a) Matter (life) rises (inception) and falls (death) during motion.
b) Sciou/scire - "to know" implies as matter (perception) during momentum (perceivable) of motion aka differentiation.
c) Few suggest con (together) scious (to know) to tempt each consenting one of many to ignore differentiation for consenting alike.
if we imagine
Image/imitari - "copy" implies an artificial shape (suggestion) within reality (perceivable). Suggested pluralism (we) tempts ones singular perception to ignore self for others.
face a hard problem
Problem/proballein - "throw forwards" implies an origin (motion) throwing (momentum) one (matter) forwards. Whatever one faces tempts one to ignore origin, because facing implies looking forwards, while ignoring what throws one forwards.
an aspect of consciousness
Con implies "together"...aspect implies special aka particular aka "apart" from one another.
sciences have practically stalled out in terms of advancement, only ever capable of spiraling deeper and deeper down their holes of “specialization”
Consenting to suggested scientism implies specialization advancing forwards. Oneself is the special, nature that which forwards one, and ones resistance to the temptation of following implies stalling ones decline.
the true geniuses capable of bridging the gaps between these chasms seem to be so few and far between.
Bridging the gap is what consent to suggested establishes, while ignoring that nature sets each one within apart from one another. Many willingly choose to ignores this by joining together aka bridging gaps, which sets apart few and far between.
capable of entertaining ideas without necessarily believing
Aka letting through (perceivable inspiration) instead of holding onto (suggested information). That capability implies ones free will of choice resisting (need) temptation (want).
the idea that psyche, aka consciousness, exists in some form or another
a) Psyche implies "animating power" aka flow...not form, which implies animated by flow.
b) Another can only exist among form (partial matter), which the animating power of flow (whole motion) differentiates from one another.
c) Ones consent to suggested idealism tempts one to ignore differences, hence also that which differentiates.
infused throughout
Form (life) coming in (inception) and out (death) of flow...not fused together; but diffused apart.
“limited” or different form
Same flow (inception towards death) as the only limit for each free form (life) differentiated within...just because one is free to limit self to others, doesn't mean that a self imposed limit cannot be lifted by raising self.
I think it’s incredibly telling that the hard sciences have practically stalled out in terms of advancement, only ever capable of spiraling deeper and deeper down their holes of “specialization”, while the polymaths, the true geniuses capable of bridging the gaps between these chasms seem to be so few and far between.
Rupert Sheldrake, if you haven’t heard of him, is unorthodox when it comes to the priesthood of science. A highly accomplished biochemist by training - but openly religious (Anglican upbringing) - he is one of the relative few in the scientific world who is capable of entertaining ideas without necessarily believing them which I think helps contribute to his ability to bridge these wide divides and come upon what could end up being the early markings of a paradigm shift (or even multiple).
The basic idea presented here is “panpsychism”, the idea that psyche, aka consciousness, exists in some form or another, infused throughout the entire universe. This would not only explain the “consciousness of degrees” that we observe in, for example, animals like dogs, whales, dolphins, elephants, etc (i.e. a more “limited” or different form of consciousness than our own) but also bridge a long-standing gap that has been created between “religious understandings” and “scientific understandings” of the universe, imo
a) Matter (life) rises (inception) and falls (death) during motion.
b) Sciou/scire - "to know" implies as matter (perception) during momentum (perceivable) of motion aka differentiation.
c) Few suggest con (together) scious (to know) to tempt each consenting one of many to ignore differentiation for consenting alike.
Image/imitari - "copy" implies an artificial shape (suggestion) within reality (perceivable). Suggested pluralism (we) tempts ones singular perception to ignore self for others.
Problem/proballein - "throw forwards" implies an origin (motion) throwing (momentum) one (matter) forwards. Whatever one faces tempts one to ignore origin, because facing implies looking forwards, while ignoring what throws one forwards.
Con implies "together"...aspect implies special aka particular aka "apart" from one another.
Consenting to suggested scientism implies specialization advancing forwards. Oneself is the special, nature that which forwards one, and ones resistance to the temptation of following implies stalling ones decline.
Bridging the gap is what consent to suggested establishes, while ignoring that nature sets each one within apart from one another. Many willingly choose to ignores this by joining together aka bridging gaps, which sets apart few and far between.
Aka letting through (perceivable inspiration) instead of holding onto (suggested information). That capability implies ones free will of choice resisting (need) temptation (want).
a) Psyche implies "animating power" aka flow...not form, which implies animated by flow.
b) Another can only exist among form (partial matter), which the animating power of flow (whole motion) differentiates from one another.
c) Ones consent to suggested idealism tempts one to ignore differences, hence also that which differentiates.
Form (life) coming in (inception) and out (death) of flow...not fused together; but diffused apart.
Same flow (inception towards death) as the only limit for each free form (life) differentiated within...just because one is free to limit self to others, doesn't mean that a self imposed limit cannot be lifted by raising self.
I think it’s incredibly telling that the hard sciences have practically stalled out in terms of advancement, only ever capable of spiraling deeper and deeper down their holes of “specialization”, while the polymaths, the true geniuses capable of bridging the gaps between these chasms seem to be so few and far between.
Rupert Sheldrake, if you haven’t heard of him, is unorthodox when it comes to the priesthood of science. A highly accomplished biochemist by training - but openly religious (Anglican upbringing) - he is one of the relative few in the scientific world who is capable of entertaining ideas without necessarily believing them which I think helps contribute to his ability to bridge these wide divides and come upon what could end up being the early markings of a paradigm shift (or even multiple).
The basic idea presented here is “panpsychism”, the idea that psyche, aka consciousness, exists in some form or another, infused throughout the entire universe. This would not only explain the “consciousness of degrees” that we observe in, for example, animals like dogs, whales, dolphins, elephants, etc (i.e. a more “limited” or different form of consciousness than our own) but also bridge a long-standing gap that has been created between “religious understandings” and “scientific understandings” of the universe, imo