CLASS OF ONE, WITH TRIVALENT FACES

.

REGARDING SET THEORY: Set theory depends on analysis under a logic based on that which presumes to sum to a mutually exclusive and exhaustive composition. However, there is often a problem with analyis under such logic: While Beingness often appears to be trivalent, set theory operates under an assumption as if beingness were only bivalent. Yet, sets that are not pre-created or artificially preset tend to be trivalent. Trivalent sets are not comprised of parts that are mutually exclusive and exhaustive. Rather, they are comprised of sets that are mutually dependent and transpositional. Depending on perspective, context, and purpose, the face of the whole of a trivalent set vibrates in transpositions among aspects that flux among the Conscious, the Substantive, and the Informational. Such transpositions correlate with, but do not "cause" one another. Their measurable vectors abide as correlates that conserve and balance to zero. As to that which for the present abides in aspect as conscious, substantive, or informational, each of said three aspects defines a different quality, even though each aspect is defined in terms of the other two (as in a game of rock-paper-scissors). No one of said three aspects (qualitative Consciousness, quantitative Substance, and algorithmic Information) in itself defines the holism of the system set, even though each avails meaning to the face of the set.

.

REGARDING MORAL MEANINGFULNESSl To meaningfully appreciate (not prescribe) the set as a fluxing holism, more is needed than a preset-logic of machined-science that is based on a digitized bivalence of true-false, yes-no, on-off, either-or, positive-negative. Rather, a trivalent mode of reasoning is needed, that intuits a pursuit of music and meaningfulness in good faith, and that empathizes in good will --- beyond bivalent logic. A trivalent mode that attaches, identifies with, and is inspired in terms of ... analogical modeling, figures of speech, and sacred parables. Such trivalent reasoning qualitatively factors trivalents, such as: perspective-context-purpose; truth-falsity-contextual dependence; separateness-relation-transposition; representation-observation-interpretive translation; positive-negative-neutral; like-dislike-indifference; vector-catalyst-translator; competition-cooperation-reconciliation; predetermination-random determination-contemporaneous determination; intuition-empathy-measurement.

.

REGARDING TRIVALENCE OF THE CLASS OF ONE: Trivalent reasoning and inspiration among perspectives of consciousness (not machined presets) recognizes not two, but three, aspects of analysis: truth, falsity, and contextually transitional dependence. The Holism (the set of one) fluxes to present trivalent faces, so that no one face of IT is sufficient in itself to define such class of one.

.
 

Machined Bivalence v. Conscious Trivalence

.

Of bivalent functioning of digitized machines versus trivalent functioning of consciously-participating iterations of a reconciling beingness:

.

By definition, no mortal can stand outside the System that determines his communications and avails his expressions of conscious identity in order to determine what he may suppose "causes" each contemporaneous reconciliation by the System among all of its variously interpreted and translated particles of functional expression.

.

Beyond quanticized, machined, bivalent causation, there abides a qualitative trivalence, which reconciles interfunctioning roles for (1) INFORMATION (math), (2) Measurable SUBSTANCE (representations of transitions among math vectors that present appearances of matter, energy, space, and time), and (3) CONSCIOUSNESS (contemporaneous feedback participation in appreciating and determining choices as they unfold from among all possible choices). Each of The Trivalents abides to function in a way that is qualitatively different from the others. Consciousness separates amoral machines from purposeful beings. Information can be represented mathematically in numbers and equations, which need not occupy or exclude others from the same space-time. Substance is empirically (bivalently) measureable in terms of space, time, matter, and energy. (Yet, each of the Trivalents may also flux in conservational expression of one another. Substance may be guided by Consciousness to combine with anti-substance to produce Information, i.e., the "number" zero, i.e., nothing but space that "occupies" space. Avatars of consciousness may die and transition to nothing but bivalent, Informational significations and representations of Substance. Vectors of Math Information may be contemporaneously activated by Consciousness in order to represent Substance.)

