See http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/a_provisional_anatomy_of_truth_comments.html#disqus_thread.
.
In bivalent derivation from the trivalent logic of the cosmos, either reconciling values abide relative to consciousness, or they don't. If reconciling values do not abide, one cannot very well complain of sociopaths ... which, of course, is consistent with what sociopaths believe. If values tending towards empathetic reconciliation do abide, then most of religion consists in analogizing the Source of such values as something human-like, or empathetically conscious. It's sort of like conceptionalizing that the aboriginal Source of unfolding evolutionary purposefulness is not "the selfish gene," but iterations of A fulfillment-pursuing and empathetically-charged Consciousness, expressing itself in meta-logic of trivalent (Y-N-I) avatars for synchronously signifying fluxing cones for selecting, experiencing, and recording attractions (Yes), dis-attractions (No), and indifference (I) (aka, YSDI --- not gene-in-itself (an absurdity), but particular Iteration in dance of reconciliation with expressing Field).
.
The logic of evolution of charged spins and double helix DNA isn't "best" conceptualized as bivalent, true-false, natural selection of "the fittest" (trivial-tautological-feedback). After all, indifferent bivalent-logic is hardly amenable of supporting moral judgments about what is "best." Rather, the logic-of-evolution is best conceptualized as abiding in the temporal-unfoldment of complex interactions among variously organized systems for expressing levels of trivalently charged Like (attraction), Dislike (repulsion), and Neutrality (indifference). The logic of the cosmos is not ruled by an indifferent void, but by an organizing, choice-manifesting Source of Principle.
.
RECEPTIVITY TO GOD: To what other principle could one appeal, if one believes in principle higher than his own immediate, sociopathic gratification? There are empathetically civilized beings, and there are trained, conditioned, and genetically shaped sociopaths. One may not have sought a consistent philosophy of purposeful morality and yet still live as an empathetically civilized being. In that case, one is simply being ruled by a philosophy that remains beyond his capacity to articulate, yet, is still a philosophy (or higher, religious-like belief). Civilization needs little more than that to begin assimilating towards more fulfillment and less divisive sociopathy. Indeed, to go much further, to pretend to be a direct terrestrial link to God, with divine license to dictate minutiae of obeisance, is to try to turn faith in empathy into terrestrial license to scourge against decency and mutual respect. That's the road to inquisitions and fatwas.
.
TRIVALENCE: Wilfully chosen and determined (Yes); Naturally not chosen but determined (No); Randomly determined (objectively Indifferent). Thus, evolution is guided, based on a synchronizing dance of feedback and appreciation. Particular perspectives of Consciousness are reconciled. Events are determined, either by upshot of competing and reconciling iterations of Will (CHOICE), randomly charged "natural" Indifference (CHANCE of evolution out of chaos), or superior, predetermining Source of Laws (CERTAINTY of fate). Choice, Chance, or Certainty. How one conceptualizes or categorizes "to explain" an event will then and there depend on one's cone, i.e., one's perspective, context, and purpose.
.
BIVALENT SUBSERVIENCE TO TRIVALENCE: It is neither true nor false to say whether light-in-itself is a wave or a particle or whether a particle-in-itself is charged to be positive, negative, or neutral. It is simply meaningless (unless as noise or music). This is because there is no such a substantive, measurable thing as light-in-itself or particle-in-itself. What light is, and what a particle is, is nothing that is identifiable in itself, but is dependent on: focus of view, frame of contextual reference, and state of mindful will or potential or purposeful consciousness. It is not objectively meaningful to say that it is objectively true or false that some substance-in-itself is truly or falsely one thing or another. Absent relation to perspective, context, and potential purpose, mortals have no directly identifiable basis for taking the measure of any thing. That is, whether a relative thing is measured as being charged positive, negative, or neutral depends on relations that are shared and entangled to its measure. There is no interpretation or recordation of truth about substance-in-itself, but only relative truth, which is as subject to flux as there is flux in the perspective, context, and purpose. Even information that is recorded is qualified by the perspective, context, and purpose of whomever may later happen to cross or come to interpret it.
