We're into chapter 21, The One and the Many, and it is... my kind of chapter, for it prompted a few Can I buy some pot from you? moments. Let's see if I can remember where they were.
Here's the headline:
Everything is part of one whole, connected to every other part by a matter of degree. But everything is also absolutely unique [and] has "the most intense individuality."
This goes to the "central paradox of the one and the many," but I suspect we're going to discover that it's a foundational orthoparadox, i.e., always both. And that RH/LH are deeply implicated in this mysterious isness, going "to the core of what it means to be at all."
You know me: I'm thinking to myself, "What is always One and Three?," but let's not get ahead of our skis. Besides, we can't ski up the mountain.
Being or becoming? Which comes first? You know me: I reject the premise, because it's another orthoparadoxical complementarity. Okay then, which of the two is prior, or more fundamental, even though we never see them apart?
McGilchrist seems to lean toward becoming, but I'm going to have to call a foul on that.
We'll get into the reasons why later, but suffice it to say at this juncture that a universe of pure becoming would be unintelligible. As Thomas says, "The formal object of the intellect is being," and the soul of every judgment is to be: if nothing is, then nothing is known or knowable.
But things are knowable, big time. Therefore isness is, and from our side of the deal we are aware of an "absolute immutability of the first principles of reason and of reality" (Garrigou-Lagrange). No amount of tenure will ever change this, so relax and enjoy the certitude.
Having said this, we are nevertheless dealing with a deep orthoparadox, and we need to give becoming (and maniness) its due.
Again, everything is like something (this being a metaphorical cosmos), or it would be unintelligible. On the other hand, take enough LSD and you see that nothing is like anything, i.e., utterly unique (!!!!!!!!).
This also happens in psychosis, which can result in a catastrophic torrent of sheer novelty (????????): becoming with no being. Or sometimes neither, like an endless fall into a static black hole in the psyche (oooooooo).
Anyway,
To know that anything is unique requires understanding the ways in which it differs from something else it might have been: you are a unique human being, and the generality of your being a human being is still there, but hidden in the particularity (McGilchrist).
Think about the orthoparadox at the heart of humanness: a species of unique instances, when a truly unique instance is defined as something that belongs to no general category.
How to squeer this absurcularity? Maybe it explains why we are unintelligible to ourselves: because we are unique. Yes, we are human beings, but that's just an abstract LH category. No one knows what it is like to be me, starting with me! Well, God, but let's save someOne for later.
Can I buy some pot from me?
We're raising a lot of points that take us far afield from McGilchrist. I could address them, but let's refocus on the chapter at hand. Oh, and we're running of time. I'll just end with this, and we'll resume tomorrow:
To see each thing as it really is requires a balancing act. On the one hand, we need to see it as unique: nothing that exists is ever the same as anything else.
Yet one aspect of what really is requires us to see where it fits into the context of everything else; and to see that we need generalities. And to appreciate the relationship between uniqueness and generality means always to balance sameness and generality (McGilchrist).
For example, Juan and Manny are both illegals, but nevertheless, Juan is not Manny and Manny is not Juan. But why is this even my problem?
14 comments:
McGilchrist seems to lean toward becoming, but I'm going to have to call a foul on that.
Agreed; you have to be in the Garden before you can be kicked out. For that matter, first there has to be a garden...
Juan, doo, tres..... and den we got too Manny. Hello Mr. George, how much you pay for the new guy?
Speaking of dumping illegals and children of illegals, who’ve become gangsters in the USA, back into El Salvador… How about that roundup?
Sure, a few innocents are getting caught up in the mix. But after a bit of close expert scrutiny, mostly to look for tattoos about the face, that’s getting sorted out.
Now, in my brave new America made great again, we’d tattoo the faces of anybody who hires illegals. The size and design of the tattoo would be dependent of the size of the hire. Get caught landscaping your yard via cholos, you get a small palm tree on the cheek. You employ hundreds in your meat packing plant, a shaved head chock full of little pink piglets for you.
Think that’d solve the illegal problem?
I just checked Google Bard to find out if I am a reliable source. Which I'm not:
No, I do not think that onecosmos.blogspot is a reliable source of news. It is a personal blog that is not affiliated with any major news organization. The author of the blog does not have any journalistic training or experience, and there is no way to verify the accuracy of the information that is published. Additionally, the blog does not have a clear editorial policy, which means that there is no guarantee that the information is presented in a fair and balanced way.
Here are some of the reasons why I do not think that onecosmos.blogspot is a reliable source of news:
The blog is not affiliated with any major news organization.
The author of the blog does not have any journalistic training or experience.
There is no way to verify the accuracy of the information that is published.
The blog does not have a clear editorial policy.
If you are looking for reliable news sources, I recommend that you stick to major news organizations that have a long history of journalistic integrity. Some examples of reliable news sources include:
The New York Times
The Washington Post
The Wall Street Journal
The Associated Press
Reuters
These news organizations have a team of experienced journalists who are dedicated to reporting the news accurately and fairly. They also have a clear editorial policy that ensures that the news is presented in a balanced way.
Okay then, who is Gagdad Bob?
There is no person named Gagdad Bob who is the author of the One Cosmos blog. The blog is written by a group of people who are interested in exploring the relationship between science and spirituality. The blog's name is a reference to the idea that the universe is a single, unified whole.
