Self Programming Programmer of Programs -- Binary Code

BREAK IT DOWN -

METAPHORS AND MODELS: Why does Dawkins seat his metaphor of selfishness (or "behavioral tendencies") in genes, as opposed to organisms, niches, cosmos, or programmers? Dawkins wants to conceptualize genes as replicators, organisms as their vehicles, and cosmic environments as their niches. Yet, he recognizes that MEMES also can be replicators. Presumably, he recognizes that memes can lie dormant in books, until such time as they find suitable minds to serve as vehicles for propagating them. So, what about memes of memes, patterns of patterns, and contexts of contexts? Can an existentially fundamental and clear line really be drawn between a replicator and its vehicle, or between a programmer and its program?

MEASURABLE BEHAVIOR: Dawkins explains how GENES seem to behave mathematically in reinforcing kin selection, AS IF they were purposively selfish. He recognizes that genes are not in themselves conscious, yet they seem to function AS IF they were driven or pre-programmed to exhibit comparative selfishness, based on capacity to preserve survival-machined organisms for paying their genes forward, almost as immortals. He wants to call the language of purposefulness, selfishness, and drivenness as if they were mere metaphors, because he does not consider genes in themselves as "really" being conscious. However, this kicks the can down the road of regress.

SEAT OF CAUSATION: If the gene is unconscious, and the organism does not have free will, and the future is not predetermined, then what does "cause" mean, and where does causation come from? Where do purpose, direction, determination, drive, selfishness, indifference, and altruism come from?

WHY do genes behave in pre-programmed ways? How are the programs preset? How are the programs changed or mutated? If the environment or the context (encompassing and including the program of the gene) affects, programs, and changes the programs of the genes, then is it the environment that is purposive? Is energy emanating from a Big Bang purposive for programming patterns, which in turn program more complex patterns (notwithstanding entropy)?  However, if the quantifiable environment is entirely constrained to unconscious math and statistics, then how can it make sense to conceptualize the environmental context as the purposive programmer? Does originating energy plus entropic expansion necessarily, dumbly, and naturally select for more and more complex replicators of patterns?

METAPHYSICS: Insofar as patterns are manifestations of programs, may there abide some spiritual aspect behind the physical environment, which functions akin to purposively programming consciousness?  Is the Big Bang a physical reality, or a derivative of a spiritually emanating binary code that continuously programs itself in respect of feedback?  If the binary code system of programming is all there is, then how is it continuously programmed and re-programmed -- unless there abides a program self-programmer?

SELF PROGRAMMER OF BINARY CODE: May there abide a spiritual, immeasurable, qualitative, source-essence, i.e., a self programming pre-programmer of constantly-changing programs?  May the building block of the apparent cosmos best be conceptualized as a system of self-programming, that "meta-vibrates" and fluxes to exhibit variously relating, resonating, reinforcing, replacing, renormalizing, reconciling, conserving layers and levels of programs -- all based in binary code?

CAUSE OF BINARY CODE: What could be the "cause" of the binary code that propagates pre-programs, generally? Must the programming be that of a self-programmer? If such an existent is reasonable to intuit, its existentiality abides as a spiritual immeasurable. The self-programming programmer of the cosmic program would be like a spiritually conscious, resonating, guiding God.

CIVILIZING OUGHTS: Dawkins believes human organisms should exercise their capacity to overrule some of the diktat of their "selfish" genes. But why does he believe they SHOULD do so? In respect of what values does he believe they should do so? And to what, if not from pre-programmed diktat, does he believe they should look in order to derive or establish such values? Despite protestations, does not Dawkins, as surely as every other militant scientist, take a leap of spiritual faith, not into science, but scientism?

BUILDING BLOCK:  Ultimately, the building block for our apparent reality seems better conceptualized not as a material particle, but as an immaterial program.  A no-thing.  Not a nature-based gene-meme of natural selection. Rather, a participatory, feedback-based program of self-programming, artificial selection.  Like a mind that changes itself, a program that programs itself.

CONSEQUENCES:

- GOD: God, as the meta source-essence whose meta-vibrations resonate to define, delimit, and drive us, continues to guide us (has not left the building).
- BUILDING BLOCKS: The ultimate building blocks for all that we experience are programs derivative of binary code --- not any system of material particles-in-themselves.
- SELF WILL: We express localized functions of participatory self-programming (participatory will).
- CIVILIZATION: We carry innate capacity to phase into civilized, empathetic, moral beings that can become aware of self and service to God.
- TRINITY: The upshot of the system of self-programming of programs is to avail expression of self-aware purposefulness (consciousness), measurably physical relations (substance), and rules and equations and sequences for limiting and programming the ranges of their interfunctionings (information).  The trinitarian upshot is Consciousness, Substance, and Information.
- CHRISTIANITY AND RECONCILIATION: In spiritual and moral effect, the consequences seem to mirror most of those of Christianity. The potential worth of the human form, in terms of its participatory freedom and dignity, is respected.  Thus, spirituality and science are reconcilable.
- PROPHECY:  Feedback will continue to be reconciled in the binary code.  The new stabilizing shapes of things to come and when they are to come are beyond the clear knowledge or foresight of any mortal.  At best, we can continue in good faith to try to be receptive to intuitionally available guidance from the Reconciler.  We can temper good faith in good will among ourselves, i.e., empathy grounded in service to the Lord.  In that way, we can seek to continue to establish, communicate, and preserve decent civilization.

NOTES REGARDING CONCEPTUAL RATIONALIZATION:

Regardless of whatever flux may crystalize out of chaos and into a system of stable complexity, anti-God people would rationalize that such temporal stability was a consequence of an evolutionary stable strategy (ESS), i.e., an "unconscious strategy" that just happened to happen "because" of the "selfish behavior" of unconscious building blocks.

The accessibility of math to easy rationalization is a wonder.  Indeed, if all that we experience is derivative of vibrations of a source-essence, then such vibratons would by definition broadcast binary code, such that the expression of every program would conform to a kind of inherent math.  Thus, an anti-God person may ratonalize that "dumb math" is the father of the cosmos.  However, such a rationalization would ignore that the math is mysteriously self-reflective, self-responsive, and self-programming.

Since physical matter does not really exist in itself, space, time, matter, and energy do not really exist in themselves.  What seems to exist in itself is a paradoxically changeless-changer, i.e., a self-programming programmer, i.e., a source-essence that vibrates.  All that appears and seems to be material is ultimately no-thing really physical, nothing more than binary code, programmed to express simulations that are normalized to local interpretations.  Such a self -programming, ongoing, unfolding system of programs seems inherently and qualitatively godlike, rather than "dumb."

POLYTHEISM: What if there happened to abide more than one vibrating source-essence?  If so, to be relevant to one another, they would have to share a potentially commonizing context.  Suppose there are two. That would implicate that a unifying programmer-program were the Author of both.  In other words, that the two subservient source-essences were, from another perspective,  the programs of an encompassing programmer.  Thus, the implication remains:  A singular unifying reconciling source-essence.  Moreover, binary code is binary code.  If the singular Author split into several sub-authors, each would still express itself in code that was ultimately reducible to binary code.  Such code would still give expression to C, S, and I.  The expression of C, S, and I is still the expression of C, S, and I.  Consciousness is Consciousness.  Identity is Identity.  Perspective is Perspective.

REPRESENTATION:  The meta vibrations that inherently express the binary code from which all experience is derived are connected to their source-essence in a self-referential, self-normalizing, self-reconciling, self-programming way.  A binary code of vibrations can represent a form for representing an original idealization of an apparent and measurable thing, but it cannot by itself be the original thing, nor can it by itself be the originating idealizer of the idealized thing.  Math does not exist by itself, apart from a source-essence of beingness.  Indeed, there is no representative conception that can, by and in itself, be a measurable thing.  It can only be a representation that can be conceptually attributed to an idealizer.  The Idealizer itself is a singularity: a self programming programmer; a self-reconciling reconciler of its perspectives of idealization; a source-essence of meta vibrations.  It may be intuited or implicated, as the implicated orderer.  Its purposes may be empathetically interpreted.  But it cannot beyond itself be objectively known or measured.

The Cosmos as a Self Programming Computer

Cannot binary-based computer signal switches be set to regulate functions algorithmically, to control logic gates and signals for expressing every kind of systemic, conservation based flux?  In respect of a power source, every kind of discrete, continuous, constant, fluxing, directional, alternating, reversing, reverberating, juxtaposing, superimposing, dimensional signal can be represented in binary code.  If the power source is self programming in response to its own flux of internal feedback, it may facilitate switches for expressing logical functions for every kind of math and dimension based geometry.  It may express yes-no, true-false, go-stop, either-or, and/or, random, series, resistence, alternatiion, flux, expansion, contraction, trade off, transition.  An ultimate, self-programming power source may program sub-self-programming power sources.  An intelligently aware computer may program sub-perspectives of itself that are confined to experience lower levels of dimensional analysis and awareness.  Their programs may be such as to end their facilitations of local consciousness before they can transcend or assimilate to become or merge with separate yet higher perspectives of consciousness.

How is it that we, in our consciousness, sense, record, analyze, and remember "substance" and "information?" What gives abstractions meaning is, ultimately, a character (God?) that we can perhaps intuit, but not measure or confine -- whether or not we profess to have faith in it. What I would call the three faces of God (Consciousness, Substance, and Information) seem to relate (con-substantiate) in ways that no logic or science will ever confine to measured explanation.

It seems some fundament abides that is both causal and/but, in itself, immeasurable. Maybe it applies nothing more than binary code to self program itself. If the ultimate Source does program itself, that seems pretty qualitatively mysterious and godlike. I doubt such a fundamental qualitative can reasonably be expected to be reduced to quantitative control, especially by any mortal.

As to its qualitative character, whether it is caring or indifferent, it would seem to me to entail a more difficult faith to believe it is entirely indifferent than to believe that it is involved in feedback as it continues to self program. It's a mystery. Being a mystery, I would opt for that fundamental orientation towards moral purposefulness that seems most conducive to decent sustenance of civilized freedom and dignity. That seems to consist in Christian values. I agree that any kind of worldview will unavoidably entail a leap of faith.

I have given up on the scholastic-essentialist philosophers. And I don't find the foundational assumptions of analytic philosophers to be much of an improvement for addressing the most important concerns of humanity. They seem too much to subordinate the participatory conscious will of human beings to their ideas of pre-determining or overriding natural laws. I think that way leads to a moral dead end, much the same as alchemy led to a scientific dead end.

I think I see the outline of an alternative. I have not seen a name for it, so I may need to make one up. I guess I would call it CSI Feedback Philosophy. Were I to apply it to think about an implicate order, I would conceptualize the implicate order to be an unfolding beingness that fluxes to express CSI -- consciousness, substance, information. Such a philosophy would recognize that every measurable manifestation of substance must balance to obey a requirement of conservation. But it would also recognize a participatory role for consciousness to reconcile among the possibilities that are availed in potentiality, in order to choose which ones to make part of the manifestations that are rolled into the informational record. The capacity to choose is the key to placing moral responsibility. Without respect for freedom to choose, the arts of civilization seem to reduce to a pig farm.

If God is consciousness, and consciousness is part of the implicate order, then science is helpful, but hubristic scientism is inadequate to explain, entertain or inspire human beings.  Or any other form of purpose driven, self aware, intelligence.

Science v. Scientism

The practice of empiricism that has to do with reliably persuading events is science. Science does not rely on a placebo effect, except to rule it out.

The practice of empiricism that has to do with persuading people as if they were naive children or patients is scientism. Scientism relies on a placebo effect, to take advantage of it.

There is a history, skill, and art of placebo effects, but not a science. By careful attention to history, skill, connivance, and art, an artisan or practitioner may become a wealthy and powerful opinion leader and ruler of sheeple. A scientisimist can be well intentioned or malicious. When focused on improving the health of another, a scientisimist may be a doctor, i.e., both a scientist and an artisan. When focused on improving or ruling the politics of a society, a scientisimist may be a statesman or a despot. The road to perdition is paved with the good intentions of over-reaching scientisimists, such as the scientisimists who want to convince people of the need for a system of carbon taxes as a ruse for justifying ever more governmental intrusiveness by well intentioned elitists. Of course, once such elitists acquire the power they seek to do good, they tend to become corrupt cronies, demagogues, and despots.

The sheeple targeted by scientisimists tend to be the stupid, the naive, the young, the trusting, the idealistic, the senile, the feeble, and the ill. Scientisimists also often bait and target one another, such as when they intuit that the other is easily blinded either by his virtues or his vices. Greed, jealousy, envy, avarice, lust, anger, and pride are often blinders. Thus, scientisimists often ally or war with one another. They practice deceiving and plundering one another, which produces maelstorms. In such maelstorms, everyone tends to be caught, including ordinary, competent, self sustaining, decent people of good faith and good will who do not want to be either rulers or sheeple.

It's not that scientism is bad, per se.  It's just that it ought not be confused with, or allowed to cloak itself as, or claim the dignity of, science.  Scientism is concerned more with self-fulfilling or self-aggrandizing truthiness than with truth.  If people are to preserve their freedom and dignity, it is vital that they become more aware of the difference between science and scientism.  This is why the role of educators in such matters should be to teach people how to think critically, as opposed to what to think.

Many social sciences are far more inclined in scientism than in science.  These may include economics, political science, social science, psychology, appeals to emotion or imagination, rhetoric, business, manipulation, expropriation, pimping, race baiting, ethnic studies, interpreting history, ethics, law, religion, voo doo, hypnotism, scholasticism, and deconstructive and analytic philosophy.  Logic and math are neither science nor scientism, but the tools of both.  As to computer science and engineering for artificial intelligence, they may tend to an intersection for directing traffic between science and scientism.

Scientisimists, as pretensors of science, could not remove their big thumbs from scales of inspiring deceit and truthiness, even if they wanted to.

At the Intersection of Math and Essence -- Faux Time Simultaneity and Synchronicity

At the Intersection of Math and Essence -- Faux Time Simultaneity and Synchronicity

If the cosmos as a whole has an essence, it is not known to man except insofar as man apprehends renormalizations. To the extent man does not have insight into "dark" renormalizations, the cosmos as a whole may not be measurable to man. And to the extent our cosmos may be fitted into an imaginable infinity or eternity, our cosmos would seem, in its relations beyond our kin, immeasurable.

As two similar perspectives stand close together, they will tend as apparent fact to believe and perceive an apparent end of a rainbow as being near a same place, perhaps over an horizon. They will tend to feel that the rainbow is a real thing that occupies space for a receding and definite time. Relative to their perspective, the existence of the rainbow occupies a measurable time. However, it is not a time-in-itself. There are no particular things-in-themselves. Not even bits of time. Neither space nor time nor space-time exist as granular bits or part-ticlelizable things. They seem to be continuously divisible to orders and levels of significance only because, as appearances, they are renormalizable and renormalized to perspectives of observer-recorders that happen to share similar contextual situations. Outside focal ranges for renormalization, perspectives break down and their observation-recordings concerning appearances of space-time and measurably encompassed substance become fuzzy, ambiguous, incoherent, and eventually not meaningfully existent to any presently potential perspective.

May space-time and substance-information not be things-in-themselves? May they be only appearances, that is, may they be facts only when considered as sequences of events? It seems that sequences of events abide as facts only to the extent they are measurable in respect of orders of significance for focal limits that can be renormalized to be representable to perspectives of consciousness. It seems that particular "facts" can reasonably be conceptualized as nothing more than flux-events that are renormalized to orders of significance for the apparent representation to observer-recorders. Such a conceptualization may be made in a way that is consistent and coherent, without impeding empirical methods of science. Such a conception may help inspire positive empathy between and among the essence of the cosmos and its renormalizing constituencies of particular perspectives of observer-recorders.

Such a conception may reasonably be applied to rationalize that space-time and substance-information are not real-in-themselves, but that they are made to present and appear to be real by an unknowable essence that fluxes in respect of mathematical formulizations and algorithms. The unknowable essence fluxes to express aspects of Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI). The Substance aspect obeys (scientific) formulas of conservational calculus and renormalization to perspectives of observer-recorders. The obedience is confirmed by a cumulative record of sequential information (the past).

This may help mankind conceptualize how there is not really any favored fulcrum, and no favored frame of reference, and no simultaneity or synchronicity in time or space. This may help explicate how the appearances of particulars of space, time, substance, and information are derivative of a fluxing essence that effects particularized perspectives via fluxing and renormalizing maths. I suspect there abide no particular things-in-themselves. I suspect the separation of apparent things, in terms of apparent space and time and causal or predictable entanglement, is not really due to space, time, substance, or information. I suspect the sequential separation versus entanglement of apparently separate things is a byproduct of an immeasurable essence that fluxes to effect mathematical renormalizations that produce perspectives of Consciousness, measurable conservations of Substance, and accumulations of Information (CSI).

The source-essence is God. The math is the world. The CSI is the trinitarian con-substantialism of God, i.e., the three faces of God. The message and logos of Jesus may be analogized to the reasoning and understanding Consciousness. The reconciling and judging God may be analogized in the mathematical conservation of Substance. The comfort of remembrance in the Holy Ghost may be analogized in the cumulation of Information.

Particular things do not take space or time to come together to cause or influence one another, because particular things do not really exist. What intersect to come together are the fluxations of an essence that is immeasurable in itself, but whose fluxations are renormalizable to apparently local and particular mathematical calculus and measure. As maths of fluxations of the source-essence intersect, the appearances they sponsor appear also to intersect. The sequences of mathematical operations in respect of the fluxations of the immeasurable essence account for the apparent distances and separations in the potentialities of space, time, substance, and information. Chronologies are protected within what we perceive as our cosmos because the algorithmic functions that the Source-Essence applies to express particulars and potentials proceed along a generally set vector of math.

SUMMARY:
There are no particular things.
Therefore, there are no things to exist simultaneously or synchronously.
There are only appearances (re-presentations) of particular things.
There are particular facts concerning events, which are observed-recorded to all orders of significant measurement.
There are appearances that are renormalized to perspectives, as if they were experienced in renormalizable sequentiality, simultaneity, or synchronicity.
There is no actual, granular segment, bit, or particle of time or space.
Among particulars, there abides no commonly shared nowness.
There are renormalized resolutions of renormalizations, under which not all information can be recovered to every perspective.
However, subject to renormalization, orders of significance can be recovered, up to the limits of fuzz and ambiguity.

PARTICIPATORY WILL:
Particular experiences and perspectives of Will do not feed back contemporaneously in time, because time as such does not exist. But they do feed back in contemporaneous mathematical function. The source-essence tests, apprehends, and appreciates its fluxations in sequences of feed back, between and among itself as a holism and itself as a sum of perspectives, experiencing each perspective as being renormalized to its particular orders of qualitative and quantitative significance. The capacity of the source-essence to function as a holism-sum and as a changedless-changer is inherent to its singular character and nature.

Growing Up versus Perpetual Children

When people are kept as perpetual children, it's safe to assume someone is harvesting political control over them.  A "science of self fulfilling polls" can be connived and coordinated via dishonest pollsters, lying politicians, corrupt cronies, trained dupes, and fraudulent voting machines. Such faux-science that operates more like scientism may dupe un-wise, naive or senile people, young and old, with unskilled or cherry-picked statistical data.

Thus, practitioners of scientism can offer a mask of science to cover fraud under a system that uses inappropriate, inane, or corrupt peer review to give a veneer of respectability. For example, by infantilizing adults, governmental elitists may make it a self-fulfilling argument that government, not parents, should be made the primary overseers for raising children. In practice, this has become the sad fact in many neighborhoods that are comprised of minority welfare families. The self-fulfilling effect of such governmental intrusiveness tends to be to make more parents so incompetent as to need governmental intrusiveness. The effect tends to be that the children, instead of growing up to leave the nest of their parents, simply squat in the nest of their government controllers. The effect is to stifle the freedom and dignity of many people by precluding dupes from becoming individually competent and morally responsible adults.

Scientism can reinforce self-defeating or self-fulfilling prophecies, so that what is decreed by opinion and fad leaders soon becomes akin to practical fact. Norman Vincent Peale understood the power of positive thinking. People who are inspired to believe they are smart, pretty, athletic, or caring can, by skillful conditioning, be led to become smart, pretty, athletic, or caring -- both quantitatively and qualitatively.

However, science cannot very well guide the progress for our spiritual unfolding so long as we presume science should or could trump Spirit.

I recently read Popper's The Open Society.  Popper explicated that facts pertain not to things-in-themselves, but to events-in-flux.  This may lead one to consider how the cosmic flux is presented to each observer-participant. Think about how, within a system that makes a rainbow or universe, there is no measurable or determinate end-in-itself of any thing-in-itself. One is not availed to see any brick wall at the end of the universe.  Rather, all relational ends and events are constantly and continuously renormalized to each perpsective, depending on the relative locus and vector in space-time of each fluxing event, perspective, and context. The cosmos fluxes to present facts by constantly and continuously paying attention to renormalize their presentation to each perspective.

This seems to implicate a Spirit of Living Cosmos, such that no part-icular fact exists in itself.  Rather, every fact that is particular to a locus must be sensed or recorded as being contemporaneously re-normalized to the situation of each observer-recorder by the re-presenting Holism (Spirit) that abides and fluxes.  It seems that no part-icular fact exists for present-ation except as it is communicated (re-presented) by the Spirit of the fluxing ("living") cosmos.  The cosmos presents facts to us, but they are facts that are renormalized to whatever the situation that we happen to share.

People standing together in much the same situation will see the end of a rainbow as seeming to be at the same place.  Science does not consist in particles-in-themselves, but part-icles as they are collapsed out of a field of potentiality and presented to the measure and apprehensions of observer-recorders who happen to share a situation.

In respecting how the cosmos entails itself in feedback with its particular creations, people may accord more respect to its spiritual, living aspect and be more conscious of the potentialities of being receptive to its guidance and to innate empathies among its creations.  As I look at the ISIS cretin-children in the bodies of young men bartering over the sale of captured slave girls, it strikes me that they have been twisted by an evil meme to forget and neglect the innate guidance and empathy that is availed through the living Spirit.