.
SHARED TRUTHS ARE RELIABLY SHARED: That is not to say that relative truth is unimportant, for there are some truths that rule our universe in common with every inhabitant who happens to share it ... and on down to the lowliest turtle. However, it is to say that precise notions of some measured truths, and especially many moral truths, become fuzzy as the cones of experience that happen to come upon them vary in what they share in respect of perspective, context, and purpose. Relative sequence, location, age, attraction, repulsion, and indifference may flux, rather than remain fixed as seeming either one thing-in-itself or another. The point is that information, interpretation, potential, substance, and experience are digital in a Trivalent sense of being relatively charged (positive or negative or neutral), but are only Bivalent (black or white, or true or false) in an inferior sense, with regard to how they happen to be processed within unfolding, fluxing, entangled, trivalent cones of: perspective, context, and eventually related purpose. The logic of the cosmos is primarily charged Trivalent; only its measure under such charge is subject to being related and analyzed in Bivalent terms. Once two or more people happen to adopt, identify with, and share a cone of perspective, context, and purpose, then they can communicate in confidence about that which happens to be measurable within that cone.
.
EVOLUTION GUIDED BY RECONCILIATION TO DANCE OF ITERATIONS OF A UNIFYING SOURCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS: The trivalence of the cosmos is what avails its unfoldment and evolution to be GUIDED and normalized, so that consciousness is an effector, not a mere byproduct of bivalent equations. It is not true to say that light is a wave, particle, or even wavicle. What light is is dependent on what happens to abide as its unfolding and potential relation to consciousness. Same with whole, part, or holon. Or holistic perspective of consciousness, particular perspective of consciousness, or encompassing holistic-particularistic consciousness. Or identity, avatar-iteration, infinity. Perspectives that happen to become closely enough entangled within a shared cone will experience, measure, and normalize the same RELATIVE FACTS. But that does not change this: that those "facts" will NOT likely be interpreted or experienced in the same way by another perspective that is part of another cone of experience that merely crosses or overlaps, without becoming so entangled as to perceive or interpret selected "facts"in the same way.
.
ENTANGLEMENT: "How" may different cones of perspective cross without altogether entangling, so that inhabitants of each may measure relative things and events differently? The "more" one perspective identifies with, empathizes with, and communicates with another, the more the two become entangled, bringing their cones of experience into entanglement. However, this "more-ness" is qualitative, not measurable unless indirectly or at some meta level that is beyond mortal kin. To the extent they merely skate by or across one another, without become measurably involved with one another, they remain unentangled. To the extent perspectives of consciousness remain measurably uninvolved (unentangled) even in indirect sense, their substantive experiences remain beyond one another's measure in any direct sense. Problem is, mere mortals will not likely ascertain "the extent" to which perspectives of consciousness may remain measurably uninvolved even in indirect sense. In other words, "degrees of entanglement" among perspectives of consciousness may not be very well calculated at the human level. Even though such entanglements, attractions, repulsions, and indifference among layers and levels of perspectives and expressions of consciousness are the very "qualitative building blocks" upon which all of quantitatively measurable physics is derived. The territory out of which the building blocks of physics are found is entirely qualitative, not quantitative or substantively "physical." Ultimately, apart from perspective, context, and purpose, there is no physical Higgs boson, nor any other ultimate particle or particle-in-itself.
.
See http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/a_provisional_anatomy_of_truth_comments.html#disqus_thread.
.
TRIVALENCE: Relator (consciously charged observer); Relatee (thing charged for being focused upon in order to be observed); Medium of Relation (dimensional field of contextually indifferent space-time-matter-energy) -- Positive Apprehender (father); Attracted or Repelled Apprehendee (son); Indifferent Field of Apprehension (holy ghost); --- ONENESS: Reconciliation with unfolding Reality of Eternal Present.
