The Future of Information Architecture examines issues surrounding why information is processed, stored and applied in the way that it has, since time immemorial. Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many scholars in human history, the recurrent debate on the explanation of the most basic categories of information (eg space, time causation, quality, quantity) has been misconstrued, to the effect that there exists some deeper categories and principles behind these categories of information - with enormous implications for our understanding of reality in general. To understand this, the book is organised in to four main parts: Part I begins with the vital question concerning the role of information within the context of the larger theoretical debate in the literature. Part II provides a critical examination of the nature of data taxonomy from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part III constructively invesitgates the world of information network from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part IV proposes six main theses in the authors synthetic theory of information architecture, namely, (a) the first thesis on the simpleness-complicatedness principle, (b) the second thesis on the exactness-vagueness principle (c) the third thesis on the slowness-quickness principle (d) the fourth thesis on the order-chaos principle, (e) the fifth thesis on the symmetry-asymmetry principle, and (f) the sixth thesis on the post-human stage.
What makes the rule of law so special that it is to conscientiously punish the “bad” doers and reward the “good” ones—such that, where there is the rule of law, peace and order are to be expected, so that “the rule of law is better than the rule of any individual”? Take the case of international law, as an illustration. While different international courts have been busy going after the killers of innocent victims in Rwanda and Liberia, they have turned a blind eye to the major powers which have killed—on a much larger and more brutal scale, by comparison—innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, just to cite two current examples. Contrary to the conventional wisdom conveniently held by many in human history, the rule of law has its other side which has not yet been systematically understood, such that the rule of law is neither possible nor desirable to the extent that the defenders of legal institutions in human history would like us to believe. Lest any misunderstanding hastily occur, this is not to imply that the rule of law is absolutely useless, or that the literature in jurisprudence (and other related fields like political philosophy, ethics, law and economics, and the sociology of law) should be dismissed because of its scholarly irrelevance. Of course, neither of these two extreme views is reasonable either. Instead, this book provides an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of law, in relation to its necessity and contingency in the context of justice—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them (nor integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other). In the process, this book offers a new theory to transcend the existing approaches in the literature in a new direction—in that, in the end, there is no justice without injustice and that it will be transcended too. This seminal project, if successful, will fundamentally change the way that we think about the nature of law, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what I originally called its “post-human” fate.
Why should inquiry be possible, only if some knowledge is required to guide it, as conventionally understood? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many thinkers in all human history hitherto existing, there are some fundamental dialectic principles hidden behind any categories of understanding in knowing. And these principles impose some constraints, at both methodological and ontological levels, together with other levels in culture, society, nature, and the mind - on how reality is to be understood. Furthermore, the specific categories of understanding (as conventionally understood), even if valid at all (which are often not the case), are often not that important, when compared with these more fundamental dialectic principles hidden behind them. The focus on understanding the nature of knowledge has been much misplaced, in this sense, in the intellectual history hitherto existing, and much time and talent have been wasted for something less important. If true, this thesis will alter the way of how knowledge is to be understood across the board. - Is written by a highly knowledgeable and well-respected scholar - A new theory called The Holistic Theory of Knowledge - A comprehensive analysis of knowledge in relation to methodology and ontology, from the perspectives of nature, the mind, society, and culture
Is it really true that martial arts, in spite of their popularity in this day and age of ours, have, at their deepest level, the promised land of “self-knowledge,” “the expression of beauty,” or something highly spiritual to be pursued for the human soul? Or, to put it in a different way, what exactly makes martial arts so amazing that, somehow, they will eventually lead the practitioners to the spiritual realm of self-cultivation in its highest depth? Contrary to the conventional wisdom about martial arts as held by many over the ages, this popular view about martial arts has become so legendary that their dark sides have yet to be systematically explored and that the lofty aims of martial arts are neither possible nor desirable to the extent that their proponents would like us to believe. Of course, this is not to say that the very tradition of martial arts is absolutely useless, or that the literature on martial arts hitherto existing in history is spiritually unworthy to be appreciated. Instead, this book constructively offers an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of martial arts, in special relation to the body and spirit of warriors—while learning from different views in the literature, without favoring any one of them (nor integrating them, as they are not necessarily compatible with each other), and, in the end, transcending them towards a new horizon not conceived before. This seminal view, if proven valid, will fundamentally change the legendary way that people have thought about martial arts—from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what I originally called its “post-human” fate. _____________________
What exactly makes creative thinking so magical that, somehow, “everyone can be creative” and, by implication, creativity is a good thing to have—to the point that this popular view is fast becoming a fashionable nonsense in this day and age of ours? To put things in a historical perspective—this popular view contrasts sharply with the opposing view in the older days (e.g., during the Enlightenment and Romantic eras), when people used to think that creativity was primarily for the selected few with extraordinary abilities. Contrary to the respective conventional wisdom in each of the two opposing eras, neither of the two views is valid. Ours is no more so than theirs. This is not to imply, of course, that there are only a few instances of creativity in human history, or, in reverse, that creativity can be equally taught to everyone—and, for that matter, that there is absolutely nothing good about creativity. Obviously, extreme views like this are far from the truth. The point in this book, however, is to show an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of creative thinking, which goes beyond both convergent and divergent thinking, while learning from them. The current fashionable nonsense on creative thinking has tended to minimize its hidden downsides and exaggerate its overstated promises, as part of a new ideology in this age of ours. In addition, there is nothing intrinsically good (or bad) about “creative thinking”—just as there is nothing essentially good (or evil) about “God,” “the King,” “Motherland,” or the like, by analogy. They have all been used and misused in accordance to the interests and powers that be over the ages. If true, this seminal view will fundamentally change the way that we think about the nature of imagination and intuition, with its enormous implications for the future of invention and innovation, in a small sense, and what I originally called its “post-human” fate, in a large one.
