NON-FICTION BOOKS BY PAUL ADKIN

DISMANTLING THE PARADIGM

Dismantling the Paradigm cover

We are driving a juggernaut along a road which leads directly to a cliff edge. If we go straight, we will topple into an abyss. Obviously we cannot continue the way we are going. To avoid annihilation, we have one of two choices: we can either turn left toward a Utopia, or right into a Dystopia. It seems obvious which decision needs to be made. And yet … most of those on board are screaming to the driver to turn right. Why? Why would we choose a Dystopia before a Utopia?

I am proud to announce the publication of my book Dismantling the Paradigm after more than six years of preparation. The English version was ready to be published two years ago, but I have delayed its appearance until now in order for it to coincide with the presentation of the Spanish version. The fact that this deferral has brought the book out into this pandemic world, seems almost propitious: the Covid-19 crisis has stripped our already shabby and dangerous system, our capitalist paradigm, of its armour and left it looking bedraggled and feeble in its underclothes. The benevolent effects of a massive human lockdown and the dramatic reduction of our economic activity has shown us how quickly we can clean the polluted air of our cities and make the world a cleaner and ecologically safer place. A progressive, and revolutionary, sentiment of not returning to the old normal has emerged, which demands a radical rethinking of the voracious paradigm we have been immersed in for the last half-century. But the question still remains of how to step cleanly away from this system.  

Dismantling the Paradigm attacks this question head on, revealing the perverted nature of our now globally effective, WEIRD civilisation, with the premise that we can only change things if we can objectively understand what needs to be changed.

If the dawning post-pandemic era is not going to fall into the constraining negativism and wall-building, anti-human authoritarianism of the far-right, and for the future to be a positive step forward from the disaster of the global affliction, it is necessary that we comprehend the real nature of the system we are emerging from. Dismantling the Paradigm was contrived before Covid, but it has become even more imperative that it finds readers in order to imagine the world coming next.

 Dismantling the Paradigm is now available from the Amazon online store:

At Amazon.com: https://www.amazon.com/Paul-David-Adkin/e/B0082UK618

At Amazon.es: https://www.amazon.es/gp/product/B08B35QJ63/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i3

At Amazon.co.uk: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dismantling-Paradigm-Tracking-Pendulum-One-ebook/dp/B08B1X7GXJ/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=Dismantling+the+Paradigm&qid=1592128068&s=books&sr=1-2

Also available in Spanish …

en español …

DESMANTELANDO EL PARADIGMA

Me enorgullece anunciar la publicación de mi libro Desmantelando el paradigma después de más de seis años de preparación. La versión en inglés estaba lista para ser publicada hace dos años, pero he retrasado su aparición hasta ahora para que coincida con la presentación de la versión en español. El hecho de que este aplazamiento haya llevado al libro a este mundo pandémico parece casi propicio: la crisis del Covid-19 ha despojado al sistema de su armadura y a nuestro paradigma capitalista, que ya estaba peligrosamente en mal estado, lo ha dejado en ropa interior,  con un aspecto desaliñado y débil. Los efectos benévolos de un bloqueo humano masivo y la reducción dramática de nuestra actividad económica nos han demostrado cuán rápido podemos limpiar el aire contaminado de nuestras ciudades y hacer del mundo un lugar más limpio y ecológicamente más seguro. Ha surgido un sentimiento progresivo y revolucionario de no volver a la vieja normalidad, que exige un replanteamiento radical del paradigma voraz en el que hemos estado inmersos durante el último medio siglo. Pero aún queda la pregunta sobre cómo alejarse limpiamente de este sistema.

Desmantelando el Paradigma ataca esta pregunta de frente, revelando la naturaleza pervertida de nuestra civilización globalizada, con la premisa de que solo lograremos cambiar las cosas si podemos entender objetivamente lo que necesita ser cambiado.

Si queremos evitar que la era posterior a la pandemia no vaya a caer en el negativismo restrictivo y el autoritarismo antihumano de la extrema derecha, debemos conseguir que el futuro de un paso positivo hacia adelante. Desde las cenizas del desastre de la aflicción global es necesario que comprendamos la naturaleza real del sistema del que estamos emergiendo. Desmantelando el paradigma se ideó antes de la aparición del Covid, pero se ha vuelto aún más imperativo que encuentre lectores para imaginar el mundo que venga después.

 Desmantelando el paradigma ya está disponible en la tienda en línea de Amazon:

En Amazon.es: https://www.amazon.es/gp/product/B08B35QJ63/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i3

En Amazon.com: https://www.amazon.com/Paul-David-Adkin/e/B0082UK618

En Amazon.co.uk: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dismantling-Paradigm-Tracking-Pendulum-One-ebook/dp/B08B1X7GXJ/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=Dismantling+the+Paradigm&qid=1592128068&s=books&sr=1-2

Recent Posts

Inspiration and Being

In order to try and imagine and discuss the metaphysical first cause, or prime mover, Hegel used the term ‘Force’. He describes his force as that which can move the inanimate, or that which can either bring two parts together or separate them, or that which can bring about any change at all in the form or nature of something. Really he is just giving a name to that which had been usurped by the concept of God, and he was making an attempt to bring metaphysical thinking back to pre-Christian reasoning, but Hegel’s choice of the term ‘Force’, just as Nietzsche’s use of the word ‘Power’, become dangerous terms once metaphysical thinking inspires the political spheres as both terms transmit an unfortunate violence that we do not think was intended by either philosopher.

However, if we accept that sometime during the evolution of the cosmos the Universe became imbued with a purposeful teleological idea, a will toward the creation of a consciousness – and an intelligent consciousness – capable of understanding its own being, then this kind of telos cannot be imagined to have come about through any kind of force or power. It has to be born from the kind of energy that is geared to stimulate that knowledge of its own being. We know that such a thing exists, it is the same vitality that moves every creative human act, and we even have a name for it, we call it inspiration.  So, for our own metaphysical understanding of the first cause, we think Inspiration is a better choice of terms than force or power.

Inspiration is a more positive and more consciousness orientated concept. It is the means that brings something that is lacking into being via the awareness that such a lack exists. Awareness here could be defined as a conscious notion of the potential of something. And, if we can imagine this conscious notion of the potential of something, can there not also be an unconscious notion of the potential of something? In trying to imagine the prime cause this is fundamental, because in order to imagine the kind of inspiration that could create something from nothing or consciousness from non-consciousness, the potential for that consciousness has to exist in a non-conscious or subconscious form.

Embedded in the very concept of the laws of physics is the idea of unconscious notions for in an unconscious universe the fabric and form of that cosmos must have been built unconsciously, and yet the fact that there is so much harmony in nature must imply that there is an unconscious mechanism (like our own DNA) which has organised and is constantly reorganising things to evolve in a sustainable and meaningful way.

It is precisely because of this apparently rational organisation of the Universe that the need for God arose, because the idea of an unconscious cosmos organising itself in the harmonious way that it has seems irrational. But God itself is equally irrational, condemned by the vicious circle of the chicken and the egg, and does nothing much but distract us from the crux of the problem by offering an easy but rationally flawed solution to the conundrum.  

To maintain the idea of the Creator, we could imagine our universe being the successful result of a laboratory experiment carried out at a greater dimension of reality by one or a group of scientists in that greater reality. Traditionally God is thought of as being omnipotent and omnipresent, but this is unnecessary from the perspective of metaphysics. Metaphysically we only need a creator or creative mechanism to produce the universe, but if we are really serious and truly looking for a reason for the First Cause of everything, then we need something else than a Creator, something much simpler.  All that is needed is a notion, the first unconscious notion that inspired the first change from nothing into something, producing the first particle point which is itself infused with a capability of being inspired by that which it lacks, which is a multiplicity beyond its singularity, and this creates an enormous multitude of particle points which themselves are all imbued with the notion of what they all lack – which is a purposeful meaningful Being.

