Some people put their philosophy above science, not recognizing why the latter is true while the former is simply arbitrary.
Sometimes I ask myself "So Science - in effect, at least circa 2017 - basically understands the nature of reality, which happens to be fundamentally
at odds with "free-market libertarianism".
How do we deal with this? Did Francis Bacon - Merchant and philosopher, not get where the scientific enterprise would ultimately lead to: the
understanding of how we work, how we emerged (evolution), and the nature and function of matter?
Did he think, or do todays free market libertarians think, that science somehow supports capitalism or individualism? Do they really think
understanding function - or how organisms, systems, etc, work - doesn't necessarily entails a relational logic - a logic of "systems", with resonance,
coherence, symmetry, and complementarity, regulating the material emergence of all things, including our selves and our own observing minds?
No. Science - or the study of empirical cause and effect - has brought Humans to the "age of emergence", which follows the darkness of the 18th-20th
century dogma of the "age of reductionism". Alfred North White., an important philosopher writing at the beginning of the quantum revolution,
understood that all things were in effect "flashing in and out" at the smallest scale, yet generating and maintain structure at largest scale through
"emergent" relationships - where a higher stability regulates the flow of energy at the quantum scales.
This mythology needs to end. As stupid as evangelical Christianity, fundamentalist Islam, and fundamentalist Judaism can seem, so to any other
fundamentalist dogma based in an irrational faith of your particular brand of meaning. Satanism seems to be that - emerging and growing because of a
fetishization of the "liberty to act" - to do what I want, and ignore or pretend consequences don't shoot off from every action you take. No matter -
theology, or a kabbalistic/metaphysical 'theory of emanation' imagines that will is 'higher' than feeling - and so, ergo, "obviously", I am acting
from a higher place when "my will" directs my action.
Yadayada. No matter how nonsensical that looks to psychologists, philosophers and other academics, poorly educated (or myopically educated) minds
working from limited information 'totalize' their assumptions as if nothing were missing from their knowledge-base, and even more disconcerting, since
this religion expects complete obedience to the doctrine, even if new information were encountered, like any bleeding-heart devotee of an irrational
religion, they will close their eyes and pretend that nothing bad just happened.
By "bad", I simply mean "as if your brain isn't completely structured by dynamical rules". Reality is felt by these people to be "inchoate", or
unexplainable. It 'flows', inchoate, like a river. The logic of this approach derives from the perception-action cycles that orient the expression of
affect/meaning - like aligning crystals, expressing the same light, so to does the mind remain tightly coupled to its ontological attractor
(existential 'way of being you').
That reality "flows", for us, of course, may lead one to assume that the flow is "one", as opposed to made-up of reiterated "moments" which swimmingly
combine to generate a unified experience of self. But in reality, there are two 'poles', that are actually organized in ways as to demarcate their
"oppositeness". Perception - or vision in Humans - is at the back of the brain, at the occipital cortex. Hearing - a secondary sense organ, is located
to the sides - the 'temporal cortex'. Primary perception - such as vision, occurs in the back of the brain, yet is dynamically "tethered" to the
limbic system mid-brain and lower-brain dynamics which regulate homeostasis within the body, vis-à-vis the "meaning" of signals coming in from the
environment. Thus, say out there in the environment is that liberal hippy know-it-all - me - posting on this here ATS, writing as if he knows
everything. If such a feeling-relation applies to you, your brain has a whole 'history' of reasons that is literally built up as your neurological
architecture. In such a situation, your amygdala would sense upon seeing who made this thread - astrocyte - that it was bad. A negative affect would
be produced phenomenologically (in your embodied experience), while your visual processes would incline to scan in particular ways as that relates to
the cognitive-centers of your forebrain. The visual centers at the back are guided by the acute sensitivities of the amygdala (affect) striatum
(habitual modes of cognizing and feeling) as well as the wider ventral, lateral, and dorsal areas of the forebrain, which 'extend' the mind out into
complex abstractive processes which are heavily reliant upon language and social references to compute the value of something.
Is there not a fundamental cause-effect in how such cognizing/affect works? Habit determines the persons feeling-relations, and the forebrains "moral
absence", is maintained by a larger scale "egotism", whereby cognitive forebrain dynamics are leveraged to justify the secondary-processes that
"branch off" from the initial perception of threat. The fact that you are threatened - i.e. implicitly recognizing your vulnerability to being hurt,
should - and would - normally inform the Humans consciousness that they should communicate that knowledge of self so that maybe a negotiation of that
reality could be created, and made semantically valuable as a 'general truth' of our condition. There's good reason to believe this is how we emerged
in the first place.
Cause and Affect, and so, morality, in Humans, is about how we understand our emotions, our affect, and whether or not we allow ourselves to unjustly
dysregulate the experience of other people. This is what karma is: the quantum/material entanglement of experiencing subjects/agents who mutually
influence one another's form of existence. Every act - every radiation from our agency, goes into someone else, into the structuring of their
body-mind, activating the same cause-effect molecular and supramolecular dynamics that underlie our brain and psychological behavior. No one is
"outside" - a fact that should be celebrated rather than disdained - as if your disdain isn't fundamentally an existential rebellion against existence
Ultimately, this fetishization of liberty without an equal emphasis on responsibility, will lead to a fundamental change in Human understanding, and
hopefully, Human conversations. You don't force people through law - but through reason, science, and studying reality i.e. through attunement,
understanding, and kindness - so that people are convinced and made aware that the options before us are limited - and fantasies and other unreal
things that imperil the one reality we live and know - whether it be luciferian/Islamic/jewish/Christian - whatever, such fantasies must be recognized
as self-regulation devices made by people who have extended themselves too deeply into material 'things' - who now worship ideas/constructs that serve
in someway to keep alive some superficial capital - social, or material - and not the only capital that matters and is relevant to our existence:
wellbeing. Change hurts, but it is good to change for the better.
edit on 1-5-2017 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)