The Antidebate: Experiments in the Art of Sensemaking for a World Gone Slightly Mad.
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 02. 2024
- A film by Katie Teague for Perspectiva.
Katie's CZcams channel is: / @inthemaking412
*
Perspectiva is registered in England and Wales as: Perspectives on Systems, Souls and Society (1170492).
Our charitable project crosses disciplines, and aims to improve the relationships between systems, souls and society in theory and practice. We have public-facing educational programs, an online community, a lively substack newsletter, and a publishing arm, Perspectiva Press, that we founded in 2020.
As a charity, we rely on the generosity of the philanthropic community and greatly value any additional support. To contribute to our work, please consider following us or making a direct donation at the links below.
Subscribe to our substack: perspecteeva.substack.com/
Follow us on X: / perspecteeva
Donate directly to our charitable project: www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_...
This is beautiful and flies in the face of a reality in which money has more to do with policy decisions than attitudes of citizens. Politics is really theater intended to divert attention from policy making controlled by monied interests who support the campaigns of their advocates. Wedge issues simply inflame people. Ultimately they are meaningless to those whose economic success depends on controlling the regulatory and financial environment in which they operate. So long as campaign contributions are unlimited, change will be impossible. He who has the gold, rules.
☀Katie Teague is a human and awesome
Exciting, intriguing, compelling experiment. Thank you for sharing the ideas here. I live in the U.S. and the breakdown of civil discourse is one of my top concerns. If we can't talk to each other, how do we find our way out of this social maelstrom?
To describe this organization just from watching this video: Its about collaboration and destigmatizing the natural emotional reactions that emerge when faced with different ideas. Allowing ourselves to be uncomfortable and express why that is in a space where it is safe to do so. Safe as in, humility without persecution or ostracization. You are fully allowed by the group to be your true morally driven self. The group is seen as an organism striding toward civic cohesion through dialect.
Wonderful! "No power can exist except through unity. No welfare and no well-being can be attained except through consultation." -Bahá‘u’lláh. Baha'is have been consciously and systematically nurturing the art of antidebate (true consultation) for 180 years. I recommend checking out a local community gathering to observe yet another example of hope.
Democracy is an emotional level system, and can't scale up to strangers. Democracy is fantastic, as you've discovered, when individuals get to know one another, and take care in understanding their shared needs before trying to solve their problems. For more complex systems, we need far more freedom to join and leave groups based on shared needs, and we need to focus on intellectual level relationships where the goal is to explore diverse possible solutions and test them out before applying them to the whole group.
Great project or process. In US most of us consume news from commercial TV . Commercial TV needs lots of viewers. It’s goal is to find the most viewers in anyway possible, entertainment or news etc. it’s in human nature to look for information about what we fear. So we get lots of scary movies and news and they lots of viewers and get paid well.
Best wishes in this endeavor.
In the US we inherited the Talking Stick model from the natives. I still find it most useful. Thank you for reminding me.
I also see strong similarities with the Quaker method. Which I think was partly/largely inspired by native peoples.
There's another one called the Apophatic Stick (◔‿◔). O.G Rose and Clayton Nyakana drop into the concept through many of their yt video discussions.
@@ximono I am of Quaker heritage 😄. Also, by chance, an herbalist, which is what the Quakers were to the colonies: The medicine chest of native remedies.
@mcdonald9001Cool 😊 I'm not a Quaker, but consider myself a "friend of friends". I'm also into medicinal herbs but didn't know that. I have to learn more about that time period when the Quakers met the natives.
Thank you so much for sharing this jewel! How can I engage? :D
❤
Im curious...is this bohmian dialogue? Have u heard of Tayria Ward phd she knew bucky fullminster personally...and she is an indigeneous /comparative religions/jungian expert...
Why not use David Bohm's Concept of Dialogue?
Yes...Dr Tayria Ward...family friend of buckys Fs teaches this method...sarah Peyton resonant language is also helpful
Hi so at 17 minutes in the reflection about moving into practice and the different skill sets needed being more relational. I was wondering if this process was informed by group formation theory ? I’m sure it probably was ? Forming norming storming performing? If not google institute of group leaders
...slightly?...
