[Xmca-l] Pleroma and Creatura

Sat Sep 8 17:17:58 PDT 2018

Greetings,

Alfredo, I'm very much savoring the chapter you posted by Bateson.

There are a few things however that I disagree in it, but it's by a matter of degree.

I disagree with the notion of an "interface" between Pleroma and Creatura (P & C, respectively).

Because P extends and pervades C, and in fact P is the very substance of C.

If you doubt this, then why is it 96% of the human body is water? I presume water is an element assigned to P and not C.

I would also suggest that knowledge, K, is also located in P, not as an object, but as awareness. And that the awareness that pervades, pervades not only us but through everything and everywhere in space and in time.

If we consider what it would look like to say that, consider this.

Let's say we have universe A (ua) and universe B (ub).

In (ua) Ka pervades the entire universe like space pervades the universe.

All objects in the universe therefore would possess or contain or constitute Ka in some capacity. Some might call this information, but I think Knowledge is better because Knowledge  implies awareness, whereas information is dead, a closed book until such time one opens it. Hold on to that for just a bit, before objecting (or objectifying :) !!)

Now, in (ub) let's say that Kb does not pervade the universe, and only resides inside sentient beings, like bubbles of consciousness interspersed throughout Pb. And anywhere Pb is Cb isn't, and vice versa. This sets up a strange scenario of dualism, by which Pb does not "know" Cb, but Cb "knows" Pb.

Let me continue in this thought experiment.

In (ua), given that Ka is pervasive in this universe (ua), all that would be required of Ca is the ability to reflect aspects of Pa, which would be very economical. If Ka were in constant movement and perpetual change, there would be no limit to the unfolding of the Ka as it pervades the Pa and Ca, since Ca is basically a subset residing within Pa. Ka would be unemcumbered and would not require any form of interface, because the Pa and Ca have no separation and are basically share the same substrate, just in multifarious forms and presentations that pervade time and space.

Additionally, in (ua), there could be two classes of perspectives, since Ka possess awareness which pervades throughout (ua). One from the standpoint of Pa and another from the standpoint of Ca, one being the total the other the particular, in an aspectual sense.

Now let's take a wormhole through to (ub). In that universe, Kb resides inside Cb and Pb has no connection and never will have connection to Kb inside Cb, because Pb is only a dead material to be consumed by Cb. And Cb constructs Kb much like a house or a combustible engine. Kb from the standpoint of Pb is non-existent. And that also implies that Kb in essence depends upon Cb for its existence, because Pb is like a void, in terms of knowledge, it is just empty, dead material.

It becomes hard to explain how awareness can manifest from dead material, seeing as we are in this universe, like the other universe, are also "made up" of 96% water, how can the awareness arise from dead material. Water might animate, like a waterfall, or like the sea or a stream, but at what point does awareness and knowledge spontaneously combust (or manifest) into the bubbles of awareness within the Cb?

If Knowledge were products of the Creatura alone, as incidental and arbitrary accidents over time and through space, then it would mean that Creatura are accidental machines producing knowledge like little knowledge factories, and randomness would not explain how knowledge has an appearance of continuity from one bubble of knowledge to another.

(I think that this is where Leibniz had to pack it up and go home, actually)

Kb1 in Cb1 located in one part of Ub would have and should have no connection to Kb2 in Cb2 located in another part of Ub. As they would manifest singularly with no connection to one another.

Furthermore, if per chance Kb1 were to collide with Kb2 because there is meeting at a Creatura convention between Cb1 and Cb2, then I suppose Kb1 and Kb2 would then become Kb3.

Additionally, Kb3 would be lost to Ub if both entities Cb1 and Cb2 died and could not disperse Kb1, 2, or 3 to other Creaturabn. Because Kb1, 2, or 3 resides "inside" the awareness bubbles of Cb1 and Cb2 it would be impossible for knowledge to be passed down at all unless there were positive contact and knowledge exchange between Cbn and Cbn+1. But knowledge doesn't really work like that. Culture and language might work like that but not knowledge.

>From the aspectual point of Cb in ub, Kb lives in Cb and only Cb; Pb has no equivalent for situated knowledge, there is no Kb from the aspect of Pb, because Pb cannot know, it is dead, non-awareful matter, and there is no aspect possible. Pb is like a mine whose matter that is consumed, as it were, by Cb, and because Kb only exists in Cb, Kb is limited by the limitations of Cb, which is limited by the limitations of dead-like matter in Pb that it consumes in an arbitrary and accidental manner.

