From the “Vortex of Life”

“It is a fact that we have only to set the most simple and primary into action, to find, without our having to import any further complications, that more sophisticated considerations are already implied, inherent within them.”

Lawrence Edwards

 

The principle of emotion as a function of attraction, implies flow, resistance to flow, and then a complex social structure that naturally evolves without anything to do with cognition whatsoever. The laws of nature inherent in the intrinsic properties and principles of movement of emotion, “emotional conductivity” implies a force of attraction reflecting back on itself —-“Perspecting”—-so that complex behavior and social structure naturally emerges. In other words, all behavior is a function of ATTRACTION, not intention.

Published June 6, 2014 by Kevin Behan
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

4 responses to “From the “Vortex of Life””

  1. Leslie Craig says:

    Question: How often does this also apply to people? I think I may have seen it in both foot and car traffic, for example, or in roommates’ and family members’ uses of common versus space in a house. And in dogs, doesn’t the dog’s individual style affect this flow, the way a driver’s comfortable speed or degree of competitiveness affects his/her traffic behavior and its outcomes?

    (Please excuse a layperson’s occasional difficulty in understanding what you’re talking about, but would it be possible to show a graphic or flowchart to help those of us who are not physicists ourselves?)

  2. Kevin Behan says:

    I understand emotional conductivity as being as true with people as it is with dogs or any animal. “Design In Nature” shows how the same flow pattern accounts for all structure, that which naturally arises as well as natural occurrences. Our personal style I believe is a set point relative to the larger flow structure, so we vary, but not at random, there’s a pattern to the nature of variability. This changes the nature of free Will. We have a choice, but it’s not arbitrary or independent. One can either choose to be a brake on flow, or add to the flow.

  3. Why does having all the dogs on a leash so drastically change your flow structure and energy principles that you talk about?
    Leash laws are highly enforced on the East Coast and even with the dogs on a leash there were a lot of aggression problems. If one gets off the leash I really saw some serious tangles with the other dogs getting bitten and people getting bitten.
    Now, I live in San Francisco CA. They have the same federal leash laws but law enforcement has to look the other way and not enforce them.(It is a long tradition here that has to do with money and politics) The dog owners unleash their dogs to “play” when they get to the un fenced park or beach areas. I see pit bulls running with Labrador retrievers, Mastiffs, pomeranians and mutts of all sizes. There are very few incidences of fighting or problems as the dogs play, run or roam. Many of the pitbulls, Mastiffs and Mutts are rescues and had a bad start in life. Then when they put the leashes on to take their dogs to leave, if the dogs are near each other the growling and agression starts. These were the same dogs that were loose a few minutes ago interacting well together.

  4. Kevin Behan says:

    Your question speaks directly to why an energy theory is so vital to understanding the canine mind. The difference between the incidence of aggression between a dog on/lead versus off/lead is due to the thermodynamic nature of emotion and the “locomotive rhythm” as the baseline for a state of emotional well being. When things aren’t moving fast enough (relative to the rotary gallop, the fastest form of locomotion), stress “(as emotional “heat”) is acquired, and then subsequently, stress will be triggered later when things aren’t moving fast enough. So dogs that are playing off/lead are having their locomotive rhythm satisfied, but then when they are restrained on a lead, the discrepancy between how much they are being stimulated versus how fast they are free to move triggers a stress memory that is then projected onto an object of resistance (such as another dog) so that they can vent toward it. These represent two different states of mind (flow versus friction) which is why a theory of learning by reinforcement is incomplete, and so is a personality theory ala the Dominance paradigm incomplete as well.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: