without further ado, my Unnecessary Blather.
My utter absence from philosophical quandary has been an immense detriment. More and more nervous energy abounds, radiating romantically from every cell in my body while my mind fails to explore all immaterial venues. I am a truly poor self-diagnostician (surprised as I am that such a word exists despite the database’s ignorance of Occom’s Razor), because the staunched flow of ideas has finally broken free of my deep seated natural fear of death. Yes, this outpour is from a great wound (visa vie, all the medical analogies), it is a hole found in the center of everyone’s mind and seems also to shrink inward, consuming the precious fatty tissues that so splendidly guard the last sanctuary of our souls. However, this great, fundamental flaw that typifies humanity is individually altered, cosmetically enhanced, and in many cases that run the whole gambit of culture, deified. But my poor inner physician, he seems utterly unable to scope the depth of my existential damage without letting all the blood drain away. Yet still I concede to making myself a guinea pig of myself, and await the review of society and my vapid peers who may use me in ways I cannot yet conceive for my frank assertions of: Truth, God, Evil, Soul, Humanity, Thought, and Ultimate Reality.
In fact, just as you requested that I write a book, I answered a resounding YES. This is that book, and the title? Pick your fancy of all my works; you are to be my producer. However, there is one that sticks out at this moment in time: Doublethink. Yes, I know it is piggybacking off of a more successful novel, but I have to consider that maybe, just maybe, this will last just as long in thinkers’ minds. Life has contradiction, but my job as one of the few childhood prodigies in this subject begs that I have to say something, to try and resolve the greatest of all disputes, to harmonize and understand everything’s basic form. I must sort through all of the misconceptions, translate various perceptions into one another with equality, and never suffer or fail to condemn blatant lies; the age of information is by extension the age of misinformation, and it is my particular generation, which will have the most say in how the most important chapter thus far in human history will unfold. It is not that I am the “only one who can do this” or that there aren’t many others working with the same mentality that I have: hunt not for gold, god or glory, but the Truth. It is rather that there is just not enough competent brain power nor enough energy expended for the cause of rationality for the sake of being alive another 2000 years. Or, in the case of the individual, an additional 1200 centuries of self-awareness.
It is interesting, isn’t it? No matter what the intention may have been, man has been struggling with the meme complex, and psychological complexes of Identity. And anytime a person tries to combine the self with the world (on any scale), one an only be met by abject failure. Perhaps selfishness versus selflessness constitutes a greater paradigm than poly-consciousness? It begs a question though—if God wants relationships with people more than anyone else, why would he make the standards of entering into the spiritual/ social contract so fluid, with the constituents being double and triple-standardized? It might be the most practical form that is the real life manifestation, but how can this be proven? This is a significant, and I think unheard of hurdle to theology and philosophy.
And even though each one of us has only a single infinitesimal strand of thought— a stream of consciousness, with and unknown psychic spring in the folds of reality that is the source— that is our destiny and our experience. However, the local psychological, spiritual, physical, and emotional (basically sensational) geography has not, and in principle, cannot be fully understood. In a nutshell: we can never know what the hell is going to happen next. However, there is a great caveat that should not be overlooked: a multidimensional concept of time, an experiential direction, and also a perpendicular time dimension consisting of the endless task of reflection, literally on a cosmic scale. But for consciousness to be ultimately practical, its planes would need to be endlessly vast. As of yet, there is no solid evidence for this hypothesis, but theories, even proven, cannot speak for what may be lurking on the farthest edges of infinity.
Occom’s Razor may seem to be a simple enough concept for general use, but even so, it holds potential for a truly infinitely variable meme. Yes, even in cases where logic has been deemed offensive, this simple mitochondrial Meme can drift in without great concern. The data would indicate that the human mind can only hold so much knowledge and wisdom; there is a fundamental threshold for what is feasible for individuals. But, memory is not ever empty, and in fact, it may not correspond to conscious thought at all. If this were not so, we would surely have no ability to learn. Take both into account then the idiocy of the assumption that life-like time-has only one possible direction (among many) can be grasped. But there are several intermediate steps that need to be clarified that would clinch the principles that I’m setting down.
The first of these is Origins. We all know that beginnings and endings occur in everything, nothing in either common sense or modern science dictates differently. However, this is not conjunctive with the proposition that there was a beginning, because that would be impossible. Again, no one can doubt this. Both of these features are a core to the present idea: cycles. Almost everything in nature occurs in cycles; even some hypothesize the entire universe itself. But this is always overlooked: cycles from various systems rarely, if ever, coincide. For example: how often do all the planets line up in a line, or are even hit by massive comets that have the most erratic orbits in the solar systems. It doesn’t happen. You will never, or it will be an extremely long wait for, a comet to collide with every planet at the same time and while they are lined up. Statistically impossible.
Statistics are one thing, but reality is another. It’s even less accurate. The other thing is that cycles are never perfectly symmetrical, which is why the Music of the Spheres died along with the ancient Greeks. Symmetry was at one point extremely deeply rooted in art and architecture, as it has today been discovered to be replanted in cutting edge theoretical physics. Stay with me: cycles can and are born everywhere, at all times, especially biological ones; or, in the case of celebrities, marital ones. Even that joke has a vague return value to it and is always surfacing in conversation. This is all a sign of homeostasis and transistasis operating together, and it would be perfectly normal and (shockingly) wise to accept this bit of information as intrinsic to a decent reality.
