(An occasional paper of the Journal of (Very) Speculative Philosophy)
2011 For more fun, see No. 2 of this Journal See other papers on Confabulology at the bottom of my papers webpage above.
A Theoretical &
Speculative Metaphysical Confabulation
been instructed / empowered / inspired / channeled / whatever to let
you know the low-down on the higher-ups, the “that’s what it’s all
about” of the Hokey-Pokey, the underlying structure of the Universe.
First of all, it’s multi-dimensional, so what we perceive as three
dimensional reality is only a shallow projection of what’s really going
on. Plato’s parable of the cave is oh, so right on. What psychedelic
inspiration clued him in on this. Of course the Aristotelians
pooh-poohed this, and many philosophers don’t get it. When ol’ Plato
talked about primal forms, he wasn’t talking about the perfect chair,
or even the archetype of sitting—that’s way too specific. My friend
Zordak point not only to the Balbonians on their planet many
light-years away, but also to the spider in the children’s nursery
rhyme about Miss Muffet on her Tuffet—you known, the one that came down
and scared her away? But the key is, how does a spider “sit
down”?? Not crouch, not lie prone, but... well you can get all
consternation-ish about it, but back to Plato.
He was trying to express what David Bohm a few decades was sort of
intuiting what he called the “implicate order” that contrasts with our
familiar ordinary universe. And don’t get me started describing how all
this is implicit in the intuitions of the great Kabbalists.
Now the discovery of the mathematics behind chaos theory, the whole
field of fractals, came a little closer, but it’s still only one
dimension. Other writers who fool with string theory have tried to
model what more-than-four-dimensional space might be like, and it’s
mind-stretching. So here we’ll just go with my revelation, okay?
So take this
little simple diagram on the left for example. Imagine that each of the
little squares is a
universe. Yet this whole set is only one button— really, only a
God’s garment (speaking very poetically, of course). Now this is the
point: Each of those little squares with circles in them are in turn
complex nexuses of influences. The physical universe at the seed-core
is only a part, sort of the flowering or product of all the dimensional
activity. From another perspective, these diagrams are just another way
to think about my mandalas:
Now, carrying on the sequence: Here on the right is another mandala
that is sort of an enlargement of one of the tiny circles in the
diagram on the above left.
those points ont the diagram to the right where the liking irregular
"chains" come together are "nodes" and close-ups of both these elements
will be shown.
Portrayed to the left, below, are some of those nodes.
They are nexuses, points where different dynamic currents come
together. You are a nexus of many roles and role demands. You may be a
parent, a spouse, the adult child of an older parent who is the
father-in-law or mother-in-law to your spouse. You have to earn money
and keep house, perhaps belong to a church and/or a club or two, and
each of these is a complex mixture of many sub-roles. They all come
together in your life. So, too, chains of many dynamics come together
to form these mediating, choosing, balancing, creative living centers.
Although these complexes may seem static, they are actually in dynamic
action. Swirling would be too simple a term---they are evolving
element is an evolutionary strand that divides, integrates, veers off
in interesting directions, analogous to the many twists and turns taken
by a religion or technology or language in our history.
Now back to that form on the righ: The connecting branches are in fact
as complex and dynamic as the nodes where they come together:
Note to the righ above the magnified connecting branch, there's a rough
diagram of a piece of that connecting branch---complexities that have
within them further complexities.
Now, below, here below is a magnified segment of that branch shown to the right.
. . . and this is not even the weird part! What’s really
that this whole explanation is only one of countless numbers of other
possible explanations! For example, the nodes might evolve so
that they look like this or even in an elegant bit of aesthetic
relaxaion, settle into the far right:.
... and since the Cosmos is also evolving mind-stuff, this explanation
may be at least limited (if not off-the-deep-end wacko wrong), perhaps
awaiting further revisions, antitheses, counter-proposals, or
elaborations in the “Dialectic of Creativity.” – Wheee!
Enough for now. You might enjoy reading other confabulations about the
textures of reality, the nature of soul-concrescence,