Was Judas the first Liberal?

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
Post Reply
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Sy Borg
Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 4:43 pm
Jesus represents the inner path to wholeness while Judas supports the descent into fragmentation.


Not at all.

Jesus and Judas were not a double act, diametric opposites. Jesus and Satan is the correct match up. Judas was just a patsy for the Romans, a dupe. The morals behind the myth of Jesus and Judas relate to trust, loyalty and how fear can lead to betrayals.

Also, liberalism has nothing to do with fragmentation. Exactly the opposite, it's about inclusiveness and freedom.
I am defining liberalism and conservatism by world views rather than politics. I begin with the Holy Trinity. The Father is ONE outside of creation and No-thing. The Son is every-thing within creation. The spirit is what unites them at different vertical levels so is the source of meaning.

I understand the universe as an interconnected giant octave. Each note along this octave is a level of reality along a vertical descending octave.

Some people are attracted to return to the whole. They desire to conserve what is being lost or forgotten. Others become enchanted with details or fragments so are unconcerned with the whole and concentrate on fragments, details, or parts of the whole. I call this the liberal mind. It defines meaning by arguing fragments The atheistic mind would be a liberal mind since it denies in whatever form, a source for the octave of creation.

Consider consciousness in terms of colors. In whatever quality, colors are drawn to return to the white light whose vibrations include all colors.
Three Primary Colors (Ps): Red, Yellow, Blue.
Three Secondary Colors (S'): Orange, Green, Violet.
Six Tertiary Colors (Ts): Red-Orange, Yellow-Orange, Yellow-Green, Blue-Green, Blue-Violet, Red-Violet, which are formed by mixing a primary with a secondary.
The Conservative mindset (non political) is drawn to return to the white light while the liberal mind seeks new colors

An evolved human being is capable of both. They receive the impressions of higher consciousness and give these awakening influences to below. Facts and values can then be united as a part of the universal mind rather than a mind in the prison of Plato's Cave
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Belindi
The "implicate order" is a deterministic image which is more like an ever-changing but ordered fountain than a series of stagnant ponds.The "fragmentation" that Nick writes of is really an undivided flow of events. It is the undivided flow that is true, not the fragmented image.
Very true. Everything changes and nothing remains the same as the universe exhibits the cycles of the Wheel of Samsara. But how many have the need to ponder this force David Bohm refers to in which we are all a part of and content to follow nature's cycles which includes the cycles of war and peace?
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Sy Borg »

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pm Sy Borg
Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 4:43 pm
Jesus represents the inner path to wholeness while Judas supports the descent into fragmentation.


Not at all.

Jesus and Judas were not a double act, diametric opposites. Jesus and Satan is the correct match up. Judas was just a patsy for the Romans, a dupe. The morals behind the myth of Jesus and Judas relate to trust, loyalty and how fear can lead to betrayals.

Also, liberalism has nothing to do with fragmentation. Exactly the opposite, it's about inclusiveness and freedom.
I am defining liberalism and conservatism by world views rather than politics. I begin with the Holy Trinity. The Father is ONE outside of creation and No-thing. The Son is every-thing within creation. The spirit is what unites them at different vertical levels so is the source of meaning.

I understand the universe as an interconnected giant octave. Each note along this octave is a level of reality along a vertical descending octave.
You need to use different language. The use of intensely political terms like "conservative" and "liberal" to describe the structure of people's character is, with all due respect, misleading and riddled with personal bias.

There is no set world view of conservatives and liberals, as you state. There have been studies showing that "conservatives" are more vigilant, fearful and less intelligent on average than "liberals". Trouble is, just as with race, the differences and diversity within the factions is greater than the differences between the factions.

Those who seek peace and unity in life do not reside on one side of the political spectrum. Those who choose to specialise on fragments of reality rather than try to understand the whole do not reside on one part of the political spectrum.

I get it that politics excites you and you like to paint your ideological opponents as limited, shallow and mindless. It's an old game. At present a faction of conservatives are presenting liberals as people who kill babies and consume their essence, like a cross between Soylent Green and Jupiter Ascending. However, there are also conservatives who see Qanon and the like as bonkers.

Okay, now lets' check the schema.

1. The "Father", you say, is nothingness. To double check, is this inclusive of the cosmic foam, of virtual particles, or are you referring to complete nothingness (which necessarily and logically does not exist)? Broadly, nothingness (or as close to nothing as possible) would appear to be the source of everything, the hyperspace out of which the universe inflated.

2. The "Son" is everything, all the stuff. Creation. Matter and energy, life and minds. All the Son.

3. The "spirit", which unites them. Since you have made clear that you feel zero unity with "liberals" - about half the human race - so whatever your means of accessing the spirit, at this stage it does not appear to be working. Do you believe that love and understanding have a valid place in this schema?

