C-3. Where to look
The things of nature, this and that particular, are not the same as the Nature of things. Everything is not just every thing. If we want to understand the Nature of things, where should we look?
What are we looking for? If consequentiality is the sine qua non of our being and becoming then nothing of consequence is to be neglected. Where is consequentiality most completely evident? And from where should we view it? (Would we do better if we could stand outside the “universe” and see it all?).
The Copernican Revolution marked a change in our focus of attention. From dwelling (all too self-consciously) on earth’s and humans’ centrality — and origin as in accord with an underlying Order of things, a perversion of “Know thyself,” we turned away as professional observers from earth and its inhabitants’ behaviors toward the sun as the center of an ordered nature. (Asking questions about the Order of things is quite defensible, but the problems are here and now in the behaviors, absent as well as present, that are relevant to these problems. For the latter to be solved we need to focus on the Nature of things, in which is contained whatever order there is.)
One-step behavioral entities, of and in earthly bodies as well as of orbiting bodies in the heavens, have claimed much of our attention. But are not multi-step behavioral entities – humans exemplary so – more consequential? More consequential in the sense of frequency, more consequential in the sense of variety?
Where we look then, with respect both to our position as observers and to the focus of our attention, has reason to be here where consequentiality is most evident, There are more collisions, especially those arranged (II: Compositional change) here on earth among us step makers and takers. Collisions manifest consequentiality.
It seems there might be a case for wanting to be an observer before and/or after Everything but not much of a case for wanting to be an observer outside of Everything. Given partial order and consequentiality we are well placed, if not all that well focused on, where we are for a more complete and accurate understanding of our condition.
Where to look? Here and now, but not just at particulars. Look at problems (I), situational (Psit) and, especially, behavioral (Pbeh).
Are we in balance (XI) with respect to our focus of attention? Is behavior, and thus consequentiality, getting its due?
(c) 2010 R. F. Carter
What are we looking for? If consequentiality is the sine qua non of our being and becoming then nothing of consequence is to be neglected. Where is consequentiality most completely evident? And from where should we view it? (Would we do better if we could stand outside the “universe” and see it all?).
The Copernican Revolution marked a change in our focus of attention. From dwelling (all too self-consciously) on earth’s and humans’ centrality — and origin as in accord with an underlying Order of things, a perversion of “Know thyself,” we turned away as professional observers from earth and its inhabitants’ behaviors toward the sun as the center of an ordered nature. (Asking questions about the Order of things is quite defensible, but the problems are here and now in the behaviors, absent as well as present, that are relevant to these problems. For the latter to be solved we need to focus on the Nature of things, in which is contained whatever order there is.)
One-step behavioral entities, of and in earthly bodies as well as of orbiting bodies in the heavens, have claimed much of our attention. But are not multi-step behavioral entities – humans exemplary so – more consequential? More consequential in the sense of frequency, more consequential in the sense of variety?
Where we look then, with respect both to our position as observers and to the focus of our attention, has reason to be here where consequentiality is most evident, There are more collisions, especially those arranged (II: Compositional change) here on earth among us step makers and takers. Collisions manifest consequentiality.
It seems there might be a case for wanting to be an observer before and/or after Everything but not much of a case for wanting to be an observer outside of Everything. Given partial order and consequentiality we are well placed, if not all that well focused on, where we are for a more complete and accurate understanding of our condition.
Where to look? Here and now, but not just at particulars. Look at problems (I), situational (Psit) and, especially, behavioral (Pbeh).
Are we in balance (XI) with respect to our focus of attention? Is behavior, and thus consequentiality, getting its due?
(c) 2010 R. F. Carter
S