Saturday, 11 January 2025

IMPERATIVES OF CULTURAL WORLD EVOLUTION

 

Homo Genesis: Future through Individuation – Equilibration - Determination



VON  J  MICHAEL  HEYNEN



Abstract


This essay of critical-programmatic reflection describes a conceptual framework on the imperatives of civilizational transition processes as individual-social, equilibrating evolution. The focus is on the category of inner and outer worlds of humans, identifying the mutual complementarity of cognitive-aesthetic individuation and simultaneous universality as a determination of noumenal-transformative, future-proof development of societies.



Introduction


In the beginning there was not the word, but spirit and consciousness. The will derived from this formed the energy of the Big Bang, the universe was created: the external world - also a space of free will. Within the framework of the metaphysical, then physical cosmic law, the home planet of today's human civilization was subsequently created, vitalized ed by a leading essence, an intrinsically hybrid essence, in order to govern the mutual complementarity of idea and reality in an evolutionary manner.


This process of so-called equilibration ensures that the spirit is vitalized and life is spiritualized - as the primary driving force of gradual transition and evolution. Life understood in this way forces the question: Is the current development of man still coherent and concordant with the universal law of development? Who will be the man of the future? - The correlation of inner and outer worlds provides realizations for the critical self-reflection towards the upcoming development paths of civilizational transition and transformation.




I. STATUS QUO : TIME AND SPACE


Beginning with the industrial revolution, human development has reached an age in the last fifty years at the latest that is referred to as the Anthropocene: the extensive domination of the planet by humans.

Complementary to this development, an increasing despiritualization set in, because Anthropocene orientation is essentially physical-material. People(s), societies and their states decoupled themselves from the self and the supremacy of the spirit, allocating their existence largely to the substructure of possessions and technical functional dominance. Cultural-spiritual connections and developments faded in favor of coping with pure existence and seemingly endless resources.

To this day, this coping is about private-public / oligarchic-autocratic competing forces of egocentric profit and power concentration under the condition of purely materially understood "distributive justice". Anthropocenic domination has thus become decoupled from people and humanity - inversely proportional to external progress - and formal power to act has largely shifted to the side of the system agents. Humane principles are marginalized or paralyzed.

This also applies to the so-called western, democratic, constitutional states that are progressive in terms of humane political models and systems. Government processes that lack substance, transparency and competence preserve democratic forms and empty society and the state - both materially and immaterially.

Political power is reduced to administrative action of formal legitimacy with high control and extreme bureaucratic expenditure; substantial creative power is the great vacuum being compensated by old, mixed up political models - mostly based on ideological political marketing and egocentric substitute projection. Highly complex pseudo-regulation and staged crises, conflicts and wars camouflage the structural legitimacy deficit of factually autocratic-feudalistic systems. Humans become persons, life becomes a function.

The critical, enlightened and analytical person might not fail to notice that such systems of rule cannot function in a sustainable manner on either the micro or macro level and are obviously unsuitable for establishing and dynamically sustaining a humane order and world order. Irritation, disharmony and disorientation are the predominant consequences. Rigidity through constantly repeating antiquated, dogmatic-ideological power formats of autocratic-imperial pseudo-greatness leads to a final loss of legitimacy, dissolution in chaos and finally complete paralysis.

Despiritualization, decoupling, emptying lead to entropy, desolation and nihilism; even quantitative attempts at control through artificial intelligence will of course not remedy this, because so-called transhumanism ignores or negates the inexhaustible creativity and cognitive quality of human-metaphysical potentials. But these are based in the inner space of man, who has currently exhausted himself in the outer space. And here - in the inner space - lies the source and the reason for civilizational transition, which describes a quantum leap. Because in the end it is always man himself: the phoenix rising from the ashes.




II. METAMORPHOSIS: INSIDE AND OUTSIDE


Anyone who agrees with the above anamnesis will have an idea of ​​the reason for the regression of civilization: the increasing loss of external freedom as a consequence of the self-inflicted abandonment of internal freedom. In any case, in Western civilization, the fathers of the freedom struggle came from the internal determination of freedom in order to organize and order the conditions of external freedom accordingly. The external constitution essentially became a reflection of the internal.

Today, the external world is in increasing disorder, as its conditions are largely decoupled from internal determinations or these are not identifiable and effective as leading ones. For a situation of transition that appears urgent, a reversal of thrust in the sense of conscious will formation to identify and dynamize necessary potential for change appears inevitable:



1. Inner and Outer Space


The Neo-Platonist Augustine conveyed the knowledge of inside and outside. According to this, humans are hybrid beings in which inner and outer worlds come together. And yet humanization develops clearly distinguishable modalities of movement depending on the space in which the respective activity is centered: being or consciousness. Inner and outer space therefore describe different sources and potentials for aggregating life processes and fulfilling life.

While the outer space describes the space of conditional and limited incorporation and materialization in the outer world, i.e. the space of learning communication, sensory experience, material-physical coping with life, etc., the inner area is to be characterized as the space of all consciousness processes and classified as follows:

The inner space contains the developing, autonomous potential not only of the mental and spiritual processing of external experiences, but also the sui generis initiated determinants of thinking and feeling processes. The emancipating self becomes the bearer of learning and perceiving consciousness, which generates the driving energy of the formation of ideas, beings and will and continues to scale it qualitatively. The mind and reason help to organize intellectual developments and results as intermediate steps, to keep them available in order to return them to consciousness in accordance with a control loop and to correlate them with feelings and thoughts.

This process - controlled as an internal one - is autonomous and thus the foundation of individual freedom, since it is completely removed from sensory experience and thus from possible external, limiting influence. In contrast to the external world, the internal world is not bound by conditions, i.e. unlimited and open to universal endlessness and eternity. The inner world of man is therefore suitable for developing and realizing the absolute, the totality of his self. This inner, formative reality of unlimited imagination and vision formation fills and shapes the respective personality, forming the consciousness of a unique essence. This also describes - analogous to the universe - an ever-expanding developmental dynamic of spiritual-psychological identity and energy.



2. Subject und Object


Comparable to the distinction between inside and outside, the differentiation of subject and object describes the central function of an intelligible, perceiving human consciousness (based on Karl Jaspers). In the identification of the human being as a subject beyond the pure object function lies the emancipatory, independent, and thus always individual mastery of existence - each from the individual self, the actual humanization according to the potentials and dimensions of the inner space.

While the object keeps external, adjustable, quantifiable materiality available up to scientific objectification, the subject is the open source of mental and spiritual, feeling and cognitively comprehensible processes including the dimensions of the absolute and the totality. The object refers to normative / standardized quantity and conditionality, to form and symbol, the subject to unlimited qualification / quality and determination, to substance and meaning, to idea and deduced will.

Objectivity questions provability and external, conditional truth, subjectivity generates inner world movement and imagination as well as processes of decision-making and finding the interior truth. The subjective leads the inner world from idea and will as the driving force, the objective offers material formation and serial conditions for existential implementation and development.

Subject and object describe a mutually complementary relationship, decoupling them means "disembodying" the spirit and "despiritualizing" life, emptying its meaning. And a life without meaning and sensuality from subjectivity becomes "objective", at the same time cold and nihilistic, and above all the least humane. The subject therefore needs the object to vitalize the spirit, and the object needs the subject to spiritualize life, to form the basis and the initiatory energy of consciousness, to humanize being.

In the current Anthropocene, material-technological domination has seduced people into almost complete objectification. And transhuman quantification marginalizes societies into unified, controllable masses that, in the false security of the enslaved collective, replace a kind of being with having and compensate for "freedom from meaning." Humans become objects by giving up their subjectivity, and the subject's individually based freedom becomes an "objective" threat to the politically economized or eco-politicized systems.