Why should anomalous experience, in a general sense, be proven to exist, before they can be taken seriously? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many scholars in human history hitherto existing, the imaginative exploration of anomalous phenomena, even if all of them were merely the fabricated products of psychological con artists, will have tremendous implications for the future of intelligent life, both on earth and in deep space unto multiverses. For the critics, this is a bold (or outrageous) claim, for sure. So, a good question to ask is, Why should the conventional wisdom on anomalous experience be challenged in this way? This question is all the more fascinating, when related to the nature of unconsciousness. Although unconscious experience does not necessarily imply anomalous experience, the two are closely intertwined, since an individual may not exactly know how and why an anomalous phenomenon he claims to encounter happens in the way that it does, and this constitutes the unconscious dimension of anomalous experience, which has remained the most controversial in the scientific community. This book thus focuses on this relationship between the nature of unconsciousness and the controversial aspects of anomalous experience so understood. To understand this, the book is organized into four main parts, that is, in relation to nature, the mind, culture, and society—together with the introductory and concluding chapters.
Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many in much of human history, in this book Peter Baofu here proposes what he calls «the perspectival theory of space-time.» According to this theory, there are multiple perspectives of space and time in society, culture, the mind, and nature, all of which are subject to «the regression-progression principle» in «existential dialectics.» These perspectives exist in society, culture, the mind, and nature with good reasons, being subject to «the symmetry-asymmetry principle» in «existential dialectics» and with some being more successful and hegemonic (dominant) than others. Furthermore and more importantly in the long haul, space and time as humans have known them will end and will eventually be altered by post-humans in different forms, be they here in this universe or in multiverses, subject to «the change-constancy principle» in «existential dialectics.»
Is history really so universalistic (even when similar events happen in different contexts) that, as George Santayana (1905) once famously wrote, “[t]hose who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”? This more universalistic view of history can be contrasted with an opposing view which is more relativistic in orientation, as shown by the equally known remark by Winston Churchill that “[h]istory is written by the victor,” to the extent that what is regarded as true in history today may not be so in another era when a new victor comes into power. (THEX 2011) So, which of the two views is correct here? Contrary to these opposing views (and other ideas as will be discussed in the book), history, in relation to both universality and relativity, is neither possible or impossible, nor desirable or undesirable to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. Of course, this challenge to the opposing views about history does not suggest that the study of history is controversial at best, or that those fields (related to the study of history) like political science, economics, military studies, anthropology, sociology, psychology, philosophy, theology, literature, ethics, and so on should be rejected too. Needless to say, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Rather, this book offers an alternative, better way to understand the future of history, especially in the dialectic context of universality and relativity—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. Instead, this book offers a new theory (that is, the multifold theory of history) to go beyond the existing approaches in a novel way. If successful, this seminal project is to fundamentally change the way that we think about history, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.
