Continued Studies - 05/22/2006

CONTINUED STUDIES

Of

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

Observations

And

General Philosophy

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

02/16/2006 ~ 07/19/2006

05/22/2006

Having given myself another break from studies - in the interest of maintaining a level of freshness in the mind - I realized today after some thought pertaining to one direction in the modern day, as well as the recent past- that much which is heralded as truth is, as per the standards of establishing such - actually negated. Within much of what I have observed and described in that which is the "normal" dynamic of existence - seems to be an underlying consistency which is overly depended upon within that illusion of social progress and development.

The interesting part of this observation for myself, is that it demonstrates an odd "skip" in the "record" so to speak. It also serves to illustrate that schism I have noted pertaining to our illusion of progress through things such as technological developments.

The "cancellation" of this "void," as it were - seems to serve as an artificial "stand in" to fulfill where it is the ongoing dichotomy fails to hold true to itself (which indicates a larger level of human origin in maintenance and perpetuation - growing larger as the need for such effort grows in the negative equation of it).

This observation is that much of society and reality depends upon a "win" or "lose" action and outcome within just about every aspect of perceived decision making. Before I go too much farther with this, I will point out that such is entirely a human perception in my opinion - more a human tendency of assigning meaning. This then acts to, in effect, remove any potential of existence beyond "win" or "lose," which then in turn acts to negate any sort of access to a living timbre beyond the "waring" mentality.

Within that direction is proof that humans could never be "God" or "omnipotent" - being that there is such a dependence on that perception of "win" or "lose" - which again are opinions based on the presence of another influence entirely - which then negates the validity of any said omnipotence.

now then, from my perspective, this perception within the human mind "reality" immediately presents a problematic - though somewhat artificial area. It is its own shackles. I believe, after brief thought, that such is directly the very point at which humans can not actually progress. Can no longer make "motion forward" in actual development beyond the illusion.

To further illustrate this point of contention, is that within the human need for win or lose, is the lack of area for something to exist where it is that win or lose is inconsequential. In other words, the paradoxical dichotomy which humans so greatly depend upon and even utilize to establish "truths" through proving in the negative - meaning through use of an "opposite" to prove the side or point as "truth" - is itself an untruth of sorts within the constrained and over applied use of it.

To simplify this for illustration - a person could compare that consistency and need within the human social dynamic with a single "tao" being "yen/yang."

Within the over applied and sole use of that one "tao (established dynamic)," is the negation of itself - even while in motion. Through placing too much importance on that one dynamic (combination of "win" or "lose" in this example for instance), there is no place or possibility to create or maintain a direct opposite of the single "tao" and dynamic in this example - the "win" or "lose" aspects presented as example, that is.

Again in regard to modern media - this could greatly relate to what I have observed in the losses incurred with the over saturation of the two dimensional perspectives and influences - such obviously holds true with the over saturation of a two dimensional social dynamic. "One" or "The Other" soon becomes imposed limitation more than efficient social movement.

When a person looks at it, this dynamic is a seemingly endless process of "paradox's" which lend one another stability to some degree - itself becoming a contributor to that aspect of imposed limitation - then that itself becoming an inconsistency within the illusion of the larger consistency of constant paradoxes - is, as I have stated; within the "logic" of that apparently ongoing consistency of "one and/or the other (being opposites)" there-in is then presented a limitation given that within the consistency there fails to be a constant opposite of the apparent consistency itself - beyond the given example dichotomy. This being true in that aspect of extended series of paradoxical dichotomy.

To further illustrate this for instance - within our self important reality - each and every one of us perceiving from and for ourselves - is that "win" or "lose."

Within that itself is NO readily apparent opposite. NO area within our existence or reality that equally opposes the "win" or "lose" paring (and that which it exists within) - no place where win or lose means nothing and is not a part of our every day - again, especially within an all important "equal" extreme as is the larger consistency of dichotomy leading to paradox.

Of course there are more aspects comprising our general reality than simply "sin/lose," but the consistency of dichotomy leading to paradox seems rather pronounced.

In considering this it occurs to me that a person must realize that in such extreme focus - such a dynamic proves itself a "lie," or an "untruth." Even within the effort to "assign" the task of "opposing" to those perceived as "losers" for instance - such is still within "win" or "lose" though being manufactured and maintained through conscious effort.