The second much more down to earth approach is the immutability of the unending future, for the individual as well as the entirety of reality. It is now really a matter of time before we find that relationships made in the quantum spectrum of the universe are far more transcendental than their weirdness implies; that is an opinion. But doesn’t it surprise anyone why we all assume that we will live forever? It doesn’t, not even me. It could very well be because this is a feeling, an innate sense of almost perfect faith. It goes back through history and past culture barriers, this is all because, if our ancestral ‘self’ had existed forever, by now it would be essentially built into the human condition, much as a small personal etching of an architect’s name in the foundations of a castle before its built will only be greatly amplified or disregarded by the time the castle is built. Yes, disregarded. Many, many people are suddenly drawn to the physical world and the information edifice that hangs in orbit, completely ignorant by their own volition of the logic of immutable consciousness. As stated, regression is as much a part of growth as growth itself; unequal, constantly fighting forces. It really is akin to a drop of water that holds the water drops next to it in place, but it takes the whole constitution of a sea to keep that one bit in its relative place. But let’s take it further; any other water where the original was would be entirely indistinguishable, the reason why this was in everyone’s opinion reading this (especially me) a particularly weak analogy. But really that’s just it: it takes the entire collective to constitute an individual, regardless of how distantly related the members are, and the individuals are constantly changing to accommodate one another, often times replacing the people lost; this is why they say fashion runs in cycles.
These two principles alone can account for present reality, but there are an endless array of other things to be clarified, like the looming Societal Crunch, which may be either a final series of wars, or a replacement species on the planet (not necessarily biological) A third ought to be invoked, this one of Filtered perception. In many cases, reality is as reality does, and if no one knows the difference, there isn’t. Like the concept of electronic life forms, as opposed to biochemical ones. Basically, anything which stores memory permanently using an energy source is good enough for life. That is what the consensus ought to be, for if we continue to advance artificial intelligence to the point of antonymous networking, we are screwed. It is not so much that they are smarter or even think faster than us, they process information completely differently. It is our lack of any kind of basic linguistic prowess at the level of the average person that will be our undoing. Most of the programs on this computer I’m working on right now are merely translating what I’m typing. It is also not a bad thing that computers lack a sense of self, in almost all respects of the word. Really, it has been shown to be a lot like our brain, not aware of itself, but still performing all the processes necessary for, you know, life. Yes, the smartest people in the world do use ten percent of their brain, but the other ninety percent use them. It really goes to show what little we know. All processes are corrosive to systems, but the safest parts remain. The sturdiest rocks (or the luckiest) have the least erosion, and that on a massive scale can create beautiful spectacles like the Grand Canyon. In the case of our highly evolved brains, the ‘safest parts’ that are visible have the opposite connotation: we only have control over the basically worthless parts of the brain, the ones that lose focus quickly, the ones that compute the slowest, and the ones that can cause the least amount of damage. The bureaucracy of our minds really is a lot like our present political system in America.
It is, therefore, our ignorance of what we are capable of knowing and doing, which has spared us from our very extremely variant personalities. There is another aspect of sight that many in the world of psychology notice: they can deny it no longer after they have seen it. Whatever it may be, they can only create internal blind spots, mental traps laid out to reduce the harmful affects of reality. It has a much more extreme parallel in quantum mechanics: observing fundamentally changes the nature of the subject. For example, there is a very specific probability that our moon will be spotted 800 million miles away from where it should be, but as long something is looking, it will behave. Not joking, either; it is one of the most impossible things about quantum mechanics, something so far beyond belief that it must be real. However, an “observer” has never been found and studied; no one knows what really changes the probable into fact at the most basic level in the universe. The dynamics of human psychology and the weirdness from science will continue to shed light on what I’ve been saying.
Now, back to Occam. It is very true that basically one should limit the number of entities that are part of a system, which normally translates to ‘simpler is more realistic.’ As I’ve just stated, we cannot see everything, and nothing lasts forever. But there is one entity which only need be invoked twice to account for everything we could ever see, impossible, nascent, or seemingly timeless. That entity is none other than infinity itself. Many times, many ways I have scratched the surface of the topic, but the only real, unflinchingly sound way to account rationally for the appearance of intellectual, emotive, physical entities is to assume that, as James Gardner did in his audacious and brilliant Biocosm (further expounded on in The Intelligent Universe), that life is integral to the universe, in some way. He never discredits any religious ideals or truly espouses particular scientific hypotheses. But where he stopped, I begin. He may have cleverly worded the ideals of a Universal CTC (closed temporal circuit) but failed to recognize that even if a second dimension in time is realized, the universe will continue to change as it cycles. In fact, that change would then have to be graphed on a third time dimension perpendicular to the others.
Again, he ends at two Time, and nine Space dimensions (the theoretical limit of M-theory) but that too, only is counting localities in physical systems. As I stated, Consciousness itself cannot begin ex nilho, but requires and infinite past, future, and present to account for the never-changing ‘self’. And while the third is actually not necessary fundamentally, this still only is a temporal extension. No one has ever yet done any work on the physical dimensions and the associated constants to them if they exist, which they might not. Space and time may not be so fundamental after all, if the ever-present mind does not truly experience them, and only approximates because of environmental selective pressures.
Above all else, a possibility is a possibility. The mind still does not explain the soul, and the soul has never metaphysically been exactly one thing. Maybe there are actually five aspects to a complete human (The ancient Egyptians had four). If the possibilities are endless, and all possibilities are expressed by necessity (remember the ocean analogy), then reality is infinitely infinite. What more could you ask for? Less, I suppose. Even this, reality has granted. CTC’s, their metaphysical cousins, and the existential filters keep the infinity out, and the Identity hidden in that inner darkness.