Change, transformation, uncertainty. With the help of more and more elaborated systems of securing, saftey, insurances we try to provide ourselves with protection against all upcoming eventualities. However, they are not able to prevent us from the disappointment that also human beings in their existence are subject to evolutionary principles. The illusions of seeming security do not protect from those underground-fears that seismographically refer to a total determination of planning being an almost touchingly backwarded thought.

Experience shows that almost never in life one cherished system of order gently and without any friction develops into another. Generally a transition phase of more or less virulent disorder is installed in between two states of order.

However, only the chaos, considered as disagreeable or even threatening, often contains the chance for a new structure. The agreement for a negative evaluation of chaos however drives us to miss the special quality of this phenomenon, which offers us a chance to have displayed all the components of a coherence isolated and singularly, or in new terrific combinations, we have not seen before. There is a good opportunity to recognize qualities even by their loss or even in retrospect, to screen valuations, take into consideration the up to now hidden, to finally move on directed by a new cleared up sight – or put on the old shoes again.

It might be still possible that chaos is not such genuinely disordered condition, but only a larger patttern integrated in much more extensive structure, which in its dimension only now is still hidden to human perception, may it be on the private sphere or thought on an intergallactic level.

It is worth even considering chaos as a basic condition for creativity at all. Russian Anarchist Michail Bakunin already a hundred years ago had referred to the interrelation between destruction and creativity. Where everything is in place, there is no need for creativity. It will only receive its impulse as soon a there is a search for new possibilites and solutions. And this would happen – we know it from our biografies – often triggered by more pain- than joyful incentives.As long as we feel secure in familiar, or even outdated structures we wont change anything.

The term of catastrophe is used, as soon as the chaos – from an anthropocentric point of view – has passed the invisible floating border of a still bearable degree, even becomes life-threatening or in worst case leads to extinction. Beyond personal biografies we observe nature, the show down and collapse of political systems, a disintegrating structure of the world.

An examination of the interdependencies of valuations in terms of the point of view taken by the observer, seems inevitable. Would not be many natural catastrophes considered from the focus of animals or plants be rather seen as cathartic cleaning processes of a clearing character, bringing rather relieve and release.

Who actually determins & defines the scale and dimensions to consider creatures or materials as „qualified for catastrophe“? Possibly the arrogance of size, the absolut claim for the human scale to be the measure for everything frequently influences those determinations?

Could it be worth to lay the „crown of creation“ aside for a while to explore possibilities of a less hierarchic setup „whole“?

Is anthropocentrism still actually future proof?

Uncomfortable utopias?

At any rate even if we don´t take into account to reach any of them within a personal life span – they help keeping up with the phenomenon of motion, they keep us busy.

Don`t we anyhow face the threat of a completely different set up organisation of the globe, if we continue following our directions collectively too unreflected and without considerable correction?

Will the louse in the coat of the global surface become a threatened species itself sometime?

Without question natural catastrophes increase in their number as a reaction on human behaviour of dominance. Even on the level of man-made order of the world, the relation of societies, a lot of occurences point to a coming explosion of dissatisfaction that can not be dammed up any longer. Also the dimensions of some species of catastrophes seem to increase, no longer only punctually but in approach of the ball-shape globe.

We act globally, and still think in our short-sighted mental frontyards.

Presumably chaos will become more and more a factor of our all-day lives, possibly reaching up to now unknowm dimensions. So let us make friends with chaos in time and try to decode it and its messages.

Catastrophe carries an enormous potential for research once it is accepted as a learning field – beyond all necessary emergency reactions. And this not only in the sense of its future avoidance.

Here the Catastrophe Research Institute takes action. An interrogation, even consultation of catastrophes is its main challenge.

Test-situations, carefully directed provocative catastrophes in homeopathic doses are proofed here as one possible medium of gaining recognition, of counter-current and healing.

The prevention of the respectively next catastrophe is a matter of our concern.

Sleeping potentials of vision-capable powers will be set in motion.

The institute itself acts in the sense of preliminary tidying up its still messed up thoughts and questions – up to the next catastrophe-impact.

We are firmly counting with chaos.

Curiosity is our fuel.

We laugh a lot.

Juliane Stiegele, Catastrophe Institute, August 2005.