FREE WILL:
.
RE-CONCEPTUALIZATION: The idea of “free will” would seem more useful and coherent were it to be re-conceptualized as a non-quantitatively measurable, yet qualitatively experiential, existent, which is not separately particular or coterminous with each apparently separate physical organism.
.
AVATARS: Rather, free will is experienced and appreciated by a Oneism, which finds iterative expression in a perpetual dance among variegated avatars, with which it imbues its fluxing perspectives. Its avatars do not exist in themselves, much less have free will in themselves, nor do they in themselves give expression to free will. Rather, the avatars only give expression to debates the Oneism has with itself, concerning which significations and sequences it should appreciate as being worthy of being nurtured through unfoldings of manifestations.
.
UNFOLDING ADJUDGMENTS OF MERIT: Thus, appreciation, worth, and merit are reconciled to unfolding concerns and guidance of the Oneism. The fluxing favor of expressiveness that seems to coordinate only with each avatar of perspective is, in that respect, as illusory as are the avatars. “In themselves,” the avatars are only fluxing expressions of the Oneism. In themselves, the avatars have no merit. Their only merit abides in how the Oneism’s experience of them is appreciated, synchronized, and reconciled. Thus, there is no eternally, objectively-measurable good or evil, but only such qualitative good or evil as the Oneism may find to be worthy of availing expression, in various sequences and significations. Thus, it is not we avatars who adjudge that which in a given sequence or duration of signification is either good or evil, but the Oneism, as it reconciles its expressiveness through us. Objectively measurable good and evil do not exist. However, qualitatively changing and experiential good and evil do exist ... in respect of unfolding purposes and reconciliations of the Oneism, of which we avatars and measurable substances are agents for availing signification.
.
RECONCILING AMONG AVATARS: Thus, it is appropriate that our organic avatars and measurable substances should avail means through which participatory expression is availed in a dance, during which what is desired is separated in unfolding sequences from what is not. Moral judgment is not to praise or condemn the merit of a particular appearance of avatar-in-itself, but to reconcile that which coheres with the unfolding appreciation and guidance of the Oneism.
.
COIN OF THE QUALITATIVE HOLISM AND THE QUANTITATIVE SUM OF PARTS: Conscious conceptualizing, thinking, appreciating, and deciding do not appear by themselves, nor as precise compatibalists or coterminants with any minor substance or beingness. The Oneism is not thinking the storm, nor is it lost in the storm. Rather, the quantitative substance of the storm is "the other side of the coin" of the qualitative consciousness of the storm. Unfolding substantive signification is the feedback-sum side of a coin, the other side of which is experienced and expressed as qualitatively-unifying, conscious-will.
.
OVERLAPPING SEQUENCES OF CHOICES: The substantive-significative-measurable side of the coin of beingness can be conceptualized as being determined by (1) presets (past choices), (2) randomizing algorithms and patterns most fit to unfold out of chaos (non-choices which will continue to affect patterns for the future), and/or (3) concurrent conscious choicemaking (present choices) by the Oneism (however sequentially delayed its choices may be in finding manifestation through measuring avatars).
.
WILL IS EXPRESSED AS UPSHOT: Thus, the unfolding of subjective consciousness gives expression to a quality of Will, which is not entirely reducible to quantitative determination or control, but necessitates respect for qualitative boundaries. That is, Will is experienced along “qualitatively open bounds,” even though artifacts of its significations are measurable only in respect of quantitatively closed bounds. Thus, a quality of spirit, purpose, value, merit, and will abides with a quantity of digitally-measurable, quantum-leapiing substance. Merit abides in being empathetically intuitive and respectful of unfolding purposes of the Oneism. There is no reason to suppose that that experience of consciousness is purely epiphenomenal, as opposed to itself being a cause-contributing, merit-appreciative factor, both from the perspective of the whole and from the perspective of the part. When a local state of being is brought to a quality of conscious appreciation, there is no reason to suppose that such experience would not become part of the causal environment or system, to be assimilated and factored for feedback appreciation to the experience of later sequencing aspects of consciousness.
.
