DIVORCING GOD

(Click title above)

DIVORCING GOD

OF PHYSICS, MORALITY, AND GOD (IS AND OUGHT):

Compare http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081007/ap_on_re_eu/eu_sweden_nobel_physics;_ylt=Ao_XIYvhrdA_qqFQU5vwlXUUewgF: "Spontaneous broken symmetry conceals nature's order under an apparently jumbled surface. It has proved to be extremely useful, and Nambu's theories permeate the Standard Model of elementary particle physics."

“IS” --- PHASING REALITY:

To appreciate or perceive a particular or holographic pattern of “physics,” one’s expression of Will must become so attuned and sensitive as to be receptive to such appreciation or perception.

To will to attune to any perspective of patterns (or of holography) is to will, artificially, to insulate oneself apart from A Holism of Being, which necessarily renders any particular-based-perspective incomplete, as well as subject to instantaneous phase conversion upon each change of perspective or attunement.

In coming to experience a perspective, as one senses any single pattern or thing, one will, alternately, sense such thing (1) from a perspective of particularity and (2) from a perspective of holism.

One may sense or measure a thing (1) as being particularly emerged or expressed out of its environment, and one may sense such thing (2) as a sub-holism out of which other particular things are expressed (or cross-reacted with).

While one is focused and intent to appreciate a pattern from a perspective of particularity, one will be so defining oneself in such relation, so that one will not then and there be appreciating such pattern from a perspective of significantly greater holism, and vice versa.

Each perspective one experiences or chooses coordinates with an interpretation of reality, which collapses in a way consistent with reinforcing each such perception. Each such interpretation is “real” to one’s experience, but is not a complete model of The Reality exterior to one’s perspective.

Based on logic availed to our empiricism, a mortal perspective-of-reality may not, at the same time and place, accurately know or measure both (1) the particular reality of its perception and (2) the holistic reality that subsumes its perspective. In part, this is consistent in that, apart from at least the potential for an interpreting perspective of spiritual Will, there is NO SUCH PHYSICAL REALITY.

As one measures light as a particle, one will not be measuring it as a wave; and vice versa.

One cannot, with completely coherent consistency, measure a thing in simultaneous space (location) and time (direction of change), from both a perspective of particularity and from a perspective of greater holism.

One cannot, merely by continuously subdividing things, reach or comprehend an ultimate particle or a complete model for explicating everything.

Nevertheless, by practicing in attuning and measuring in respect of, and across, various perspectives and models, one may come to appreciate an ever-expanding and/or changing universe of ambiguities and possibilities.

Therewith, one may gain vision, insight, intuition, judgment, and skill. Therewith, one may artfully ever-engage in one’s choices and appreciation of Will.

For that, no single science or course of study will yield “the correct answer.” But, a variety of approaches may enhance one’s artistically skilled appreciation of paths for pursuing fulfillment.

“OUGHT” --- INSPIRING MORAL CHOICES WITHIN SOCIAL REALITY:

We have no way to make our interpretations or physical measurements “more perfect or complete,” merely by rationalizing arbitrary notions or blends of notions, such as notions of “part-wholes” or of “particle-waves.” Rather, it is beyond our mortal comprehension or mathematics to devise any synthesizing model that could yield a complete, coherent, consistent interpretation of physical reality.

Perhaps, however, we may enhance alternative, hyper, virtual ways of interpreting, which may lead us to experience different perspectives of holographies of our common holism. In any event, no one model and no blend of models avails a reliably complete interpretation of any non-trivial event.

Such problem of incompleteness pertains to every model or perspective we may choose, and is not confined only to our physical reality. Rather, such problem also permeates our intangible, conceptual, conscious reality. Such problem applies when we try to blend concepts of: psychology with sociology, or individual enterprise with community goals, or capitalism with socialism.

In considering a number of different models or perspectives, we may enhance our humility, insight, vision, intuition and emotional appreciation. In such way, we may better inspire choices, even though mere logic or math can never prove that any one choice was ultimately morally “better” than any other.

In relation to where our civilization is presently, “socialistic-capitalism” may be descriptive of what we have chosen --- consciously or unconsciously. Yet, no such concept of “socialistic-capitalism” will necessarily be a better or higher form --- either of socialism or of capitalism.

We are in a passing phase. Our appreciation of it may be enhanced were we to become more receptive to spiritual humility and intuition that avails from a variety of perspectives.

Make choices we must. One such choice may be to appreciate how no zealous notion of communism, socialism, or humanism can replace the enlightened empathy that can be received in common, spiritual, humility before “God.”

Whether we label our secular political philosophy as communism, socialism, capitalism, humanism, scientism, or as some blend thereof, what is most important to our humane, enlightened empathy is that we appreciate our spiritual interconnection, which devolves from a myriad of ambiguous possibilities of Will.

In single-minded prodigal-zeal, divorced from God-empathy, there lurks the blind evil that ever-challenges our forgiveness.

GOD: SOURCE-GAIA

None of even the most fundamental of broken symmetries and patterns of physics that we perceive exists, except in derivative respect of our Source of common receptivity and sensitivity to such patterns.

Intuitively, other universes, holographies, and fundamental patterns also exist, perhaps not in relation to our mortal capacity to perceive, but in relation to a Source of common capacity of other expressions of Will to perceive.

Whatever the commonality connecting all beings with capacity to perceive such patterns as are amenable of appearing to them, no physical pattern would exist were it not for the potential of beings, in some sense, to relate to them. As such transcendent Source of potential departs, diminishes, or devolves, so also does such physics depart, diminish, or devolve.

So, what is IT, which in common with all potential expressions of perspectives of Will, avails us with potential to perceive any manner or form of physics? Without IT, our seemingly infinite physics would devolve instantly to nothingness.

May we, as expressions of ITs Will, guided by common empathy, logic, and non-physical mathematics, in some direct way, in appreciation of, yet beyond appearance or sensation of physics, rationally hope to sense or intuit aspects of ITs interpenetrating presence, purpose, and priorities?

As we sense common consciousness in one another of patterns around us, may we also intuit, in enlightened empathy, a participating Author of such consciousness, beyond our common patterns of physics? Aside from some degree, however minute, of conscious respect for God, would not all of any particular universe, holography, or mortal perspective be perfectly trivial?