.
.
BIVALENT MATH INFERIOR TO TRIVALENTLY SHARED CONSCIOUSNESS: Consciousness of Bivalent Truth and Falsity (math-based logic) abides only in respect of a Trivalent cosmic logic-of-consciousness that is based on complex patterns of iterations of omnipresent digital expressions of Attraction (Y-yes), Denial (N-no), and Neutrality (I-indifference). (Aka, "YSDI," or digitally entangled bits of Yes-Deny-Indifferent.) At their most fundamental level, these expressions are metaphysical, in that they are not directly amenable of any dimensional measurement. It is pointless to talk of their quantitative size as opposed to their qualitative beingness. Rather, the variety of patterns they share in entanglements among themselves is what avails the dimensional contexts within which all that constitute particular perspectives of consciousness can quantitatively measure, record, relate, signify, identify with, empathize about, and communicate.
.In bivalent derivation from the trivalent logic of the cosmos, either reconciling values abide relative to consciousness, or they don't. If reconciling values do not abide, one cannot very well complain of sociopaths ... which, of course, is consistent with what sociopaths believe. If values tending towards empathetic reconciliation do abide, then most of religion consists in analogizing the Source of such values as something human-like, or empathetically conscious. It's sort of like conceptionalizing that the aboriginal Source of unfolding evolutionary purposefulness is not "the selfish gene," but iterations of A fulfillment-pursuing and empathetically-charged Consciousness, expressing itself in meta-logic of trivalent (Y-N-I) avatars for synchronously signifying fluxing cones for selecting, experiencing, and recording attractions (Yes), dis-attractions (No), and indifference (I) (aka, YSDI --- not gene-in-itself (an absurdity), but particular Iteration in dance of reconciliation with expressing Field).
.
The logic of evolution of charged spins and double helix DNA isn't "best" conceptualized as bivalent, true-false, natural selection of "the fittest" (trivial-tautological-feedback). After all, indifferent bivalent-logic is hardly amenable of supporting moral judgments about what is "best." Rather, the logic-of-evolution is best conceptualized as abiding in the temporal-unfoldment of complex interactions among variously organized systems for expressing levels of trivalently charged Like (attraction), Dislike (repulsion), and Neutrality (indifference). The logic of the cosmos is not ruled by an indifferent void, but by an organizing, choice-manifesting Source of Principle.
.
RECEPTIVITY TO GOD: To what other principle could one appeal, if one believes in principle higher than his own immediate, sociopathic gratification? There are empathetically civilized beings, and there are trained, conditioned, and genetically shaped sociopaths. One may not have sought a consistent philosophy of purposeful morality and yet still live as an empathetically civilized being. In that case, one is simply being ruled by a philosophy that remains beyond his capacity to articulate, yet, is still a philosophy (or higher, religious-like belief). Civilization needs little more than that to begin assimilating towards more fulfillment and less divisive sociopathy. Indeed, to go much further, to pretend to be a direct terrestrial link to God, with divine license to dictate minutiae of obeisance, is to try to turn faith in empathy into terrestrial license to scourge against decency and mutual respect. That's the road to inquisitions and fatwas.
.
TRIVALENCE: Wilfully chosen and determined (Yes); Naturally not chosen but determined (No); Randomly determined (objectively Indifferent). Thus, evolution is guided, based on a synchronizing dance of feedback and appreciation. Particular perspectives of Consciousness are reconciled. Events are determined, either by upshot of competing and reconciling iterations of Will (CHOICE), randomly charged "natural" Indifference (CHANCE of evolution out of chaos), or superior, predetermining Source of Laws (CERTAINTY of fate). Choice, Chance, or Certainty. How one conceptualizes or categorizes "to explain" an event will then and there depend on one's cone, i.e., one's perspective, context, and purpose.
.
BIVALENT SUBSERVIENCE TO TRIVALENCE: It is neither true nor false to say whether light-in-itself is a wave or a particle or whether a particle-in-itself is charged to be positive, negative, or neutral. It is simply meaningless (unless as noise or music). This is because there is no such a substantive, measurable thing as light-in-itself or particle-in-itself. What light is, and what a particle is, is nothing that is identifiable in itself, but is dependent on: focus of view, frame of contextual reference, and state of mindful will or potential or purposeful consciousness. It is not objectively meaningful to say that it is objectively true or false that some substance-in-itself is truly or falsely one thing or another. Absent relation to perspective, context, and potential purpose, mortals have no directly identifiable basis for taking the measure of any thing. That is, whether a relative thing is measured as being charged positive, negative, or neutral depends on relations that are shared and entangled to its measure. There is no interpretation or recordation of truth about substance-in-itself, but only relative truth, which is as subject to flux as there is flux in the perspective, context, and purpose. Even information that is recorded is qualified by the perspective, context, and purpose of whomever may later happen to cross or come to interpret it.
.
SHARED TRUTHS ARE RELIABLY SHARED: That is not to say that relative truth is unimportant, for there are some truths that rule our universe in common with every inhabitant who happens to share it ... and on down to the lowliest turtle. However, it is to say that precise notions of some measured truths, and especially many moral truths, become fuzzy as the cones of experience that happen to come upon them vary in what they share in respect of perspective, context, and purpose. Relative sequence, location, age, attraction, repulsion, and indifference may flux, rather than remain fixed as seeming either one thing-in-itself or another. The point is that information, interpretation, potential, substance, and experience are digital in a Trivalent sense of being relatively charged (positive or negative or neutral), but are only Bivalent (black or white, or true or false) in an inferior sense, with regard to how they happen to be processed within unfolding, fluxing, entangled, trivalent cones of: perspective, context, and eventually related purpose. The logic of the cosmos is primarily charged Trivalent; only its measure under such charge is subject to being related and analyzed in Bivalent terms. Once two or more people happen to adopt, identify with, and share a cone of perspective, context, and purpose, then they can communicate in confidence about that which happens to be measurable within that cone.
.
EVOLUTION GUIDED BY RECONCILIATION TO DANCE OF ITERATIONS OF A UNIFYING SOURCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS: The trivalence of the cosmos is what avails its unfoldment and evolution to be GUIDED and normalized, so that consciousness is an effector, not a mere byproduct of bivalent equations. It is not true to say that light is a wave, particle, or even wavicle. What light is is dependent on what happens to abide as its unfolding and potential relation to consciousness. Same with whole, part, or holon. Or holistic perspective of consciousness, particular perspective of consciousness, or encompassing holistic-particularistic consciousness. Or identity, avatar-iteration, infinity. Perspectives that happen to become closely enough entangled within a shared cone will experience, measure, and normalize the same RELATIVE FACTS. But that does not change this: that those "facts" will NOT likely be interpreted or experienced in the same way by another perspective that is part of another cone of experience that merely crosses or overlaps, without becoming so entangled as to perceive or interpret selected "facts"in the same way.
.
ENTANGLEMENT: "How" may different cones of perspective cross without altogether entangling, so that inhabitants of each may measure relative things and events differently? The "more" one perspective identifies with, empathizes with, and communicates with another, the more the two become entangled, bringing their cones of experience into entanglement. However, this "more-ness" is qualitative, not measurable unless indirectly or at some meta level that is beyond mortal kin. To the extent they merely skate by or across one another, without become measurably involved with one another, they remain unentangled. To the extent perspectives of consciousness remain measurably uninvolved (unentangled) even in indirect sense, their substantive experiences remain beyond one another's measure in any direct sense. Problem is, mere mortals will not likely ascertain "the extent" to which perspectives of consciousness may remain measurably uninvolved even in indirect sense. In other words, "degrees of entanglement" among perspectives of consciousness may not be very well calculated at the human level. Even though such entanglements, attractions, repulsions, and indifference among layers and levels of perspectives and expressions of consciousness are the very "qualitative building blocks" upon which all of quantitatively measurable physics is derived. The territory out of which the building blocks of physics are found is entirely qualitative, not quantitative or substantively "physical." Ultimately, apart from perspective, context, and purpose, there is no physical Higgs boson, nor any other ultimate particle or particle-in-itself.
