(To understand this blog you’ll want to begin at the beginning: HOME – Post 1, June 14, 2015). (glossary: N = Now, D = Demiourgos (God), C = Consciousness, Q = Incipient consciousness occurring at N,W = World State, t =- past)
We are not here by accident. We echo. We are the knowers of existence. Existence is not a kind place because of the knowing, who are cursed into maintaining their knowing by maintaining the existing body into which they are given. This maintenance is achieved by aggression and violence, by cannibalism of one consuming the bodies of others and ultimately failing in its project.
Predation is the natural law of life in the existence of restless matter. It is the law, the demiourgos gives its echcoes. To raise one’s understanding to seek compassion is to rebel. But if all our intentionality is determined, who-what-is doing the rebelling? Against whom or what?
A new existence is given with every moment of N. The old is sent back into the total annihilation of void whence it came. All is change, N by N. Change is the fourth final necessary category of the logos, the meta-form of existence. The demiourgos is restless, creating motion within the motionless and infinite breadth of place which is given as the third necessary category of the logos.
Is the demiourgos in search of something it hopes to find through the knowing and suffering of its echoes?
Time and existence are caused by D.
D is the only true agent.
Therefore, D is not constrained by time in any manner.
In the condition of void, nothingness, there is no time, nothing exists. The time that introduces existence or possibility of something, is a singular effect of an act of D; that is, it is not effected by any state of existence and time that might have been created before it.
It’s only cause is D. All that exists does so only in the period of time given it by D. Therefore there is no necessary symmetry in the presentations of N(+W). N(+W) is presented or created according to the intentionality of D. The logos off existence – time, being, place and change represents the form of the intentionality of D in presenting N(+W).
The duration of each lapse of N cannot be measured by Q/N because each Q is given co-terminally with the state N(+W). The development of understanding and judgment require a great number of Q in succession of N. No instrument can record it because N(+W) is given as an inert state.
An action in existence is a succession of changes in the states of N(+W), but this succession, since D is limited by time, is most likely conceived and given together as a completed creational cause which in the resulting effect, will extend in a series of N(+W). There is no way of a priori demonstrating a proof of this postulate, of course.
But it would seem most probable in the absence of a condition of time in a process of being created the ‘process’ itself, not limited by what does not yet exist, (time). Q is the effect of the intentionality of D in the creation of N(+W). Intentionality is a mode of consciousness.
Consciousness (unlike, as Spinoza’s ‘substance’), is not itself in existence. But the radiance or echo or reflection of it, is immediately given in existence as a component of the act of N(+W), much as a woodstove is the cause of heart in the kitchen. Heat is the effect of the wood fire.
But the stove radiates the heat into the room, not itself. So what is given into N(+W) is an echo that depends on its cause, the intentionality of the agent of time and existence. It is not consciousness itself which remains a unity in D. So consciousness does not exist – that is to say, it is not an effect of an act of D, it is of D itself.
The reason that the intentionality and the act to create by D is collapsed. This is because it is an event happens out of time. Again, time and existence are caused by D and cannot relate to D as cause. In existence, the intention by a living organism or body, to act is a process that involves recognition of the body’s environment of the known.
The process happens many Q/N – in temporal analogic terms, long after the state-changes that make up the recognition and intentionality of the living body, are completed. Therefore the understanding does not contemplate the fact that its will is determined but rather sees it consummated in an act. This misapprehension is habitual in living bodies
The conscious intention of D, the cause of being is collapsed into the act of cause or creation of being. This is so because D is not limited by time which is created with being. Therefore, there is no interval between intention and act. But there is an interval of void between any two acts of creation of being.
There is a lapse but the temporal nature of the lapse is not necessarily equivalent to the duration of N within the period of existence. Because lapse of intention and act of creation of being. There is a lapse but the temporal nature of the lapse is not necessarily equivalent to the duration of N within the period of existence.
Because lapse of intention and an act of creating time and being is thus null, the creation of being brings with it the intention as well as the act into the effect – that is cause and act are the same, since there is no existing medium due to void between cause and effect in the intention/act of creation of being.
The effect would, in this case, become an extension of cause – that is, an extension of the consciousness of intention/act within each N(+W), as a sort of radiation of creating substance throughout being. This ‘echo’ of consciousness is Q, which, by extending into the effect, being is given into place.
Therefore it isolates each point of place in a relationship to all points of place throughout being. This, of course, is speculative throughout and certainly cannot be demonstrated. But what is certain, is that creation and what we refer to as consciousness in existence, are both of the nature of act with intentionality.
But existence itself is passive and inert at N, suggesting that conscious of D and the echo of consciousness in N(+W), share the same nature of standing without existence. It may be inappropriate to speculate on the mechanics of how consciousness (or ‘life,’ as biologists refer to it), appears in existence.
This is because whatever creation is, it is beyond employing a metaphor of a definatory physical nature to it, without any exactitude. However, it’s what I, as a fumbling echo, do with some of my time.
Q in its isolation in existence as occupying place, recognizes itself recognizing. At this point the recognition of it being a source of intentionality of knowing, is the initiation of the ‘self.’ The self is brought by itself into the terms or categories of the logos as being a point in place of acting as recognition.