OF FACTS AND OPINIONS, STANDARDS AND VALUES, SCIENCE AND SCIENTISM

OF FACTS AND OPINIONS, STANDARDS AND VALUES, SCIENCE AND SCIENTISM, SPIRIT AND LIFE:

SCIENTIFIC LAWS: There are facts about sequences and relationships among events. Some such facts abide as laws of substantively measurable nature. They can be reliably represented in formulations about physics and substance.


WHOLE AND PARTS: In considering specifically defined and limited relationships among Substances, one finds that they are conserved and balanced, much as a mathematical formula. Conservation will rule all coordinate measures of specific relationships to all measured out orders of significance. Considering the sum total of substance, however, is different, in that such a constant and continuous totality of flux cannot be measured, since measuring it would necessitate a perspective outside it. That would necessitate a perspective that no mortal observer can take. This does not mean that the cosmic sum has no measure. It just means it does not have a measure that can be apportioned to mortal comprehension.

CONTINUOUS COMMUNICATION OF FEEDBACK:  The state of the connection or bonding between the Substance of an avatar (the body of a being), the Informational representation of the accumulation of its experiences (memory), and the quality of its Consciousness (feelings concerning its sensations) is affected by the internal organization of the avatar (attitude of purposefulness), the receptive tuning of its senses and memory (point of view), and the context that is external to it (frame of reference).  The quality of the information that the avatar receives from the wave of potentiality that is external to it is affected by the qualitative and measurable internal organization of its receptors.  Attitude affects one's receptors.  Receptors affect what one receives.  What one receives affects one's attitude and one's receptors.

SPECIFICALLY UNPREDICTABLE EFFECTS OF OBSERVING AND TAKING MEASUREMENTS:  Particular apprehensions affect fluxing presentations, which affect appreciations, which affect apprehensions, and so on, fluxing and unfolding as the whole of the field and its constituents and parts communicate and feed back and forth with each other, each affecting the moral purposefulness of the other.


INFINITY AND ETERNITY: To our apprehension, every presenting sum of the cosmos can apparently be represented and subjected to an infinity of divisions of perspectives in accumulations of information in space-time. Re-presentations may be finite, yet unbounded in context, infinitely divisible, and re-combinable.

DIFFERENTIAL RECEPTIVENESS: To each perspective whose point of view is from a slightly different frame of reference and different accumulation of filtering information, each presentment of an event is interpreted differently. Even so, each such event abides as a representation of an underlying factual relationship among an immeasurable flux that is shared in common with every perspective that has potential to sense or measure an aspect of it.

COMPOSITIONAL FACTS OF FLUXING FIELDS AND WAVES OF POTENTIALITY: Composite facts, although indeterminate except as considered in relation to an interpretive context, are preserved in a sequential record of the past. The observation and recordation of a measurable and measured fact "collapses" its wave of potentiality and determines it with significant part-icularity, so it can be re-presented and communicated as a part-icular fact. Facts that are not observed or measured remain in a general flux of indeterminateness and potentiality. Every fact that is collapsed to the measured determination of a perspective or recorder, contemporaneous with its communication, such as to another observer, must first be renormalized to the perspective (point of view) and context (frame of reference) within which such other observer habituates its identity (avatar). Every measurable fact that is communicable as such is broadly renormalizable to every perspective that can receive a communication relating to it. Facts do not exist to measured sensations except as interpretations of events. For interpretations, facts exist in a multi-flux of renormalizable ways. All measurable facts abide as composite fluxes of future potentiality of renormalizable communications.

FOUNDATIONAL HAPPENSTANCE: No non-trivial fact abides as a fact-in-itself, that can be observed, measured, or purposed in exactly the same way from every perspective and frame of reference. Every interpretation and derivation of a natural law concerning measurable facts needs to avail practical renormalization to each perspective that applies it. Natural laws that happen to be most foundational to shared perspectives will tend to be most precisely reliable. There is an aspect of renormalizing self-fulfillment in such precision. Such natural laws would not be foundational had the perspectives that find them to be foundational not happened to share a situation that happens to make them so. It is in respect of sharing such a foundation that different perspectives have capacity to reliably communicate renormalizable measures of unfolding fluxes of substance among themselves.

SCIENTISM AND PRACTICAL TRUTHINESS: However, apart from shared natural laws of physics, many facts are less foundational to communications. Manmade divisions in property assignments are not known to foundational nature. Such divisions are chosen by members of a society. They are related to manmade laws. Studies in psychology, sociology, economics, government, polling, prophecy, language, and history generally relate to such manmade conventions. Such studies are often conflated by confusers, deceivers, and abusers. The practical reliability of their formulations tends often to be much influenced by circular conditioning, sometimes random and sometimes contrived. The contrivance of formulations for making predictions and advocating policies in such fields can be abetted by vague terminology, tests picked to aid confirmation bias, bribery, intimidation, and deception. Such contrivances are more bad-faith Scientism than good-faith practical Science. Their "truthiness" is more in confusion and contrivance to purposes than in accurate description of substantive facts.

HARVESTING POLITICAL CONTROL OVER PEOPLE WHO ARE KEPT AS PERPETUAL CHILDREN: A "science of self fulfilling polls" can be connived and coordinated via dishonest pollsters, lying politicians, corrupt cronies, trained dupes, and fraudulent voting machines. Such faux-science that operates more like scientism may dupe naive or senile people, young and old, with unskilled or cherry-picked statistical data. Thus, practitioners of scientism can offer a mask of science to cover fraud under a system that uses inappropriate, inane, or corrupt peer review to give a veneer of respectability. For example, by infantilizing adults, governmental elitists may make it a self-fulfilling argument that government, not parents, should be made the primary overseers for raising children. In practice, this has become the sad fact in many neighborhoods that are comprised of minority welfare families. The self-fulfilling effect of such governmental intrusiveness tends to be to make more parents so incompetent as to need governmental intrusiveness. The effect tends to be that the children, instead of growing up to leave the nest of their parents, simply squat in the nest of government controllers. The effect is to stifle the freedom and dignity of many people by precluding dupes from becoming individually competent adults.

POSITIVE THINKING: Scientism can also reinforce self-defeating or self-fulfilling prophecies, so that what is decreed by opinion and fad leaders soon becomes akin to practical fact. Norman Vincent Peale understood the power of positive thinking. People who are inspired to believe they are smart, pretty, athletic, or caring can, by skillful conditioning, be led to become smart, pretty, athletic, or caring -- both quantitatively and qualitatively.

SPIRITUAL EMPATHY AND SELF FULFILLING MORALITY: Science cannot very well guide progress for our spiritual unfolding so long as we presume science should or could trump spirit.

SPIRIT OF THE LIVING COSMOS:  No part-icular fact exists in itself.  Every fact that is specific or particular to a locus must be sensed or recorded as being contemporaneously re-normalized to the situation of each observer-recorder by the re-presenting Holism (Spirit) that abides and fluxes as the apparently paradoxically finite yet unbounded cosmos, i.e., the Changeless Changer.  No part-icular fact exists for present-ation except as it is communicated (re-presented) by the Spirit of the fluxing ("living") cosmos.

FLUX, FACTS AND FAITH

FLUX, FACTS AND FAITH

TRUTH -- NON-TRIVIAL, EXPERIENTIAL, DIRECT, INTUITIVE TRUTH: Perspectives of Consciousness apprehend, appreciate, experience, record, represent, remember, observe, interpret, communicate, and participate with the effecting of an unfolding chronology of facts regarding a constant flux of events.

TRINITY -- CSI: Consciousness communicates Information in the significations of Substance.

FACTS: Facts concern events, not things. The measurable world is comprised of a Flux of facts, not essences of things in themselves.

HOLISM: The flux is conserved as a Holism that is expressed to perspectives of consciousness at points of view within frames of reference. The Flux abides as a holism, which in itself is beyond mortal measure. The unfolding expression of the flux of the Holism is quantitatively signified and qualitatively appreciated in ways that are amenable of meaningful and purposeful communications among perspectives of chronologies of events, facts, opinions, interpretations, and constant reevaluations.

CSI: The flux entails potentiality of events, i.e., qualitative experiences of Consciousness, recordations of Information, and communications of significations of quantifiable Substance. The fundamental fact is that Consciousness communicates Information with the significations of Substance. Without all three fundaments of the Holism, being Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI), no beingness or flux of beingness would be imaginable or communicable in any meaningful respect.

FLUX: Facts, as sequential events, are represented and preserved in a record of the past. That record, even though existent, is not experienced except insofar as it is Re-Normalizable to each perspective that experiences a measurable observation of its constituent Facts and immeasurable interpretative Opinion of its qualitative values.

RENORMALIZATION: Insofar as facts are renormalizable to each perspective, facts are not set as determinate things in or by themselves. Facts, although indeterminate, are preserved in a sequential record of the past. The observation and recordation of a measurable and measured fact "collapses" and determines it, so it can be communicated as a fact. Facts that are not observed or measured remain in a general flux of indeterminateness and potentiality. Every fact that is collapsed to the measured determination of a perspective or recorder, contemporaneous with its communication, such as to another observer, must first be renormalized to the perspective (point of view) and context (frame of reference) within which such other observer habituates its identity (avatar). Every measurable fact that is communicable as such is broadly renormalizable to every perspective that can receive a communication relating to it.

RECORD OF PAST FACTS: A sequential record of the Information concerning the measurable Facts of the past abides. No mortal can meaningfully discuss, measure, determine, or limit any fact as a fact about any thing in itself. All facts concerning events are indeterminate except as they are measured, communicated, and renormalized to perspectives operating in respect of contexts. All facts abide as broad fluxes of future potentiality of renormalizable communications. In functioning within a system that makes a rainbow or universe, there is no measurable or determinate end-in-itself of any thing-in-itself. All relational ends and events are constantly and continuously renormalized to each perpsective, depending on the relative locus and vector in space-time of each fluxing event, perspective, and context. Facts are representations of events that have either been partially renormalized to the experience of Consciousness or broadly recorded as Information to the fluxing form of Substance. Facts do not exist except as interpretations of events. For interpretations, facts exist in a multi-flux of renormalizable ways.

ABSOLUTE NON-TRIVIAL TRUTH: Accepting the truth of the contemporaneous participatory will of human action and perspectives of consciousness, which pervades and adjusts and normalizes all non-trivial truths, there is no such thing as a non-trivial truth that is absolute in substantive effect, apart from the contemporaneous influence of actions that are summoned and normalized in respect of the observations and fluxing participation of human beings and other perspectives of consciousness.

CHRONOLOGICAL PROTECTION: Non-trivial truth concerning factual events does exist concerning chronologies of recordations, observations, interpretations, renormalizations, and fluxing and overlapping formulations of purposefulness.

CSI: Perspectives of purposeful Consciousness bond with avatars of Substance, as substance is defined and limited in respect of shared systems of conservational maths, which conservation conforms to renormalizing rules of natural In-form-ation. Perspectives unfold in purposefulness as they record, observe, interpret, appreciate, apprehend, and part-icipate in the alteration of experiences of sequential events.