As a result, nihilism, inner emptiness and vegetative existence leave behind an external world without human ideas and imagination, without reason and fantasy - in other words, everything that is so urgently needed beyond the current, small-scale system relevance of the objective as a prerequisite for successful and sustainable transition. This assessment provokes the question: How can people and societies overcome this dead end of any kind of humane development?



3. Individuation und Introversion


The ability of humans to learn is based on cognition and experience, the latter can serve knowledge and finding. At the same time, cognition - the area of inner space - has much more extensive dimensions, which it places independently of experience in the outer space and elevates above it: the dimensions of reflection, perception, imagination and contemplation as well as empathy and feeling as a method of a- priori exploration of complementary inner and outer worlds.

The increasing consciousness of the adult human being is developed from the process of being as a child. This type of emancipation - like a quantum leap - brings about the reversal into the supremacy of spirit-supported self-determination, the autonomy of the subject, i.e. dependent on conscious cognition processing, to deduct leadership and responsibility from its inner world and to correlate and communicate with the outside. Only this opening to the inside, introversion, creates the foundation for inner leadership from the self in order to give space to the absolute, the totality of the human being's inner world and - depending on the condition - to represent it on the outside.

In this way, humans mature into individuals, while at the same time increasing their potential as free, communicative social beings. And further: humans as subjects of their respective individuation, guided by the infinity of their consciousness, are largely aware of their relativity in physical-material reality and choose appropriate positions and processes to position themselves socially and legitimately within society. Their inner formation becomes a creative impulse, an inspiration for social, non-violent processes of will-formation, decision-making and qualitative growth.



4. Equilibration und Elevation


Man becomes a human being from a person - see above - through his natural hybridity: correlating inner and outer spaces, transcendence and spiritual worlds with real and material ones. Intertwining consciousness and being privileges and liberates in the independent potentials of universal control and design. The human capacity to design and understand the interface between inside and outside, between subject and object - comparable to a control loop - and life processes from this is all the more essential.

This process of equilibration is a vertical (re)connection from and with the self of the subject. Consciousness takes the lead, the process is simultaneously and first of all a mental one. The soul, still part of the inner space, is the perceiving connection to the outside, the inner eye to the outer world. Imagining, contemplating, finding and learning connect subjectivity and objectivity, connect inner and outer impulses, inspire and facilitate.

This type of equilibration is one of the greatest challenges of human interaction, because inner totality meets reality, the absolute meets the relative, determination meets conditionality, the will of the spirit to create meets finiteness and the conditionality of the physical and material. It is therefore a specific learning and performance capacity of humans and in particular of their constant mental development to approach potentially opposing energetic "aggregate states", to coordinate them adequately, to balance them integratively and to harmonize causes and effects as transformatively as possible.

In any case, humans have a solution for this connection and transformative fulfillment: the dimension of aesthetics and cultures with all their multiple levels of design and expression. "Objective" reality is bound and sensitized, high consciousness is aesthetically grounded. The experiencing soul becomes a dynamic space, mediating and moderating inner and outer worlds and perception processes between substance and form. The perpetuation of this equilibration leads to a kind of constant conversion, transition and transformation.

Thus the a-posterior mutates into the a-prior and opens consciousness to a creatively effective subject in increasingly reactive objectivity. In this way, vertical and horizontal equilibration are crossed and fused in an emancipatory manner: the object is subjectivized and the subject is objectivized, thus life is spiritualized and spirit is vitalized! The middle, the "arithmetic mean" of the resulting decision-making and action processes of the individual human being is cognitively and communicatively raised and describes a permanently available elevation as a core element of human development dynamics: the foundation of a cultural human.

The equilibrating solution of subject-object differences and opposites can serve the fulfillment of the human being in forming a reality from his dreams and fantasies, visions and imaginations. In this way, the civilized human being – each with a sense of freedom and peacefulness – can also succeed in configuring and shaping concordant social worlds of humanity that prescribe an adequate statehood, insofar it’s still needed.



5. Free Will and Societal Worlds


Consciousness determines being. Thus, the inner space (see above) comprises the basis of freedom, the cause of free will. Individual totality, the absolute, purified by mind and reflection, feeling and contemplation, norms the determination of the subject. These exclusively internal processes are to be connected with and in the external space through adequate communication and negotiation. The inner determination is correlated and equilibrated with the external conditions (see above), thus creating free groups, societies and unlimited inter-societal interaction.

Of course, societies can exist that constitute themselves exclusively from a collective will (volonté generale), foregoing individual consciousness and free will (volonté de tous). In this case, the conditions of reality are elevated to determination, being determines a limited consciousness that follows the so-called knowledge into necessity. This can result from a final act of free choice, but can also be based on physical or psychological violence. If the source of the norm lies exclusively in the external space, the internal space becomes the vanishing point of a mental and spiritual emigration. The dominance of external pressure to conform dissolves the humane connection between the inner and outer worlds and sacrifices individual existence to a mostly ideological and/or religious totality and absolutization that lacks any legitimacy in the external space. The exclusion of human subjectivity leads to slavery, spiritual impoverishment, nihilism, morbidity and overall to social decay; a future that at least meets the standards of a humane existence is thus probably unattainable.

The existence and future viability of a society therefore require the spirit to bring it to life and the spirit to guide its development. In constant equilibration, the change and transition processes of internal and external sources of norms must be classified, adapted, balanced in negotiations and the formation of will - from individual freedom – is to be coordinated. This function of representation shapes governance and creates the statehood that a society can give itself to control its living conditions, as long as and to the extent that the categorical imperative (Kant) has not yet been essentially fulfilled.

The state and government form of the constitutional monarchy and in particular that of the constitutional democracy are particularly suitable for organizing the objectification of subjective social dynamics and for correlating them synthetically. However, this form of governance is subject to the highest demands: maximum legitimization for the minimum necessary regulation, consistent promotion of individual and social freedoms, unrestricted transparency, personal integrity and professionality. Otherwise, governance becomes rigid in form, empties social resources, delegitimizes state power and reverses the state's monopoly of power entrusted and granted by society against the substance of its mandated existence. Feudal-autocratic overstretching of state functions and - especially evident in foreign policy – (post-) imperialist policies counteract freedom and peace in social living conditions. After statehood has solidified, society then takes on the emptied form again in order to reposition itself substantially. The process of subject-object equilibration as described above organizes innovatively and at the same time creates truly legitimate sovereignty if the a-priori cognition primarily includes the historical process: the social dynamics, drawn from the individual's free consciousness and will, guarantee future developments in constant, equilibrating internal and external transition.

Ultimately, it can be recognized that the reasons for good governance and wise politics - as well as for economic processes - lie in the responsibility of societies and their future-oriented responsibility, in terms of power control and, above all, the free will to shape things. And these depend on a consciously and intentionally de-personalized, i.e. transpersonalizing, social leadership culture in accordance with universal laws of thought. The equilibration of the creative tension between adequately corresponding essences and external resonances creates the transformative synthesis of a humane fusion of present and future. In this sense, the free will of man is the energizer and the conditio sine qua non of his free societies.




III. FUTURE VISION: CIVILIZATION AND HOMO GENESIS



Anyone who looks at the current world situation and, above all, the current development of humanity in the ongoing Anthropocene can identify three directions of egocentric "vision formation": transhumanist projection, perceptions of the threat of an end of the world and the traditional persistence in ideological and religious patterns. However, all attempts of this kind also deliberately fail to recognize the centrality of humans for their future development. Or have humans largely become alienated from themselves in the course of the Anthropocene?

