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.
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.
7 comments:
I wonder what may be implicated if Obama thinks he is made secure by replacing top generals with people who are more faithful to him than to the Constitution, Will not people who are not faithful to any higher standard tend also not to be faithful to any particular person? The Romans often entertained a habit of disposing of one emperor after another, in rapid succession.
There are ideas that are as well or better served by mental experiments and thinking as by substantive experimentation. I would not call such theories or science. I would call such qualitative analysis, insight, and argumentation. This is because such ideas tend not to be advanced either by empirical replication or by attempts to falsify. They may be inspiring or persuasive, but they are not quantitatively measurable, factual, or testable. So, they do not move us towards more accurate practical empiricism.
PT
Neither Party has leadership that inspires. Both parties appeal to base interests. Our elections have become a substitute for war between marauding tribes of soulless barbarians. Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what you can steal legally from dronies with the help of your homies or cronies. Choose your gang, endure your initiation, pay your dues, and declare open season on children and generations to come. That's community organization, crony capitalism, and libertine pyramiding. Yup, no need here for any social values. Sarc.
The establishment Rinos are not small gov republicans. They are crony statists. We need a state, but a small gov state. We will not get that with establishment repubs or dems. Old time loggers used to man two sides of a saw, so each could take turns pulling, but both were sawing the tree clean through. A similar technique can be used to ratchet and cinch up a saddle ever tighter on a horse. That's what the establishment of crony repubs and corrupt dems takes turns doing to America. They will continue to ratchet their torture until the horse, being the middle class, rears up and kicks both of them in the head. Voting for either an establishment Dem or an establishment Repub is to vote to have oneself squeezed clean through. There's no relief in sight.
Using the State's judges to force equal treatment and equal results for so many things that are inherently unequal will only continue to royally muck things up.
The option of declining to make a choice is itself a choice. The vacuum will be filled by libertines. No one gets off that easy. Justice Kennedy adopted your stance. The result is not looking good.
In elections, the wild card is the uninformed voter. Since he is uninformed, a studied appeal to reason will never pierce the armor of his thick skull. You have to make a hard or direct hit. Either between his eyes or at his pleasure centers. He has to be made to see plainly how he will be hurt or pleasured. The more successful the welfare state, the less he will incline to believe he can be hurt.
The people who are active in politics are not those who have responsible jobs. They are: (1) old retired people; (2) basement choomers on trust funds; (3) professional hacks; and (4) crony operators. 2,3, and 4 tend to be aroused by single or pet issues. 1, when healthy and not fearful, tends to be concerned for country, progeny, and humanity. However, 1 is old, marginalized, or shouted down. So 1 tends to be drowned out in a "tragedy of the commons." What 1 has going for it, however, to follow up on a Simpsons episode, is it tends to get up early each morning, before everyone else.
Post a Comment