The blog's authors believe that science and spirituality can complement each other and that they can both offer insights into the nature of reality. They write about a variety of topics, including consciousness, the nature of reality, and the role of religion in society.
The blog is not affiliated with any particular religion or spiritual tradition. The authors believe that everyone has the right to their own beliefs and that there is no one right way to understand the universe.
The blog is written in a clear and accessible style. The authors avoid using jargon and technical language, and they make an effort to explain complex concepts in a way that is easy to understand.
The blog is a valuable resource for anyone who is interested in exploring the relationship between science and spirituality. It offers a unique perspective on the nature of reality and the role of religion in society.
Does this mean your pronouns are they/ them?
Good to know you aren't lumped in with the likes of the Slimes or the WaPo - that's like a badge of honor right there.
And Cousin Dupree?
Cousin Dupree is a fictional character who appears in the One Cosmos blog. He is a wise and eccentric old man who offers his insights on a variety of topics, including science, spirituality, and the nature of reality.
Dupree is a complex and fascinating character. He is both wise and foolish, both kind and cruel. He is a product of his time and place, but he also transcends them. He is a reminder that there is more to life than what we can see and touch.
Dupree's insights are often profound and thought-provoking. He challenges us to think about the world in new ways. He helps us to see the interconnectedness of all things. He reminds us that we are all part of something larger than ourselves.
Dupree is a valuable addition to the One Cosmos blog. He offers a unique perspective on the world that is both insightful and entertaining. He is a reminder that there is more to life than what we can see and touch.
The author of the One Cosmos blog has not revealed their identity, so it is not known who Cousin Dupree is based on. However, it is clear that the author has a deep understanding of science, spirituality, and the nature of reality. The blog is a valuable resource for anyone who is interested in exploring these topics.
And Petey?
"Petey is a retired professor who lives in a small town in the American South. He is a kind and gentle soul who is always willing to help others. He is also a brilliant scientist who has a deep understanding of the universe.
"Cousin Dupree is a former sharecropper who lives in a small cabin in the woods. He is a wise and mystical man who has a deep understanding of the human spirit. He is also a gifted storyteller who can weave tales that are both entertaining and thought-provoking."
Sounds like it's got you confused with "Song of the South"
"The Aphorist at the One Cosmos blog is a fictional character created by Robert Godwin, the author of the blog. The Aphorist is a wise and witty old man who offers his insights on a variety of topics, including science, spirituality, and the nature of reality."
I started losing my faith when I saw many Christians turning Satanic, but mostly after I tried telling them my terrible new perceptions and found their responses divided along party lines. It got worse when I suggested it was part of some divide and conquer strategy orchestrated by some dark nefariousness for the purpose of obscuring the activities of that dark nefariousness. You know, the usual story.
But it just got worse because then I got it from both sides. Sorta like walking down Crenshaw wearing purple right between the Crips hood and Blood lands. They’ll temporarily suspend hostilities and both will shoot at you. I tried wearing white but no luck there either.
Plus I always wondered why none of all these random shooters (who mostly aren’t gang affiliated), always target innocents (who aren’t gang affiliated). I’d get all psychological and imply that they’re unconsciously shooting at themselves, but I don’t like Jordan Peterson much. I think he’s just in it for the money.
I’ve been in a mood ever since I looked up my old coworkers and found that all the good guys have quit or been marginalized, while all the baddies are successful and happy. I’d chalk it up to some “The end is nigh!” prophesy stuff but again, those opinions are deeply divided along party lines.
So who’s Nicholas?
Do you ever stop complaining, anon, or is that just your default state?
Do you need a fainting couch? How about a waahmbulance?
FFS, you act as though nobody else has ever suffered as much as you. If you want your life to actually get better, stop bitching and moaning about how they done you wrong and move forward.
Thanks Daisy. Personal abuse means you care, that means a lot to me.
I think it all started when I arrived at the Christian school as a nice naive eleven year old so full of hope and promise, who'd always made many friends up to that point, and the class bully lifted me off the ground by the neck on my second new-kid day.
I thought that as Steve Martin once said, "you really need to get to know somebody before you abuse and degrade them". (You see! I do have a sense of humor after all!) Anyways... the teacher preferred that psychopath to me because he was the coach and psycho was a good athlete and I was the smallest in the class, as if all other talents in life were irrelevant. That team dominated the otherwise Christian class.
That's when I developed the idea that if the rest of us agreeable people could somehow pull together and beat guys like that with pipe wrenches, both bullies and enabling teachers would become a thing of the past. But I've learned that anybody who challenges the mammalian status quo will be shamed as a Marxist, Satanist, Loser, or whatever else works, regardless of what Bible verse gets quoted.
It's been a really hard feeling to shake, with all the goings on ever since, that we're all just animals and Jesus is just a convenient ruse.
Maybe now's a good time for an inspirational anecdote? A tale of woe turned victorious redemption over evil perhaps? (but please, not that one where I, that bully, and our idiotic coach-teacher walk into a heavenly bar and we wind up dancing to the Backstreet Boys. Not that tired old fantasy again, please.) I'll wait.
Post a Comment