Showing posts with label Parasimplicity Principle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parasimplicity Principle. Show all posts

Sunday, September 30, 2012

The Elan Vital

"Vitality shows in not only the ability to persist
but the ability to start over.
"
~ F. Scott Fitzgerald
 
 
 
 
 
Where the Popess is identified with the intuitive Virgin, the feminine yet unsullied by the masculine, the fourth Tarot card - the Empress - is identified with the fecund Mother; her association is with Isis, where the Popess is with Hathor. The second aspect of the Triple Goddess, she is the Queen of Heaven; she is the vessel of the lifeforce, the elan vital.
 
Numbered 3, the Empress represents the common energy between the One and the Two, the energy of increase, the parasimplistic urge to be more than one's mere being-in-the-moment. In Rider-Waite, she is seated with crown and scepter, and her throne is carved with a heart-shaped design: because love can be understood as this energy of increase, the motivating force that makes an individual seek to become part of something more. The Empress is both a signifier of love and of fertility.
 
Although she restores balance to the first four cards of the Tarot, being a second female after the first two males, the Empress is not a union of the energies, a divine androgyne; she is not a parasimplex. She does, however, embody the parasimplicity principle: her presence in a drawing indicates a desire for increase, and generally the gratification of that desire. 'Increase' here could be material, although usually a somewhat more spiritual development is implied.
 
The energy of the Empress is universal; it is undirected, but it flows inevitably between living things. It is identifiable with qi in Chinese belief: the acupuncturist places needles at key meridians in the human body to identify and redirect the flow of qi, just as the feng shui practitioner orients the furnishing of a room to promote harmonious flow through the building (qi, accordingly, is self-similar and so partakes of the character of transcendence). Although these examples indicate that the energy can be controlled, it would be a mistake to think of it as something that ought to be harnessed. The principle of wei wuwei recognizes this implicitly.
 
 
 


Thursday, September 20, 2012

Zenophilia

"Never confuse motion with action."
~ Benjamin Franklin
 
 
 
 
Zeno of Elea anticipated many of the points I've touched upon over the preceding few posts in formulating what Bertrand Russell described as "immeasurably subtle and profound" paradoxes. Zeno was a Parmenidean philosopher, who shared Parmenides' belief that "All is One;" his paradoxes challenge the notions of Time and Space and the existence of entitites within them.
 
His 'Paradox of Place,' for example, is both a Platonic Form of the self-reference paradox and, paradoxically enough, a refutation of the Platonic Theory of Forms:
 
"If everything has a place, then place itself has a place, and so on ad infinitum."
 
He similarly challenges Time in the Fletcher's Paradox:
 
"If everything when it occupies an equal space is at rest, and if that which is in locomotion is always occupying such a space at any moment, the flying arrow is therefore motionless."
 
In fact, elsewhere in his writings, Zeno demonstrates that not only is it impossible to move, it is impossible to start a journey or to reach a destination. Yet it is even more clearly demonstrable that motion occurs and that physical entities undergo motion travelling from place to place.
 
Intriguingly, advances in quantum physics suggest that apparent motion - and even more importantly, apparent lack of motion - are both not as straightforward as they seem. A famous experimental result, Young's Double-Slit Experiment, proves that light operates as a wave; Einstein's Nobel-Prizewinning verification of the photoelectric effect proves that it operates as a particle. The fundamentally paradoxical notion of wave-particle duality, which follows from these two results and leads to a bizarre conception of matter as a measure of quantum interference patterns and mass as a byproduct of collisions with Higgs bosons - all of this is just another paradigmatic way of representing the Parasimplicity Principle.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

The Great I AM

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."
~ Albert Einstein
 
 
 
I had said earlier that all paradoxes are either paradoxes of the All-in-One, or of the One-in-All. I will restate that here: Identity and Persistency are the twin illusions that shape our world. It may not be clear how that is a restatement; today's discussion will begin an attempt to build that bridge.
 
We talked at some length a while back about what being means. We had said that something is in several senses, potentially several senses at once. The implication of this is that identity can mean several things simultaneously, as well.
 
Let's consider something with a fairly stable identity, as we'd naively consider it: Mount Rushmore. Chances are pretty good that you recognize that name, and that as you read it, your Cartesian Theater obligingly summoned up an image of it. You probably thought about the Presidents' heads carved into it. You probably feel pretty confident that you know how many Presidents there are up there... which ones... how they're arranged... what the rest of the mountain looks like...
 
Getting less confident, right? In fact, even people who've seen Mount Rushmore with their own eyes would probably be less than certain about those details. Even though most of the people who read this understand what 'Mount Rushmore' is, I'd venture a guess that every one of you has a subtly distinct, individual, subjective impression of 'Mount Rushmore.' So, while we can maybe agree that there exists an objective Mount Rushmore, it isn't as real to us as our subjective version. And the intersubjective Mount Rushmore is a strange beast indeed - it encompasses all these subjective versions, and the objective Mount Rushmore, under an umbrella that lets all of us recognize the same mountain (even though it's not the same mountain). What's more, without summoning that shorthand, I could offer you a vague description that nevertheless incorporated the necessary details for you to recognize the idealized Mount Rushmore. And that's before we get into Mount Rushmore as a symbol or an association for each of you personally.
 
The point is that, even with something that all of us think we know as an objectively real entity, it exists in many different ways, as many different things. Everything is both itself, and other than itself: this is the Parasimplicity Principle. The self-similarity Mandelbrot described in Nature's curves is another aspect of this: identity as a pattern of infinite recursion, Self as both self and self-concept and concepts of Self beyond the self, as many unique iterations as there are possible perspectives. Paradoxes of self-reference arise because of the essential dichotomy between the Self we are being and the Self of which we are aware in the process of Being. Russell's famous paradox - "this sentence is false" - arises because we erroneously view it as equivalent to "the sentence 'this sentence is false' is true." Truth, in this context, denotes positive Being - Being in a state of awareness. The truth that Self alters itself in the course of becoming aware of itself qua self makes it paradoxically impossible for Self ever to be truly self-aware; despite the inescapable truth that self-awareness is the hallmark, the necessary condition, of Self-being or Sein-in-der-Welt.
 
Persistency, it turns out, is just Identity viewed from another dimension - the dimension of Time - and that will be the subject of our next discussion.