reasonvemotion wrote:Learn to know thyself! He who has understood himself has understood God
(The Prophet Muhammad ) from the Quran.
The essence of any religion lies solely in the answer to the question: why do I exist, and what is my relationship to the infinite universe that surrounds me? ... It is impossible for there to be a person with no religion (i.e. without any kind of relationship to the world) as it is for there to be a person without a heart. He may not know that he has a religion, just as a person may not know that he has a heart, but it is no more possible for a person to exist without a religion than without a heart.
(Leo Tolstoy, 1879)
For God is thought to be among the causes for all things and to be a kind of principle ... (Aristotle)
Except God no substance can be granted or conceived. ... Hence it distinctly follows that God is one alone, ... in the nature of things only one substance can be granted, and that is absolutely infinite. ... extended substance is one of the infinite attributes of God ... God and all the attributes of God are eternal. (Spinoza, 1673)
Nature is none other than God in things... Animals and plants are living effects of Nature; Whence all of God is in all things. ... All things are in the Universe, and the universe is in all things: we in it, and it in us; in this way everything concurs in a perfect unity. ... Before anything else the One must exist eternally; from his power derives everything that always is or will ever be. (Giordano Bruno, 1585)
God alone is the primary Unity, or original simple substance, from which all monads, created and derived, are produced. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670)
When forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one sentence: Time and space and gravitation have no separate existence from matter. ...
Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept 'empty space' loses its meaning. (Albert Einstein)
"A careful analysis of the process of observation in atomic physics has shown that the subatomic particles have no meaning as isolated entities, but can only be understood as interconnections between the preparation of an experiment and the subsequent measurement. Quantum theory thus reveals a basic oneness of the universe. It shows that we cannot decompose the world into independently existing smallest units. As we penetrate into matter, nature does not show us any isolated ‘basic building blocks’, but rather appears as a complicated web of relations between the various parts of the whole." (Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics, On Quantum Theory)
Most of the quotes are from Judeo-Christians, my dear.
The last only states that there is no God, no absolute, but only a process. "Relationships" are (inter)actions.
The quote I offered states that all thinking, or most of it, is now infected with Platonism....the way the mind thinks now evidence of reality outside its thinking.
There is no
thing, and all the linguistic terms that imply the underlying premise of a static absolute, if taken literally, lead to the disaster of morons replacing words for reality.
there are only processes that exhibit patterns. these patterns are not eternal for they too are fragmenting, changing, and so reality is in constant
Flux.
But these patterns, in relation to human lifespans, do exhibit a consistency within temporal/spatial parameters that make life and consciousness possible.
Here are some examples of such terms:
thing, here, now, order, one, god, whole etc.
These are human abstractions:simplifications/generalizations of a fluid world into static models.
These are constructed by cutting away the phenomenon, from the world, this is what simplification means. This selective cutting away fabricates ambiguous boundaries so as to enable the conceptualization of the phenomenon as a thing. It is how consciousness works and should not be mistaken for the world it is trying to make sense of.
When I say "tree" I am using a symbol to define a process which cannot be defined by a static term. The real tree is changing, so by the time you say "tree" you are talking about a variant of the original you became aware of.
All language is a symbolization of mental abstractions...with math being the highest form of this.
Math is based on binary logic...1 (thing) and its negation 0 (no-thing)...this is dualism. In fact reality is the fluctuating in-between the two absolutes. The concepts of 1-0 are boundaries symbols to construct a mental grid so as to direct the Will. It is a method.
1+1=2 is logical only if you accept the starting premises as a given: 1/0.
Within this presumption does the logic of mathematics hold true. Outside of it it leads to paradoxes and to failure if taken literally and not as figurative methods.
There is no 1 or 0 outside human constructs...and so all human constructs based no it must be repaired, maintained...they are not eternal for the binary logic they are based no is a method freezing a fluid reality.
To take either as real outside human abstractions is an error.
There is no 1 and no 0 outside the human brain that requires them so as to make sense of the world.
This is why when man takes these terms literally he falls into paradoxes: infinite-divisibility being one of them.
Paradoxes are entirely the result of taking words, symbolizing mental abstractions, as anything but artistic forms of conceptualizing reality by freezing it into static forms.
It is like painting a tree and then mistakenly considering your painting as the actual phenomenon. A phenomenon is constantly changing, (inter)acting, and so it is never the same...it is not a static thing but a dynamic process.
Phenomenon means: that which appears. That which appears is appearance through and through.
I (inter)act with it via an intervening medium. My sense organ (eye) interacts with light which has (inter)acted with the phenomenon which has already changed by the time I process the information and abstract them and construct a mental model.
The term "whole" is also a human construct as it implies a border, an outline, an outside/inside...and a completion.
It places a temporal/spatial border around a world that has none.
It offers a fantastic conception of "all" from a vantage point beyond it; as if you were a God existing in non-existence surveying reality totally (omniscience).
It is a fantastic projection of the mind outside its own abstractions.
There is no outside existence, for this is a mistake based on human binary logic.
It also represents a contradiction to experience.
There is no
wholeness and no
oneness outside the human brain that must conceptualize in absolutes.
