We are the smartest we have ever been. We are the furthest generation in the future. There has never been more information before this point. The current time will never come back; it is the furthest forward it will ever be.
What does this mean?
Officially- We are the smartest we (as humans) have ever been.
There are many facets to this statement. A few points and examples will be brought to light in the hope that something may come of it. We are the smartest can mean me globally or individually. “We” can mean people in North America or can include the entire human race. “Have been” implies that there has been some semblance of logic tied to everything that occurred before us. I mean to say “we are the smartest we have been” is every individual in their own way, because they exist now, have the most available knowledge to them than anyone before them.
If you were born into a particular family and you were raised on a particular ideology, would you be to blame for acting a certain way? The answer surely is that every person is to still take responsibility for his action.
This is because the ones to make a good decision is entirely a human gift that differentiates us from animals. Every sentence every word has meaning. Every action a consequence, whether intended or not; every particle a purpose whether we see it or not. The purpose is subjective or objectively sensed by us humans. We don’t have to believe in god or higher powers to believe that everything has a purpose. The pursuit of knowledge, why we walk talk and act the way we do is a result of a cascade of historical incidences that brought us here today. Therefore, every consequence has a purpose, whether intended or not.
What if we as humans, as a thinking species, tap into finding that purpose? To finding the essential life that exists within everything. Try to see its purpose. The problem with proposing such a life lesson is it is assumed by me that a person reading this will derive exactly the purpose I intend to portray-this is a false hope. It also assumes this point actually makes sense and has credence; who knows? Every moment and action have “before it” that brings it here. ‘Before’ is not necessarily in time, rather it is in esoteric metaphysical time, which is levels of depth. To explain, if you the reader has ever done logistics for a company that manufactured, they easily will understand, for the rest, wait open your mind. Take a product that is manufactured in one facility, a plastic cup. It is comprised of a plethora of necessary “ingredients” so to speak, that allow for it to be ultimately be used for its purpose, a cup. All those parts have to come together. Logistics management theory is the example to explain before in terms of level rather than in time. The cup, being the final product is the last thing in a long chain. The step “before” it is hierarchically higher than the cup itself, because without it the cup would cease to exist. Or more clearly would not be able to exist. But the step before it, even though it is important, it is superposed by something “before” it, that also takes the place of being “higher” than it. And this can go on and on. This maslowian hierarchy of needs that exists in getting a final product out is the depiction of what before means in terms of level rather than in time. Why logistics people will get this, because they will see what it clearly means to get many orders of necessary items brought in one area so that the cascade of delivering a final product can occur. They will also understand the importance of every item and having everything in order and on time so that final products can be delivered. This is along the same lines, why the Chicago School of Thought dubbed urban spaces “the urban plexus”. Plexus is a medical term, a term used to describe the body. A body works best when all parts are working together. And when all parts are healthy, the body is the healthiest and strongest. In that vein, when something is a problem we must diagnose it, and fix it. There is a holistic approach to diagnosing and fixing something before it comes to a problem of excising it entirely. Even though excising would heal the body somewhat, it would not be entirely whole and still be missing something. Deciding what excise is erroneous in terms of it being purely a one-opinion decision. Without review of an outside source, or second opinion so to speak, a bad decision can be made.
Just as the composition of manufacturing a cup requires logistics management, humanity, and our opinions, and our point in history is composed of a long line of history which brought us to this point. We can choose to try and evolve from our history, or let it repeat itself. This truism applies to all outcomes. In that, if the outcome of one ideology is perceived to be true, and the outcome that is being fought for, it ought to have been formulated based on context and interpretation of all things that came before it. All, doesn’t necessarily mean everything here, rather the outcome is synthesized with as many possible points, ideally taking account of conflicting ideas. This synthesis will hopefully allow for more critical thinking, less shooting from the hip, and optimal outcomes. But remember, just because something is clear as day to you, doesn’t make it mutually exclusive. My concluding argument therefore is that many people will arrive at optimal outcomes based on their personal journeys, this doesn’t mean that one is “more correct” (necessarily) than others. The framing of right and wrong is personal. Societally we have “buy in” to morality, but that doesn’t mean that the entire spectrum of human thinking, each person with their own way of seeing the world, doesn’t believe they are right either. But adopting the less mutual excusive attitude, we can open better channels of discourse, so people can adopt, discuss, and learn. Not everyone is an enemy, and not everyone is reprehensible. When we don’t talk or discuss, with an open mind to all possible outcomes, we destroy the beauty in humanity.
The title reflects my thinking. Aglets are the plastic caps at the end of (shoe)strings, which keep them from fraying. Telomeres and “biological” aglets on strands of DNA, a sort of cap to DNA. Some people will see this as an entirely useful metaphor, others may not. But we can discuss the connection, an whether there is credibility, again to open and discuss, and beaty is in the conversation, and learning.