Are the performing arts really supposed to be so radical that, as John Cage once said in the context of music, “there is no noise, only sound,” since “he argued that any sounds we can hear can be music”? (WK 2007a; D. Harwood 1976) This radical tradition in performing arts, with music as an example here, can be contrasted with an opposing view in the older days, when “Greek philosophers and medieval theorists in music defined music as tones ordered horizontally as melodies, and vertically as harmonies. Music theory, within this realm, is studied with the presupposition that music is orderly and often pleasant to hear.” (WK 2007a) Contrary to these opposing traditions (and other views as will be discussed in the book), performing arts, in relation to both the body and its presence, is neither possible nor desirable to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. Needless to say, the challenge to these opposing traditions in performing arts does not imply that performing arts are worthless human endeavors, or that those fields of study related to performing arts like aesthetics, acoustics, communication studies, psychology, culture studies, sociology, religion, morality, and so on should be rejected too. Of course, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Instead, this book provides an alternative, better way of understanding the future of performing arts, especially in the dialectic context of the body and its presence—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. In other words, this book offers a new theory (that is, the transdisiciplinary theory of performing arts) to go beyond the existing approaches in a novel way. If successful, this seminal project will fundamentally change the way that we think about performing arts, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.
Why should mass media be informational and accurate as much as its proponents would claim—and, conversely, disinformational and propagandistic as much as its critics would argue? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many since the modern era of mass media, neither of the two opposing views is correct, to the extent that a total analysis of media influence has yet to be adequately explored and understood. Something fundamentally vital to the analysis of communication has been missing. This is not to say, however, that the literature on media studies hitherto existing in history has been much ado about nothing; on the contrary, indeed, much can be learned from different theoretical approaches in the field. But the important point to remember here is that this book aims to show an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of mass media (which goes beyond both the pros and cons in the literature on media influence, while learning from them all). If true, this seminal view will alter the way of how mass media are to be understood, with its enormous theoretical implications for going beyond the existing paradigms on the future of communication, in a small sense—and for predicting the future of open and closed societies, in a large sense.
Why are some individuals relatively more successful than others in achievement? And why are some countries (or regions), for that matter, relatively more successful than others in development? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many, Dr. Baofu argues that the nature-nurture debate is misleading and faulty, since his “transcendent approach” is to show how and why the two are closely intertwined in producing the behavioral differences as often seen in individual human endeavors on the micro scale, and for that matter, in country (or regional) endeavors on the macro one—without, however, committing “the compromise fallacy” as often seen in an in-between alternative. The debate also obscures something more tremendous in the long run, in relation to the emergence of what Dr. Baofu originally proposed as the “post-human” world that humans have never known, when human genes will no longer exist. Human genes have their days numbered.
Are sports really supposed to be so competitive that, as Henry R. Sanders once famously said, ""Men, I'll be honest. Winning is...the only thing!""? (WK 2012) This competitive view of sports can be contrasted with a critical view by William Shakespeare, who wrote in Othello (Act. iv. Sc. 1), ""They laugh that win."" (BART 2012) Contrary to these opposing views (and other ones, as will be discussed in the book), sports (in relation to both training and winning) are neither possible (or impossible)...
Is migration really so constructive that, as Ralph Emerson (1909) once wrote, in the context of the New World, “asylum of all nations . . . will construct a new race, a new religion, a new state, a new . . . smelting-pot”? (WK 2012) This noble lie—the “melting pot” in the 20th century—can be contrasted with an opposing noble lie of the “salad bowl” in the 21st century, when those in multiculturalism like Tariq Modood (2007) argue nowadays that multiculturalism “is most timely and necessary, and . . . we need more not less.” (WK 2012a) Contrary to these opposing noble lies (and other views as will be discussed in the book), migration, in relation to both the Same and the Others, is neither possible or impossible, nor desirable or undesirable, to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. Surely, this exposure of the opposing noble lies about migration does not mean that the specific field of study on migration is a waste of time, or that those interdisciplinary fields (related to the study of migration) like animal migration, gene migration, diaspora politics, culural assimlation, human trafficking, urbanization, brain drain, tourism, ethnic cleansing, environmental migration, globalization, religious persecution, national identity, gentrification, fifth column, migration art, xenophobia, space colonization, multiculturalism, and so on are worthless. Needless to say, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Instead, this book offers an alternative, better way to understand the future of migration, especially in the dialectic context of the Same and the Others—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. More specifically, this book offers a new theory (that is, the theory of the cyclical progression of migration) to go beyond the existing approaches in a novel way. If successful, this seminal project is to fundamentally change the way that we think about migration in relation to Sameness, Otherness, and identity, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.
