Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [existlist] the truth is not complicated

Expand Messages
  • chris lofting
    ... ... We are an energy conserving species where such is essential for living in a thermodynamic universe. This energy conservation sets down a focus
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 26, 2009
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nr_rajkumar
      > Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2009 4:19 PM
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [existlist] the truth is not complicated
      >
      <snip>
      >  
      > The paradoxes and contradictions that you wan me to  in
      > specific, are, I think
      >  
      > a) the vanishing past which obliterates and negates all
      > previous encounters and experiences and reducing it to mere
      > memory which also gets obliterated in time

      We are an energy conserving species where such is essential for living in a
      thermodynamic universe. This energy conservation sets down a focus on
      symmetry and the aggregation of the ESSENTIALS of experiences to form
      instincts/habits where they too reflect energy conservation. As such we take
      difference, extract what we consider essentials and forms sameness but at a
      GENERAL level (more energy conserving). Thus the realm of symmetry and of
      memories/instincts/habits takes on objective qualities as a source of
      'laws', social filters, determinism etc. - all enabling energy conservation.

      The focus on symmetry means that memories are in the form of emotional highs
      and lows as well as date/time stamps. Some favour emotional sorting and so
      lose their sense of time in that temporality is measured through emotional
      highs and lows - the middle is often forgotten - and date/time stamps can be
      marginalised for being 'out of order'.

      Others sort by date/time stamp and so favour a more sequenced emphasis.

      I recall ONE example of someone able to remember all of their past in detail
      - this skill reflective of a neurological anomaly. Others are doing research
      in destroying memories - especially those elicited when experiencing trauma.

      > b) the future that is ever unborn

      ;-) this suggests you sort things by emotional highs and lows rather than
      date/time stamps! ;-) A focus on magnitudes over sequencing, cardinality
      over ordinality, can elicit a sense of something not being 'right' in NOT
      experiencing all that was/is/will-be NOW. The ability to sort different
      date/times into emotional orderings will naturally mix up the sequencing and
      so marginalise the rigidity of the order and so open up considerations of
      the need for such an order!

      Some people get attracted to quantum mechanics for this reason in that QM is
      grounded in SYMMETRY and symmetry lacks a sense of DIRECTION such that the
      experiences of past/present/future are sensed as if interchangeable. Gets
      into the focus on emotions, metaphor creation, interchangability of
      metaphors, post-modernism ('any metaphor will do'). The perceptual errors
      in QM are grounded in using a symmetric perspective upon an asymmetric
      universe (hot to cold, hot to cold ;-) and confusing the properties of our
      methodology used in filtering reality with reality.

      The idealism of past physics etc, the hubris involved in being able to map
      all back in time to the 'big bang' has been shattered by discoveries of
      IMPLICIT, non observable, properties of the universe indicating we see but
      6% of that universe!

      > c) the present that endows one with extremely limited and
      > short term/shortsighted knowledge, restrictive/oppressive/(at
      > times) harsh conditions and a very wide range of choice of
      > possibilities/outcomes without any cue or clues

      The clues are in the structure of the unconscious and its seeding of
      consciousness - the whole we experience consciously is NOT the same as the
      whole we experience unconsciously (see refs etc in
      http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/wavedicho.html ) and so better
      knowledge of the unconscious can aid in understanding/dealing-with the
      moment.

      There is PURPOSE in a lot of what we perceive but it is hidden, unconscious,
      vague and so in need of specialist tools for us to 'see' such. Given the
      purpose where it is vague, operating at a collective level, so we as
      singular beings can CHOOSE what we wish to do (a) go with the flow,(b) fight
      it by asserting one's own or (c) moving on. There is competitiveness present
      of course - all of those other singular beings doing the same thing! ;-)

      > f)  the problem of not being/knowing what/where, why what for and how?

      Too energy expending. Pragmatism covers extracting of essentials,
      recognising the 'differences that make a difference'. Experience then
      refines such as we develop discernment - aging leads to quality control and
      maturity.

      Differentiating covers what/who/which. Integrating covers where/when/how.

      Hierarchy is present in the dynamics of WHY/HOW - the WHY moves up, the HOW
      moves down.

      > d) difficulties in carrying the self through routine and
      > mundane and multitudinous chores amidst
      > restrictive/oppressive  existential self conditioning and
      > waxing and waning interest cycles.

