It is not too much to say that in the extreme development the chance to reason of most men is destroyed, as rationality increases and its locus, its control, is moved from the individual to the big-scale organization.
Living systems are units of interactions; they exist in an ambience. From a purely biological point of view they cannot be understood independently of that part of the ambience with which they interact: the niche; nor can the niche be defined independently of the living system that specifies it.
Beyond all explanations which a good brain can give, why do we choose the worse and not the better, why hate rather than love, why greed and not generosity, why self-centred activity and not open total action? Why be mean when there are soaring mountains and flashing streams? Why jealousy and not love? Why?
The major problems in the world are the result of the difference between how nature works and the way people think. The dynamics of the natural world are complex, interconnected, and often nonlinear, while human thought and understanding tend to be linear and fragmented. This mismatch leads to misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and unintended consequences, giving rise to many of the significant challenges we face. In this context, it becomes evident that psychic processes, including consciousness, thoughts, emotions, feelings, and motivations, are deeply conditioned by the fundamental principles of nature and biological processes. Our ways of thinking and perceiving are inherently influenced by the intricate web of life and the physical world around us. Therefore, to truly understand the nature of our psychic processes, we must recognize and appreciate the profound impact of the natural world on the human mind.
Thirty years ago, we used to ask: Can a computer simulate all processes of logic? The answer was yes, but the question was surely wrong. We should have asked: Can logic simulate all sequences of cause and effect? And the answer would have been no.
Up till now [the development of proto-consciousness], we can suppose, nervous systems solved the "Now what do I do?" problem by a relatively simple balancing act between a strictly limited repertoire of actions — if not the famous four F's (fight, flee, feed, or mate), then a modest elaboration of them.
It is the 'zoomorphic' or 'rattomorphic' fallacy - the expressed or implicit contention that there is no essential difference between rat and man - which makes American psychology so profoundly disturbing.
