BONDING THE SPIRITUAL AND THE GLANDULAR

BONDING THE SPIRITUAL AND THE GLANDULAR:
.
I very much doubt that people are born as racists. Rather, they attach at birth to inclinations for being acculturated to acquire habits of appreciation and favoritism. That which they continue to appreciate tends to become that which eventually manifests into expression. That which manifests to their experience then directs, defines, and limits the cone for that which continues to unfold to their experience. Race is only a sub-category among a myriad of aspects (nation, genetic affiliation, tribe, gender, custom, fashion, trade, union, corporation, hobby, addictions, tattoos, etc, etc.) for which appreciations are acculturated.
.
It is unavoidable that people will seek to profit or advantage themselves by appealing to others to soften of harden their habits of appreciation for varying ways of distinguishing their friends and opponents. Such process is not evil in itself, but is simply the way of flesh. The process only becomes handmaiden to evil when it is set against a defined good. For example, one might choose to intuit or define “good” as consisting in the seeking of civilization that is checked and balanced for broadly facilitating sustainable human freedom of expression and enterprise. Upon such a foundation, one can sensibly discuss merit, responsibility, fairness, and evil. Thus, evil would consist in setting civilization on a path for empowering institutions bent on the demolition of human freedom and dignity. (If you think such would not be evil, simply consider how you would like to live in such a society, as a subject serf who had no hope or freedom for changing it.)
.
Once profit centers come to be invested in corporate institutions that benefit by populist preying on gullible and cheaply-bribed followers, the road to ruin will not be diverted, except with strong medicine. Once established corporations have under their control all significant institutions of banking, media, academia, churches, regulatory power, and international alliances, then there is little medicine left for overcoming the push to serfdom and ruin. Yet, strong medicine remains innate. It is meta, spiritual medicine. It abides in the innate spiritual dignity and meta-empathy of each perspective of consciousness. Once society is duped to ridicule and revile that medicine, there would be little left to check the most base of narrow, gland-based, profit-centered abuses. Once profitable, there would be nothing to check incitements to fornicate, vomit, and defecate in the streets – with children and animals alike. The end of the populism of Crassus, Caesar, Soros, Clodius, and Obama.
.
Religions and spiritual traditions, to put flesh and significance on communications in respect of meta and moral empathies, often employ the language of metaphors. How else could perspectives of consciousness communicate regarding the non-measurable qualities of moral significance, except with figures of speech that relate to interactions among quantitative bodies, flesh, and matter? How else can qualities of morality be inspired and discussed, except with metaphors and figures of speech? Yet, atheists and pure scientists tend to focus only on proving the metaphors are not measurably or literally coextensive with meta, moral truths. Then, they assume such proves the lack of all value in traditional forms of speech concerning moral interests. So, we have atheists raving and ridiculing, while pretending to be “objective.” Lol. All along, they are mainly patting themselves on the back for noticing that qualitative non-measurables cannot be quantitatively measured. They have proved a tautology! What geniuses!
.
I wish this were only funny. However, this looney, know-it-all, faux-objectivism that seeks to replace spiritual based morality with some “scientifically based measure of well being” also leads to tragic consequences for decent civilization. Ask: But for meta, fundamental respect for human freedom, dignity, and empathy, what do so-called purely objective scientists have to offer in respect of the issues of most importance to civilization? What moral wisdom do they have to pour out for our courts, social clubs, and theaters? Well, they have the “reasoning power” to justify doing in the road whatever the hell they like, so long as the collectivist authority that substitutes for individual responsibility does not veto it. Not only has civilization been pushed to a point of needing strong medicine, it is simultaneously confronted by know-it-all, gland-drunken dunderheads who contribute all they can to impede any medicine. They mean to tear down civilization and replace it with Caesar and his scientific administrators of social well being — as if that were “progress.”
.

Replace Standard Model with Connective Model?

Towards a Connective Model --- instead of a Standard Model / CONCEPTUALIZE:

.

1) Relationals within a holistically connected system of fluxes --- instead of Particles

2) Rationalized communications of experience and purposes --- rather than derivations of entirely precise maps of substantive control

3) Meta-living cone or field of shared synchronizations of experience --- instead of cone of perception of entirely dead substance

4) Synchronization based on feedback appreciation of perspective, context, and purpose --- rather than on parameter-phase limits of substance

5) Evolution based on synchronization of appreciations of feedback --- rather than on niches of particle-bits of happenstance condensing out of chaos

6) Levels of mathematical certainty and predictability and degrees of freedom based on general direction of rationalizations of synchronizations --- rather than on pre-set forces

7) Fuzzy byproduct of synchronization of fluxing and receding purposes --- rather than Higgs boson

8) Moral synthesis of the reality of the qualitative with the quantitative --- instead of imagining the qualitative to be entirely derivative byproduct of the quantitative

9) The eternally present now of fluxing feedback of apprehensions of qualitative perspectives of consciousness in respect of the quantitiatively signifiable infinity of local frameworks of space-time --- instead of a beginning or end of time or space

.

BOTTOM LINE / such a connective model: (1) respects but does not impede objective understanding; (2) rationalizes the seeking but never grasping of receding purposefulness or of the final perfection of a completely objective model; (3) respects the domains of the subjective moral versus the objective substantive.
.