FLUX ENTAILS LIBERTY: To avail expression of any consciousness, the Oneism must flux. To flux, the Oneism cannot always equally empower every human perspective. Human beings tend to abide as temples of receptivity to such empathetic intuitiveness. To choke off the receptive expression of such empathetic intuition is to choke off only a local perspective of the freedom and dignity of the Oneism. However, it is also to reduce a human being to a status of subhuman. Were every perspective reduced to an equality, things would not simply be uninteresting; things would not be experienced at all.
.
DIGITAL DELAY BETWEEN QUALITATIVE RECONCILIATION AND QUANTITATIVE EXPRESSION:
May it reasonably be said that no particular observer perceives or measures a field except through its particles, and every particle is availed measurable significance only AFTER it has already, a quantum instant previous, been determined to be expressed by a field?
.
DIGITAL DELAY BETWEEN QUALITATIVE RECONCILIATION AND QUANTITATIVE EXPRESSION:
May it reasonably be said that no particular observer perceives or measures a field except through its particles, and every particle is availed measurable significance only AFTER it has already, a quantum instant previous, been determined to be expressed by a field?
A unitary field determines how each particle is to be expressed, before the particle is expressed (manifested).
In that sense, no manifested particle is causal.
Rather, all are merely significative, though their measurable significations show trends and contexts.
Sequential feedback to the field for its appreciation of trends, contexts, sub-fields, and measured expressions is subjugated to the field’s unfolding qualitative reconciliations.
Thus, communication fluxes back and forth in apprehensions between the qualifying field and its digitized iterations, between consciousness and its perspectives, between holistic (superior) God and particular (inferior) avatars of God.
Mortal notions of "substantive causation" simply do not apply to the conserving, synchronizing, reconciling Holism.
While separate avatars (quantitative bodies) do not themselves have free will, there is no good reason to believe they are not nurtured as way stations for overlapping transfers of perspectives (qualitative minds) of free will.
.
GOD'S MATH:
Does any substance or principle limit the possible number of different kinds of "bosons" that can function as way stations for the transfer of measurable expressions of a zoo of potential particles and forms of mass?
If one kind of particle functions as way station for signifying the transfer of specific bits of measurable mass, may another kind of particle function as way station for signifying transfers of "dark mass" (whose associative effects are measurable only indirectly, in aggregates)?
Might that particle be associated with organizing and transferring expressions of consciousness?
.
BAYES:
At best, temporal-notions-of-causation pertain to tinkering, to detect and manage trends unfolding out of chaos into sensible manifestations.
That is, trends for perspectives of consciousness will tend, trivially, to follow trends for expressions of happenstance.
Depending on level and layer of field of analysis, some trends simply happen presently to be much more reliable than others.
For that, Baye’s Theorem may be more of an observation about trivial happenstance than a principle for running God.
Indeed, does not a quantitative expression of a God-particle implicate a qualitatively expressing God-field?
.
DEATH: Particles and bodies are necessarily temporal, for they, taken in sum, comprise only digital, trace significations of all accumulated information and measurement up to the last present sequence. As each present signification is replaced in sequence by a following digital signification, particular representations of the past must be constantly and organically reconciled and reorganized. So they will be different. A phase-change in organization of an observationally-focused organism will result in phase-out or transformation of that particularly formed organism. Phase change will not, however, result in phase out of the Source of conscious field that temporally fluxed about that organism.
.
HOLISM SELF IMPOSED LIMITS: The Holism experiences freedom to decide what to appreciate and reinforce within a framework it accepts for imposing conservational limits. Only by imbuing avatars for accepting such framework does it capacitate and signify coherent purposefulness. In respect of wormholes for releasing the Holism to other pursuits, neither the Higgs nor any standard model can ever be a complete answer. God cannot confine or explain God.
HOLISM SELF IMPOSED LIMITS: The Holism experiences freedom to decide what to appreciate and reinforce within a framework it accepts for imposing conservational limits. Only by imbuing avatars for accepting such framework does it capacitate and signify coherent purposefulness. In respect of wormholes for releasing the Holism to other pursuits, neither the Higgs nor any standard model can ever be a complete answer. God cannot confine or explain God.
.
STANDARD FRAMEWORK FOR SIGNIFICATIONS: Whatever the nature of the parts that comprise the universe, there seem to be reliably measurable in interfunctionings in respect of the mathematical framework of a standard model. That standard model seems to be coordinate with reliable measurement.
.
ORGANIC AVATAR IDENTITY: Particular consciousness is imbued with its identity by being capacitated with levels and layers of organically polarized significations. Consciousness is not coterminous with perimeters of skin.
.
DANCE OF FEEDBACK: The Holism decides from the perspective of each organism what the organism should do. The Holism does not predetermine or foresee how what the organism chooses to do will actually be successful or reconciled or valued once the decision is completed.
Once completed, the Holism evaluates both from holistic perspective and, later, from perspective of consciousness of the organism. And overlappingly reconciles ... Thus makiing the experience of the present one of feedback as well as of overlapping continuity.
Once completed, the Holism evaluates both from holistic perspective and, later, from perspective of consciousness of the organism. And overlappingly reconciles ... Thus makiing the experience of the present one of feedback as well as of overlapping continuity.
.
APPEARANCE OF CONTINUITY IN TIME: Why is the present experienced as continuous and connected? Why is memory of the past connected and represented to the present? How can discrete states be experienced with appreciation of a consciousness that is contemporaneous with the present?
.
GOODNESS CHANGES: Things are not good in themselves, except as they are thought good, and thoughts necessarily flux and change within a system of conservation.
A Holism fluxes to pursue unfolding experiences of goodness, and our human bodies and brains are only avatars for signifying the communication of its changing purposes. We have free will only in respect of how the Holism speaks and operates through signifiers.
Insofar as we express identification with God’s trending purposes, this may be expressed as temporally “good.”
A Holism fluxes to pursue unfolding experiences of goodness, and our human bodies and brains are only avatars for signifying the communication of its changing purposes. We have free will only in respect of how the Holism speaks and operates through signifiers.
Insofar as we express identification with God’s trending purposes, this may be expressed as temporally “good.”
.
EXPENDABILITY CHANGES: Regardless, all avatars are ultimately expendable, for re-assimilation with the Holism.
.
FRAMEWORK WORMHOLES: Apparently, we are given to derive the standard model for this universe. Perhaps there is a meta-trend, pursuit, or ideal: the establishment and preservation of a decent civilization of freedom and dignity. Perhaps God, through us, will guide ways to establish wormholes to change or phase to alternative models and universes.
.
8 comments:
From A.T. -- The fundamental rule of the cosmos is one of conservation. (I wonder who or what is doing the conserving?) Terms can be fluxed, but equations must be balanced. When fundaments of a framework are changed, the framework itself must change. Those who would respect a framework for liberty within a representative republic must also respect defining parameters, for there is no liberty without rule of law. And There Is No Rule Of Law Once The One Millionth Become Powerful Enough To Buy The Law and its legislators and enforcers. There is no viable incentive for sustaining liberty once incentives have produced despots who have acquired so much wealth and power that they need not respect the liberty of others.
Too many people think only linearly, arithmetically, forgetting that equations must balance if sudden phase shifts for their fundamental terms are to be avoided. Example: The linear mindset of "It's my money and I earned it and merit it and society has no claim on it." By and large, I agree with such sentiment. But I also recognize that society DOES have a claim to this limited extent: to the limited extent of keeping me from accumulating so much money that I can use it to buy and replace the framework itself, with myself and my cronies at the head. By now, we should know that there ARE many people whose character is such that they would pay lip service to a representative republic only until such time as they could buy it or cannibalize it.
Fundamental terms for our constitutional framework has been so changed that, absent prompt corrections, the framework itself must soon change. If we are not already doing so, we will soon be observing only the ceremonies and formalities of constitutional republicanism, while every substantive concern of significance is ruled outside the ceremonial framework. You will spend your time being pulled into circuses about freedom, but you won't participate as a free agent.
Sam Harris has a new book out about Free Will. Like most linear thinking, it gives much insight regarding the trees, but utterly fails to see the forest.
George III was limited in his power over Britains, but acted like he was not limited with respect to the colonies. The colonies did not want to be serfs to the mother country, yet many of their inhabitants kept slaves personal to themselves. People then were struggling as they are now to find, establish and sustain decent principles. Every real American now wants the right and liberty to participate in that process. Every real American values right to freedom, over security in equal droppings from elitists. Americans celebrate Independence Day; Collectivists celebrate Free Stuff day.