.

Each preset algorithm of digitized bivalence that predetermines the unfolding of any particular series of sequences, at the time and place of its having been preset, would then and there have been contemporaneously preset under the participation of a trivalent operator. And each now-present unfolding is, by definion, contemporaneously determined ("chosen"). As any unfolding is contemporaneously determined, it is also, by the System, contemporaneously absorbed, synchronized, and reconciled.

.

By definition, no particular mortal perspective of the system would/could "scientifically" control, direct, replicate, or prescribe the constant and continuous process of reconciliation by the System as it operates and conserves as a holism. As the System as a whole synchronizes and reconciles in contemporaneous feedback responsiveness to each change among its particles, and as it "chooses" among all possible alternatives for each contemporaneous reconciliation, how can any mortal comprehend non-pre-determined, contemporaneous reconciliation as being other than the function of an appreciating field of feedback, i.e., a field of consciousness?

.

As qualitative choice enters into each sequentially-unfolding and contemporaneous determination (that has not been prescribed by a non-choosing entity or function), then does not such choice-making function inject a qualitative trivalence into an otherwise inanimate (dumb), machine-like, bivalent algorithm? Is not the trivalent feedback (of apprehending, evaluating, purpose-ing, and choosing) by appreciative observers what distinguishes communications among perspectives of consciousness from preset sequences hammered out by machines?
.
Bottom line:  Scientists overreach when they presume moral purposefulness can be explicated in purely objective, quanticized, measurable, bivalent terms.  To so assume is a mis-directed, religious-like belief of scientism.

.
 

Regarding Atheism

.
Some say science-ism is not religion.  Do they mean it is never a religion, usually not a religion, or sometimes not a religion?  The statement is either so trivial or so broad that I could not help but take it as somewhat arbitrary, unscientific, unreasoned, or faith based.  Since the attack seems too broad based,   I would address it more from a Judeo-Christian perspective.  You're probably familiar with the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule.  I suspect you choke on the Great Commandment (and maybe you think the Golden Rule doesn't "really" say anything).  Were I translating the Great Commandment in the language of secularists, I might phrase it this way:  Find and devote yourself to that principle or vector of moral purposefulness that is even more important than the preservation of your own skin (i.e., stand for something larger than yourself).  I might translate the Golden Rule in this way:  Devote yourself to a moral compass that is principled and relevant in your dealings with other people (i.e., be fair).
.
I wonder:  Do you "believe" such principles are supported in your secular philosophy?  Do you find them to be signified in your reading of natural civilization?  If yes:  How is your finding/belief/faith really that much different from one who believes religious parables serve simply to illustrate translations of the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule?  If no:  Why "should" anyone value any of your opinions or beliefs about the value of moral principles or spiritual faith?
.
Your use of the word "belief" is itself interesting.  A religious believer does not tend to say he knows that natural science proves the legitimacy of his faith. He does not reason himself to moral or spiritual belief based purely on natural empiricism because nature is not suited for such purpose (unless you have found yourself to be "the one," i.e., the exception who has derived and proved "ought" from "is").  Rather, a religious believer looks beyond the limits of empiricism in order to reason about moral and spiritual values.  He looks to the broadest aspects of his relationship with the cosmos, and he, in good faith and good will, tries to apply his best intuition and empathy.  If you have a better way of reasoning about such concerns, please share.
.
I don't quite see how matters of "believe" and "not believe" are quite as simple as you suggest.  Any needle that might be imagined to scale the attitude of conviction (belief) in each person would seem to vary throughout his life, even his day. A believer may push towards belief one day, towards doubt the next.  Would such a person be a "believing doubter?"  To doubt is also to believe, i.e., it is to believe one does not believe.  Many people think moral and spiritual values are matters of likelihood.  They seem to believe they have some empirical insight for weighing whether a moral or spiritual belief is "likely true" or not.  It would be interesting to see them try to write a paper to clearly demonstrate such likeliness.
.
You seem to complain that concerns about faith are too important to many people who think at A.T.  You would rather focus on measurables.  Well all righty then!  Measure that focus on measurables, sans spiritual inspiration:  How has uninspired, dispassionate focusing on scientifically indifferent measurables worked out for you (and for America)?  I wonder why all the empirical-minded folk somehow were unable to inspire, connect with, or save the day with the modern electorate?  Last I looked, the election secured the federal government in the hands of cronies bent on using useful idiots to smash the political influence of the productive class.
.
As to empiricism and broad concerns about decent civilization:  I wonder which empiricist has ever gathered viable "evidence" to refute what many people consider a common sense observation, i.e., that a Qualitative Immeasurable created the cosmic cone of measurable signification that we mortals share in common?  Has anyone gathered empirical evidence that suggests a plausible alternative to the common sense empirical observation that the creator abides/abided in a way that is qualitatively immeasurable to mortals?
.
As to whether the Creator has "left the building":  Well then, explain what guides or causes each result, when no one has the least clue to explain what determines each sequence in the unfoldment.  Hint: Labeling a result as "random" does not explain its cause.  Labeling whatever happens to survive or replicate as "the fittest" does not explain any cause at any particular time and place.  Arguing that every thing that is possible to occur must occur in some cosmos is not an empirically testable thesis.  It is just a faith to avoid an alternative faith:  That God is with us, that God appreciates and rconciles us, that God's field of consciousness functions in cyclic, qualitative feedback with the apprehensions of particular mortal expressions of consciousness, that such relationship is signified in the cosmos in terms of the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule, that so believing and conceptualizing will tend to guide us towards more fulfilling civilizations that celebrate the dignity of human consciousness. Do you have evidence that an alternative faith would better guide us to human freedom and dignity?  If not, how is your faith not of a religious quality?  (Hint:  Merely inventing and attaching yourself to a label for "belief in lack of belief" -- such as "atheism" -- does not make your belief meaningful, faithless, testable, empirical, civilizing, or worthwhile.)
.
 

