CIRCLE
| T |
he discussion of the society versus the individual has existed almost since the beginning of the society. Is society more important than individual? Or are the individuals more important as they are the components that eventually make up the society? These questions have been asked many times by many people.
We keep talking about how bad the world is and we blame the wars, disasters, crime, and much other negativity for the reason. But why do these exist: Because there’s an evil side to the human being, or because the people act like this as they become a part of the society? When I think about this question, I can’t come up with an answer as it occurs to me like a question about chickens and eggs: Maybe people won’t act like this, if they didn’t try to become a part of the society they live in, but at the same time maybe the individuals that act like this don’t exist, there won’t be such a society to be a part of, which will create a much different world that we know it. Therefore, the answer is vague.
Evolution lasts for hundreds, maybe thousands of years. Therefore, I believe evolution can cause changes in human behavior as well as appearance. In universe, everything seems to be forming a circle. Circle of life, circle of time… Even the earth is shaped as a circle. Events and other terms also form a cycle as well. This is the reason the history keeps recurring: Everything forms its own cycle, thus recurring at certain points. Universe is infinite. Maybe what makes it infinite is the fact that it is in fact a circle. After one point, we can’t go any further because if we do, we will enter from the other point; just like a never-ending circle. This can be explained with a few small examples. For instance, if we laugh too much, after one point we start crying. Likewise, if we cry too much, after one point we start laughing. Just like a circle: It is therefore called the circle of moods. Another example, if one person is too smart (like Albert Einstein), he is on the verge of being challenged. What I mean, is, the border between gifted and challenged is blurry, as they are next to each other, forming a circle. Ilexa Yardley has this same hypothesis, which she explains in her book ‘The Circular Theory’. In this book she hypothesizes that there is a hidden circle connecting and separating, producing and explaining, all entities, processes and systems.(*)
I wasn’t too surprised to hear about this theory as I feel like I’ve known it naturally and I was naturally viewing everything around me as circles and cycles. When I look more deeply, I can see that I’m not the only or the first one to discover this in the world as I see many religions and symbols are based on this theory even though they seem to be channeling through different metaphors. For example, if we look closely at the famous Ying-Yang symbol, we see three circles and a circular line (much like a ‘relative’ diameter) with black and white color symbolizing the opposites like day and night. This alone is the perfect summary of the circular theory of the universe. Other than that, we can list endless circles such as circle of color and light, circle of sound, cycle of size and speed, the cycle of atoms and their particles etc. that evidently prove that everything is, in fact, a circle.
According to this theory, history and society is moving like a circle as well. There is in fact a separate name for the Circular Theory when talking about societies: Cyclical Theory of Social Change (**). This was actually one of the earliest theories of social change that describes the societies and history following certain cycles and thus certain events and processes repeat themselves over time. The easiest way to see this change is to analyze civilizations: It is evident that all civilizations as well as dynasties go through a cycle and at a certain point they reach their Golden Age right before their imminent gradual fall. Pitrim A. Sorokin also classifies societies into categories in his book ‘Social and Cultural Dynamics’, and observes that after a civilization of one categories peak, the social change occurs and the civilization turns over his place to a civilization of another category. For instance, Sorokin claims that Western Civilization, which is a materialistic civilization that prioritizes technological advances, will fall and another civilization of a different category, such as a more spiritual civilization, will prevail.
Likewise, I believe, when we speak about primitivism, we don’t grasp the fact that being ‘too’ primitive also equals being ‘too’ civilized. I believe the society started out as being civilized and slowly, as time progressed, and the humankind began to grasp his power, he slowly became primitive – and by primitive I don’t mean anything to do with technology, but only the human behavior – and as time will progress, he will slowly turn back to times he was civilized. In short, when what we call ‘civilization’ come to its top point, he will turn back to being what we call ‘primitive’, thus being a truly civilized society in means of human behavior.
But where does technology stand in this situation: Is technology a way to help us in this road to being ‘civilized’, or does it hold us back by pointing our target point off-route. Usually humans relate being ‘civilized’ with technology. It’s also very ironic to see that wars have started with the attempt of ‘civilizing’ the East by the West with technology and education, as in my opinion; war is one of the most primitive expressions of human being. Maybe technology is making it worse, maybe not, maybe it has no effect, but which one?
