The Myth of Chaos

People often use the word chaos.  Until recently, this word did not pose a question for me;  however, I now think it signifies something that does not exist.

 

By the dictionary’s definition, chaos means a state of utter confusion and disorder – a baffling, inexplainable something that has dropped irrationally out of the blue.  As I perceive it, nonetheless, our world, its people, and this universe are actually in a state of order, not chaos.  This observation is not related to any religious doctrine but rather from a consideration in logic.

 

Everything exists as a consequence of relationship.  Each action, a follow-through of a preceding whatever, consecutively, reacts in relative repercussion, which in turn causes something else to happen.  We are part of a falling domino principle existing in crisscrossing lines hitting each other.  Whatever decision I make in action, will produce a consequence of some kind.  Whatever decision you make, in turn, will manifest an effect.

 

This to me is order.

 

Nothing happens unless something precedes it.  A preceding force pushes all thoughts, actions and events.  When we examine that preceding force, we would say, "Oh yes, of course, it was caused by such and such.  This resulting occurrence was obvious to happen and not surprising at all."  

 

Is this not order?  How can any event be underlined chaotic?  Any accident can be analyzed as to what led up to it.

 

Our ignorance of preceding force causations is the foundation of our chaos misperception.  We see or learn of pandemonium and incorrectly use the word chaotic to define it.  In fact, each eventuality always has a causation.  There is no happenstance.  Any occurrence is a relative consequence of an interaction between two elements that produce an occurrence that bumps into another element that produces another occurrence and on and on. 

 

Everything happens for a reason even if that reason is a thought energy that leads to a decision that causes a reaction or the flapping of a butterfly's wings that causes a turbulence across the world.

 

There is a proposal by The Chaos Theory that the flapping of a butterfly's wings in New Mexico causes a hurricane in China.  This theory, to me, does not support disorder or chaos but rather a system of inter-related chain events. That we believe in chaos is our obtuseness in understanding the intricate domino coordination into which we have emerged.  In other words, the hurricane in China did not appear by happenstance, it was a result of a butterfly’s wings flapping in relation with another force and so on and so on.  There were a series of logical acts, one leading into another in order.

 

Not an order where events appear as you would like but rather an order where one thing influences another in a mysteriously ever-changing principle.  When we consider this, that everything is in relationship and we, part of this, with our thoughts, decisions, and acts also in relationship, are we not also ordering our reality?

 

 

If we want a more beneficial reality for ourselves, we need to stop using the word chaos and take responsibility for the type of order we are creating.  

To leave a comment, please sign in with
or or

Comments (24)

  1. magnocrat

    A look at the human world now and in the past we may well describe it as chaotic. Each individual pursues their own ends and the larger tribes also manipulate for their own ends. Determinism took a blow when quantum mechanics found the fabric of the universe was governed by probability. Later they discover that the outcome of experiments depended on the observer. It was triggered by that genius Heisenberg who put forward his uncertainty principle.
    Lastly what we create is not entirely our action because we were formed by the process of natural selection for the purpose of survival.
    There is still some debate about the human mind but many believe it was also a result of selection. It does create a question , has that mind the capability to understand the universe that brought it into being?

    May 03, 2017
    1. greunie

      Yes, we are a result of some preceding forces. Simply, our father and mother in relationship caused us to emerge. Do we need to understand the universe? or do we need to become aware how we are affecting it?

      May 03, 2017
  2. Nightbane

    The definiton of chaos assumes there is no order other than that imposed by humans. humans have this unfortunate tendency to assume no order exists beyond their extremely limited and rather unnatural estimation of such and go about destroying the perfect order of the enitre Universe by alleged virtue of this assumption. They also tend to become very agitated when reminded the Universe got along very welll without thier pathetic definitios and impositions for an impossibly long time before they showed up and started mucking about with things.
    Silly humans…

    May 03, 2017
    1. greunie

      So that I know better what you are saying, do you think there is a perfect order? Or are you saying that there was a timely balance that gave humans the privilege of emerging? and now, ignorant of how we affect this order, we have no clue that we are destroying the balance that sustains us?