As already stated in the introduction above: Human life and the sustainable design of their development processes remain intrinsically linked to their individual human identity and the quality of their implementation. The supremacy lies in the autonomous subject, not in the vegetative object and its tendency towards entropy. The obvious self-alienation can be reversed through a re-connection with the human self - the "eternal self" (Sörensen Kierkegaard) - through remembering and revitalizing it, its inner spaces and processes. This revitalization of inner "radial energy" (Teilhard de Chardin) from the totality of reflective consciousness is to be understood as the basis of the present, from which a humane future can be developed. The humanization in the waning Anthropocene is at the same time the building of a bridge to the Noocene: from the balancing guidance of human consciousness and being to the process of fulfilling its self-according destiny.



1. Noumenality und Normativity


Leadership into the future of man and for man is firstly inner leadership from the self and thus from and for freedom. The most essential immanence is that of freedom. Successful leadership comes from individual determination, never from the immanence of external conditions. The necessary potential for change towards the future follows the processes of inner spaces, which are to be correlated afterwards with the outer spaces in a way of guiding implementation.

Leading development understood as evolution, transition and transformation towards humane future evaluation is based on the - necessarily individual - capacity of the mind, on the cognitive, reflective and feelingly contemplating use of universal laws of thought and human consciousness. The 'cognition / knowledge based on mind' - noumenality – being independent of limited reality offers the unlimited scope and autonomy to identify and decide on the future. The a-priori cognitive consciousness of the individual can sovereignly emancipate itself from the normativity of the factual and organize the relevant living conditions. And so it is possible to use inner spaces of freedom to reorganize and shape the external living spaces of people in a formative way and to constantly qualify them in an equilibrating way. The largely superficial circulating present processes (“dead end”, see above) are thus replaced and dissolved by the noumenal and normative (maxims) inner guidance of the creative human, who knows about his future and makes it manageable for his society.



2. Will of Creation and World Formula


The human who acts and equilibrates from within comes from the “cogito ergo sum” (Descartes) as an autonomous subject and thus controls his identical and social positioning. From substance and “radial energy” (see above) he transforms his internally matured process of finding into the life processes of society – creatively, subjectively and communicatively objectifying. Its radial energy is transformed into a "tangential" one (also Teilhard de Chardin) and internalized and formed socially in a clarifying resonance process. Individual creative will is transformed into a process of persuasion in order to inspire further social development on a large and small scale. In this way, in constant equilibration of individuation and universality, (inter)social interaction can be consolidated as a transition and transformation process.

Inner peace and freedom leads to movement: the revitalization of spirit, the spiritualization of life. In this process, the "one decisive formula" - usually from and for the ideological-religious fixation of external power conditions - is replaced by the world formula of creatively and interactively connected, multilateral and unconditional processes: the future is development based on the presence of consciousness, and an infinite process, and a process is ultimately the limitless human metamorphosis of civilization. This world formula also offers the potential to revitalize human beings, to experience the often sought-after redemption through precisely this kind of fulfillment – ​​individually generated and socially supported.



3. Cultural Human and World Order


The above statements may provoke the objection that not every person can meet the "high" demands of this so-called ideal/idealistic image of man. And whoever or what this objection is intended to justify or protect, it is certainly not wrong, because people are not equal. At the same time, as introduced above, the following applies: Man is born in a space of free will and can have every natural potential to develop into an autonomous subject. This development is always open-ended, as it is probably the greatest challenge: the cultural man is - in his infinite variety, diversity and quality - the bearer of his civilization and thus the „principal“ of his own further development.

Thus the cultural man - grown from consciousness and being - is inevitably the master of his future, this cannot be compensated for, egomaniacally projected and/or sublimated. His fate and thus that of his society lies in his inner leadership. Because homo sapiens, an evolutionary act of creation in external space, has individually taken over the further process of creation with the development of his consciousness, incarnated and emanatively shaped it from the inner spaces of his self: homo genesis. The people of the Renaissance had already preluded it: homo genesis - comparable to a "pole shift" - comes from within and carries out a kind of individual self-creation within the framework and as part of the universal overall creation. In this way, the cosmic balance arises in connected spaces of consciousness and being and equilibrates radial and tangential energies.

This cultural human, the individual homo genesis, who is evolutionarily responsible for himself from the "knowing human" to the (co-) creative human, also expands his progress in recognizing himself in other people and their self-consciousness. Body, soul, spirit are basic elements of human nature, from which exponential variations in perception and perceptibility arise: love and solution, communication and understanding are essentially possible from and on all levels – transpersonal, not transhuman!

The knowing and perceiving subject therefore has infinite opportunities to connect and engage with other individuals and/or their groups and societies in a balancing and objectifying manner. From this connection (see above III, 2) of the cultural human being, creative and constructive synergies are created for the constant, even optimizing development of societies. The potential of humane progress and its order can be facilitated in a constant correlation of individuation and universality. In this way, these communicative clarification and ordering processes give rise to orders and a world order that can continually develop / deepen justice and the dignity of human beings as to be justified and fundamentally guaranteed even in transition.



Outlook


On the one hand, the development of human civilization is essentially admirable and successful in its control of the biosphere and geosphere, as long as these do not lead to their destruction. On the other hand, homo sapiens has largely abandoned the balance of internal and external development spaces, since it no longer or not yet recognizes and understands itself as a human being who proactively creates from within, as homo genesis.

Anyone who takes up Teilhard de Chardin's concept of cosmogenesis can recognize that evolution and the future are always constitutively linked to the further development of consciousness. Evolution first formed the conditions for the emergence of consciousness, then expanding consciousness became the intrinsic core element of human development and its societies. The reverse is also true: a being without sufficient consciousness leaves behind a stagnating evolution without elevation and provoces an end time that does not exclude the end of civilization. At the same time, an end time contains the essential ingredients of a new beginning: the self-determined rebalancing of the external and internal worlds of individual and societal humans under the supremacy of the inner space.

Cultural man has the creative and energetic potential to resolve social "dead ends" (see last paragraph II 2 above), which have repeatedly materialized in political and economic, autocratic and neo-feudalistic dominances that are ultimately turned away from man. Man, as the subject and facilitator of his culture, will always be able to regain the determination and the power to act for sustainable, humane civilization development: sovereign and dynamically balancing, at the same time free from ideological and religious messianisms that have to be overcome.

If the cultural human being as homo genesis succeeds in shaping himself creatively and innovatively from his inner destiny - transcendence, spirit and feeling - he can fulfil his humanity from within. And if he begins to "not look outside for what he carries within himself" (in reference to Gandhi), but to carry from within to outside what he wants to find and shape, then he rises towards the often-invoked redemption. The future is then not the substitute projection of a limited ego, but timeless elevation, the opening into the universality of equilibratingly developing societal worlds as part of a cosmic continuum. For the so-called paradise may have been lost on the outside, but never on the inside.



©  J MICHAEL HEYNEN | FOUNDING PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE OF CULTURES




Saturday, 24 February 2024

Democratic Foreign Policy - and „Foreign Policy Democracy“?

 

An Essay on the Necessity of Western Foreign Policy Transformation


by J Michael Heynen



This planet is part of the universe and therefore a space of free will. Cultural historicity and territorial classification have created conditions in the tension between anarchy and hierarchy under which at least a third of people live in autocracies/dictatorships. The international system is therefore still characterized by anarchy (also hierarchical) and the successful model of a 'free-democratic basic order' is not a normative imperative of a world order.



Democratic foreign policy involves the formation of societal, domestic political (representative) will in order to interact accordingly within the external framework of diplomacy (bilateral and multilateral). The external sovereignty is therefore based on the internal or on the respective legitimation process. This recent development towards democratic foreign policy has led to significantly higher levels of non-violent conflict ruling capacity, transformative cooperation and welfare. The space for human creativity and peaceful lifestyles to develop has also expanded significantly (e.g. EU).


