Sunday, May 26, 2019

On the Possibility of Ontological Prisonhouse Conversions

It is impossible to engage with the simpleton who imagines that because one is religious one is somehow "anti-science," because the simpleton in question inhabits a vertically closed world, and therefore cannot speak of what goes on outside its walls. The assertion itself is profoundly anti-science -- if by science we mean something based upon logic and evidence -- but this is another of those ironies lost on the vertical amnesiac.

The distances of the physical universe are those of a prison (NGD).

As anyone who gives it a moment's thought realizes, the practice of science rests upon a specific metaphysical framework that isn't disclosed by the scientific method. Nature is always supernatural; if it isn't, then knowledge of it is strictly impossible.

I'd like to complete our journey From Big Bang to Big Mystery before getting back to Voegelin. Bearing in mind what was said in the first paragraph, Purcell references a remark by Wittgenstein, who, in a lucid moment, observed that "even when all possible scientific questions have been answered, our problems of life remain completely untouched.... One keeps forgetting to go right down to the foundations. One doesn't put the question marks down deep enough."

Completely untouched

Is this an exaggeration? Polemical? "In a manner of speaking?"

I don't think so. Nor do I think this makes us "anti-science." Rather, "pro-human person."

Why deceive ourselves? Science has not answered a single important question.

Rather,

As long as we do not arrive at religious categories, our explanations are not founded upon rock (NGD).

Notice that this is no less true of scientistic rockheads who attempt to found their metaphysic on nothing more solid than the relative opinions of a radically contingent primate. In other words, they absurdly claim that contingency and relativity are absolute.

Science can only cope with existence in the context of a "beingness" that is simply given, and cannot be explicated with the tools of science. Existence is a "special case" of being, and science, in order to operate at all, must take being for granted.

Conversely, metaphysics begins with the principle of being; it is higher up the cosmic food chain, so that nothing that occurs in science can violate it, say, the law of non-contradiction, or of sufficient reason, or of the greater being derived from the lesser.

The other day we spoke of spiritual and intellectual wet and dry rot, which occur as a result of a conflation of being and existence. Scientism, for example -- which is a quintessential form of dry rot -- confuses what it can affirm about reality with all that can be affirmed of reality, which is why it is anti-intellectual to the core.

For one of the first things the scientistic worshiper must jettison is the intellect per se, which of necessity (for him) reduces to something less than itself, on pain of a self-refuting contradiction. And in the absence of the infused intellect, no higher realities can be perceived at all, so the result is a closed circle of ideological fantasy; the resultant world is not surreal but sub-real, and the person who lives in it is in denial of his own personhood (for person is another irreducible category that is beyond the reach of science, but which science requires in order to operate).

Conversely, wet rot occurs when existence is confused with being, so that things that pertain to the vertical are mindlessly transposed to the horizontal. In this regard, Voegelin points out that we have indeed seen a beneficial differentiation within the Ground over the centuries, in which science plays a vital, albeit subordinate, role.

In other words, man first awakens to a kind of compacted realm of being, and our journey through history allows us to unpack and map its dimensions and coordinates, both horizontally and vertically. Things were pretty jumbled at the start of history, for the same reason that things are pretty jumbled for an infant.

One doesn't have to travel too far back in time to see a conflation of science and religion to the detriment of both. For every kooky religious idea there was an equally kooky scientific idea, say, the theory of blood-letting that for so many centuries made a visit from the doctor a deadly gamble.

Probably the most detailed map of the totality of reality was drawn up by Thomas Aquinas. Naturally, parts of it are now obsolete because of the state of 13th century science, which has evolved so dramatically since then.

But nothing that has occurred in science has posed any fundamental challenge to Thomas's metaphysics, given some tinkering at the edges. To the contrary, something like the Big Bang would be a necessary consequence of his metaphysics (although he also allowed for the possibility that the cosmos has no horizontal boundary, so long as one bears in mind the priority of atemporal, vertical creation).

One might say that science can only take a view from "inside" the cosmos, whereas metaphysics is able to take the wider view from the perspective of being as such. Now granted, few people are metaphysicians, hence the necessity of revelation, which conveys the essential truths to those who are open to them. These truths resonate on a level much deeper than the conscious ego, which is why they evoke (and deserve) our faith. Truly, faith involves a re-cognition that is really a recognosis, i.e., intuitive perception of trans-empirical truths.

You might say that being pertains to the Center, science to the periphery. Now, everywhere we look, we see signs of the Center poking through the periphery, and one might even say that it is our duty to be aware of this phenomenon as much as possible, for it is the essence of maintaining an open and wide stance to the queerness of reality.

Again, for Voegelin, all forms of pneumopathology involve spiritual and intellectual closure. To put it the other way around, our task is to maintain noetic and pneumatic openness to the world and to experience (for there is no unexperienced world; or, it won't "ex-ist" until someone ex-periences it).