.
A muse may communicate appreciable music merely by tickling piano keys, only as there happens concert among perspective, context and purpose. Unless guided and reconciled, purposeful consciousness would not arise merely from random mixing among charge potentials --- unless the charge potentials themselves were expressive of conscious apprehensions of charges, i.e., positive likes, negative dislikes, and mutual indifference. As there abide the conserving, reconciling, guiding holism, with conscious apprehensions of particular charges, so does experience of consciousness unfold, like music being tickled off piano keys. The piano player is itchy.
.See http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/a_provisional_anatomy_of_truth_comments.html#disqus_thread.
.
TRIVALENCE: Relator (consciously charged observer); Relatee (thing charged for being focused upon in order to be observed); Medium of Relation (dimensional field of contextually indifferent space-time-matter-energy) -- Positive Apprehender (father); Attracted or Repelled Apprehendee (son); Indifferent Field of Apprehension (holy ghost); --- ONENESS: Reconciliation with unfolding Reality of Eternal Present.
.
5 comments:
The market measures "merit" about the same way nature measures the "fittest." Not! Both simply measure a trivial tautology: Him that gots, gets. Whomever gets is labeled most meritorious or fit. However, the wider society, governance, field, and world are also part of the market and nature. To rationalize present particulars as justifying future particulars is little more than hindsight rationalization. Except against morons, you don't get future "ought" from present "is" by playing a shell game. Tax policy CAN stimulate production while also redistributing wealth. How? Simply don't tax domestic corporate production, but do tax distributions to individuals. Do it by taxing consumption, progressively. To say that tax policy should never take wealth redistribution into account is tantamount to saying it's ok for government to be for sale to crony corporatists. It just replaces crony socialism with crony corporatists by making the sale of government part of the market. Crony socialists lie that the cure is to push out the crony corporatists. Crony corporatists lie that the cure is to push out the crony socialists. It's a great game of sociopathy against the uninformed and easily bribed. Rino Hyenas and Dino Dingos ripping apart the carcass of the middle class. But an elitist crony is an elitist crony. Push come to shove, they preserve their unholy game. We either establish and preserve a nation where ordinary, middle class, working citizens can retain influence over their governance, or we don't. Presently, American sheeple think their only choice is to switch out cronies every 4 years.
It seems the only thing of interest to a sociopath is to reduce everything in his/her path. The greater a thing's decency, the more it challenges sociopathy, the more it must be destroyed. Otherwise, it stands as direct affront to a sociopath's entitlement to immediate gratification. Deception is perfectly ok. Having rationalized easy wealth availed to herders of sociopaths, sheeple of America now stand to be easily cannibalized. Too many Americans have become owned by self-devourers. NYT, GE, MSNBC, Code Pink, CAIR, CPUSA, OWS, NEA, AARP, DNC. Self reliant decency scares the hell out of them.
