It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
All things may end up being describable in terms of a "point" "counterpoint" doctrine.
You do this, I do that. Beginning and End may be responding to one another, however huge that may sound.
Indeed, on Earth, we have all sorts of point/counterpoint situations. Indeed, everything that IS is in a dialogue.
nfants sense the essential animacy of human movements by “amodal perception” (Michotte, 1962), translating between the senses of their own body and the expressive forms of another person who is seeking communication. Gunilla Preisler (Preisler & Palmer, 1986) has recorded subtle expressive communication between blind infants and their mothers. She filmed 5-month-old Maria, who was born totally blind, “conducting” her mother’s singing (Trevarthen, 1999). Maria is lying on her back while her mother is bottle-feeding her and singing two Swedish baby songs, which the baby knows well. From time to time, baby Maria joins with the music by waving her left hand in graceful undulations. Her dancing hand points up toward her head as her mother’s voice rises in pitch and drops at the wrist at the close of a stanza, making flowing gestures that resemble those of a trained conductor. Accurate measurements of the movements revealed that one several occasions, when there is an important lift of feeling in the melody, the baby’s hand movements precede the changes of the mother’s voice by approximately 300 milliseconds. She and her mother behave exactly like two dancers or improvising jazz musicians, and at key points the baby leads as if she were causing her mother’s song. This exemplifies the human harmony of the embodied spirit with its future imagined in movement (Trevarthen, 1999, 2009).” – Colwyn Trevarthen, Jonathan Delafield-Butt, Biology of Shared Experience and Language Development, in The Infant Mind: Origins of the Social Brain; pg. 171, Guliford, 2013
Are we really, though, destined to be alienated? We see two versions of reality. One is dytopian, toxic, and apocalyptic: it's what nihilists want. Their need for 'order' - or coherence - entails wanting destruction, disorder, and incoherence. Is it the snake eating its own tail?
Hollywood has provided countless examples of apocalyptia - or dismal social/ecological futures such as in the walking dead, mad max, Elysium, terminator, etc.
Yet, other views exist. The positive view is always green, and always about accepting. To be "green", contra the perverting import of money, is to recognize what is: much of that which is in nature is green. Green is the wavelength not absorbed by chlorophyll, and so the wavelength that is "sent back" into the semiotic world of signs (via the green wavelength) is picked up by human eyes, and becomes to us, as it is, a living metaphor for "living with", as opposed to against, nature.
We see really cool versions and futures: technology merged with the science of ecology. Natural forms become preferred over idealized fantasies of perfection - cubes, etc. Human ingenuity borne from an alien perspective - technology - can finally be integrated into our own experiment with and modification of natural materials, even at the nano-scale level.
Right now a sort of "democratic process" is occurring. Where do you stand? Do you imagine existence, knowing or being, can exist without a body? Do you like existence, or not? Which future do you hope for? One where all life is respected and honored, or the opposite?
This is a dialogue. We, amongst ourselves. All of us, between ourselves and reality. We are open to two possible directions, life, existence, and beauty, or death, death and death.
originally posted by: Astrocyte
Where do you stand? Do you imagine existence, knowing or being, can exist without a body? Do you like existence, or not? Which future do you hope for? One where all life is respected and honored, or the opposite?
My point is: spiritual egotism, or narcissism fueled by a profound experience which can only be ordered through a particular philosophical explanation that was derived from a culture you interacted with and assimilated information from, seems to be a major problem in our world today.