You have to think about this carefully though. On the one hand, for there to be choice makers, in the form of meaning processors at all, how can further structuring, to keep them going, not be allowed? Or expressed another way, we are meant to express because that's what happens when you make meaning objects, you express new representations of a new realizations, transformed of many levels of either energy, or mass, out of this vector, of experience association, we must assume has to keep doing something. We have to assume that or how else do we justify the idea of a self sustaining, iterative process at all?
The kicker to keep in mind here, though, is this: do too much in too close a concentration and you risk going back to a singularity. Do too little, over too much expansion, and you risk settling out to the last moment of a cosmos that did nothing much different, for far too long, to keep differential going at all.
That means finding the right sweet spot, along the right angle of attack, to keep creating something that allows you to keep the vector of expansion (of the what and when, or now the new plane of objectifying layer) going. Which also then begs the question of can we get outside our own, originating, objecticating resolution system? And of course the answer is: anything is possible because we also exist in the ultimate, unbounded entirety itself; which has the amazing property of infinite potential. So if we are fundamental to the duality of energy, and we are also, fundamentally, residents of the ultimate of our Elemental Intents: That thing for which no further objectification can be done. A thing, like zero itself, has to be a part of a well functioning Cosmological Model.
In any case, though, the point here is that you can now define "progress" in a lot of different ways. Ways you might not think of if you didn't read a lot of speculative fiction. Read that, though, and you realize that there are indeed a lot of ways we can try to do "progress."
There is one line of thought that suggests that, instead of going out, and seeing all manner of environment that does not suit us, and change it to one that does, why not change ourselves to better live in the environments we find; from which you see people doing genetic manipulation so that they can become the most wondrous of new forms of "meaning processor;" ones that might live in various layers of the upper atmospheres of gas giants, for instance; able to survive the hard radiation, perhaps float as some form of lighter than air leviathan, finding an energy to mass translation chain for sustaining ourselves in whatever convenient interaction matrix is up there, at those levels to be had. And there are lots of other examples as well, even a lot more fantastic than that.
Another line of thought might go like this: Suppose you took what I like to call the idealized frontiersman's way of life. Not the usual frontiersman that came, in large part, to find new places where wild game could be hunted, and the firs (or whatever other resource) exploited, but the one suggested by Hawkeye in "Last Of The Mohicans." The frontiersman who knew how to listen to the native people; didn't want to crowd them too much, and who also wanted to not concentrate all that much; because too many people, too much society, and too many rules; as well as which too many men who could see the beauty of nature only as a means for more power. That kind of Frontiersman, and that kind of limited development, and then explore to expand some more; that might be the balanced approach to reaching into every solar system, in every galaxy we can find. You certainly could think credibly that you could do that kind of expansion for quite a while. But truly indefinitely? But then, at those time scales are we worrying about how many angles can dance on the head of a pin?
Then there is the line of thought I have already suggested, and one, I have to admit, I am the more partial to. And that is that our angle of attack itself must change so that we see not not only expanding out, or conforming to, as an option, but one where we find the way to bend our imaginations around it just far enough so that we can grasp a new handle; a handle that cannot possible exist in this plane of objectification, but could in the next layer out because that is, somehow, where we experienced it; and experienced it so deeply that it allows us to make powerful suggestions to both sides of the Mind, Elemental Embrace, meaning space dichotomy. Suggestions so powerful, and the handle so complete, in fact, in its meaning makeup, that physical meaning space just makes it happen because it doesn't, in the larger frame of reference, break any unbreakable rules. A presto digi chango, are you then expressed, as a complete identity, will, soul, memory, dichotomy balancing system, sustaining itself in the laws that must necessarily come into place, in this new layer, to make your elegant new, existing self, work. And from within which you will begin creating a whole new kind of expressive possibility.
The science fiction books, and shows, have usually referenced this sort of line of progress in terms like "ascension;" which seems a bit too limiting to me. It suggests to me too much of a necessarily religious tone to the whole thing. Not that a religious avenue couldn't be possible, mind you, just that it is not at all the only avenue. One might ascend in a lot of ways, for a lot of reasons, and create quite different, new, higher layer, objectifying realms; which might then go off on their own, emphasize working with the lower level realities, or perhaps some combination of both (with there probably being other options I haven't even begun to consider yet).
Or is a particular vector of association, or a particular meaning processor for that matter, meant to process indefinitely at all? Anything is possible when self sustaining process is suggested at almost every metaphoric level one can think of. And we live in infinite potential, And we are a fundamental intent. And everything is relative.
How long, actually, is indefinitely? And how many different types of you might there then become, in an unbelievable sequence of being reborn in one sense or another. Is it really the same life, or self sustaining process that continues on? Or just a quite different version of you... To the point of maybe only remembering the slightest details of which; as a new visual icon to mark a new sense of time.
Like I always say, time, or some new sense of process altogether, will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment