My findings for the workshop ‘Intersectional Analysis of the Gendered Brain’ 2- 6 March, Lorentz Centre, leiden.

Putting my mindset first, using workshop ‘lingo’, because I notice being outside the box too much sometimes:
About the metaphor of chasing a bus, or being on the bus as a scientist… I do not thrive inside the bus. I have a hard time staying on, as result of my autism. I have no real ambition to fit in, or to be successful, other than satisfying my own curiosity. My mind needs to wander and wonder. I can’t eat the cake and have it. Yet, not being affiliated makes it hard to ‘survive’ as the human trust/economy system is based on ‘progress’. My belief: ‘There is no progress, there is harmony and disharmony.’ (And things inbetween.)

Me pointing out on the subject of economy, saying kapitalism is aggression, stems from a biological point of view. I look at our society as something that’s completely losing its purpose, because it should be there to support everyone in their need to ‘be’. Yet ‘being’ is only supported as fully as possible in harmony with ecological factors being harmonised as well. As such, and I know it’s idealism, I think the value of our ‘exchange system, e.g. money’ should be based on ecological balance.

In this fashion, our (current) common goal is generating products, in which we (and our individual beliefs) are products themselves. In my view we are living a lie. Tuning our individual identity with this system will always be giving away too much, unless one’s particular niche fits within this goal. If you have a character that fits, you’re bound to be successful. Instead, we should be creating our own singularities as a part of the supporting system as a whole, while giving back on our use. Identity as a product is shown to be a lie, because identities get more compartmentalised over time, yet finding out where you belong doesn’t actually improve your life. Again, unless it finds its niche.

As for ecological balance, human beings are so arrogant they think they can control it, but a forest (for instance) and its diversity depends on means being scarce, and organisms finding their niche. So it’ll florish best, if left to its own need to harmonise. Sometimes there is an agressive organism in a forest, creating a plague. It will grow beyond the boundaries of the ecological system, until it caves because of its own succes. For the forest it will take a while to bounce back, but for the plaguing organism as well

I think harmonising with nature, as it is the system we are part of, is the best way to shape a human society as well. Instead of asking for trust, we should be able to give trust. Yes, I know, yet another idealist way of operating. Let me put is this way… Let’s try for shaping societal pockets, where scientist can be whatever en however they are, as long as it doesn’t involve disharmonising for the sake of disharmonising. It may lead to an ability to bounce back from us becoming this plague we practically are for this planet.

Human behaviour is almost entirely based on entangled storytelling. The used bus-metaphor is a node in such entanglement, where in a religious way humans harmonise towards a fictional goal. To work towards this goal we use resources from our habitat and even fictional resources (i.e. AI, Bitcoins etc), yet we don’t provide in returning them after use. We don’t care about the earth and its ‘Gaiastatic’ (Homeostatic equivalent) needs. Yet we are part of the Gaiastatic system. By not minding this Gaiastasis, we’ll cut ourselves off more and more, chasing a fictional goal.