The Nature of Information -- Is Information ever lost?

.

INFORMATIONAL HISTORICITY --- REGARDING MODELS FOR THE HISTORY OF THE PAST AND WHETHER INFORMATION ABOUT SEQUENCES IS EVER LOST:

.

RE-NORMALIZATION: Every particular perspective that has bonded to a particular cosmos, regardless of how the reconciling and conserving Principal of the cosmos may re-phase or re-normalize the measurable system that is shared as a whole, will always interpret its sensations, memories, and records AS IF the measurable system itself had not changed, and every perspective will simultaneously and synchronously re-interpret and re-normalize, back to an instant after a rationalized beginning of the system, as if the rationalized beginning had not changed. This is because beingness-in-itself is timelessly fluxing, i.e., eternally present. Each change in the Field as a whole synchronously alters the interpreted "history" of each Particle of expression of the Field. No Particle has any means, outside of the Field, of testing to see whether the Field may have altered the record and memory of the "past." IOW, Information may be lost, but we mortals cannot know or demonstrate it to be lost. We can flux in what we "believe" depending on how we flux in our conceptualizations, points of view, contexts, and purposes. For some purposes, we can reasonably believe Information is not lost, for other purposes, we can believe Information is lost. For some purposes, we can reasonably believe Time is only a stubborn illusion, for other purposes, we can believe Time is ordained by God.
.
ETERNAL DURATION OF THE MANIFEST PRESENT:

.

The Eternal Present abides as a fluxing farm for manifesting different points of view among various contexts for implicating all possible Information. The manifest present avails "farms" for storing Information. The "crops" are the manifest; the potential crops are the qualitative implication of all potential Information that may possibly become manifest. The various worlds, universes, cosmos, which abide are manifestations of measurable Information, serve as VECTORS for implicating all Information that can potentially be imagined. The total amount of Information that is in potential is unmeasurable, unknowable to mortals, perhaps as infinite as God. The total amount of Information that is manifest to the present may be measurable in respect of its own BITS and terms --- even though mortals cannot know whether or how such terms may phase through system-wide re-normalizations, with respect to whether each change of phase may increase or decrease some total sum of manifest Information, or even how a unit or bit of such Information may be worthily represented. The mathematical "DURATION" of each connecting segment and sequence of the Eternal Present is related to the cyclically sequential, vectorized vibrating of meta feedback between the system and its parts. Such duration may be conceptualized as continuous or discrete, DEPENDING ON CONCEPTUALIZATION (perspective, context, and purpose). Spins can be measured and degreed as continuous, while intersections and leaps may be measured as instantaneous and discrete.

.

SEPARATENESS AMONG PARTICULARS:

.

Without space-time, how can Meta Stuff and Math Information be conceptualized as yielding separate points of view and context, i.e., qualitatively and subjectively different perspectives of consciousness? How can consciousness bond and identify with SEPARATE perspectives, if there is no space-time grid for vectoring or imposing or excluding separation?

.

Upon what meta spirit, stuff, essence, or term does math do its math? How is math vectored and made active? Is such (meta?) stuff of a quality that is relevant, yet not measurable? Is meta-stuff inferred because of manifestations of representations to Consciousness? Does Meta Stuff avail relationally constant stuff that avails precise measurements among Perspectives of Consciousness within bubbles in the common founding units and terms of such bubbles? I would analogize "Meta Stuff" as that which subjects (subjective) itself to object (objective) math vectors of itself, and conservationally (equationally, algorithmically) transitions experience in Discrete intersecting vibrations and Continuous spins of space, time and mass ... in relation to qualitative attitudes of quantitatively shared informational sequencing, recording, and unfolding.

.

I would conceptualize that the meta stuff cyclically feeds back, and vibrates to, vectoring math. Vibrations avail curves, spins, intersections, interference, thus spin Continuosities and quantum leap Discretes. Thus SEPARATIONS abide among sequential vibrations (frequencies, wavelengths, amplitudes, intensities ... availing complex layers and levels of conserving, reconciling systems of sub-vibrations among forms that interfunction to intersect, reinforce, and reduce one another). Different cosmos may occupy the same meta stuff by operating under different command frequencies (equations subjectively under and objectively within equations, forms within forms, vibrations within vibrations, spins within spins). A single cosmos may collapse under (subject to) a single algorithm, yet avail objective differentiation among its vectoring parts via exclusionary and transitionary processes under sub-algorithms. Thus, separation is availed via consciousness' bonding and Identifying with sequentially different vibrations of perspectives. Thus, the meta stuff does not occupy space-time. Rather, space-time "occupies" the meta stuff.

.

Thus, the meta stuff (God) exists-in-itself, as a feedback-appreciative-communicator-and-reconciler of the qualitative with the quantitative. Thus, the Information from the perspective of Identity that seems to follow the measurable signification of each body with which the Meta Stuff bonds is partially communicated during each body's life, beyond the illusory perimeter of its skin, and upon its death, the remainder is reabsorbed into the informational sum of The Manifest and the immeasurability of The Potential.

.

No objectively measurable substance-in-itself really exists, moves, changes, or occupies or passes through time or space. Rather, potential Information availed to the Field of Consciousness and its Perspectives is simply re-vectored and reorganized in its manifest recordation, presentment, interpretation, and communication to and among perspectives of consciousness. That is, Information is math-ed in reconciled appeasement to and among perspectives of consciousness that somehow register their appreciations and operations from different contexts within a common cone of experiential presentment, appreciation, evaluation, and thusly motivated will. A local vector of Information may be locally interpreted as “longstanding,” yet, it may be erased by anti-vectors. Sequentiality will be rationalized and re-normalized to local experience. Yet, sequentiality (chronological time), in itself, is subject to annihilation, even reversal.

