I love the use of em dashes, it really drives home the point of thresholds and cubing.
I think the secular world is struggling to integrate what you speak of, because to integrate and initiate itself requires right sight, in that it is aware of the layers to begin with.
The beauty is that the mind can only be unaware of it for so long before it becomes apparent (the layers and to itself) that it is defending illusion.
“The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”
"this too has been admirably devised by the Logos and Wisdom, the supreme artificer who surpasses every intellect: that we should be teased by visible things, which go up and down and twist and slide and escape. . . . In this way we perceive their instability and disorder and advance towards that which belongs to the age to come"
Do I misunderstand, or do you have a more positive prospect on technology than others? Most articles I read since stumbling upon Gryphon and others on Substack seem to imply demonic forces behind technology, this doesn't seem to be the case here - or am I missing something?
The ultimate image of Christian Eschatology is technological: the New Jerusalem. That's my beginning point, and so I see all technology in the light of how it could be integrated in a way where its oriented towards the good. I agree with the sentiments that technology can and neccessarily will be used by demonic forces, but demonizing technology itself I think is a big mistake.
If you look at the sphere of symbolists or estoericist, especially on substack, for example, you'll see the recongition of the symbolic world or the world of patterns, but never the recognition that it was the technological enviroment which induced and fueled it in the first place. Indeed, I think this is the missing link: why and how does the technological and the eschatological or revelatory connect? I think many mistakenly ignores the artifical enviroment for some kind of romantic hubbub.
I think you'd find something to appreciate in Arie Uittenbogaard's work over at Abarim Publications. Your idea of the Main Frame or Time Machine or the CCRU's AxSys all seem to reduce to Uittenbogaard's understanding of 'monotheism', which is a technological environment of belief rather than solely a belief in a singular power. Monotheism in this sense is the technologically-mediated realization that reality is essentially unified such that all moments are always already in dialogue with all others towards the end of the concrete communication of the absolute, with all ultimately in all.
"Monotheism is NOT simply the "belief in a single god" because virtually all systems of religious monotheism are simply forms of polytheism (my god is better than your god). Polytheistic deities are always anthropomorphized aspects of reality, and that includes any pseudo-monotheistic deity who managed to beat all the others, and hence solely represents the whole of reality like a one-god pantheon. The God of the Bible is not an anthropomorphized version of human reality, but (rather quite the opposite) human reality is the anthropomorphized version of God. Instead of creating gods from marble in man's image, monotheism forms man from flesh in God's image. Pagan gods are anthropomorphized aspects of human experience, whereas the Biblical God is that upon which human experience converges.
The Bible is NOT a religious book but a proto-science book. It contemplates information technology, not mythology. The heirs of the intellectual momentum of the Bible are not the world's churches and temples but rather universities and hospitals. That's where the sick are healed and the poor educated (see John 14:12 relative to Matthew 11:3-5)."
...
"Time is a tricky business. When all the energy in the universe is concentrated in one point, eternity is balled up with it. So no, there was nothing "before" that singularity and whatever caused that singularity to be there did not exist "before" it in a temporal sense. That means that any trace of the primal cause of the singularity can only come after it, which in turn means that there is causality that progresses in a direction not that of time. Whatever "caused" spacetime to be there, came to communicate with spacetime long after time had begun. The universe is caused by something that is greater than the Big Bang. That is why mind is not caused by anything in spacetime but spacetime is caused by something in mind (John 1:30).
Said as blatantly as possible: when God decided he wanted to be known (when he uttered the most primal ratio, namely: "treat others like you want to be treated"), he imagined creation by first imagining rational consciousness outside his own identity, something super to his own nature, something to be formally known by. The existence of this super-godly rationality is contingent on the entirety of biological evolution, which in turn is contingent on the entirety and eternity of spacetime. And that necessitated the Big Bang, as the final element of the creative idea and the first to be executed. This explains why life fits the thermodynamic universe so well (life is the rock and matter is water that fills every pore native to the rock). This also explains why mathematics is so very effective in describing the physical world: the thermodynamic universe sits like a pea in the pod of pure rationality, with the emotional biosphere as the interface layer. That realm of pure rationality is the one we share with God (whose own emotions cannot be fathomed by anything that is not One With God), which means that the mutual language must be one entirely void of emotional sentiment. Hence the language of mathematics."
Your writing has improved greatly. This is evidenced in the fact that my pea brain understood everything that was being talked about from start to finish. Well done.
I love the use of em dashes, it really drives home the point of thresholds and cubing.
I think the secular world is struggling to integrate what you speak of, because to integrate and initiate itself requires right sight, in that it is aware of the layers to begin with.
The beauty is that the mind can only be unaware of it for so long before it becomes apparent (the layers and to itself) that it is defending illusion.
“The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”
Looking forward to the next article!
"this too has been admirably devised by the Logos and Wisdom, the supreme artificer who surpasses every intellect: that we should be teased by visible things, which go up and down and twist and slide and escape. . . . In this way we perceive their instability and disorder and advance towards that which belongs to the age to come"
- Gregory of Nazianzus
pg 91 Deification in Christ
Do I misunderstand, or do you have a more positive prospect on technology than others? Most articles I read since stumbling upon Gryphon and others on Substack seem to imply demonic forces behind technology, this doesn't seem to be the case here - or am I missing something?
The ultimate image of Christian Eschatology is technological: the New Jerusalem. That's my beginning point, and so I see all technology in the light of how it could be integrated in a way where its oriented towards the good. I agree with the sentiments that technology can and neccessarily will be used by demonic forces, but demonizing technology itself I think is a big mistake.
If you look at the sphere of symbolists or estoericist, especially on substack, for example, you'll see the recongition of the symbolic world or the world of patterns, but never the recognition that it was the technological enviroment which induced and fueled it in the first place. Indeed, I think this is the missing link: why and how does the technological and the eschatological or revelatory connect? I think many mistakenly ignores the artifical enviroment for some kind of romantic hubbub.
Also I dig tech/sci-fi aesthetics.
Thank you! Then I understood at least part of your intention correctly. Also thanks for the further explanation. :D
They connect through memory.
I think you'd find something to appreciate in Arie Uittenbogaard's work over at Abarim Publications. Your idea of the Main Frame or Time Machine or the CCRU's AxSys all seem to reduce to Uittenbogaard's understanding of 'monotheism', which is a technological environment of belief rather than solely a belief in a singular power. Monotheism in this sense is the technologically-mediated realization that reality is essentially unified such that all moments are always already in dialogue with all others towards the end of the concrete communication of the absolute, with all ultimately in all.
Also: 'The Main Frame' = AQ 221 = 'Monotheism'
https://www.abarim-publications.com/How-The-Mind-Works.html
"Monotheism is NOT simply the "belief in a single god" because virtually all systems of religious monotheism are simply forms of polytheism (my god is better than your god). Polytheistic deities are always anthropomorphized aspects of reality, and that includes any pseudo-monotheistic deity who managed to beat all the others, and hence solely represents the whole of reality like a one-god pantheon. The God of the Bible is not an anthropomorphized version of human reality, but (rather quite the opposite) human reality is the anthropomorphized version of God. Instead of creating gods from marble in man's image, monotheism forms man from flesh in God's image. Pagan gods are anthropomorphized aspects of human experience, whereas the Biblical God is that upon which human experience converges.
The Bible is NOT a religious book but a proto-science book. It contemplates information technology, not mythology. The heirs of the intellectual momentum of the Bible are not the world's churches and temples but rather universities and hospitals. That's where the sick are healed and the poor educated (see John 14:12 relative to Matthew 11:3-5)."
...
"Time is a tricky business. When all the energy in the universe is concentrated in one point, eternity is balled up with it. So no, there was nothing "before" that singularity and whatever caused that singularity to be there did not exist "before" it in a temporal sense. That means that any trace of the primal cause of the singularity can only come after it, which in turn means that there is causality that progresses in a direction not that of time. Whatever "caused" spacetime to be there, came to communicate with spacetime long after time had begun. The universe is caused by something that is greater than the Big Bang. That is why mind is not caused by anything in spacetime but spacetime is caused by something in mind (John 1:30).
Said as blatantly as possible: when God decided he wanted to be known (when he uttered the most primal ratio, namely: "treat others like you want to be treated"), he imagined creation by first imagining rational consciousness outside his own identity, something super to his own nature, something to be formally known by. The existence of this super-godly rationality is contingent on the entirety of biological evolution, which in turn is contingent on the entirety and eternity of spacetime. And that necessitated the Big Bang, as the final element of the creative idea and the first to be executed. This explains why life fits the thermodynamic universe so well (life is the rock and matter is water that fills every pore native to the rock). This also explains why mathematics is so very effective in describing the physical world: the thermodynamic universe sits like a pea in the pod of pure rationality, with the emotional biosphere as the interface layer. That realm of pure rationality is the one we share with God (whose own emotions cannot be fathomed by anything that is not One With God), which means that the mutual language must be one entirely void of emotional sentiment. Hence the language of mathematics."
Your writing has improved greatly. This is evidenced in the fact that my pea brain understood everything that was being talked about from start to finish. Well done.