Rational and intuitive mind can embrace a single “reality”?
July 7, 2008 § 3 Comments
In short, I found this General Systems, Gravitation, and the Unified Field Theory website.
We grow up thinking that the ability to become complacent is the equivalence of success in life. True arrogant bastards (and arrogant bitches like me) know that this could not be further from the truth.
The question of how morality and other aspects of human behavior became associated with the spiritual realm is a separate issue, but in a world full of calamities, both natural and man-made, it is easy to see how troubles could be associated with “evil tempered” humans and animals (predators, poisonous snakes) and the spirits they presumably contained, and also with inanimate “trouble makers” such as storms and volcanoes. “Evil spirits” could be opposed by “good” spirits, whose favor could be won by “good” behavior, gifts, or sacrifices. Through the evolution of such notions religion became the royal road to the social control of human behavior. The other contenders for this role, the chief, the secular law-making body (“parliament”), and the warrior group or military, would usually make common cause with the priesthood, and when all four united, that is, when the king was also the head of the church (or thought to be an actual god, or relative of the gods) as well as the commander of the army and the head of the parliament, the social grip of this arrangement was generally unshakable. Society is at its most stable (and immobile) in this 4-square configuration.
Dissension within or between any of these four power centers risked loss of control and social instability, and when the rational mind began to question religious dogma the very foundations of the state were seen to be at risk. The influence of the rise of the rational mind has not been, could not be, restricted to religious authority alone. Because of the intimate connection between religion and government, the intrusion of the rational mind weakened the link between them and changed government forever. It is the weakening or actual loss of this powerful link to government that religion resists so mightily, for with the loss of this link its authority (and revenue) is vastly reduced.
Government has evolved from the personal leadership of the Chief or Shaman, to the leadership of ruling and privileged families preserved through a genetic royal line and aristocratic class, to the control of society through elected officials (the “people’s” government), and finally to international rule through the United Nations (an evolution still in progress). The rational mind and the rise of science has greatly influenced this progression, especially the shift from royal family to socially elected government, which may leave the church “out of the loop”.
An “ideal situation” is where all connections in the power structure are complete and the entire system intercommunicates and works together. It should be noted that this is a 4×3 representation, 4 triangles, very similar to the “hourglass” figures developed in field theory. Tetragrammaton. To achieve this configuration in the modern scientific world requires that religion find a new spiritual and ethical base which both the people and the government can endorse.
But should that be our goal? An Ideal Situation? Is that aligned enough for an embrace?
In the rational system, the overwhelming single fact is that the physical Universe of matter represents a condition of broken symmetry. More matter than antimatter was produced during the Big Bang and we are here in consequence. The particle and gravitational charges are responses by the spacetime continuum to this condition of broken symmetry, which is a consequence of the conversion of energy from a symmetric massless state, (light), to an asymmetric, massive one, (particles). The various conservation laws and forces which have been engendered as consequences of this broken symmetry work to return the cosmic system to its primordial symmetrical state. The inevitable march of thermodynamic processes toward a condition of greater entropy characterizes this process, for light has the greatest symmetry, and hence the greatest entropy, of any energy form.
The analogy between the rational story of a universal physical descent by light into the asymmetry of mass, time, gravitation, and charge, and the subsequent process of recovery via conservation laws, and the intuitive tradition of a cosmic “fall” into manifestation and sin, followed by the recovery of lost souls, is startlingly complete. Whether we are talking about the conversion of particles to light or bodies to spirits, the conservation of souls or the conservation of symmetry, the gravitational rescue of the physical system or the spiritual redemption of humanity, the process is so similar, on both the individual and cosmic scales, that we can only believe that rational and intuitive minds have embraced a single reality.
My 2 cents
I am not in denial about unbalances in the world … I have lived this system, in a wide variety of roles.
To achieve this “stable ideal situation” configuration in the modern (scientific) world, requires that religions find a new spiritual and ethical base which the people can endorse? Without making the same mistakes again? Without becoming the petty tyrants we fight? How about changing the world without taking power, for a change?
There are (at minimum) three possible ways out of the dilemma.
The first is to give up hope. Instead of thinking that it might be possible to create a society free of exploitation, free of war, free of violence, an emancipated society based on mutual recognition, this approach accepts that the world cannot be changed radically and focuses instead on living as well as can be and making whatever small changes may be possible.
The second possible option is to forget the subtleties and focus exclusively on the binary nature of the antagonism between proletariat and capitalist class.
The third possible approach to solving the dilemma of the urgent impossibility of revolution is to accept that there can be absolutely no certainty of a happy ending, but nevertheless to look for hope in the nature of capitalist power itself. Ubiquitous power implies ubiquitous resistance. Ubiquitous yes implies ubiquitous no.