I remember back in grade school, learning about biology. I don't know if it is still true today, but back then photosynthesis was still a mystery; biologists knew it existed, but couldn't understand how. This is no mere peripheral concern, because photosynthesis is the very engine of life.

"Photo," of course, is light. Does anyone really understand how light is converted to the energy and information that powers the whole biosphere? I mean, I fully realize that there are scientific explanations, but do they bring the question marks all the way down to the foundation? Because I personally find it peculiar beyond words that sunlight can be transformed into plants, animals, symphonies, poetry, darkness, stupidity, everything.

At any rate, if we transpose this mystery to the level of man, we see something analogous, which I call pneumosynthesis and logosynthesis, or the transformation of spirit and reason, respectively. However, we could also just call it photosynthesis, since both of these organic mechanisms -- just like their biological cousin -- involve transformations of Light, i.e., spiritual and intellectual Light.

One problem -- and this is addressed by Voegelin, just as it is by Schuon -- is that we no longer have proper words for these higher human functions, since they have been conflated with, and eclipsed by, lower ones. As Voegelin put it, we can no longer use words such as "intellect," or "spirit," or "reason" in the manner of a Plato or Thomas.

For which reason I developed those abstract symbols for them, so we wouldn't imagine we know what we are talking about just because we have words for them. Sometimes the letter kills, but it is still capable of liberating spirit from matter. Poiesis is noesis, and vice versa.

Note that this linguistic pathology is the result of a devolution, which, instead of taking us from compaction to differentiation, takes us in the opposite direction, back to compaction. Someone like our troll William lives in a compacted and de-differentiated world, which again accounts for the breezy confidence he has in his own brazen stupidity.

Obviously, in order to describe reality we need words, but if these words become corrupted, then the ability to perceive reality is compromised.

For example, on a mundane level, if you confuse "liberal" with "leftist," you will lose the ability to perceive political reality. Likewise, if you fail to understand the distinction between male and female, sexual reality is lost to you (or you will only exist on a quasi-animal sexual level).

The question is, is this attack on language intentional or just a result of stupidity? Hard to tell, but I suggest we judge them by their fruits. I do sense a kind of deep malevolence behind the attacks from elites, but the rank-and-foul leftist often has a decent-to-middling spirit that has just been manipulated by elites and hijacked by bad ideas. Such people are educable and correctable, and grateful for the heads-up.

I suppose that would be the key: the non-malevolent person can be helped, because deep down he remains open to reality in all its fulness, and hatred hasn't yet completely supplanted love (for one who doesn't love truth will never know it). Upon contact with truth, such a person will experience a flood of vertical recollection which then sends them on a path back to themselves and back to reality. I've got the letters and emails to prove it. Better yet, I have myself to prove it.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'd recommend upgrading your physics. The big bang and expanding universe, black holes, warped space time, dark energy, dark matter, along with many other standard "physical" (not really) theories of the universe and solar system have been disproven for some time by plasma cosmology and the electric universe movement. Wal Thornhill is the best guy to consult if you want real physics based on labatory experiements in plasma labs rather than abstract mathematical mysticism.

https://www.amazon.com/Electric-Universe-Wallace-Thornhill/dp/B007SP1LK8/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=the+electric+universe&qid=1558923365&s=gateway&sr=8-1


They also have a YouTube channel

https://youtu.be/kz-Bwi5xTTs

julie said...

Hi Anon, that's all very interesting. However, you may have missed the point of the post, assuming you aren't a bot and read it at all...

Anonymous said...

Hi Julie,

Revelations in cosmology and astrophysics have consequences for all creation myths and their underlying metaphysics. People just assume the configuration of the planets and the rotation of the earth has been the same forever, but we now know through mythical reconstructions of the past this is not the case. That we didn't always revolve around our current star and that Saturn, Mars and Venus were closer to earth ancient history has implications for the way we interpret the creation in genesis the cataclysms that followed our reorientation to our current star.

Earth and mars share the same 23 degree tilt as Saturn and were therefore originally ejected from Saturn, as the water rings are evidence of recent ejection. Venus was the archetypal comet mentioned and witnessed by all cultures in the world, and it shares tame 3 degree tilt as Jupiter, which means it was ejected from Jupiter in historical times and it came close enough to earth to be seen and felt.

Both Jupiter and Saturn are brown dwarf stars that lost electrical potential, but are still volatile enough to eject matter. See the number of moons for evidence.

The ancients knew Saturn as the original sun, so it would make sense that genesis is a reflection of the creation of the world, i.e. earth and the days--the day being something that didn't happen near Saturn because of the red plasma glow (it was a star). Creation is Not about the whole Cosmos, and especially not a universal "big bang," neither of which make sense from spiritual standpoint. Nor does it make sense from the standpoint of electricity's role in creation, because electricity and matter are not created or destroyed as far as I can tell.