So, in a non-space (in this imagined pre-universe space has not been created yet) full of non-dimensional parts, the same inspiration brings them, now an almost infinite number of them, back together through a unifying will to gain together what they all lack. Compressed, the inspiration that pulls them all together creates an immensely compact point of energy until has to explode – the Big Bang.

Everything from then on is inflationary, but inspired by the singular notion to obtain what it most absolutely lacks – the purpose of this Universe is to obtain the meaningfulness of purposeful Being.

But the great metaphysical question is still unanswered. How can an inspiration come from nothing? Again, we are thrown back into the unresolvable conundrum of cause and effect – it seems we need a Creator, but the Creator also needs a Creator.

However, the idea of particles arising out of nothing is a perfectly acceptable concept from the point of view of quantum mechanics, and once we take the reality of quantum fluctuations into consideration quantum mechanics tells us that the only possible way to understand the Universe is that in the beginning there was empty space (space as a void is eternal), and that into that empty space emerged a tiny something. And from a philosophical point of view, through reason, it seems the most logical way of understanding what that something would be, would be to imagine it as the simplest kind of something that our intelligence can conceive. Or, even better still, the most basic kind of something existing today in the Universe – and in this way metaphysics becomes inextricably linked to the quantum theories and revelations of physics.

Using philosophical rationalisation, we can now propose that lack itself could be seen as an inciting force behind this primordial quantum process. Lack inspires. It is therefore an active force. Perhaps it is even capable of activating nothingness – after all, the inspiring force generated by lack will be more potent when there is nothing, for what the void lacks is everything.

Of course, this kind of reasoning is also flawed: in the void there is, logically, also a lack of lack. And even if there were a notion of lack, there is nothing for that lack to act upon. Lack, for example, cannot force nothing to become something. In order for something to emerge out of empty space there needs to be some very subtle, energy flows within that emptiness, what quantum physicists call quantum fluctuations or vacuum state fluctuations, and ‘which are a temporary random change in the amount of energy in a point in space’[i]. Speculating philosophically then, we propose that these fluctuations are inspired by an absolutely unconscious sense of what is lacking (which from the point of view of the void is Being). In this way lack inspires something, the most necessary thing in its simplest form, out of nothing.[ii] It defies the logic of cause and effect only because we do not know the true first law of cause and effect. Mathematically, a first law must be expressed something like 0 ≡ 1 when 0 is absolute. Philosophically, this 0 ≡ 1 means Nothingness MUST BE the notion of Being, and the sequential result of this could be expressed as:

0 ≡ 1; 1 ≡ 2; 2 ≡ 3 … ∞ ≡ BEING

Being therefore, is that which is always Becoming, and it is driven by the imperative of Necessity. Natural laws will also evolve in the process of Becoming in order to ensure that the potential for Absolute Being in the Universe is always being intensified. The Universe, it could be said, operates in a future continuous way, inspired by the purpose of ‘we are going to make absolute Being.’ Laws then are determined by the necessity of becoming Being.

This imperative also makes absolute nothingness impossible, and this impossibility may be the only way to conceive of the Universe being possible.


[i] Pahlavani, Mohammad Reza (2015). Selected Topics in Applications of Quantum Mechanics. BoD. p. 118. ISBN 9789535121268.

[ii] Another way to look at the primordial, pre-inflationary universe would be to imagine it as a conditional universe. In the beginning there was Either nothing Or something. However, conditionality would be too chaotic to have formed natural laws. To have natural laws there needs to be a simple imperative factor that creates a tendency to evolve towards more complex versions of the same factor (to develop in an evolutionary way).

  1. Necessity and the Noumenon Leave a reply
  2. The One Thing we must do for the Climate Leave a reply
  3. Hegel’s Force and the Human Problem Now Leave a reply
  4. Reality and Truth Leave a reply
  5. Notes on Absurdity Leave a reply
  6. On Identity Leave a reply
  7. The Logically Necessitate 2 Replies
  8. Freudian Macro-psychology Leave a reply
  9. The Economy Leave a reply