The Salmon's Revolt Against a Mechanical World
Peter de Ceuster
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) November 3, 2026 preprint DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23931659 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that modern civilization's explanatory and technical powers leave it poorly equipped to describe the felt reality of belonging, and proposes that reading distinct traditions—Plato, Australian First Nations Country teachings, Egyptian, Indian, Persian, Tibetan, and Daoist thought—beside one another opens a conversation about appearance and depth, individuality and unity, mortality and renewal, and attention and freedom. It holds open, rather than resolves, the tension between the metaphysical hypothesis that the brain receives or filters consciousness and evidence that conscious life depends closely on brain activity. |
Abstract
Modern civilization has inherited extraordinary powers of explanation and control, yet itoften struggles to describe the felt reality of belonging: the experience that a human being isnot merely an isolated observer moving through a passive world, but a participant in a livingweb of relations. At its centre lies an older and still urgent question. The journey begins with themind–body distinction and the mechanistic picture associated with René Descartes, then turnstoward Plato’s Forms, selected Australian First Nations teachings about Country and ancestralcreation, the cycles of ancient Egypt, Indian reflections on the self and the senses, Persian ideasof moral and inward order, Tibetan contemplative practice, and the equilibrium of Daoist thought.These traditions are distinct, and their differences are part of their richness. Read beside oneanother, they nevertheless open a conversation about appearance and depth, individuality andunity, mortality and renewal, attention and freedom.Two images guide the journey. The basket and the balloon suggest that the visible body maynot exhaust the mystery of consciousness; the beads and the necklace suggest that individualityneed not mean isolation. Neither image is a scientific demonstration. The possibility thatthe brain receives or filters consciousness rather than producing it remains a metaphysicalhypothesis, while the close dependence of ordinary conscious life upon brain activity is firmlysupported by contemporary evidence. The essay holds that tension open rather than pretendingit has been settled.From this metaphysical horizon, the discussion moves into the life we make together: theeducation of children, the centrality of care, the equal dignity of women and men, the moralfailure of war, the habits that shape the psyche, and the power of focused intention. Its finalimage is the salmon, turning upstream against the current: not an escape from the world, but arefusal to drift passively away from the sources of life, meaning, and responsibility.