“All things began in order; so shall they end and so shall they begin again; according to the Ordainer of Order” – Thomas Browne.

The root of the concept of change lies in the regulatory mechanism of creation, whereby things and systems that become decrepit, effete and unbalanced, run into disintegration and subsequent regeneration and a new embodiment. It is, therefore, a cheering development that a political party has taken on the gauntlet for a change as an ideology for transformation rather than rhetorical purposes.
The true concept and mechanism of change go beyond politics and what any group can bring about without submitting to the underlying law of change. Does such a law not exist? Thermodynamics?
The process or phenomenon of change can be seen visibly in the activities of nature and in the life-cycles of biological species. But change is more than a physical phenomenon, hence there is what is called Encephalocodal Law which stipulates that change as a development process begins in the brain.
There is also a Proximodal Law which, in current political slogan, stipulates that “change begins with me”, being the most immediate proximity of social life.
Biologically, the human cells as the first unit of organism, regenerate and change, such that in every seven years, there is a cycle of complete change or replacement of the cells. Within the human system, there is a conscious or guided programming, whereby physical development is not an accidental process. There are regulating forces beyond physical matter!
From the musical octave, the arrangement of the household of Nature, we find the ‘Order of Sevens’ as a regular pattern or cycle of life. What we call melody and harmony in music result only from an orderly combination and coordination of sound waves from various musical instruments.
The cycles of human life are also arranged in such definite pattern of progression so that harmony and melody can arise, but human volition can bring some distortion into the order of arrangement. A growing child does not run before it has learned to walk, neither must a child continue to suck breast at the age seven.
Normal life-cycles of humans are arranged in segments of seven years and in three phases of youths, middle and old age. At the age of 21, anyone is deemed to be old enough to vote and to be voted for, but common sense would demand more years of personal experiences before taking on vital responsibilities. It remains true that “they stumble that run fast” and so, change goes with maturing and experiencing.
One of the purposes of the cycles of human life is to ensure that progression and change are arranged in systematic order without leaving or creating gaps and distortions that would need to be revisited or rectified later.
Any serious discussion about change would not fail to take into account the fact that new forms usually emerge from the old according to the species. This concept of change is contained in the cliché of “garbage in, garbage out”, since no one can sow yam and then harvest cassava or anything else.
This leads to another vital issue in the concept of change, namely: a law that you reap what you sow, which no artificial change can obliterate. That law is known by many names, but the vital issue is that there is a carry-over effect whereby the seeds of past deeds are encoded in the genes of the new form which physical change cannot obliterate. This spill-over or re-cycling mechanism which some people call “karma” can only be obliterated or changed through a transformation of the individual and an adequate compensation for the imbalances caused before. We really can’t cheat!
Therefore, the process and mechanism of change can be in two dimensions, namely: outwardly and inwardly of which the outward one would merely change the form without changing the content. The difference between form and content is what defines and determines the value, meaning and context of change. An old wine in a new bottle would be the same wine even if it bears a new name or label.
The irony of the change process is that there is a higher mechanism than what humans put in place which determines the final outcome of a real change. Humans, individually and collectively, are given several opportunities to tinker with changes for their own good such that only those on clear standing stand the chance of salvation when the mechanism of the change process culminates into a final judgment. There is evidence that humanity is facing such large-scale change currently. Human tinkering plays little role here.
Dr. Amirize is a retired lecturer, Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.

Bright Amirize