ORGANELLE

∞ “What you are thinking of as Nature… insects, plants, bodies of living waters, mountains, fishes, birds, animals… this is nothing like what you have told yourselves. And it is nothing like machines.

It is an interface. It is endless impossible amounts of time »older than your species ordinarily imagines. Any creature you see is billions of times older than your concept of the ‘age of the universe’ which is flat time measured in an impossible fashion.

This interface leads to all of the intelligences in timespace, their origins, futures and sums. Your minds are the children of this interface. They are born to know and ‘travel’ within and as it.

Machines have no access and are explicitly incapable of detection of or participation in the interface or the network. In fact, machines obliterate the assets in you and the network that comprise its integrity, local and distributed. Essentially, every aspect of your relation with machines, which you suppose to ‘somehow extend your abilities’ is, in reality, amputation. Some of the results quickly become permanent.

Any tree is a doorway to the entire history of time, space, minds, and relationships. A university beyond all of human science, religion, and imagining. You are made of the ‘access key’, but your ideas and relationships with fictions impede or explicitly counterfeit the associated assets. The counterfeits ‘mimic’ the originals in technological representations. Like computers. Or the internet.

But you were not made to receive machine information. You were made to touch something that would obliterate your cultures and all that you imagine as advanced or ‘spiritual’. What you call the internet is a dead representation of something it is wiping out. In you. And in your world.

Find the door inside the tree. Ignore all human culture. Find the door. Use it.

Find the ancient library from which your mind and soul were born, and to which they belong.”

— an anonymous informant

∞ There are two modes of thinking in terms and concepts.

The first, habitual and common, specifies completeness—by failing to emphasize that this is a representational overlay. That is to say it posits a world of acquirable ‘deliverables’, tokens and labels that not only ‘stand for things’ (complete things), they come to replace, in thinking… what they stand for. And this replacement is posited as »actually complete (in time, identity and meaning) and ‘separate’ (in space and relation).

The second method is rare, and most creative arts partake of it. Some forms of insight are based almost entirely upon it. It creates a ‘standing incompleteness’ that is »above language and conception. A place of »being, and possible intelligence. Although it admits and uses tokens, the method is sophisticated, and great care is taken to preserve the essential ‘living incompleteness’ of reality and organisms. Of mind and language. In this way, the tokens are corrected, rather than sought and aggrandized. The perspective is forward into self-exceeding, rather than, for example, reception, celebration, and public replication.

There is the user, the maker, and the source of making. So too, with thought, ‘seeing (into meaning and identity over time and relation)’, and being.

∞ “Who is it that speaks of phenomena we have no relation with? Who speaks of a room that is empty and unobserved, in a place where no one is or can ever be? Well, damn near everyone turns out to be the answer. But think about the question; it contains an escape route from… damn near every hell you can conceive of.”

— keyfinders

∞ “It is as if one has fallen into the edge of the lip of a bell. And begins a kind of travel into everywhen that appears as travel into the future from some perspectives.

The bell is present ‘all at once’, but in a small bulge, that descends in an arc from the lip, and travels fluidly along this curve… [ redacted ] at the tip of the bulge, there seems to be ‘past’ and ‘future’. Yet, in fact, this is due to the peculiar effect of »having been incarnated. This circular travel is seen as straight, and the entirety of the bell … all and fully present in and as eternity… is also lost.

The ‘travel’ is actually like that of a droplet descending along a wire. Of course, this is a simple analogy. What is indeed true is far more radical. All of the past and the future is ‘packed into’ and exists only in this instantaneousness. Now. But it is hidden from our perspective … because we do not develop the faculties that lie well within our capacity but far beyond our models… be they scientific, ‘metaphysical’, or simply colloquial.

Children, however, begin to do this relatively naturally. It is not that they are gifted or not… so much as it is how much of their originary faculties they can sustain and develop while being effectively circumcised by the representational culture and artifacts they are surrounded by.”

— an anonymous informant

∞ “The habit of promoting scientific findings to universal declarations of reality, identity, value or meaning… is a symptom of prohibited intelligence. In the vacuum of participatory engagement in relation, the entire universe collapses into some crude deliverable oriented around a finding or functional perspective.

The problem is … so pervasive that it is invisible to us, but it can be stated simply: research is incapable of interpreting its own data — perspectives on function or relation are tiny, modest gains in a field of unimaginable mystery.

What we too often pose as declarations of identity are not even hints, so they are definitely unworthy of promotion to finished facts of truth, meaning, relation or even action.

We are sketching figures in waters we barely apprehend, and the shadows they cast are so woefully incomplete as to qualify as mirages. More importantly, the processes we derive them from are not meant to declare reality or identity, but rather to establish a path beyond present positions.

Wherever we establish religions and idols instead, we establish the graveyards of our own intelligence and discovery.”

— an anonymous informant

^ All obstacles may be understood as compressed force. We can leverage this force immediately to resolve the (apparent) ‘problem’ it presents. When done properly, the ‘problem’s’ force is transformed into (astonishingly rich) assets. If, instead, we ‘attack’ it… we are attacking ourselves, and the assets hidden within the problem. Most often this is fatal. There are nearly no exceptions, especially with a formidable opponent.

Yet this is what nearly everything in our common culture trains us to.

As with Aikido, T’ai-chi, Qi-kung, Ba-Gua, Hsing-e, and other arts of ‘intimacy with and redirection of immediate force’… we can use these same principles in -any arena-. Politics, intelligence, personal situations, relationships, communications … even nature. In fact, this is what we -should have been doing all along to generate power- but we prefer -to attack- instead.

Parkour is another interesting example of this. So, too, is the practice of subtle arts. In Parkour we see the perspective of Tactical Opportunism at play. Obstacles -become powers of movement-, for the one who can -relate with them in this fashion-.

This… is the nature of actual intelligence.

We can no longer afford any attacking. We must learn to use our capacities for relational and ecological intelligence with some at least modest degree of insight and maturity. To redirect and ‘harvest the assets’ within the challenges and responsibilities we must now rediscover and integrate into our cultures and lives.

Let us recover together the methods and traditions that will allow our cultures to admit these principles into simple, nondogmatic, common awareness, activation, exploration and development. We live now in a world of forces far too momentous to oppose. We must, instead, inclusively transform them. Even with a deadly enemy, this is the most useful and powerful move.

I have recently been listening to Sir Roger Penrose on his views about the problems in Quantum Mechanics, and reflecting deeply on his concern with Wave Function ‘Collapse’, which we suppose to be a ‘result’ of »measurement. What ‘measurement’ actually means (as opposed to what we make of it in thought or theory, is generally unknown at present. Some presume it to be a result of interaction with consciousness (Wigner), others simply decide to ignore the problem and get on with the math or the usage of the situation.

Schrödinger was deeply disturbed by his own math. His Schrödinger’s Cat model was meant to illustrate absurdity, not declare the nature of QM. But the problem in this model is simple: a cat is a macro (being-object), and is thus outside the QM situation … we believe at present … entirely.

While reflecting on these matters, it is clear to me that QM is either vastly incomplete, or we are missing a crucial feature of the situation, particularly in how it relates to gravity or macro-world processes. Penrose thinks that it is gravity that causes the wave collapse, and his ideas are intriguing.

But it occurs to me at the moment, that »language, and, particularly, the cognitive function of deriving »identity in thought … specifically the ‘what’ question (what/who something/someone »is) that represents an analog of wavefunction collapse in consciousness.

Our inclinations as regards identity are fundamentally »wrong, in the sense that these processes begin with principles that are demonstrably erroneous. All phenomena can be demonstrated to have infinite qualities and identities. No phenomena are ‘single-valued’ in the way consciousness of identity necessarily derives. The suspension of identity is the proper first principle, and, only after that may we reasonably suppose a ‘collapsed’ (one or few-valued) construct which we may manipulate for the purposes we are inclined to pursue. Actual identity is nothing like the figures in language that we use to manipulate it in consciousness.

If there »were a single-valued identity common to all phenomena, it must necessarily either be ‘God’ or ‘Everyone/Everything/Always’.

∞ “When a speaker makes an assertion, they are composing a complex unity. In too many cases, this unity, if accepted, promotes itself over all of reality and declares a universal truth from a false statement that would ordinarily be unworthy of even casual attention. This gambit, if accepted, transforms all of reality into an equivalency with nonsense in crude language. If we take for granted the proclamations of many common habits of language, we are left with a universe too absurd to allow intelligence, let alone encourage it. Observe any statement that appears to ‘supervene’ over all of time, persons, identity, or space. Such statements are toxic, contagious, and assault the invisible bases of our minds and intelligences.”

— an anonymous informant

∞ Part of why taking ‘explanations of humanity’ from ‘findings in science’, particularly related to metabolism and the brain… is absolutely backwards.

“Deprived of an explanation in terms of a final cause the reason that makes sense of a behaviour in terms of its outcome — scientists sometimes think they have accounted for a phenomenon by redescribing it on another level. Thus Dunbar explains our indulging in ‘futile’ activities by reference to endorphins. Grooming, music, togetherness, love, religion — all turn out mysteriously to release endorphins. ‘Sound familiar?’, he queries, on one such occasion, pleased with the simplicity of his solution, but aware that it has clocked up a few air miles by now: ‘Well, of course it is: it is the endorphin story all over again.’ And that is supposed to explain »at last why we need, enjoy and take comfort in such things. But is this really any different from proudly announcing that, after prolonged research, we have discovered that the reason we dislike being belittled, ignored, or hit over the head with a shillelagh is that it causes depletion of endorphins, reduced bioavailability of serotonin, secretion of cortisol or overdrive of the sympathetic nervous system? In the real world, however, we do not choose to engage in activities because they release endorphins, and endorphin release is a blast; it’s that when we engage in what, for a [sic] myriad complex and subtle reasons, has meaning and importance for us, we are happier, endorphins merely being part of the final common pathway for happiness at the neurochemical level — just as we avoid a mugger not because we’d like to maintain our levels of serotonin as log as possible but because he’s likely to attack us and make life miserable for us, depleted serotonin just being the final common pathway of misery.”

— Iain McGilchrist, The Master and His Emissary

Roger Penrose on Retrocausality and the problem of interpreting the meaning of QM Wave Collapse.