.g., fear of pain, or fear of death), etc. Dr. Narvaez, and the rest of you, still hoping... why don't you consult with a fearologist, for starters and go from there? The "why" they don't do this, is critically important. I have suggested in my latest book it is because of a "resistance to fearlessness"  built deeply into the self-social-political fabric of how people are perceiving the world's problems and the answers to its problems. I actually sent that new book to her upon her request so she might write a book review, of which she has not done so, nor shared anything with me about my book and her reading it. Instead, she "hopes" there is some one out there who will make a silver bullet. I think her troubling view expressed in the above discussion is that she herself in my opinion, is still caught in the "colonized psychology" she is critiquing. It is not anyone's fault per se that our fear management/education discourses (at least, in the W. world) are so unhelpful.
1. Granted she did engage somewhat in a Psychology Today blog some years ago, supporting Four Arrows' and my work on fear and fearlessness; go to: https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/moral-landscapes/201801/stories-heal-primal-wounds
2. Fisher, R. M., and Kumar, B. M. (2021). Resistances to fearlessness. Xlibris.
I think this is a powerful extract from the teaching of the cultural historical theorist, Jean Gebser, from a 1972 talk on "Primal Fear and Primal Trust" re: his asking humans to continue to pursue the answers to the origin questions like: 'Where do I come from?', 'Who am I?' and "Whither do I go?' (the full quotation from this talk is offered in Georg Feurstein's (1987) Structures of Consciousness p. 30, and in Johnson's book in a chapter on "The Integral A-Perspectival World" (Johnson, 2019, p. 168).
For those of you who know I am a critical integral theorist/philosopher, often following much of the integral philosophy of Ken Wilber, it is important to note that integralist philosophy is articulated by many other great minds of which Jean Gebser is one of them. Johnson names Gebser (1905-1973) "a German-Swiss cultural philosopher, intelectuall mystic, poet, and scholar of the evolution of consciousness." (p. 1).
See also https://prism.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/handle/1880/112698/Tech%20Paper%20114_rev.pdf?sequence=5 [my more in depth article on "Cultural Theorist Jean Gebser Meets a Fearologist").
Feurstein, G. (1987). Structures of consciousness. Lower Lake: Integral Publishing [translation].
Gebser, J. (1997 ed.). The ever-present origin [Trans. Noel Barstad with Algist Mickunas]. University of Ohio Press.
Johnson, J. (2019). Seeing through the world: Jean Gebser and integral consciousness. Revelore.
[art poster image by R. Michael Fisher]
Four Arrows (Wahinkpe Topa) aka Dr. Don T. Jacobs (a longtime member of FM ning and cultural warrior), gives a really useful interview (video) on his work, which I see as part of fearlessness path and its connection to re-visionist (corrective) Education today and the survival of this planet's ecosystems. He says, "I want to be human"... and he defines that in a very unique way in regard to the relationship with "hope" for change of this world and its hegemonic Dominant worldview--as he offers a 'reading' of a universal Indigenous worldview (sometimes called Kinship worldview)-- as a solution to our current crises on mass scales. The Indigenous worldview is based not on a fear-based cosmology and value-system--and, that's really important to note. He talks about decolonization and Indigenization as processes of re-socialization and re-education on a mass scale and how 'turning' things around from the current status quo is near impossible but that doesn't mean we ought not do what we can to "be human" in the midst of this tragedy and rather 'hope-less' situation in terms of actual outcomes of our work to liberate ourselves and come to our Natural-based (place-based) intelligence--or what he has called "primal awareness." He also says so interesting things on hypnosis and de-hypnosis in this regard of bringing change and transformation about.
Note: at the 1:04:00 mark in the interview. Four Arrows is talking about the "mysteriousing" of existence, rather than a noun for "god"--the former being the Indigenous way. He says, it is this in touchness with the mysteriousing that is "getting in touch with that fearlessness around death" and he concludes: "I have never met a traditional Indigenous person who has a fear of death...[or] fear of life."
For a concise write up on Four Arrows' Indigenous-based worldview on fear and fearlessness, go to:
I have just collected this data from PRISM (online library at The University of Calgary) where my many publications and unpublished works are held and freely available as open-access to the public. I just looked up the 2006 paper I wrote on what I founded as "In Search of Fearlessness Project" and to my surprise it has been downloaded in the past few years while put up online, near 900 times. How is that possible? Why have none of the download readers contacted me, contacted the FM ning... etc. (?) I am not seeing or hearing anyone writing about this historical phenomenon as Project. I'm puzzled. But it is interesting. To read my paper "Overview of the In Search of Fearlessness Project" (click here).
