Multisense Realism

This latest chart improves on previous versions, hopefully simplifying and clarifying without losing anything important.

Note the comments in parentheses are critical for those who do not understand the basic premise of Pansensitvity, which is that sense* is the Primordial Identity and therefore cannot be truly absent**.

Logic is listed as Indirect Sense, emphasizing that in fact logic relies on local sensation and sense-making but is mediated through distance; rationally or empirically + rationally, experience can be conditioned and refined by observation, deduction, measurement etc. Rationality, like ratio, is always a comparison between known features – a reading between the lines of fact to arrive at a more universal and conclusive truth.

Logic then is sense making which is theoretically independent of sense. It reaches for evidence and what is evidence through the evidence, but it can never be manifested directly without being clothed in some sensible aesthetic. The great mistake of our era, in my opinion, is the failure to recognize and accept this, preferring, as people have done since Plato and beyond, to conceive of a perfect nature beyond sense. A landless land of formless forms, working its magic from behind the scenes. In my view, the key to understanding why this is unlikely is to understand that the possibility of pattern recognition must precede the constellation of the first pattern. That capacity for recognition, that sense, can in theory be other things, feel other ways than as a pattern. It doesn’t need to be coherent, or rational, or subjective or objective, it only needs to participate in making and appreciating aesthetic phenomena. From there, order and forms can follow, but order and forms can’t in and of themselves, invent the sense that they are composed of.

The numbers seem like a good addition also. The 1 row is the the basic unit, so the physical unit is Electro-Magnetic Dynamism and the phenomenal unit is Sensory-Motive Presence. The E-M unit is the Logical equivalent, i.e., it is dependent on Sensory Motive presence and does not exist independently. There was matter around even before biology evolved, but I think only because what we call molecules are, within their own inertial frame, nothing but sensations. The repetition and significance of sensations gave rise to time, not the other way around. There can be no such thing as unconscious particles in a void. That is mistaking the inferences of logic about structure for concrete sensory presentations. Voids in a void unseen by a void-seer is a failed cosmology in my view.

The 0 row is such a void. The digital underpinnings of inference technologies like statistical analysis and computation, allow us to construct artificial aesthetics and prosthetic powers to amplify our motives. My conjecture that the entire subatomic substrate may be in some sense theoretical, or gradually evanescent into inference can seem like a huge red flag for crackpottery, and it could be, but my hunch is that everyone is wrong and I’m right :).

By this I mean that literally atoms are slightly less real than molecules, and sub-atomic particles are perhaps exponentially less real. Because we are pushing the envelope of our own range of participation in the cosmos, our measurements increasingly feed back on themselves, and we are actually doing surgery on the scalpel that we forgot we are using. Ok, that sounds insane, but if you add up everything that we have observed about quantum mechanics – the uncertainty, the entanglement, the particle-wave ambiguity…it is not out of the question that what we are looking at is that the nature of light is actually seeing itself. Again, not human seeing, but molecular seeing, astrophysical seeing…light is sensitivity. That’s why it has an absolute speed in every frame of reference, and why there are reference frames in the first place.

The Row 2 level is where we live most of the time. We feel like a private person in a body which is a form in a world of forms. Can we all agree that most of us feel like that most of the time when we are awake? Waking up, gaining consciousness (or more consciousness) seems to bring us back to where we left off in our world – our public world. The private “world” is ok as a metaphor, but does it really seem like a world, or does it seem more like a fugue of intentions and distractions – of performances and rehearsals. It’s not a world so much as it is a story that you are co-writing with a partner who might not exist. Maybe that’s just me?

Row 3 is not only higher on the scale, in the sense of a higher frequency, but higher in the sense of being logarithmic to Row 2. Unlike the Row 0 logic of computation, the Geometric-Algebraic level is equivalent to poetry – it has deep and austere mathematical elegance. Topological forms tie out to Algebraic functions. Perfection is revealed conceptually and with purity that can be demonstrated visibly. You can see the sacredness of sacred geometry, and you can prove the significance of algebra factually. On the ‘East side’ of Row 3 is the equal but opposite aesthetic channel of the mytho-poetic. The counterpoint to masculine mathematical ideal space/world is the floridly eidetic, feminine story. The collective unconscious is a cast of characters, ever changing, but, like strange attractors, chaotically repeating themselves…or else they remain fixed as archetypes and repeat the universe around them chaotically, depending on your frame of reference.

The top row contrasts the West side’s ultimate faith in meaningless knowledge with the East side’s faith in unknown meaning. The supreme irony here is that for all of science’s focus on certainty and skepticism, it’s roots emerge directly from the void. Quantum mechanics represents the ultimate triumph of certainty about uncertainty – a final gasp of human reason before sinking into its own self-negation. QM is the reverse of machina ex deus, or a savior of senselessness, ensuring that the futility of all feelings and even ideas and understanding is a fact, and that mathematical fact is all that there can ever be. The irony on the Spiritual side is that for all the praising of God or Spirit, the identity is a question mark. All of the deep meanings that can be derived from worshiping and communing with the divine gives us almost nothing that we can count on other than faith itself. All of the worlds holy scriptures and prophecies have nothing to say about refrigeration or radio broadcasting. If the spirit is eternally full, it is mainly full of advertisements for itself…which turns out to be the bootstrap that science needs to plug in to its cosmology instead of the ‘fertile void’ concept it has fixated on at the moment.

*sense is the full spectrum of sensation, emotion, participation, appreciation, meaning, but not limited to humans, living organisms, minds, or selves. Pansensitivity is the capacity to present and be present, to experience, project, and represent experience.

**Nothingness can only be an abstraction conceived a posteriori of the existence of something which can conceive of absence. There cannot be a priori nothingness, because the potential to change into something else is not nothing. Nothing at all can come from absolutely nothing, so even if such a nothing were to non-exist, we could never contact it in any way.