      May 04, 2017
      1. Nightbane

        The Universe has it’s own lovely order even if it is a rare human can grasp it. An integral part of that order is change. Humans seem to think change is disorderly.
        Humans emerged due to conditions being conducive to it, much as some amoebae once clumped together for some unknown ( to us ) reason and became a more complex structure.
        Humans have before them that all organisms and all inanimate things have a lifespan, as it were. Unfortunately, they don’t take it very well when that is manifested up close and personal… they can handle stars or a dish of interesting algae dying but insist all humans must live forever. They also refuse to see disbalance of the slim conditions in which any life occurs have both a limited scope and that no life, can continue forever if the growth of that life exceeds the resource of the atmosphere to sustain it. If, for any reason, the atmosphere becomes to hot, cold, poor or rich in oxygen , water, etc. life forms within the atmosphere will cease. some precious few may manage to do what those aforementioned amoebae did and somehow take a form can survive the changed conditions. The rest, whether due to natural change or the unnatural tinkerings of certain organisms themselves, die.
        consider a moment, the earth as a petrie dish, earth’s finite resources as growth medium and the actual dish. Now introduce a culture. where the growth medium is finite, the culture will thrive until the food is exhausted. The leavings will likley sustain some other culture like amoebae until every last bit of the dead culture and its wastes are too far changed or exhausted, all in the dish and eventually the dish itself reduce to the atoms of which all is made. In the lovely order of the universe, the atoms will eventually be picked up by something else or used in another process overlaps in such a " chaotic " way as is ordinary and perfectly orderly to the Universe
        now look at an identical dish but the culture in it is slighty different, it consumes the medium at a rate greater than that needed to sustain it, fiddles about with the structure of the medium, creates all sorts of extra wastes it isn’t careful about where it puts or what it does with them and then starts altering the very structure of the dish itself. The dish becomes so foul with the mess the culture creates simultaneous to the food being exhausted adn additionally suffering exponential growth due to both tinkering with the food and over consumption.. bad enough but the culture has also tinkered with the dish,that very fragile dish is all that keeps everything in it from the cold vacuum of space.
        the end result is much the same, but the chance of anything in the dish doing as the aforementioned amoebae did is quite less because of the tinkerings and the damage to the dish holds all the living stuff within. Indeed, the second culture seems to have caused such a mess even mould might not be able to live it. if it can, the dish itself has become so fragile it may crack and collapse under the weight of even healthy mould.
        I view humans as the culture in the second dish. my limited understanding of the incredibly long span of such a complex species leads me to describe the tinkerings as artificial and without the natural order of the Universe itself but I also concede i may be incorrect in that assessment. either way, I can see it seems we not only hasten, but fling ourselves headlong to end of our ability to survive on the planet through over consumption of resource, tinkering with the it and the structure of theplanet itself and through exponential growth.
        In another analogy, the planet was once a healthy body, the humans some of the cells made it up. Humans seem to ahve become like a a particularly aggressive cancer, such as multiple myeloma. The body may survive or no in due course, planets are rather larger and harder to kill than a human, have a better chance to survive but it won’t sustain the cancer the humans have become much longer, or so it seems to me.
        ~
        How do we persuade the humans to return to a healthier state? To stop over consuming, to handle wastes in a way dunt harm the planet, stop fiddling with the structure of the planet itself and, chiefest of all, to stop breeding exponentially?

        May 04, 2017
        1. Nightbane

          Jeez… sorry, i got lost in in responding.

          May 04, 2017
          1. greunie

            I am glad you expressed yourself freely but sad that many will miss your words hidden here as a comment instead of out in Thoughts as a blog. How do we persuade the humans? I don’t know but I keep trying to lessen my own fear so that I may better connect in my sphere of influence. If I learn to temper my fear and competition, I will connect with another and help them feel safe for a moment in time. They, calmer, because of it, will interact with less fear to another. The only power I have is to raise my own awareness of fear production and temper it. The more of us who understand and choose an inner focus, when it reaches 51%, it will all change. If it all goes kablooie, we were busy trying and not fearing.