I get FREEDOM at home ( -- even though it's diminished to the extent Congress is allowed to strut on the auction block for selling its members to cronies). But I don't get America's exporting of freedom abroad. Freedom isn't something one exports --- especially to regimes with no culture or taste for it. This talk about America exporting freedom is a load of Orwellian crap! What we're exporting is crony corruption, giving it a military-industrial-banking-crony base of operations abroad, and then letting its chief sociopaths buy back our politicians and infrastructure at home in the name of "free trade." We're not exporting freedom. We're surrendering to lunacy and the NWO. The more we export faux-freedom, the stronger we make the NWO. In how many ways and for how much longer will ordinary Americans tolerate the impoverishment of Americans at home and the enriching sell-out to politicians and faux-freedom-fighters abroad? In previous times, religious evangelists for saving souls were the dolt-fronts for cynical sociopathy. Now, its the freedom evangelists. Please, make them stop! Establish and defend freedom at home. Defend borders. Defend infrastructure. Defend allies. Stop the freedom free-traders who are selling out our freedom. When most of your debt is held by Chicoms, whatever you're peddling abroad, it's neither freedom nor free trade. Ordinary Americans are exceptional in respect of world history, but among sociopathic leaders, American sociopaths are quite ordinary to history. Would you buy product from a snake oil salesman who said his ingredients consisted of extracts of freedom? Alliance with other freedom-loving allies, yes. Exporting freedom, fuggetaboutit.
From A.T. -- Re: "Today it makes no sense to attack a neighboring state and put its people to the sword. It's much better to loan them capital and ratchet them up into the global commercial system, whether they are Chinese making Christmas lights for Wal-Mart ...."
.
Pinker is too linearly simplistic. What about the maturing relationship between Christianity, spirituality, science, and technology? Slanting all the credit to technology and free-trade-with-thugs somehow doesn't add up. All it takes is one misopportune mis-enriching of a sociopathic culture to knock everything down. (Free trade of nuke technologies?) Wasn't there some investing scheme a few years back whose operatives thought they had found a surefire way to beat the market forever? The new math worked great for awhile, but when things fell, all came tumbling down. The Pinker idea seems to be that if we avail nations ruled by Islamic and Commie thugs with a lot of stuff, that will make them more peaceful. As if they would not simply bribe, buy out, and replace our leaders with their satraps. Well, that did work awhile for the Romans against the Barbarians. For awhile. But it got to the point where they were trying to assimilate the barbarians faster than they could be assimilated. We're on the same unsustainable track, but we're accelerating the speed of the track much faster. Free trade with thug nations is turning the American middle class into a morally devalued farm of sheeple, and Pinker thinks all will be well with trusting to competition among free-trading elites to impose a new competency among the most crony of sociopaths? Some pretty big blinders are filtering his progressive analysis.
Cultural evolution does occur. However, it's partly guided and reconciled, not entirely blind happenstance. The Will of each perspective of consciousness finds expression for the unfolding guidance. Each perspective carries its own innate freedom, dignity, and empathy. In sociopaths, the empathy aspect is malformed and mal-organized for repression. When innate dignity surrenders moral belief and purposefulness, sociopathy flourishes. Moral cowards become commodity herds for free trading among sociopaths. How else should godless elites consider the masses, except as commodities to be used and traded? All for their own good, of course, ha ha. Surrendered masses can soon be trained to think their reduction is good and proper --- so long as all non-elites among them are equally subjugated. These kinds of masses and their sociopathic rulers do NOW WANT any relatively free-minded middle class to challenge their notions about how the farm should be run. Whether sociopathic rulers are crony socialists or crony corporatists makes little difference. Neither group wants any free-minded middle class to challenge its control.
So now we have another Progressive telling us we will live longer the more we consent to be ruled by liberal elites. Indeed, sheep kept on a farm do tend to live longer. But it's the life of a sheep! And in the end, death comes to all. Meantime, freedom and dignity will have been traded for the oblivious life of a sheep. Moreover, not even long life is guaranteed. Sociopaths are not slow to war, and when they war, their sheep become cheap fodder. As sheep become dependent upon sociopaths to run them in times of crisis, sheep become incompetent in fending or choosing for themselves. They believe what they are fed. This is not freedom or dignity, nor is it "liberal." It's farming into sub-humanness. Violence comes not to be resorted to in desperate attempts to defend decent liberty, but to defend systems of subhuman subjugation. This is what Progressives and sociopathic handlers call freedom, better angels, and peace --- when the masses become sheep. Not sheep to God, but to sociopaths. And why not, since Matter is their God?
Post a Comment