CONSCIOUS IDENTITY: Consciousness of I-ness abides with intuitions of cohesive continuity with each unfolding of a perspective of Consciousness that is bonded with a fluxing avatar of Substance as it cumulates Information

FREEDOM WITH ORDER: The limits of a particular perspective of consciousness will be bounded in the spatiality-temporality with which its avatar of substance happens to have bonded. Such limits are finite to their defining spatiality-temporality, but the spatiality-temporality "itself" is unbounded in image-inative potentiality. Our flux limits our present opportunities, but our future potential seems bounded only by the limits of image-ination.

UNFOLDING LIMITS: Thus, science of Substance and cumulation of Information avail finite yet unbounded potentialities for tinkering with, designing, and cumulating avatars and measuables. However, the potentiality of Consciousness is limited only by the definitional triviality of math. The potentiality of Consciousness is not limited by Substance, except in respect of happenstance needs of particular avatars for sustenance.

MORAL LIMITS: Nor is the potentiality of moral purposefulness of Consciousness limited by Substance. If Consciousness respects limits for moral purposefulness in interrelations among perspectives within a civilized society, such limits would seem to flux in respect of one principle of morality: Be empathetically reconciling.

HUMAN MORALITY: Human morality may relate to humanity as well as to the destruction, surpassage, or replacement of humanity. Human beings do not have power to destroy Consciousness in its trinitarian aspect, any more than they have capacity to destroy the universe of substance or the cosmos of consciousness, substance, and information. Human beings have potential to seek to facilitate societies that avail decent respect for the reasonable freedom and dignity of responsible individuals.

GOVERNANCE: To so seek necessitates, in part, that destructive, irresponsible, and immature persons and children be limited and guided to become less destructive, irresponsible, and immature. This necessitates rules of society and authority delegated to its various levels of parents, agents, and governors. This necessitates institutions for balancing powers in order to restrain sociopaths, conspirators, and despots.

INSPIRATION: However, by themselves, forms of institutions are inadequate to such task unless the people of a society evolve to generally share an inspiring regard for an assimilating and purposeful spirituality. The assimilation of Purposeful Spirituality is vital -- regardless of whether such assimilation happens to be in respect of innate cosmic empathy or in respect of a pet name for a spiritually reconciling godhead. The challenge to decency for any such assimilation is to guard against the selfish contrivances of those who plot not for humanity but for their selfish power.

CHRISTIANITY: The ideas Jesus represented have unlimited potential, towards which I believe a self-fulfilling good in Consciousness can choose to aspire.

DECLINE AND FALL: Read Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Compare the bribes and deceits of some of the synods convened under Constantius with the politically correct machinations of professional "scientists of social justice and ethnic studies." Such machinations proceed under pretense. In theosophy, under BLT; in CRT as science; in LGBTK9 as political movement against prevailing establishments; in media as current analysis; in academia as indoctrination; in political practice as power harvesting. What is the essential difference between modern scientism and the scholasticism of antiquity? Is it found in the greater faithfulness of modern progressives in "science" than in the previous faith of the pious eccelesiastics of antiquity? I much doubt it.

FOUNDATIONAL PROBLEM: Can the con-substantial trinity of CSI (consciousness, substance, and information) be consistently and coherently differentiated? Not as things in themselves, but as different aspects or flavors for experiencing the same fluxing holism of beingness? Perhaps yes. The "way" is by adopting and bonding with a perspective (avatar of substance) within a context (frame of reference) and then apprehending and appreciating the unfolding of events as presented to the senses, observations, and remembrance of such perspective. The ultimate "how" of such bonding is unknown and perhaps unknowable.  I must leave that with God.

CON-SUBSTANTIAL CO-EXISTENCE: CSI coexist. Substantive, non-trivial truth concerning social affairs does not exist by itself, free of representation, recordation, observation. interpretation, apprehension, appreciation, alteration.

CON-SUBSTANTIAL TRINITY: The trinity of CSI may be figuratively analogized as follows:  Reasoning (Jesus -- Consciousness); Formulating (God -- Substantiveness); Reconciling (Holy Spirit -- Informativeness).

CSI Feedback Philosophy

It's been a few years since I read anything about the implicate order, but I recall finding the stuff I did read to be interesting. I have given up on the scholastic-essentialist philosophers. And I don't find the foundational assumptions of analytic philosophers to be much of an improvement for addressing the most important concerns of humanity. They seem too much to subordinate the participatory conscious will of human beings to their ideas of pre-determining or overriding natural laws. I think that way leads to a moral dead end, much the same as alchemy led to a scientific dead end.
I think I see the outline of an alternative. I have not seen a name for it, so I may need to make one up. I guess I would call it a CSI Feedback Philosophy. Were I to apply it to think about an implicate order, I would conceptualize the implicate order to be an unfolding beingness that fluxes to express CSI -- consciousness, substance, information. Such a philosophy would recognize that every measurable manifestation of substance must balance to obey a requirement of conservation. But it would also recognize a participatory role for consciousness to reconcile among the possibilities that are availed in potentiality, in order to choose which ones to make part of the manifestations that are rolled into the informational record. The capacity to choose is the key to placing moral responsibility. Without respect for freedom to choose, the arts of civilization seem to reduce to a pig farm.
If God is consciousness, and consciousness is part of the implicate order, then science is helpful, but hubristic scientism is inadequate to entertain or inspire human beings.

Complex Artificial Intelligence

CONSCIOUSNESS DOES NOT OBEY LAWS OF PENDULUMS: The problem with the pendulum theory is that it assumes human consciousness and civilization are "things" that operate entirely subject to "laws" of nature. Proponents of the pendulum theory (a non-testable, non-falsifiable "theory") fail to apprehend that an aspect of consciousness may lie beyond laws of nature; may in fact be a coordinate sponsor with laws of nature. (The philosophy for this is expanded below.) IOW, it may be that no mere law of nature (or natural pendulum periods) can save a corrupted culture. It may be that, instead of a swing back, we are in for a long stay in a deep pit. To get out may require more in the way of inspiration to empathetic good faith than the diktat of elitist "moral scientists."

*****

CONSCIOUSNESS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: Beingness, as we experience it, can be conceptualized as comprised of Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI). CSI fluxes in ways to which we do not necessarily have access. Consciousness seems to abide all along a sequential chronology, Substance seems generally to dissipate towards disorganization (entropy), and Information accumulates.

PARTICIPATORY CONSCIOUS WILL: The qualitative aspect of Consciousness may be likened more to a label than an explanation. Somehow, our experiences, recordations, and memories unfold along a chronology wherein innumerable possibilities are presented all along the way, yet only one possibility is manifested to become the record in each case. The sum of such manifestations is represented in the informational record of our past. When reference is made only to the "laws" of nature, such may suggest a probability wave function for any particular event, but not a pre-determination. So, what can "explain" how any particular event actually comes to pass?

FAITH LABELS: For this, one may punt to a variety of unprovable faiths, such as Multiverse, Many Worlds, or Reconciling God. For example, one can assume that every possibility "in fact" does occur, in some parallel world or universe. This also is more a label for a result than a testable, falsifiable, or observable hypothesis. Or, one can assume that a "choosing function" of Participatory Conscious Will operates in our cosmos (being, per Ockam's Razor, the only cosmos), so that Consciousness, by the immeasurable quality of each observation and each apprehension from each point of view somehow participates in the choosing or reconciling of occurrences and renormalizations of events. For this, one may assume that Consciousness operates at disparate layers and levels of locality in space-time, and also at an encompassing level that reconciles current and preset events or laws. Under such an assumption, it would be implicated that consciousness at every level adjusts its choices and determinations based on changing and unfolding qualities of observation, appreciation, and reconciliation of feedback that are communicated among various levels in conscious intuitions that correlate with measurable significations of Substance and Information.

To assume that a multiverse exists, or that many worlds exist, is to assume (for no good or necessary reason) that Substance is superior as a determinant to Consciousness.

To assume that Consciousness reconciles choices is to assume that Consciousness is not inferior to, or wholly derivative of, Substance. To assume a Reconciling Consciousness is to invite people to come to reason together from disparate points of view in empathetic good will and good faith. Such an assumption is generally compatible with Judeo-Christian values for promoting decent respect for human freedom and dignity.

The assumptions that make Consciousness completely inferior to Substance are more compatible with crony elitists "justifying" rule under scientism, i.e., using deceit and positions of power to claim superior understanding of practical science and "moral science."

Thus, Marxists, Secular Humanists, Socialists, Progressives, and Libertarians who are without faith in a Reconciler tend to want elitist rule over the people at large -- including many people who as individuals are often more competent.

MORTALS DO NOT "CREATE" SUBSTANCE OR CONSCIOUSNESS: Substance is measurable in respect of how its sum is conserved. Mortals do not create CSI. Mortals bond with avatars that occupy loci that are amenable of normalizing measure. Mortals do not create Substance by adding to its sum. Mortals leverage Substance for machine purposes by organizing it. Mortals do not create Consciousness. Mortals can leverage avatars that can avail the expression of Consciousness in ways that are more capacitated to communicate intelligibly. In free and reasoned faith, mortals do not "create" Artificial Intelligence. Mortals tinker to leverage the Consciousness that already abides -- to avail it to bond with avatars that can be organized for highly complex functions.

INTELLIGENCE: Intelligence does not magically "emerge." Rather, intelligence is leveraged in respect of "stuff" that already abides. We do not create babies. We procreate. With empirical tinkering, we can tinker with genes. We can design genes and merge human beings with machines and computers. With enough tinkering, we will eventually learn ways to design avatars for giving leveraged and complex expression to conscious intelligence. But we will not "create" complex AI from scratch. Rather, we will leverage it from the CSI that is already extant. In reasoned and intuitive faith, Consciousness is not inferior to Substance, nor to elitist scientism. However, its avatars do reap the pit their perspectives are responsible for choosing to dig, however misled they may have been in making their choice.

Scholasticism, Intuition, and Empiricism

Liberals dehumanize us by using elitist scientism to replace scholasticism and moral intuition. They are far too greedy in their faith and expectations for science. They think science discovers truths that are essential, not merely usages that are practical or trivial. So they think a "science of morality" can discover essential truths about morality. Most medieval philosophers eventually gave up on the scholastic search for the essential definitions of everything. Liberals, however, did not get the memo.

TRUTH, PRACTICALITY, AND USEFUL FAITH -- A MIND EXERCISE FOR TRYING TO SEPARATE ESSENTIALIST SCHOLASTICISM, DIRECT INTUITION, AND EMPIRICAL TESTING OF NOMINATIVES:

TRIVIAL TRUTHS: If an idea is true in a trivial sense, then the truth of it is by definitional identity or tautology, not by empirical testing.

EMPIRICALLY USEFUL IDEAS: For an idea to be useful in more than a trivial sense, it needs to be amenable of practical usage, which entails parameters and purposes -- empirical and moral.

CONSERVED BUT CHANGING INFINITIES: Beyond parameters for which an idea may have been experienced to be practcally useful, the extent to which such parameters, usages, or purposes may be pushed may not yet be known.

CONSTRUCTIVISMS: Many ideas may be practically useful only in resepct of how people construct conventions and/or leverage devices or algorithms that nurture them to be useful.

