I love everything Polyphanes writes. I was going to comment on this post on his blog but in typical fashion it turned into a much longer rant. I think we’re in the same headspace but I also don’t quite like how he crouched it (working up) when in my mind the flow is the opposite direction (emanating from or working down). It doesn’t mean we disagree. He is after all an all around awesome young guy.
My personal goal is to reconcile science and religion and through that I’ve fairly comfortably settled on hermetic thought, which is really classical philosophy. As above, so below is the axiom.
Because I believe we have a reductionist philosophy, it’s not OK to start at the bottom and work up, it’s much better to start at the top and go down. Things flow out, they expand, and they emanate and therefore to magic, we do have to climb the tree. On the other hand to grasp what the road looks like, it’s better to actually ride the road out. I think it’s also better to try to pick neutral names to explain these ideas.
The One Thing, which I label the Godhead, was everywhere and nowhere at once. This is impossibly hard to explain except that in a space where there is no-thing (nothing), that single little particle would be everything and everywhere. This idea is intentionally supposed to invoke the idea of the Big Bang. That original particle was the source of the big bang, but where did it come from? Kabbalists would point to the idea that to create, an infinite godhead first had to withdraw. The godhead decided that it wasn’t going to occupy all the space, and by doing this it created the difference between itself in density and itself in sparseness. It withdrew to the point and than exploded. Science minded readers will see allegories to the expansion of the universe – if the previous universe collapsed, then this universe exploded from that point.
Now because of the difference between sparseness and fixity, the universe expands outward. Remember what the first matter was – the godhead itself – so the godhead expands outwards. Also because of sparseness and density we have frequency and motion. Things can now be one place or another, and things can now be more or less dense. This primitive energy then has frequency, which at an extremely high pitch are things like radiation and light and at extremely low pitch condense into matter. The less abstract minded example is taking CO2, which is normally a gas, and condensing it into a liquid and eventually a solid. We get ahead of ourselves.
From fixity and sparseness, frequency and motion we come to actual matter. The universe at this point is made mostly from concepts and forms of energy (light, radiation, etc) and at some point the energy ends up in a state where two bits of it cannot occupy the same place at once. In the sparser parts of space this is OK, but back towards the middle things get compressed and therefore condensed and eventually fall out of being energy and end up in matter. This new plane has plenty of space and while it is adjacent to the previous plane including some crazy Higgs stuff going on, it’s a separate form of being.
The process repeats itself all over again. Matter can be one place, and not the other. Matter can vibrate like the string on a violin. Matter is never completely divorced from energy and has qualities we might know as hot and cold which, through the properties of sparseness and fixity, determine how warm or cold something is (how much energy it has compared to some baseline) and how that energy wants to flow (resistance and conduction).
A special hat tip to the Higgs Boson here. People call it the “God Particle”. It’s not. It might not even be the smallest unit of matter there is. If it is, then the Higgs Boson is the smallest unit of matter before pure energy. However, it’s not the God Particle, it’s just the smallest unit of condensed energy there is. The universe will remain a zero sum game until we figure out how to actually create energy. Once we do that, if we can figure out how to condense it into parts of atoms, then atoms, then molecules, then… CHOCOLATE – we will truly be free.
But wait, this was supposed to be about religious stuff! The mind! Philosophy! All you’ve done is link the big bang to making chocolate from scratch!
People familiar with Kabbalistic thought and LMD’s Chicken Qabalah will hopefully have enjoyed the post thus far. To go back up to the godhead, the most abstract thing, we can use the four worlds. You really should read the Chicken Qabala if you’re enjoying this so far. But to paraphrase the chapter as it applies to our big bang universe, things are things (chairs, apples, stars), unformed matter, energy, and then finally the big bang itself. In our philosophical four worlds universe, things are things (a specific chair), the plans to build the chair, the idea of a chair, and then needing a place to sit. As science acquires more and more control over the finer parts of matter the four worlds becomes more and more important.
This is really how we apply the process – how do we avoid grey goo of discarded stuff? We need to work, as a people, to identify our actual needs versus our actual wants. Everyone wants a Ferrari. Everyone needs a mode of transportation. In fact, a lot of people end up getting Ferraris and then don’t realize it needs and oil change every 1000 miles and there’s no drain bolt on the oil pan. People needed transportation, they wanted the flash, and they became trapped in a money abyss. Whether we’re designing software or we’re trying to assess what we need out of life, we have to go up (or down) through the four worlds and make sure we perceive each one clearly.
Why then does it matter by what name we call God(s)? We’ve just put faces to emanations of the divine and it doesn’t matter if we call him Odin or Mercury or Granny Smith or Red Delicious. These things have common qualities they share through time and space and just as they are all selfsame with one another, they are all selfsame with the parts which comprise them.
“You’re confusing the machine with the godhead.” Much in the same way people write crap software, their creation carries their own mind. A Picasso would not be confused with a Warhol and we shouldn’t embrace mediocrity or pictures of soup.
“You can’t prove any of this!” We don’t need to prove any of it. Science is merely flailing around in the darkness without inspiration. To run this process in reverse, we must seek to add to our knowledge and apprehend or reconcile each division of the whole. Where does inspiration come from?
“What did the philosopher order at the pizza shop?” Make me one with everything.