PROBLEM:  For consciousness to fashion new ways for manipulating a cone of beingness, it often needs to imagine and act AS IF there were precise objective particles.  It needs to act as if there were a common beginning or reference point for instigating communication in respect of a unfolding cone of shared perspectives of consciousness.  Even though ways to fashion recede, communication along the way depends on sharing "as if" assumptions.  Thus, even if a precise Standard Model cannot be achieved, appreciating a Connecting Model often requires one to assume as if a Standard Model were achievable.  While there is no precise universal coordinate for the local drug store, day to day communication requires one to assume a common meaning for directions to it.  Scientific tinkerings and adventures proceed in like fashion.
.
********
.
If all relations were holographically synchronized by a single projecting holism that avails no degrees of freedom (neither quantitative nor qualitative degrees of freedom), then there would be no chance for any local perspective to have any causal influence (or "free will") that were not mere subjective delusion.  Not so, however, if determinations made by the synchronizing holism were influenced by qualitative empathy (or meta-digital feedback) with local, subjective apprehensions and observers ("the measurement effect").  In that case, such apprehensions, even though of non-measurable aspect from our mortal perspective, would affect unfolding relations with the holism.  By definition, such a back and forth dance of  relational effect would never be reducible to empirically quantitative proof.  To "prove" that what is given to consist of the non-measurable qualitative cannot be measured is not to prove that it does not abide, but is only to "prove" a dancing, circular tautology:  that the quantitatively non-measurable is not quantitatively measurable.  Alternatively stated, the only "proof" or reasonable basis to believe that the qualitatively non-measurable carries causal potentcy is necessarily qualitative, subjective, intuitive, ... insightful.

**********

ULTIMATE BUILDING UNITS:  Some seem to suppose mass can be modeled as consisting of piles of a limiting unit or particle of quantifiable substance.  For some purposes, this "building block notion" serves practical needs; for other purposes it does not.  We simply don't have an integrated conceptualization, model, map, or metaphor with which to account for every practical purpose.  There does not seem to abide any single model of reality that can quantitatively, consistently, coherently, and completely account for every purpose, thing, and context.  Indeed, our concept of "reality" itself seems to flux.  Do we suppose that, in reality, every conscious experience that is qualitatively subjective is merely the derivative byproduce of some objectively measurable substance?  Or do we suppose that, in reality, every experience of measuring substances objectively is merely the derivative signification of some synchronizing and reconciling qualitative?
.
Nothing in our practical science demonstrates that evolution is other than the consequence of a conservation of God's investment in a conversational experience among iterations of God's perspectives of consciousness.  Nothing demonstrates that material substance is other than the figurative consequence, signification, and logos of unfolding communications of a mix of negative apprehensions, neutral non-apprehensions, and positive appreciations among iterations of perspectives of God.  For a perspective of God to love the ideal of the holistic God is to respect the holistic sponsor and counterpart to one's qualitatively much more limited self; to love God is to respect the author of all iterations of consciousness. The consequence of good faith in God is good will among men.
.
It seems to be because quantitative significations of qualitative interests of the Holism are synchronized and reconciled in obedience to mathematical constraints of conservation that we take and rationalize such significations in their sequential order AS IF they themselves were causally related, back to a primordial first mover or beginning. However, we have no way of knowing whether there are/were beginnings before beginnings, or futures after futures. Even though sequential, all sequentially measurable significations are associational, i.e., associational with unfolding fluxes in the interests of a holistic, synchronizing, reconciling, Experiencer of consciousness.  If so, substantively quantitative causation is illusion, secondary to holistically reconciling qualitative causation.  If substantive causation is ultimately illusory, then searching for the ultimate building block with which to quantify substantive causation is a chasing after a receding rainbow.

.

When Saying Free Will Is An Illusion, What Is Meant By Will?

.
In respect of “Will,” does Sam Harris mean to explore something like choice-making (in respect of alternatives among degrees of freedom availed within parameters of possibilities) by an Immaterial, dualistic ghost that confines itself to the perimeter of a person’s BODY, as if the body were mere avatar for availing parameters for choice-making by Spirit? Does Harris mean to explore something like an Immeasurable quality, which yet has quantitatively measurable energy and POWER to move matter (such as a penny) up a wall?

.

If so, I readily agree that no Immeasurable-To-Mortals has ever been Measured-By-Mortals. Merely to phrase the issue is to demonstrate the absurdity of trying to measure such a thing! However, I don’t agree that such a trivial and tautological twist disproves an intuition that an immeasurable quality of Will (or of meta-apprehension and appreciation) inter-functions (in ways beyond confinement to measurable bodies and braincases) in order to affect how particulars come to condense and manifest from a generally measurable field into particularly measurable relations. I don't agree that human feelings are simply simultaneous "ride-alongs," with no feedback-effect upon how events are guided or come to unfold.

.

I would agree that the ghost of Will is not quantitatively confine-able to a body or machine. Indeed, to believe otherwise would be to "believe" a direct contradiction in terms (which would constitute "belief" only in an oxymoronic sense). However, I do NOT agree that mere empiricism (of a kind that ignores Intuition while being founded on scientific Faith that all can be reduced to quantitative explanations) can "prove" that Qualitative Will does not abide. Mere empiricism cannot disprove an intuition of Qualitative Will, i.e., feedback of meta-apprehension and appreciation among perspectives that are synchronized with respect to a fluxing Holism.

.

By definition, the only way to test for a Non-Quantitative Qualitative (if Will abides in such a way) would be qualitative. Such a qualitative test would abide in the character of intuitional experience by a conscious Identity, as opposed to empirically measurable experience. To substitute a quantitative test for what can only be tested qualitatively is to try to twist word games for restating tautologies into proofs for that which such games cannot prove. It is hardly serious to suggest we should attempt quantitatively to measure the non-quantitative, and then to assert "proof" of the non-existence of the non-quantitative simply by restating the obvious: that the non-quantitative is not amenable to quantitative measure!

.