It is the brain which is an ordering tool. In a world of increasing chaos, the mind (re)acts by ordering. this is what makes the male spirit valuable.
Masculinity represents an ordering principle:
ORDER (Apollo).
Feminine represents an abandonment to the status quo, the increasing chaos...it is at heart conservative, though in modern times it has been defined as progressive.
One need not preserve change, sweetie, for it happens naturally (nature always anthropomorphized as feminine); one need only preserve order, non-change (static). This is the revolutionary method of towards order...towards absolute order represented by a masculine Deity.
We must take care not to misconstrue man's method of conceptualizing for the reality being conceptualized.
This is counter-intuitive because it questions man's methods of intuiting.
This is what Plato meant by using man's natural proclivities to offer him dualistic good/bag models so as to enable the existence of a stable city-state.
We see here how with nihilism the concepts have been turned on their heads.
Those proposing the abandonment to the status quo, to chaos, to change, are called "progressive" when they are conservatives. they wish to conserve what is occurring with no effort: the ongoing fragmentation.
They project this as a towards absolute emptiness, a total immersion in the Buddhist void where they imagine it as a return to the "source".
This is what I call "positive" nihilism. A self-denying, world-denouncing, psychology which imagines the end result as a merging with a "higher" consciousness or a "higher" state of Being.
Here fragmentation leads to a
Higher Order...a contradiction. Total uniformity is imagined as a relief from the constant turmoil (inter)activity, and uncertainty and suffering of existence.
Death as a relief from life.
The sensation of need/suffering, is, in fact, the sensation of (inter)acting, in other words of existing.
Those promoting the fantasy of an end to suffering are really promoting an end to life...for instead of strengthening themselves to endure (inter)activity they hope for a total absolution.
Suffering being a need reaching an intolerable level.
Cosmology is also based on binary logic:
The
Big Bang is the closest point to an absolute, singularity...it always lies in the past.
When we speak of the past we speak of a more ordered state; when we speak of the future we speak of a less ordered state.
It, the past, is immutable because the past cannot be intervened upon; it is determining because the present is a manifestation of the past....ergo we get the conceptualization of an immutable, creator, God.
The Big Bang is a scientific conception of a Deity or of Masculine nihilism. For here too if the approach to the absolute order is completed then all existence ceases...therefore the Big Bang is not a singular event, but an ongoing process, receding into the temporal-spatial distance.
On the other end of this dualistic model we have increasing chaos, fragmentation. Chaos is a term denoting a state where the mind cannot find patterns within:
randomness.
In an absolute form randomness would make life impossible and consciousness even more so impossible, for there would be no pattern (genes are an encoded pattern created in and reflecting the past).
Chaos requires no energy, no effort to come about...it happens.
I will not get into how or why at this point.
It is only ordering (thinking, acting, knowing, living) which requires effort.
Ergo the feminine ideal of chaos, of embracing change, is a nihilistic one. This is feminine nihilism.
Masculine Nihilism: absolute, complete Order = God.
Feminine Nihilism: absolute, complete, Disorder = Emptiness/Void.
The feminine is attracted to order, and order wants to impose itself upon disorder.
The feminine is attracted to order as an ideal....the masculine is attracted to the feminine as a possibility.
Here we get the basic sexual dichotomies.
In the case of chaos the feminine surrenders to the most stronger tendency, for no matter how much order resists entropy is always increasing.
The feminine is only attracted to another power if it promises, inspires, her...Apollo's appeal is always illusionary and temporary.
This is why sexual attraction is always based on a hyperbole and a lie.
A male exaggerates his power; a female eventually becomes disillusioned with him and laughs at his drive toward power -
Will to Power.
If there is no evidence of a
one, a
whole, anywhere in nature then to assume it as the foundation of it all is the same as the concept of "god".
You might find that the absence of a particle only contradicts oneness. Even the theoretical model of
String-Theory uses a "string" which vibrates...but there is no string, there is only vibration. If we take away the vibration there is no-thing.
There are even models where there are multiverses, cosmological membranes interacting, and not a uni-verse.
The concept of a uni-verse a whole is a human projection.
I am a
bottom>up thinker not a
top>down thinker.
I do not begin with a construct and then try to justify it with the given. I start with the given and I try to work upwards.
Of course ignorance is always present as nothing is ever absolute and so awareness is never complete.
Like Wittgenstein I try not to pass over in silence what is nonsensical. But from a sociological point of view I am forced to study myths and socially popular lies.
The top>down thinking offers a comforting delusion: it begins with a certainty and then works backwards. Such minds already know, they are already aware, and must only discover what they know and what they are aware of. They have the solution but must work through a rational way of getting there. They always fail, because they presume, they are presumptuous, and so they resort to lies and to selective reasoning and schizophrenic mind-sets. There is no harmony in their mind, no order, no symmetry in their thinking because this would expose their errors. Their goal is already given and it is comforting and decided...a self-serving projection.
This might be considered dangerous knowledge for not all can bear it.
Tolstoy's assertion only proves that man must have an ideal...but no two ideals are the same nor do they result in the same type of man.
An Ideal is another term for the perfect, the absolute, the one, the God.
It guides it cannot, and should not, be attained.
The ideal inspires, and it identifies those that strive towards it.