Of course, it should be self-critically stated that the so-called “Western model” is also exposed to the risk of decline and backsliding in attitudes, including long-term strategies of absolutist foreign policies and dominant hierarchies / hegemonies that also provoke risks of war due to the substantial decoupling of free democratic legitimation processes. Foreign policy then degenerates into purely formal, administrative “sovereignty”. In short: a lack of internal legitimacy leads to an external rejection of pluralism, transparency and integrity as well as trusting cooperation. Life-threatening interactions up to and including war form the remaining spectrum of foreign policy action, framed in geopolitical competitive interests as well as egomaniacal enemy images and messianistic power projections. Diplomacy is then marginalized, foreign policy is completely cannibalized by security policy (“defense policy”) - instead of de-escalation and conflict transformation: “inflation” of the warlike!


This development is man-made, but does not correspond to human capacity at all. In particular, technological progress – including military overkill capacity and AI – leads to the civilizational dimension of respective foreign policy behavior. History can, but does not have to, repeat itself, because it depends on the individual human Self. At least the civilizational normativity of Western societies and policy designs holds the essential potential of foreign policies relevant to globally relevant clearance if they transform the imperative of their determination:



The success and future potential of democratically constituted societies - when the state is organized with integrity - is fundamentally undeniable. Traditionally, this - the functions of democracy - is related to the respective domestic politics - also because of the necessary government-political legitimacy. However, it is conceivable - and can also be achieved in terms of system logic - to reflect domestic democracy in a foreign
affairs as a foreign policy democracy: as an analog international process of decision-making, legitimation and action. Of course, the possibility of “exporting” domestic democracy must be ruled out in principal. Because democracy arises from the internally generated freedom of individual human(s) and their societies and is therefore always hostile to mission and fundamentally immune to even psychologically mediated violence and so-called „world saving“. The countless human and international rights violations worldwide are intolerable, yet foreign human rights policy is largely unsuccessful and must be limited to humanitarian intervention under strict conditions.


As a result of liberal movements of the 18th and 20th centuries. In the 19th century, foreign policy democracies were first established, including the integration of federal systems: the USA, the German Reich, the EU, etc. The League of Nations and the UN can also be seen as the first supra-regional and global attempt to collectively coordinate foreign policies according to the principles of the Wilson Doctrine. Independent of institutional international procedures, successful foreign policy democracy strategies such as the détente policy from the beginning of the 1970s can also be classified. Antagonistic system competition between a seemingly intransigent conflict figure was resolved in a cooperative, dialogical and creative manner in such a way that societies that were oppressed at the time were able to initiate their self-determined and therefore emancipation process. In trust-building cooperation regimes, undemocratic power states and despotism were taken beyond their narrow limits and dissolved at their core.



The pessism of Tocqueville – “democracy cannot survive in anarchic systems“ – therefore was unfounded. Because freedom as the basic paradigm of civility and “eternal peace” is convincing and developing, while lack of freedom, on the other hand, is doomed to death and can only survive based on violence. Nevertheless - Tocqeuille taken in another way - the temptation is great, especially for Western states and their foreign policies, to get involved in the anarchic game, perhaps based on fear and enemy images, and then ultimately to allow themselves to be driven against its democratic essentiality in domestic politics. Extremism, nationalism, armament spirals, contempt for humanity and destruction of resources on an unforeseeable scale are the consequences. Societal autonomy and state sovereignty are paralyzed despite the best defense capability. - A democratic foreign policy with the aim of developing democracy in foreign policy is therefore probably the only sustainable civilizational solution - in essence there are i. a. the following determinants:


1. Exemplary guarantee of domestic political implementation of a free-democratic basic order and further development of cultures of freedom as well as human rights and international law and its application without double standards

2. Non-judgemental and value-neutral communication with every societal and governmental subject in the international arena capable of dialogue with the aim of establishing substantial cooperation, or vice versa: non-communication and peaceful coexistence

3. Fundamental respect of different, even deviating, development paths and speeds of 'other' / alternative societies, cultural identities and domestic political systems in order to strengthen self-responsibility and innovative, self-developed solutions

4. Neutrality and non-intervention in the case of symmetrical and asymmetrical regional and/or domestic political and societal conflicts; a request for assistance can only be responded to at the global (UN) level, based on a clear, robust mandate

5. Strict avoidance of double standards to strengthen transparency and integrity, use of cooperatively integrated intelligence capacity to establish neutral verification regimes

6. In particular, civil society relationship levels are for enlightenment-oriented, emancipatory dialogue processes such as rule of law dialogues, cooperation for the independent establishment of fdbo, etc. (without success parameterization, corruption or reward strategies from traditional or new “hidden agendas”)

7. Relationship managament without egomaniacal projection, chosenness mechanisms of self-righteousness, and mentally misguided superiority or supremacy, but rather friendly recognition of pluralistic performance and learning processes, bi-/ multilateral facilitation towards respective self-leadership in inter-/social projects and networks, etc.

8. Establishment of cooperation platforms in the areas of art and culture, technology and science, etc. as specific organizational forms of human-culturally open interconnection processes in the sense of classic as well as innovative, noumenal diplomacy

9. Foreign policy primacy is the “categorical imperative” (Kant) as the development maxim of international relations policy: the international system creates the orchestration process of foreign policy democratization as well as the structural basis

10. Rule-based generation of a real (noo) world order of free subjects and their participatory-synthetic relationships through inter-human / inter-societal, heterarchic networks / clusters as an equal driving force (to states) of international foreign policy / diplomacy transformation.





[ A further systematizing concept of “foreign policy democracy” and/or „Internationalization of Democracy“ is being prepared by the IRCInternational Regimes Council in collaboration with the NOMOIInstitute ]




© J Michael Heynen I R C



Thursday, 1 February 2024

NOUMENAL DIPLOMACY

 

by J Michael Heynen



Introduction


‚Noumenal Diplomacy‘ is an innovative human- | society-centric, emanational, cosmopolitan, post-national, conceptual framework, developing noumenally overarching 'nomoi' by facilitating the normative competition and hierarchic power of norm validities and by determining the integratively coordinating vertical, meta-codificational primacy processes: for targeting and co-creating the potentials of 'coincidentia oppositorum' and universal transformation through cognitive-normative external and international relations policy: Noumenal Diplomacy.


The ‚Noumenon‘ of human | humanistic capacity is the constitutional basis of the ‚Noumenal Diplomacy‘ concept for innovative, transitional as well as transformational, heterarchical networks also to overcome the classical | traditional scheme of the international system’s fall-back in anarchy, caused by at least absolutistic modes of governing and its present, real dangers of escalating violence, wars, and civilisatoric decline. Therefore ‚Noumenal Diplomacy‘ integrates even so called „intransic conflicts“ as decisive change indications | potentials and challenges for constructive transitional development and transformational solutions of qualifying growth as well as mature use of resources.




Function - Definition - Reflexion



D E F I N I T I O N



  • In addition to the classical functions | instruments of diplomacy, 'Noumenal Diplomacy' reinforces esp cognitive-transcendentially guided procedures of perception and internalization, of communication and interaction, of negotiation and verification,

  • initiated, constituted, structured, facilitated by metaphysical reasoning, cognitive determination, and intellectual, intercultural discourse, using hierarchical mechanisms or instruments with meta-normative dimensions of correlating values, norms, and principles of interconnected meta-governance systems,

  • the activation portal and platform, the organized process and systemic interface of sovereign subjects of free will as intersystemically connected private | public actors | stakeholders, their networks | arenas | alliances,

  • in the field of external, international relations policy and governance | governing coordination synergizing external metagoverning processes,

  • the interdisciplinary, intersystemic approach for the development, implementation, and management of metapolicy and metagovernance regimes, guided by syndicating interorganizational network-systems between states, markets, civil societies, and their interrelated institutions and organizations,

  • a noumenal normativity ruling procedure based on the supremacy of constantly adapted, correlated, and controlled policy legitimation | verification regimes according to the metaleadership | metacode paradigms | systematics.