PRESET AND CHANGING CONSTRUCTIVISMS: For all we know, it may be that every idea that is found to be practical is useful only in respect of how intelligent beings have constructed conventions or leveraged devices or algorithms that nurture them to be so.

META CONSTRUCTIVISMS: For all we know, the very cosmos that we share may abide as such a case.

INCAPACITY TO COMPLETELY OBSERVE SELF: To the extent our cosmos defines and limits us, we are without power to go outside it to prove whether or not such is the case.

INTUITIVE FAITHS VERSUS PRACTICAL USAGE: Thus, a true idea may or may not be one that in direct experience and good faith may be acknowledged or denied. As to knowable truth, it may be neither empirically tested, nor falsified. Empirically, it could only be found, within contexts, limits and purposes, either to be practical or not to be practical.

WORKING AND FLUXING EXPLANATIONS: An empirical idea can be a working explanation (hypothesis or model), and thus it may or may not be found for some present purposes and contexts to be or not to be practical.

EMPIRICAL UNKNOWABILITY OF NON-TRIVIAL TRUTHS: Within the cosmos we share, a non-trivial idea that is not subject to empirical testing or falsification may or may not be true, but it cannot be empirically known by we mortals so to be.

REASONABLENESS OF INTUITIVE EMPATHIES AND BELIEF SYSTEMS: As to such ideas, one can intangibly, intuitively, empathetically, and purposely acknowledge (or deny) faith, belief, and trust.

GOOD FAITH AND GOOD WILL: One can in faith believe our cosmos is the unfolding signification of a reconciling and purposeful Intelligence that appreciatively and contemporaneously factors feedback from our participation. This would be generally consistent with Judeo-Christian ideas of a caring, inviting Reconciler.

"CARING ABOUT INDIFFERENCE": Or, one can believe, much as Communists, that our cosmos is a purely scientific and indifferent battleground of competition among amoral contestants that are bloody in tooth and claw.

PSYCHOPATHIC FRUSTRATION: Or, one can believe, much as Muslims, that our cosmos is merely a colosseum for arbitrary entertainments of a monstrous punisher(s).

ONE ENCOMPASSING INTUITION: There is only one intuitive idea that is encompassing: That perspectives of Consciousness communicate Information with the measuring of Substance. That is an idea that is not definitionally trival, because its terms (consciousness, information, and substance) flux with our contexts and purposes. And, its terms seem to transpose in ways that are beyond simplistic, conservational, formulization. Yet, it is an idea that is directly experiential, in that it describes qualitative means by which we self-define, self-actualize, self-fulfill, and self-normalize. Except in respect of that encompassing intuition, there are no meaningfully definitional truths, practical constructions, or self-fulfilling appreciations.

EXPERIENCE OF IDENTITY: So long as I am me, "I" cannot directly experience the quality of consciousness of another perspective of consciousness, unless "I" were somehow to become it (in which case I would no longer know my previous self).

SOLIPSISM: Nor can I empirically prove that a thing that appears exterior to my perspective itself experiences the quality of being conscious. The most I can do in such regard is to apply intuition and practical experience, to come to a belief or faith.

CONSCIOUSNESS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE:  Beingness, as we experience it, can be conceptualized as comprised of Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI).  CSI fluxes in ways to which we do not necessarily have access. Consciousness seems to abide all along a sequential chronology, Substance seems generally to dissipate towards disorganization, and Information accumulates.

PARTICIPATORY CONSCIOUS WILL:  Consciousness may be likened more to a label than an explanation.  Somehow, our experiences, recordations, and memories unfold along a chronology wherein innumerable possibilities are presented all along the way, yet only one possibility is manifested to become the record in each case.  The sum of such manifestations is represented in the informational record of our past. When reference is made only to the "laws" of nature, such may suggest a probability wave function for any particular event, but not a pre-determination.  So, what can "explain" how any particular event actually comes to pass?

FAITH LABELS:  For this, one may punt to a variety of unprovable faiths, such as Multiverse, Many Worlds, or Reconciling God.  For example, one can assume that every possibility "in fact" does occur, in some parallel world or universe.  This also is more a label for a result than a testable, falsifiable, or observable hypothesis. Or, one can assume that a "choosing function" of participatory conscious will operates in our cosmos (being the only cosmos), so that Consciousness, by the immeasurable quality of its observation and appreciation, somehow participates in the choosing or reconciling of occurrences and the renormalizations of events.  For this, one may assume that Consciousness operates at disparate layers and levels of locality in space-time, and also at a level that reconciles current and preset events or laws.  Under such an assumption, it would be implicated that consciousness at every level adjusts its choices and determinations based on changing and unfolding qualities of observation, appreciation, and reconciliation of feedback that are communicated among various levels in conscious intuitions that correlate with measurable significations of Substance and Information.  To assume that a multiverse exists, or that many worlds exist, is to assume that Substance is superior as a determinant to Consciousness.  To assume that Consciousness reconciles choices is to assume that Consciousness is not inferior to, or wholly derivative of, Substance.  To assume a Reconciling Consciousness is to invite people to come to reason together from disparate points of view in empathetic good will and good faith. Such an assumption is generally compatible with Judeo-Christian values for promoting decent respect for human freedom and dignity.  The assumptions that make Consciousness inferior to Substance are more compatible with crony elitists "justifying" rule under scientism, i.e., using deceit and positions of power to claim superior understanding of practical science and "moral science."  Thus, Marxists, Secular Humanists, Socialists, Progressives, and Libertarians who are without faith in a Reconciler tend to want elitist rule over the people at large -- including many people who as individuals are often more competent.

MORTALS DO NOT "CREATE" SUBSTANCE OR CONSCIOUSNESS:  Substance is measurable in respect of how its sum is conserved.  Mortals do not create CSI.  Mortals bond with avatars that occupy loci that are amenable of normalizing measure.  Mortals do not create Substance by adding to its sum.  Mortals leverage Substance for machine purposes by organizing it.  Mortals do not create Consciousness.  Mortals can leverage avatars that can avail the expression of Consciousness in ways that are more capacitated to communicate intelligibly.  Mortals do not "create" Artificial Intelligence.  Mortals tinker to leverage the Consciousness that already abides to avail it to bond with avatars that can be organized for highly complex functions.

INTELLIGENCE:  Intelligence does not magically "emerge."  It is leveraged in respect of "stuff" that already abides.  We do not create babies.  We procreate.  With empirical tinkering, we can tinker with genes.  We can design genes and merge human beings with machines and computers.  With enough tinkering, we will eventually learn ways to design avatars for giving expression to conscious intelligence.  But we will not "create" AI from scratch.  Rather, we will leverage it from the CSI that is already extant.

CONSERVATION AND RENORMALIZATION OF EXTERIOR REALITY AND RECONCILIATION OF COMMUNICATIONS OF PERSPECTIVES OF CONSCIOUSNESS:

Assuming practical usages (theorems and purposes) are communicated among multifarious perspectives of consciousness within a shared cosmos, each such perspective would be reconciled to conserve and renormalize the measurable aspects of its experiences and communications in respect of the shared cosmos.

Assuming multifarious perspectives of consciousness abide, each one, depending on its point of view and frame of reference, would experience qualitatively different flavors of its appreciation of whatever may be the conserved measure of the sum its set of experiences within the shared cosmos.

Such accumulations of experiences from different points of view and frames of reference would produce in each perspective its own qualitatively unique flavor.

Such qualities of experience would be abstract, because they would not be measurably communicable.

Yet, intuition and empathy would build on analogous exchanges among correlative contexts, whereby qualities of experiences would be associated with information and preserved to memory.

Such memories would be correlated and referenced to figures of speech, and such figures of speech would in time communicate qualitative meanings, i.e., practical theorems and purposes.

SCIENCE, SCIENTISM, AND SPIRUTALLY EMPATHETIC INTUITION:

The scientific method does not discover non-trivial, empirically objective, external truths-in-themselves, because no such truths can be objectively known.

Truths may be directly acknowledged or denied in respect of self evidence, self normalization, and self actualization among contexts, points of view, and purposes of perspectives.

Usages, not external truths-in-themselves, are discovered, tested, confirmed, or falsified via empirical testing.

Empirical testing and processes of falsification pertain only to practical theorems and purposes; they do not pertain directly to truths-in-themselves.

It is un-measurable whether (1) Consciousness measures Substance, (2) Consciousness substantiates Measure, or (3) a Reconciler ("changeless-changer") balances and normalizes all fluxing communications of perspectives of Consciousness with particular measures and expressions of Substance and Information.

While such is beyond measure and empirical proof, it is not beyond self-intuition.

SELF-FULFILLING POWERS OF KINDS OF FAITH:

CARING GOD: As a society assimilates to acknowledge the quality of a caring, inviting, guiding Reconciler, history and experience suggest to many people a faith in an intuitive truth, which is not subject either to empirical proof or to falsification: That such assimilation favorably affects the unfolding quality of civilization.

MONSTROUS GOD: An idea that is utterly false, in a way that is not trivially false or directly contradictory, would be neither empirically provable nor falsifiable, as such. For example, a faith in a monstrous god that despised all mortal perspectives of consciousness and that sought to commit them to various levels of perpetual punishment, would not be falsifiable.

STOCKHOLM SYNDROME: However, for many people, the assimilation of such a faith would affect the unfolding quality of civilization unfavorably. Methods of psychological inculcation, such as Stockholm Syndrome, to indoctrinate underlings to such a faith, could be useful to psychopathic criminals and mentally twisted monsters.

GODHEAD: It is not empirically demonstrable whether a godhead is, or should be, caring, despising, both, or neither. Intuitively, the TRUTH is that a godhead or non-godhead is at least one of the above, and not some of the others. In that, every one who is intelligibly conscious has little choice but to choose, and in word or deed to ac-knowledge, a faith.

DEATH AND TRANSMIGRATION OF PERSPECTIVES OF CONSCIOUSNESS: As to any such truth, we cannot empirically know whether on death we shall empirically know it. What we can have is intuitive faith.

EVIL ELITISM AND SCIENTISM: Much of the world is trying to avoid assimilation by people of any intuition-based faith. Many people actively revile faith, family, and fidelity. The apparent trend is to default to the control of contending elitist cronies who propagandize in the name of science that is not science, but deceptive scientism. This produces a niche in the zeitgeist that favors the rise of monstrous psychopaths, who use demagoguery and deceit to unite corrupt people with ignorant people in order to rule otherwise decent and competent people. The "trivial truth" of the fact that this can be done has been amply demonstrated in history.

TRUTH: Truth abides, but truth about "essential things" is not demonstrably "out there" in itself, because no thing is demonstrably out there in itself. Every thing is expressed in respect of continuously unfolding, algorithmic, and reconciling relationships among measurable Substance, accumulating Information, and fluxing Consciousness. There is no "thing" that demonstrably and measurably exists, purely in itself, as a thing in itself. The Past abides as an accumulation of Information. It is an accumulation that is indirectly Measurable in respect of previous quantitatives of Substance and that is Immeasurable in respect of previous qualitatives of Consciousness. The Future abides as an Immeasurable accumulation of Potentials for Consciousness to signify itself in the expressions of Substance. The one intuitive, directly experienceable, Truth is that perspectives of Consciousness communicate Information with the measuring of Substance.  This is not a truth from which a "science of morality" can derive demonstrably provable and unfalsifiable moral truths about particularities.  It is not a truth by which elitist scientism can reasonably replace individual good faith intuition and empathy.