I'd recommend studying more on cosmologies and astrophysics that don't assume gravity as the principle organizer of the universe, or that our solar system is some Newtonian clockwork mechanism that never changes or has changed in the past.

If Aquinas would have had this context, he might have thought about creation in a different way and the world wouldn't be staring at black holes--literally our projected ignorance.


Here's a good one on Saturn earth connection:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fjcPguafug&t=315s





julie said...

I hear you, and that's all very interesting if true, but still misses the point. Was the earth created 6000 years ago or some-odd billion? I don't know, can't prove it, and don't particularly care aside from an abstracted sort of interest. Given the clues we have found thus far, it appears to be somewhere in the billions. Great! It still doesn't answer the question of Who and Why and What Are We For?

The Earth revolved around Saturn once? I find that doubtful, but who am I to argue, I haven't done the research. And if it did, so what? Does that change the fact that we are here, now, and each of us is tasked with getting to know the Person behind it all?

Don't misunderstand me, science and scientific discovery, whenever they lead us closer to the truth, are amazing. The fact that we can have this conversation is amazing. Even so, what's more amazing, is that God came first and graced us with minds capable of discovering these things. That's what I want to know more about.

Anonymous said...

"And if it did, so what?"

Wrong attitude.

We can't know who we are unless we know our terrestrial history and where we came from. And I'd say that genesis being a birth story of the earth and creation of the current "time" or "age" is a game changer in regards to who we are. Reconstruction of mythical archetypes is a science, because multiple ancient cultures around the world drawing the same symbols and referencing saturn as the sun, the "best sun" in fact, has to have some objective explanation since these cultures had no knowledge of each other. In fact, the origin of "sunday" was originally the saturn day, which was a remembrance of the golden age of saturn before the fall from paradise.

In the electric universe gravity isn't a universal constant, but rather a function of electric charge. Therefore, earth near Saturn would have had about 1/3 the gravity than around our current larger star. Less gravity on earth at one point in the past explains how massive dinosaurs and other mega species could have existed, not to mention larger humans and mega mammals, whereas now it's a perennial problem of physics that mega dinosaurs couldn't have existed in our current environment as they would collapse under their own weight and suffocate just like whales do out of water. For e.g. a steal beam the length of a brontosaurs neck couldn't even hold itself up. Much less bone and muscle tissue.

After the fall, the consciousness of humans who were adapt to an environment of less gravity near Saturn regressed, warped or enfolded down into itself, and our nervous circuitry melted down causing massive depression and near extinction from natural disasters. That we inhabit a different heavier environment than we originally evolved in explains our universal ptsd and "fallenness." Also the feelings of being out of place, heavy, depressed, inability to adapt, unconsciousness, along with the universal history of sacrificing animals and people to appease the sun...

I'm sure in the age of Saturn humans enjoyed a greater levity and consciousness similar to what we call "samadhi" now, which is only achieved by a few under current conditions who have used spiritual forces (electricity) to adapt to our current planet and star.

All of this stuff is relevant to the search for the Person and Self, as well as evolution of consciousness, resurrection of the body, and probably many other spiritual problems and doctrines.

Yes it's amazing that we communicate via 'electricity', but for some reason physics has ignored the role of electricity in space, and medical science has also ignored electricity role in the human body. Yet anyone who knows anything about kundalini will intuitively know electromagnetism is the principle organizer of not only our flesh, but also the stars and universe, i.e., as above, so below.

It's amazing how much stuff we think we know that is not so. When physics says the big bang doesn't exit, yet your metaphysics says the big bang is necessary consequence from a metaphysical system, well then we are engaged in bad mysticism, because physics is based on cause and effect, while metaphysics is not, as it involves infinities and principles causes-- both of which are mental forms.

Anonymous said...

It might be hard pill to swallow, but it's necessary to start over. Aquinas was wrong, along with every western meta-physician attempting to interpret genesis without the concept of modern plasma cosmology. It's no ones fault, just that science hadn't progressed enough, and we also took a left turn at the beginning of the century with Einstein, which led physics into metaphysics, i.e., big bangs, black holes, dark energy, warped space, and so many other schizophrenic views of reality that can't even really be physically investigated, e.g., a black hole by definition. Or what came before the big bang? Not physics.

I'd also note that with the fall of science in the last 100 years, politics took a similar left turn. It's all connected, science, religion, and politics.

Anonymous said...

This is a good one too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kff_ytg0-8w

Dude said...

It's all a god damn fake, man. It's like Lenin said: you look for the person who will benefit, and, uh, uh, you know...

Gagdad Bob said...

I don't say the big bang is the necessary consequence of a metaphysical system, rather, that creation is.

Anonymous said...

No,no,no,no...not Lenin.
Beria!

STALIN'S HEAD OF SECRET POLICE: "SHOW ME THE MAN AND I WILL SHOW YOU THE CRIME!" - Lavrenty Beria

You're welcome.

- shoe

Theme Song

Theme Song