Rod's Summary

So many fascinating questions arose this week that I don't know how to summarize them, so I'll just extract from my notes without trying to tie it all together...yet.

Equilibrium vs Disequilibrium: Do systems naturally tend toward equilibrium? What would it mean to be in DISequilibrium? How about just "local" disequilibrium. Local disequilibrium appears as the result of adjustments in a larger system (equilibration). Waves of equilibration ripple through the multi-layered universe. All systems are constantly both in-equilibrium & in-DISequilibrium, and always in the process of equilibration. In & Out & Becoming, all at the same time.

This would be consistent with the unfolding edge of chaos. The Past has already become equilibrated (quiescent), while the Future always implies disequilibrium (chaotic). And Now is the edge where the disequilibrium of the chaotic Future equilibrates into the equilibrium of the quiescent Past. The edge of chaos is in-disequilibrium on its leading edge and in-equilibrium on its trailing edge, and the edge itself is the process of equilibration.

Radical No-self: Radically complete No-self, or merely distancing from one's self in order to explore the No-self territory? Radical No-self implies Enlightenment as a state to be attained, a state beyond consciousness which has no relation to normal self-consciousness. A radical attainment that "blows your mind" to such a degree that nothing seems the same any more?

My personal predilection is toward an exploration of no-self as one category of consciousness which reveals things not easily seen from normal self-consciousness. No-self isn't a state BEYOND consciousness, but a state OF consciousness.

On "getting it": At my Men's Group discussion, the following two hypothetical questions came up:

[a] What if we wake up one morning and suddenly everyone in the world "gets it" all at the same time?

[b] What if there's no "it" to get?

Rational Meaning vs Felt Meaning: Quentin Smith differentiates between Rational Meaning & Felt Meaning. Rational Meaning asks the "why" question, to which the answer is "because..." (e.g., "because god wants it that way"). But Felt Meaning is awareness of the world-as-it-is; immersion in the here & now & this and the immediacy of being. Felt Meaning is the answer to the "why" question that cannot be expressed as an "answer." Getting to the place where there is no "it" to get to. Complete incompleteness unfolding out of chaos. Knowing THAT you know without knowing WHAT you know.

Complete universe vs "designed" universe: Is the universe complete unto itself, unfolding its own intelligence and emergent design? Or does the apparent order of the universe imply an a priori intentional design?

In the first case the universe is just what it is and there is no meaningful "why" question.

But intelligent design demands an answer to the "why" question to complete the universe. Rather than order being an emergent property of the universe, order is the product of, the result of, the purpose of, an intent, an intelligence, a designer. And that designer must be external to the universe itself, i.e., its creator. Unfortunately, the question of "why" remains unanswered, being merely recycled in an infinite regress, as in "why would an intelligent designer design a universe?"

I, of course, prefer to think of the universe as complete unto itself, and needed no intentional intelligence to activate it.

... from Rod