« Home | How Do You Stop An Addiction? » | Apophysis Two » | Apophysis Fractals - First Attempts » | A Partial Random Anthology » | Decision Points - Back to the 'is' Theory » | A Gift for an Angel » | Googlewhack (serendipity) » | Hoe Do You Spell 'Aaarrrgh......'? » | 3-Dimensional Tag » | Speaking With Authority »

Eleventh Out of a Million Plus

"When in about 1880, I prepared the first draft schemes for systematizing the still completely chaotic subject of general chemistry, I knew of no better way to aid myself than by attempting simultaneously to formulate a universal system for all sciences.....Whether that coherence obtains universally is a question that need not be answered here since only those parts where the coherence has actually been found become a part of Science." -Wilhelm Ostwald. (Nobel prize winner for chemistry, 1909)

I find three things of interest in this quote. First, the capitalization of the word "Science", as if it's a sub-domain of existence. Secondly, the implied acquiescence to the reality that things exist which don't "fit" into the science spectrum, and that's ok...he doesn't deny their existence, just their failure to adhere to his set of rules at the moment. Third, his approach to organizing chemistry, was to simultaneously seek a similar organization to science in general. Essentially, this is what I'm doing with my theory...so, in spite of what I said a few days ago about calling it a 'theory', I shall continue to refer to it that way. You may obviously feel free to still reject that word!

You may have noticed that a few weeks ago, I put a stats tracker on my site just for fun. One of its features is to let you know where each "reader" came from and, if it was through a search, which words were used to hit your site. Reminding me a little bit of the current book I'm reading about Googlewhacking, yesterday someone came across my entry for the Five Basic Tenets by entering the three words, "universal, pattern, triangle". So I did the same search on google, and discovered that I was 11th in the list out of 1,180,000 possible sites!! All of a sudden, I felt a combination of vindication intermixed with a tinge of what it must be like to win a gold-medal victory! I took out the word "triangle" (it's in the header of my blog site), and the count for "universal, pattern" jumped to 30,800,000, and I disappeared into the mists somewhere down the list. I had no idea there were as many people on the same quest as I am!!

So, emboldened by this new strength in numbers, I offer you the next little tidbit in my slowly unfolding theory.

Remember some time back when I drew a mental word-line, and placed one word at one end and its NOT-word at the other? I declared this line to be infinitely long, because the number of conditions and shades that lie between a concept and it's NOT-concept is essentially everything else. Well, obviously, if your life's journey was to explore where you "stood" on a particular issue, it would only seem appropriate that you explore all the alternatives so you'd be aware of the options available...clearly an impossible, as well as improbable task.

But let's employ the mirror perspective. Instead of "looking forward" at this infinitely long line of possible positions, consider what I said in the earlier blog. If all these conditions have been rank-ordered, the ONLY one really worth considering is the one next closest to you. (i.e. "one step" towards the other end of the line). The problem is, you don't have another option to weigh it against, except for the familiar case (i.e. the current position you are taking...the 'end' of the line that you are currently occupying...). It's a special case...it's the 'dead end' problem. To have a generalized theory, it must apply for ALL conditions, no exceptions. So we need a single, common rule that applies to any and every point on the line. Do I go left, do I go right or do I stay where I am? As long as you are at some point ON the line, it's a trivial exercise. Compare your options, and make your choice. It's the 'fork in the road problem'. The difficulty lies in the fact that you're still always "somewhere in between where you're really trying to be (i.e. figuring out what 'stand' to take on a given issue)".

Here's the key point folks. On this entire line of positions, the only two of any significant relevance are the two end points. Furthermore, they are the two that you want to choose between. Many times it has been said that the shortest distance between any two points is a straight line. Well, in this case, that's exactly NOT true.

Go stand on one end of the line...either one, it doesn't matter. Let's pick the line defined by {HATE,.....NOT-HATE} for our illustration. One simple procedural step needs to be done first. We need to turn around and look at {the opposite, the mirror image, the absence of...the NOT-WORD} from our current perspective. Here's how we do it.

Turn the straight line into an ALMOST-CIRCLE. Pick up your end and drag it with you to almost touch the other end. Not too difficult a task since, after all, opposites tend to attract each other. There's only room between the two ends for....wait for it......'is'.

For you. You are a dot. You are the variable 'd' in this illustration. You are the dot between HATE and NOT-HATE.....and you are no longer standing on the infinitely long line between the two positions...jump into the void....make a stand...commit yourself. Once you've done that, you only have the two 'pure' options to consider. They are your only options.. All other visions, versions and variations are watered down, partial compromises that don't define a position, an ethic, a principle clearly. It is said that it's a fine line between a and b, between insanity and genius, between right and wrong.. It sure is. YOU are that fine line, comprised of all the 'dots' that make you. You don't "take a stand" on one side of an issue or the other....you make a stand between the two sides, and then choose which one you support, either inherently or by conscious decision. You ARE the lines you draw, they are your self-portrait. In the pure solution, you become the line, and the line becomes you....not everything else on one side or the other.

So, on an issue, you don't "draw a line that you won't step over", you are the line the separates what you stand for (or against) from all else. That's why I've maintained all along that a binary choice is a three-way decision. You reject everything to your left, and everything to your right as being a part of your essence, your 'is', your being, and you are what is left over. You are the choices you make yourself to be.

The eternal triangle of choice.

It is our goal, as humans, I maintain, to search out these pure positions. The fact that we all never reach our perfect state (however we perceive it to be) gives purpose to the search, gives birth to faith, and gives trust in quest.

Which way do we turn? Which face do we show? Who stands with us? Near us? Against us?

We start from a seed, we have the power of self-generation and regeneration, we have the internal essence of choice (consciousness/overriding the default), and we have the essence of evolutionary growth (unconsciousness/defaulting). My position is that these fundamentals can be generalized and extrapolated to all, as stated in tenet #5.

For today's PEACE link, I entered the three words, "triangle, universal, peace", and it lead me to a site about rocks that are being gathered from around the world for a Healing Wall. It includes rocks from Varanasi, India that Buddha spoke of in his writings; Encinitas, California; stones cherished by naitives in Alaska; and Ayer's Rock in Australia.

The fascinating thing (synchronicity at work again!) was the following quote from the article, by an art teacher who collects triangle-shaped rocks [the parts in square brackets are my additions]:

"An idea, thought or spark of creation [what I call a 'seed'] is the urge to produce something with this space [what I refer to as the ability to self-generate]. Imagine that thought or idea as a dot. Now the dot or thought needs help to produce itself so it is looking for another thought that needs it as well [what I refer to as the two ends of the line...opposites attract]. Two thoughts or dots can now connect with the use of a "line." The original thought or idea is not yet complete, more needs to be added and so another dot will help create a flat "shape" called a triangle. A triangle is the first geometric shape that requires other points of thought or dots to create the structure. A circle is different in that it begins with a thought and returns to itself in a complete rotation. It is already inclusive."

There is order to the Universe. Even within the chaos theory, there is order.


Links to this post

Create a Link

  • I'm Evydense
  • From Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • And I'm tired of living in the shadow of narrow-mindedness and ignorance. So here's the fax, Jack! "The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and three hundred and sixty-two admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision." - Lynne Lavner*** I'm confused; curious; satisfied; realistically resigned to being a frustrated idealist; usually at peace with myself, but not always. Amazed at how little I know, and wondering how much I need to understand.
More of Me