What exactly is so appealing in formal science, such that its influence can be seen in numerous disciplines nowadays, for practical purposes like better functionality, performance, and so on—as Pythagoras already famously said in antiquity: “Number is the ruler of forms and ideas and the cause of gods and demons”? This contemporary addiction to practical convenience in formal science has turned a blind eye to its other side, which has impoverished both our knowledge of reality and the well-being of our lifeworld. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the other side of this appealing addiction has yet to be comprehensively understood, nor has the fact that its practical convenience is neither possible nor desirable to the extent that the proponents of formal science would like us to believe. Needless to say, this by no means suggests that formal science should not be used for practical purposes, or that the literature in formal science (and other related fields like computer science, information theory, microeconomics, decision theory, statistics, and linguistics, just to cite a few of them) should be dismissed. Of course, neither of these two extreme views is reasonable either. Instead, this book provides an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of formal science, especially in relation to systems theory for practical convenience—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them (nor integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other). In the end, this book offers a new theory to transcend the existing approaches in the literature in a new direction not thought of before. This seminal project is to fundamentally alter the way that we think about formal science, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what I originally called its “post-human” fate.
Is it really true that martial arts, in spite of their popularity in this day and age of ours, have, at their deepest level, the promised land of “self-knowledge,” “the expression of beauty,” or something highly spiritual to be pursued for the human soul? Or, to put it in a different way, what exactly makes martial arts so amazing that, somehow, they will eventually lead the practitioners to the spiritual realm of self-cultivation in its highest depth? Contrary to the conventional wisdom about martial arts as held by many over the ages, this popular view about martial arts has become so legendary that their dark sides have yet to be systematically explored and that the lofty aims of martial arts are neither possible nor desirable to the extent that their proponents would like us to believe. Of course, this is not to say that the very tradition of martial arts is absolutely useless, or that the literature on martial arts hitherto existing in history is spiritually unworthy to be appreciated. Instead, this book constructively offers an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of martial arts, in special relation to the body and spirit of warriors—while learning from different views in the literature, without favoring any one of them (nor integrating them, as they are not necessarily compatible with each other), and, in the end, transcending them towards a new horizon not conceived before. This seminal view, if proven valid, will fundamentally change the legendary way that people have thought about martial arts—from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what I originally called its “post-human” fate. _____________________
Why should mathematical logic be grounded on the basis of some formal requirements in the way that it has been developed since its classical emergence as a hybrid field of mathematics and logic in the 19th century or earlier? Contrary to conventional wisdom, the foundation of mathematic logic has been grounded on some false (or dogmatic) assumptions which have much impoverished the pursuit of knowledge. This is not to say that mathematical logic has been useless. Quite on the contrary, it has been quite influential in shaping the way that reality is to be understood in numerous fields of knowledge—by learning from the mathematical study of logic and its reverse, the logical study of mathematics. In the final analysis, the future of mathematical logic will depend on how its foundational crisis is to be resolved, and "the contrastive theory of rationality" (in this book) is to precisely show how and why it can be done by taking a contrastive turn, subject to the constraints imposed upon by "existential dialectic principles" at the ontological level (to avoid any reductionistic fallacy) and other ones (like the perspectives of culture, society, nature, and the mind). The contrastive theory of rationality thus shows a better way to ground mathematical logic (beyond both classical and non-classical logics) for the future advancement of knowledge and, if true, will alter the way of how mathematical logic is to be understood, with its enormous implications for the future of knowledge and its "post-human" fate.
Why should mass media be informational and accurate as much as its proponents would claim—and, conversely, disinformational and propagandistic as much as its critics would argue? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many since the modern era of mass media, neither of the two opposing views is correct, to the extent that a total analysis of media influence has yet to be adequately explored and understood. Something fundamentally vital to the analysis of communication has been missing. This is not to say, however, that the literature on media studies hitherto existing in history has been much ado about nothing; on the contrary, indeed, much can be learned from different theoretical approaches in the field. But the important point to remember here is that this book aims to show an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of mass media (which goes beyond both the pros and cons in the literature on media influence, while learning from them all). If true, this seminal view will alter the way of how mass media are to be understood, with its enormous theoretical implications for going beyond the existing paradigms on the future of communication, in a small sense—and for predicting the future of open and closed societies, in a large sense.