I have never heard conservatives speaking about this in public. This is not about conservatism, nor the nature of conservatives. My father and his pals were arch conservatives and they would be dismissive of your claims. As I say, you need different language. Not all conservatives are devout, not all liberals are secular. Confusing these concepts is not helpful.

Also, perhaps you can explain your point about how the spirit unites God and creation vertically? That seems to me more of a Lane idea than a Gurdjeiff concept, such as his law of octaves.



Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmSome people are attracted to return to the whole. They desire to conserve what is being lost or forgotten.
All people want this. They just use different words to express it, usually a wish for peace and harmony.

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmOthers become enchanted with details or fragments so are unconcerned with the whole and concentrate on fragments, details, or parts of the whole. I call this the liberal mind.
No, it's called analysis. It has nothing at all to do with "the liberal mind". Chunking is what analysts do. You look at a dynamic and want to understand it, be able to predict it. So you study the dynamic and better understand its underlying drivers.

Ultimately, your theistic criticism of science is dated. It's well-known the siloing of scientific fields is an impediment to a broader understanding. So, today, for example, we can see the logical absurdity of non-living geology giving birth to living biology - that geology and biology are each part of a larger process. Hence the emerging field of geobiology.

Thing is, life requires analysis of parts. There is no way around it. That's why meditation and contemplation exist - having free time from the exigencies of specific analyses to consider the whole, to take time out to simply be, rather than do. It's healing.

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmIt defines meaning by arguing fragments The atheistic mind would be a liberal mind since it denies in whatever form, a source for the octave of creation.
Trouble is, many atheists are conservative and many theists are liberal. You think that billions of people fit neatly into two categories - 1. conservative/religious/whole/righteous and 2. liberal/secular/incomplete/wicked. Do you appreciate how anti-philosophical that is? Paula White would love it.

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmThe Conservative mindset (non political) is drawn to return to the white light while the liberal mind seeks new colors

An evolved human being is capable of both. They receive the impressions of higher consciousness and give these awakening influences to below. Facts and values can then be united as a part of the universal mind rather than a mind in the prison of Plato's Cave
Certainly in the US, plenty with conservative mindsets prefer whiteness to colour. No argument there.

Still, all you are ultimately advocating is meditation about the whole to be incorporated into one's life, something that arguably is more likely of liberals than conservatives. I was raised in a conservative family amongst conservatives in one of the most conservative suburbs in the country. So, unlike you, I have enormous real life experience with those on the other side of the political spectrum.

That real life experience is why I don't paint conservatives as soulless and insensitive dummies, as you seem to paint secularists. I don't relate to black-and-white views of a multi-textured reality.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Sy Borg »

Nick, here we can see that the secular world is sensitive to the more valid issues you raise about interest in the whole rather than just parts:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cr ... nly-false/
Some scholars, notably philosopher Thomas Nagel, are so unimpressed with science that they are challenging its fundamental assumptions. In his new book Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False, Nagel contends that current scientific theories and methods can't account for the emergence of life in general and one bipedal, big-brained species in particular. To solve these problems, Nagel asserts, science needs "a major conceptual revolution," as radical as those precipitated by heliocentrism, evolution and relativity.

Many pundits calling for such a revolution are peddling some sort of religious agenda, whether Christian or New Age. Nagel is an atheist, who cannot accept God as a final answer, and yet he echoes some theological critiques of science. "Physic-chemical reductionism," he writes, cannot tell us how matter became animate on Earth more than three billion years ago; nor can it account for the emergence in our ancestors of consciousness, reason and morality.

Evolutionary psychologists invoke natural selection to explain humanity's remarkable attributes, but only in a hand-wavy, retrospective fashion, according to Nagel. A genuine theory of everything, he suggests, should make sense of the extraordinary fact that the universe "is waking up and becoming aware of itself." In other words, the theory should show that life, mind, morality and reason were not only possible but even inevitable, latent in the cosmos from its explosive inception. Nagel admits he has no idea what form such a theory would take; his goal is to point out how far current science is from achieving it.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Sy
Still, all you are ultimately advocating is meditation about the whole to be incorporated into one's life, something that arguably is more likely of liberals than conservatives. I was raised in a conservative family amongst conservatives in one of the most conservative suburbs in the country. So, unlike you, I have enormous real life experience with those on the other side of the political spectrum.

That real life experience is why I don't paint conservatives as soulless idiots, as you paint secularists. Life is not black-and-white.
You Have had Bad experiences with people calling themselves conservative and has produced a lot of negativity. I don’t look at the liberal mind as soulless idiots but rather as unawakened.

“Humanism was not wrong in thinking that truth, beauty, liberty, and equality are of infinite value, but in thinking that man can get them for himself without grace.” Simone Weil


As a conservative I know that freedom is impossible without the energy of help from above awakening conscience sufficient to resist indoctrination. In contrast where the true conservative appreciates the value of objective values initiating from above, the liberal mind believes its education can produce anything other then what it has produced in the past.

Notice I’m not referring to a personal God telling a person what to do but rather the necessity of the energy of grace to enable a person to awaken. Until a person experiences this AHA moment they cannot understand and prefer to believe that Man can change by its own initiative and remain liberal.

The metaxu of a society either furthers or prevents awakening. Metaxu is the quality of the arts and intellect within society that connects Man with higher consciousness. It is obvious that the quality of metaxu in America is declining normal for a society increasingly enchanted with fragmentation. I’m not referring to the duality of good and evil but the distinction between psychological sleep and awakening. Freedom requires some awakened individuals to invite the help of grace

I must have misled you on the unity of Trinity. The Father is pure consciousness. It divides into three at the first cosmos producing the potential for the necessity of creation. The Son is the manifestation of pure consciousness into everything or fragments or parts of the whole for each level of reality.

Man exists on earth at one level of reality held there by the human condition explained by Plato in the chariot analogy. The whole idea of esoteric Christianity is the potential for Man to consciously evolve into a higher level of reality or where it initiated from
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Sy Borg »

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 10:58 pm Sy
Still, all you are ultimately advocating is meditation about the whole to be incorporated into one's life, something that arguably is more likely of liberals than conservatives. I was raised in a conservative family amongst conservatives in one of the most conservative suburbs in the country. So, unlike you, I have enormous real life experience with those on the other side of the political spectrum.

That real life experience is why I don't paint conservatives as soulless idiots, as you paint secularists. Life is not black-and-white.
You Have had Bad experiences with people calling themselves conservative and has produced a lot of negativity. I don’t look at the liberal mind as soulless idiots but rather as unawakened.

“Humanism was not wrong in thinking that truth, beauty, liberty, and equality are of infinite value, but in thinking that man can get them for himself without grace.” Simone Weil


As a conservative I know that freedom is impossible without the energy of help from above awakening conscience sufficient to resist indoctrination. In contrast where the true conservative appreciates the value of objective values initiating from above, the liberal mind believes its education can produce anything other then what it has produced in the past.
As mentioned, I have known tons of conservatives, and not one spoke of the need to gain help from above. Not one.

What you speak of is not conservative, not in the least. Rather, it's a somewhat radical and quirky spirituality, and these days American Christians have rallied around the Republican Party, which no doubt drives your claims.

Surely you must have noticed that most conservatives do not give a fig about "awakening conscience" - they care about government red tape, unions, asset protection and promoting the needs of business over individuals, whose fate is considered up to themselves solely.

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 10:58 pmNotice I’m not referring to a personal God telling a person what to do but rather the necessity of the energy of grace to enable a person to awaken. Until a person experiences this AHA moment they cannot understand and prefer to believe that Man can change by its own initiative and remain liberal.
Again, nothing whatsoever to do with conservatism and liberalism. Grace is certainly not being seen in conservative politics of late.

Plenty of so-called "liberals" have enjoyed extraordinary awakenings and countless conservatives give not a flying fig about any such "aha moment".

It's true that humans delude themselves into seeing humanity as being more in control than it is, ie, almost completely not in control of itself. We are not creatures on the Earth, but parts OF the Earth. Look up and see the clouds. That's akin to a fish looking up at the water's surface. We are not only not on the Earth, but we can only survive within it.

You speak of some grand and enjoyable thought-provoking concepts but then you drag these ideas through the mud of political language for reasons unknown. Seemingly suckered into group loyalty. Shame. It dilutes and distracts from your ideas, which are not at all common to conservatives.

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 10:58 pmThe metaxu of a society either furthers or prevents awakening. Metaxu is the quality of the arts and intellect within society that connects Man with higher consciousness. It is obvious that the quality of metaxu in America is declining normal for a society increasingly enchanted with fragmentation. I’m not referring to the duality of good and evil but the distinction between psychological sleep and awakening. Freedom requires some awakened individuals to invite the help of grace
You forgot one of Gurdjeiff's better observations - that humanity en masse can never amount to much. That we are animals. Only small groups can progress.

I think we have worked out who the few are, and it's not small life coaching classes like Gurdjeiff's, it's those with billions of dollars, who can access all of the best technology as it emerges. They will become ever more knowing and capable and everyone else is left to scrabble over that which they leave behind.

