Laminated Networks vs Melting Pots
....Transportation and Communication capabilities have allowed
co-adaptive networks to spread throughout the extent of such
modernisms. Periods of retraction see principly skeletal networks
persisting as excess manpower is shed from post-successful
schedules. Such skeletal structures bias retention on trust and
similar deductive rational systems, as efficiency dictates less
distribution of acceptably effective work efforts. Initial movements
see increased tolerance for deviation from source analysis, while
terminal-approach analysis requires increasing consistency.
However, though severing conceptual co-adaptive bonds
may be immediate, severing physical associations are alwarys
constrained by physical mundane realities, such as moving a
household from one city to another. This tends to diassemble
the natural mutual support networking from the convenient ones.
Compatable network categories with sub-threshold extension
populations tend to meld in coalitions of convenience reflective
of their original source populations. Familiar enemies in strange
hostile places tend to form alliances of survival. This phenomenon
leads to a laminated social-political envelope insulating small
coalitions against the uncertainties of changing macro-social
ambiant changes. This appears to be a modern phenomenon,
as it occurs in widespread transnational distributions. Unfortuantely,
such laminations appear to naturally cecede as they retract into
older ethical forms of survival.
.....Perhaps the question is not one related to enemies, and, instead,
is related to compatibility. Such questions require at least one
unbridgeable dichotomy. For example, those who gate principles
over materialism are disctinct from those who gate materialism over
principles. Peoples able to maintain characteristic separate identities
must be of principles not to be abandoned for any material benefit.
While, Peoples whose stability of principles is variable as determined
by material presence cannot be stable in principles sufficient to sign
a treaty of war in search of more peaceful evolutionary environments.
What is a nation unfamiliar to torment to do in the presence of such
embedded populations as are not able to control their progeny? Truly
peace was not a participant to time only to be subsumed by terror
in the minds of wartime treaties. How do such members of certaintly
separated laminated co-adaptable classes of philosophies or structures
of reason separate mutually destructive versus mutually obviating
ways approaching concepts of rational systems. Surely the extent
and nature of necessary assistance concepts will vary sufficiently
widely that success in one category would be judged failure in
the other category. Further divisions occur along linguistic and
tribal-national lines. However, material driven compliance behavior
implies resolutions always exist even if temporal. Principles driven
compliance is due to the nature of being as a construction of
"nurture" while genetic humanoidism is a construction of nature.
The difficulty arises because "nurture" based systems depend upon
stable explanations to support transgenerational explanations and
tend to fail to sustain "being" when engulfed in contradictions.
Sadly, contradictions which are tolerated by an "everyone has
a price" co-adaptive system are anathema to the "everyone dies
on his cross" co-adaptive systems within the linked networks nature
of any village concepts.
.....Why is this so? Each network has a characteristic set of situational
based dialogues...a dialectic, so to speak. Each dialectic depends upon
the stability of the preferred conotations for its functionality. Interlinking
two co-adaptive networks also interlink the usage of the two categories
of dialectics which characterize each co-definable social group type.
This induces a displacement in the definitions used by each network set
for each category of diallectics, which renders dysfunctional paradigms
required to transfer skill internally or exterally, as constrained by Interests
and Questions coefficients...both of which wane in the presence of
unresolvable contradictions which are not gated properly relative to
their particular parent system-sets. Rational Systems are collections of
logical modules, within each Rational System culture is used to bridge
from ways acceptable relative to one logical system to other incompatible
ways acceptable relative to another co-adaptive logical system within
the same Rational System. For example, the command "put your weight
into it" may work to open a large wooden box, while such a command
may well cause one to shatter a similar box made of glass.
.....Creating dysfunction under the guise of mutual assistance cannot
be within the purvue nor the closure of any rational system related to
a wartime treaty between peoples presumably functioning within rational
systems based upon principles which must always be gated over materialism.
Separation of dialectics has been historically essential to stablizing rational
systems, as naturally required by village concepts. Where communicative
networks overlapped each other, informal cast systems' non-interaction has
provided a natural linguistic buffer to supplant the functionality of physical
separation the most ancients knew. As systems-interfacings become more
complex, honor and loyalty become characteristic necessities of viable
laminated systems, whose laminated characteristic is essential to maintainance
of the rational systems required to sustain the more general community.
Of course, we stand amidst the shambles of trust as towers have fallen.
The question is posed by fate, "What is functional separation?" When does
rational system functionality require physical separation, as would give rise
to separate languages over an acceptable period of future peace, if by peace
we include such intrusive behaviour as would distract our essential attention?
Clearly, a melting pot is not possible for these two broad categories of
rationally structured reasoning system sets...based upon principles versus
materialism, respectively. Decision making must be predictable, and
cannot be so if cross-category thought occurs in analysis.
.....We arrive at the historical question: "When incompatible laminations
mutually discover each other, under what conditions can they retract into
distinct mutually separate physical locations through whose boundary
only essential transfers occur without mutual degradation?