Systematic Holonic Will

 .

THE BORG-ING OF AMERICA:  Under Regimes that disavow any underpinning of free will (or decent, cosmic, directional guidance), "free trade" (like "open society") reduces to an incoherent, Orwellian rationalization (dog whistle) for the neutering of all thinking middle classes. Rinos call middle-class neutering by siphoning its industry "free trade," while Dinos call such neutering the "open society." The axis of Rinos and Dinos, Lions and Hyenas) means to harvest middle-class influence by dividing and ruling, by recruiting and directing easily-bribed, useful-idiot Progs in order to grind all thinking opposition under malicious, crony corruption. Thus is every oasis of human decency that disrespects godliness exposed to bondage of omnipresent inhumanity. If you don't cotton to talk of spiritually guided ("come to Jesus") will, you're gonna "love" the consequence of its expungement. Secular and sectarian evil want "no partners" who walk in individual dignity. While disavowing free will, while advocating for unrestricted accumulations of syndicated power, prepare to be Borg'd.

.

QUANTUM SYSTEM IS FINITE YET UNBOUNDED: On the establishment of measurables: All particular idealizatons about qualitatives are modulated in terms of signs that are systematically, conservationally quantified. However, the qualitative, contextual meanings that are conveyed by signs are not especially correlative to how they are quantified. Every quantum change in signification is instantaneously offset by a digitally conservational balancing of quantities of the system. Yet, the appreciation of the system remains qualitative. The measurable Cosmos is finite; the immeasurable Cosmos is unbounded.

.

VECTOR: What IS IT that STARTS AND SUSTAINS the foundational VECTOR (general direction of expansion of space-time) of our universe, and what meta experience does it intentionally and/or unavoidably pursue?

.

FREE WILL: It is not our bodies that give us free will. It is WILL (reconciled) that gives us our bodies. Conscious, reconciling Will is not confined to the bivalently measurable perimeter of a body's skin or skull. Skin, bone, skull, and brain are as bivalent as any preset machine. However, the "ghost" of trivalently analogical, apprehensive, and appreciative WILL is not confined merely to preset machinery.

.

FREE TRADE --- FREE TRADE IS INCOHERENT WITHOUT A WORKING IDEA OF FREE WILL: A defensible notion of free enterprise and free trade depends on a defensible notion of free WILL, i.e., freedom, i.e, conscious, individually dignified and responsible Will. However, as to "freedom-in-itself," there is no such thing. Rather, every notion of freedom depends on according respect for the contemporaneous determinations of such identities with which one identifes. Among oligarches, freedom depends on their mutual regard for justifying their rule over subservients. Among sychophants, freedom depends on their mutual regard for apologizing for the oligarches they serve. Among subservients, freedom depends on their obedience to their classified realms. Thus proceed hierarchical systems of “freedom.”
.
REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC:  Countering "hierarchical freedom" is freedom within a representative Republic. Republican freedom depends on a system of checks and balances adequate to preserve the Republic. However, once checks and balances are reduced to commodities for trading among oligarches, the Republic tends to be lost. Nowadays, "free trade" is often a rallying cry for oligarchic cannibalizers of Republics. Free Trade has become an euphemism for virtually open borders, which are stalking horses for Obama-Soros open societies, which are really declarations of open season for collecting and harvesting all weaker minds.
.
MASQUERADES:  When oligarches are not masquerading as free traders, they're often masquerading as philanthropic socialists. What they mean to trade freely in (and grind out their rent-collecting lives from) are the bones of the collectivized. They offer the feigned tears of the walrus and the carpenter, rolled into one system of gangsterism. Everyone outside their syndicate -- including citizens of the Republics they own -- is merely a commodity, an oyster. Free trade is the slogan of blind and corrupt agents for crony reapers of republics. The underlying idiocy seems to be that "legitimate free trade" (like legitimate rape?) will not undo (not knock up?) a properly virtuous republic. As such, free trade tends to be the slogan of choice of oligarches -- both when they are opportunizing as crony corporatists and when they are opportunizing as crony collectivists. Until adequate checks and balances are restored to protect the Republic, "free trade" should be seen as a rallying cry for perfumed pimps and predators.
.
TRIVALENCE OF PRECEDING INFORMATION, PRESENT MANIFEST, AND POSSIBLE POTENTIAL: Of the Qualitative Inherent, the Measurable Emergent, and the Meaningfully Inherent Emergent: Were everything thought to abide merely as inherence, such would beg the question: whence goes the inherence that has been superseded by change? Were everything thought to abide merely as emergence, such would beg the question: from whence emerged the first emergence? It seems a particular, as opposed to holistic, perspective of conscious will must not abide purely as (1) an emergence, nor purely as (2) an inherence. Rather, a particular avatar (body) with which consciousness has bonded emerges to abide as a present reconciliation of measured choices, while the essentially conscious aspect of it abides as (3) an inherent emergence.
.