"The Uses of Beauty and Order" (a 13 pp booklet) by the founder of Re-evaluation Counseling (Harvey Jackins) came out in 1972 and talks of the "environmental crisis" facing human beings and that we are responsible to "clean up"  our messes... meaning, not only the physical 'garbage' we 'dump' but on the inside 'distress' ('garbage') we also hold inside our body/mind and social systems and institutions that function upon philosophical premises of oppression is 'normal' and that's the way it is. That's human nature for us to be violence, and dumping on each other, etc. Jackin's, peer-to-peer theory and praxis is a marvelous tool that I have used since the early 1980s, and am still using it as a way to not let my distress accumulate (as 'fear' patterning) in any ways, and mostly in ways that stop me from being a fully alive, creative being who is interested in beauty and order in the environment (inside and outside). That's why in this publication Jackin's argues:
"With discharge [via peer counseling sessions] we can begin not only to realize but to act on the truth that every human being is gifted artistically, in the visual arts and in all others. In the meantime, it is perfectly possible to take a length of wire and bend it into an interesting shape, then mount this piece of wire sculpture in a prominent position. It's possible to take some torn pieces of tinted or colored paper and move them about on a sheet of cardboard until the arrangement pleases the arranger, glue them in place and, with such an 'abstract collage' mounted on the wall, be continually reminded of one's own ability to create beauty. A poem or verse which one has composed belongs in plain sight to be read and looked at. This will be another signal that one is a creative human being in charge of the environment [as a steward, and co-maker, co-participant in evolution itself]." (p. 12)
I recently am working on an art project with stones (a 1/2 dump truck load of them) which most people use only to "decorate" their landscapes and keep down weeds and grass from growing (as a suppressant). I am working with the stones in an artist residency right now to make them interesting, beautiful and even sacred... I just am learning how to do that with children at the daycare center and kindergarten school where I am artist in residence, and of course, then there is the difficult challenge to get the staff and parents and other adults around the children to 'attune' and 'resonate' with the words and direction of Jackin's (above)--and to playfull engage as part of their day in making art, and connecting with the art of the stones I am working on their premise. Mostly, the adults are quite in a "rut" from what I can see, and they can hardly gaze to the environment around them. Often they are on cell phones when they leave their car and walk to work, and often they have a preoccupied (if not worrying) mind about what they are doing and what is happening and how this or that is going to coordinate. They are managing their lives. This management paradigm is quite working in the opposite direction of a creative-artistic-aethetic paradigm.
As a fearologist and artist, what I am interested in is the role of fear/anxiety and how it shapes one's creativity, aliveness, and everything else in the environments we make, the relationship we engage in any moment in time. Too often, most all people are living lives feeling a "victim" (prisoner) of some kind, and often they are not aware they feel this but are just on 'autopilot' doing things that are functional and help to manage their day. Jackins' experience is that human beings who have been hurt and not fully allowed to heal their hurts from birth onward, are carrying distress-based (fear-based) patterning in their nervous system and memory systems, and when that accumulates there is a sense after awhile of feeling like the environment is "hostile" (more or less) and one has to try to survive within it--but for Jackins, like myself, the hostile perception (as a fear projection and defense mechanism) can become quite distorted and totalizing of one's inherent being and destroys the best part of our human nature. This is, says Jackins, due to "past fears of isolated groups of human beings in danger from weather, disease or other hostile forces" but his point is, that within a healing culture (practices) such dangers/fears can be healed through adequately so that humans do not carry around trauma (unhealed painful memories) for any length of time beyond what is necessary. The past thus, when unhealed, turns to dominate our nervous systems and thinking patterns, we 'become our distress' (i.e., our fear patterning). We feel victimized. We then justify our behaviors that come from fear-based (distress-based) sourcing. We even justify that it is okay we oppress others and accept our social oppression because that's the way it is--the world is hostile, etc.
Fearlessness as a paradigm is quite in the opposite direction of this fear-based paradigm of victimization and oppressive patterning. Thus uses of beauty and order making (healthy creativity to enhance one's world individually and collectively) is a way to stay in "present time" reality (says Jackins), and that leads to a greater humanity and care for everything to follow from that. Arts and aesthetics, are critical to good fear management/education.
1. To be clear, I use "clean up" in this context within a sophisticated therapeutic philosophia (or therapia) based on many traditions but in particular I most recommend the theorizing of integral philosopher Ken Wilber on "Cleaning Up" as one of four calls to come to full consciousness and attention in the best way humans are potentially able--and, such a mode of "cleaning up" is not just some psychological clinical, homogenizing, white-washing, or purification schema of a germophobia, xenophobia, paranoia about Nature--no, I and Wilber are talking about something very different and you may wish to read his writing on "Cleaning Up" in this larger transpersonal and evolutionary perspective; see Wilber (2017), pp. 11, 75, 264-66, for e.g. (also see his writing on the analogous process of "shadow work"). Wilber, K. (2017). The religion of tomorrow: A vision for the future of the Great Traditions--more inclusive, more comprehensive, more complete. Shambhala.
