Sapius,
I think it can, in a sense. It would be no more than a “feeling†sensed, rather than a thought, felt through its external “boundary†that senses the environment….
…a single cellular animal to animals like us.
…is necessary for a sperm to even move around.
In my opinion, there is no point when A is all there is. Duality is sensed, say like that turtle thing, all the way down.
Agreed.
This is sentient-comparison, but a particle may be able to sense that just by sensing the environment, through some inbuilt “memory†system of 0.00000000001 memory card, at a quantum level, which we are now exploiting as in quantum computers.
I sort of accept this. For causality to work, something must "sense" what it is not. Everything senses its boundaries….
or does it?
In every instant, depending on how one tries to define a things properties, a things boundaries range from absolute to nul. The path of least resistance is where one side of the causal duality, can manifest to the greatest possible degree. Perhaps the sole logic in the universe is just the path of least resistance. That a thing/force will take the causal path of least resistance is an absolute truth. ? The "path of least resistance that occurs" is essentially the path of no resistance, it becomes a determined path, as if something is caused to take that path, then the resistance can no longer apply. A boundary is either a boundary or it is not any form of boundary at all
[WRONG -see below] - however this statement only applies to things that are truly opposite, of which there are only two. Totalised things, particles or whatever, do not have any true opposites, as they all have at least some attributes in common. An apple and that same apple converted to radiation are not absolute opposites.
The phrase I used above "sense what it is not" now seems a bit false. It is more that a fundamental cause is prevented from manifesting itself because it is bounded. No, no, this is still not right. It must still
know of the existence of the opposite.
Ok, what this dilemma now suggests is that what I've said elsewhere fairly recently is correct. I've said two things:
a) that the two forces must be able to converge, meaning my statement above that boundaries are absolute is false - nothing could converge with an absolute boundary.
The absolute boundary between the two forces still exists, but only exists non-spatially - convergence is a concept that can only be applicable within the spatial domain.
b) the two forces cause each other, and for this reason they do not "know" the existence of the other. +A causes more of -A and then this "greater -A" causes more of +A, ad infinitum. So what is occurring here is that the fundamental forces inherently know only themselves, not the other. It is their absolutely singular causal nature, the fact that what they are is "expansion" or "contraction" and no other property, means that knowing themselves is just being as they are. The trick is that they can only be what they are when caused to "be more", by their opposite.
"Knowing" also requires time, it is something that occurs only over time, however, absoluteness cannot require time to be an already existent causal factor. Time must be subsequently caused.
If the two forces are outside of time, this means they are permanently instantaneous. What this then means is that they are continuously causing the entirety of the other. It then becomes a question of what is the entirety of the other - they are just permanently "being". In "being" they become existence.
They cause the existence of existence by being opposite to each other. The effect of the existence of A and Not-A is the set of "A and Not A", as this set becomes B. B is more than either A or Not-A, in the same way that Space is more than either the expansionary force and the contracting force. The set or total becomes the 3rd causal leg of the trinity. In being more than what originally caused it, it becomes a reverse cause. The reverse cause of space, is that it causes fluctuations in the degree of beingness that the forces can manifest. As the forces manifest some of the force flows not into causing just more of the existence of the other, but into the already existing unity of expansion and contraction that is space. The result being that this then fucks up the perfect logical equalisation of the non-spatial domain by the mere fact it is additive.
As we are talking about a cause acting from the non-spatial domain into the spatial domain, the effect is that the shape of space will be caused to alter. This is the point where it becomes quite logical to refer to the nature of the fundamental forces as being "expansion and contraction". They cause spatial pressure and gravity as attributes of space itself. Their action causes space to be in a continuos state of geometrical-causal change, which evolves into things via the turtles within turtles scenario.
Memory is a is sequential causal flow that has the ability that resets itself to its prior state, to some degree, or to have no sections added if the right triggers are released. Our ability to create new memories is better when our ego is in a positive frameset for instance. Most people have trouble groking truths they think are negative.
The key is the sequential flow within a structure, that is what allows for memory. That’s the sort of memory seen in DNA or a computer. Atoms are no different, nor could sub-atomic matter be any different. What holds things together is the ability to continually reset sequences to what they were or almost were. That's all memory is.
I'm saying this as I don’t want others to infer from what you said above as possibly being some sort of cosmic consciousness - it is all just about degrees of fundamental manifestation and how this manifests as a flow of change through the existing patterns of things.
The point of ego, the REAL self that cannot be eradicated however one tries…. through reasoning.
Agreed
I think the ever-existent ego of a thing, however of a minimal-awareness that that may be, evaluates all else and hence is able to operate on it own dimensional level. Its duality all the way down, James.
But for what you say here then a duality must assume the additional existence of a non-duality. It must be a non-duality that "evaluates all else". So you can't have a duality without that duality causing a non-duality. In the context of everything, and noting that everything is interconnected, this is the duality of the fundamental forces causing the non-duality of the totality of all there is.
That everything is interconnected prevents things from being inherent non-dualities, as does that they are caused by causes that are continuously manifesting in opposite ways. Things are non-dualities to the degree an observer can recognise synergistic causal patterns bound within differently structured synergistic causal patterns. Without the observer, these synergistic patterns are just boundaries that repel to some degree other synergistic patterns - there is no non-duality, except at the level of the whole.
The QRS see that their self's are not inherent and rightfully recognise they are just a pattern that is a part of a whole, and not intrinsically separate from that whole. That concept however is just a memory, seeing as consciousness is just observation, the part of themselves that observes, that part of one's self, is a non-duality whenever it manifests, but it can only manifest in dualistic concert with that which is not-consciousness, which is everything else.
In reference to A=A and identification, I admit to not understanding its significance. A lot of what Steven's saying above is stuff I've said before. I have not yet deconstructed it, and rebuilt it in a manner that gives it any significant meaning to me. I sometimes use A=A in posts, but I always remain uncertain I'm using it as it should be. I get the shits with it because it seems like the simplest thing ever to understand :)
I hope the QRS are not just using it as a koan.
