The Philosophy of Pattern: Learning the Language of the Universe

reply to post by HyphenSt1


Are you writing a book called "the philosophy of Pattern"??? Smart way to stick out in peoples minds. A reappearing preamble.

are Astronomy, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Philosophy, Film, Art, and Music

I don't see religion there

The 8 subjects you listed are areas of inquiry for people: the stars; the laws of physicality; the laws of life;the laws of molecular reaction; reflections upon ultimate meaning, knowledge, being etc; physical representation of expressive feeling (film); general artistic expression; artistic expression in sound.

See the common theme? In each of these activities, there's an essential expression of individuality. Not that there's anything wrong with that (all those things are interesting in their own right), but religion has a communal aspect that science and art don't quite touch.

I'm not Christian or Jewish. But I do believe in God, and I do go to church with my sister from time to time. For me, Church or Synagogue or (fill in the blank) can provide an experience that you can't quite get from anything else. When people sing, or when they express art, this is a usually abstract form of expression. Tacit in the art is a good will, but it isn't as direct or forcibly felt as when you share a field with hundreds of different people, energized by a powerful spirit of goodwill, which btw incorporates song and movement to tremendous spiritual effect.

Anyways. I think religion deserves a spot in that list of yours.

reply to post by WarminIndy


I couldn't exactly tell if you were using this information to go with or against my point, but I will demonstrate why I think that your point is compatible with what i'm trying to say: All of the paradigms (including physics and other sciences) are in fact dealing with suspension-of-disbelief...

film is the most obvious example because, as you said, there are many details that must be tended to if consistency and an even-mood is to be maintained..

but the same goes for music (when a chord is out of place or a "sour note" is hit, the ear seems to be able to pick up on whether or not it is intentional.. at least in tonal music haha. when you get into horror-scores and noise-bands things get a lil' more ambiguous )

and less obviously in the "hard-sciences"..

ideally, that information which makes up "the accepted theory of practice" in any one paradigm is supposed to be based on OBSERVATION and experiment, but while certain theories seem conclusive for the time being, the next generation tends to point out where observation left-off and suspension-of-disbelief (the willingness to accept a convenient theory) took over.. investing scientific authority based on PAST results and not proof of rigid scientific practice..

the "authority" we give to the police and government are also demonstrations of suspension-of-disbelief, because theoretically I could break every law I possibly could, and as long as I'm not reported by someone who invests authority in the police, they would have no authority until it is given..

But back to film:

I believe that this is the most cathartic and multi-media of the art-forms today (except perhaps videogames and internet sites which make user-interactivity and major aspect of the experience..) and is a major demonstration of how life was seen (or at least how it was intended to be seen..) at the time that it was made. I love watching silent movies for this reason, because the compensation for no sound made the actors be very aware of body-language and the filmmakers more aware of the overall mood of the piece. Metropolis, Nosferatu, and Dr. Caligari are all silent films that perhaps get more-than-their-share of attention, but they certainly strike me as timeless works of art because they each speak "the language of the universe" so well, but in such vastly different ways..
movies of the 30s thru the 50s looks like another civilization when compared to what I see when I look outside.. even the 60s through the 80s looks unnervingly alien when you find yourself immersed in the story and setting of that time, and then come back to 2013.. Films are an excellent source of perspective if you can see it in contrast with films of today (and take that grain of salt that must come with even the most NON-fictional of films..)

It seems that many modern filmmakers have become desensitized to the wide potential of a film and tend to suspend disbelief through over-stimulation instead of communication in terms of theme and risky ideas on how to make films in a different way. Formula and Familiarity have replaced Novelty and Spectacle as being "what the audience is looking for" (though I don't believe they know what "the audience is looking for" whatsoever, and rather are trying to TELL us what we want, so they can get the most out of the formulas they've figured out)

but anyhow: I'm just saying that film is one TYPE of pursuit in speaking the language of the universe.

reply to post by Astrocyte


I suppose that you could say that I am incorporating these ideas for A book, though probably not a book I would be trying to get published and then reviewed in the New Yorker haha. These theories and such are going to be incorporated in music and art that I've been working on for some time, but am interested in using this sort of forum for feedback. Before I reply to your post, I will say that I am not someone who has ever "believed in God" with an upper-case 'G' (as in a creator-being that "watches" us and punishes those who do evil..) even when I was little and going to church with friends' families and being around people who "spoke in tongues", I never felt like I needed to commit to any system of belief outside of what I experienced. I've read about Buddhism and Hinduism off-and-on since middle-school and have always loved Greek-myths, but I am NOT trying to preach, so much as question and reason..

