reply to post by Itisnowagain
["Chaos does not mean disorder. Chaos is a word used to describe something where the 'order' can not be understood by the human mind."]
That's the definition I've used dozens of times, something you may be unaware of. So no disagreement there.
Quote: ["Chaos could then in fact mean divine order."]
And it 'could' not. That's just speculations.
Quote: ["When we put our noses on a tv screen we will see chaos, yet if we take a few steps back we will see the whole picture."]
From former contact with you, I'm familiar with your suggestions on 'superior' perspectives. 'Superior' perspectives are as debatable as
Quote: ["I don't see 'chaos' as freedom either, because like the picture on the tv screen it has to be whole."]
So regress your reasoning chain to 'whole' as a basis.
Quote: ["We can not see the entire universe and until we do we can call it chaotic, but that does not make it true."]
So on your homeground your subjective 'absolutes' are acceptable as a common basis, while objective procedures can be used on other situations,
where it supports your position. Make up your mind or explain this skipping around.
Quote: [" It is complete and it knows what it is doing."]
Quote: ["It is doing the whole show.
Where is freewill (individual freewill) in that?"]
I'm not operating with the same degree of (philosophical) positivism as you are, so my answer is not 'absolute':
The uncertainty principle.
Quote: [" Say, the universe was a watch (for instance), a cog may believe he has freewill, the individual hands (second, minute, hour) may believe
they have freewill, but if it were true the watch would not work.
The wise cog/hands see and know for sure that it is all taken care of, that everything is being done, that all it needs to do is relax and enjoy the
movement. It knows it is moved by the rhythm of the watch and marvels at the complexity.
The cog/hand that has not understood the working of the watch will insist that it is in control and will resist the working of the watch and fight
with it. The cog/hand will still be moving in the same direction as it is ordered to be but it is the watch doing it, not the cog/hand.
Let go little cog, be one with the watch.
We do not have to turn the cog.
The watch is."]
That was a nice allegory. But allegories are only illustrations of positions, they do not have any intrinsic value as evidence. So what is your