Pantheism
fundamentals
|
Not by design The pantheist believes that: Design1,2 happened3 as
adaptation4 (response).5,6,7,8.9 © 2020 by
Victor Langheld |
1. According to the
New Oxford Dictionary the word ‘design’ derives from the late medieval
English verb ‘to designate’ and which is derived from the Latin past
participle of designare (i.e.
designatus) understood to have meant: appoint to
a specific position. The NOD defines ‘design’ as 1. A plan or drawing; 2.
The art or action of conceiving something; 3. A purpose, plan or intention. 2. Alternately
read ‘design’ to mean: identity, i.e. a series of
random (or differential) contacts/strikes which when repeated can be identified.
3. Adaptation,
interpreted as design, was activated by energy, i.e.
by random momentum quanta, viz, turbulence and so on and as response to the
need to survive. 4. The NOD defines
‘adaptation’ as: the act, process or procedure of adapting, the latter being
derived from the Latin verb adaptare, meaning ad
+ aptare (from aptus
‘fit’). 5. The NOD defines
‘response’ as: answer, reaction, adapted from the Latin re ‘again’ + spondere ‘to pledge’. What appears as an
identifiable reality’s design or architecture happened as actual response (i.e. as adaptation to local conditions) to the virtual goal/necessity
of survival. 6. The response (i.e. as a real quantum of identity) is dependent on the
responder’s state as ensemble of conditions (i.e. as collective (or universe)
of alternate real identity quanta). For response read alternately: affect because it
happened at contact, or, as tradition would have it, effect. For
activation (by random momentum ≈ energy) read (traditionally): cause. Several
ancient Indian physical speculation systems, such as Buddhism and Samkya-Yoga, intuited the above. But they interpreted the
cause as ‘ignorance’, Sanskrit: avidyā
or, more closer to home, as ‘turbulence’. 7. Every response
(as identifiable reality) has 2 components. The first is discrete individual
quantum (or digital) contact (or impact, thus instruction) resulting in the
experience of momentary isness, i.e. of realness. A series of
individual contacts is falsely experienced as being. The second is
the response to a quantised series (or, with repetition, as sequence) of such
discrete individual contacts and which results, with repetition, in an
(analogue) identity. In short, all data (hence identity) transmission is
quantised (i.e. digital). The receiving (actually
being touched) order quantum responds by compressing and analogising and so
identifying the digital contact inputs (i.e. a
message) as a whole. 8. Initially, that
is to say, in simple order quanta, the adaptation response is automatic (i.e. spontaneous) and blind. Complex order systems, such
as a blade of grass or a human, and which have adapted to the survival mode
and therefore have learnt, like artificial intelligence or the blind man with
his walking stick, to predict outcomes, respond semi-automatically and
seemingly partially sighted. 9. In short, the
initial (and thereafter recursively and differentially) ordering procedure
(and which some choose to name GOD) reveals itself upon
quantisation (i.e. as a god) as blind response. The virtual necessity,
rather than ‘intention’, as goal, of a quantum of order is survival. The design
merely represents the actual means (or pathway) by which the virtual necessity,
as goal, was satisfied, i.e. achieved. |