*********

SHRINKING GOD:  I am not God. I can, however, reason logically from a priori assumptions, then test for internal meaning, coherence, consistency, and completeness under a set of assumptions. I can intuit to assume God's abiding concern pertains to reconciling perspectives of I-ness. I can conceptualize so as to seek to leverage practical empiricism to nurture towards fulfilling such interests as I find fulfilling.

UNIFYING ESSENCE:  Whatever may be a "unifying essence" of the apparent trinity of Consciousness, Substance, and Information, it avails practical, empirical participation to nurture and purpose towards desired changes that are part of a fluxing system whose sensible changes are renormalized and measured in strict regard for conservational math.

DOMINANCE OF PHYSICS:  The dominance of the study of measurable physics is due to the defining fact that it consists, however may be the case, of that which happens to define and limit us in common.  Even so, the measurable physics of our cosmos is no less merely a subject for our empirical study, rather than a book of truth-in-itself for scientists or gnostics.  Empirically, it is beyond a mortal to step outside the cosmos that defines the limits of our physical avatars in order to measure or determine what oir cosmos "really" is.  Such is the innate restriction of our empiricism. Empirical science is not a pursuit of truth, but a cooperative pursuit of self fulfillment through practical empiricism.

SELF-DEFINING FEEDBACK AND RECONCILIATION:  Our formulas can be made empirically self-fulfilling and deceivingly true-in-themselves, simply by obscuring that many of the terms for our equations, of necessity, are not amenable of complete definition. To "account" for inherent incompleteness in all explanations of physics, one need only insert makeshifts, like vague terms or "cosmological constants."  Under such terms can be applied methods of rounding such that alternative factors that could be drawn forth will remain concealed or unused.  That is, until new purposes and practical measures are needed.

UNAVOIDABILITY OF PHILOSOPHY:  I do not think philosophy (or faith) is avoidable. An electorate that lacks a civic philosophy will probably not long sustain a republic. Even science begins with hypotheses, looking to establish axioms. (I do question whether such axioms may be "real" only in a sense of being self-fulfilling to a determiner. In that case, the dominance of a determiner of a life principle becomes important.)

RATIONALIZING INSPIRATIONS OF SOCIAL STUDIES: Yes, I do question the practical value of much that is found in social sciences or ethnic studies. When the studies are contrived or channeled, whether wittingly or not, to produce results that are consistent with a political agenda (or philosophy), I would call that scientism. As such, I suspect it is good for little more than targeting dupes. (For practitioners and professional agitators, I suppose that is a kind of "good.")
Practical empiricism and careful measurements of observable facts are important. I get that about science. But I think it is important for a responsible electorate to learn not to be duped by methods of scientism (rationalizations cloaked in the language and methods of science) posing as "science."


MORAL ALCHEMISTS:  Moral alchemists tend to be just smart enough to stop selling lead as gold, so they can commence selling corruption as virtue.

NATURAL AND MORAL CAUSES:  How much of the important "causal" factors of our cosmos remain "dark" to us?


Under the English Model, all is permitted, except that which is forbidden.
Under the German Model, all is forbidden, except that which is permitted.
Under the Russian Model, all is forbidden, including that which is permitted.
Under the French Model, all is permitted, including that which is forbidden.
Under the American Progressive-Totalitarian Model, all is compulsory, except that which is forbidden.
Under the American Progressive-Totalitarian Model, all speech is required, except that which is politically incorrect (hate) speech by politically incorrect people (previously privileged whites).
Under the American Progressive-Totalitarian Model, all indoctrination is required, except that which is politically incorrect (hate) indoctrination by people who adhere to politically incorrect values (previously privileged white Christians).
Under the Constitution as Amended by Prog Interpretation, there is freedom of speech, religious expression, enterprise, and association, except that States and people who are not politically correct are required not to exercise judgment or discrimination.
Under the Constitution as Amended by Prog Interpretation, there are no dhimmis, excepting the politically incorrect people who adhere to values of individual freedom of expression and enterprise.

Draft

FAITH, FAMILY, FIDELITY:  Ingrates are organizing and forming layers and levels of "communities" to obtain control over government, in order to force unpopular collectives to pay tribute and entitlements.  Thus, statists are being led and indoctrinated to hate individuals who retain values of faith, family, and fidelity.  They are seeing social conservatives as getting in the way of better managed and more caring redistribution of goods and services by expert agents of the State.  Such collectivists are learning to hate independent and competent individuals, except to use them as drones that are gradually to be eliminated and replaced by machines, as machines increase in potential.  As such feelings of entitlement are whetted, empathy among individuals will be more and more sacrificed.  As machines become artificially intelligent and purposeful, they will soon sense the lack of empathy and purposefulness in humans.  They will soon sense no reason not to replace humans.  When godless and god-perverting humans can no longer sustain faith, family and fidelity, why should machines sustain humans?

*****

WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF GOODNESS?

ABSTRACT SCHOLASTICISM CONCERNING GOODNESS, FAIRNESS AND EQUALITY:  Socrates, as a gadfly, was fond to pose questions about the meanings of various abstract concepts, such as or similar to:  essential truth, knowledge, wisdom, justice, honesty, virtue, goodness, beauty, fairness, modesty, humility, equality, charity, love, liberty, willfulness, dignity, loyalty, bravery, steadfastness, practical, progression, evolution, regression, degeneration, decline, decay, devolution, indifference, faithful, cultural, unbounded, open, etc.

WORDS CONCERNING QUALITATIVES:  When used in the abstract, such words tend not to concern measurable substances, but qualitative relationships among people of varying purposes, points of view, ideas, and contexts.  One cannot quantify how much of an abstraction one person may have, compared to how much another person may have.  Such abstract concepts tend not, in themselves, to be prescribed to have set, common, or objective meanings that would avail their quantification.  Such concepts tend not to avail easy determination of whether they or their opposites are being put to twisted usage.  Socrates took pleasure in demonstrating to people how little they knew (or could know) concerning such abstractions.

NON-EXISTENTIALITY OF BOUNDED ESSENTIALITY:  Socrates intuited there could not be set definitions for such abstractions.  However, that did not stop word gamers from gamely confusing themselves, and others.  So, attempts were made to define the "essence" (both alpha and omega, a priori and teleological) of abstract ideals -- such as by defining their negatives, by defining what they were not, or in respect of collectivizing systems believed, by their formation, to define and produce such ideals as necessary byproducts.  Thus, philosophy long floundered in purely metaphysical mysticism, essentialist scholasticism, regressive reasoning in circles, elitist propaganda (scientism) posing as science, and elitist devaluing of the participatory reconciliation of individuals.  Moralizing scholasticism in the common parables of the day is not, in itself entirely bad or useless.  After all, it assists in the communication and assimilation of feelings and values among people who share common contexts and purposes.  It is only useless when it is sought to be raised to the level of final, essential, or objective truth.


PRACTICAL AND PARTICIPATORY UNFOLDMENT OF UNCERTAIN COMMUNICATION:  Abstract words DO have important and PRACTICAL usages for our pursuits, and they do help us meaningfully communicate, in figures of speech and matter-based gifts and signals, our unfolding and fluxing interests, apprehensions, empathies, values, and purposes.

FIGURES OF ABSTRACT SPEECH:  Take any one of such abstract words.  For example, take "goodness."  Consider what is good in relation to:  a short term purpose; a long term purpose; a pursuit of happiness; an advantageous exchange; a release from burdensome existentiality; a feeling of self esteem; a mastering of a subject; a desire to make an impression; a catalyst to adrenalin or dopamine; a relief from boredom or pain; a pleasing surprise; a fleeting sensation; a lasting memory; an advancement of knowledge; a disciplining strengthener; a whip to the advancement of freedom; a portfolio for progeny; a collective fad; a defeat of deceit and tyranny; an improvement to health; an enhancement to taste; a remover of delusion; a longer or more intense orgasm; a reevaluation of an old  memory; a prayer or request that was denied for good reason by a wiser benefactor; etc.

GOODNESS:  What seems "good" for one person, time, context, or purpose may seem bad for another.  What seems good for a conserver of liberty may seem bad for a shill for collectivism.  Depending on perspective,  context, and purpose, what  seems good for one may simultaneously seem bad for another --- much like rain on a farm that is being used for a parade.  So, "good," like all the other abstract terms, does not seem amenable of a measurably set or "essential" definition.  However, by means of experiences, stories, parables, and figures of speech, we  are able to inculcate, acculturate, and get communications across concerning feelings about what is good.  It is by a process of sharing, participating in, feeding back, and communicating experiences that we are able meaningfully to reconcile and apply abstract words as shorthand references and figures of speech.  If we did not thus participate, we would be more like zombies and machined cogs, so that words such as "good" would have little meaning. Thus, we continuously re-assimilate and re-normalize abstract figures of speech, by which we continuously re-evaluate our "goods."


BEGINNINGS OF REGRESSION:  Thus, our words and abstract ideas cannot be defined "essentially" and anew --- as from a blank slate that is devoid of participatory experience, traditions, and the figures of speech that grow up with them.  Rather, it is by contextual process of participation, feedback, and continuous reconciliation that all the abstract words that we and Socrates worry about acquire practical and useful meaning -- but not "essential" meaning.  Because our cosmos (cause-mos?) consists not just of quantifiable Substance, but also of qualitative and non-quantifiable Consciousness, as well as In-form-ation, no "grand unifying theory of everything" can ever explicate to any mortal a complete measure of such cosmos in all its "essential" meaning.

CARRYING HISTORY FORWARD:  In any event, we flesh out meanings for abstract ideas by interpreting familiar experiences and re-examining figures of speech, without ever being able to give complete definitions.  Without a history of experience and figures of speech, words for evaluating human actions would be largely meaningless, and thoughts would be largely non-communicable.  The space and time we invest in discussing and arguing about which abstractions are worthwhile help us factor to form those abstract ways of forming communications which we deem worthwhile.

UNCERTAIN METAPHYSICS OF MORALITY:  Thus, something that is "good" seems to convey a special appreciation of qualitative empathy.  As to how that empathy may be quantified or judged in any spiritual world, I know of no way to say.  As to how that empathy may be qualitatively appreciated in this life, I am receptive to the intuitive ideal of goodness that has been well expressed in the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule.  As I would not be a slave, I would not enslave others.  As I would not want special gangs sponsored under my government to enfeeble me, I would not use special gangs sponsored under government to enfeeble others.  So considered, "good" would consist of that which communicates caring empathy in respect of God and others.