I don't resent billionaires for it (though it would be nice if more of them paid at least some tax). At least someone will be able to carry on the show, so to speak. It's sure not going to be all those billions of hominids, ever more intensely pit against each other while ignoring the massive exploitation.

No doubt the same thing happened to other great apes when humans first started taking over. They were brutalised, exploited and massively outgunned by humans thanks to technology. That's equivalent to the situation emerging today but, with respect to Eric Burdon, human masses will become The New Animals. That is - either human resources, human vermin or a neutral background.

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 10:58 pmI must have misled you on the unity of Trinity. The Father is pure consciousness. It divides into three at the first cosmos producing the potential for the necessity of creation. The Son is the manifestation of pure consciousness into everything or fragments or parts of the whole for each level of reality.
Sacred geometry, right? Start with a point of consciousness that explores outwards in all directions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oA6cVzAl4jk

Or the Father might be like the John Hagelin model of the Universal Field. Not all secularists lack interest in the esoteric - cold and calculating heathens attacking non-materialist ideas with snarkiness and a smug sense of superiority (somewhat reminiscent of your own attitudes towards the secular at times, yes?).

I have long been interested in esoteric knowledge. But I never found a believer who has been able to put a convincing case to me, and often their cases have been nowhere near as rigorous as the more thoughtful secular arguments around.

I think many things are possible with reality - there are many gaps in our knowledge - but many of these ideas are both speculative and contradictory. How to know which speculative claim is most correct? Might everyone be wrong? Dunno.

The strongest evidence for an esoteric aspect to reality for me was a powerful peak experience about a decade ago (knowledge by revelation), but I cannot claim it to be solid evidence or conclusive, more suggestive. In a sense, the experience was enough to convince me that something is going on outside of the materialist model, and it's super interesting. But ... can I trust myself to be a reliable witness? Other peoples' accounts of peak experiences provide reassurance that it wasn't a random, but glorious, period of madness, but we are all subject to human biology and we experience similar affects in many ways, possibly in this way too.

So I remain agnostic about a great deal.

Nick_A wrote: July 15th, 2021, 10:58 pmMan exists on earth at one level of reality held there by the human condition explained by Plato in the chariot analogy. The whole idea of esoteric Christianity is the potential for Man to consciously evolve into a higher level of reality or where it initiated from
What would be the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Belindi »

Sy Borg wrote:
The strongest evidence for an esoteric aspect to reality for me was a powerful peak experience about a decade ago (knowledge by revelation),
The causes of knowledge by revelation are not necessarily a personal God Who by means of grace intervenes in nature. My own unusual revelation was a simple revelation of letting go of 'ego' or maybe what Nietzsche called will to power. It could have had a materialist(physicalist) explanation , however what mattered was not any explanation such as 'grace', or oxygen deprivation ,or mind-altering substance, or whatever, what mattered is that I learned from it quicker and more pleasantly than the usual cognitive slog of making myself concentrate on difficult ideas.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Belindi »

Nick wrote:
I must have misled you on the unity of Trinity. The Father is pure consciousness. It divides into three at the first cosmos producing the potential for the necessity of creation. The Son is the manifestation of pure consciousness into everything or fragments or parts of the whole for each level of reality.

That is like my own take on God the Father and God the Son. Implicit in this metaphor is the primacy of the Father, so the metaphor is flawed by the presumption, no doubt originating among ancient nomads, that the tribal deity is the head of the tribe, and perpetuated among the few remaining Christians and others.

Politics matter to individuals at the psychological level. Some individuals are happier as followers of charismatic or powerful leaders (conservative types), and a few are happier to do their lives their own way(liberal types). Jesus of Nazareth as portrayed by the three Gospels undoubtedly did it his way and was tortured to death by the Roman administration for not being a follower.

Similarly in modern times, great artists , novelists, and reformers who have been avant garde have often suffered for their authentic vision. E.g. some visionary women have had to pretend to be men, and others, such as Florence Nightingale, have been promoted to being regarded as honorary men.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Sy Borg wrote: July 15th, 2021, 9:57 pm Nick, here we can see that the secular world is sensitive to the more valid issues you raise about interest in the whole rather than just parts:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cr ... nly-false/
Some scholars, notably philosopher Thomas Nagel, are so unimpressed with science that they are challenging its fundamental assumptions. In his new book Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False, Nagel contends that current scientific theories and methods can't account for the emergence of life in general and one bipedal, big-brained species in particular. To solve these problems, Nagel asserts, science needs "a major conceptual revolution," as radical as those precipitated by heliocentrism, evolution and relativity.

