[But … question. Does e=mc^2 leave no wiggle room for willful acts? Perhaps this is why it cannot be completely reconciled with aspects of other theories—because it cannot account for the whole story. It mathematizes out the authors, for which the actual theory does leave/hold room/space.]
Not all change is creative/progressive… divergent change is destructive (but privative, so unsustainable, not self-sustaining)… Convergent change is creative toward eternal synthesis (ontologically prior, omnitemporal, self-sustaining). That means it pivots self=other, or person=person, or (from @Jakob) valuer=valuer. Both kinds of change can move mountains, but only one of them builds up to an eternal one, and manifests it here, now.
Discuss amongst y’selves.
Distinguish between:
how things ACTUALLY ought to happen
how WE THINK they ought to happen (divergent, rather than convergent, humanmade laws) versus how they ACTUALLY OUGHT to happen
how they actually do happen when we BRUTE FORCE how WE THINK they ought to happen
how they happen when we FLOW WITH (WE THINK in alignment with) how they ACTUALLY OUGHT) to happen
Privation can never be original, is always parasitic on the answer to what came first, what has always been (a priori).
What is the artist of the work we incarnate/inhabit saying/expressing in intuitable purposiveness, or even dissonance, or negative space, that provokes a creative participation in interpretation, both eisogetically (revaluatively, contributively) and exegetically?
To repeat:
Not all change is creative/progressive… divergent change is destructive (but privative, so unsustainable, not self-sustaining)… Convergent change is creative toward eternal synthesis (ontologically prior, omnitemporal, self-sustaining). That means it pivots self=other, or person=person, or (from @Jakob) valuer=valuer. Both kinds of change can move mountains, but only one of them builds up to an eternal one, and manifests it here, now.
Discuss amongst y’selves.
[But … question. Does e=mc^2 leave no wiggle room for willful acts? Perhaps this is why it cannot be completely reconciled with aspects of other theories—because it cannot account for the whole story. It mathematizes out the authors, for which the actual theory does leave/hold room/space.]