.

If there is no substance-in-itself, then “in” what is Information organized or vectored? Where? ANSWER: “In” the qualitative field of consciousness. A perspectives of consciousness (will), does not itself “travel” “in” any where. It appreciates, feeds back, judges, wills.

.

COIN: The Field of Beingness is like an ambiguously flipping coin, one side relating as Math (nature), the other as Consciousness (god).

.

How can Math be conceptualized to exist? Does math exist in itself, as being inert, pre-vectored, randomly vectored, chaotic and evolutionarily vectored, ... or consciously, qualitatively, appreciatively, and contemporanously vectored (like Active Math or Platonic Geometry)? Can Math be conceptualized as itself being bivalent, but only existing within a trivalent system? In other words, is the System itself bivalent or trivalent? Is each cosmos/universe a closed, self-contained, system-bubble of BIVALENT either-or, dots and dashes, ones and zeros, anti-ones and zeros, yin-yang, yes-no, positive-neutral, negative-neutral, positive-negative? Or is each cosmos/universe a system-bubble of TRIVALENT relationships?
.
TRIVALENCE --- MANY CONCEPTUALIZATIONS ARE MODELED IN TRIVALENT TERMS, SUCH AS:

NUMBERS: imaginary-rational-irrational,

INFORMATION: measurable-immeasurable-transitional,

Compressible-exclusionary- mediating conversionary,

PARTICLES: fermions-bosons-ghosts,

Particles-anti particles-virtual particles,

Manifest-potential-transitional,

Absolutes-relatives-relative absolutes,

Cyclical-linear-flux,

Positive-negative-neutral,

Radiating-repulsive-attractive,

Unity-relational-exclusional,

Qualitative-quantitative-fluxing,

Definitional-transitional-translational,

Context-perspective-purpose,

Objective-subjective-reconcilative,

Observation-rationalization-reason,

Deductive-inductive-analogical,

Mathematical-meaningful-reasoned,

Music-noise-background,

Equal-different-like,

Consciousness-substance-information,

System-synchronizer-particular,

Encompassment, immortal-mortal,

Source-System-Sum,

Class-sum-member,

Tribe-family-individual,

Upper-middle-lower,

Time-space-substance (matter and energy),

Conveyed-absorbed-reflected,

Complete-coherent-consistent,

Constant-Continuous transition-quantum Discrete digital leap,

Kind-degree-phase change,

Finite-unbounded-guided,

Motion-medium-grid,

Direction-acceleration-relation,

Inertia-friction-transition,

Action-catalyst-reaction,

Competition-cooperation-reconciliation,

Cause-appreciation-correlation,

Preset-contemporaneously determined-random,

Intuitive-empathetic-motivative,

Quantitative-qualitative-reasoned,

Representative recordation-interpretation-communication,

Sequential feedback within the eternal here and now between whole forms and fields and their variously jumping parts,

Naturally quantitative preset directionally LINEAR vectors (no-god) vs. Mind-made-up preset guided vectors (god has left the building) vs. qualitative Field FEEDBACK cycling contemporaneously fluxing vectors (god is with us)?

.

REALITY --- for Active Math, the most superior and "real" constant is the field of meta stuff, i.e., the Field of Conscious Beingness, whose experientialism perpetually fluxes and changes with the eternal present. As the Field of Consciousness abides to “occupy itself (its appreciation) in any certain way with Information, it identifies with, and experiences, a qualitative illusion of a manifestation of quantitative space, time, matter, and energy. As each bubble is created, the Information is already bonded/assigned to it. The Moral Purpose is to guide organization of the Information, to avail it to develop perspectives of consciousness that are self aware, intuitive, and empathetic of God (Great Commandment and Golden Rule) and God’s general purposes, to give expression to appreciate good faith and good will, so God can experience qualities that come to living purpose during manifestation, such as poetry, music, beauty, drama, and the pain and pleasure of diversionary pursuits of astonishment and joy, to relieve existential angst. Thus, the Field of Consciousness diverts existential angst for the eternal present of its Beingness, converting angst to perpetually recycling potentials for astonishment, joy, good, evil, despair, and perpetually reassembling hope. Qualitative angst is thus subject to constant and continuous feedback, guidance, evaluation, judgment, reconciliation. As to the un-organized, non-manifest Information: With what could the Field of Consciousness potentially occupy itself with? Such remains subject to inferred consciousness of possibilities or meta-sub-consciousness of the field. By consciously appreciating and guiding an organization or bubble of Information, the Field of Consciousness produces a common cone for its perspectives of consciousness to interpret in various ways, subject-ive to their sensory gatherings and appreciations of Information.
.
SHARED OBJECTIVITY --- the common cone that is availed and shared by mortal perspectives of consciousness is reconciled and re-normalized to all its perspectives in an objectively measurable way. For that, all its perspectives relate to the same relational, relative-constants. Thus, for the bubble presented to the experience of mortals, there may be pre-sets of conserved quantities of bits of equational Information. Even so, the qualitative experience of each perspective, and its evaluations of apparent causal and/or correlative agents, will remain subject to relational local interpretations and re-normalizations.

.

CONSCIOUS WILL V. INANIMATE MACHINE --- HOW MAY UNCONSCIOUS MACHINE FUNCTIONS BE DIFFERENTIATED FROM CONSCIOUS FUNCTIONS?

.

Unconscious Machines function on digital, binary logic. BIVALENT: If A, then B. Non-active math is bivalent.

.

Conscious identities function with trivalent reasoning. TRIVALENT: If A, then B, then flip coin. But, exercise or give expression to contemporaneously appreciative conscious Will, to choose coin and/or weight it with factors for loading the odds. "Active Math" is trivalent.

.
To mortals, consciousness is an existential, immeasurable, subjective, trivalent quality --- not a bivalently measurable, objective, empirical “thing.” Mortals may use machines. The organic cells of mortal bodies may function as unconscious machines, bivalently processing Information as directed by reconciling functions. The reconciliation is done by trivalent feedback with the Field of Active Math. Each perspective of consciousness is subject to (subjective to) the Field. In giving expression (feedback-appreciation or intuitive-empathy) subject to the Field, each local body (organic or machine based) that expresses a local perspective comes to express local consciousness.

.

INFORMATION: Bits of Information and Numbers (1 and 0) do not occupy (“in”) time, space, or substance (matter and energy). Rather, as guided by the qualitative Field of Consciousness (Meta Mind), they avail communications about shared ILLUSIONs of quantitative time, space, and substance. Information abides as Bits of vectorized formulations of ones and zeros, i.e., Active Math. Our cosmos is like a "SIMULATION," run on a meta-connected "tape" of a "meta-computer," which operates trivalently, subject to meta consciousness of reconciling feedback and direction. May the Bits of Information that are manifested to representation in our cosmos themselves be subject to a law of conservation, so that the total number of Bits of Information that are subject to measurement at any arbitrary segment of nowness are limited and constant? Or are they necessarily constrained and interpreted as constant? I think a conceptual "answer" depends for its completeness, coherence, and consistency on the conceptualizer's perspective, vibrational context, and appreciative purposefulness.
.
BY WHAT DESIGN MAY A MACHINE COAX THE FIELD OF ACTIVE MATH TO EXPRESS THROUGH IT A TRIVALENT KIND OF LOCAL CONSCIOUSNESS?
.
OF GOD AND APPEARANCES: Numbers and "bubbles" of numbers, in themselves, do not occupy Information, nor does Information occupy Space or Time. Chronologies, numbers, information, space, time, equations, formulas, forms, and vibrations are derivative appearances of, not the essence or source of, Meta-Stuff. Meta-Stuff does not occupy numbers, bubbles, information, chronologies, vectors, space-time, formulas, or vibrations. Rather, they are inferior appearances and representations that are derivative of, and "occupy," Meta-Stuff. Meta-Stuff is the creating, conserving, reconciling, guiding Source. Chronologies and conserving anti-chronologies, being inferior to and derivative of meta-stuff, are VECTORED and transitioned as mere Information, i.e., numbers of ones and zeros for representing equations of equations, applied to "terms" that are derivative of nothing more than VIBRATIONS of, and guided by, Meta-Stuff. They do not "occupy" space-time, because space-time abides as an illusion created by Meta-Stuff, which abides as Conserving Source of an "Eternal Present." Beingness does not arise out of nothingness. Rather, a zero balance of nothingness is conserved out of Meta Stuff. It is not for mortals to conceptualize a beginning or end of Meta Stuff in any way that can be complete, coherent, and consistent. IT simply abides.
.

 

REASON AND INFORMATION

.

OF INFORMATION: Our cosmos is a temporal expression of the Eternal Present, made manifest by Information vectoring of Active Math. While we mortals share a common, cosmic unfolding of Active Math made manifest, such unfolding is recorded and availed to us along sub vectors of time, space, matter, and energy. Were Active Math to deploy anti vectors to destroy our cosmos and revert it to zero, we would not have this cosmos by which to communicate Information. Such Information would no longer be manifest to our potential usage. It would, however, remain within the potential of Active Math to re-combine and re-express universal aspects of such Information. However, why suppose Active Math would or should ever choose to bring our entire cosmos back to nothingness or zero? Why may IT not instead simply continue the Eternal Present by continuously re-phasing our cosmos, so that aspects of its potentiality are winked in and out of the record of Information that is made manifest? And, as Active Math does so, we mortals would have NO WAY to learn or specify what aspects of Information made manifest were new versus destroyed. The record would simply be re-phased and re-normalized, to remain, SUBJECT TO OUR MORTAL PERCEPTION AND RATIONALIZING INTERPRETATION, continuous and unaltered. Yet, in injecting such re-phasings, re-normalizations, and re-reconciliations, must not Active Math KNOW, via some sort of meta holistic record that abides beyond the kin of any perspective that attaches to a mere mortal frame? As to the Question: Is Information ever "really" lost to the cosmos, I think the answer is ambiguous. I think it reasonable to believe that Information phases in and out of being accessible to mortals, but never phases beyond the potential for being accessed by Active Math or God.

.

What does it mean to say, "REASONABLE TO BELIEVE?" Reason encompasses sensation, feelings, in-sight, out-sight, subjective, objective, intuition, empathy, logic, math, science, meta purposefulness, and reconciliation. To try to constrain one's moral reasoning to only one among such various aspects is to stunt one's potential as a moral human being.

.

 

Transcendence to Active Math

.

I suspect that in the beginning there was the eternal chaos of the present, with no beginning and no end. There abided and abides one singular real thing (Nature), i.e., the number one! and one spiritual thing (God), i.e., the potential that necessarily accompanies the number one, for vectoring and representing forms of nothing more than forms, and for balancing, conserving, feeding back, and consciously appreciating fluxing and particular perspectives of such representations.

.

In itself, the chaos (void?) is not of time, space, matter, or energy. Rather, it is the Source of such vectors of time, space, matter, and energy as are appreciated and experienced by Consciousness, with potential to express consciousness of consciousness of oneself (self awareness) and of likely other conscious Identities. (The Chaotic Source, in its balancing and reconciliation, is not precluded from reversing such vectors as avail manifest representations of space, time, matter, and energy by re-diverting anti-vectors with potential to re-balance outward bursts of expressions back to nothingness, i.e., the "number" zero.)

.

The binary (yin-yang) interplay of Nature (the number one) and God (the reconciling conserver of zero), i.e., ones and zeros, constitutes the Active Math that presently and perpetually creates and re-creates all that is signed and signified to fluxing, mortal perspectives of consciousness.

.

Our world has arisen out of the expression of the Active Math of God and Nature. Such Active Math vectored out a direction to our world of space-time and availed means within such world to preserve and record a chronology of unfolding forms being appreciated and guided to evolve within forms. Such records evolved to be preserved in biologically based forms for preserving reactions, habits, instincts, desires, memories, and, eventually, self awareness.

.

Biology has been Guided to avail feedback appreciations of pain and pleasure via neural connected expressions of reproductive organs, hormones, glands, stomachs, and brains. A singular big-bang vector has guided us to an astonishing expression of wondrously varied cosmology and consciousness. All manner of perspectives of consciousness and hormonal-based glands have covered the earth, amenable of amazing feats of competition and cooperation --- generally for avoiding pain (evil?) and finding pleasure (good?). Each gland-based brain is occupied with avoiding pain and finding pleasure. Individual competition and collective cooperation have helped to guide human evolution to a temporal top of the earthly food chain. The technological, measurable "how" of our dominance is empirically discoverable and replicable (to the extent the determining vectors for our temporally shared cosmos remain reliably stable).

.

However, IS THAT ALL THERE IS? Is hormonal avoidance of pain and satiation of pleasure the end-all be-all for being human? Is God's purpose and agenda for reconciling and guiding human expression simply "gay" (to avail the biggest, longest, and best orgasmic experience to the most people, before all die)? Many utopian-minded people, religious and non-religious alike, seem to think so.

.

For spiritually inclined expressions of consciousness, I think, however, there abides with God a singular purpose that is transcendent, beyond mere appeasement of personal pain and pleasure. What else may be written in the logos of measurable matter and in the flesh of the word made qualitative? May (or must?) there abide a universal, connecting morality that transcends human selves, that is higher and more encompassing than personal avoidance of pain and enhancement of pleasure, that apprehends each individual's re-connection with a one-of-a-kind, Individual-Collectivist, Particle-Field, Whole-Part Holon?

.

I suspect many people tend in their interpersonal dealings to try to apprehend whether those with whom they deal may in their insights, intuitions, and empathies apprehend the potential for spiritual transcendence, versus only the temporality of pains and pleasures. This seems often to mark a fluxing boundary between secular-humanist-engineers-of-utopia (including communists, earthly despots, and Rinos and Dinos) versus those who seek companionship among those who want OF THEIR OWN MORAL EXPRESSION OF WILL to "come to Jesus" (Conservers of Liberty).

.
 

Jesus is Logos

.
Jesus is Logos for the Great Commandment and the  Golden Rule. His life was illustrative of those principles. Many people intuit those principles. That intuition cannot be confirmed in measureable empirical evidence.  Even so, I suspect even atheists intuit an organizing moral principal, even if it is as hollow as self preservation at all costs.  One either intuits a higher moral guide, or one does not.  Some act on the basis of a higher organizing principle, even as they deny God.  Their actions speak of faith, even as their words deny it.  I think they are quite confused about that which is reasonably believed about moral purposefulness and yet not amenable of empirical  proof. They don't get how the author of our empirical nature need not be inferior to our empiricism. IOW, they look for reason to believe in all the wrong places. However, at least they tend to be less dangerous to human decency than those who believe all others have value only as materials for advancing themselves.  As to Islam, I don't find much in it or its practice  that does honor to the Golden Rule. To all who have faith in the Author of the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule, have a Merry Christmas!  To the rest, if you intuit you have no soul, I don't disagree.  In your case, who knows: Maybe you're right.  Just don't expect me to stand aside while you monopolize the public square with visions of free soma and condoms for kiddies merely because I believe God prefers to guide us towards a more modest society that is respectful of human freedom and dignity under an assimilating mores.
.