Is waste (or trash) really so useless that, as William Faulkner once wrote, “[r]ead everything—trash, classics, good and bad, and see how they do it. . . . If it is good, you’ll find out. If it’s not, throw it out the window”? (TE 2012) Interestingly, this critical view of waste (or trash) can be contrasted with an opposing observation by Isaac Bashevis Singer, who once famously said that “the waste basket is the writer’s best friend.” (TE 2012a) Contrary to these opposing views (and other ones as will be discussed in the book), waste, in relation to both uselessness and usefulness is neither possible or impossible, nor desirable or undesirable to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. Of course, this challenge to the opposing views of waste does not imply that waste has no practical value, or that those interdisciplinary fields (related to waste) like epidemiology, global warming, waste management, low-carbon economics, ethical consumerism, resource recovery, freeganism, environmental justice, space debris, and so on are unimportant. Of course, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Rather, this book offers an alternative, better way to understand the future of waste, especially in the dialectic context of uselessness and usefulness—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. More specifically, this book offers a new theory (that is, the transfigurative theory of waste) to go beyond the existing approaches in a novel way. If successful, this seminal project is to fundamentally change the way that we think about waste in relation to uselessness and usefulness from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.
Why should mathematical logic be grounded on the basis of some formal requirements in the way that it has been developed since its classical emergence as a hybrid field of mathematics and logic in the 19th century or earlier? Contrary to conventional wisdom, the foundation of mathematic logic has been grounded on some false (or dogmatic) assumptions which have much impoverished the pursuit of knowledge. This is not to say that mathematical logic has been useless. Quite on the contrary, it has been quite influential in shaping the way that reality is to be understood in numerous fields of knowledge—by learning from the mathematical study of logic and its reverse, the logical study of mathematics. In the final analysis, the future of mathematical logic will depend on how its foundational crisis is to be resolved, and "the contrastive theory of rationality" (in this book) is to precisely show how and why it can be done by taking a contrastive turn, subject to the constraints imposed upon by "existential dialectic principles" at the ontological level (to avoid any reductionistic fallacy) and other ones (like the perspectives of culture, society, nature, and the mind). The contrastive theory of rationality thus shows a better way to ground mathematical logic (beyond both classical and non-classical logics) for the future advancement of knowledge and, if true, will alter the way of how mathematical logic is to be understood, with its enormous implications for the future of knowledge and its "post-human" fate.
What precisely resides in “sexuality” which warrants the popular discourse on sexuality as “part of our world freedom,” or something as an inspiring source for “our own creation” of “new forms of relationships” or “new forms of love” never before possible in human history? This popular treatment of sexual freedom has become so politically correct, in this day and age of ours, that it fast degenerates into a seductive ideology which has impoverished our understanding of sexuality by blinding us from its dark sides. Contrary to this intoxicating conventional wisdom, the dark sides of this seductive ideology have yet to be systematically understood and that its very creative freedom is neither possible nor desirable to the extent that its advocates would like us to believe. Of course, this is not to suggest that sexuality should not be about freedom nor creativity, or that the literature in sexual studies (and other related fields like gender studies, queer studies, and cultural studies, for example) should be ignored because of their scholarly nonsense. Needless to say, neither of these two extreme views is reasonable either. Instead, the purpose of this book is to provide an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of sexuality, in special relation to the sexual body and spirit, in conjunction with the mind—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them (nor integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other). This seminal project, if successful, will fundamentally change the way that we think about the nature of sexuality, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what I originally called its “post-human” fate.
Is chemistry really so valuable that, as Theodore L. Brown (2011) and his colleagues continue to claim in the twelfth edition of their work in 2011, chemistry is “the central science” in connecting the physical sciences with the life and applied sciences? (WK 2011 & 2011; C. Reinhardt 2001) This crowning of chemistry, however, can be contrasted with an opposing view, as Michael Polanyi once questioned the centrality of chemistry, when he wrote that “[n]o inanimate object is ever fully determined by the laws of . . . chemistry,” so other fields of study are just as important. (BQ 2011) Contrary to these conflicting views about chemistry (and other ones discussed in the book), chemistry, in relation to substances and their changes, is neither possible nor desirable to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. This challenge to the conflicting views about chemistry does not mean, however, that chemistry is useless, or that those fields of study related to chemistry like astronomy, physics, geology, mathematics, material science, biology, psychology, computer science, and so on should be ignored too. Of course, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Instead, this book provides an alternative, better way of understanding the future of chemistry —especially in the dialectic context of substances and their changes—while learning from different approaches in literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. This book offers a new theory (that is, the creational theory of chemistry) to go beyond the existing approaches to literature in an original way. If successful, this seminal project will fundamentally change the way that we think about chemistry, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.