When the Americas were discovered and the Europeans set foot there they claimed that the Natives were ‘uncivilized’ people who knew nothing of war and theft, with limited technology in comparison to their own. But in the end they, as civilized as they are, started a holocaust on them on their way to ‘civilizing’ them. In this story, we see that the newcomers have been the ones who acted primitive and the Natives were highly civilized in comparison to them. Was technology the component that caused them to be so opposite of each other? Technology is the reason for Europeans to have called themselves ‘civilized’, so can it be the reason it is also the reason they acted so ‘uncivilized’?
Technology feeds on human greed, as greed feeds on technology: We need something, so we invent, as we invent more, we want more from it, therefore, we keep inventing and improving the technology. In the articles on technophobia, the recurring theme is the fear of technology comes from the loss of humanity. We can, in a way, see technological improvements as drugs: they’re good for your problems, but they come with side effects that cause other problems. Technology is good for the humankind as it adds improvements in order to perfect people’s lives and it can be used for the good of people. However, it also has ‘side effects’ such as, changes in society, pollution, mechanization, and loss of humanity.
These side effects are what cause the technophobia, as we know it. The most important side effect is the social change as technology has its way of shifting the society and its culture to be in accordance with itself, which makes most people who can’t keep up with this change uncomfortable. But also, technology is something that evolves within time, in accordance with the society, forming a common memory, a history. As I mentioned above, everything is cyclical, and history is included. History is, in fact, one of the most obvious examples of the circular theory. If you look at any history textbook, you will find yourself reading the same things over and over again at certain time intervals. It is often said that the history repeats itself: it’s because it occurs as a cycle. Therefore, technology belongs to this cycle too, and it is called the Hype Cycle.
The Hype Cycle starts with a new innovation that creates excitement among people. However, as time progresses, and the expectations rise, some flaws of the innovation become apparent and unable to meet the unrealistic expectations of the public, the innovation is abandoned. Although the new technology is still used by some entities and tested until it becomes stable and efficient to some point, therefore is widely used. After this point, next generations of the innovation go through the same cycle, as well as other breakthroughs.
If we go back to the issue of Western Civilization being a more ‘technological’ civilization, I believe most people will agree with Sorokin on that. But is it truly coming to an end, this techno-mania? Is there a top point to this endless madness for newer technologies? I believe it may… Maybe not immediately, but if there really is a social cycle and recycle, there should be a change in the way the societies react to technology. Maybe technological advances will be so ahead that the people will stop reacting to it and accept every new technology only natural and new technologies will be as natural as a newborn baby in our lives. I believe this option is more probable as I can start feeling like people are already acting a bit like this now. People are already acting like cell phone is an extension to their arm, and screens all around them are their mobile eyes. We, in a way, already have stopped responding to technology.
Therefore, we can say that technology, as part of the Circular Theory, is losing its status of being the center of attention. Then, what will be the new favorite: paranormal activities, obsessive yearn to figure out the universe and all the other secrets? These may be the more important issues that will be in the future societies’ minds. Because all the technology in the world probably won’t help us understanding the secrets of the universe we live in, as the answers to these ultimate questions cannot be in anything manmade, if they are anywhere to be found, they are inside our very brains. In this new era, I believe that human mind will expand itself not to create new technological advances, but to explore its own limits and figure out the ultimate answers to these ultimate questions. Even as I prophesize this, I am writing a paper that is explaining the Circular Theory of the universe, which is a good point that shows our hunger for these answers. We are weary of speaking of technology and where it will take us in the future, because the topic is ‘out’, ‘démodé’ and ‘irrelevant’. It is more exciting and intriguing to talk about the trendy new topic of Secrets of the Universe.
In the film and book of ‘the Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’, a race of hyper-intelligent pan-dimensional beings create a computer that will calculate the ‘Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, Universe, and Everything’. The computer’s answer turns out to be ‘42’. When bewildered creators ask the computer what is the question, the Ultimate Question, he answered, the computer replies that it cannot answer that, but it can help them build a more efficient computer that can produce the Ultimate Question. Amazingly, this more efficient computer turns out to be the Earth. I find this story very witty, and self-explanatory on our topic. In a caricaturized way, it points out the ultimate question and answer is not so distant, but within us. We don’t need to go out of our ways to design new technologies to produce answers to these questions, as all the answers are within us.
Therefore, as conclusion, we can say that all the answers are within us; because we are the universe. Each and every entity in the universe equals the universe. The Circular Theory eventually comes to this:
We are all moving in a big circle.