Many pundits calling for such a revolution are peddling some sort of religious agenda, whether Christian or New Age. Nagel is an atheist, who cannot accept God as a final answer, and yet he echoes some theological critiques of science. "Physic-chemical reductionism," he writes, cannot tell us how matter became animate on Earth more than three billion years ago; nor can it account for the emergence in our ancestors of consciousness, reason and morality.

Evolutionary psychologists invoke natural selection to explain humanity's remarkable attributes, but only in a hand-wavy, retrospective fashion, according to Nagel. A genuine theory of everything, he suggests, should make sense of the extraordinary fact that the universe "is waking up and becoming aware of itself." In other words, the theory should show that life, mind, morality and reason were not only possible but even inevitable, latent in the cosmos from its explosive inception. Nagel admits he has no idea what form such a theory would take; his goal is to point out how far current science is from achieving it.

Once secular scientists become aware of the law of the INCLUDED middle, they may feel what is essential to rise from a secular binary perspective into a universal triune perspective by awareness of the third force. Yes Gurdjieff also explained it as the law of three.

https://ciret-transdisciplinarity.org/b ... /b12c3.php
1. Quantum physics and levels of Reality
The major cultural impact of the quantum revolution has certainly raised questions for the contemporary philosophical dogma of the existence of a single level of Reality [1] .

Here the meaning we give to the word "Reality" is pragmatic and ontological at the same time.

By Reality I intend first of all to designate that which resists our experiences, representations, descriptions, images or mathematical formalizations. Quantum physics caused us to discover that abstraction is not simply an intermediary between us and Nature, a tool for describing reality, but rather, one of the constituent parts of Nature. In quantum physics, mathematical formalization is inseparable from experience. It resists in its own way by its simultaneous concern for internal consistency, and the need to integrate experimental data without destroying that self-consistency. Elsewhere as well, in so-called "virtual" reality or in computer generated images, there are mathematical equations which resist: a single mathematical equation gives birth to an infinite series of images. In potentia , those images are already present in the equations or in the series of numbers. Abstraction therefore forms an integral part of Reality.

In so far as Nature participates in the being of the world one must ascribe an ontological dimension to the concept of Reality. Nature is an immense, inexhaustible source of the unknown which justifies the very existence of science. Reality is not only a social construction, the consensus of a collectivity, or some intersubjective agreement. It also has a trans-subjective dimension, to the extent that one simple experimental fact can ruin the most beautiful scientific theory.

By level of Reality [1] I intend to designate an ensemble of systems which are invariant under the action of certain general laws: for example, quantum entities are subordinate to quantum laws, which depart radically from the laws of the macrophysical world. That is to say that two levels of Reality are different if, while passing from one to the other, there is a break in the laws and a break in fundamental concepts (like, for example, causality). No one has succeeded in finding a mathematical formalism which permits the rigorous passage from one world to another. Semantic glosses, tautological definitions or approximations are unable to replace a rigorous mathematical formalism. There are even strong mathematical indications that the passage from the quantum world to the macrophysical world would never be possible. But there is nothing catastrophic about this. The discontinuity which is manifest in the quantum world is also manifest in the structure of the levels of Reality. That does not prevent the two worlds from co-existing. The proof: our own existence. Our bodies are at once a macrophysical structure and a quantum structure.

The levels of Reality are radically different from the levels of organization as these have been defined in systemic approaches [2]. Levels of organization do not presuppose a break with fundamental concepts: several levels of organization appear at one and the same level of Reality. The levels of organization correspond to different structurings of the same fundamental laws. For example, Marxist economy and classical physics belong to one and the same level of Reality.

The emergence of at least two different levels of Reality in the study of natural systems is a major event in the history of knowledge. It can lead us to reconsider our individual and social life, to give a new interpretation to old knowledge, to know ourselves in a different way, here and now.

The existence of different levels of Reality has been affirmed by different traditions and civilizations, but these affirmations were founded on religious dogma or on the exploration of the interior universe.

In our century, in their questioning of the foundations of science, Edmund Husserl [3] and other scholars have discovered the existence of different levels of perception of Reality by the subject-observer. But these thinkers have been marginalized by academic philosophers and misunderstood by physicists, enclosed in their respective specializations. In fact, they were pioneers in the exploration of a multi-dimensional and multi-referential reality, in which human beings are able to recover their place and their verticality.

2. The logic of the included middle
Knowledge of the coexistence of the quantum world and the macrophysical world and the development of quantum physics has led, on the level of theory and scientific experiment, to the upheaval of what were formerly considered to be pairs of mutually exclusive contradictories (A and non-A): wave and corpuscle, continuity and discontinuity, separability and nonseparability, local causality and global causality, symmetry and breaking of symmetry, reversibility and irreversibility of time, etc.

For example, equations of quantum physics are submitted to a group of symmetries, but their solutions break these symmetries. Similarly, a group of symmetry is supposed to describe the unification of all known physical interactions but the symmetry must be broken in order to describe the difference between strong, weak, electromagnetic and gravitational interactions.

The intellectual scandal provoked by quantum mechanics consists in the fact that the pairs of contradictories that it generates are actually mutually contradictory when they are analyzed through the interpretative filter of classical logic. This logic is founded on three axioms:

1. The axiom of identity : A is A.

2. The axiom of non-contradiction : A is not non-A.

3. The axiom of the excluded middle : There exists no third term T which is at the same time A and non-A.

According to the hypothesis of the existence of a single level of Reality, the second and third axioms are obviously equivalent. The dogma of a single level of Reality, arbitrary like all dogma, is so embedded in our consciousness that even professional logicians forget to say that these two axioms are in fact distinct and independent from each other.

If one nevertheless accepts this logic which, after all, has ruled for two millennia and continues to dominate thought today (particularly in the political, social, and economic spheres) one immediately arrives at the conclusion that the pairs of contradictories advanced by quantum physics are mutually exclusive, because one cannot affirm the validity of a thing and its opposite at the same time: A and non-A.

Since the definitive formulation of quantum mechanics around 1930 the founders of the new science have been acutely aware of the problem of formulating a new "quantum logic." Subsequent to the work of Birkhoff and van Neumann a veritable flourishing of quantum logics was not long in coming [4]. The aim of these new logics was to resolve the paradoxes which quantum mechanics had created and to attempt, to the extent possible, to arrive at a predictive power stronger than that afforded by classical logic.

Most quantum logics have modified the second axiom of classical logic -- the axiom of non-contradiction -- by introducing non-contradiction with several truth values in place of the binary pair (A, non-A). These multivalent logics, whose status with respect to their predictive power remains controversial, have not taken into account one other possibility: the modification of the third axiom -- the axiom of the excluded middle.

History will credit Stéphane Lupasco with having shown that the logic of the included middle is a true logic, formalizable and formalized, multivalent (with three values: A, non-A, and T) and non-contradictory [5]. Stéphane Lupasco, like Edmund Husserl, belongs to the race of pioneers. His philosophy, which takes quantum physics as its point of departure, has been marginalized by physicists and philosophers. Curiously, on the other hand, it has had a powerful albeit underground influence among psychologists, sociologists, artists, and historians of religions. Perhaps the absence of the notion of "levels of Reality" in his philosophy obscured its substance. Many persons believed that Lupasco's logic violated the principle of non-contradiction -- whence the rather unfortunate name "logic of contradiction" -- and that it entailed the risk of endless semantic glosses. Still more, the visceral fear of introducing the idea of the included middle , with its magical resonances, only helped to increase the distrust of such a logic.

Our understanding of the axiom of the included middle -- there exists a third term T which is at the same time A and non-A -- is completely clarified once the notion of "levels of Reality" is introduced.

In order to obtain a clear image of the meaning of the included middle, we can represent the three terms of the new logic -- A, non-A, and T -- and the dynamics associated with them by a triangle in which one of the vertices is situated at one level of Reality and the two other vertices at another level of Reality. If one remains at a single level of Reality, all manifestation appears as a struggle between two contradictory elements (example: wave A and corpuscle non-A). The third dynamic, that of the T-state, is exercised at another level of Reality, where that which appears to be disunited (wave or corpuscle) is in fact united (quanton), and that which appears contradictory is perceived as non-contradictory.

It is the projection of T on one and the same level of Reality which produces the appearance of mutually exclusive, antagonistic pairs (A and non-A). A single level of Reality can only create antagonistic oppositions. It is inherently self-destructive if it is completely separated from all the other levels of Reality. A third term, let us call it T', which is situated on the same level of Reality as that of the opposites A and non-A, can accomplish their reconciliation.

The entire difference between a triad of the included middle and an Hegelian triad is clarified by consideration of the role of time . In a triad of the included middle the three terms coexist at the same moment in time . On the contrary, each of the three terms of the Hegelian triad succeeds the former in time. This is why the Hegelian triad is incapable of accomplishing the reconciliation of opposites, whereas the triad of the included middle is capable of it. In the logic of the included middle the opposites are rather contradictories : the tension between contradictories builds a unity which includes and goes beyond the sum of the two terms.

One also sees the great dangers of misunderstanding engendered by the common enough confusion made between the axiom of the excluded middle and the axiom of non-contradiction [6]. The logic of the included middle is non-contradictory in the sense that the axiom of non-contradiction is thoroughly respected, a condition which enlarges the notions of "true" and "false" in such a way that the rules of logical implication no longer concerning two terms (A and non-A) but three terms (A, non-A and T), co-existing at the same moment in time. This is a formal logic, just as any other formal logic: its rules are derived by means of a relatively simple mathematical formalism.

One can see why the logic of the included middle is not simply a metaphor like some kind of arbitrary ornament for classical logic, which would permit adventurous incursions and passages into the domain of complexity. The logic of the included middle is perhaps the privileged logic of complexity, privileged in the sense that it allows us to cross the different areas of knowledge in a coherent way, by enabling a new kind of simplicity.

The logic of the included middle does not abolish the logic of the excluded middle: it only constrains its sphere of validity. The logic of the excluded middle is certainly valid for relatively simple situations. On the contrary, the logic of the excluded middle is harmful in complex, transdisciplinary cases.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Belindi wrote: July 16th, 2021, 5:15 am Nick wrote:
I must have misled you on the unity of Trinity. The Father is pure consciousness. It divides into three at the first cosmos producing the potential for the necessity of creation. The Son is the manifestation of pure consciousness into everything or fragments or parts of the whole for each level of reality.

That is like my own take on God the Father and God the Son. Implicit in this metaphor is the primacy of the Father, so the metaphor is flawed by the presumption, no doubt originating among ancient nomads, that the tribal deity is the head of the tribe, and perpetuated among the few remaining Christians and others.

Politics matter to individuals at the psychological level. Some individuals are happier as followers of charismatic or powerful leaders (conservative types), and a few are happier to do their lives their own way(liberal types). Jesus of Nazareth as portrayed by the three Gospels undoubtedly did it his way and was tortured to death by the Roman administration for not being a follower.

Similarly in modern times, great artists , novelists, and reformers who have been avant garde have often suffered for their authentic vision. E.g. some visionary women have had to pretend to be men, and others, such as Florence Nightingale, have been promoted to being regarded as honorary men.
You have reduced the concept of the trinity into secular dualist logic. Then it doesn't make any sense. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are equal as a triune necessity. Together they make a unified whole. Secularists argue over which is more important. A universalist knows they are equal and serving a necessary function within creation

Of course secularization corrupts the idea through dualistic logic. It is up to the Universalists to remember the origin, the "forms" which serve as the beginning and learn the laws which create lawful levels of reality..
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Sy Borg
Nick_A wrote: ↑Thu Jul 15, 2021 9:58 pm
Man exists on earth at one level of reality held there by the human condition explained by Plato in the chariot analogy. The whole idea of esoteric Christianity is the potential for Man to consciously evolve into a higher level of reality or where it initiated from
What would be the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?

First of all, human evolution is connected with the evolution of our earth. Time is relative. A day for our earth includes many generations for humans. However, human beings are capable of accelerated evolution which concerns all the authentic paths initiating with a conscious source.

In Christianity it requires carrying ones cross. The Crucifixion was a conscious drama. Jesus will and conscious quality to remain present to the worst humanity can come up with created a tension between presence and animal chaos (above and below). It can only be resolved by the Holy Spirit enabling the New Man or what we call the Resurrection

Of course we can't do it. If someone looks at us the wrong way we lose all sense of presence or the balance of our three centers or the harmony of our souls according to Plato. But as Gurdjieff said, "conscious efforts are never lost" so each attempt at presence is beneficial for our being.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Sy Borg »

Nick_A wrote: July 16th, 2021, 4:46 pm Sy Borg
Nick_A wrote: ↑Thu Jul 15, 2021 9:58 pm
Man exists on earth at one level of reality held there by the human condition explained by Plato in the chariot analogy. The whole idea of esoteric Christianity is the potential for Man to consciously evolve into a higher level of reality or where it initiated from
What would be the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?

First of all, human evolution is connected with the evolution of our earth. Time is relative. A day for our earth includes many generations for humans. However, human beings are capable of accelerated evolution which concerns all the authentic paths initiating with a conscious source.

In Christianity it requires carrying ones cross. The Crucifixion was a conscious drama. Jesus will and conscious quality to remain present to the worst humanity can come up with created a tension between presence and animal chaos (above and below). It can only be resolved by the Holy Spirit enabling the New Man or what we call the Resurrection

Of course we can't do it. If someone looks at us the wrong way we lose all sense of presence or the balance of our three centers or the harmony of our souls according to Plato. But as Gurdjieff said, "conscious efforts are never lost" so each attempt at presence is beneficial for our being.
Yes, but what are the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Sy Borg wrote: July 16th, 2021, 4:56 pm
Nick_A wrote: July 16th, 2021, 4:46 pm Sy Borg
Nick_A wrote: ↑Thu Jul 15, 2021 9:58 pm
Man exists on earth at one level of reality held there by the human condition explained by Plato in the chariot analogy. The whole idea of esoteric Christianity is the potential for Man to consciously evolve into a higher level of reality or where it initiated from
What would be the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?

