C-257. Why so much “bi-“
Why “bi-“? Two of this, two of that, and so on. Because it is the character of the Expansion … to slice so as to splice and swing. From Big Bang on. Onward AT, ON the Frontier, actually. A matter of Accord with the Expansion* and its principles of Differentiation, extension and contingent emergent materiality (CEM).
Whether sensOry or sensEry, “bi-ness” is pervasive: sensOry as in the body’s eyes, ears, arms, legs, jaws et al … or sensEry as in the step’s technology of slice and splice (e.g., the pragmatic precept’s slice followed by the teeter-totter’s splice).
A lot of bi-ness. But not yet enough.** An evolutionist, conceptually or theoretically speaking, may be satisfied. The back and forth of a found bi-ness informative enough.*** Development can not settle for that. Especially now that we can see how procedural technology, as in the case of the pragmatic precept (PP), can generate bi-ness to consequent good effect (step strength and CEM) when assisted by the help of ratios and balances.
***
* We need not see post-Big Bang materiality as organically lacking and as “tragically” as Weinberg. We need to see it more completely and accurately. Needed functionality gives us purpose -- purposes, good or evil, notwithstanding. Nor should we discount or suppress religion – until we can surpass it in achieved functionality. Suffering is immediate … and hard, step after step, to bear. Especially alone.
** Why humanity is the sound of one-hand clapping. “Humanity” too.
*** As equitable as “taking turns” may be in conversations, there is a dearth of CEM in most of them.
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2021 R. F. Carter
Whether sensOry or sensEry, “bi-ness” is pervasive: sensOry as in the body’s eyes, ears, arms, legs, jaws et al … or sensEry as in the step’s technology of slice and splice (e.g., the pragmatic precept’s slice followed by the teeter-totter’s splice).
A lot of bi-ness. But not yet enough.** An evolutionist, conceptually or theoretically speaking, may be satisfied. The back and forth of a found bi-ness informative enough.*** Development can not settle for that. Especially now that we can see how procedural technology, as in the case of the pragmatic precept (PP), can generate bi-ness to consequent good effect (step strength and CEM) when assisted by the help of ratios and balances.
* We need not see post-Big Bang materiality as organically lacking and as “tragically” as Weinberg. We need to see it more completely and accurately. Needed functionality gives us purpose -- purposes, good or evil, notwithstanding. Nor should we discount or suppress religion – until we can surpass it in achieved functionality. Suffering is immediate … and hard, step after step, to bear. Especially alone.
** Why humanity is the sound of one-hand clapping. “Humanity” too.
*** As equitable as “taking turns” may be in conversations, there is a dearth of CEM in most of them.
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2021 R. F. Carter
S