If the essence of the universal glue – the “love” or attraction that keeps everything together – is value, and if we take the ‘actor’ of this love as the self-needer - then I wonder what takes place within the black hole around which we revolve. We are all values to this thing. “It loves us”. The black hole at the center of the Galaxy dictates all the attraction, will, intent and choice that is available to us with it’s physics - its “body”.
All present order arises from the pull of this constantly collapsing power. If it were to fall away, a chaotic place of conflicting states and systems would probably destroy all relations until all the mass collapses in a big crunch and orderly expands again. Whatever it is that goes on inside of it, this entity deserves respect. It is not an old and large entity with a wand of power and a cup of magic and a noble frown who takes care of all us forever and beyond. It deserves more respect than to compare it to a human. Nothing against humans, this thing just isn’t human.
The “harmonic resonance” or “mind” of the black hole is transcendent to the situation outside of it, and yet it dictates this outsides every condition. If I were such an entity, I would have a strong urge for the immanent entities to communicate with me, be aware of my presence.
So, science is mans love for God, and technology (“Magic”) is Gods gift to the man who loves him.
Certainly not one who is violating the laws of physics, and not one who is anything other than completely consistent. So, no. But I do might believe that man can butt into his own life by addressing this center of causality directly somehow.
Although black holes are massive, they take up no space. A black hole has the mass of a star in a space infinitesimally smaller than a pinhead. The laws of quantum mechanics and general relativity break down when trying to explain how black holes work. So, in this sense, a black hole makes a nice analogy for God who we can symbolize but not understand. Kind of like death.
Except not exactly “person”-ifying, because despite attributing the human emotion “love” to gravitational force, a black hole “deserves more respect than to compare it to a human”. So more like “divinifying”?
Fair enough, not the first time man has personified/“divinified” inanimate objects. But is this just a means to begin replacing the older, dying beliefs in our minds with Value Ontology?
Rather, I find that the error of modern thought is in mystically personifying humans. As if humans are somehow exempt from the processes that originate in the inanimate, and our consciousness is “magical”, and occupies a whole different frame of reference than, for example, the ones dictated by black holes.
Rather, I prefer to see the human and its consciousness and something entirely compatible with the general fabric of the physical universe.
Without taking a position one way or the other, I would like to observe that this statement can be integrally rephrased as follows: “as the collapsing universe reaches certain limits, it ceases to be physical”.
I sympathise with your point, which is why I do not even mystically personify other humans - just myself.
Though others seem to have a real problem with this philosophy.
It is not a problem if they too think in the same way, even towards me - it’s not like there’s any universal imperative for (supposedly) completely different people to believe things in exact consistency with one another. To assume this is the main error of modern thought, though it is at least an understandable and useful social compulsion.
People never do believe things in exact consistency with one another anyway, even when dealing with the most abstractly reduced of concepts, and even if they aren’t Solipsist.
Given the degree to which I do relate to other humans, which appears to be a greatly significant one, I would in fact consider it more consistent if everyone else was Solipsist.
At the very least, it solves all of your issues of compatibility between human consciousness and the general fabric of the physical universe, since they are “one”. And in my opinion it is the only acceptable way to do so.
Isn’t that like trying to tickle our self? ; since personifying is based upon my/our person ; it’s a loop back ; loopy? We’re a person and it comes natural to think of everything else as a person. Surely you’ve been pissed of by inanimate objects, like a can-opener, mower, or car? My sister pats her car on the dashboard and tells it, “You’re a good car. I love you little car?” The car never answers. It comes easy for person’s to think in personifying terms … our imagination is primed for it … what else do we have as a basis, or reference, other than our very own personal person? The world is more fun, and dramatic, if we personify it. It think black holes just need a big hug. That’s all it’s trying to get, by sucking every thing. And I think if the universe is expanding something is chasing it. Where do you think cartoons come from?
And are one reason God is far away. He doesn’t want to get sucked into one. The Bible says “God is light,” and light gets sucked into a black hole. Then He’d be far, far, away … and minced to smithereens. Much more than a trinity.
But a small reason. Man is the real reason God is far away. Do you blame him?
Just as well. We don’t need him to butt in anyway. He doesn’t have the right to butt in, to snoop in all the time ; always being a peeping-tom … into our privacy … enjoying the live porn … like me watching Bonobo monkeys in a zoo.