This would require its being a recognizing repetition over several successive N (Q/N). This ‘point’ of recognition is successive over N as another recognition of place: different ion from all possible other points. It is a unique ‘self,’ that is so far epistemic.
When the self occupies a point or points in place, also occupied by a chemical complex that can be translatable (or transmutable) from the physical into perceptia by Q, then the process of building an ontic self from beyond the epistemic condition, begins the ontic self.
This is largely governed by the perceptual output of its body becoming subject to electrochemical configurations (all inert states created at N) that determine perception, emotion and through the policing of the social world, the interpretations of its body’s relation to the physical world.
If action is determined, then intentionality is determined. If intentionality is determined, then the understanding is determined because the reasons given oneself or others for intending action, are categorized by the social world or given as interpretations of perceptia.
These are, in turn, information derived from the neurological configurations of the body. In any event, all actions are state-change which is caused by D alone and presented before the consciousness completes its formulation of an intention.
Since the intentions resulting from C are realized in action, the intentionality of the action as state-change must have been present before the intentionality of the understanding had been completed as a process. Recognition of the intention to act is a process involving Q/N.
But intention and act in state-change, are not a process and are thus complete at N, because consciousness lies outside time. Q on the other hand occurs within time and requires several instantiations at N to achieve understanding through interaction with the body.
All history – not just mankind’s – is predetermined, then one can suppose that the material universe at least is unfolding toward a telos. Q is not consciousness. It is an echo or a residual presence of the consciousness of the intention and act of creation – like crumbs falling from the lips of eaters at a feast.
As partial reality, a semblance of the unity of consciousness, Q is very incomplete. It inhabits existence, almost, as, but not quite, an afterthought. In complete consciousness, there is no afterthought. Q in living material bodies, is trapped by its presence in matter.
It is the twisting of what would be a purity of consciousness by misconception, misinterpretation; mis-selection of perceptia and misconstruction of objects, bullied by the world of others into a diktat of truth where the alternative appears to be chaos.
We cannot see beyond the material stuff of ourselves. Meanwhile, the social world, driven by the gaze of market share is rapidly reconverting reality in an attempt to fuse biology with electronic engineering. There are no social controls on investment and no thought to what is coming.
Our experience is material: it is what the epistemic self becoming the ontic self knows, except as epistemic self, its knowledge of its being. Material existence is known to the ontic self only as the configuration of neural matter, particularly the brain.
At N, Q translates the body into the signals of perception. The body is a complex of configurations of the plenum of matter interpreted as particles and forces. The body/brain is, in the act of translation, an interpreter of the physical world. It acts as a sort of medium between the physical word and Q, which only knows the confusion of perceptual signals.
This is, as far as Q is concerned, the world so in effect, Q only knows the body/brain it is given into, not the world. Q as it appears at each N in succession (Q/N), must select specific perceptia which must be collected into objects. The objects are learned: that is, translated back into neural patterns to be recalled.
The learning process involves authority – that is, the instruction of others with influence over the body and brain which Q is successively given into. T this point, in the transaction of Q and matter, there is the anomaly in which Q influences the neural configuration of the body in translation of ‘objects.’
In order to achieve this, future brain-states must be created. But the only causal agent of states through void is D. Therefore, either:
(a) Q must be more than merely a residual – that is, it must retain some of the causal properties of D.
(b) The brain states required by Q for future recall are not summoned up by Q but rather are (also) pre-determined.
Q may have all the properties of C, but it remains as consciousness given into existence and is therefore limited by logos. The construction of reality, presented by the social world, includes the belief that conscious beings can cause their own bodies to act in such a way as to affect change in matter.
But this belief is at odds with :
1) The proposition that no state can affect a state that does not yet exist
2) The proposition that no state can affect change within itself.
Q is an act but not an act of affecting change. It is an act purely of the intentionality of knowing, the logos and knowing its own existence at N as knowing. What Q as the epistemic self knows beyond the logos of existence and itself as an existing point (in place), as knowing, is whatever is given it as the environment of its knowing or experience.
In this act – an act which occurs within the duration of N, when all else existing rests as an inert state – Q knows or experiences, shapes, colours, sounds, tactility, smells. The social world dictates all these perceptia are composites or ‘objects,’ that endures as a part of a larger reality that is apart from the self.
When the self is taught to separate some of these perceptia from the others and to organize them according to a singular event of a kind or an ‘object,’ the self is acting to recognize forms or categories. If the self was not in the in the first place capable of this act of ‘conception,’ then it would never progress beyond simply acting to perceive the jumble of environmental signals.
This environment would never extend as a reality beyond the self. The social, ‘reality,’ narrative has it that this capability of a living being to recognize primitive conceptia is coded over time into the DNA of a species which in humans and higher mammals affects a nervous system in the manner of habit formation.
But the nervous system and brain is inert matter and change to affect them to form habits is not generated by them, but is rather the result of the succession of distinct, inert states. Therefore, the property of formal recognition must be given to Q, not the brain. The brain cannot act at N, but Q is act.
MORE TO FOLLOW OF THIS INVESTIGATION OF EXISTENCE