First of all, human evolution is connected with the evolution of our earth. Time is relative. A day for our earth includes many generations for humans. However, human beings are capable of accelerated evolution which concerns all the authentic paths initiating with a conscious source.

In Christianity it requires carrying ones cross. The Crucifixion was a conscious drama. Jesus will and conscious quality to remain present to the worst humanity can come up with created a tension between presence and animal chaos (above and below). It can only be resolved by the Holy Spirit enabling the New Man or what we call the Resurrection

Of course we can't do it. If someone looks at us the wrong way we lose all sense of presence or the balance of our three centers or the harmony of our souls according to Plato. But as Gurdjieff said, "conscious efforts are never lost" so each attempt at presence is beneficial for our being.
Yes, but what are the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?
Can a caterpillar understand a butterfly? Can an acorn understand an oak? Can animal man understand the being of conscious Man? From 1 Corinthians

Only a rare few are capable of this evolution of human being. But at the same time, good seed is saved and essence can come again.
The Resurrection Body

35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. 39 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41 The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”[f]; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46 The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we[g] bear the image of the heavenly man...........
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Sy Borg »

Nick_A wrote: July 16th, 2021, 7:49 pm
Sy Borg wrote: July 16th, 2021, 4:56 pm
Nick_A wrote: July 16th, 2021, 4:46 pm Sy Borg
Nick_A wrote: ↑Thu Jul 15, 2021 9:58 pm
Man exists on earth at one level of reality held there by the human condition explained by Plato in the chariot analogy. The whole idea of esoteric Christianity is the potential for Man to consciously evolve into a higher level of reality or where it initiated from
What would be the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?

First of all, human evolution is connected with the evolution of our earth. Time is relative. A day for our earth includes many generations for humans. However, human beings are capable of accelerated evolution which concerns all the authentic paths initiating with a conscious source.

In Christianity it requires carrying ones cross. The Crucifixion was a conscious drama. Jesus will and conscious quality to remain present to the worst humanity can come up with created a tension between presence and animal chaos (above and below). It can only be resolved by the Holy Spirit enabling the New Man or what we call the Resurrection

Of course we can't do it. If someone looks at us the wrong way we lose all sense of presence or the balance of our three centers or the harmony of our souls according to Plato. But as Gurdjieff said, "conscious efforts are never lost" so each attempt at presence is beneficial for our being.
Yes, but what are the attributes of those who have evolved to a higher level of reality?
Can a caterpillar understand a butterfly? Can an acorn understand an oak? Can animal man understand the being of conscious Man? From 1 Corinthians

Only a rare few are capable of this evolution of human being. But at the same time, good seed is saved and essence can come again.
The Resurrection Body

35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. 39 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41 The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”[f]; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46 The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we[g] bear the image of the heavenly man...........
Just because humans can only personally experience within their body schema, does not mean they cannot extrapolate to understand the next steps. Human consciousness, capable of perceiving time beyond the immediate, has a feature not seen before but it has an obvious limitation. That is, each of us is limited to this particular place and time. Humans appear to be on the way to forming super-organisms, facilitated by technology. In time (asteroids permitting) there will evolve a consciousness capable of processing multiple perceptions as readily as our brains juggle multiple senses. The breadth of understanding such an entity could possess would seem godlike to humans today, the result of networked complexity in excess of human brains.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Was Judas the first Liberal?

Post by Nick_A »

Sy Borg
ust because humans can only personally experience within their body schema, does not mean they cannot extrapolate to understand the next steps. Human consciousness, capable of perceiving time beyond the immediate, has a feature not seen before but it has an obvious limitation. That is, each of us is limited to this particular place and time. Humans appear to be on the way to forming super-organisms, facilitated by technology. In time (asteroids permitting) there will evolve a consciousness capable of processing multiple perceptions as readily as our brains juggle multiple senses. The breadth of understanding such an entity could possess would seem godlike to humans today, the result of networked complexity in excess of human brains.
You seem to be describing a super machine. But conscious evolution is evolving from reactive creatures or machines into conscious beings. A reacting super machine is still a creation capable of MECHANICAL REACTION. Conscious Man in contrast is a being capable of CONSCIOUS ACTION. What IYO is the difference between a conscious action and a mechanical reaction
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021