virus: Definitions (was Consciousness and Will)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• [ Next ][ Previous ] In reply to: Brett Robertson

--WebTV-Mail-28104144-13850
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

chance-- correlations about a mean of zero objects which show a deviation attributed to degrees of freedom

freedom-- the sum of all possible chance correlations

order-- the construct which results from resolving all hypothetical negations and theoretical suppositions. (ie. chance)... a symbolic manifestation which logically expresses this resolution (ie. freedom)... the action of existence which makes possible this construction and symbolization (ie. a "chance" deviation from "freedom"

As such: Chaos-- the "remainder" allowed for by chance. (If the sum of all possible correlations about the mean of zero were stated such that zero was absolute, whereby chance represented degrees of certainty, such that order applied to only hypotheticals and theoreticals, and in a way that abstractions could be said to control for their own abstract nature; then, what exists might be said to exist by "chance" to a 100% certainty and to be "ordered" from a 0% agreement to absolute freedom).

psypher... the view represented by "chaos" (above) is rationally correct though logically absurd... similarly, the proposed construction of order (as defined) from freedom (as defined) violates the "laws" of chance as defined (a result of the attempt to make chaos logical with regard to these terms)

... the only resolution is to say that chance itself is misrepresented when stated as "the correlation of degrees of theoretical freedom about a hypothetical mean of zero relationships" when in fact this should be stated that *chance* is "the sum of all errors about an *order* to 100% hypothetical and 100% theoretical degrees of necessity about a mean of one."*

*whereby your "will" can be defined as the right to be wrong [re: chaos] and your "consciousness" can be seen as the constructed justification for error

Brett Lane Robertson
Indiana, USA
http://www.window.to/mindrec
MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
BIO: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay ...........
Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE to view great deals!:
http://www.utrade.com/index.htm?MID=59876

--WebTV-Mail-28104144-13850
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Message/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit


Received: from mailsorter-101-1.iap.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.97) by
	postoffice-131.iap.bryant.webtv.net; Tue, 18 May 1999 07:51:53
	-0700 (PDT)

	mailsorter-101-1.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97)

	with ESMTP id HAA19705; Tue, 18 May 1999 07:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by maxwell.kumo.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id

	IAA30922 for virus-outgoing; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:35:24 -0600

As such, when
> talking about how "all things" are abstracted to an "at once", we
> speak of *freedom* (not "chaos").

..."Freedom" implies [to me] room to move, potential variability, a set of potential options. Chaos has two meanings which I acknowledge: [1] (from the physycs of dynamic systems) - not being subject to prediction.
[2] having unlimited potential.

...freedom a ground to move *in*, chaos doesn't. I think we're trying to code the same concept though.

This is true precisely because the
> "sum of all CHANCE" (not the sum of all "order") is the symbolic
> *CONSTRUCT* called *order*.

...okay. I'm with you on order as a symbolic construct, but apparently somewhere else on the composition of order. I think this stems from your use of the word "chance". I'm not sure what you mean by it. Traditionally, chance has been used as a label for all the inputs to a dynamic system which have not been accounted for, but that's just using [chance] as a symbol for [ignorance] and with the death of the mechanical universe we're left with an indeterminate construct anyways.
...in my symbol set:

[Chance] = the limits of an abstraction [ie. those relations which cannot be accounted for by the capabilities of a given consciousness. These relations are not even deducible in principle within the frame of facilities of abstraction of the given entity]

[Order] = an expression of will, the deliberate relation of constructs

[Abstraction] = a synthesis of inputs

[Construct] = a deliberate [willed] relation

As such, freedom includes the freedom to
> establish order from chance by way of consciousness (see post on
> quality).

...I would say that order is established from chaos. Order sometimes arises out of chaos spontaneously because limited systems seek homeostasis. But it's only order if somebody notices, otherwise it's just a momentary stability [a node] in a larger flux.

> Because of this, it is wrong to call consciousness "will". *Will*
> is the construct, order, which justifies chance (by way of
> consciousness) as that which exists contrary to freedom (destroying
> freedom for "chaos").

...I've got your assertion [first sentence] but your explanation is a bit muddy to me.

Thus, you suggest that consciousness arises
> from chaos and institutes an ordering called "incarnate existence";
> though the fact of the matter is that chaos can neither allow for
> consciousness nor destroy it, and incarnate existence (or *Being*)
> must pre-exist will so as to maintain an objective existence.

...oh no. If this descends into Sartre I'm going to scream. ...existence is subjective. The precursor to everything is the statement

I AM.

...not the will to power or anything else, the simple will TO BE.

-psypher

>
> Brett Lane Robertson
> Indiana, USA
> http://www.window.to/mindrec
> MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
> BIO: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
> ...........
> Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE
> to view great deals!:
> http://www.utrade.com/index.htm?MID=59876

--WebTV-Mail-28104144-13850--

• [ Next ][ Previous ] In reply to: Brett Robertson