\u201cDrawing on, but moving beyond deep ecology, Mathews (The Ecological Self, 1991) presents a metaphysical and ethical explanation for the concept that all-is-one. Mathews draws heavily on systems theory, the work of the philosopher Spinoza, and Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity including geometro-dynamics, to present an argument she suggests is at this present time ‘speculative’ and undogmatic.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Yes, it would be nice to dialogue with Freya again, but we see all the time,\u00a0 in science as often as in philosophy, where two \u2018specialists\u2019 talk excitedly to one another on topics they are both \u2018tuned\u2019 to, and it sounds like absolute gibberish to everyone around them.\u00a0 I like the poem of Edna St. Vincent Millay in this regard;<\/p>\n \u201cUpon this gifted age, in its dark hour,<\/em> Wisdom enough to leech us of our ill<\/em> Edna St Vincent Millay, From Huntsman, What Quarry? (1939)<\/em><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Anyhow, I have never studied Spinoza and while deeply interested in the concepts in physics and modern physics, and the philosophical issues therein and there-around, I have never done a course in tensor calculus (my \u2018formal\u2019 physics education stopped with vectors).\u00a0 Meanwhile, I ravenously consume everything in sight on the \u2018concepts\u2019 that associate with Spinoza\u2019s philosophy and with relativity and quantum physics.<\/p>\n The basic concepts are pretty simple and have been around for ever and we continue to struggle with them in different ways, and that\u2019s what Freya does and what I do too.\u00a0 That is, how do we explain the One-and-the-Many?\u00a0 What is the difference between our human \u2018self\u2019 and a \u2018rock\u2019; i.e. does a rock \u2018have purpose\u2019 or does it just sit there and let itself be \u2018worked over\u2019 by the rest of the cosmos?\u00a0 And how about \u2018us\u2019, what is the relationship between how the cosmos \u2018works us over\u2019 and how we \u2018purposively\u2019 push forth out of the centre of ourselves?<\/p>\n When we start thinking about such complexity, we may tend to say; \u2018what the hell, let\u2019s just take life as it comes, and make the best of it\u2019.<\/p>\n But the \u2018fly in the ointment\u2019 is that both as individuals and as collectives, we somehow keep doing stupid stuff that has horrendous effects on people who are in the wrong place at the wrong time, not to mention animals, insects, oceans and atmospheres (and rocks).<\/p>\n That is, while we human beings have done amazing things through \u2018organisation\u2019 (by families, communities and nations, and now globally, by trans-national corporations and NGOs), amplifying our faculties of reach (global economy), vision (global tv), communications (global internet), touch (ICBMs and drones loaded with bombs etc.), … we suffer from something we call \u2018intellection\u2019.<\/p>\n Intellection employs the notion of \u2018past\u2019, \u2018present\u2019 and \u2018future\u2019.\u00a0 This brings us back to the notion of \u2018purpose\u2019, and the associated notions of mission, vision, strategies, goals and objectives.<\/p>\n [[N.B. Intellectual structures proceed from some assumption of the present (‘initial conditions) and use some ‘theory’ to calculate how things will unfold in the future.\u00a0 The theory is generally formulated by assuming that the present depends only on the immediate past (forget about avalanches and earthquakes and buildups of energy in the distant past that release much later to directly influence what goes on in the present).\u00a0\u00a0 It is impossible to capture what really is the current state of affairs in specifying ‘initial conditions’, for example, what about all the cycles of spatial spring-loading (ex-tensional and tensional) that goes on?\u00a0 So, the specified ‘initial conditions’ are not the ‘true initial conditions’.\u00a0 But, never mind, science has this technique called ‘the experiment’ that it uses to ‘validate theory’ by establishing some ‘initial conditions’, capturing some of the perturbations to the system, and measuring whether the unfolding future (as measured relative to the ‘initial conditions’) corresponds to the theoretically predicted unfolding future. \u00a0 A professor of English, Marshall McLuhan, put the limitations of ‘experiment’ in their proper context when he noted that an experiment wherein we set up Cadillac and\/or cornflakes producing systems, specifying initial conditions and the perturbations to the system, will indeed confirm that the unfolding future does indeed correspond to theory, but only in the limited sense of what we specify for ‘initial conditions’ and therefore what we ‘track’ through the before and after unfolding.\u00a0 If we are interested in the ‘real world dynamic’ in which the experiment is necessarily included, the transformation of our relations with one another and the environment, as a result of conducting the experiment, are intrinsically more important (the experiment is a subsystem that transforms the suprasystem it is included in and its influence on the suprasystem cannot possible be accounted for in the experiment\/system) .\u00a0 As the scientist announces to the world how his experiment exactly confirms his theory, indicating that he really does know what he is talking about, he explains this from within a circle of confusion of media reporters streaming in from around the world and satellite transmitter trucks that are destroying the floral ecosystems\u00a0 on the laboratory grounds, announcing with great confidence how we are increasing the precision with which we\u00a0 understand what goes on in the world.\u00a0 This is a local causal agent ‘forcing’ view which, thanks to the implicit imposing of an absolute space frame, ignores the participation of the dynamic space it is included in’]] <\/span><\/p>\n The \u2018organisation\u2019 associated with \u2018intellection\u2019 is unlike that of the \u2018rock\u2019 which is always \u2018in the now\u2019 of sky-valley’s forcing of changes in the rocky terrain, and worried only about the possibility of a rough ride\u00a0 (ouch!) and perhaps undergoing some crude form of reproduction in the process, members of the family lineage becoming progressively smaller (a chip off the old block), though gaining mobility in the process, perhaps enough for travel towards the coast with its beach-bars and deep-sea diving.<\/p>\n No, \u2018intellection\u2019 is the source of people running around frenetically in the present, directed by a voice on high<\/span>, … by, a vision of a desired future (a \u2018voice-in-here\u2019); i.e. by a goal or objective.\u00a0 Of course, people are \u2018bumping into one another\u2019 all over the place because these \u2018visions of the future\u2019 vary greatly.<\/p>\n Only if we remove [or consolidate within the present] the influence of the future and the past do we get to see what we humans are like without \u2018intellection\u2019.\u00a0 Of course, as infants we start off this way, but unfortunately we are at that point unable to share what we are experiencing.<\/p>\n But there are clues, such as when a group of people are convinced the world as they know it is coming to an end.\u00a0 Then they want to love and cuddle and protect those close to them.\u00a0 In other words, they revert to behaving \u2018like animals\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 This was the case in Concrete, Washington when Orson Welles did his famous radio program \u2018War of the Worlds\u2019 stunt.\u00a0 In Concrete (a small town in the hills near Bellingham),<\/p>\n \u201cSeattle CBS affiliate stations KIRO and KVI broadcast Orson Welles’ radio drama. While this broadcast was heard around the country, it made a deep impact in Concrete, Washington.\u00a0 At the point where the Martian invaders were invading towns and the countryside with flashes of light and poison gases and the lights were going down, there was a loud explosion and a power failure plunged almost the entire town of 1,000 into darkness. Some listeners fainted while others grabbed their families to head into the mountains.\u201d\u00a0 — Wikipedia<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n People had no use for \u2018money\u2019 or anything of non-immediate value in that circumstance and they shifted out of their \u2018destination orientation\u2019 and invested fully in the unfolding journey.<\/p>\n Another situation where we can \u2018get a look at ourselves\u2019 as if \u2018without intellect\u2019, is where we have our hands so full of dealing with the unfolding present that we don\u2019t have anything much left over for mission, vision, strategies, goals and objectives.\u00a0 This is the situation with the Nenets, Inuits and Saami people of the Arctic.\u00a0\u00a0 They are pretty much fully focused in their engaging with the unfolding present.\u00a0 In fact, this distinguishes them from we \u2018urban dwellers\u2019 who are protected by technological shells to the point that we can sit around in our air-conditioned apartment and tally up the money we are going to receive when we retire forty years from now, and plan what we are going to do with our lives at that time.<\/p>\n Researchers into the social dynamics of the Nenets have shown that their behaviour is not primarily \u2018knowledge-driven\u2019 but \u2018cosmically forced\u2019, meaning that as the climate changes, and as the migratory patterns of the reindeer (which nest inclusionally within the climate) correspondingly change, the Nenets let their social dynamic patterns change accordingly.\u00a0 That is, they let their movements and behaviours be orchestrated by the dynamics of the space (habitat) in which they share inclusion (with the reindeer etc.).<\/p>\n The \u2018picture\u2019 here is one in which \u2018nature is alive\u2019 in a spatial sense and the Nenets see themselves as \u2018participants\u2019 in these spatial dynamics.\u00a0 The same used to be true of the Inuits, however, as part of a western program (e.g. Canadian government program) \u00a0to \u2018acculturate\u2019 (\u2018civilize?\u2019) \u00a0the Inuits, the nomadic aspects of their lives have been traded out for living in permanent settlements and using technology (snowmobiles) for foraging expeditions, insofar as they do not wish to live on government subsidies entirely.<\/p>\n So, it is hard to get a peek into who humans are when they set their intellect aside and \u2018become like animals\u2019, except for the odd situations like the Nenets of the European and Siberian Arctic and the people of Concrete Washington (situations wherein the future, which was the animating source of their behaviour in the present by way of \u2018intellection\u2019, is demoted from its powerful behaviour-orchestrating primacy) during that time they entered into the future-less reality given to them by Orson Welles and company, back in 1939, during his \u2018War of the Worlds\u2019 broadcast.<\/p>\n The results for \u2018humans as animals\u2019 who have cast off \u2018intellection\u2019 based on \u2018mission, vision, strategies and objectives\u2019 is really not all that bad.\u00a0 In fact, many urban dwellers have had a hankering to go back to living in a \u2018cosmically forced\u2019 manner of the Nenets and traditional Inuits.\u00a0 They deem it \u2018more real\u2019 that the current \u2018bullshit society\u2019 that they find themselves currently woven into.\u00a0 A recent film, \u2018Into the Wild\u2019, directed by Sean Penn, brings out this desire in (many of) us to, like Christopher McCandless (the real person the story is about)\u00a0 break free of the expectations of urban society and let \u2018who we are\u2019 emerge for ourselves to see and feel, in our direct engaging with the \u2018cosmic forcing\u2019 of nature.<\/p>\n As one of the actresses (Marcia Gay Harden) says of what the film brought forth in her;<\/p>\n \u201cI felt a very, very deep yearning to remember what my voice is like for that quiet place within, and understanding that society … is this magnet that sucks us to march to a specific formula in time and that, .. FREEDOM, that the boy gave himself… and I mean, FREEDOM is a word that is as expansive as the spelling … a beginning and a middle and an end, and it\u2019s an amazing word, and I feel like, WOW, what would it be like to have FREEDOM again,\u00a0 in that spirit, of the soul, of the spirit, and of time\u00a0 … and it most likely would absolutely exist in nature because there you\u2019re unfettered by other people\u2019s opinions of who you should be and what you should be, …\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n What Chris McCandless was looking for, which Marcia is acknowledging, was \u2018what the Nenets have\u2019, this freedom to directly engage with the cosmic forcing influences and allow these to bring out \u2018who you are\u2019 in the unfolding now, rather than being driven from within by a whole lot of social theories and civilized concepts as to the \u2018correct\u2019 way to govern yourself in the artificial shell that modern civilization has set up for itself, where FREEDOM is understood as \u2018freeing ourselves from direct engaging with the cosmic forcing influences\u2019 so that we can be driven entirely from within, kind of like a wind-up toy in playland, or like the passenger in the luxurious comfort of the restaurants, casinos, bars and ballroom in the belly of the Titanic, where the protocols of the rich and powerful are the social dynamic \u2018forcing influences\u2019<\/p>\n Anyhow, without writing a book or a film, one is challenged to find a way to share concepts that require modifications to the old cognitive engine in order to be \u2018heard\u2019.\u00a0 And, again, the unmodified cognitive engine will definitely \u2018hear something\u2019 but without modifying itself, what it hears will be a highly bastardized version of what is being intended.<\/p>\n So, my \u2018mission\u2019, …. whoops, did I really say \u2018mission\u2019, … let\u2019s replace that with \u2018challenge\u2019, … in the essay \u2018The Invisible Spatial Origins of Material Dynamics\u2019, is to invite the reader to temporarily suspend his \u2018standard acculturated cognitive engine\u2019 and reconfigure it a bit (but in the gizmo that deals with profundities) so as to be able to \u2018see\u2019 what would otherwise not be seen, … kind of like putting on some 3D glasses to see a 3D movie.<\/p>\n Now, this is not too bad an analogy because the modern 3D technology (on television screens) allows you to see TWO DIFFERENT\u00a0 DYNAMIC SCENARIOS AT THE SAME TIME.\u00a0 That is, every alternate \u2018frame\u2019 on the screen presents the same scene viewed from a different angle the immediately preceding (or following) frame and the electronic glasses behave like rapid shutters so that the left eye sees only the one series of frames which are viewed from the left and the right eye sees only the series of frames viewed from the right.<\/p>\n In the case of the subject matter in the essay, we are trying to comprehend two dynamic scenarios at that same time; (a) cosmic forcing of the dynamic, and, (b) local internal forcing of the dynamic.<\/p>\n The thing is, both of these, evidently, are going on at the same time, in any and all dynamics in our real-life experience.<\/p>\n This is why there is a \u2018silver lining\u2019 in the \u2018global warming debates\u2019 because it is now getting our serious attention, using the \u2018earth\u2019 in place of our \u2018self\u2019 (as Nietzsche observed, science seems to be anthropomorphism in that we understand the experiences of \u2018things\u2019 in terms of how we understand our own experiences).<\/p>\n That is, some scientists argue that the earth\u2019s climate is (a) cosmically forced wherein we would be talking about the earth being included in the spatial dynamic in the manner that the hurricane is included in the flow of the atmosphere, and\/or, (b) internal process forced wherein we would be talking about the earth as a \u2018local system\u2019 with \u2018its own locally originating (internal-process driven) behaviour.<\/p>\n Well, as it turns out, we have this same \u2018questions\u2019 as to the nature of \u2018ourselves\u2019; i.e. is our behaviour \u2018cosmically forced\u2019 or is it \u2018internal process [biophysics, biochemistry] forced?<\/p>\n Evidently, we do need something like \u20183D glasses\u2019, and if this is the case, why has Nature not provided us with them?<\/p>\n Who says Nature hasn\u2019t provided us with them.\u00a0 Maybe we have just forgotten how to use them.<\/p>\n That indeed is the suggestion in \u2018The Invisible Spatial Origins of Material Dynamics\u2019, which starts off talking about \u2018The Theory of Communication\u2019 of Dennis Gabor.\u00a0\u00a0 The space we live in has \u2018quality\u2019 and this varies spatially.\u00a0 If the quality of the space we are in changes, this can orchestrate our actions, and give rise to \u2018nomadism\u2019.<\/p>\n What we \u2018see\u2019 is \u2018people on the move\u2019, but the Nenet people say that it is their practice to continually accommodate environmental change, while a modern man of the urban world, like the passenger on board the Titanic, would claim that he is fully and solely\u00a0 responsible for his own movements. .<\/p>\n So which is it to be?<\/p>\n Gabor put things in a different light.\u00a0 He spoke of \u2018time language\u2019 and \u2018frequency\u2019 language, not as if these were mutually exclusive languages but that they were \u2018talking about the same thing\u2019 in different ways.\u00a0 He picked up on this at a time where quantum physics was coming into vogue, and where Heisenberg\u2019s Uncertainty Principle was causing everyone to scratch their heads.\u00a0 At the time Schroedinger insisted that the world dynamic was a resonant phenomenon and there were no \u2018quantum leaps\u2019; i.e. they were only \u2018appearances\u2019.\u00a0 Mathematically, one could argue the case both ways (one put waves first and the other put particles first, but both satisfied quantum mechanics).<\/p>\n Schroedinger \u2018lost the argument\u2019 but as the saying goes; \u2018The majority has no monopoly on the truth\u2019, and Schroedinger\u2019s view was arguably \u2018stronger\u2019 since it deals with the two options at once, rather than dropping out a lot of essential understanding.<\/p>\n That is, if one understands \u2018space\u2019 as a \u2018plenum\u2019 (an energy-filled spring-loaded medium), then particles can be understood in the analogy to \u2018convection-cells\u2019 in a fluid flow (energy-field-flow) which are not only animated by spatial resonances but which are created by them.\u00a0 In this sense \u2018particles\u2019 or \u2018material bodies\u2019 are secondary \u2018affects\u2019 or \u2018appearances\u2019.\u00a0 This agrees with Bohm\u2019s view, the holodynamic view etc. etc.<\/p>\n Gabor was coming from communications theory where one has the same sort of options between \u2018solid content\u2019 and \u2018harmonic medium\u2019.\u00a0 For example, any amplitude versus time plot (including the global temperature plot used by climatologists) can be understood as a composite sum of harmonics of different amplitude and frequency.\u00a0\u00a0 This different interpretation of some measurement (any measurement) plotted against time has been brought up a lot in geology.\u00a0 Hence J. Barrell\u2019s suggestion that the \u2018cycles\u2019 of sediment deposition are tied to the cyclic nature of climate;<\/p>\n Of course, one might say that Barrell was starting off from some assumptions as to the basic character of Nature, as a resonant phenomenon, much as Schroedinger had been (and Herclitus and Pythagorus and the Orpheatics, before him); That is, Barrell, in his paper \u201cRhythms and the Measurements of Geologic Time\u2019, observed;<\/p>\n \u201cNature vibrates with rhythms, climatic and diastrophic, those finding stratigraphic expression ranging in period from rapid oscillation of surface waters, recorded in ripple-mark, to those long-deferred strirrings of the deep imprisoned titans which have divided earth history into periods and eras.\u00a0\u00a0 …. Nature pulsates with many rhythms, small and large, fast and slow. Their combination gives a varied curve which, if the rhythms are incommensurable in period, may never recur in quite the same combination.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n So, if nature is an essentially resonant phenomena, as Schroedinger and Barrell would have it, what happens to \u2018time-based measurements\u2019?<\/p>\n Well, as Gabor made clear, with his \u2018complex signal\u2019 based Theory of Communications, which, by the way, is implicitly foundational to all kinds of 3D imaging techniques in seismology and in medicine (body scans etc.); i.e. IT WORKS, … the \u2018time language\u2019 turns out to be the \u2018real component\u2019 of \u2018the complex information signal\u2019.\u00a0 That is, it is a \u2018reduction of the real-natural phenomena\u2019 to the \u2018real-mathematical\/intellectual plane\u2019; i.e. it is a reduced partial view of things.<\/p>\n Well, didn\u2019t we always know, intuitively (without the explicit details) that our actions can bring on \u2018repercussions\u2019 so that what we actually do, and thus \u2018what is visible\u2019 fails to take into account that we are letting our behaviour be orchestrated by these \u2018rhythms\u2019 that Barrell is talking about?<\/p>\n How, then, can we take for \u2018reality\u2019 what we can visibly see playing out \u2018in time\u2019? \u00a0The answer is, \u2018we can\u2019t\u2019, not if nature is intrinsically resonance-based phenomena.<\/p>\n So, back to global warming, what is the meaning of the \u2018temperature curve\u2019? \u00a0Henrik Svensmark, the weather scientist at the Danish National Space Centre claims that cloud cover is a resonance based phenomena and that the resonance is from cosmic forcing rather than being \u2018forced\u2019 from within the earth;<\/p>\n \u201cHenrik Svensmark, …. believes the planet is experiencing a NATURAL PERIOD of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere. \u00a0… This, he says, is responsible for much of the \u2018global warming\u2019 we are experiencing. — \u201cIt was long thought that clouds were caused by climate change, but now we see that climate change is driven by clouds.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n So it\u2019s \u2018back to the cosmic forcing notion\u2019 once again, at least according to Svensmark, and that means that we can\u2019t interpret the temperature versus time curve in the standard causal terms, whereby the present depends only on the immediate past, as in \u2018greenhouse gas climate forcing\u2019.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s face it, these two different interpretations as to the source of dynamic behaviour, (a) cosmic forcing, and (b) local forcing, are always cropping up. \u00a0Schroedinger was pissed off till the day he died with the likes of Max Born, Heisenberg, Einstein and the rest having promoted their view in the global scientist membership club, and thus in the media and in the school textbooks etc.<\/p>\n Gabor\u2019s communications theory, which provides reconciliation of the two views, was never taken serious (it was published in 1944-1946 period) until his \u2018holography theory\u2019 (which follows from his communications theory) was actually demonstrated when laser technology arrived in the 1960s.\u00a0 So Gabor got his Nobel prize in physics in 1971, about 25 years or more \u2018after the fact\u2019.<\/p>\n In Gabor\u2019s paper, he uses the analogy of the dynamo (two sets of crossed poles) where the harmonic motion derives from the relationship between a \u2018rotating vector\u2019 (the visible local movement [of the rotor]) and a \u2018rotating field\u2019, the invisible field-flow or \u2018cosmic forcing\u2019).<\/p>\n We can always describe this motion in terms of the most visible eye-attracting movement, as with the pinwheel motion of the hurricane, and this is what we tend to do.\u00a0 But the dynamic cannot be fully comprehended as a \u2018local movement in time\u2019 (where we plot the position of some thing at successive times).\u00a0 The \u2018cosmic forcing\u2019 (associated with the spatial energy-plenum or \u2018field-flow\u2019) must also be taken account of.<\/p>\n These are not \u2018two different dynamics\u2019 but \u2018one dynamic\u2019 in which the \u2018movement in time\u2019 (the changing position in time of a local object) is, as Schroedinger would say, \u2018schaumkommen\u2019, \u2018appearances\u2019.\u00a0 Space is moving at the same time (it is \u2018energy-field-flow\u2019) but we have a trick to select out the \u2018local object, organism or \u2018system\u2019\u2019, to define it and name-label it, and thus to axiomatically affirm its local existence, and then go on to describe the dynamics of local objects (that we have invented, but which are in fact \u2018dynamic figures in the ceaselessly transforming \u2018dynamic ground\u2019), these \u2018time-based\u2019 dynamics, AS IF THEY WERE REAL when the truth is that they are the MOST EYE-ATTRACTING DYNAMIC PHENOMENA, but certainly NOT REAL but \u2018appearances\u2019 that we have idealised using the \u2018invariable solids of geometry\u2019 (abstraction) as dependent foundations for our \u2018belief\u2019 in their \u2018realness\u2019.\u00a0 \u00a0As Vladimir Tasic observes;<\/p>\n \u201cSo \u201cobjects\u201d are implicitly assumed to be invariable bodies. Therefore the axioms of geometry already contain an irreducible assumption which does not follow from the axioms themselves. Axiomatic systems provide us with \u201cfaulty definitions\u201d of objects, definitions that are grounded not in formal logic but in a hypothesis \u2014 a \u201cprejudice\u201d as Hans-Georg Gadamer might say \u2014 that is prior to logic. As a corollary, our logic of identity cannot be said to be necessary and universally valid. \u201cSuch axioms,\u201d says Poincar\u00e9, \u201cwould be utterly meaningless to a being living in a world in which there are only fluids.\u201d\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n This brings us back to the \u2018real world\u2019 of today which any one of us could capture in similar words to Marcia Gay Harden, in regard to what was common in the experience of Christopher McCandless as re-enacted in the film \u2018Into the Wild\u2019; i.e. the yearning to engage directly with the \u2018cosmic forcing\u2019;<\/p>\n \u201cI felt a very, very deep yearning to remember what my voice is like for that quiet place within, and understanding that society … is this magnet that sucks us to march to a specific formula in time and that, .. FREEDOM, that the boy gave himself… and I mean, FREEDOM is a word that is as expansive as the spelling … a beginning and a middle and an end, and it\u2019s an amazing word, and I feel like, WOW, what would it be like to have FREEDOM again,\u00a0 in that spirit, of the soul, of the spirit, and of time\u00a0 … and it most likely would absolutely exist in nature because there you\u2019re unfettered by other people\u2019s opinions of who you should be and what you should be, …\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Nenet that takes a trip on the Titanic is unlikely to stay below decks [for too long] in the bars and casinos, charming the girls and playing roulette, and making out as if\u00a0 his behaviour is fully and solely locally driven, from his internal knowledge and purpose, … a purpose constituted by mission, vision, strategies, goals and objectives, such as getting the pretty girl into bed before the ship docks in New York.\u00a0 No, the Nenet or Inuit will certainly be impressed by the technology of the Titanic, but he will never forget that \u2018nature is in charge\u2019 and he will be up on the deck smelling for icebergs, and reminding himself that \u2018whereever he goes\u2019, he has no choice as to being included in the cosmic forcing and to be engaging with it.\u00a0 And no rich man or pretty girl is going to make him \u2018flip\u2019 his priorities and put his time-based mission, vision, strategies, goals and objectives into \u2018first place\u2019, in which case his engaging with the cosmic forcing would be occluded and denied.\u00a0 [to the Nenet, intuitive engaging with the cosmic forcing comes first and intellection is something that you take along on the ride with you, it does not determine the ride and demote intuition to secondary status]<\/p>\n Like those with a \u2018sailboating psyche\u2019, the Nenet will never forget that his form, power and steerage all derive from the dynamics of space he is included in, and thus he will sustain his \u2018voyage-in-the-transforming-present\u2019 orientation and not be taken over by a \u2018powerboating psyche\u2019 in which one assumes that one\u2019s form, power and steerage derive locally and internally from one\u2019s onboard systems; i.e. that one\u2019s behaviour is local-self-forced\u2019, a time-based destination-oriented view in which the space one is included in is psychologically reduced to a vacuum or to a troublesome impediment to the attaining of one\u2019s mission, vision, strategies, goals and objectives-based destination..<\/p>\n For those that do let themselves be taken over by a \u2018powerboating psyche\u2019, it follows naturally<\/span>, … er, … robotically\/intellectually, that, this time-based or \u2018destination-oriented\u2019 way of thinking is how \u2018the rest of the world works\u2019 as well, even to the point of attributing to \u2018the earth\u2019 its own locally originating (internal-process-driven) behaviour.<\/p>\n And so we have the current \u2018global warming debate\u2019 as to whether the climate is \u2018cosmically forced\u2019 or \u2018locally forced\u2019, and if Nietzsche is correct in saying that science is anthropomorphism, those who believe that they are firstly and foremostly \u2018locally forced\u2019 will opt for the earth\u2019s climate being \u2018locally forced\u2019 and those who believe that they are firstly and foremostly \u2018cosmically forced\u2019 will opt for the earth\u2019s climate being \u2018cosmically forced\u2019.<\/p>\n Sharing ideas like this is a problem if we hold on too strongly to our everyday \u2018cognitive engines\u2019 without being willing to tinker around with them a bit. \u00a0But if one does tinker around, one can tune one\u2019s cognitive engine in a manner similar to the 3D television technology whereby it is possible to [REGAIN OUR NATURAL ABILITY TO] see, at the same time (a) cosmic forcing and (b) local internal forcing [appearances], in which case there is really no need for a wakeup call of the nature of the Titanic bumping into an iceberg or Orson Welles\u2019 dramatization of War of the Worlds, wherein \u2018the future is cancelled’ and is no longer available as the director of today\u2019s behaviours (as it most intensively is in our urbanized, civilized society).\u00a0 The Inuit who goes out to chase walruses in a kayak is not going to be in need of such a \u2018wake-up\u2019 call since the future for him is \u2018right now\u2019, and if he even lets the orchestrator of his behaviour slip off into the future for merely the length of time it takes to cook up a pot of walrus soup, he may himself become food for the walrus.<\/p>\n * * *<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" What was I thinking when I wrote \u2018The Invisible Spatial Origins of Material Dynamics\u2019?. The assimilation of ideas of others is an everyday activity, and, most often, the \u2018cognitive engine\u2019 we employ in this activity is \u2018untouched\u2019 by the ideas we are \u2018processing\u2019, but in philosophical discourse, it often happens that there are ideas that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-502","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-apn","count-0","even alt","author-emile","last"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/502","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=502"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/502\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":505,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/502\/revisions\/505"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=502"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=502"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=502"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nRains from the sky a meteoric shower<\/em>
\nOf facts\u2026they lie unquestioned, uncombined.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n
\nIs daily spun; but there exists no loom<\/em>
\nTo weave it into fabric\u2026\u201d<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n![\"sedimentation-curves\"](\"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/01\/sedimentation-curves.jpg\" "\\"sedimentation-curves\\"")
<\/p>\n