This latest video out on the "mass psychosis" of an entire population, what is also being called here "menticide" has an opening quite appropriate to concerns of the FM ning community and myself as a fearologist. The video image above has the narration of: "Priming a population for the crime of menticide, begins with the sowing of fear." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lctpOxSR-FE
See my own video talks (4 videos) on "mass psychosis" as well, beginning with https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBl735zqTco
Note: this video is published by Academy of Ideas: Free Minds for a Free Society
There's so many books and articles about fear, and emotions, etc. So many are similar and some are different, and often they tell contradictory things about fear. That's what I have found in my researching this subject for 32 years. Okay, here's a recent book review on amazon books re: a book self-published by G. M. Murrell (2016), called "Bone's in a Box: Fear and the Drive for Human Control." I share this not because I have read this book nor approve its approach necessarily--but I share it because here is another observer of human behavior, like myself, who has pretty much seen "fear" (as motivational patterning) is below all other major behaviors, emotions etc. It is fear that acts in ways to control... so here's the book review:
Book Review by Kori Meltzer (Mar. 28, 2020) re: "Bones in a Box":
I am not a psychoanalyst myself, yet I found the author’s beliefs about fear and control to be true as they pertain to various aspects of human emotions. In particular, I agree with his premise that other emotions stem from fear. If you strip our emotions down you will find at the root that fear does dictate our actions. I did not completely believe this when I first read this book. However, I started to read the book again recently in light of the Coronavirus pandemic. I now believe the author is correct. People are acting out of fear. They are hoarding supplies. They are throwing used masks and gloves in the street. Strangers are yelling at one another. Domestic violence incidents are on the rise. The realization that we cannot control this situation has caused people to behave out of fear.
There is so much valuable information in this book. The author delved into aspects of behavior and presented thought provoking and well researched cases. I recommend this book for anyone who is interested in learning about how fear influences our other emotions.
Check out my new video on my new book "sketch" and possibilities and how I am influenced in thinking about educational philosophy in a new key--from many new perspectives (transdsciplinary) etc. See my teaching video just put up now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6H6rpQlZ60
Once again, in "Comments" on the previous blog post by Michael Eneyo, a philosopher of fear from Nigeria, FM ning readers can read his interpretation of my "Comment" on his blogposting--in particular that he posted of Ben's analysis of Eneyo's new book.
I say once again, because Eneyo comments (critiques) my commentary respectfully, which I appreciate, yet misses central aspects of my work on a fearlessness theory (since 1989). His interpretation continues, I say, once again, to mis-interpret basics of my position. He does get some parts of my work, but major aspects he mis-interprets quite in the wrong direction and thus there is nothing to debate him on because of his insistence on his critique.
I say once again, because our contentions have been rooted in various exchanges going back near 3 yrs or so. And a culmination of exchanges was summarized in our exchange, via Eneyo (2020) and my Response to his Rejoinder (Fisher, 2020) ; and, so I am not going to spend more time on the same issues Eneyo keeps reproducing about my work that skew it because of his reading of core aspects of my theory. I recommend readers interested follow-up on your own reading of our exchanges in the above journal articles. And may readers feel free to post their thoughts on the FM ning.
Once again, in the Comment of Eneyo in this latest FM ning exchange, he repeats that I am avoiding, ignoring, or trying to go around negative fear and only want to keep positive fear, unlike his binarist position he claims that we need both to have good philosophy, theory, practice. Nothing could be further from the truth of my position which in the late 1980s began with my reading of Rinpoche Chogyam Trungpa (Tibetan Buddhist teacher) and a reading I most respected called Chapter 4 "Fear and Fearlessness" from the ancient wisdom teachings of Tibetan Buddhism--and, so I'll quote Trungpa who (like Krishnamurti) teach that any fear (whether we assign it negative or positive) is important and not to be avoided, slipped around, or to be eliminated in some absolute intervention-- rather, both they and myself teach to what is most important is to learn from fear and learn from the ways we think about it that may in fact trap us in its grip in very limiting if not pathological ways (e.g., as 'fear' patterning). I'll admit that my work has gone way beyond Trungpa and Krishnamurti in its postmodern (and post-postmodern, integral) constructions since the late 1980s , yet, I am assuring readers who see otherwise, that I am not at all trying to avoid fear via fearlessness or anything else. I call for a fear management/education (full curriculum from kindergarten to university level as compulsory fear education actually). So, here is Trungpa's quote, I'll leave you all with to see also where my original and core premise starts from:
Trungpa wrote: "Acknowledging fear is not a cause of depression or discouragement. Because we posses such fear, we also are potentially entitled to experience fearlessness. True fearlessness is not the reduction of fear, but going beyond fear." (p. 33) 
1. Eneyo (2020) and Fisher (2020) see International Journal of Fear Studies, 2 (1) pp. 49-63.
2. Where Trungpa and Krishnamurti and others (like Eneyo) are not thinkers in full alignment with my work, is mainly because they have not constructed in their theories anything (virtually) beyond a psychological or psycho-spiritual framework for understanding fear. I am much more a cultural theorist than they (see my teaching video on "fear is social" and fearlessness theory of late https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyKwoFJb9UE) and thus 'fear' is essential to my work, and it differentiates from fear (as normally understood in the psychological domain of knowing). Again, you can read my many works on cultural 'fear' patterning and the theory of healing, fearlessness, and transformation behind it and in counter-hegemony to 'fear' patterning (or 'Fear' Project).
3. Trungpa, C. (1984/2007). Shambhala: The sacred path of the warrior. Shambhala Publications.
PATRICK EFFIONG BEN
THE TRANSHUMAN WORLD AND ITS FEARS: A Fearological Guide for the Developing Countries
MICHAEL BASSEY ENEYO
Michael Eneyo in this interesting book takes us on a philosophical journey into the heart of one of the most topical issues in the twenty-first century digital age: Apprehension over what the future holds for humanity in view of new technological advancements and their possible impacts on the structuring of the human society. The transhuman world which is the central focus of the book is here, and humans have already started questioning their place in it. Eneyo ranks among the few African philosophers to critically capture the fears of this new society that is fast approaching. Here, Eneyo attempts to answer some questions that surround the transhumanization of the human species through advancements in the fields of science and technology, and possible ways of managing the fears that will be precipitated by these new inventions.
However, I am sceptical about Eneyo’s hope that “stick international and local policies” will be enough to curb the excesses of future technologies, especially when one takes a causal stroll through history to discover that the nuclear bombs that were detonated over Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9 respectively, in 1945, were carried out by a legitimate government that cared less about policies. The chemical weapons that were used by the British imperialist empire against the Bolsheviks in Russia in the summer of 1919, before its most recent usage 94 years later by Bashar al-Assad against his own people in Syria, were all done under the watchful eyes of the international community amidst “strict international and local policies” against their deployment.
The book presents a good account of the negative possibilities that lurks beside the future society that will be driven by intelligent machines. Inasmuch as I believe that the fears raised in the book are justified, I think Eneyo’s gloomy picture of what a transhuman society would likely look like is too pessimistic and creates room for the propagation of negative fear-one aspect of fear that the book urges us against. Eneyo’s proposal of the “Philosophy of Fear” and the “Philosophy of Unity” as what would be needed to manage the fears and psychosocial discontents that will arise in the future society is worthy of mention. Also, in dealing with the transhuman world which is a typical “fear territory” for Eneyo, the suggestions offered to the African continent with regards to not being left behind in the race to a transhuman materialization is also worthy of commendation.
I here conclude by saying that beyond the thought-provoking approach to the question of our place in the present and future society, the author’s daring questions, unapologetic confidence on the subject matter, and analytically poignant perspectives make his book a worthy read for all-especially those who are profoundly curious about humanity’s place in the inevitable transhuman world that is upon us.
Patrick Effiong Ben
MasterCard Foundation Scholar University of Pretoria,
ELUEMELEM, Frank N (PhD Cde)
THE TRANSHUMAN WORLD AND ITS FEARS: A Fearological Guide for the Developing Countries
MICHAEL BASSEY ENEYO
The concept of trans-humanism seems not to be an emerging philosophical field of study in the academic research domain. Michael Bassey Eneyo, a well-known fearologist, in this novel book of his; titled “The Transhuman World And Its Fears; A fearological Guide For The Developing Countries” juxtaposes the good, the bad, and the ugly sides of technological advancements with the fearological thoughts that he brought to bare. He x-rays and analyses the challenges and benefits of the complex advancement in science and technology with respect to their effects on the humanoid species within our visible universe that may likely exist in an envisioned world of super-intelligent agents such as robots, expert systems, and their likes.
This book, by Michael Bassey Eneyo analyses the likely degrees of fear that may bedevil the human species in the universe due to the trans-humanism agenda.
Michael Bassey Eneyo, in his philosophical thoughts, took a deep dive into an enormous conflagration of topical issues already eroding and devastating man’s natural domicile and way of doing things; bringing man into what I call the disruptive era; arising from human-machine interaction which is in relation to fundamental psychological theories of human behaviour and persuasive technology.
Trans-humanism, in a nutshell, is the resultant effect of complex advancements in science and technology with the deliberate intention to help humans overcome the prevailing challenges of their physical and social environments; thereby making life easier and smarter. In a bid to create these multi-faceted challenge-overcoming possibilities; myriads of new, higher and deeper problems are created for man with various degrees of fears and disadvantages.
Trans-humanism is a philosophical movement that advocates and predicts the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies that are able to greatly enhance longevity, mood, and cognitive abilities. These possibilities can be made manifest through the use of artificial intelligence; a high-level complex advancement in computer science and technology.
Michael Bassey Eneyo in this book, particularly in chapter one, took time to explain the historical background of trans-humanism philosophy with respect to Julian Huxley’s work in 1957; which was a resolve to continue the theory that supports human evolution; by teaching that human evolution can also be technology and society driven. Michael Bassey Eneyo enunciates that trans-humanism is one of the 21st century philosophies that advocate the use of science and technology in an attempt to overcome human limitations; in areas of the longevity of life and reduction in human sufferings. From my intellectual evaluation, I am truly convinced that the extra-sensory perception of the author as expressed in this book is highly optimistic with respect to his philosophical and fearological prowess of thoughts about artificial intelligence concepts which he sees as what will be one of the major causes of envisioned trans-human world.
Talking about artificial intelligence (AI), it can be described, in a nutshell, as the branch of computer science that is used to make computer machines behave like humans using fuzzy logic and heuristic programming; otherwise known as “the rule of the thumb”. There are several components or branches of Artificial Intelligence, namely; expert system development, robotics, artificial neural network, speech recognition, natural language processing, machine vision, deep learning, and machine learning, etc.
Expert system development is the branch of AI that makes use of the knowledge of experts on a machine, say computer machine, to achieve definite tasks that are even beyond human limits. It has three major components known as knowledge base, inference engine, and user interface. The knowledge base consists of both necessary data and knowledge of experts in the field where the expert system is to be deployed.
The Inference engine takes care of all the programmable logic arrays and heuristic application programming interfaces (heuristic APIs).
The user interface makes reference to the concept of human-computer interaction (HCI) and persuasive technology strategies deployed into the machine according to Fogg’s Behavioural Model (FBM), Harri-Oinas Kukkonem Model, and Robert Cialdini Model of Interaction Designs. It is pertinent to note that all AI systems are tested before deployment using Turing Test as postulated by Alan Turing. A.I testing may solve some of the ethical issues of trans-humanism.
Michael Bassey Eneyo’s philosophical thoughts of fear and fearology from chapter six through chapter seven of this book vocalizes the workings of fear in humans and exposition of the fear territory. He went further to explain the importance of fear and how fear can be used as a tool to manage the problems of the envisioned world of trans-humanism. In his opinion and thought; fear would be very useful in moderating the future world if attention is paid to knowing how it functions in shaping and molding human actions as seen in chapter nine.
The envisioned world of trans-humanism is in congruence with a concept in engineering thermodynamics called “perpetual working machine (PWM) of its first kind”. PWM is an ideal machine with 100% efficiency but may never be realised in this visible universe due to friction, air resistance, and other negating factors. The mere fact that humans live in an enclosed space called universe with various dimensions of energy inter-conversions at different levels and how they relate to matter (in this case man, who is the epicentre of any definite body of organised knowledge and philosophical thoughts). Primordial studies of an enclosed system showed that a lot of reactions and bombardments happen because one matter must interact with another matter at different energy levels in relation to variations in temperature, pressure, distance, and time. Every enclosed system is affected by itself and its surrounding known as “environment of system”.
The big bang theory postulates that our visible creation/universe emanated from a point of low enthalpy to a high enthalpy state. This is in consonance with the philosophical thoughts of trans-humanism expressed by Eneyo in this novel book of his. It is pertinent to note that enthalpy simply means the degree of disorderliness of a system.
It is therefore important to say, at this juncture, that the whole concepts of engineering thermodynamics, energy inter-conversions, the big bang theory, wave-particle duality/paradox of light, quantum mechanics, Le’Chatelle’s Principle, Schrodinger wave law Equation, Ascholli-Azillar Principles, Cauchi-Rannian Integral Equation, Libnitz Inequalities, Furier’s series, random number series, fibonacchi series and theory of spontaneous generation show that the universe where humans dwell has been in continuous and contentious disorderliness.
The finesse, dexterity, intellectual prowess, and pretty good juxtaposition of transhumanism and fearism philosophies and concepts as expressed and interrelated in this book would go along away to helping the government of nations as a guide to national legislation and governance.
I, hereby truly and strongly, recommend this book for heads of government and academic scholars at different levels for consideration in research and development. This book is specifically recommended as a decision support system (DSS) for programmers, artificial intelligence, and neural network experts, scientists, technologists, psychologists, philosophers, and religious leaders at all levels. Directors General and Chief executive officers (CEOs) of companies and business systems are not left out as this book can play a major role in decision making, policy reformation, and information dissemination.
ELUEMELEM, Frank N
Product Interaction Designer and
Persuasive Technology Advocate.
Rev. Fr. Edward Obi, MSP (PhD)
THE TRANSHUMAN WORLD AND ITS FEARS: The Fearological Guide for the Development countries.
MICHAEL BASSEY ENEYO
The term ‘Transhuman World’ is not in common currency yet, but it refers to a new world order in which the supremacy of humans will be contested by super-human machines.