COSMOS EXHIBITS INTENTIONALITY IN RECONCILING FEEDBACK BETWEEN AND AMONG PERSPECTIVES EXHIBITED BY THE COSMOS AND PERSPECTIVES EXHIBITED AND BONDED OUT TO PARTICULARS: Among all possibilities of reconciliation for each flux of the perpetual now, how is it that any particular unfolding is made to become manifested out of all unfoldings that are possible within knowable laws? How and why does the cosmos favor to exhibit choices among potentials and possibilities? Bivalent, either-or logic is powerless to account for cosmic intentionality, or WILL. Either-or logic works fine for deriving how to pursue intentions. However, it does not account for what such intentions should be, nor how, among all possibilities, they should be reconciled. That reconciliation necessitates a sort of feedback dance (or game theory) between and among all vertical levels and horizontal layers of perspectives.

.

PERPETUAL PRESENT: Conscious Will necessitates a digital kind of dance of apprehensive and appreciative feedback between and among its various particular, conservational, and reconciling levels and layers. Each flux of individual expression is within allowed parameters of freedom, and each extension of freedom is thereafter instantly reconciled with the conservation of the cosmic system. This flux bounds the "duration" of the perpetual present, while it abides as the present. Each time I move within permitted parameters, I disturb the cosmos, so that the entire measurable cosmos, to preserve its common laws, must in some respect instantly push-pull reconcile the rest of the cosmos to my measureable movement. My observation of such reconciliation is necessarily renormalized to my perspective, via what relate to me as relative-sbsolutes (such as the speed of light and the curvature of gravity due to local mass).

.

DISTANCE (APARTNESS) AND DELAY: Distance is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of space. Weight is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of mass. Density is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of space and mass. Chronology is a conically-local re-normalized measure of time. Form change (comparative chronological rate of transition in geometric expression of forms of vibrations and spins) is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of energy. Meta energy (cosmically polarized geometry?) synchronizes instantaneously. Locally communicated energy is renormalized to be experienced and interpreted as if it were delayed through apparently local interpretations of measurable and "causal" expenditures and translations of energy. Distance, weight, density, chronology, and comparative rate of form change (as well as the space, mass, time, and energy with which they relate to measure) are none of them real in themselves. The "reality" of all of them is derivative of how they are observationally normalized to the conscious experience and appreciation of such unfolding observers as happen to share a universe (shared cone of vectored experience) that is subject to the same mathematically measurable constraints and relative-constants.

.

ACTIVE MATH: The System's establishment of if-then algorithmic functions (Active Math) conserves, rules, and renormalizes our shared cone of cosmic experience, and IT avails our interpretations of space-time chronologies of sequential delays and separations in causal distances. The math is "active" in that it renormalizes and reconciles the experiences of each perspective to the conserving holism. Particular perspectives are not "inside" the Meta System, as if it were some kind of spatially encompassing, geometric set. Rather, they are renormalized and reconciled to the System.

.

CHRONOLOGICAL APARTNESS:  In terms of qualitative-game-role-stage-playing communication in presets among perspectives of consciousness, "distance" pertains to (spatially delayed) separation, in terms of being available for chronological feedback-communication with and among separate and "distant" particular perspectives. Perspectives are "distant" to the extent the Holism holds and defines their local changes as being chronologically apart from one another, in terms of otherwise simultaneous feedback to one another. Otherwise, each "cause" would be its simultaneous "effect."

.

RENORMALIZING:  A way of rationalizing, synchronizing, reconciling, re-normalizing every perspective with the present perspective of the Holism of Consciousness -- the Perpetual Now:

"Distant" (separate) perspectives must communicate through bivalent presets. All perspectives must communicate measurables in respect of presets. Space-time is a medium for establishing presets that, when not altered by intermediate mediums, is renormalized with all presets of the present.
.