F U N C T I O N


    Procedures being based on

  • noumenal normativity metacode generation as an a-priori constitutional | inter-| societal-contractual primary order codification of hierachical determination integratively norming the 'categorical imperative' of human societies-centric, interdisciplinary framework for transitional | transformational cooperation | coordination re-| engineering and regimes building,

  • synergizing the respective societies' will and cognition, syndication of ethical, cultural, social, emotional, and soul deducted values, subjective and "objective" norms, the telos and primary values including the real-world correlation matrix,

  • inclusion of group | societal standards, social contracts, organizational policy guidelines, normative concepts, legal codes, directives, regulations, and codes of conduct,

  • syndication | integration of universal law, norms, principles, maxims of transcendence, metaphysical orders, law of thinking, theoretical frameworks, individual | collective will, and individual | societal determination,

    Targeting

  • structure, form, type of external policy meta-power creation by self-referencing reason generation, self-ruling, and self-parameterization of determining principles, objectives, individuall willpower,

  • syndication of interdependent individual micro-societal entities, founding and constituting a metapolitical organization, institutionalizing hierarchical metagovernance with equivalent sovereignty,

  • meta-constitutional order of noumenal normativity for a metagovernance policy regime as a supreme system with the highest level of codified aegis, multidimensional | multilateral determination and determination,

  • metapolicy regimes, claiming to ultimate authority and comprehensive legitimacy with the corresponding accountability for metagoverning | metapolitical governing,

    Implementation by

  • identifiying | norming the 'categorical and existential imperative' of an individual human self based, society-centric, interdisciplinary framework for the anthropocenic transitional | transformational Metapolity re- | engineering and regimes building by conducting equivalent MetaLeadership and adequate MetaGovernance,

  • providing a reflexive, multi-perspective and/or "bird's-eye" view in external | foreign policy making, institutional, and organizational design regarding the ethical principles | values | norms | codes of conduct,

  • developing noumenal paradigms, normativity settings, and syndicating targets, forming partnerships, structures of vertical and horizontal organizational | institutional governmentality,

  • transpersonal concertation and transsystemic synthesis of constitutional rationales and mindsets for generating metapolitical concordance, and

  • transcendent universalization and unification of guiding principles, constitutional norms, and social contract standards in accordance with the laws of thought | principles of cognition,

  • heterarchical policy dialogue, vertical mediation, and coordination of the strategic, determinative interagency consortia's and networks-system's relationships,

  • transformative synthetization of the decisive micro-polities, political | societal systems, regulatory frameworks, hybrid legal and juridical orders … ,

  • constutional-normative grid of policy determination, the meta-guideline of leadership and the corresponding intersystemic governance, the fusion of the eligible, interdependent, and subsidiary governance policies of connected bodies | entities as individual, autonomous societal organizations, institutions, states, etc.,

  • hierarchic, transformative synthetization of the decisive micro-polities, political | social systems and their regulatory frameworks as well as hybrid legal and juridical orders - for metagoverning system(s), for the supervision of coherence designing and transition as transformational processes,

  • concentrating and managing the complexity, plurality, and tangled hierarchies of normative processing: coincidence designig power-sharing, negotiations, conflict conciliations and communication, on both the inter- and intra-institutional | organizational levels,

  • referencing back the synchronizing coordination of the reciprocal interdependence among operationally autonomous actors, organizations, and the functional systems' hierarchical market and network governance: the systematization of prior relationships between the institutional orders and functional systems including civil societies' orders.




R E F L E C T I O N


Noumenal Diplomacy' is a non-religious | non-ideological, mind-based, emanatory international policy conceptual framework and a kind of essential keystone for paradigmatic transformational ruling | governing in external affairs | international relations by keeping in the supremacy of cognitive-transcendent determination and legitimation.

This concept is about "vertical diplomacy" as an emenative, heterarchically interconnecting, structural interface and interdependent space of discourse and resonantial free will, diverse and multi-mutual completion, and vertically upwards processing development, targeting to reach the sphere of learning and desolution of conflicting opposites and dualism: 'coincidentia oppositorum".

Analysing, strategizing, and examining the utilization of 'Noumenal Diplomacy', a farsighted executive and thinker might realize the principle détente and peace design potentials as well as the counterpoint to the current global re-militarization:

The vertical reflection and communication process merges the guiding paradigms and qualifying potentials of constituting the 'world formula' of future ruling in external | international policy governance and especially disclosing the determination of future leadership in international relations as concentration on | concertation of self-governing - on inter-| regional as global scale.


The concept of Noumenal Diplomacy …


  • introduces and obtains a cosmopolitan meta-constitutionalism for the transnational, intersocietal, transitional, and transformative innovation of evolutionary self-| governing as inclusively coordinating free policy guidance and management of complexity, multiplicity, and diversity, dynamically facilitating and ensuring the interior | exterior connectivity with meta-political definition, identification, and manifestation processes,

  • follows the logic of a broader post-Westphalian multilateral 'meta-constitutional discourse' concept esp for non-state and state actors to develop and institutionalize an innovative, anthropocenic, organizational, humanly adequate policy order: The hierarchical structure of determination being noumenally based on universal law allows a heterarchical, sovereign governing that is not based on direct and top-down control but a plurality of discourses of decision finding | negotiation processes coordinating | integrating the dynamic of positions | interactions of self-governing, self-organizing, and self-adjusting practices serving the free space of self-empowerment and development,

  • frames and structures the cognitive metaphysics, the metamorphosing sublimity, the substantial power legitimization, and the concordance processing of the dynamic vertical equilibrium between determinative universal mind | law and conditional real world self-governing, based on the transpersonal individuality of the single human, group, and societal self, its enforcement of meta-codification and manifestation,

  • contains the principles and structural elements as well as the essential keystones for manufacturing and manifesting a post-post-Westphalian co-creative, constitutional policy culture and order of humanity's complimentary, diverse development and interconnectivity enhancement, provides and contributes a substantial framework to the world formula of governing as self-governing and global governance as metagovernance for manifesting an anthropocenic order of humanity's co-| existential advancement in a space of free will,

  • co-creates the common ground aiming for the implementation of the vertical equilibrium between metaphysically determined leadership and the conditions of the real world as the primacy of human/e capacity to develop intersocietal governance regimes as sustaining postnational societies' components of a coincident as well as concordant world order,

  • claims the self-referential supremacy of noumenal normativity and normative primacy of metaconstitutionalism, creates ethical | social competence and procedural guidelines for micro-political self-governing and the codes of conduct for the coordination management of collaborative policy network relationships.