      ;-) sound like bi-polar to me! - LOL, I am teasing.

      An intellect out of its context can have such issues; but the challenge
      then is to get the context to conform through identification of different
      ways to do things and so conserve energy; what can be done in parallel as
      compared to in serial? What variations exist and if not why not? Ask enough
      questions and either you introduce more efficiency or else you are invited
      to 'move on' to 'higher' things!

      > g) How to navigate between the hold of tradition and the call
      > of modernity

      ;-) hexagram 26 of the I Ching covers exactly this point - quality control
      in a context of modern developments; high mediation dynamics. We can hold
      firm to the past as a GUIDE in setting an infrastructure to deal with change
      BUT we do not let the past LEAD since being the past it is not 'changing'
      when change IS required, or else at least openness to deal with it.

      A metaphysics mindset can be frozen in these conditions due to its lack of
      understanding of, acceptance of, change and the dialectical. That said one
      CAN translate metaphysical concepts into dialectical ones through
      understanding how meaning is derived. Thus the concepts of wholeness,
      partness, static relatedness, dynamic relatedness can be translated to
      dynamics of producing-distributing-filtering-exchanging.

      Filtering is the most energy conserving, exchanging the most energy
      expending. There are in fact eight qualities at work here and the order of
      structure is different to the order of process but the SAME generic
      categories serve both perspectives.

      If one takes a metaphysical perspective and reflects metaphysically on this
      then one can get stuck in a loop. The same for taking a dialectical
      perspective and reflect dialectically! the process is more on applying
      dialectics to metaphysics and metaphysics to dialectics - we oscillate
      across the metaphysics/dialectics dichotomy and in doing so extract means
      that mix the qualities and get a better 'fit' upon reality and so diversity
      in choices in dealing with reality (real or imagined!)

      > h) Why humanity as a species cannot come together act in
      > unison one to resolve major conflicts and contradictions 
      > about God and religion, governance, jurisdiction, social
      > imbalances, poverty, finance, science & technology, ethics
      > and code of conduct - we know what we inherited a legacy and
      > what we will be leaving behind one for posterity - where is
      > all our efforts going as addition to the value chain
      >  

      The most successful method of resolving issues is through argument and that
      is COMPETITIVE (thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis - although I prefer the
      recursion of:

      Representation = mediation (stimulus, response) first time through and then
      Representation = mediation(representation) ad infinitum if you like!

      . The innovations of war reflect the creative aspect of this high energy
      focus but also bring out the borderline psychosis of such a position. Our
      brains will NATURALLY resolve paradoxes by oscillations and it seeks out a
      category that 'best fits' as a solution to the problem. The realm of LOCAL
      context and positive feedback favour emergence and so self-organising
      systems. If we put too much positive feedback into it we get a runaway
      system (amplification of the amplified!) so some negative feedback helps
      keep things grounded but the overall creativity in this realm is noted. THEN
      come normative issues on the 'value' of those creations - an increase in
      differentiations and so distinction-making can increase subjectivities and
      so a lot of 'stuff' can appear and be presented 'as if' 'value', as if
      aesthetically 'pleasing'. - This also gets into issues of the languages of
      generations where, if allowed, each generation would derive their own Creole
      style language and so be 'free' of the previous generation(s)!
      Education-for-socialisation tries to stop this.

      Another issue is in the emergence of LABELS to describe reality in that they
      can be taken literally rather than figuratively. This gets into the biblical
      story of the tower of Babel where once we all spoke the 'one' language and
      then we switched to 'many' languages - and with that the focus is on
      mediation and so we are back to argument!

      As a species member so all effort goes towards the species. The relational
      dynamics of our social being ensures such - even the most anti-social
      contributes by being anti-social and so eliciting responses across others to
      over-socialise!

      For the development of a more cooperative dynamic it is better to accept the
      argument focus and refine such skills rather than let primitive instincts
      dominate - and THAT requires education on the SAMENESS of us all as species
      members - we sell the mechanical, the descriptive BEFORE the organic, the
      normative. Subjectivity naturally emerges from objectivity and putting the
      normative before the descriptive, or making it appear AS IF descriptive is
      an issue - history well covering these sorts of issues.

      Chris
      http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/AbstractDomain.html
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.