The non-quantitative (that is, the qualitative) is sensed in the general and subjective experience or intuition of an immaterial perspective of conscious Identity, not by quantitative measurement of an impingement on a materially definable sense organ. No doubt, Harris followers will next try to prove that "you," as an individual, neither exist nor matter.

.

************

.

When someone like Sam Harris says there is no such thing as Free Will, I need to have some idea of what he means by this “Will” — of which he says there is no such thing as. I need for him to define his terms, so that I do not gullibly allow myself to be led into a shell game of words, to recite a mere tautology under a different inflection, in order to confuse people into believing the mere inflection of a tautology actually demonstrates anything that is more than a trivial restatement of an assumption.

.

Skill with verbal shell games and tautological twists does not disprove intuition that an immeasurable quality of Will (or of meta-apprehension and appreciation) interfunctions in ways beyond measure and beyond confinement to measurable bodies and braincases. Simply put, circular reasoning does not resolve "the measurement problem," whereby that which comes to manifest is affected by that which observes or measures it. The purposes and perspectives of participants affect how particulars are appreciated and interpreted to manifest, appear, collapse, and condense from a generally measurable field into particularly measurable relations. (This collapse from the wave function into the particle function is often referred to as part of “the measurement problem.”)

.

Does Harris mean to explore something like choice-making (in respect of alternatives among degrees of freedom availed within parameters of possibilities) by an Immaterial, dualistic ghost that inhabits a person’s BODY, as if the body were a mere avatar for availing parameters for choice making by Spirit? If so, again, I agree that such an Immaterial spirit, by definition, has not been materially measured. And I agree that the ghost of Will is not quantitatively confine-able to a body or machine. Indeed, to believe otherwise would be to believe a direct contradiction in terms.

.

However, I do not agree that it is required that intuition of a Qualitative Will is false. I do not agree that the quantitatively measurable interactions of bodies could not be the significations and byproduce of inter-functionings of perspectives of Will. Rather, Qualitative Will can be conceptualized as expressing itself with feedback of meta-apprehension and appreciation among perspectives, synchronized to a fluxing Holism.

.

Does Harris mean that we should define and test Will as if it were something like an “undying energy that is confined to a particular human body?" If so, I simply see no need for such an absurd test. I do not sense how any serious philosopher of this day and age should postulate such a thing in order to need to have it quantitatively tested. After all, by definition, the test for a non-quantitative qualitative would need to be qualitative, i.e., of the character of intuitional experience by a conscious Identity, as opposed to empirically measurable experience.

.

BOTTOM LINE: If Harris has no pertinent and testable notion of Qualitative Will in mind, and if his notion takes Will as simply being not quantitatively testable, then there is little to be gained by playing word games with varying inflections for restating redundant tautologies. Such a method for testing whether Free Will is an illusion cannot be a serious one. Alternatively stated, it is, definitionally, non-serious to suggest we should attempt quantitatively to measure the non-quantitative, and then to assert, as "proof" of the non-existence of the non-quantitative, the triviality that the non-quantitative cannot be quantified. This is because the non-quantitative (that is, the qualitative) is sensed in the general experience or intuition of an immaterial perspective of conscious Identity --- not by quantitative measurement of an impingement on a materially definable sense organ. One who invariably disposes himself to take it as nonsense, to speak of that which cannot be appreciated except in the qualitative and not in the quantitative, can hardly have much relevance to helping to inspire broad contours for purpose, poetry, or prose. Nor to law, morality, or social guidance.

.
*******
.
Conceptualize:  How can there be simultaneity in the synchronization of Holistic Will, while still availing moral significance to feedback in the apprehensions of particular Perspectives of Will?  How can Perspectives be causally meaningfully and not mere "ride alongs" and epiphenomena?  If Reality is conceptualized as merely a continuous projection of a holograph, such would seem to implicate that our subjective perspectives are causally meaningless.  This would be consistent with the observation that a non-measureable cannot be measured to push a penny up a wall.  However, what if one conceptualizes a sequential flux of digital feedback between and among the sums of the parts versus the whole?  What if there is an eternal flux in the eternal now, whereby the Holism and its Parts interfunction and apprehend one another, like an alternating current?  As Perspectives, we apprehend and appreciate.  As connecting synchronizer, the Holism responds to our apprehensions.  Thus, unfolding purposefulness is guided via a dance of appreciative feedback.   We, as Parts, would not be privy to each digital halting in the current of the back and forth.  The current would appear to us to be continuous.  A particular perspective neither notices nor measures the time or space between its incarnations.
.
NOTE:  Coherence regarding such alternating current of feedback in appreciation may be better preserved or intuited by conceptualizing a trivalence, i.e.,: (1) a sum of particular perspectives (Son), (2) a connecting synchronizer of such parts (Father), and (3) the one of a kind whole-sum that constitutes both sides of such coin of conception (Holy Ghost).

.

Scientists Jeaslously Intruding Upon Priests, Lawyers, Economists, and Artists

.

Scientists Jeaslously Intruding Upon Priests, Lawyers, Economists, and Artists:

.

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dodTNPp12rg.

.

For my taste, the author of this video too narrowly conceptualizes Causality by assuming causality must be based in entirely measurable and dumb substance. The video also too narrowly conceptualizes Will, by assuming it must be causally independently of synchronization with the cosmos --- as if free will must be limited to the perimeter of a brain case or a body of skin.

.

If every thing and every quality were entirely reducible to quantifications of sets within sets, then the Pythagorists would be correct, that all is math. However, direct intuition indicates there may (or must?) abide at least one quality or aspect that constitutes more than dumb math --- else math would function only upon the territory of math, with subsets of formulas functioning upon formulas, blueprints upon blueprints, and maps upon maps. Indeed, even geometrical forms of genes may then take on mutually exclusive and exhaustive traits of selfishness, as in "the selfish gene" (or maybe even "the selfish number"). Lol! Thus, the physical territory would consist of no underlying reality, apart from numbers functioning upon numbers. That is, physical reality would be illusion, not in itself having capacity to support or signify causal feedback (much less capacity to support evolution that weighs physical feedback against otherwise meaningless chaos in order eventually to produce consciousness of identity and self). Yet, a conscious being will generally perceive, know, and communicate that such capacity abides! Thus, some innate quality of beingness avails capacity for the interfunctioning of more than mere dumb numbers, blueprints, and maps. Some quality that is coextensive with physics or spirituality signifies capacity for appreciating and availing communication of meaningfulness beyond mere random juxtoposition of numbers, formulas, genes, and blueprints. That quality is the immeasurable but intuited "Elvis" --- that has not "left the building."

.

Mere numbers, formulas, and blueprints for formulas do not "appreciate one another" in order to effect relational changes among themselves. If they did, they would not be mere numbers, formulas, and blueprints for formulas. Rather, they would qualitatively signify much more. They would signify entangled involvement with some "appreciative and qualitative observer," beyond the quantitative, that may or must avail capacity for collapsing and interfacing appreciation, interpretion, and communication with interfunctionings among quantitatives.

.

For those who think not, let the pure quantitavists --- the ones who believe that even our laws, economies, entertainments, music, and arts can (and should?) be reduced entirely to quantitatives --- revel us with their wisdom concerning how we should best manage without reference or respect for such heretofore believed to be qualitative concepts as will, freedom, merit, beauty, music, purposefulness, or self actualization. Let the scientists who know best how the entire quantification of everything should be pursued fill their wisdom into our courtrooms, traderooms, and theaters, and thus "enrich" our lives by ridiculing or banning regard for any intuition, appreciation, or metaphysical interface with the qualitative. Yes, let these elites "progress" our civilization. Well, not so fast! After all, if spiritualists are properly banned from the science class, why should scientists monopolize the morality class? Have they some special logic for adducing "ought" from "is"? If religion too often intrudes beyond its proper domain, should reasonings and treatises on morality now be restricted to peer review by scientists? Who's being too greedy now?

.

 

Time Travel and Free Will

.
TIME TRAVEL: Travel through time-in-itself does not occur for the simple reason that, apart from whatever constitutes The Holism, there is no thing-in-itself.   That is, TIME is not a non-relative thing that can be traveled through; it can only be related to (or a mere byproduct or aspect of relations and sequences thereof).  However, Relative Time travel is routinely experienced from every perspective of consciousness that apprehends transition across the eternal present. At the human scale, one may fashion a rocket trip such that one would depart and not return to Earth until all one’s relatives had long since expired. At the micro scale, physicists hypothesize that virtual particles continuously flux across the past, present, and, perhaps, future. However, such conceptions of fluxes average out, so that no information is allowed to upset an appearance of preserved sequentiality.  Sequentiality is shared among all perspectives that are in communication within a shared cone of experience. This is consistent with what Hawking calls a "chronology protection mechanism."
.
I am not so confident to say that relative time travel into the past is not possible. Rather, I would say that, except possibly by The Holism itself, such time retrieval can never be proved, because any change in the past that effected any relative change in the future would erase any possibility of communicating any awareness of any preceding condition that was different from what is preserved in the accumulated record of the present. Thus, if anyone or anything time traveled back and forth between the past and the present, we would never know to prove it. Otherwise, there would be a violation of Hawking’s chronology protection mechanism. Nor would we be able to say how the present had been rendered different from what it otherwise would have been had there been no hypothetical travel to the past and back.
.
Every particular, relative thing averages out within a wider context to conserve a present zero. Things bubble and flux because some eternal and infinite aspect of the cosmos enjoys a trivalent capacity to divide in (and by) zero — even though flatlander mortals, with their limitation to bivalent logic, do not. To rephrase Shakespeare, there are more spirits in the physics of nothingness and zero than abide in our poor imaginations. In truth, we can appreciate and be receptive to the music and noise of the cosmos, we cannot comprehend its non-trivial logic. Nor am I confident that “you” could ever prove that some aspect of “you” has not always existed. This is because I suspect no essence of any particular thing or conscious identity can abide — except in respect of  “the eternal present.”
.
FREE WILL:  A similar line may be followed for reasoning about free will.  Free will among particular perspectives is not a thing that abides in itself, but only in relation to perspective, context, and purpose.  It abides only in relative apprehension and appreciation.  Individual mortals don't move and energize matter or substance by "pushing it about with free will."  Spirits don't push pennies up walls.  Rather, how we apprehend and appreciate the music and noise around us and how we determine to observe and measure the relations among such music and noise constitutes our feedback, which DOES affect how the fluxing of The Holism is synchronized --- on a metaphysical level.  This idea may commonly be referred to as coordinate with "the measurement effect."  In that respect, free will is not something that can be quantified or scientifically proved or disproved.  Only by arbitrarily pretending that free will is something that should be defined as being measureable can it be said that free will does not present itself (because it cannot be quantified or measured).  However, that is not to say that free will, in respect of how we come to apprehend our surroundings, has no qualitative effect on that which The Holism synchronizes to collapse and present to our interpretations, appreciations, and communications.  Until this is better understood, people like Sam Harris will simply continue to shill shell games for pretending to prove that it is unreasonable to intuit or believe other than that the qualitative pea does not exist, simply by conflating and restricting free will under labels for quantitatives.  It's not that we have measurable freedom to choose, independent of the cosmos.  It's that we have no choice but to effect choices (apprehensions and appreciations).  And such apprehensions and choices DO interfunction to affect outcomes.  Once the powers of the Establishment buy into the notion of quantitativsts (atheists regarding non-qualitativeness), we will then encounter confusion and despair ... in all its enormity.  Once the State monopolizes to establish the party line that free will does not exist, then notions of merit and of respect for thought processes of individuals will be twisted into all manner of Orwellian pretzels.  Often, human life will be rendered valueless, so that confusion and anarchy will run amuck.
.
I don't know why this is so hard to get into the skulls of know-it-all scientists and secular elitists.  Really, the presumptiveness for pure quantitativists to pretend they can prove (or that they have proven!) that qualitativists are unsupported by reason ... gets to be a rather tiresome, juvenile game.  Simply put, it's a mirror image, coming from an opposite direction, of the abuse of science that is done by creationists.
.
META INFLUENCE OF BELIEF AND WILL:  Belief in a metaphysically qualitative aspect of conscious free will that, while immeasurable, connects us in feedback with God and with one another, tends to be reasonable, soul inspiring, and self uplifting. Belief that consciousness is nothing more than an accidental passenger that accompanies unfolding events while having no influence on them tends to be irrational, soul stifling, and self annihilating. Belief that children of civilization should be led to become adults for facilitating broad respect for human freedom of expression and enterprise tends to produce society that is ennobling and fulfilling. Belief that there is no such property as free will, apart from illusion, and that alternative ideas should entirely replace it, is base and demoralizing. One belief facilitates meaningfully assimilative seeking of existential music; the other greases the way to noise, disintegration, confusion, despair, anarchy, and social nihilism.
.

Stellar Wind, Privacy, Liberty, Yates

Are luddites entirely wrong to question whether the advancement of technological know how is always a good thing? Is it even pertinent to ask that question, if humanity, absent higher guidance, can do nothing to put the "progress" of technology under sustainable control? Privacy will soon be gone. Freedom to tinker will soon be monitored. Access to anything smacking of WMD will be rigidly supervised. Technologies will avail categorizing of orientations of brain functions. Minds will not be read, but brains will. Political and commercial attitudes will be tested. TSA lines will appear far beyond airports. Freedom of expression and enterprise will be constrained to corporate like franchises and fiefdoms. The next world war will usually not be violent except when it cannot reliably be kept virtual. The high ground will abide in control over the internet cloud. North Korea launches. Physical violence will generally give way to science of persuasion. Freedom of thought will collapse, unless borders for islands of liberty can be sustained.

.

Once national boundaries collapse, predators will establish territories and fire walls on the cloud. Generic fire walls will be accessible only to different layers and levels of elites. For hire hackers will take on new flavors. Different races, tribes, cults, and gangs will play defense and offense, preserving and exploiting firewalls and capacities to weaken or even eliminate entire levels of cloud use. Users will be required to sign on with two way cameras, verifying identity based on thumbprints and retina pictures and verifying need to know based on current situational context. People left without means of cloud communication will be one step removed from social collapse into barbarism. People of foresight and means will have shelters provisioned with essentials: water, rations, seeds, arms, ammo, gold, maps, books. Absent an assimilating prophet or poet, there's no way out. Until then, we have Yates: twenty centuries of stony sleep / Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle ....

Scientific Progress and Division of Nothingness

REGARDING SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS: Human and other forms of consciousness undergo bubbles, phases, and changes. For an arbitrary duration and context, they may happen to become proportionately more represented than other ways of being. However, no mortal perspective of consciousness undergoes "progress" in understanding its capacities and limitations in respect of any ultimate goal or explanatory model. Science does not "progress" to objective truth. To know thyself and to know thy opponents are aspirations that are relational to contexts and subjective purposes, not to truth in itself. This is because there is no ultimate explanatory model in itself. There is no such a thing to linearly progress towards. As each qualitative form of consciousness transcends towards changing ways of interpreting and controlling its relation to the contextual universe that happens to quantify it, such consciousness itself changes. Situations and bubbles phase change, flux, absorb, burst, and reconfigure. Aspects flux across changing relations among qualitatives and quantitatives. As we learn, old opportunities foreclose while new ones unfold. Each sense of pleasure, expansion, learning, and progress is subjective to a way of being conscious with respect to present context and purpose. We do not "prove" any non-trivial, circular-tautology that is meaningfully true in itself. At most, we simply intuit and abide with one or more truths concerning relations among subjective perspectives of a qualitatively connecting whole.
.

REGARDING DIVISION BY ZERO --- MORTAL MATH CANNOT, YET THE COSMOS DOES:  When the bubble of this world-universe ends, its potentiality may be conceptualized as an aspect of nothingness.  Question begged:  Is there a quantifiable potential to nothingness?  To pose the question is to experience the paradox.  No "progress" of science will "answer" such paradox.  So, if not an holistic aspect of Consciousness itself, what Source or metaphysic averages nothingness to zero, yet avails perspectives of such nothingness with capacity to image results of divisions by zero?  Is reference to such Source --- whether stated or unstated --- our only common communion?  To pretend to sever one's relation with such Source, I suspect, is to disfigure one's receptivity to meaningfulness.  It is to confine one's expression of self to the limits of an artificial lie.  No particular form within the context of any bubble, merely by manipulating quantities of relationships against the potential of the universe, will ever achieve immortality for any particular set of relational quantities.  Immortality, by definition, whether in science or in natural evolution within quantitative evolution, cannot be entirely confined to a frozen set. In other words, no scientific model can represent quantitative truth in itself.  Rather, truth is experienced, which necessitates perspective, which necessitates consciousness, which necessitates qualities that accompany capacities to signify and communicate relational quantities.

.

Knowing By Labeling

.

KNOWING BY LABELING:  Interesting ideas seem to abide at a receding intersection of the qualitative and the quantitative, between dark energy and measurable energy, mind and brain, choice and fate, consciousness and nature, feedback and chaos, epigenetics and genetics, empathy and mirror neurons, and belief and science. However, I suspect that there abides no "either-or answer" to the who-what-how of choices that accompany us.

.

If "the answer" is purely quantitative, then, by trivial definition, it is not purely qualitative. If the answer is purely qualitative, then it is not purely quantitative. But what if "the-answer-in-itself" to the quest of consciousness is a "non-answer neither"? What if the non-answer fluxes between the not completely quantitative and the not completely qualitiative? What if, instead, the "non-answer" abides in coextensive dependence upon perspective, context, and purpose?  Doesn't that seem in fact to be the way of things? I don't suggest that any individual who is less than God could make his own reality. I do suggest that each individual perspective of consciousness may participate in how it chooses to apprehend and appreciate meaningfulness. See Bruce Lipton, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjjvimJRevQ&feature=fvwrel.

.

Notwithstanding, there do seem to abide devotees of science who affect "to believe" that blueprints for science will someday fully explicate how every blueprint is actually applied ... as if we will fully understand consciousness, empathy, meaningfulness, morality, and epigenetics ... if only we build and label enough blueprints. For them, every alternative belief is "crap." Of course, a belief system based on faith in "knowing by categorizing blueprints" leads to rather strange rationalizations about the nature of freedom, merit, morality, and blueprints. It seems to lead some to want to submerge every individual into a group, race, or tribe identity, as if only groups of things should be recognized as having moral or rational "worth."  Our political dysfunctionality may be rooted in propensity to confuse merit with scientific control, so that we conflate the spreading of equality in opportunity as being equal in merit (or non-merit) with the spreading of equality in wealth.  Why else should we have otherwise brilliant nuclear scientists who, politically, split among avowed capitalists, Marxists, and radical Muslims?

.

Money in Flattering Morons

.
Yes, the only effective way to reach the feeling and non-thinking Left is with catchy commercials.  Just don't weigh them down with too much analysis.  The media run off advertising, and messages that appeal to hipsters attract minds that are prone to advertising.  The market for media, advertising, and political commercials is driven by those who are most anxious to feel good, cool, fashionable, and hip.  It's far less driven by those who are principled or who think more for themselves.  Indeed, among hip, feeling, non-thinkers, it's quite easy to convince them that they are actually "smart."  They actually believe advertisers target them because they're so smart.  That's why Obama's commercials are so chock fully of substantive analysis!  (Hope and change and all that.  Yeah, right.  Lol!)
.
Problem:  Because media make money mostly by taking advantage of and selling to simpletons, simpletons are the ones media most cultivate.  I suspect journalists tend to be Leftists not because they themselves are all simpletons, but because they see that's the target demographic for the sheep most easily sheared.  There's big money in cultivating simpletons while praising them for how smart they are!  Especially in registering them to vote while making cheap promises to them.  Whatta deal!  You can make big bucks while you sell your country down the river!  How cool is that for a nihilist hipster?  You go, Billie, Jonny, Rachel, Chrissy, and Soledad.
.

Masks of Neutrinos, East and West

.

POLAR ORIENTATIONS:  Although Individualists versus Collectivists will intersect along weaving and often confused paths, the goals of their adherents will tend to be fundamentally polar. One group (Western Civilization?) will seek to enhance an individually-examined life of conscious awarenss. The other group (Eastern Civilization?) will seek to enhance a mind-numbed (indoctrination with simplistic and literalistic religious or secular dogma), pleasured (gluttonous), or oblivious (mind drugged) life that is largely removed from awareness of self as a moral and responsible entity apart from the collective. Western Thinkers seek to facilitate rewards for individual initiative and merit. Eastern Feelers seek to redistribute spoils among then prevailing collectives (which may be based on shared race, shared superstitions, or professional courtesy among prevailing parasites and predators of convenience). The West respects an ethos or spirituality based on empathy (let the children come); the East forces an ethos based on hierarchical institutions of power (let no children survive who do not obey and come). It does not appear that these polar ways for organizing civilization can be peacefully intermixed any more so than matter and anti-matter. Simply put, Obama and his cohorts do not mean for the Western ethos to survive.

.

WORLDVIEW:  Regarding the proper or "best" mode of political organization, I suspect logic, math, empiricism, and reason cannot adduce a correct answer. This is because I suspect there abides no correct-answer-in-itself. Rather, I suspect the only meaningful "answer" depends in each situation on perspective, context, and purpose. In moral and poltitical terms, I suspect one derives answers based on how one frames issues that one deems important. If one deems it important to faciliate a culture that will broadly avail flourishing of adult Freedom of Individual expression and enterprise, one will tend to reason along a path. If one deems individual freedom to be less important than Survival of a social Collective, then one will tend to reason along a different path.

.

MERIT VS. FATE:  Ultimately, one's world view for favoring West or East may be colored by how one thinks about merit and causation. What does "causation" mean? Are causes of quantifiable interrelations determined by: (1) Strict Determination (a preset, predetermined, first cause or bubbled up big bang); (2) Random Determination (a preset, random generator that builds on feedback in order to evolve patterns out of chaos); and/or (3) Chosen Determination (participatory feedback among perspectives of conscious will, effecting choices in respect of apprehensions and appreciations of perspective, context, and purpose). Alternatively stated, does quantifiable Substance precede or follow Consciousness, or are fluxings of Substance and Consciousness somehow coterminously dependent and synchronous?

.

DOWNGRADING CONSCIOUSNESS TO THINGNESS:  I suspect West and East have come to a perilous clash that correlates with a worldwide downgrading in respect for individual perspectives of consciousness. West, in know-it-all scientific hubris, degrades the moral quality of consciousness to mere byproduct of substance. East, in disrespect to science, promotes know-it-all collectivist dogma as the only path to meaningfulness. Know-it-all Elites of both East and West demote the moral value of individual perspectives of consciousness. This does not bode well for individual human beings or civilized respect for freedom.

.

NEUTRINOS:  Masks for neutrinos are in the news. I wonder about the mask each neutrino deigns to adopt for each context of time and place. Does whatever relates to constitute Substance, as quantifiable signification, not take on signification until a perspective of Consciousness receives it (takes its measure?) as such? Or, does whatever quantifies significations, as Conscious receiver, not take on reception until Substance is relationally quantified? Must the answer abide --- either in quantifiable Substance or in qualifiable Consciousness, but not in both? I suspect no objectively provable answer abides in either, but that participatory meaningfulness abides in how we flux to relate to either or both.  Even so, Either-Or habits of logic tend to polarize us into West and East modes of thinking and being.
.
EVOLUTION:   "Purposefulness" is meant to relate to contextual orientations or attitudes of empathy or lack thereof. Purposefulness may be conscious-driven or gland-driven. Conscious driven purposefulness among individuals (West) participates in evolving patterns for enhancing pursuits of self fulfillment. Gland driven purposefulness subjugates individual minds (East) to forge packs for salaciously evolving patterns of parasitism for marking, deceiving, and feeding on groups of prey. Example: Bonding packs of predatory races for training slave races to accept the inferiority of their own bonds. Attitudes of racial hegemony are examples of group competition and evolution, as opposed to individually or culturally emphasized evolution.
.
HOLLOWING OF SOULS:  Thus, consciousness of Mind is trained to consider self as nothing more than gland of Brain. Quality of consciousness is considered entirely reducible to Quantity of substance. Tribes are selected and trained to polarize themselves as like aligned things and to tattoo their alignments by substituting predator-pack initiations for loyalty oaths. Thus, minds become things, become collectives, become nothing more than eating transformers of substance. Individual merit, responsibility, and purposefulness are reduced to signification of nothingness beyond the mindless collective.
.

Moral Villains

Everyone carries a cross. Everyone endures challenges and inadequacies. Some are born with gross brain deformities, some are born idiots, some are traumatized with physical limitations, some are cast into bereaved or bizarre families and relations. Many are taught to parade their crosses as if they constituted entitlements for asking for, even demanding, reparations. Many are taught that their material wants have nothing to do with individual initiative or merit, but are simply entitlements. None the less, they are taught they are entitled to self esteem and respect, even though their philosophy admits of no basis for meriting such esteem and respect! Go figure. And so, 95 percent of blacks vote for Obama for no other reason than that he is black. Likewise, among many Hispanics, "the race" is all. Same for skinheads (though one hardly senses why minority racists should believe they have principled standing to complain of skinhead racism). Each racist is fond to say that those not of his race cannot relate to his difficulty, hence have no basis to refuse his demands for reparations and revenge. And so, to question a minority person's racism is to be racist. To promote decent values is to be a "phobe." This is moral insanity! Because it tries to divide the quantifiable by the non-quantifiable, it is equal in its insanity to a like assertion that Minorities (especially among those enamored with Obama?) cannot possibly hope to comprehend the responsibility entailed in establishing and preserving a culture of principles for identifying and rewarding merit, nor comprehend the freedom of expression and enterprise that such effort necessitates. Whites saying Minorities lack social responsibility is not so different from Minorities saying Whites lack social understanding. The associated moral blindness is greedily acculturated; it's not strictly genetic. It's acculturated and reinforced by institutional and aristocratic inbreeding that produces generation after generation of small minded, morally blind, "elite" leaders. What is needed is not nihilism, but a thorough delousing. Less coddling, more manning up from adolescence, and a thorough re-examination of moral villains versus exemplars.

Dividing By Zero

Moral Equivalence Derivative Of Faux Objective Division By Zero: More and more, adults are being conditioned to subjugate their subjective responsibility to confused suppositions about "pure objectivity of the external community." Absurd formulations are pounded into us, such as: Freedom, Will, and spiritual participation are mere delusions, byproducts of interactions along the unfolding path of a materially exploding universe. Thus, people are nothing more than units of consumption, and consumption by them is to be, and should be, equally and mathematically unitized. All desires are equal in merit, justice, and rightness. In no context does there abide any qualitatively meritorious choice or culture. Desires of conquered cultures to conquer cultures that conquered them are of equal merit in justice and rightness. Desires of slavers, misogynists, and racists are of equal merit with desires of those who seek to establish and preserve cultures that would avail broad freedom of expression and enterprise. To most fairly distribute material consumption, all units of consumption must be zeroed out. Holistic Will, by permanently extinguishing itself, has given us The Won and shown us the way. There is no progress in moral enlightenment, except to maximize present surrender of sense into oblivion of painlessness. A quick, drugged, and painless apocalypse into oblivion is the closest thing to spiritual fulfillment. Thus, Israel must not defend herself, and slavers must be annihilated in equal part with anti-slavers. Matter must be forced to tolerate anti-matter, for all must be annihilated. It's only objectively logical and fair. There is no alternative material exit from having to endure such reasonings of secular and religious nihilists. There is, however, an idealistic exit. Answers come with asking: What is needed in order to facilitate broad respect for freedom of expression and enterprise among responsible adults? When we begin to ask fundamental moral questions, we will begin to coalesce to moral paths. And we will show the exit to The Won.