There are obvious indications that present technological advancements in the development of efficient and automated machines are effectively constructing the imaginary super-highway to that world and that order. A case in point is the near-universal personal ownership of smart devices with multiple functionalities, thanks to nanotech micro-chips. Add this to the infinite connectivity that is envisaged in many countries and regions, then one is persuaded to think that nothing can stop that logical step to be taken. In fact, nations and governments are already marshalling their resources and expertise to face the future in this realistic way.
Without doubt, numerous problems that we face now will be resolved by machines within a tiny fraction of the time it would have taken humans to accomplish the same routines. The COVID-19 pandemic with it restrictions and protocols has, somewhat, heightened the aspiration for, and fastened the pace of transition from the present to the possibilities that lie ahead, perhaps, in the near future. Artificial intelligence (AI) has, for instance, been deployed effectively to initiate and complete activities hitherto done by humans, and their effectiveness is not in doubt!
Michaeleneyoo Eneyo’s book, The Transhuman World, addresses some of these complex realities and prospects in very ordinary human language. He is unabashed in his quest for understanding, and for fellow humans to accept the inevitable. Rather than whining about the possible subjection and subjugation of human beings to a regime of insensitive machines, humans should brace up, and prepare for that eventuality. What is, perhaps, needed more in this transition is a courageous effort by humans to equip themselves for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which will be dominated by extreme automation and extreme connectivity! with the potent mechanism for controlling these machines.
The ethical concerns raised by these prospects are numerous. The human need for work and leisure clashes with a Transhuman World where AI and robotics are deployed to do most of the work. The implication of this is that even where there is work; it would be poorly remunerated due to the downward pressure of the Transhuman World. In this scenario, human persons would, possibly, be reduced to poor and bored loafers, prone to suicidal ideation. Thus, the dignity of the human person would be compromised and undermined, and this comes with attendant debilitations. Community, as such, and the need for a Common Good to work for and to live for, and the sense of solidarity that ties all these together would be ineffectual or severely threatened since insensitive machines cannot feel the pain of others and empathise with them!
The developments that will come about in the transhuman world, however well-intentioned, will engender fear, naturally. The author, therefore, dedicates a significant portion of his work to expound on the theory of fear. Appropriate fear or apprehension towards something new and different is normal to most human beings, because it serves to prepare them for that unknown eventuality. This is why people would usually approach the unknown other, or circumstance, with trepidation. He hopes, therefore, that well-placed fear of the transhuman world, and all its yet-unknown possibilities, would give present human persons a soft-landing in that world order, whenever it may be realised.
The book is a good read, and I recommend it to all who dare to think about the future!
Rev. Fr. Edward Obi, MSP (PhD)
NOTE: These kinds of events, purporting the nature of fear as positive (at least in some way), are part of a much larger long discourse (especially in the W. worldview) that I find always existing and being promoted by some theorist or group, and of which I am always critical of because they don't define fear carefully enough and problematize their own positivism ideology of fear. -rmf
This new video, "Taking Children to the Edge" is first in a series of "Stone Teachings" as I call them. In this video you find how I think about making the transformation from a culture of fear to a culture of fearlessness, and we'd better start doing this with how we educate and socialize children. Thus, parents, teachers, caregivers of young people may find these thought insightful or at least provoking of your own thinking.
As for the larger audience for this video, as the citizens of this planet earth and the crises we face, I think you too will gain something from these teachings, from the stone, through me, to you ... and finally, to the children of the world.
I have been having conversations with Dr. Teich for a few years now, off and on. Recently, we are collaborating on his SolarLunar Arts venture to create 21st century curriculum materials (e.g., movies, 3-D and virtual reality games, etc.) to enable people to understand the 'old worldview' of gender separation (which became dissociation) in many cultures, especially the W. world. This has been a disaster, he argues... and, he and I agree, it is a major dualism that brings so much unnecessary fear-based thinking into the world--and, a lot of destruction with it. He presents archetypal ancient "Twin" myths and symbols that have long been part of humanity, which emphasize the more 'harmony' of opposites via complementarity principle...
I thought I would share from his 2012 book (image above) a short excerpt (pp. 47-8)--on these two modes of consciousness:
I highly recommend this film (watch by donation only): https://wisdomoftrauma.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI06PGvtCI8QIVuyCtBh1nYQglEAAYASAAEgLom_D_BwE
PHILOSOPHY OF UNITY: LOVE AS AN ULTIMATE UNIFIER
“While boundary and division are mostly creation from humanity’s greed and hatred for another, love is a bridge that brings every being together. In love there’s no boundary and division”—Michael Eneyo
Humans, by their nature are meant to be in association with one another. Their self-realization largely depends on the ability to study and understand how different things operate in their uniqueness and at the same time, to master how they operate in their unity in all living conditions in search for the attainment of the overall goal of life. Such knowledge is expected to help human beings on how to live in mutual and complementary manner in any society. It was on this desire to master the operational patterning of beings in this complex universe and also to know what causes them to be the way they are that human persons were motivated in different historical periods to embark on cosmological researches. These researches were also to unravel the mystery behind creation and the kind of being(s) or element(s) that could be responsible for the world. This curiosity to know the totality of things, their sources, nature, workings, their constituents and that which is responsible for the unity in the universe, necessitated what is now known as Philosophy.