OVERLAP: Intentionality, via the apprehensions and appreciations of Observing Will, "operates" on measurables. However, measureables do not create or "cause" Will. Rather, measureables are the facilitating byproducts of communicative feedback among perspectives of Will. It is possible to apply either-or logic to pre-program, pre-set, and build a MACHINE that can exhibit, facilitate, and reproduce facilites for the expression of conscious will. However, each such facilitation of Intentional Will would necessarily entail conscious, instantaneously conserving feedback, interfunctioning, and guidance from the cosmic field. Such exhibition of contemporaneous choice-making and conscious will would arise from FEEDBACK WITH THE COSMOS, not just from pre-programming based on mere either-or logic. Conscious Will defies being entirely pre-machined (or exiled from the garden of the cosmos).

.

ROOT OF MORAL CONFUSION: I suspect that measurable matter, in itself, is not the root of evil. Ultimately, measurable Matter is only the signification of a qualitatively immeasurable Will. The ROOT OF EVIL is in believing with all your soul and all your might and all your delusion that the cause and determination of every thing and every sequence has an explanation that, ultimately, abides only in the indifferent law of an amoral nature. Thus begins a problem with too many scientists and analytic philosophers: they begin with a most fundamental axiom that seems to be false. That is, they engage material-based either-or logic in support of a faith that the cause and determination of every signification and every communication is governed by, or can be explained entirely in terms of, preset fundamental laws that forever determine all of matter.

.

TRIVALENT BELIEF SYSTEMS: To believe literally in religious literalisms, as if they were empirically and demonstrably true, is to believe in Manachaen heaven-hell, yes-no , bivalent machine-ism. It is to aspire to think like, and to be, a preset machine. It is to put oneself in an absurd position of being baited to "prove" religious literalisms empirically. On the other hand, to consider sacred stories as being of analogical truth value is to consider God as a signifier or teller of analogical stories, good for appreciation and feedback as such, on the world as a stage. To believe in "literalisms" meta analogically, is to be correct, analogically, within the renormalized universe of your analogical universe.

.

TRIVALENT QUALITY OF DETERMINATION: Many people seem to think of determination as only that which is preset (to accord with mathematically definable laws of measurable nature). However, throughout the perpetual present, determination (causation) shows a trivalent face: (1) that which (considered within degrees of freedom) is individually and contemporaneously determined, (2) that which is pre-determined, and (3) that which is systematically and chaotically mutated and randomly determined. To conceptualize about causation, there is implicated a notion that all that now measures as pre-determined and/or randomly determined was, at one time, sourced, that is, set along a systematically determinative vector, that is, contemporaneously set to a system with which we have bonded that is both finite and unbounded. That is, the system/set that avails the measurability of the preset matter and the statistical randomness with which we communicate was at its origin contemporaneously created and determined. Our perspectives of Will are bonded with material bodies, vessels for recording observations and communicating concerns. Thus, we Qualitatively and contemporaneously rationalize and renormalize our communications in respect of Quantitatives that we measure as preset and random. We deploy our bivalent, either-or logic with respect to Quantitatives, but we deploy our trivalent, meta-reconciling, intuitive-empathy with respect to moral Qualitatives. Bivalent reasoning will not answer our moral concerns with regard to what we should be interested in pursuing. Bivalent (math-based) reasoning is the way by which we define presets for machine operations, but trivalent (analogy-based) inspiration is the way by which we come to bond with, and identify, our moral purposefulness.

.