I believe most of problems that come out of "religion" is the insistence on giving "answers" instead of asking questions. Notice how the FOUNDERS of every religion do nothing BUT ask questions, whereas the FOLLOWERS want nothing more than to accept what SEEM to be the answers that were found by the founder..

Buddhism (in theory) is different in this way because the idea is to BECOME Buddha yourself, not idolize the historical Buddhas..



are Astronomy, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Philosophy, Film, Art, and Music

I don't see religion there

The 8 subjects you listed are areas of inquiry for people: the stars; the laws of physicality; the laws of life;the laws of molecular reaction; reflections upon ultimate meaning, knowledge, being etc; physical representation of expressive feeling (film); general artistic expression; artistic expression in sound.


The way I see it, Religion is the same as Math and really a paradigm which presents itself as the ONLY pursuit to speaking "the language of the universe" but in practice, is anything but that..

You may go to church to "feel the holy presence" but besides that, ALL of the communication is one-way from the preacher and there is no interest taken to teaching EVERYONE to "speak with God" is there..? sure you too can become a preacher (usually only if you are of the right sex and demeanor) but even then, what can you DO with it..

I am most-interested in the actual practicality of "communication with the universe" and not just re-naming known concepts or working-within already established frameworks of thought.. hence "The Philosophy of Pattern" I believe best describes the system I am trying to assemble, whereas the more esoteric and occult aspect of my system I term "Is-ism" but that is still beyond my abilities to explain..

When people sing, or when they express art, this is a usually abstract form of expression. Tacit in the art is a good will, but it isn't as direct or forcibly felt as when you share a field with hundreds of different people, energized by a powerful spirit of goodwill, which btw incorporates song and movement to tremendous spiritual effect.

I don't think that it is necessary to distinguish between Art and Music (and film etc) in a secular form, versus religious. sure, there is more of probability that a church gathering will have a "positive energy" and (ideally) "goodwill" would be an element in each work..

BUT..

I have found from my experience (and I really do try to give most things a chance.. I have attended Acquire The Fire which is a huge Christian concert in Tacoma, WA..) that most SECULAR gatherings and shows are MUCH more potent than that of a religious organization BECAUSE there is more individuality and diversity shown in the works, whereas a Christian event is much more likely to be a monoculture of Jesus-inspired works; making for a sorta monotone and OBVIOUS common ground.. the magick is much more present when there is a subtle chaos and excitement in the crowd AND artists, instead of an ideology that really CONTAINS the art, instead of enhance it..

reply to post by Astrocyte


I will say, however, that (again, in its IDEAL state and in-theory..) Shamanism does belong on the list because it is not supposed to be about a standardized belief but an evolving group of methods that are based on EXPERIENCE. There are traditions and mythologies in every shamanic tradition, but there is also often a practice of consciousness-altering experiences (such as partaking in peyote or mushrooms) which keeps any dogmatic systems in-perspective and the tradition evolving..

I think I could make the case that most of the best (most timeless) musicians could be considered shamans in their own right, though I think most of them are unaware of this and run into a plateau when they refuse to "go off of the deep-end" and be open to receive ALL experience, and not just that which fits into a preconceived idea of "how things should be"..

reply to post by HyphenSt1


whoops! went back to edit my screwed up my quote section two posts up.. but the 4 hours have passed! oh well.
OH! and P.S.: Philosophy was on the original list, and I don't really see a natural divide between philosophy and religion besides "faith" which, outside of religion, is usually seen as the equivalent to someone saying "well.. If you don't understand what i'm saying.. just pretend that you do, because i'm right.. believe me.. God told me so. I mean this is ME talking.. Have I ever steered you wrong..?"