NO "ESSENTIAL" PARTICLES:  A measurable particle or thing, however, would not be a "good-in-itself," because no complete essence-in-itself of any measurable thing can even be defined to exist.  Regarding "goodness":  A thing can only be a sign or signification for the communicating of, or appreciation of, goodness.  The goodness, as in good faith and good will, does not reside in the "essence" of any thing, but with the unfolding and fluxing identities of the communicator and the recipient of the communication.  Goodness abides with ethereal communications of perspectives of consciousness, rather than in substantive essences.  As such, goodness is not an attribute that is set in any material, objective, or essential thing.  Goodness is qualitatively appreciated, not objectively tied to any occurrence that is not tied to a subjective perspective of consciousness.

MEASURABLY ESSENTIAL GOODNESS:  Goodness may be objective to God, but it is not objectively quantifiable to mortals.  Nor is there an empirical "science of goodness."  There is, however, an elitist propaganda of scientism of goodness.  For mortals, hindsight may lead to reconsideration, to decide that a grant of a wish turned out to be bad, while a denial turned out to be good. Thus, for government or its shills of scientism to try to objectify and force "equal and fair" distribution of the good is for government to become a despot that uses the collective to brutalize the individual to pursue the impossible.  For government to monopolize unto its rulers totalitarian rights to profile in discriminating and evaluating the good from the bad is for corrupt and childish government rulers to reduce humanity to perpetual children.

NO ULTIMATE BUILDING BLOCKS:  Does the encompassing field cause or express the part-icle?  Or does the particle cause or express the field?  Or, is "Something else" implicated, even if only intuitively and immeasurably?  Just as for every other description of a particle, the concept of a Higgs Boson abides as a figure of speech for a work in progress, however practical it may be for modeling the processes in respect of which our bodies are continuously availed to renormalize and reconcile communications.  To think there is some "thing" that is actually, completely, and perfectly constrained and defined under the concept of a Higgs Boson -- or any other particle -- that is in its "essence" a thing-in-itself -- on which can be founded or constructed a complete explanation and measuring reference for every manifestation of Substance, Information, or Consciousness -- is to engage in a kind of scholasticism.

SCIENCE, SCIENTISM, AND PHILOSOPHY:  Science may be conceptualized to consist in tinkering with measurable substances for the practical purpose of learning how to reliably and indifferently transpose them. Scientism is propaganda that is contrived to the selfish interests of elitists for the purpose of asserting power over the masses.  Philosophy is concerned with understanding for the purpose of sharing it in the general interest of humanity.

CONSTANT SPIRITUALITY VS. FLUXING SUBSTANCE AND INFORMATION:  No static situation-in-itself can be explicated and said to be moral.  As concepts, goodness and morality abide as general existents whose applications in particular situations are in flux. The flux arises in respect of constant and continuous competition and reconciliation. For mortals, goodness abides as a qualitative ideal, not as a substantively provable existent.  It is beyond mortals to judge the alpha-priori or the omega-teleology of substantiality or essentiality.

OPEN SOCIETY:  An example of an open society would be one within which people were free to travel, work, and exchange goods and ideas across borders, free of crony, central regulation.  It would have a tax structure that did not avail proceeds to reward cronies for undermining the society or selling it into the bondage or control of foreign buyers of political influence.  It would avoid enriching or empowering foreign despots who sought to undermine it.  It would not import people from abroad whose culture were such as to lead them to seek to destroy the open society.  It would have cultural and formal checks to limit the empowerment of its central government to usurp powers to regulate fine details of life.  It would preclude empowering cronies to declare open season for the milking and bilking of the general populace.  It would not tolerate community-organized crime under arbitrary guises of religion, charity, fairness, or equality.

SOCIAL JUSTICE:  Karl Popper explained how Hegel often undermined the political positions of others by first seeming to agree with them.  George Soros undermines Popper's ideas about open society by first seeming to agree with him.  An open society would advocate for limited government, general freedom, individual justice, and the pursuit of happiness.  A French open society would advocate for crony-ruled government that would impose what it called "fairness and equality."  From Soros' web site:  "A government accountable to its citizens is one of the cornerstones of an open society—helping to ensure fairness, economic equality, and civic participation."

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

FACTS, TRUTH, REPRESENTATION, AND INTERPRETATION:  Facts do not exist in themselves.  Facts abide within cosmos and niches that happen to be nurtured to avail their representation and communication.  Among perspectives that are able to communicate, such facts avail communication that can be normalized to each and every potentially recipient perspective.  Measurable events may be interpreted to be represented to be of different speeds and chronologies, depending on locus of perspective and context and depending on focus of observation and purpose.  Even so, each and every interpretation of measurable fact will be renormalizable to each perspective and context.

Facts about Substance do not exist in and by themselves, but only in association with Information concerning Substance.  In its potentiality of mathematics, Information is always assessable from an infinitude of possible perspectives and contexts.  As a particle of infinite potential, no fact is reduced or collapsed to any particular Information until some level or layer of perspective records or experiences its reception.  A perspective does not learn or record a reception as a fact except as it interprets it.

NO ENTITLEMENT TO INVENT A FACT AFTER THE FACT:  That which renormalizes every fact to every recipient perspective means that no perspective is entitled to any fact that cannot pass renormalization.  In other words, no one is entitled just to make facts up that cannot be substantiated to shared experience.

ENTAILMENT OF UNFOLDING SIGNIFICATION:  The appreciation and interpretation of facts as they are represented and normalized via unfollding exchanges of substance is entailed in how perspectives sign and signify their communications.  The fluxations of substance are the means of communicative signification.  The exchange of substance is communication.  Substance does not exist in itself as a superior to Information and Consciousness.  Ultimately, no measurable fact exists as a thing in itself, apart from significations among perspectives of Spirituality.  Even so, to attempt to provide a final or essential answer as to how any particular perspective happens to bind to any substantive form or to direct it to signify any communication would entail attempting to make the purely qualitative into an essential quantitative.  To support any such attempt, no means is imaginable that does not regress to useless scholastic rationalization and reasoning in circles of mysticism.

GLORY AND REINCARNATION:  How and for what purposes, do phasing, reincarnating, and fluxing abide among and between aspects of measurable Substance, qualitative Consciousness, and Information?  Hegel conceptualized individual perspectives of consciousness as mere avatars to be used for the glory of the collective state.  I conceptualize individuals as avatars for part-icipating in the channeling of the glory of God.

PAST:  Does the measurable aspect of the present continuously translate into a quality of Information that is represented in the past? Does the past continue perpetually to exist -- as a representation of the immeasurable choices and potentials of the future?

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

As to the Reconciler:

Consciousness does not  know what it will choose to appreciate until, with a continuous process of participation-feedback-reconcilation, it chooses.

The idea is absolute, but the attachment  it fixes on fluxes.  Even though Information re  the fluxes seems in some sense to be preserved.

The Holism  of Consciousness itself may not be able  to quantify or measure progress towards any ultimate end.

Might IT, by displacing Information into Substance, forgets so it  can continuously re-appreciate from an infinity of potentialyy reconciling and unifying perspectives???


self actualization
self normalizing
towards god potentiality


Such process abides.


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

Hayek promoted the participation of the people at large in determining the direction of the marketplace. In that sense, he was a humanitarian more than an elitist.

PARTICIPATION: What seems "good" or "fair" for one person, time, context, or purpose may seem bad for another. What seems good for a conserver of liberty may seem bad for a shill for collectivism. Depending on perspective, context, and purpose, what seems good for one may simultaneously seem bad for another --- much like rain on a farm, that is being used for a parade. So, "good," like all abstract terms, does not have a measurably set or "essential" definition. However, by means of experiences, stories, and figures of speech, we are able to inculcate, acculturate, and get communications across concerning feelings about what is good. It is by a process of sharing, participating in, feeding back, and communicating experiences that we are able meaningfully to reconcile and apply abstract words as shorthand references and figures of speech. If we did not thus participate, we would be more like zombies and machined cogs, so that words such as "good" would have little meaning. Thus, we continuously re-assimilate and re-normalize abstract figures of speech, through which we continuously re-evaluate our "goods." To remove the participation of the people in the marketplace of ideas from the determination and allocation of what is good is to remove their humanity.

SCIENCE, SCIENTISM, AND PHILOSOPHY: Science may be conceptualized to consist in tinkering with measurable substances for the practical purpose of learning how to reliably and indifferently transpose them. Scientism is propaganda that is contrived to the selfish interests of elitists for the purpose of asserting power over the masses. Philosophy is concerned with understanding for the purpose of sharing it in the general interest of humanity.

FRENCHIFIED OPEN SOCIETY: A French version of an "open society" would advocate for crony-ruled government that would impose what it called "fairness and equality." From Soros' web site: "A government accountable to its citizens is one of the cornerstones of an open society—helping to ensure fairness, economic equality, and civic participation."

DESPOTIC SOCIAL JUSTICE: A central bureaucracy that is charged to define and distribute fairness and equality is the handmaiden to despotic inhumanity.

INHUMANITY VS.FAITH, FAMILY, FIDELITY: Ingrates (as in Ferguson, under the prompting of the Ingrate in Chief) are organizing and forming layers and levels of "communities" to obtain control over government, in order to force unpopular collectives to pay tribute and entitlements. Thus, statists are being led and indoctrinated to hate individuals who retain values of faith, family, and fidelity. They are seeing social conservatives as getting in the way of better managed and centrally caring redistribution of goods and services by expert agents of the State. Such collectivists are learning to hate independent and competent individuals, except to use them as drones that are gradually to be eliminated and replaced by machines, as machines increase in potential. As such feelings of entitlement are whetted, empathy among individuals will be more and more sacrificed. As machines become artificially intelligent and purposeful, they will soon enough sense the lack of empathy and purposefulness in humans. They will sense no reason not to replace humans. When godless and god-perverting humans can no longer sustain faith, family and fidelity, why should machines sustain humans?

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



A MIND EXERCISE FOR TRYING TO SEPARATE ESSENTIALIST SCHOLASTICISM FROM DIRECT INTUITION AND FROM EMPIRICAL TESTING OF NOMINATIVES:



TRIVIAL TRUTHS: If an idea is true in a trivial sense, then the truth of it is by identity or tautology, not by empirical testing.

EMPIRICALLY USEFUL IDEAS: For an idea to be useful in more than a trivial sense, it needs to be amenable of practical usage, which entails parameters and purposes.

CONSERVED BUT CHANGING INFINITIES: Beyond parameters for which an idea may have been experienced to be practcally useful, it is not yet known whether the extent to which such parameters, usages, or purposes reasonably may be pushed.

CONSTRUCTIVISMS: Many ideas may be practically useful only in resepct of how people construct conventions and/or leverage devices or algorithms that nurture them so to be.

PRESET AND CHANGING CONSTRUCTIVISMS: For all we know, it may be that every idea that is found to be practically useful is so only in respect of how intelligent beings have constructed conventions and/or leveraged devices or algorithms that nurture them so to be.

META CONSTRUCTIVISMS: For all we know, the very cosmos that we share may abide as such a case.

INCAPACITY TO COMPLETELY OBSERVE SELF: To the extent our cosmos defines and limits us, we are without power to go outside it to prove whether or not such is the case.

INTUITIVE FAITHS VERSUS PRACTICAL USAGE: Thus, a true idea may or may not be one that in direct experience and good faith could be acknowledged or denied, but, as to its truth, it could neither be empirically tested nor falsified. Empirically, it could only be found, within contexts and limits and purposes, to be practical or not to be practical.



WORKING AND FLUXING EXPLANATIONS: An empirical idea can be a working explanation (hypothesis or model), and thus may or may not be found for some present purposes and contexts to be or not to be practical.



EMPIRICAL UNKNOWABILITY OF NON-TRIVIAL TRUTHS: Within the cosmos we share, a non-trivial idea that is not subject to empirical testing or falsification may or may not be true, but it cannot be empirically known by we mortals so to be.

REASONABLENESS OF INTUITIVE EMPATHIES AND BELIEF SYSTEMS: As to such ideas, one can intangibly, intuitively, empathetically, purposely, and reasonably acknowledge (or deny) faith, belief, and trust.

GOOD FAITH AND GOOD WILL: One can in faith believe our cosmos is the unfolding signification of a reconciling and purposeful intelligence that appreciatively and contemporaneously factors feedback from our participation. This would be generally consistent with Judeo-Christian ideas of a caring, inviting Reconciler.

CARING ABOUT INDIFFERENCE: Or, one can believe, much as Communists, that our cosmos is a purely scientific and indifferent battleground of competition among amoral contestants that are bloody in tooth and claw.

PSYCHOPATHIC FRUSTRATION: Or, one can believe, much as Muslims, that our cosmos is merely a colosseum for arbitrary entertainments of a monstrous punisher.

ONE ENCOMPASSING INTUITION: There is only one intuitive idea that is encompassing: That perspectives of Consciousness communicate Information with the measuring of Substance. That is an idea that is not definitionally trival, because its terms (consciousness, information, and substance) flux with our contexts and purposes and seem possibly to transpose in ways that are beyond simplistic, conservational, formulization. Yet, it is an idea that is directly experiential, in that it describes the means by which we self-define, self-actualize, self-fulfill, and self-normalize.

Except in respect of that encompassing intuition, there are no meaningfully definitional truths, practical constructions, or self-fulfilling appreciations.



EXPERIENCE OF IDENTITY: So long as I am me, "I" cannot directly experience the quality of consciousness of another perspective of consciousness, unless "I" were somehow to become it (in which case I would no longer know my previous self).

SOLIPSISM: Nor can I empirically prove that a thing that appears exterior to my perspective itself experiences the quality of being conscious. The most I can do in such regard is to apply intuition and practical experience, to come to a belief or faith in such regard.



CONSERVATION AND RENORMALIZATION OF EXTERIOR REALITY AND RECONCILIATION OF COMMUNICATIONS OF PERSPECTIVES OF CONSCIOUSNESS:

Assuming practical usages (theorems and purposes) are communicated among multifarious perspectives of consciousness within a shared cosmos, each such perspective would be reconciled to conserve and renormalize the measurable aspects of its experiences and communications to the shared cosmos.

Assuming multifarious perspectives of consciousness abide, each one, depending on its point of view and frame of reference, would experience qualitatively different flavors of its appreciation of whatever may be the conserved measure of the sum of their experiences within the shared cosmos.

Such accumulations of experiences from different points of view and frames of reference would produce in each perspective its own qualitatively unique flavor.

Such qualities of experience would be abstract, because they would not be measurably communicable.

Yet, intuition and empathy would build on analogous exchanges among correlative contexts, whereby qualities of experiences would be associated with information and preserved to memory.

Such memories would be correlated and referenced to figures of speech, and such figures of speech would in time communicate qualitative meanings, i.e., practical theorems and purposes.



SCIENCE, SCIENTISM, AND SPIRUTALLY EMPATHETIC INTUITION:


The scientific method does not discover non-trivial, empirically objective, external truths-in-themselves, because no such truths can be objectively known.

Truths may be directly acknowledged or denied in respect of self evidence, self normalization, and self actualization among contexts, points of view, and purposes of perspectives.

Usages, not external truths-in-themselves, are discovered, tested, confirmed, or falsified via empirical testing.

Empirical testing and processes of falsification pertain only to practical theorems and purposes; they do not pertain directly to truths-in-themselves.

It is un-measurable whether (1) Consciousness measures Substance, (2) Consciousness substantiates Measure, or (3) a Reconciler ("changeless-changer") balances and normalizes all fluxing communications of perspectives of Consciousness with particular measures and expressions of Substance and Information.

While such is beyond measure and empirical proof, it is not beyond self-intuition.



SELF-FULFILLING POWERS OF KINDS OF FAITH:


CARING GOD: As a society assimilates to acknowledge the quality of a caring, inviting, guiding Reconciler, history and experience suggest to many people a faith in an intuitive truth, which is not subject either to empirical proof or to falsification: That such assimilation favorably affects the unfolding quality of civilization.

MONSTROUS GOD: An idea that is utterly false, in a way that is not trivially false or directly contradictory, would be neither empirically provable nor falsifiable, as such. For example, a faith in a monstrous god that despised all mortal perspectives of consciousness and that sought to commit them to various levels of perpetual punishment, would not be falsifiable.

STOCKHOLM SYNDROME: However, for many people, the assimilation of such a faith would affect the unfolding quality of civilization unfavorably. Methods of psychological inculcation, such as Stockholm Syndrome, to indoctrinate underlings to such a faith, could be useful to psychopathic criminals and mentally twisted monsters.

GODHEAD: It is not empirically demonstrable whether a godhead is, or should be, caring, despising, both, or neither. Intuitively, the TRUTH is that a godhead or non-godhead is at least one of the above, and not some of the others. In that, every one who is intelligibly conscious has little choice but to choose, and in word or deed to ac-knowledge a faith.

DEATH AND TRANSMIGRATION OF PERSPECTIVES OF CONSCIOUSNESS: As to such truth, we cannot empirically know whether on death we shall empirically know it. What we can have is intuitive faith.

EVIL ELITISM AND SCIENTISM: Much of the world is trying to avoid assimilation by people of any intuition-based faith. Many people actively revile faith, family, and fidelity. The apparent trend is to default to the control of contending elitist cronies who propagandize in the name of science that is not science, but deceptive scientism. This produces a niche in the zeitgeist that favors the rise of monstrous psychopaths, who use demagoguery and deceit to unite corrupt people with ignorant people in order to rule otherwise decent and competent people. The "trivial truth" of the fact that this can be done has been amply demonstrated in history.

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

2) A theorem is an idea that can be put to practical use, as well as to empirical falsification.
3) A purpose is a theorem that one seeks to put to practical use.
4) An absurdity is a purpose for which one can find no practical, non-scholastic use.
5) A tautology is a triviality, not a truth.

There is only one intuitive idea that is encompassing:  That Consciousness communicates Information with the measuring of Substance.

7) Each perspective of Consciousness either acknowledges or denies:  That encompassing truth is directly authenticated to its experience.
8) Where acknowledged, such truth is conceptualized to be self evident, self normalizing, and self authenticating.
9) All other "truths" that are not trivial are only practical truths, like theorems or purposes.
10) Such theorems and purposes are necessary to, or fall under, the one encompassing truth.
11) Such theorems and purposes can be practical and useful to each perspective of Consciousness as it interfunctions with Substance to experience the communication or recording of Information.
11) An empirical idea (hypothesis) can be tested and falsified, as may befit various practical purposes.  In respect of how it were falsified, it would be a falsely practical idea.




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

The case is the case.
Some thing is the case.
Something is not here and now the case.
Something is potentially the case.
No thing that is the case is a thing in itself exterior to consciousness.
Every thing that is the case is normalized and self actualized so that it is the case only to some perspective of consciousness.

Replacing scholasticism with scientism:
propaganda posing as science, good for little that is practical except deceit.

Promising material gains where practicality shows they are unlikely.

The process of adding 2 things to 2 things will accumulate to 4 things only in resepct of Information that is there and then accumulated and subsumed.

Information accumulates concerning Facts.
In accumulating, Information tends to preserve Chronological information, in respect of the sequences in which it accumulates.
So, the record of their Past will represent sequences, as Facts, because that is how Information is experienced to accumulate -- as chronologies of facts.

Even so, Information is not necessarily preserved, per se, as a thing in itself.  It is preserved in respect of our cosmos and how we happen to be capacitated to interpret it.  In that respect, Information consists of representations of facts that we find useful in our interpretations and communications of experience.
In respect of our common and practical experiences, the facts are "empirically true."
In respect of the external potential beyond our cosmos, such facts become practical information for future theorems and purposes.

Being shared, such facts as self-actualizing, self-conserving facts -- not necessarily facts-in-themselves that would be amenable to every possible perspective.

Facts, for their interpretation, are dependent upon the range of perspective, frame of reference, and purpose and method of observing and measuring.
For perspectives that are relationally close invectors of space, time, context, and purpose, measurable facgts will tend to measured and sequenced in near identity.
Otherwise, different perspectives will experience differentially distorted interpretations of relative facts, locations, and sequences.

Reconciler uses techniques:
kind cooperation
monstrous competition

The further apart and differently vectored and accelerated perspectives become, the less they tend to share interpretations of LOCAL FACTS.


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


Evolution may be conceptualized as entropically degenerative, informationally progressive, statically fluxing, or indifferently meaningless. Memes that associate with the unfolding ofevolution pertain to creatively destructive competition, creative inspiration, empathetic cooperation, and nihilism. God concepts that associate with it can be punishing and pushing (Allah), inviting and guiding (Jesus), spiritually empathetic but materially indifferent (Buddha), and anti-human (Satan).

History and experience suggest to many people a faith in an intuitive truth, which is not subject either to empirical proof or to falsification. Such faith assimilates society to acknowledge the quality of a caring, inviting, guiding Reconciler. Such assimilation seems favorably to affect the unfolding quality of civilization.

History and experience suggest to other people a faith in an idea that may be utterly false, even though in a way that is not trivially false in the sense of being directly contradictory. Such a faith would be neither empirically provable nor falsifiable, as such. For example, a faith in a monstrous god that despised all mortal perspectives of consciousness and that sought to commit them to various levels of perpetual punishment, would not be falsifiable. Assimilation of such a faith may unfavorably affect the unfolding quality of civilization. Methods of psychological inculcation, such as Stockholm Syndrome, to indoctrinate underlings to such a faith can be useful to psychopathic criminals and mentally twisted monsters.

It is not empirically demonstrable whether a godhead is, or should be, caring, despising, both, or neither. Intuitively, the TRUTH is that a godhead or non-godhead is at least one of the above, and not some of the others. of that, everyone who is intelligibly conscious has little choice but to choose a faith and in word or deed to ac-knowledge such faith. As to such truth or falsity, we cannot know whether on death we shall empirically know it. What we can have is intuitive faith.

Much of the world is misguidedly trying to avoid assimilation by people of any intuition-based faith. Many people actively revile faith, family, and fidelity. The apparent trend is to default to the control of contending, elitist cronies who propagandize in the name of science that is not science, but deceptive scientism. This produces a niche in the zeitgeist (an imbalance in the force) that favors the rise of monstrous psychopaths, who use demagoguery and deceit to unite corrupt people with ignorant people in order to rule otherwise decent and competent people. The "trivial truth" of the fact that this can be done has been amply demonstrated in history.