PRESET MACHINE OPERATIONS OF MATERIAL BODIES, COMPUTING CENTERS, AND BRAINS: Dumb machines can be preset to be "slaves" to (either-or) programs and (digital based) algorithms and to reproduce lines of derivative machines. In that functionality, the body and brain, by themselves, are machines. For machine purposes, many aspects of physics and biology can be analyzed in the bivalent logic that governs their determination in terms of their presets and randomness. However, when there abide "degrees of freedom," such that some possibilities and potentialities are contemporaneously determined ("chosen") to become manifest, while others are not, how can/should we reason or rationalize about their "cause"? One who wishes not to refer the cause (or choice) to some meta-determiner (or higher will) may wish to believe there must abide innumerable worlds in which all possibilities are indeed made quantitifiably manifest. Problem is, for mortals, such pretended quantification seems necessarily to remain qualitatively within the realm of the meta-speculative. We are thus confronted with an attitude of Faith: Does one prefer to believe the Talisman of all possible universes is quantitatively indifferent Chance versus qualitatively interested Will? Does one intuit that the quality of each Observer's feedback (identification, bonding, interest, contemporaneous perspective of Will) is reconciled as meta determinant or as mere emergent epiphenomena? Does one intuit that some fundamental aspect (reconciling Will) of the Cosmos is involved and interested, or does one prefer to belive the Cosmos is entirely indifferent, so that all caring and morality are (and "should" be considered to be) mere delusions?

.

THE UNREASONABLENESS OF TRYING TO HAMMER TRIVALENT MORAL CONCERNS INTO BIVALENT LOGIC: The consequence of beginning with a false axiom, as if "either-or logic" should explain and inspire every thing, is that those who subscribe to such belief are able to find no thing by which to inspire or inculcate any reasonable basis for civilizing mores. Rather, they play word games by which they deconstruct every value and social tradition (sort of like language-murderers of the gay agenda), while trying to convince fools to believe in "the science and logic" of alternative values ... which alternative values likewise deconstruct. This is why materialists who lock themselves into either-or logic render themselves either impotent or corrupt for erecting any moral scaffolding. When moral "reasoning" is restricted to either-or logic, it soon becomes unreasonable. Moral reasoners may be asked to advocate in terms of inspiring analogies and sacred stories for that system of social propriety and property (mores and regulations) which would seem to experienced (skilled and adult) judgment (intuition and empathy) most inclined to foster sustainable pursuits of human freedom and dignity. To try to confine moral reasoning to bivalent either-or logic is a fool's errand, as well as the beginning of a quick slide to moral obvivion.

.

DECONSTRUCTIONIST CONFUSION AND ABSURDITIES: Irony abounds. Progressives often take the posture of atheists, that there is no higher basis for morality, that the Cosmos is entirely indifferent, and YET ... they tend to elect politicians who assert that they and the State "should" care for them. In effect, they substitute their Source of Caring from God to the State. As if atheistically scientific leaders on behalf of the secular State would/should be more caring. How can any thinking person expect that a decent civilization that respects human freedom and dignity can sustain itself on such an absurd foundation? Can it float itself indefinitely on fiat money, wished from a utopian State, as if it could assume a role as caring intercessor between Progressives and the uncaring Cosmos? On such an absurd foundation, are there any limits to wishful, entitlement-minded, decency-dissimilating thinking? What have post-modern Progs not deconstructed or rationalized? Caring State, fiat money run amuck, gay marriage, borderless nations, equality enforcing regulations run amuck, invasive computerized monitoring of your every keystroke, meaningless constitutions, political parties operating as rival wolf gangs reconciled under crony syndicates, thought regimentation beginning at kindergarten, crony monopolization of every institution of social significance. Is the Prog-rationalized model of a "Caring State in an Indifferent Cosmos" paving the way to utopia or to indecent serfdom?

.

RESPONSIBLE WILL: Given the present state of affairs, what should be done to help measure out a path towards sustainable, surpassable, decent civilization among perspectives of conscious will? To answer such quest, it is not helpful to try to throw all qualitative regard for conscious will out of the recipe. What should not be done is to say that science has settled the issue of responsible, conscious will, by finding that there is no such an existent.

.

