Existence

The definition I use is...
Existent = energy, i.e., dynamic, interactive.
All that exists is interactive, dynamic.
Energy is the term that encompasses this without implying anything mystical or supernatural.



Another way to describe it is as "vibration" - in 4 dimensional space/time - or oscillation - in multidimensional space/time.

Interaction implies attraction/repulsion as the two types of interacting - relating.
Attraction/repulsion is not either/or but simultaneous - degree.

We say something attracts when the degree of repulsion is exceeded by the degree of attraction.
What does attraction - and repulsion - mean?
Harmony.
When a vibration/osculation is more in harmony with another they attract; when they are in disharmony they repel.
So now we can describe interaction as a degree of harmony/disharmony.
All this applies to patterned energies.
Chaotic energies have no pattern - so they always repulse, therefore chaotic energies can never unify into complex structures, so they cannot be perceived by organisms that have evolved the sensual acuity to perceive only patterns of a certain complexity - only those that suffice to facilitate reproduction/survival - nature is frugal.

The concept of a static, absolute, i.e., indivisible, immutable, is a noetic abstraction that can only exist as a vague mental concept, an idea/ideal; it describes the antithesis of existence, so it is non-existent.
If such concepts develop into ideologies/dogmas, they become nihilistic - negating the perceived existent; negating or rejecting, what is present, interpreted as appearance, i.e., the apparent.

Chaos - energies that lack a consistent, repeating, predictable pattern - cannot be perceived, i.e., measured, even if they exist.
They become apparent through the patterns they interact with, as the unforeseeable, the unpredictable.
This is what makes consciousness necessary; this is where free-will is necessary.
"Free" does not mean unconditional. It means non-contingent in the sense of unforeseeable.
It means following the path of most resistance rather than least resistance.
Only intentional - willful - interactions can choose the path of more, or moist, resistance. All else follows the path of least resistance.

Less resistance/more resistance, indicates power relationships.
Non-living unities - energies - always repel from what is more resistant - less in harmony with tis own pattern - moving towards what is less resistant - more in harmony with its own pattern.
Only live has intent that can override this rule and move towards its objective despite higher levels of resistance. Intent is founded on need/necessity.
Only living unities need, or experience existence as agon, struggle - constant attrition - resulting in depletion of energies which require replenishing; experienced as need.
Suffering is the experience of need left unsatisfied.

An action is what identifies the actor, therefore life is that which is involved in the act of living.
It is not a "something" that lives - it is living....no more than there is an "I" that thinks, but "I" is thinking.
The act cannot be separated from the actor.

Rudimentary life begins as a process of iteration which reclaims energies being lost due to interactive attrition.
If this process establishes a successful iteration it begins to be intentional; its intent being to reclaim energies it is losing due to interaction.
So, the primary motive of life is to preserve itself s living. Life is the constant, successful, negation of death.

Yet, not all energies being lost can be reclaimed so life develops the ability to appropriate energies from other life, so as to replenish energies being lost that cannot be reclaimed. It begins to feed on other life; it begins to exploit the work of other organisms.

Beauty inspires and terrifies for it represents a higher level of order; order that has endured and progressed towards more sophisticated levels of order; endured the ravages of interactivity - time (change, flux) & space (possibility/probability) - and has imposed its own pattern for as long as it did to become apparent.
Beauty is power and power terrifies and inspires.

Beauty = symmetry (order) & proportionality (potential).
Beauty inspires because it proves that higher order is attainable; because it offers an example of probability.

Sometimes beauty inspires with its delicate fragility - its rarity.
It fills us with hope that something so fragile managed to endure the ravages of flux long enough for us to witness its existence - filling us with awe and a sense of appreciation for being present - given a rare gift.
We preserve it in our memory, lamenting its passing.

Math, like any other language, is a mediator, connecting the noumenon with the phenomenon.
Man can only experience existence in four dimensional space/time and so man's language is dualistic, reducing the four dimensions to dualities.
All language acts as a connector between the abstract - mental map, the noumenon (subjective) - and the apparent - geography, the phenomenon (objective). Like all approximations the map can only approximate the geography replacing actual existing phenomena with symbols referring to noumena, abstractions.

When the mental map is intentionally or unintentionally corrupted and it ceases to correspond to external, experienced, phenomena then we have the roots of nihilism, i.e., abstractions referring to other abstractions via semiotics.
The external world is essentially the perception of patterns, differentiated by their rhythms, sequences; patterns that can be evaluated, measured, appreciated in relation to an objective and in relation to ourselves and our own metabolic rhythms.

When the goal is to be as objective as possible then language becomes a tool in the hands of men - weapons as well as tools - but when the goal is to help the subject cope, or help it escape the observable, experienced world, then it becomes a toy in the hands of men-children, used to manipulate and exploit by those who use it as a tool/weapon those who use it as a toy or a method of concealment.

As Schopenhauer said....all is like a symphony.

Every pattern is a note - non-patterns are noise.
The sequence of the notes creates a melody = unity.

A conspiracy need not be conscious.
Whoever understands why Dawkins called it "selfish gene" will understand that a meme incorporates the mean s of its own survival and propagation, without having to involve the organism's consciousness.
A parasite, for example does not know what it is doing or why it is doing it. It simply follows a genetic program, because if it did know it may become less efficient and effective.
Self-decpetion is an important part of many survival strategies. Awareness may inhibit behaviours that lead to the organism's demise, so remaining oblivious is part of the effectiveness of the survival and reproductive strategy.

A liar, for example, that is aware he is lying may become reluctant or expose himself in a moment of weakness, whereas a liar that believes in his own lies is a liar that multiplies his ability to become convincing.
Higher cognition inhibits many base - primal - behaviours.
Self-awarnbess is not necessarily a multiplier of fitness, as it is defined biologically.
Awareness is not the end of natural selection.

So when I speak of memetic cross contaminations I am not referring to some grand planned out organized conspiracy. What I am talking about is the infection of a culture by another culture by coming in contact with it - transferring world-views, ethics, ideals, mythological narratives that carry tis underlying principles and values - most often unintentionally, because only then is the transference easier, suffering no resistance form those who become aware of an intent.
A cuckoo bird doesn't know why it places its eggs in another bird's nest. It doesn't have to know.

How, for example - this is the context - did Christianity emerge when Judaism came in contact with Hellenism?
There was no scheme. None was necessary.
What was transferred was a victim world-view, a salvation myth, which was appealing to the pagan who was at the lowest level of the socioeconomic ladder; an individual looking for help, for hope, his own world-view - pagan - offering him nothing comparable to that of Judaism.
When Saul went spreading Jesus' "gospel" from Roman city to Roman city he was appealing to the lowliest members of the Roman empire, and there he found minds desperate for hope.
The ethos and world-view spread like wild fire, morphing with Hellenic, and 'Roman paganism.
Consequently, Judaism was also affected by this contact.
Cabbalism is a product of this contact with Orphism, Egyptian death worship and Zoroastrian monotheisms.
Marxism evolved, over time, as Judaism fermented in Christian ethics and socioeconomic realities, and in many ways Zionism is also a by-product of this contact with Indo-Euroepan tribalism.
Conspiracy need not be conscious nor intentional, nor proactive....sometimes not doing anything facilitates a outcome one can take advantage of.
No interventions necessary, other than standing by and letting it happen.

If there is no free-will, like (((Harris))) believes, then how does he define "discovery".
Shouldn't he be calling it "revelation", "choseness", "chance", "blessing"?
If "free-will" is an "illusion" then would not this also include reality?

Existence is experienced as need, which can increase - if left un-satiated - to be experienced as suffering.
Awakening to existence is a process of awakening to insatiable need suffering, which, even if consistently satiated, becomes the pressing feeling of desire, requiring purging.
I am with Schopenhauer on this....pleasure, or the feeling of gradual or sudden satisfaction of needs, or gratification of desires, is experienced as an ephemeral negative state which is quickly replaced by another pressing need and desire.

Need = feeling of temporal attrition demanding constant replenishing of energies - lack.
All life made conscious experience this existence as need/suffering.
Desire = feeling of accumulating energies - stress - requiring purging.

Life the experience of a constant shift from lack to excess - physical and mental anxiety/stress.
Stress due to the constant necessity of self-maitnenance, and then ennui, if this primary need is satisfied easily or for a prolonged period of space/time, necessitating constant purging.
As Schopenhauer put it, existence experienced as a state between suffering and boredom.  

This si where Nietzsche differentiates from Schopenhauer...approaching existence as unceasing energy....ergo excess, only experienced by life as lack because said energies are not concerned with the maintenance of the specific organism.
The difference of Schopenhauer's feminine passivity - pessimism, Will to Life - and Nietzsche's more masculine, proactive, Will to Power.


Will being the human, all too human term for energies, because the Kantian thing-in-itself must be made intimate, converting it from an incomprehensible other, to a comprehensible drive.
Here is where men-children lose their way.
Will to....is merely an inversion of Will from: reactive/proactive.
Willing what is missing and necessary or what is desired necessary.
ancient Greek cosmogony shifts from Ananke - goddess of necessity - to Eros, god of excess, mirroring an ascent to power versus descent from power.

Will to Life implying self-preservation - founded on need - whereas Will to Power expresses a desire to grow, expand, reflecting cosmic expansion - founded on desire....even if this expansion is not ordered (patterned), but is a gradual deterioration of order, moving towards chaos - infinity.

Schopenhauer presents 'will' as a a replacement of Abrahamism's absolute being, as beyond space/time....whereas I use the more neutral concept of 'energy' - rather than force or thing-in-itself - as a open-ended state expanding outward - boundless - not encompassed by any cognitive boundaries made necessary by organic brains that must reduce existence to a level it can use.

The "groundlessness" of Schopenhauer's 'will' - adopted by Nietzsche - I replace with 'energies' that can be divided into patterned (ordered) and non-patterned (chaotic).
Kant's "thing-in-itself" requires a "thing", which Schopenhauer gives the more intimate definition of 'will'.....retaining the Abrahamic idea of intentionality, even if Schopenhauer goes to great lengths to deny such insinuations.
Will implies intent....which can only be ascribed to life....and what life will's as need, is what is being denied: completion, finality, total satiation, expressing the idea of constant movement outward: constant fragmentation, expansion...
Order wills order, because order is deteriorating - linear space/time; ergo will wills willing, or itself.
This is what 'eternal return' means.

This description of existence makes choice essential to life - free-will- and it also validates the idea of cyclical existence - even if it does not make eternal return of the same, a certainty.