Is culinary art really so exact that, as Delia Smith once wrote, “cooking is an exact art and not some casual game”? (BQ 2012) This exact view of cooking can be contrasted with an opposing observation by Tom Jaine, when he argued that, “if cooking becomes an art form rather than a means of providing a reasonable diet, then something is clearly wrong.” (BQ 2012a) Contrary to these opposing views (and other ones as will be discussed in the book), culinary art, in relation to both ingredients and techniques, is neither possible or impossible, nor desirable or undesirable, to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. Needless to say, this challenge to the opposing views of cooking does not mean that culinary art has no practical value, or that those interdisciplinary fields (related to culinary art) like food science, nutritional economics, food chemistry, food aesthetics, the ethics of killing for food, molecular gastronomy, food rheology, food photography, Shechita, the science of aphrodisiacs, and so on, are unimportant. Of course, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Rather, this book offers an alternative, better way to understand the future of culinary art, especially in the dialectic context of ingredients and techniques—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. More specifically, this book offers a new theory (that is, the inquisitive theory of culinary art) to go beyond the existing approaches in a novel way. If successful, this seminal project is to fundamentally change the way that we think about culinary art in relation to ingredients and techniques from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.
A SKILLED STORYTELLER WHO KNOWS HOW TO SERVE UP VIVID NARRATIVES, ROMANTIC ADVENTURES, COMPELLING CHARACTERIZATIONS, RIVETING PLOTS AND INTRIGUING VIEWS OF MODERN DAY CHINA." --BookLoons "A BRISK, SOLIDLY PLOTTED POLICE PROCEDURAL, WITH LOTS OF GRITTY FORENSIC DETAILS." --Mystery Scene Magazine Detective Li Yan and forensic pathologist Margaret Campbell travel to Shanghai, where a new ally--and a new enemy--await. When a mass grave containing eighteen mutilated female corpses is discovered in Shanghai, detective Li Yan is sent from Beijing to establish if the bodies are linked to an unsolved murder in the capital. Here, Li will be working with Mei Ling, deputy head of Shanghai's serious crime squad. Mei Ling is a formidable woman: a fact that is not lost on Li's on-again, off-again lover, forensic pathologist Margaret Campbell. But when Campbell, vulnerable and still grieving the death of her father, learns that the victims were subjected to "live" autopsies, she swallows her pride and joins Li Yan and Mei Ling in the hunt for the murderer. As Li, Campbell, and Mei Ling enter the arena of a sickening nemesis they are forced to confront each of their very worst nightmares.
Takuan Sōho’s (1573–1645) two works on Zen and swordsmanship are among the most straightforward and lively presentations of Zen ever written and have enjoyed great popularity in both premodern and modern Japan. Although dealing ostensibly with the art of the sword, Record of Immovable Wisdom and On the Sword Taie are basic guides to Zen—“user’s manuals” for Zen mind that show one how to manifest it not only in sword play but from moment to moment in everyday life. Along with translations of Record of Immovable Wisdom and On the Sword Taie (the former, composed in all likelihood for the shogun Tokugawa Iemitsu and his fencing master, Yagyū Munenori), this book includes an introduction to Takuan’s distinctive approach to Zen, drawing on excerpts from the master’s other writings. It also offers an accessible overview of the actual role of the sword in Takuan’s day, a period that witnessed both a bloody age of civil warfare and Japan’s final unification under the Tokugawa shoguns. Takuan was arguably the most famous Zen priest of his time, and as a pivotal figure, bridging the Zen of the late medieval and early modern periods, his story (presented in the book’s biographical section) offers a rare picture of Japanese Zen in transition. For modern readers, whether practitioners of Zen or the martial arts, Takuan’s emphasis on freedom of mind as the crux of his teaching resonates as powerfully as it did with the samurai and swordsmen of Tokugawa Japan. Scholars will welcome this new, annotated translation of Takuan’s sword-related works as well as the host of detail it provides, illuminating an obscure period in Zen’s history in Japan.
Are natural resources really so limited that, as Mahatma Gandhi once famously said, “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not every man’s greed”? (TE 2012) This limiting view of natural resources can be contrasted with an opposing view by John Maynard Keynes, who “summarized Say’s Law as ‘supply creates its own demand’” but then “turned Say’s Law on its head in the 1930s by declaring that demand creates its own supply,” so whenever a demand exists, there will be resources to create the supply. (EN 2012) Contrary to these opposing views (and other ones as will be discussed in the book), natural resources, in relation to both diversity and discontinuity are neither possible or impossible, nor desirable or undesirable to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. Needless to say, this challenge to the opposing views of natural resources does not mean that natural resources are unimportant, or that those interdisciplinary fields (related to natural resources) like conservation biology, environmental management, ecological economics, political ecology, environmental ethics, adaptive management, genetic engineering, Malthusianism, and so on are not worth studying. Of course, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Rather, this book offers an alternative, better way to understand the future of natural resources, especially in the dialectic context of diversity and discontinuity—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. More specifically, this book offers a new theory (that is, the resilient theory of natural resources) to go beyond the existing approaches in a novel way. If successful, this seminal project is to fundamentally change the way that we think about natural resources in relation to diversity and discontinuity from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.
There is something fundamentally wrong with the conventional wisdom in the field of Comparative Politics, Political Theory, and even Political Science as a whole, which rigidly conceptualize and theorize political systems in terms of different categories (e.g., liberal-democratic vs. authoritarian), which are supposed to be distinct and separate, without much mixing of each other, certainly not in any major way. A liberal-democratic political system (like the one in the U.S.), in accordance to this conventional wisdom, is anti-authoritarian (and therefore good). Conversely, an authoritarian political system (like the one in mainland China) is anti-democratic and therefore bad. This book takes the challenging task to show that all political systems—different as each is, for sure, from the rest—have much in common. Under the right conditions, a liberal democracy, as an illustration, not only can be as evil as its authoritarian counterparts, albeit in different ways—but also can be more authoritarian as it becomes more advanced as a liberal democracy. In fact, Dr. Peter Baofu suggests that authoritarianism is an advanced stage of liberal democracy, under these conditions. To understand this, the book is organized into two main parts with different sections, that is, in relation to meta-theory (i.e., methodology and ontology) and theory (i.e., nature, the mind, culture, and society).
Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many contemporaries in our time, the popularity of studying complexity is fast becoming a new fad in the intellectual scene. However, can the study of complex phenomena truly reveal recognizable patterns (with predictable outcomes) to enhance our understanding of reality, especially when it is embedded within the messy web of complexity? If so, what then are the limits? This book strives to demolish some of the myths surrounding the nature of complexity and, in the process, to provide an original theory to understand it in this world and beyond. It introduces the author's dialectic theory of complexity, together with the theoretical debate in the literature. It expounds on the concept of complexity from various perspectives, including chemistry, micro- and macro-physics, biology and psychology. It also examines the nature of complexity from societal and cultural perspectives.This book presents a broad view on the nature of complexity, adequately introducing the reader to this emerging field.
Why are some individuals relatively more successful than others in achievement? And why are some countries (or regions), for that matter, relatively more successful than others in development? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many, Dr. Baofu argues that the nature-nurture debate is misleading and faulty, since his “transcendent approach” is to show how and why the two are closely intertwined in producing the behavioral differences as often seen in individual human endeavors on the micro scale, and for that matter, in country (or regional) endeavors on the macro one—without, however, committing “the compromise fallacy” as often seen in an in-between alternative. The debate also obscures something more tremendous in the long run, in relation to the emergence of what Dr. Baofu originally proposed as the “post-human” world that humans have never known, when human genes will no longer exist. Human genes have their days numbered.
Why should urban planning in our time be obsessed with the issue of sustainability? Or differently put, is sustainability really as desirable and possible as its proponents in urban planning (and other related fields like economics, political science, environmental studies, architecture, and so on) would like us to believe? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many since the modern era, the concern with sustainability has been much exaggerated and distorted, to the point that it is fast becoming a new intellectual fad, so that its dark sides have been unwarrantedly ignored or downgraded. This is not to say, however, that the literature on sustainability in urban planning (and other related fields) hitherto existing in history has been full of nonsense. Indeed, on the contrary, much can be learned from different theoretical approaches in the literature. The important point to remember here, however, is that this book provides an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of sustainability in urban planning (and other related fields), which learns from different sides of the debate but in the end transcends them all. The urgency of this inquiry should not be underestimated, as it concerns not only urban planning (as a case study here) but also other highly related yet very serious challenges in our time (e.g., ecological, economic, demographic, technological, moral, spiritual, political, and the like). Therefore, if true, this seminal view will fundamentally change the way that we think about the issue of sustainability, with its enormous implications not only for understanding the future of urban planning, in a small sense—but also for predicting the relevance of sustainability in relation to the entire domain of human knowledge for the human future and what I originally called its “post-human” fate, in a broad sense.
Recent agricultural reforms in the People’s Republic of China have generated great interest in the ability of the Chinese state, traditional and modern, to accommodate rapid economic change. Exhausting the Earth examines an earlier period—from the late Ming to the mid-Qing era marked by tremendous population growth, extension of the market, and increases in agricultural productivity. Peter C. Perdue describes the relationship between agricultural production and state policies toward taxation, land clearance, dike-building; property rights, and agriculture in Hunan. During the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, Hunan changed from a peripheral, sparsely populated region into a crowded, highly commercialized, grain-exporting province. State policies had stimulated this growth, but by the early nineteenth century serious signs of overpopulation, social conflict, and ecological exhaustion had surfaced. Local officials were conscious of these dangers, but the influence of the state on the economy was so weakened that they could not alter the ominous trends. The stage was set for the disintegration and rebellion of the nineteenth century. This in-depth study of official policies in one region over a long stretch of time illuminates the dynamics of official initiatives and local response.
The 21st century is on the verge of a possible total economic and political revolution. Technological advances in robotics, computing and digital communications have the potential to completely transform how people live and work. Even more radically, humans will soon be interacting with artificial intelligence (A.I.) as a normal and essential part of their daily existence. What is needed now more than ever is to rethink social relations to meet the challenges of this soon-to-arrive "smart" world. This book proposes an original theory of trans-human relations for this coming future. Drawing on insights from organisational studies, critical theory, psychology and futurism - it will chart for readers the coming changes to identity, institutions and governance in a world populated by intelligent human and non-human actors alike. It will be characterised by a fresh emphasis on infusing programming with values of social justice, protecting the rights and views of all forms of "consciousness" and creating the structures and practices necessary for encouraging a culture of "mutual intelligent design". To do so means moving beyond our anthropocentric worldview of today and expanding our assumptions about the state of tomorrow's politics, institutions, laws and even everyday existence. Critically such a profound shift demands transcending humanist paradigms of a world created for and by humans and instead opening ourselves to a new reality where non-human intelligence and cyborgs are increasingly central.
Why should some essential properties of geometry (i.e., infinity, symmetry, and dimensionality) be both necessary and desirable in the way that they have been constructed—albeit with different modifications over time—since time immemorial? Contrary to the conventional wisdom in all history hitherto existing, the essential properties of geometry do not have to be both necessary and desirable. This is not to suggest, of course, that one has nothing to learn from geometry. On the contrary, geometry has contributed to the advancement of knowledge in many ways since its inception as a field of knowledge some millennia ago. The point in this book, however, is to show an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of geometry, which goes beyond human conception, intuition, and imagination, together with worldly experience of course, as its foundation, while learning from them all—with theoretical implications for time travel, hyperspace, and other important issues. If true, this seminal view will fundamentally change the way that the nature of abstraction in the thinking process is to be understood, with its enormous implications for the future advancement of knowledge, in a small sense, and what I originally called its “post-human” fate, in a large one.
Why should mass media be informational and accurate as much as its proponents would claim—and, conversely, disinformational and propagandistic as much as its critics would argue? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many since the modern era of mass media, neither of the two opposing views is correct, to the extent that a total analysis of media influence has yet to be adequately explored and understood. Something fundamentally vital to the analysis of communication has been missing. This is not to say, however, that the literature on media studies hitherto existing in history has been much ado about nothing; on the contrary, indeed, much can be learned from different theoretical approaches in the field. But the important point to remember here is that this book aims to show an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of mass media (which goes beyond both the pros and cons in the literature on media influence, while learning from them all). If true, this seminal view will alter the way of how mass media are to be understood, with its enormous theoretical implications for going beyond the existing paradigms on the future of communication, in a small sense—and for predicting the future of open and closed societies, in a large sense.
There is something fundamentally wrong with the conventional wisdom in the field of Comparative Politics, Political Theory, and even Political Science as a whole, which rigidly conceptualize and theorize political systems in terms of different categories (e.g., liberal-democratic vs. authoritarian), which are supposed to be distinct and separate, without much mixing of each other, certainly not in any major way. A liberal-democratic political system (like the one in the U.S.), in accordance to this conventional wisdom, is anti-authoritarian (and therefore good). Conversely, an authoritarian political system (like the one in mainland China) is anti-democratic and therefore bad. This book takes the challenging task to show that all political systems—different as each is, for sure, from the rest—have much in common. Under the right conditions, a liberal democracy, as an illustration, not only can be as evil as its authoritarian counterparts, albeit in different ways—but also can be more authoritarian as it becomes more advanced as a liberal democracy. In fact, Dr. Peter Baofu suggests that authoritarianism is an advanced stage of liberal democracy, under these conditions. To understand this, the book is organized into two main parts with different sections, that is, in relation to meta-theory (i.e., methodology and ontology) and theory (i.e., nature, the mind, culture, and society).
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.