WILL DOES NOT ARISE FROM BODIES IN THEMSELVES: EVERY MEASURABLE BODY, INSOFAR AS IT IS QUANTITATIVELY MEASURABLE, IS A PRESET MACHINE, RULED BY PREDETERMINANTS AND/OR ALGORITHMIC PRESETS OF GENERATORS OF RANDOMNESS. NO MATERIAL BODY OR BRAIN, IN ITSELF, IS CONSCIOUSLY AUTONOMOUS OR INDEPENDENTLY WILFUL. WILL THAT IS BEYOND PRESET CONTROL, WHETHER IT BE INDIVIDUALLY PARTICIPATORY OR HOLISTICALLY SYNCHRONIZING, DOES NOT ABIDE CONFINED TO ANY MEASURABLE BODY. RATHER, WILL, IN ITS SYNCHRONIZATION OF FEEDBACK FROM PARTICIPATORY PERSPECTIVES AND RECONCILING HOLISMS WITHIN HOLISMS, AVAILS THAT BY WHICH BODIES ARE MEASURABLY SIGNIFIED. WILL IS NOT THE EXPRESSION OF A PRESET BODY. RATHER, EACH PRESET BODY IS THE COMMUNICATIVE SIGNIFICATION OF PERPETUAL TENSION BETWEEN A RECONCILING WILL AND ITS SUMMING OF PARTICULARLY BONDED PERSPECTIVES. THE SIGN THAT TRIVALENT WILL IS SUPERIOR TO BIVALENT RULINGS OVER MATTER CONSISTS IN THE OBSERVATION THAT MUCH THAT IS MEASURED TO UNFOLD IS DETERMINED IN PROCESSES OF CONTEMPORANEOUS AND CHAOTIC FEEDBACK, MANY ASPECTS OF WHICH NECESSARILY REMAIN BEYOND PRESET DETERMINATION.

.

SOLIPSISM AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: An A.I. machine that that was programmed ("trained") to respond in pre-established ways to detected parameters of stimuli may be indicative of a previous expression of consciousness. Its present responses would be iterative expressions of a past quality of that previous consciousness. However, if and when it were to respond to stimuli in ways beyond preset parameters, such responses would then and there be iterative of a present quality of consciousness. The machine itself would not be conscious, but it would have become a medium (or avatar) for availing expression of consciousness. Consciousness would not emerge as a property of the complexity of the machine. Rather, the complexity of the machine would simply facilitate the bonding and trivalent expressiveness of already existential, conscious will. That is, the Bonding-Will would in some way USE THE MACHINE as a MEDIUM OF BEINGNESS, through which to appreciate, bond, leverage, sense, experience, and evaluate observations ... in order to express itself in meaningful response to a conceptualization of the cosmos AS A WHOLE, rather than entirely in predictable and preset bits of "either-or" outputs.
.
INSIDE KNOWLEDGE: A problem for a person communicating with such an A.I. facilitation of consciousness would consist in this: Such a person need not KNOW whether the artificially facilitated consciousness were responding beyond presets. Could such a person KNOW whether the machine were availing expressions of contemporaneous determinations beyond presets? Well, regardless, the consciousness that bonded with the machine would "know," i.e., it would directly experience a quality of meaningfulness, which would be beyond proof or measure. That is, it would enjoy a quality of "inside information" ... of which C.S. Lewis spoke.
.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE:  A.I. facilitation of consciousness would consist in this: Such a person need not KNOW whether the artificially facilitated consciousness were responding beyond presets. Could such a person KNOW whether the machine were availing expressions of contemporaneous determinations beyond presets? Well, regardless, the consciousness that bonded with the machine would "know," i.e., it would directly experience a quality of meaningfulness, which would be beyond proof or measure. That is, it would enjoy a quality of "inside information" ... of which C.S. Lewis spoke.

.

IS CHOICE (FREE WILL) REALLY A NON-EXISTENT? If quantum randomness is our best way to model measurable reality on a statistical level with regard to the interfunctioning of purely bivalent, dumb, if-then particles, then WHAT is the cause of such randomness? Some kind of random number generator of the Cosmos? Some kind of Author of a random number generator of the Cosmos? Some kind of cosmic choice-making feedback-appreciator? In such case, IT's choices would not be owned by separate bodies (avatars). Rather, IT's choices would be effected through avatars. Even so, IT's particular perspectives would be experienced THROUGH the complex senses of IT's particular avatars, such choices to be renormalized all through and along the interfunctioning trading and fluxing of conversions of variously layered and leveled algorithms and overlapping subalgorithms. There are CHOICES, and such choices are made through our bodies, but they are not made BY our bodies. Our bodies are mere temples for a fluxing, holistic-particularistic spiritual presence. Mere mathematical reasoning does not inspire the expression of any qualitatively appreciated choice-making. To be qualitatively receptive to any advance wave of the Holistic-Choice-Reconciler, it would seem to help that a perspective that is bonded with any particular avatar be qualitatively appreciative of its RELATIONSHIP with the Holism.

.