  • guarantees transparency, inclusion, concentric dialogue, reliability, and continuity based on the dynamic processing of perception and internalization, real participation and creative solution, systemic resilience and timely actualization; the trust generating and truth finding avenue of adequately codified ruling mediations creates not only procedural, but substantial justice and its adequate processing. This especially applies to the area of international relations policy governance and above all to internal | external crises | conflicts incl symetric | asymetric formations | transformations,

  • substantiates and justifies the de-personalization | transpersonalization and self-referential legitimization of self-based reason and authority of meta-normativity by generating the determination processing of meta-power and by operating as a legislative meta-order to generate executive metagovernors, as entire meta-"codificator" and equilibrator of the substantial visions, the will, and the interests of actors also in accordance to the structural methods and form of metagovernance,

  • dissolves the traditional "agency dilemma" of principal-agent problems by determining coordinational, heterarchical leadership skills: acting as a principal the Metagovernor (Meta-Leadership) is highly qualified in providing a neutral, integrious, self-referential, self-reflecting, and transpersonal authority, cognitive independence, social sensitivity, interactive dynamic and sovereignty, proactively collaborating and balancing, priotizing, and inspirational visionary stimulation capacity by navigating and facilitating heterarchical collaboration, consensual and transformational decision-leading concertation for coherent and efficient syndication, manifestation, and implementation,

  • syndicates the paradigms and principles of multiple micro-policy generation primarily as cognitive-creative and meta-connective coherence processing, as higher frequent, normative, hybrid facilitation by synoptically transcending values, norms, rules, ethics etc. including cultural particulars and also humans' adequate social, societal, and emotional demands,

  • incorporates the regulatory triptych of polity generation: constitution-building, generating the substantial content of prescriptive constitutional norms, and institutional architecture structuring beyond the traditional matrix of ego-, states-centrism, nations, and reason of state-based international system with the historically prooven tendency of diverse ways of renewing absolustic governing (also religious enemy images, geopolitical, resource competition etc.),

  • restrains and replaces the declining factual, post-national normativity of outgrown states-| government-centric, paternalistic authority and formal sovereignty as well as the egocentrically projecting personalism of masses causing an increasing anarchic disruption and systemic erosion also with growing impact on the international system and global "order", facing anarchic disruption, destabilisation, and regional disorder, and civilisatoric decline,

  • systematizes the reason of noumenal-institutional order as a direct expression of the social contract and societal will in accordance to | concordance with the common, synthesized, and universalized principles, guiding values and paradigms forming a kind of "eternity guarantee": legitimacy, accountability, transparency, integrity, consensual authority acknowledgement of cognitional enhancement, and transcending wisdom for humane self-governing and coordinating meta-governance | -governing as the implementation of free will,

  • enables polycentric governance codification and metapolitical agenda-setting in dynamic procedures of concertation, unification of diverse, multiple, interdependent, and mutual complimentary, a/symmetric networks of micropolities in a heterarchical and dialogic approach by ultimately prevailing transpersonal and transsystemic authority | sovereignty and by constraining | rejecting egocentricity and inadequate micropolitical supremacy,

  • creates the multistakeholders' engagement | settings and manages the polycentric coordination and syndication of processes which are open to anyone and/or any interdependent entity coming in and fully participating the discourses, referring to an individual, group, or organization that has a direct or indirect interest of societal relevance: these may be businesses, civil society, governments, states, interstate | intergovernmental institutions, and non-governmental organizations,

  • provides the networked societies' accountable, multilevel self-governing polity | policy generation achieving the multiplicity of collective and asymmetric dynamics and challenges of governability by mediating, building, steering, and heterarchically processing the intersection of three types of determinative relationships and discourse dynamics: authoritative, strategically competitive, or dialogic,

  • closes the lack of adequate internalization and systemic institutionalization of human factors, values, and humanities, caused by a largely non-standardized globalization and the methods, procedures, and bureaucratizing techniques of "global governance", which in this way neglected any maxim | paradigm of ruling the supremacy of human transpersonal individuality, humane identity, and social justice,

  • creates the equivalent public sphere for exterior policy implementation of the interior determination | inner guidance of transpersonal individuals and adequate societal | transsocietal self-governing, particularly its ruling competence for constructive future planning and the identifying foundation of metagoverning multiple networks and multilateral relationships, and …

  • generates transpersonally qualifying essences of meta-leaders and transformationally progressive, dynamic policy | metapolity developers with a shaping spirit for the culture and the sustaining significance of her | his public | private organization's functions and targets with fully legitimized governability based on formative and determinative normativity. This process starts with developing a > MetaCode as fundament and common ground for concertation and cohesion, thereby the concept

  • guarantees the self implementation of transpersonal | organizational sovereign guidance based on clear normativity without the dependency on | restriction of just formal authority and facilitates a dynamic, resilient ruling system with the highest capable leadership and enforcement quality guaranteed by the supremacy of transcendently determined, integrative MetaCodification safing a sustaining culture of organizational governmentality,

  • defines the leadership and governance processing of free minds and souls and facilitates the openly clearing consciousness of an individually guiding self. In order to guarantee the best usage and effectivity of guidance by equivalently resonating, orchestrated individual subjects in order to save the congruent calibration of power legitimation,

  • allows the integrative coordination as the best way of highest possible individual self-regulation of every participant including transpersonalized responsibility and the capacities of a real and free good will. These characteristics are the corresponding components of the Noumenal Diplomacy concept's determinative rationality and communicative conviction to be fully developed by being based on a common-ground framework of a MetaCode of the individual self,

  • associates and synthesizes individual and transpersonal, societal, and inter- | transsocietal autonomous value spheres of dignity, cultures, practices, experiences, issues, know-how, needs, objectives, motivations, morals, rationals, mindsets, worldviews, structures, characteristics, and the dynamic actualization processes of changing paradigms, based on the human progressing self- | consciousness especially about societal, political-organizational development, the elevating emotional and cognitive-spiritual intelligence, and human self-empowerment by further transcendence and self-connectivity enhancement,

  • enhances the policy generating, ruling, and reigning competence and legitimization processes by reinventing forms of institutionalizing heterarchical power organizations, based on the integral, inclusive, and convergent coordination and syndication of multiple realms, levels, lines, scales, and relationships of societal and transitional stakeholders' systemic networks - targeting, developing, and facilitating a 'Noumenal World Order' (https://ir-council.webnode.page/nwo/) .



© J Michael Heynen I R C

https://ir-council.webnode.page/






Tuesday, 26 December 2023

Culture of Peace


by J Michael Heynen


As this year's #Christmas is confronted with further violence and wars, it becomes understandable that the world, after phases of pacification, is once again moving further away from a 'culture of peace'. This applies even more globally: There is neither a so-called world order nor a culture of peace that preserves human dignity. On the contrary: sources of conflict and military technology as well as the inability to renounce violence and far-sightedly transformative conflict management have reached civilizational proportions in the sense of mechanisms of action that endanger humanity.


In fact: Human development has reached the Anthropocene, i.e. the extensive domination of the planet by humans, at the same time to an extent that endangers humanity. This control does not refer to a spiritual level, but - that is exactly the problem - exclusively to the biosphere and geosphere. So the question is: Is it human limitation, not to say stupidity? Or is it negligent acceptance of a rather incomprehensible development? Or is it - also not to be excluded - simply long-term planning - with whatever goal?!


War and massive violence have returned to the forefront of people's minds - by whom and for whom? And shouldn't it actually be the complete opposite? Foreign ministers babble about war, about “having to win,” etc. Is even the word détente disturbing? Why have we (states/societies with a liberal-democratic basic order) not managed to move from détente to a sustainably established culture of peace as the central global benchmark for international politics? Why do entire systems keep falling back into the 20th century? Why doesn't at least Europe - the much-vaunted and incompetent peace force - manage to put the "European House" (Gorbachev) in order? Is it that so hard? What does it take for this?


A way out? As long as statehood forms the main structuring of international relations, states (even democratically constituted) will always tend towards absolutist foreign policy governing and will no longer be in control of the central, transformative, solving processes and human developments. Monetary, selfish, and geopolitical interests, the classic sublevel („Unterbau“) with no real sustainability, are obviously decisive. Every new generation begins a-historically, so history repeats itself - even without convincing reasons.


