i used to understand one out of about every eight or nine concepts you and andrew talk about... i've whittled it down to about one out of ever six or seven. i feel like my trajectory is good. thanks for your work!
Beautiful, rich, nuanced discussion. Thank you thank you. I'll add that CosmoErotic Humanism (which is highly influenced by Whitehead) says that there absolutely are self-evident First Values inherent in Cosmos - they are both Eternal and Evolving. We must hold this paradox, which we can learn how to do. (And paradox itself is a First Value of Cosmos - along with Eros, Intimacy, Relationship, Perspective, Evolution, Creation, Story, Freedom, Desire, Uniqueness, etc.)
I think Andrew’s point to Darren, that God _as a whole_ is not unconsciously ordering the relevance of eternal objects, fails to really get at the point-because it is precisely the unconscious part, the primordial nature, that is doing that ordering. What’s more, this is very relevant to the point, that Andrew tried to argue, that there is in some sense an objective and necessary standard of values that stands as a condition for the possibility of the world: God’s primordial nature uniquely is independent of the actual world, doesn’t change, and is entirely unaffected by it. We can only say this if we allow ourselves to claim distinct attributes of distinct phases of prehensions in God, that don’t belong to other phases, which is what we actually are doing when we talk about “natures.” Whether or not we believe in that thesis, it’s undeniably Whitehead’s thesis in PR. But I don’t think Darren’s point re unconscious valuation is so devastating anyways, as at least in a psychological sense the existence of unconscious valuations doesn’t seem especially controversial now a days, even if the science on it’s still maybe a bit obscure. Maybe even more importantly, in Whitehead’s system unconscious conceptual valuation will by definition occur in all actual entities, because “consciousness” refers to the subjective form of intellectual feelings (and not the subjective form of conceptual feelings nor propositional feelings). So in that sense it’s a rather mundane aspect of God.
8:17 Y'know, the first thing I thought of after hearing this is irrational numbers. An infinite series of all possible combinations of number, and irrational numbers are foundational to our understanding of rationality and reason through the mathematical lens (though also as representations of what we see occurring in the corporeal).
Enjoyed this. Thanks. The fellow of the UK whose name is Perter that Andrew mentioned. Whats his last name? I couldn't make it out. I'd like to check him out.
Reality = That which is/That I am. Gnosis = Being aware of being aware. God = Life Life eternally actualizes infinite potential, because only Eternity can fully embrace Infinity. Empty of ego (separateness) = Full of Life. The abstract (Heaven) called Love can be expressed concretely (Earth) as a smile, hug, etc, thereby uniting Heaven and Earth. Dream it, feel it, do it.
Many thanks. Great stuff. I appreciate it. There cannot be infinity without nothing: The mathematically rigorous notion of infinity would not have been possible without zero. No?
Great conversation! I'll share this in the upcoming Center for Open and Relational Theology newsletter.
i used to understand one out of about every eight or nine concepts you and andrew talk about... i've whittled it down to about one out of ever six or seven. i feel like my trajectory is good. thanks for your work!
Beautiful, rich, nuanced discussion. Thank you thank you.
I'll add that CosmoErotic Humanism (which is highly influenced by Whitehead) says that there absolutely are self-evident First Values inherent in Cosmos - they are both Eternal and Evolving. We must hold this paradox, which we can learn how to do. (And paradox itself is a First Value of Cosmos - along with Eros, Intimacy, Relationship, Perspective, Evolution, Creation, Story, Freedom, Desire, Uniqueness, etc.)
I think Andrew’s point to Darren, that God _as a whole_ is not unconsciously ordering the relevance of eternal objects, fails to really get at the point-because it is precisely the unconscious part, the primordial nature, that is doing that ordering. What’s more, this is very relevant to the point, that Andrew tried to argue, that there is in some sense an objective and necessary standard of values that stands as a condition for the possibility of the world: God’s primordial nature uniquely is independent of the actual world, doesn’t change, and is entirely unaffected by it. We can only say this if we allow ourselves to claim distinct attributes of distinct phases of prehensions in God, that don’t belong to other phases, which is what we actually are doing when we talk about “natures.” Whether or not we believe in that thesis, it’s undeniably Whitehead’s thesis in PR. But I don’t think Darren’s point re unconscious valuation is so devastating anyways, as at least in a psychological sense the existence of unconscious valuations doesn’t seem especially controversial now a days, even if the science on it’s still maybe a bit obscure. Maybe even more importantly, in Whitehead’s system unconscious conceptual valuation will by definition occur in all actual entities, because “consciousness” refers to the subjective form of intellectual feelings (and not the subjective form of conceptual feelings nor propositional feelings). So in that sense it’s a rather mundane aspect of God.
8:17 Y'know, the first thing I thought of after hearing this is irrational numbers. An infinite series of all possible combinations of number, and irrational numbers are foundational to our understanding of rationality and reason through the mathematical lens (though also as representations of what we see occurring in the corporeal).
Enjoyed this. Thanks. The fellow of the UK whose name is Perter that Andrew mentioned. Whats his last name? I couldn't make it out. I'd like to check him out.
Reality = That which is/That I am.
Gnosis = Being aware of being aware.
God = Life
Life eternally actualizes infinite potential, because only Eternity can fully embrace Infinity.
Empty of ego (separateness) = Full of Life.
The abstract (Heaven) called Love can be expressed concretely (Earth) as a smile, hug, etc, thereby uniting Heaven and Earth.
Dream it, feel it, do it.
Many thanks. Great stuff. I appreciate it. There cannot be infinity without nothing: The mathematically rigorous notion of infinity would not have been possible without zero. No?
Zero seems crucial for calculus and set theory, so that sounds right to me. Hope you're doing well, Corey!
@@Footnotes2Plato I miss you you buddy, the old day too. Happy New Year.
My humble ass thinks that : EXISTENCE is the absolute GOOD