Attempts to get to the root of this knowledge become the primary aim of Philosophy and it is indeed the fundamental worry of Philosophers of all ages. What then is the term philosophy? It is a systematic study of everything that exists for the purpose of knowing the truth about them and how this truth can be used in solving human existential problems. When Georg Hegel, the prominent German idealist, tried to put pieces of history together, he reasoned that the goal of Philosophy is to achieve a unified and a systematic understanding of everything in the world. For him: “to apprehend what is, is the task of philosophy. Because what is, is reason” (Hegel, 1820). This quest for the knowledge of every existing being also endeared scholars of all facets of life into the study of both physical and metaphysical realms of reality within their specific fields of research. The explanations offered by these scholars on what constitutes the workings of the universe are noteworthy, as these have exposed us to the existence of natural relationship amongst different individual beings in the world and the need to working hard to use it as means of providing solutions to people’s daily problems.
Critical evaluation of the studies from history carried out by different scholars so far, reveals that the apparent separate entities and distinct events in existence are not actually separate in the real sense of the word: that they are somewhat related, they are both unique in themselves, and at the same time connected to each other. This chain of unity has already registered in our sub-conscious such that we frequently make references to events that are not clearly linked. For example: two similar events can occur in different historical periods from two disharmonious backgrounds, but this inter-connectedness of things compels human persons, by the level of judgment, to make comparative references to these separate events. Also, we can see, in our houses we have many compartments: toilet, seating room, and bedroom, each with its peculiar functions and purposes, but all these different compartments jointly constitute a house.
Again, we are challenged with the apparent warring opposites of things in the universe: Hot/cold, water/fire, black/white, short/tall, man/woman and none of these can independently and sufficiently survive without the existence of its opposite part. Even as we look around, there are so many objects and elements surrounding us: when we pick a book to read, we are faced with different stories about different things, all these draw us closer to concluding that the universe is made up of fragmentations and multiplicity of things. Even with these phenomena of fragmentations and multiplicity, the world is known as universe and not multiverse. This further informs us of the inherent unity that is natural to every existent irrespective of their apparent external differences. Aren’t there things that can serve as unifiers of the multiplicity of things in the universe? Isn’t it worthy to really understand the source of this natural unity in the world?
The puzzle about the unification of the multiplicity of things in the universe is somewhat connected to the age-long quest for the ultimate reality that was common among the earliest Greek Philosophers. The ancient philosophers had occupied themselves with the desire to know the basic cause(s) of things in the world and try to prove that this basic cause is also responsible for the unity and the separation of the things in it. In this work, we intend to take some steps further by not only trying to know the ultimate cause of things, but most importantly, to make effort to unravel the unifiers (the things that caused the unity) of these fragments; thus, appreciating the unity of these fragmentations as the means through which humankind can achieve peace in the contemporary society. In the course of doing this, we shall refute any attempt to promote the idea of absolute separation, disassociation or division among different entities, their species notwithstanding; instead, we shall work hard to demonstrate critically that the idea of absolute separation is an illusion; that everything is naturally connected to everything else. Also, we shall in the course of doing this, try to establish that without the ultimate unifier; there wouldn’t have been perfect and enduring connections in the universe. This therefore can amount to saying that without love which we have identified in this book as an ultimate unifier; the world would be like soup without salt. Thus, love adds flavor and taste to existence and it is also a bridge which makes everything to naturally connect such that any attempt to negate or deny any part of existent, becomes an attempt to negate or deny the whole of it (in a subtle manner).
The first chapter of the book begins with the definition of the scope of our enquiry so as to make the ideation behind the topic of the book more precise and clear. Hence, universe (cosmos) is the scope of the discursive fray. In making universe our scope, we shall, among other definitions, give a short summary of what we shall consider the meaning of universe, that is; a family of all beings. Thus, the book is primarily concerned with the development of workable methodologies on how unity of all beings in the universe can be achieved. In advancing our discourses on the above expanding research territory, we shall be focusing on the concepts of university and universal to explain the roles of beings within the context of connectivity. However, we shall adopt some transcendental and metaphysical analogous concepts when necessary to elucidate any part of our discourses where such is imperative.
Chapter Two deals with intensive analysis of the meaning of unity as well as knowing the categories of beings that need unity. It is within the context of this enquiry that we shall come to know that all beings need unity. This unity is for their individual self-realizations as well as in the move to making a better society or a community of living organisms. Here, the concept of unifiers shall be equally discussed to bring out the point that we are all unifiers of some sorts. Every being has the potentiality of uniting different kinds of beings. To buttress the above thesis, some selected forms of unifiers shall be briefly discussed and then summed up with a summary of the chapter.
The unifier and the notion of ultimate reality in the ancient period is inserted in chapter Three to draw us back to the earliest researches carried out by some western ancient philosophers on cosmogony and cosmology to know how the world was made and what is responsible for the unity and the separation of things in it. This is not to mean that the cosmological studies started with the philosophers in view. Before and during this time, some anonymous thinkers other than Philosophers we are going to discuss have enquired into the compositions and the originating cause of things in the world and how these things work. Though their ideas were lovely and promising, the lack of documentations and the fact of the unknown sources of such philosophies diminished their chances for commendations and inclusion in the theoretical and historical records. Efforts shall be made to critically analyze the reflections of some of the philosophers who offered unique explanations, the ultimate cause of things and that which holds all things together.
In successive manner, the earliest thinkers had speculated that water, apeiron, and air respectively are responsible for the workings of the things in the universe. The positions of these first (known) thinkers, however, gave birth to many other schools of thought whose aims were: To attempt either a total destruction of the foundations of these thinkers, or to refute some of these opinions as pseudo (false) or at most, to build on them for a better understanding. This attempt for a better understanding of the universe and what should have been its operational methodology ushered in Philosophers like: Pythagoras, Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, etc. The pluralists were also pregnant with ideas about the make-up of the universe. Empedocles, Anaxagoras and Democritus front the position of the pluralists from different backgrounds which we shall carefully discuss in this work. The reason for this historical reflection is not just to know their power of rhetoric; rather, it is for the purpose of having foundational ideas on the natural unity characterizing the world. This historical reflection will also help us to know how useful these early postulations are to this work, as it will help us evaluate the different paths they took in search for that ultimate reality and the extent of its connections with the ideation of unity articulated in this book.
Chapter Four focuses on the problems of disunity which have affected all fabrics of the society globally. The factors and the causes of disunity in human society shall also be discussed; thus, exposing the havoc caused by our acts of disunity and division anytime we want to make meaningful progress in life.
In Chapter Five we are going to identify the phenomena fear as one of the major impediments to inclusive unity. A brief historical account of Fearism/Fearlessness Movement will form part of our discussion in this chapter. The chapter insists that a proper fear education can assist us to know the method(s) to be applied in our attempt to overcoming fear problems in the present world order.
In chapter Six, we intend to look at the challenges or impediments in an attempt to bring unity in any group or gathering, especially when such unity involves beings of contrasting opposites.
In addition to the foregoing, the chapter also examines the theory of opposites to re-affirm our stance that opposite does not mean faction or division in the strict sense of the word, but a reminder of strength if the different categories of beings are brought together. In the theory of opposites, there are always struggles; but these struggles are always targeting at surmounting or fusing the interests of their contrasting units.
Love has been identified in chapter Seven as an absolute instance for unification; hence, becoming the ultimate unifiers of all categories of beings. The chapter has logically, explanatorily, and demonstratively defined love in three different historical dispensations; the amoral, moral and immoral, while also giving insights on how the idea of law came into human society. Selected world religions have been briefly discussed. The classical types of love shall be equally discussed and then coalesced into two major categories: pleasant (positive) and unpleasant (negative) through which every other kind of love can be explained.
In Chapter Eight, we explore the African (Efik) episteme as a model for the impact of love in communal unity and tolerance. The chapter defines love in the light of communal unity in Efik kingdom. The idea driving this exploration is to put the result of our findings into critical and pragmatic scrutiny to know how relevant our research shall be to the people in the 21st century and beyond.
In the Ninth Chapter, there is a strong emphasis on the illusion of thinking that we are completely separate from every other being. A call has been made for the need for all beings to unite as one and see themselves as a part that is independently insufficient unless in union with other existents. The concepts of nationalism within Nigeria territory and the internationalism have been employed to capture the gamut of ideas on unity of all human beings. The chapter argues that anytime we try to destroy any human persons or beings; that we are indirectly working toward our own destruction on the premise that we are the parts that make up the whole.
The final chapter explains how love is capable of uniting all parts of beings. In all, the book sets out to argue that the universe is a “Uni Bi-centric” as well as “Uni Multi-centric”(that is: one and opposite and also one and many). Things are naturally unique in themselves and also naturally connected to everything else. Again, that these natural connections also have their respective connectors. Among these different connectors, there is an ultimate connector of which every other connector relies on and that, love is that ultimate connector. In this book, we use the term “unifiers” to mean these connectors and “ultimate unifier” to mean the ultimate connector. From the analysis and explanation given herein, love is believed to have the ability to bring all beings together. As a supreme paradigm for unification, love is the most needed norm if a healthy and harmonious society is to be built.
Please, subscribe to get an access.