Derivation / Insight: A culture of peace only emerges individually, supported by knowledge, conscience, ethics, and shaped by reflection and inner self-determination. So the supremacy of peace lies within in order to achieve success externally. In the long run, only the subject (!) human being is the central perspective of international relations, because states have historically failed - or to put it another way: How long do we want to watch them practice? Time and again sheer (ideological-religious) political failure at the expense of human life? This is exactly where we have arrived again at Christmas 2023 and are discussing further additional risks of war. Isn't it finally enough?


It is up to the human’s individual Self to manifest a culture of peace, starting from within. Everything else is more like "child's play" - but without weapons and puberty! - Peace is not higher than reason, peace is through reason!



©  J Michael Heynen | Nomoi Institute




Wednesday, 22 November 2023

Noo World Order

 



NOO WORLD ORDER



A Cognitive-Imaginative “Simulation” about a Human Future, 

which begins in a Presence – and postulates Implementation!



by J Michael Heynen




I. Introduction


First: 'Noo' comes from the Greek Noos / Nous and refers to “the human ability to grasp something spiritually, and the instance in the human being that is responsible for recognizing and thinking, i.e. spirit, intellect, mind, reason, also the divine World reason… (Wikipedia).


At the same time, 'Noos' indicates the new age of humanity following the Anthropocene: the Noocene! While in the Anthropocene people had more or less control over the geosphere and biosphere of the planet, in the Noocene they begin to (re)connect with the noosphere. In doing so, life is spiritualized and spirit is vitalized; human action ultimately follows the individual self, thus from insight and knowledge, from feeling and understanding, from reason and spirit. It is possible - under the supremacy of Noos - to achieve harmonizing equilibration by controlling life processes in all spheres of human consciousness and being.


The transition into the new era, the Noocene, was marked by crises and suffering, but at the same time it was facilitated by the following sublime realization: de-individualization and extensive economization and monetization (materialism), infantilization and (self-)incapacitation, egomaniacal projections and egocentric formal rituals, disinformation and nihilistic misuse of power have irreversibly decoupled political representation and governing as well as large parts of the economy from people and societies. Politically - and also economically - presumptuous "background powers" left behind emptiness on all levels and ultimately a historically unique vacuum in terms of legitimacy and trust.


The public space thus also became a space for the emptying of humanity. The so-called “politics” and their “elites” finally paralyzed themselves and “accomplished” the finale of their, above all, systemic incompetence and satanic heresies. The resulting multiple system failures - continued losses of peace and freedom, violence and wars, bankruptcy and impoverishment - shaped the experiences of the so-called “last generation” in the Anthropocene and led to the insight-driven statement in the transition: by humans for humans!


In the transition to the Noocene, the following is already happening: people from regional and global inter-societal units come together to, beyond their cooperation in crisis management, discuss a charter for a truly new, a Noocene world order. The only requirement was that this type of representative fulfilled the following central characteristics: individuality - i.e. not a system agent of traditional, typical conformity -, then mastery of principal, transpersonal inner / outer leadership competence and integrity, creative-cognitive, i.e. spirit-guided capacity, insightful mind, and understanding their societies, then above all joy in the creative interweaving of spirit and life, of humans and societies!


The representatives of this kind come together and discuss the first draft of a so-called 'Noo World Order', which deliberately avoids legal complexity and focuses
pnprinciples and paradigmatic maximes:




II. Noo World Order - Charter [ First Draft ]




Preamble


We, the representatives of respective societies, come together out of our own free will to discuss the charter of a real, new world order, a 'Noo World Order'. We put the following in front:


We are all part of creation as a space of free will; our free, co-creative development is based on the creation’s legality. In accordance with the measure and center of this law, we as the learning human part of this space strive in open, not only horizontal, but above all vertical interaction to understand creation and its source codes to the best of our abilities and, through vivification of ‚Nous‘ / spirit, to return to the universal development process (emanation). To do this, we connect back to the noosphere: generated as a spiritual intermediate level of human capacity and selectively specified in respective phases of civilization.


Today, at the beginning of the Noocene, through the reconnection with the Noosphere we have overcome the purely existential human phase of the Anthropocene integrating all the magnificent, at the same time one-sided technical and material advances. We have individually transpersonalized ourselves and in societal discourses we decided for pure leadership based on spirit and reason, insight and knowledge.


Accordingly, inner and outer knowledge justify our intention to present the normative principles of humane civilization in the following charter. We do this independently and with the pure goal of conviction and inspiration, but at the same time without any mission, i.e. non-religious / non-ideological. Our initiative serves individuals and societies to facilitate their peaceful, creative, and free development, adequately to vary in their respective cultures and to cooperate multilaterally for the joy of shaping a humane future.


With this in mind, we recommend the following maxims to critical, constructive-creative world discourses:



§ 1 Human and Creation


The human is born in a space of free will (planet earth / universe). As such, the human has rights and obligations that are derived from the universal law of creation and are to be applied in legal equality. The human's free, and especially fear-free, existence deserves the highest level of protection; his physical identity is the first condition of his metaphysical determination and development.



§ 2 Development and Fulfillment


To incarnate as a human essence as a decisive part of creation means to understand life as an opportunity and potential, to learn from the external, physical reality and to determine the individual, inner, metaphysical reality. This is the principle meaning of life, to develop the individual Self in a way that is appropriate to creation and therefore humane, and to create an emancipating life from it - as the basis of humanity.


This also includes the derived pursuit of happiness as an important part of human salvation generated from the fulfillment of transcending consciousness and mind. Because the human individual - a highly privileged subject in the universe - has the unique capacity to determine life from spirit and to form the conditions of existence from this. A human is a thinking and perceiving subject in one, if it is wanted.


§ 3 Will and Imagination


Every human is a co-creative part of creation. Only as a freely developing individual and with guidance derived form the Self he can develop autonomous will and unlimited imagination. For further creative development, he can connect with all humanly available spheres - vertical (metaphysical) as well as horizontal (physical), i.e. with the noosphere, biosphere and geosphere, etc. The transpersonal human being (Self connected) facilitating the process of equilibration (here: balancing the validity of the spheres) anticipates the intellectual normativity of the noosphere (suprematism) for the implementation of appropriate life development. Because free consciousness determines being.


§ 4 Determination and Discourse


What the individual human being as a thinker determines as the absolute - and the absolute only exists in the “inner temple” of the individual self - he, as a communicating subject, carries into the relativity of external reality. In connection with other humans, the individual positions are correlated and decided on in a prioritized manner. In teleological discourses groups, societies, and their alliances can arise from this. This process of dialogic objectification serves to create meaning and truth, to form wills and decisions, and to balance interests and conflicts in a transformative manner.


§ 5 Internal and External Leadership


The individual human being - from the emancipating and free transcendent development out of the Self - masters inner leadership confidently: from spirit and feeling – backed by universal law of thought – he has the full capacity to develop reason, logic, insight, and knowledge. So the human, deductively anticipating the general, is part of the whole in order to concretize himself in practical reason; his balancing connection with all humanly accessible spheres ensures him the substantial perception as well as love for humans and that way also the ability for external leadership. This excludes personal ego power and is mainly characterized by transpersonal comprehensive responsibility, integrity and truthfulness, inspiring creativity, persuasiveness, and holistic civility.


§ 6 Society and Contract


On the basis of transpersonal, cultural identity, a general will is established to form a society (first regionally) in order to organize coexistence and synergy under appropriate ideas and visions and to shape the future from this spirit. The respective individuals and groups constitute a free civil society and decide on a contract (similar to a constitution) in order to provisionally establish the conditions and structures of coexistence and to standardize the necessary organizational mechanisms. There is agreement in advance in unrestricted voluntary membership and in the maximum fulfillment of the Categorical Imperative (Immanuel Kant).


