Positivism yields no surprises when ran through the P.A.S.F. filter. We have phenomenology, existentialism, naturalism, romanticism, postmodernism, literary realism, annals school, decadent movement, symbolism, post-structuralism, classicism, expressionism, and futurism. We are running this search, on these and many more philosophical “isms”. The results are available to any interested party. I am interested to see how these results change over time.
When you think of UP what and where in your mind do you picture? From what perspective? How about down? Easy right? What about back and front? Now it gets tricky, how about ascent and descent? It's intuitive, and correct, to think of ascent as moving upward, whereas descend is rolling downhill. This is the first point worth mentioning. Rather unanimously, descent is forward moving, and I like to intuit, similar to a Darwinian Descent of Man. The implications are easily envisioned with the sequential, cumulative and compounding building blocks of DNA. This is our descent, where evolution is a downward speech act. I shudder at the campaign of pluralistic partisanship where opinions of hell bound Darwinians are desperately climbing the hubs of hell and are treated as equal to the peer-reviewed, challenged, collective aggregate of our brightest minds.
The revolution for truth and reason is more fundamental. Anchored in the fabric of logic the progress is clearly in a positive trend in the direction of Science. Ascension, at this point, would be transcendent. If this sounds enlightened to you then I have just discovered your own bias. Metaphysics should be (and I don't use the word, "should" lightly), play only an ephemeral role to create information structures written in the same logic as fundamental to truth and reason.
Ideological thinking, mythology, and other such wastes of information structures are only useful if constructed in a venue of self-proclaimed fiction. I will concede that these ideas were progressive at some point in the past and that is worth acknowledging their importance, however ephemeral. Some will say there was no net or individual benefit, I don't think that argument is worth having, what would an answer tell us? Anytime an extremist position is defended, the situation is more of a performance. Instead, I like to share my opinions and perspectives with members of my community or in groups that share my academic interests.
No upward movements to monopolies of monotony. I want to play my part on the sidelines, supporting the descension of man and the marketing campaign it so desperately requires. I will do what I can, but these things have a way of working themselves out without group intervention, only with a little thought authorship. This is my first public step advocating for a marketing thought leadership and supporting a societal shift of values away from consumable and disposable garbage.
Thinkings isn't expensive. Living is. Economies are our new dictator and omnipresent archetype. Let's push for a shift in values away from consumerism and place a reward system around ideas, innovation and bettering communities. Not only would this be a life worth living, the world would be even more benevolent. The moral arc notches upward, or in this example, your bias will kick in again when we refer to the moral arc moving downward. Regardless of direction, the move is an improvement. It's not that it can't go the other way, it's just trending in a good way, despite our preconceptions to the contrary. Steven Pinker is a pioneering thinker in this area. I recommend The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined (2011), and Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress (2018). Both books are very "Enlightening".