Even when a person considers a culmination of "non-moments" as representations of that supposed opposite - such negates the concept of equal opposites to begin with in the fact that so much is dependent on "win" or "lose." ("Non moments" being descriptive of the idea of non attachment to a given example moment. "Non issue tasks," even to the extreme of hypothetical non-presence).

As a personal note, this entirely supports my stance on "Will To Power" as well as my perspective pertaining to the idea of perfection. Again, I find myself drawn to the unconscious parent/child relationship when I look for possible "opposites" to the importance of that one describable dynamic within society of "win" or "lose."

Even in that is little to show for equal opposites in regard to the paralyzing use of "win" or "lose" within humanity.

Laughably, it would seem that we have seized our own progress and existence through over importance on the topical and very child like need to see ourselves in such labels and within such limitations. If I do say, such proves points I have put forward in comparing humanity being in a sort of large infancy. We possess potentials for greater capacity - but continue to grasp such a simple (and very limiting) social means of comparison and even decision making as if it were a security blanket or a stuffed toy.

We continue to distract ourselves within the substance-less problems which we create in effect, through that dependence and dynamic - which as I have established, is an untruth within and comparatively, with its own standards.

Metaphorically, it would seem that humanity has chosen the direction of a proverbial "rabbit hole" - that of a self perpetuating labyrinth - amplifying artificial puzzles and problems while paralyzing our existence and progress with our own focus and seeming want of imposed limitations. As if we managed to mesmerize ourselves and stand frozen or dazed continually focused on the result of our own actions.

Perhaps, as an amusing note - we may even be as is the person hypnotized into dancing like a chicken at some traveling minstrel show.

Even as a self perpetuating imprisonment as it were.

What of that "opposite?" That place where our want of "win" and fear of "lose," does not exist?

Knowing that from our own current perspective, such isn't possible- it is in that where it could be said that we even negate our own existence.

How incredibly hilarious!

We do not and cannot even be in existence through our own reasoning and perspective - in our own version of reality!

Humans cannot (could no) possibly exist within and of their own reasoning!

How wonderfully funny we are!

Perhaps someday, if it is that we actually manage to move beyond our current obsession of self limiting - eventually we may be able to use such an over focused perspective as we do the aperture of a camera. Introduce such perspectives wholly and only when the resulting dynamic is useful to which ever "right now" it is again being implemented within to serve a definite purpose.

Such on and in the larger sense, combined with that hyper-linear aspect in regard to "thought" and perceived "motion" within reality, seems to have produced a holding pattern of sorts which "expands" in an "outward" fashion... even descriptively, "horizontally..." allowing things to become "rotund" so to speak as opposed to "progressive," developmental - pertaining to capacity and the apparent depth in use, of the human mind.

11/06/2006 - How do we then transcend that over all consistency? Are we ever supposed to?

If we can imagine it, does it not then mean that it is entirely a possibility to some extent?

What of the cusp on which we have perched ourselves pertaining to the transitional tendencies between "idea - conceptualization" and "realization - solidification?" That area of our development which has lead us from the areas of perception employing imposed limitations as representation, to that of understanding without imposed limitations.

It is as though we just seem to hover there on the edge of it.. even without really recognizing the potentials and potential in transition - continuing to hasten the motion and effect of anything and everything from and within that "idea" into "solidification" area of the process of existence. Almost clinging entirely to the security of those imposed limitations we use for understanding... insisting they are "all" and "everything" ever possible or imaginable.

Most certainly, the idea of representing the concept of "all" as in the configuration of a tree for instance, is quite profound - but beyond that is the ability to no longer contain (and limit) the idea of "all" for the purpose of our need to grasp... even to seem as though we are more than said example. But we even shy away from such directions, struggling even at some points to maintain those limitations we have established within that larger process.

The use and comfort of such representations is itself an example of the parabolic process I have described pertaining even to the process of "idea" into "reality." It "hardens" and becomes brittle along the line of becoming comfortable as reference in the capacity of limitation.

In so many words, at first such concepts (limitations) seem quite boundless and profound - but through use in understanding, they grow firm and even brittle to some extent - then becoming more of an imposed limitation than a liberating realization.

Such seems to be the consistency of our tendency within the realm of "idea" into "reality." Then you add into that, the modern tendencies toward hastening this effect for what ever reasons. That parabolic curve from idea into reality, then easily could be seen - more described as a hard slant with the rate at which ideas are snatched and solidified.