Power of the Feds (owned and operated by international en-serfing cronies) needs to be more clearly limited! The greater the ambiguity, the greater the opportunity for exploitation. Power to tax needs to be closely tied and limited to power to regulate. To restrict direct power to regulate while not restricting power to accomplish the same thing, indirectly, via taxation, is a wide open door, nay, a bottomless pit, for inviting abuse.
It is not enough merely to say that Congress must be made to butt out of social engineering, either for or against. In part, this is because a failure to choose to incentive certain behaviors in the face of dangerous trends is itself a kind of choice: a choice to leave society defenseless against whatever trends may be ginned up by conniving opportunists and hedge artists. I doubt it's even possible simply to "butt out" on every question of social engineering.
Unfortunately, precedents for worming great holes for interpreting the Constitution to overbalance fed power against state and local power are now firmly infested throughout the republic. Cut a worm in half and two new worms grow. The patient is so ill that a constitutional convention, dangerous though it be, may be the only hope.
I mainly agree. Because there's inadequate groundwork, a constitutional convention would be foolhardy. In the Founders' day, there was groundwork in which they were very well educated. Much thought had been given to ideas of liberty, economic liberty, checks and balances, and rights of humanity. Today, there is a different kind of challenge to our system, coming from hierarchical centralizing collectivists of every flavor: socialist, environmental, and corporatist. While there abides a plethora of rationalizing in support of each collectivizing flavor, few ideas are circulating about how to limit the overall trend towards elitist-ruled collectivism. Scientists, greenies, socialists, and corporatist cronies all have their rationalizations for why they should rule. Their rationales marinate throughout the Rino and Dino parties. The rationales of anarchists and libertines are not systems of well thought out counter-ideas, but justifications for bringing things down, choking the leviathan, and diversely tolerating the non-assimilable. While independent, middle class thinkers of the Tea Party provide hope, they have not developed an assimilating groundwork of ideas for how to check against the rising tide of centrally collectivizing crony corporatists. Until more groundwork is forthcoming, a convention would simply pour gas on a steady bar-b-que. The fundamental challenge is only beginning to be identified, but ideas for solutions are sparse. It's not enough simply to tell cronies to stop buying up politicians, who have well learned how to make circus promises to the electorate, while planning how to excuse being unable to deliver.
In a nutshell, Obama's program consists only in carving up and redistributively cannibalizing Western Culture. Once that's consumed, his followers won't have a clue. They have no sustainable sense or ideals, apart from "Get yo free stuff." Their culture of "music" and entertainment is twisted around nothing more substantive than rationalizing redistributions and perversions. Every attempt to draw a line is ridiculed as vain. Once all sustainable ideals are corrupted, they will have made themselves right only by having made themselves worthless.
When you're The One, the Monarch of Nature, you can't be wrong. So none who disagree with you can be right. At best, they're ignored, then patronizingly informed, then ridiculed, then, if necessary, rolled over. Godless elitists cannot in time be reformed. They have volleyed their avalanche, and Conservatives cannot now turn it back merely by talking to it.
The Tea Party may be torn. On one hand, many among it want respect instilled for traditional family values. On the other hand, they do not want Congress to be free to force Leftist-bent social engineering of every conceivable variety through the ruse of absolute power to tax. Problem is, our diversely divided culture seems to be easy prey for dope dealers (of every variety of physical and cultural dopery). The money-backed trend of regulation is not to reinforce sustainable families, but to tear them down. The trend towards further division through birth rates, which will produce ever more easy marks, seems nigh unstoppable. Without strong checks, money for financing predators has become astonishingly more influential than mere talk. If the Tea Party can assimilate a position, it should be to back some kind of Amendment that would constrain Congress so that nothing in its power to tax should allow it to invade or diminish rights reserved to the States. However, mere talk and law will NOT reverse the trend (especially if amnesty is allowed and the border continues to be insulted).
Instead of making the world safe for democracy, the uninterrupted trend has been to tame humanity to the rule of collectivist elites. We're now mired in that thick syrup. America tried to free Native Americans by forcing them to give up reservatons for homesteads. We corporatized and called ourselves "free," but called the Natives "collectivist tribalists." Words seem to dance in unconscious circles. Maybe the Tea Party could raise consciousness by calling for a national Ghost Dance, to try to free us from 150 years of dehumanizing, coercive centralization of elitism. Bury my heart in Chicago elitism, progressively run by international corporatists.
Post a Comment