OK, thanks for staying with it.

Let's return to Ua. There, Kac1 in Ca is no different from Kap in Pa, because actually, Kac1 is a reflection of Kap, and if Ca1 were to meet with Ca2 at a Creatura convention, Kac1 and Kac2 colliding wouldn't actually create a Kac3, but instead they would be testable by how well Kac1 and Kac2  holds up to Kap, which pervades through the Pa, uninhibited.

This interaction is actually more like what we experience when it comes to science, actually.

OK.

Let's say that in Ub, Cb1 and Cb2 strongly believe that Kb only resides within them, and not in Pb. And when they look out upon Pb through the lens of Kb1 and Kb2, they are convinced that the location of Kb1 and Kb2, and even Kb3 and Kbn and n+1 can only reside inside Cbn and n+1.

Then, in Ua, Ca1 and Ca2 strongly believe that Ka only resides within them, and not in Pa. But in reality, the truth is that Ka pervades Pa which includes Can and n+1. And in fact this reality does not depend at all on Ca1 and Ca2's belief of where Ka resides at all. Ka's location is in Pa; it just is that way, independent of Ca understanding.

Now here's the kicker:

>From the aspect of Ca looking upon Ka in Ua; and the aspect of Cb looking upon Kb in Ub; how would it be possible to tell the difference between the perceived location of Ka and the perceived location of Kb? From the aspects of Ca and Cb, the appearance of Ka and Kb, respectively, would look identical to each other. Ka is a reflection of Kp residing in Pa, while Kb is the object residing as Kc within Cb.

Furthermore, to test the hypothesis that Kb resides only in Cb and not in Pb we would have to eliminate the entire Pb to test that Kb only resides in Cb, which is impossible.

And we do happen to know that the universe abhors a vacuum.

But how would we test if Ka is pervasive through Pa of which Ca is a subset?

That is your homework, maties.

Given that our experience of Knowledge from our perspective has an appearance of being constructed because we work with knowledge, construct it, etc., there is an illusion of authorship arising from Creatura. There is also an experience of continuity and overlap that couldn't exist for Knowledge if it were limited to the boundaries of Creatura, and not only Creatura, but a particular kind of Creatura called Humans. Other Creatura residing in the Pleroma where Knowledge exists only in small consciousness bubbles inside Humans, don't possess one iota of Knowledge, because there is some special unknown entity or property within Humans, that we haven't yet discovered, or uncovered, put our finger upon, to explain coherently and economically why knowledge is something located in us, but no where else.

This story resembles pre-copernicus views of the universe, which asserted that the earth was the center of the universe (because we live on it). So if humans are not at the center of our solar system, but also the galaxy and the universe, why should humans be the center of knowledge and awareness?

We do know that awareness resides in other Creatura than ourselves (think Koko), and we do have a Gaia-sense about Nature in the world, which isn't just a projection or anthropomorphizing ourselves upon the world, because we do have a sense that worlds (and natural systems) can exist without us, and that there is an ordered way about them, not an arbitrary collection of matter that looks like an abandoned basement of discarded items or a garbage heap 4000 years old.

Indeed, when we learn about something really disruptive or novel in the Pleroma, we say it is a "discovery". Knowledge has been uncovered, or revealed. The Aha moment is one of light and recognition, and not about a totally original creation of something that did not exist ever before in a vacuum. All things that we create, we create from something that existed before, even if it is just dumb wood, or stone. Material is beginningless and endless, like knowledge is beginningless and endless.

I think I can safely assert, though I'm not sure at this point, that Knowledge's location is in the Pleroma, not in us. Indeed just like our attentional focus can zero in on particular aspects of the Pleroma, our knowledge also reflects particular aspects of the Pleroma, and we need not "store" the knowledge in our heads, we only need to reflect it, which is extremely economical.

It means then, that the effectiveness of the knowledge we do as-if possess has a basis upon the nature and health of our minds, and how well we might reflect this knowledge. The "cleaner" the mind, the "cleaner" the reflection, the brighter the flame of knowledge appears in the individual.

The words "cleaner" are relative and not absolute, because just as in the physical world, there are elements that possess different properties of reflectivity, such as the difference between silver and the surface of water, or a surface of white marble compared to one black marble; they reflect differently, but what they reflect is the same light. Additionally, no single member of Creatura can claim ownership of knowledge, unless they can claim possession of the Pleroma.

OK, perhaps this could be better rendered, but that is my take upon it.

Kind regards,

Annalisa

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20180909/ff95dd8d/attachment.html 