            May 05, 2017
            1. Nightbane

              " Fear is the one true enemy." Not an absolute but it is astonishing just how fr we can be steered with/by/for fear…
              and yet… we cannot truly conquer fear, it is wired into us and actually has uses. in a natural human, ( one without all this artifice we name civilsation if you please ) fear is the brain telling the being connected to it has either unhappy/hurtful files regarding something just encountered or it has no files and take care with the unknown element.
              the being tends to react to the stuff in the brain’s files without questioning. In the natural state, taking chances with unknown things is likely to result in injury , deprivation, death.
              we aren’t in the same state as the natural human though we are still wired the same way beneath it all.
              We have the ability to look at what the brain retrieves quite closely and determine if the content merits the basic response or whether it is only similar and presents no need for the fear response.
              We have the ability to turn round and put queries to our brains, see what the brains draws forth from the files.
              Your brain is a filing system, it records everything about you your entire life and can actually call up those files in stunning detail if you simply enter queries.
              the hard part is being willing to face again the unpleasant stuff maybe remembered to you in the files.
              while fear isn’t going away ( nor should it ) but one can develop a working relationship with it, the result is being and brain are communicating better and may then reach a better balance for the whole.
              Friend Artist describes it as being the referee, family counselor and judge between the instinctive and the analytical, says it is the only work of any true worth she has ever undertaken.
              ~
              It all will go kablooie some day, is the nature of all things. So, what am doing in the meantime? What would I like to do in the meantime? How much of it can we see, smell, taste, feel, drink in and be nourished with, refreshed by, a bit exhilarated or even tipsy with in the meantime….?

              May 05, 2017
            2. greunie

              I agree that fear is our one true enemy. What’s more, there is less to fear than what our mind wants us to believe. I love your last paragraph most of all!

              May 06, 2017
  3. morningafter7

    Interesting…so, in this way of thinking, would you say there is no such thing as coincidence or chance? When something (seemingly random) happens, is it just random or were there events/energies that led up to and caused it?

    May 03, 2017
    1. greunie

      Thank you for your comment. Yes, presently, I don’t see random anything. I see each event in relationship with something else. If two things meet in a meaningful way although there were forces preceding that led up to that meeting, for me, that there is a traceable progression, doesn’t minimize a coincidence’s impact.
      -
      That everything is in relationship with something – that we are entrenched in a system that changes itself – I come to a silence where the following question rises – how can there be a beginning or an end? Scientists refer to a big bang that put our galaxy into motion but really? how far can we see into this unfathomably enormous universe? The big bang is evidence of our neighboring catalyst, not a truth for this universe. The truth of our existence is far more mysterious and wondrous than we have or perhaps can even imagine. That there are energies interacting with each other causing an order that seems like chaos but is not – for me, does not take away the wonder of this but rather intensifies it. It also deems us powerful creators – which inspires me to take more responsibility of how I decide to respond.
      -
      I hope that addressed the theme in your comment correctly.

      May 04, 2017
      1. morningafter7

        Absolutely – I like the way you think very much, greunie. I have pondered on this subject for a while myself. Especially after a recent experience I had – one of those instances where things just magically “click” into place where it seems almost impossible that they ever could have or would have. In fact, the night had chaos written all over it, but for me turned into something truly meaningful. But the timing of events couldn’t have turned out the way they did if I would have TRIED to make them. Hopefully that makes sense.

        May 04, 2017
        1. greunie

          It has happened to me, where something clicks into place, a magic something that I would not have imagined yet a meaningful gift for me. Do I have it right?

          May 04, 2017
          1. morningafter7

            Exactly – yes! As far as the situation I mentioned above – it was a series of events that took place that involved absolutely no pre-planning on my part, but just somehow worked out perfectly – leading up to a very meaningful (for me) event. I was left with a feeling of – I could not have made that happen if I would have TRIED to! It was crazy.

            May 04, 2017
  4. roe

    I have desperately missed your wisdom! I just wrote something called “chaos to order” Love you

    May 05, 2017
    1. greunie

      How wonderful that you are writing here!

      May 05, 2017
      1. roe
        Believe me I’m thrilled to get so many things out of my journals and into the computer

        July 10, 2017
  5. dopesleeper

    “Man is the measure of all things.” – Eddie Van Halen
    -
    My point is that of course “chaos” is a state of things that only humans can conceive, but to say it doesn’t exist, as if anyone who describes a situation as chaotic is mistaken, is going to far. A certain amount of order is necessary for survival, and when that order is disturbed to the extent that it threatens survival, I think it’s reasonable to describe the resulting state as chaotic. It’s easy for us, in our well ordered society that isn’t being disordered by war, disease, famine, political strife, flood, earthquakes, etc., to be philosophical about it and say there is no such thing as chaos, but would you begrudge, say, a Syrian, the use of the word? Would you say to him, “Cheer up! The bombs, the bullets, the nerve gas, the lack of food, housing and medicine isn’t chaos; everything is as it is meant to be.”
    -
    You may be right technically, but chaos isn’t just a technical term.
    -
    If I misstated your position, please feel free to delete this post. Ricola!