Procedures are regularly established to update the decision-making process in a timely manner. The same applies to the introduction of coordinating administrative structures in the so-called public space, as - in historical comparison - previous states or intergovernmental structures and functions had set up. In this context, the establishment of respective interstate / statehood is only recommended if it is possible to develop efficient procedures to exclude regularly recurring alienation from the decision-making process of society and to guarantee this in the long term.



§ 7 Society World and Cultures


Analogous to the individual, the most important foundation of a society and a societal contract lies in the spirit and development of its culture. The breadth and depth of this term - culture - reflects the historicity and creative vitality of a society. Freedom and non-violence (including psychologically mediated) are central elements and characteristics. This applies overall to internal and external societal relationships.


The specifically human quality lies primarily in their connection to other human individuals. The same applies to the learning and supporting bonds between societies. This is based on the realization that their relationships are guided neither by (qualitative) equality nor by superiority. Despite all the necessary (formal) legal equality, the respective cultural differences are not only respected, but are also seen as a decisive potential for corresponding development.


In every type of inter-societal communication, different speeds and cultural qualities of development are perceived and integrated in a complementaryly completing manner. In any case, the common maxim that must firstly to be identified is adherence to the universal law of creation and thought as a central principle of respective, mutual cooperation. In this way, cultures become the carrier of a society and at the same time a driving force for a societies’ world that carries the code for the constitution of a world society, a humane civilization.


§ 8 Society State and Governing


The contractually constituted society (usually regionally first) is made up of individuals and groups who syndicate their basic self-governing and bring it into collaboration. This means that the single individual self-governing is delegated to the level of government. This authorization applies to a kind of governing that relates exclusively to the moderation and implementing coordination of the respective free formation of societal will.


In this way, intellectual and societal connectedness establishes the form and function of a society state (regional or inter-regional), in which political power is based exclusively on comprehensive legitimacy of governing. The legitimacy of government is to be understood not only as a quantitative derivation of individual will, but especially as qualified in strict accordance with reason.


The free and humane society state essentially depends on: contract / constitution, individual decision-making, legitimacy. Equally constitutive for the functioning of the society state is the personal and professional development of its actors / representatives in accordance with reason and responsibility (to perceive as a kind of elite based on excellence). Above all, the representatives are fully transpersonally developed, but at the same time the diversity of their continuous quality and development lies in their exemplary individuality.


In forming the society state - governing as the syndication of self-governing - various reasons can lead to the fact that the full participation of all members has to be foregone. Because the highest possible, responsible quality of the function of the society state cannot be jeopardized or hindered. For this purpose, specific procedures of specific delegation mechanisms must be developed in order to ensure long-term distributive justice “in the space of free will”. In particular, the high demands on the human development capacities of the society-state (“being and becoming”) must be met and the different potentials must be promoted and combined constructively and creatively.



§ 9 Economy and Sociality


A free, humane society is not determined by the economy and its expansion, but by the rational fulfillment of existentially necessary conditions. It is not ‚having‘, but ‚being‘ derived from consciousness that shapes economic and social conditions.


The free individual disposes of property according to his performance capacity. At the same time, parts of this property are subject to social participation compensation or an appropriate social bond for civil society development in accordance with the measure of reason. The market of a free society also functions classically according to supply and demand, production and consumption. This cycle is competitive and cooperative and, above all, as a constantly corresponding qualitative growth movement to be correlated with the meaning and benefits of societal development goals.


For this purpose, the classic free, social market economy must be further qualified in the sense of reason and societal exchange between members of society. Free science and research must be directly linked with cultural and economic societal processes. The same applies to the areas of health and media etc.


In any case, the top priority is to balance individual self-determination and societal development in a targeted, complementary manner and to be negotiated and decided in a corresponding balance of interests.


§ 10 Human World and Future


After individuals, groups, and individual societies have overcome the one-sided domination of the geosphere and biosphere (Anthropocene) and decided to enter the new age, the Noocene, we recognize the particularly responsible challenge for the future in the equilibrated relationship between leadership from spirit / reason and the conditions of matter: the balancing development and sustainable implementation of a so-called noosystem.


This noosystemic, i.e. the vertical balancing of spheres (noosphere / geosphere and biosphere) as well as the simultaneous horizontal balancing (individual / society), is also successful in an “institutionalized” long-term manner when integrity, transpersonally developed individuals and representatives (in / between the societies) ensure the best possible decisions or their optimizing further development in constant, free discourse.


The mastery of consciousness and real processes equilibration is understood as a constant, future-oriented transition / transformation process for the spiritualization of life and the enlivening of spirit. In this way, a humane world is formed in the long term and, in particular, the determining power of its vertical further development of human civilization is guaranteed. In this way, the human world is opened up to its fulfillment as a connected societies’ world.



§ 11 Transitional Regulation


In the transition to the full validity of the Noocene, traditional statehood must be comprehensively and finally tailored to humans. I.e. state sovereignty and legitimacy of governing must be re-substantiated and fed back as a temporarily empowered / authorized act of individual / societal and associated self-governing (see above).


For societies that constitute themselves individually and freely, this means reactivating the generally valid constitutions according to their spirit and thereby revitalizing the form of statehood that has factually been left degenerated. Depending on cultural and societal developments, changes and additions following from the societal discourses are to be decided and approved provisionally (regular revision).


In this process, the cultural-historical and legal achievements of human rights and the so-called 'free-democratic basic order' (fdbo) are to be understood as pre-state noumenal normativity and based on this in correlation with the universal legality of thought and reason. From this - to the extent necessary and reasonable - the legitimizing justification for statehood can be derived as limited, entrusted substitute action from individually connected self-governing. - The spirit-derived substance of individual consciousness determines the form of being and its free, appropriate implementation, especially as governing.


The noospherically reconnected and noosystemically organized society-state according to a free human world strives to organize the maximum necessity of its existence for an introductory phase and then it reduces itself to a minimum or dissolves itself in the measure of fulfilling the Categorical Imperative. This should also apply to the political spheres of power in the whole free, connected societies’ world and ultimately to the humane civilization of a global society.




III. From A-Posteriori to A-Priori


While the consultations continue in order to create a sustainable, humane normativity in which all individual world cultures, including historical ones, recognize themselves as represented, the following realization prevails among most participants: Why did we have to go through all these terrible and humanly unworthy experiences in order to be able to perceive and understand the other one as a true human being?! How could we become so far removed from Self and our multiple genius capacities?! Today we are wiser... and today, the now is timeless when spirit is brought to life and life is spiritualized... "and anyone can do that if wanted!" (Kierkegaard: „The Eternal Power of Self“)


Most of the participants in this type of 'Noo World Order Council' provide mentally comprehensive forgiveness and achieve a stage of real transformation: In the especially noumenal normativity of the above draft charter, on the one hand, the historicity of humanity was understood, on the other hand, at the same time, a humane and sustainable civility is being established. The human self is the supreme authority, first and foremost bound by universal law and legitimation. The purely quantitative legitimation of egocentric statehood is irreversibly overcome by the qualitative legitimation through valid reason and the universal laws of thought, which equilibrates anthropology with cosmology - of course not as theology, but as evolutionary, human teleology.


Not the personal ego or the state superego, but the individual transpersonal Self becomes the supreme determining, at the same time communicative and participatory, shaping power of the public space in order to moderate societal will and coordinate its implementation: for a free and peaceful, further developing humane civility and future of an adequte civilization.



© J Michael Heynen, Baden-Baden, 22.11.2023



Nomoi Institute | Noumenal Cultures Council