Imperial Communism

A spoils system rotted Rome from the head down, and is now on course to rot America in the same way. Except with courage united with vision and fortified in comprehension of history, there will be no escape. Eventually, a spoils systems, like that of Caitline, Crassus, Caeser, and Antony, will always get around to toppling the likes of a Cicero. A spoils system seems always to be about consolidating power by falsely promising to redistribute equality and wealth. The liars who lead either the rulers or the ruled tend hardly to abide any notion of a truly educated or middle class. Of the list above, today's counterparts, respectively, might be Obama, Soros, Putin, Jintao, and Gingrich/Rush. Because Gingrich/Rush is/are hardly Cicero, and not even Cicero had much of a chance, what prayer have we now, against forces gathering to bury any hope for a viable, free, educated, middle class? Recommend Imperium, by Robert Harris, for considering parallels with our present situation.

Polestar

.

Dogma, by itself, is dead. Dogma can help us navigate, but cannot substitute for the polestar. We are cast upon a vast, violent, and changing ocean. For our governance, there is only a spiritual polestar, not a substantive one. For those who would own up to be judged, to become responsible for their own thinking and conduct, there abides an immaterial, political polestar. It abides with asking this question: What is presently needed to be done in order to establish and preserve a society whose adults will continue to be availed decent freedom of expression and enterprise? To ask that question in good faith and good will is to become receptive to answers made far less difficult. To ignore that question, to conflate that polestar with dogma, to hold only to the dogma as the polestar recedes, is to so envy a single lifeline as to cut it in preference to the sainted ship.  The ocean is simply too vast to humor us always to rely on dogma as opposed to the polestar.  We adjust as the tempest of our niche adjusts, or we perish.  Within the tempest with which we find ourselves, a dogma that denies release for children, even as it would prohibit them from employing contraception, is spent.  Being despised in reality, such a dogma feeds disillusionment into immediate gratifications.  It manages a disorderly retreat towards reviving a dark age, where individual responsibility is to be surrendered to the collective --- whether the collective be spiritual or socialist.  Thus, the free and responsible citizen of a city on a hill is to be sacrificed to the old cave of a new dark age.

Aside from concern about capacity, purely from standpoint of aesthetics, there are quite enough people on the planet.  There is hardly reason to worry that enough irresponsible people will not continue to procreate.  Indeed, it is the most irresponsible who most procreate.  The human niche is quite swamped with those who think others must be forced by taxes to finance their irresponsible behavior.  They call this forced financing "charity."  So, the most irresponsible will not support their offspring, much less see to their decent education.  With the collapsing of decent civilization, it's little more than madness to make it our priority to ensure that the breeding of irresponsible, mal-educated, and spiritually misguided children, by such irresponsible children, should continue to go unabated.

What Can Be Salvaged?

.

Why does it so often seem as if there were liars as far as the eye can see and the ear can hear? May it be because objective, substantive existence is a participatory delusion, inferior to subjective, conscious existence? That which appears and presents as being quantifiably objective is held in gossamer place by happenstance of shared, unfolding patterns of delusions. At bottom, it seems unlikely that there is any quantifiable substance to it. So-called externally objective reality fluxes and changes with happenstance of perspective, context, and purpose. It is sponsored and produced derivative of happenstance of our shared participation. Moreover, no perspective shares precisely the same immediate or sequential purposes as any other. Thus, it is impossible that any two perspectives should reach complete accord regarding either what is or what should be. Moreover, the more passionately a perspective identifies with an unfolding purpose, the more he/she/it will incline to view competitors as false and needing to be defeated, often, by all means necessary --- including bait-setting, trap-laying deceit and connivance. Thus, to participate seems to require "lying."

.

Is there an overarching standard that can offer a way to more consistent meaningfulness? Perhaps. But that way will not be found in purely objective empiricism based on some notion of a most ultimate thing in itself "god particle." One may assume a non-quantifiable, qualitative standard: Human beings should cooperate to establish and preserve cultures and nations within which individuals will be raised in families and eventually accorded general freedom of expression and enterprise. Assuming and sharing such a standard, a society may assimilate for preserving it. In that way, agreements may generally be reached for describing the political reality and how best to steer it.

.

Of course, the signs and appearances of objective reality will be steered, regardless.   Signs of reality can be steered by overpowering forces, unforeseen randomizing chaos, or elite and impersonal and lying despots. However, to be steered meaningfully, by conscious and participating human beings, there needs to be inculcated some shared respect for an assimilating vision. That vision could entail general desire for freedom of expression and enterprise. Or it could entail the lording of the elite over the inferior. Or the sudden surrender of mind to chemical or religious apocalypse. Regardless, each participant will make choices and will rationalize such choices in respect of some abstract vision, ideology, faith, or, if need be, energy-sapping confusion. The trick for the American middle class is to find the spiritual, conscious drive to restore faith in itself and to demand it's place of superiority in the American experience. The alternative is the decline of the republic, the destruction of the middle class, the temporary rise of a despotic aristocracy, but all soon falling into another long and dreary age of darkness.

.

Know-it-alls are pushing us pell mell to another dark ages. How can it be otherwise? Assimilating vision is lost. Loyalties are bought. Cult followings are easily duped and established simply by buying media and politicians. Force and influence can be insinuated at every crevice. Yea, even the keystrokes on your computer are counted. Families are undermined. National borders are erased. Charitable funds are first filtered through despots. Votes are corrupted. Pols thrive by promising unsustainable bribes to thought-challenged voters. The most evil, corrupt, narcissistic, and sociopathic are more favored for natural selection now than ever. This babel tower of lies and temporal greed can do naught but fall. The only question is: What can be salvaged?