    May 08, 2017
    1. greunie

      Perhaps using the word order that has too much bias to make my position clear, was not a good choice. Perhaps I could have used – it is one thing that leads into another (er – maybe I did use those words) … or perhaps … every act has a consequence (mmm I used those too? didn’t I?) Nothing happens by itself? One thing leads into another? Chaos, as used by people, means that something ‘random’ has appeared but in truth, there were logical reasonable linking events to that randomness. I am not sure how you read my words but your comment confuses me. Nowhere did I mention that consequences are about ‘everything is as it is meant to be’. Most people label anything that doesn’t fit in with what they want as chaos, but it isn’t chaos, for there was a consequential structure that created whatever they are now calling chaos. What’s more, they call it that only because they don’t like what has manifested. If they like what has manifested then it’s called magic or something such. But this universe and its organisms are immersed in an interplay of relationship and that is not chaotic, it is a neutrality of one action causing another something to happen and so on and so on.

      May 08, 2017
    2. greunie

      To add something other, weren’t the bombs, the bullets, the nerve gas, the lack of food created by someone’s decisions and acts? Isn’t a Syrian’s reality a manifestation of a specific order – for the purpose of our conversation – let’s begin with Assad? It wasn’t chaos but actual linear acts decided upon by people, in a row, leading up to the horror they are living now. I wouldn’t say cheer up… I would say, I see how this happened and I am sad it has. I wouldn’t begrudge a Syrian the use of the word or anyone who perceives his whatever to be the cause of random forces but I would think, “There is a reason for this, that has befallen you and here are the consequences that led up to it.”

      May 08, 2017
      1. dopesleeper

        I agree with your idea that nothing happens purely by chance. I disagree with your idea that because humans have a concept of chaos, that we don’t understand that nothing happens purely by chance; that if we were to somehow ban the concept, the world would be a better place The concepts of causality and chaos aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. I don’t find it obtuse when someone describes a situation as chaotic. But I’m getting perilously close to arguing semanctics, which I don’t care to do, so I’ll just chalk this one up to my lack of understanding of your post.

        May 11, 2017
        1. greunie

          Perhaps it is I that needs to learn your conviction. As I understand your stand, there is no benefit in defining a problematic situation as caused by consequential events. Am I correct in stating that if someone sees a negative happening as chaotic, it helps solve the problem?

          May 11, 2017
          1. dopesleeper

            “…there is no benefit in defining a problematic situation as caused by consequential events. Am I correct in stating that if someone sees a negative happening as chaotic, it helps solve the problem?”
            -
            No, that’s not what I’m saying. I disagree with the definition of chaos on which you base your premise. The part of the defintion I disagree with is “a baffling inexplainable something that has dropped out of the blue”.

            Here is why I disagree with it: I would describe the conditions in New Orleans, Louisiana after it was struck by hurricane Katrina as chaotic. Was the hurricane a baffling, inexplainable something that dropped out of the blue? No, it wasn’t; we know how and why it formed and the people of the city knew it was coming. Yet, the order of the city had been severely disrupted. This is a condition known as chaos. Defining it as such doesn’t mean that we are baffled by it’s cause and can’t explain it, and therefore don’t know how to restore order and prevent the chaos from happening again.

            You might think that if the residents of New Orleans did indeed feel philosophically that the aftermath of Katrina was order instead of chaos, they would be less motivated to restore the city to the condition it was prior to the devastation. (Am I allowed to use the word “devastation”? It does imply chaos after all.)

            In summary, I think chaos is a useful concept that accurately describes certain conditions that we experience, that is all.

            May 17, 2017
            1. greunie

              As you said, you are arguing semantics and so the spirit of my post is of no value to you. I can see that now. With that – I bow to your greater language excellence and exit this conversation.

              May 17, 2017