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?

.