Tuesday, April 03, 2012

Scoping the Cosmic Competition

First of all, take a look at the cover:


Look familiar? We're obviously describing the same object:


His is just a little more sloppy, or impressionistic, or sloppy drunk, that's all. Same bang, same torus-shaped object emanating outward from a central point of infinitude, which is both source and destiny, alpha and omega. Both are renditions of O. Truly, we have been drawn into the same attractor, right down to transformations of the same invisible visual image to convey it.

We are of course talking about Brendan Purcell's From Big Bang to Big Mystery: Human Origins in the Light of Creation and Evolution, which, like our One Cosmos, attempts to pack the whole existentialida -- the whole cosmic drama -- into a combo-plate in the head of about 300 pages. It is the only other recent book of which I am aware that synthesizes everything from physics to anthropology to paleontology to biology to history to mysticism to theology to mind parasites into one convenient narrative -- but in a non-stupid manner, since anyone can do it the other way.

There are differences, however. I would estimate that his bibliography is about twice the size of mine. Hard to tell because of the different sized fonts, but his runs to over 20 pages, whereas mine is only 11. However, this quantitative difference reveals a qualitative difference, in that mine has much more of a "top-down," synthetic approach, whereas his is much more of a bottom-up endeavor.

In my case, I was guided by a clear and distinct vision and narrative that organized the material below, whereas his relies more on an overwhelming amount of scientific data, from which an attempt is made to discern the overarching pattern stretching from 13.7 billion years ago to the present moment. Perhaps that's why his cover art is so much more sloppy. You might say that mine suggests the supernatural order of Dante's realism, whereas his is more postmodern.

Who is this Brendan Purcell? According to Professor Backflap, he is an ordained priest who is currently adjunct professor of philosophy at Notre Dame. His previous book was called The Drama of Humanity: Towards a Philosophy of Humanity in History, while he also co-edited Voegelin's classic Hitler and the Germans. In fact, he is hugely influenced by Voegelin, whom he knew personally. In his bibliography there is more Voegelin than anyone else, essentially the complete works, which would probably take about five years to get through, assuming one has other responsibilities and a slight streak of masochism.

Speaking of whom, our bibliographies contain many of the same names. This is not an academic observation, since it reveals the "clues" we both regard as significant. In other words, faced with the infinite mass of data before us, we both honed in on particular sources.

At the same time, we had some mutually exclusive influences, including some who are quite central to my approach, thus accounting for differences in sensibility and emphasis.

For example, I don't expect that too many other people -- well, none actually -- will share my enthusiasm for W.R. Bion, Allan Schore, Robert Rosen, Valentin Tomberg, James Joyce, and Fritjhof Schuon, especially in combination. You'd think the combination would make for one weird stew, and perhaps it does. Yes, that would explain a lot. The elusive "royalty check," for starters.

I think it's safe to say that Purcell's approach is much more mainstream, both scientifically and religiously. Obviously we are burdened -- or liberated, depending upon your EQ (eccentricity quotient) -- by the whole Raccoon thing, from which we could not escape even if we wanted. I think Purcell would say that he wants to "engage" the other side, not wage a polemical and unproductive battle with them.

But from our more bobnoxious perspective, this has as much chance of success as attempting to reason with a liberal, which we all know is as productive -- and perverse, frankly -- as milking a bull. As we say, liberalism cannot be argued out of, only awakened from.

That being the case, it is only more true of Spirit, to which we must also awaken, not be argued into. Arguing helps, of course, but only if one is dealing with an intellectually honest and uncorrupted spirit who is inclined to accept the evidence and willing to humble himself before Truth.

This is just a very short intro, since I'm already pressed for time, so let's start with the big picture, and get into details later. This Big Picture is the idea that all human beings -- even the wrongheaded ones we don't like -- are motivated by the same Quest, which is none other than the Cosmic Adventure, the search for the Eternal Ground.

Although their metaphysic will not allow them to admit it to theirproudselves, even -- or perhaps especially -- Marxists, leftists, metaphysical Darwinists, doctrinaire atheists, secular fundamentalists, and positivists of various kinds are all seeking the same ultimate Truth, except in a self-defeating way that assures failure. However, this hardly means that we can't benefit from this or that genuine relative truth they discover, since all truth is of the Holy Spirit.

Damn, I think I'll just stop now, because it will be too frustrating to stop once I get started. Gotta wake the boy in five minutes, and then drive him to school. To be continued....

But first, another snapshot of the cosmos, just because:

33 Comments:

Blogger julie said...

That last picture must be an especially good one: the boy in my lap kept pointing at it and saying, "Wow!" Or rather, "Woooooooooooow!"

4/03/2012 08:10:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

OM schooling him, I see.

4/03/2012 08:13:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

:)
Just trying to do what I can before the conspiracy gets to him.

4/03/2012 08:16:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Remind me again, Bob, what was the difference between "moron" and "imbecile"?

4/03/2012 08:42:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Purcell actually gets into that in an interesting way. The technical term would be "idiot," for to affirm that truth cannot be universally known is to live outside the logos and destroy the possibility of intelligible intercourse.

Idiot literally means to inhabit a private world. This world is necessarily private for reasons Wm. affirms, that there is no one truth accessible to all men as men. His comment is actually a delightful instance of the genre, which we will be discussing in detail as we proceed. But Purcell's delineation of cosmic idiocy very much converges upon our description of mind parasites. Gotta run.

4/03/2012 08:53:00 AM  
Blogger Cond0010 said...

"I think Purcell would say that he wants to "engage" the other side, not wage a polemical and unproductive battle with them. But from our more bobnoxious perspective, this has as much chance of success as attempting to reason with a liberal, which we all know is as productive -- and perverse, frankly -- as milking a bull. As we say, liberalism cannot be argued out of, only awakened from. That being the case, it is only more true of Spirit, to which we must also awaken, not be argued into. Arguing helps, of course, but only if one is dealing with an intellectually honest and "pure" spirit who is inclined to accept the evidence and willing to humble himself before Truth."

This is what Og was trying to say to me earlier. Archiving.

4/03/2012 08:56:00 AM  
Blogger Cond0010 said...

"This Big Picture is the idea that all human beings -- even the wrongheaded ones we don't like -- are motivated by the same Quest, which is none other than the Cosmic Adventure, the search for the Eternal Ground. "

Yea.

A Return to Eden - whether they realize it or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTozCB3cueA

4/03/2012 08:56:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Bob @ 8:53 -

Oh, that makes sense, idiot being etymologically related to id. Which would certainly explain his inability to see or grasp anything outside of his extremely limited agenda, and his insistence on returning over and over to concepts that are either irrelevant here (creationism) or have been thoroughly debunked both here and in many other places (ultrasounds). In his case, it's starting to come across like an autistic tic or a case of intellectual Tourettes. But "idiot" covers it quite nicely.

Guess I'm going to have to read that book...

4/03/2012 09:04:00 AM  
Blogger Magister said...

“Do not be so open-minded that your brains fall out.”

G. K. Chesterton

4/03/2012 09:14:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

One more point about idiocy -- it becomes immediately apparent that any form of relativism is the quintessence of cosmic idiocy, hence the a priori stupidity of the left, i.e., multiculturalism, cultural relativism, deconstruction, perception is reality, the personal is the political, etc.

Nor is it any coincidence that Obama's only electoral hope is to reach out to already confused women and confuse them even more. Listen to this interview with the idiot chair of the DNC. Makes Pelosi look sharp.

4/03/2012 09:27:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

"...whereas mine is only 11."

Yes, but on the other hand, yours does go up to 11.

'Nuff said.

4/03/2012 09:29:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Re. the interview, holy cow - speaking of people whose brains have fallen out...

4/03/2012 09:35:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

"But from our more bobnoxious perspective, this has as much chance of success as attempting to reason with a liberal, which we all know is as productive -- and perverse, frankly -- as milking a bull..."

[Glances down through comments. Yep. There's willian. Carry on.]

"... As we say, liberalism cannot be argued out of, only awakened from."

Some people snore soOo loudly.

4/03/2012 09:36:00 AM  
Blogger Cond0010 said...

"“Cherish those who seek the truth but beware of those who find it.”
― Voltaire"

Yea, lovely quote, William. To use this quote properly, William, one must look at this as a 'caution' sign and not literally.


So, considering the fact you are taking it literally (like fundamentalists do - think atheists) and then take it to its extreme, you get...

The Hitchhikers guide to the Universes 'Ruler of the Universe'.

Here's a brief conversation Zaphod Beeblebrox had with someone who had no Truths beyond his own senses (listen up Atheist/Scientific types):

Here's a few Pearls of wisdom from that most wise man:

"How can I tell that the past isn't a fiction designed to account for the discrepancy between my immediate physical sensations and my state of mind?"

"I only decide about my Universe. My Universe is what happens to my eyes and ears. Anything else is surmise and hearsay. For all I know, these people may not exist. You may not exist. I say what it occurs to me to say."

"So you say—or so I hear you say."

http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/hitch1.html

Voltaire would be proud.

4/03/2012 10:42:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

willian, have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Why do you hate women so?

4/03/2012 11:20:00 AM  
Blogger Cond0010 said...

""anti-science / anti-education party?"

That is absolute and extreme, William. Its like me saying 'Doesn;t it bother you to be in the Baby-killer party?

"Conservatives deny science, fear science, and equate it with atheism, anti-Americanism, and all things 'for the devil.'"

No, we don't deny science. We just use it for its proper function. Science is for building stuff and understanding the machinery of this universe. Many Atheist go too far and use it improperly by using it as a measure of the Meta-physical. Thus it becomes religion.

"Republicans are afraid of REAL scientists with authentic qualifications."

Strawman Attack. Beeep.

"A pathetic case in point: California Republicans who are trying to get Rep. Jeff Denham, [R-Turlock] reelected, have sued to try and get his opponent's professional designation as "astronaut/scientist/engineer" removed from the election ballot. "

Read the article again, William: it says nothing about Republican 'fears' of scientists.

"The party of science fearing morons strikes again. "

Strawman attack. Beeep.

So hows it like to kill babies, William? (just flipping your insanity back into you face - hows that feel?)

4/03/2012 11:24:00 AM  
Blogger son of a preacher man said...

Another good Chesterton quote.

"Materialists and madmen never have doubts."

4/03/2012 11:31:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Good arguments, Cond - too bad he can't hear you. It doesn't matter how many times nor how many ways we explain or position, nor how much we dumb it down. The people he's telling off in his head don't have anything to do with anyone here, we just serve as mannequins for his projected parasites.

Son of a Preacher Man - indeed. I'm reminded of something Prager observed recently. To paraphrase, when he went to speak at some sort of atheist convention, he asked the audience how many ever had doubts about their atheism. Very few raised their hands. Religious people, conversely, almost all have had doubts at some point, and even struggle with them day-to-day.

4/03/2012 11:36:00 AM  
OpenID morpheus808 said...

Love your blog Bob

4/03/2012 11:36:00 AM  
OpenID circleorline said...

Love your blog Bob

4/03/2012 11:38:00 AM  
Blogger Cond0010 said...

Thanks Julie,

I think William (the Tennessee Loose Cannon - or should I say 'Canon') is hear to just make a mess.

Too bad he is such a tomato can as most of the mess is his.

I think Bob is trying to gently tell Raccoons such as myself the same thing:

"As we say, liberalism cannot be argued out of, only awakened from."

I'm afraid I'm a slow learner in this area. :(

4/03/2012 11:43:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Oh, gosh - don't feel bad about that. Some of us have been hanging around here for years, arguing with trolls and idiots under the mistaken idea that some bit of sense will get through. And most of us still do, from time to time.

Anyway, I don't think it's even a bad thing, necessarily, so long as one bears in mind that the purpose of arguing with someone like William is not to change his mind - he can't see or hear you, anyway - but rather to clarify one's own thoughts on whatever the matter may be.

4/03/2012 11:51:00 AM  
Blogger Cond0010 said...

"Some of us have been hanging around here for years, arguing with trolls and idiots under the mistaken idea that some bit of sense will get through."

I'm a sucker for hope, too, Julie. Though not too much of one to vote for Obama.

Thanks for the nice words. :)

4/03/2012 11:54:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Cond0010, What Julie said.

I do the same thing when new proto-trolls come along - and once in a blue moon they will show themselves to not be trolls, but simply in disagreement with us on an issue. But even with the proven trolls like willian, occasionally they'll glance off an issue that I'd like to work through, or that seems like it might be interesting for others, and I'll go through their spewage as you just did.

willian though, proved his trollishness many moons ago.

And BTW, when unsure, see if you can get them to discuss & define a fundamental principle ('Rights' for instance), and consistently apply it. Those worth arguing with, can and will, or will at least attempt to... the trolls like willian though, cannot.

It's simply above them.

4/03/2012 01:12:00 PM  
Blogger mushroom said...

...motivated by the same Quest, which is none other than the Cosmic Adventure, the search for the Eternal Ground

And when you put it like that, it is easy to understand why we are told to be in the world but not of it, and why Ecclesiastes uses the word "vanity" or "futility" to describe the efforts of man to find meaning within the world system.

They end up chasing rainbows and living on unicorn stew.

4/03/2012 01:32:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Yes, lots of false paths, but even someone like, say, Dawkins, is motivated by a passion for truth. He's just going about it the wrong way. But I'm more than happy to integrate any relative truths discovered or articulated by such folks into the bigger picture.

4/03/2012 04:41:00 PM  
Blogger ge said...

search
NDE
and get more images like Bob's cover & this book's

4/04/2012 05:01:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Much easier than nearly dying.

4/04/2012 06:51:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Oh, I dunno - it's pretty easy to nearly die. Coming back is the hard part...

4/04/2012 07:39:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

"Miracle Max: Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly ..."

4/04/2012 07:49:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

:D

4/04/2012 07:50:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Proregressivism: The disease of Mostly Deaderishness.

4/04/2012 07:53:00 AM  
Blogger Cond0010 said...

"I'm more than happy to integrate any relative truths discovered or articulated by such folks (Dawkins) into the bigger picture."

Amen.

Its not the data itself that is wrong, but how it is arranged.

4/04/2012 08:55:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home