Thought the intentions are well meaning it’s still a reactionary process. You need to create a non binary foundation grounded on self evident truths that transcends all people. Consensus building should be the goal by finding the common good with in people to become more open minded and less dogmatic
excuse me Chris I'm speakin'
Nuace is the key to eudaimonia.
[🕒A year ago the difference between 0 and 1 changed and why that matters]:
Both sides in the Religion vs Science debates use the Materialism/Empiricism version of logic, math and physics which say 1D, 2D, 3D and 4D are "locally real" and 0D is "not locally real".
Unfortunately for Materialism/Empiricism, quantum physics proved the observable universe is actually "not locally real" a year ago (Oct 2022 was the earliest article i could find). The immediate lead-up to this was the Nobel Prize proving quantum entanglement.
Well over 300 years ago Leibniz vs Newton competed for the title of "Universal Genius". We chose Newton, obviously, but an interesting point is that nobody ever proved Materialism/Empiricism... we simply thought it "ought" to be true.
The only proof that happened was a year ago when quantum physics flat-out disproved Materialism/Empiricism:
The observable universe is "not locally real" and that proves we chose the wrong guy, full stop 🛑.
Zero vs nonzero numbers are what we assign "locally real" and "not locally real" to. If zero is one thing then nonzero is the other. This is due to zero being "not-natural" whereas nonzero numbers are "natural".
The absolute version of the observable universe proposed by Newton simply does not exist and it never has (was never proven anyhow, just disproven).
Leibniz said 0D is necessary and more real; having no predecessor and 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D are contingent and less real; all having an immediate predecessor.
Necessary and more real = locally real
Contingent and less real = not locally real
Leibniz was correct and that means we're all taught contradictory logic, math and physics.
[What is the difference between Newton and Leibniz calculus?]:
Newton's calculus is about functions.
Leibniz's calculus is about relations defined by constraints.
In Newton's calculus, there is (what would now be called) a limit built into every operation.
In Leibniz's calculus, the limit is a separate operation.
Study zero (not-natural) vs nonzero (natural) numbers since the difference between 0 (zero) and 1 (nonzero) changed a year ago.
Then:
0 = not locally real
1 = locally real
Now:
0 = locally real
1 = not locally real
It's about time the same tired Religion vs Science arguments we've heard for over 300 years can be updated (on both sides).
Holy guacamole we need new conversations 💤.
Contradictory: *impossible to be true.*
Non-contradictory: *possible to be true.*
❌️Contradictory Theology, Mathematics and Physics (knowing good; functions; limit built into every operation)❌️:
1. The Gen 1 character and the Gen 2 character are the exact same character (knowing good).
2. Zero is not fundamental and nonzero numbers are fundamental (Newton/Einstein calculus).
3. 0D is not locally real and 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D are locally real (Newton/Einstein physics).
⬆️ this is what we're all taught. Materialist/Empiricist version of reality.⬆️
✅️Non-contradictory Theology, Mathematics and Physics (knowing good from evil; relations defined by constraints; limit is a separate operation)✅️:
1. The Gen 1 character and the Gen 2 character are polar opposite characters (knowing good from evil).
2. Zero is fundamental and nonzero numbers are not fundamental (Leibniz calculus).
3. 0D is locally real and 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D are not locally real (Leibniz physics).
⬆️ this is what quantum physics proved a year ago and if Theology doesn't match Math and Physics then you're doing it wrong. Realist version of reality.⬆️
[🦄Materialism/Empiricism💩 version of Religion]:
Interpreting the Bible with the Genesis 1 character and the Genesis 2 character as the exact same character generates near 70,000 contradictions (see reason project) and requires heavy apologetics. A Bible interpretation which includes near 70,000 contradictions (impossible to be true) is what a snake-oil salesman would sell you. 🐍
[🦤Materialism/Empiricism💩 version of Science]:
The standard model of physics is Einstein's 3+1 space-time, which are considered locally real, where 0 is considered not locally real...been that way since Newton for zero vs nonzero numbers.
Problem is...quantum physics proved the observable universe (1D, 2D, 3D and 4D) is actually not locally real...and that was over a year ago.
(Yes, Leibniz was correct after all.) 🦧
[Layman's terminology of locally real vs not locally real]:
locally real = more real (Leibniz said "necessary")
not locally real = less real (Leibniz said "contingent")
[Closing arguments]:
The Materialism/Empiricism package contains within itself all the contradictions, false dichotomies, paradoxes and literally "life's biggest questions". It's been a year why is everyone still using Logic, Calculus and Geometry that is contradictory at the most fundamental level? Legitimate question 🙋.
If both Religion and Science removed their "Materialist/Empiricist-perspective shades 👓" (contradictory for a year) and put on their "Realist-perspective shades 👓" (non-contradictory for a year) they would not only cease to argue...they'd agree with each other (world first 🪙).
[infinity and zero, theology, soul]:
in·fin·i·ty
MATHEMATICS
a number greater than any assignable quantity or countable number (symbol ∞).
(In counting numbers 0 is the subject where positive integers "1, 2, 3 and 4 etc" are the objects).
What is the meaning of zero in Webster's dictionary?
a. : the arithmetical symbol 0 or 0̸ denoting the absence of all magnitude or quantity.
b. : additive identity. specifically : the number between the set of all negative numbers and the set of all positive numbers.
Zero is the most important number in mathematics and is both a real and an imaginary number with a horizon through it.
Zero-dimensional space is the greatest dimension in physics and is both a real and an imaginary dimension with an event horizon through it.
Isn't⚡God⚡supposed to be outside of space (1D, 2D, 3D) and time (4D)?
Well, 0D is outside of space and time:
0D (not-natural) = dimensionless and timeless
1D, 2D, 3D (natural) = spatial dimensions
4D (natural) = temporal dimension
Read Leibniz's Monadology 📖 and consider that the Monad is the zero-dimensional space binding our quarks together with the strong force (it is). The other side of the Monad is Monos (Alone) and this side is Monas (Singularity) and there's an event horizon between them. So El/Elohim or Theos/Logos etc pick your language.
Quarks are dimensionless (no size) and timeless (not-natural). The two main quark spin configs two-down, one-up (subatomic to neutron) and two-up, one-down (subatomic to proton) could easily be construed as the male (upward facing trinity) and female (downward facing trinity) image that Elohim made us in during Genesis 1.
Quarks (no spatial extension) experience all 3 fundamental forces plus have a fractional electric charge⚡and that's why protons and neutrons (spatial extension) have electrons orbiting around them.
In Geometry any new dimension has to contain within it all previous dimensions. This holds true with it being impossible for atomic protons and neutrons (spatial extension) to exist without subatomically containing within themselves quarks (no spatial extension).
"Something (spatial extension) from Nothing (no spatial extension)".
A) The postulated soul, 👻, has
1. no spatial extension
2. zero size
3. exact location only
B) Quarks are mass with no size measured in Megaelectron Volts. Mass with no size is a unique equation in that it has no spatial extension.
Conclusion: A and B are the same thing.
[Important point 👉 (dont forget)]:
0D (zero) is different from 1D-10D (nonzero) because 0D is a not-natural dimension whereas 1D-10D are natural dimensions.
Not-natural = ectropy
Natural = entropy
0D monad (Creator event horizon)
1D, 2D, 3D are spatial (space) dimensions
1D line
2D width
3D height
4D, 5D, 6D are temporal (time) dimensions
4D length
5D breadth
6D depth
7D, 8D, 9D are spectral (energy) dimensions
7D continuous
8D emission
9D absorption
10D black hole (Destroyer event horizon)
It is impossible for anything 1D-9D to approach 0D or 10D due to their event horizons. 10D contains a placeholder 0 (not locally real) for its event horizon. Only 0D is locally real on this side.
The other side of the event horizon at the zero-of yourself (near horizon) is God.
The other side of the event horizon of a black hole (far horizon) is not God.
Anything we know about black holes (Destroyer) we know the opposite of that is true for monads (Creator), and we know some crazy sci-fi stuff about black holes.
It's a mirror universe with 0D at the center. This side (Elohim; Singularity) is contingent and less real (the natural dimensions anyway) and the other side (El; Alone) is necessary and more real (pretty sure the entirety of the other side remains locally real).
The zero-of ourselves (more real 👻) was made by the Holy Trinity (Deity; possessive; God's) in Genesis 1 which should not be confused with the Unholy Trinity (Deity; plural; gods) in Genesis 2-3 who messes with the 1D, 2D, 3D parts of us (less real 🤷♂️).
Elohim was "syncretized" to just mean El during the Babylonian captivity. To avoid this simply use the Latin, "unsyncretized", counterpart Deity for possessive (God's) and plural (gods) context. (Septuagint and Vulgate use Post-Babylonian captivity "syncretized" meaning of Elohim so mistranslate as Theos and Deus, respectively).
Gen 2-3 introduces the placeholder Elohim (not locally real) and their blind, foolish chief running amok. Plurality of bad guy that 'are' each other and 'are not' El.
Nephilim are sons of the false Elohim associated with Yahweh (the BAAL, or LORD, of the gods).
[Monad in philosophy/cosmogony]:
Monad (from Greek μονάς monas, "singularity" in turn from μόνος monos, "alone") refers, in cosmogony, to the Supreme Being, divinity or the sum "I am" of all things.
The concept was reportedly conceived by the Pythagoreans and may refer variously to a single source acting alone, or to an indivisible origin, or to both.
The concept was later adopted by other philosophers, such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who referred to the Monad as an *elementary particle.*
It had a *geometric counterpart,* which was debated and discussed contemporaneously by the same groups of people.
[In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's *Monad,* from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of *the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together* using the strong nuclear force]:
1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong force.
2) Interconnectedness: Leibniz's monads are interconnected, each reflecting the entire universe from its own perspective. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together.
3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions.
4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter.
5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz.
6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics.
7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions.
[Monad in mathematics, science and technology]:
Monad (biology), a historical term for a simple unicellular organism
Monad (category theory), a construction in category theory
Monad (functional programming), functional programming constructs that capture various notions of computation
Monad (homological algebra), a 3-term complex
Monad (nonstandard analysis), the set of points infinitesimally close to a given point
"Some first follow the true Savior but then turn away to worship a dead man." - the revelation of Peter
THE WORLD RULER TRIES TO KILL ME
And then a voice of the world ruler came to the angels: “I am god and there is no other god but me.” But I laughed joyfully when I examined his conceit. But he went on to say, “Who is the human?”
And the entire host of his angels who had seen Adam and his dwelling were laughing at his smallness. And thus did their thought come to be removed outside the majesty of the heavens, away from the human of truth, whose name they saw, since he is in a small dwelling place. They are foolish and senseless in their empty thought, namely, their laughter, and it was contagion for them.
The whole greatness of the fatherhood of the spirit was at rest in its places. And I was with him, since I have a thought of a single emanation from the eternal ones and the unknowable ones, undefiled and immeasurable. I placed the small thought in the world, having disturbed them and frightened the whole multitude of the angels and their ruler. And I was visiting them all with fire and flame because of my thought.
And everything pertaining to them was brought about because of me. And there came about a disturbance and a fight around the seraphim and cherubim, since their glory will fade, and there was confusion around Adonaios on both sides and around their dwelling, up to the world ruler and the one who said, “Let us seize him.” Others again said, “The plan will certainly not materialize.” For Adonaios knows me because of hope. And I was in the mouths of lions. And as for the plan that they devised about me to release their error and their senselessness, I did not succumb to them as they had planned. And I was not afflicted at all.
Those who were there punished me, yet I did not die in reality but in appearance, in order that I not be put to shame by them because these are my kinsfolk. I removed the shame from me, and I did not become fainthearted in the face of what happened to me at their hands. I was about to succumb to fear, and I suffered merely according to their sight and thought so that no word might ever be found to speak about them.
For my death, which they think happened, happened to them in their error and blindness, since they nailed their man unto their death. Their thoughts did not see me, for they were deaf and blind. But in doing these things, they condemn themselves. Yes, they saw me; they punished me.
It was another, their father, who drank the gall and the vinegar; it was not I. They struck me with the reed; it was another, Simon, who bore the cross on his shoulder. It was another upon whom they placed the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the rulers and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory. And I was laughing at their ignorance.
I think the antidebate would have greater impact if some ecological insights were thrown into the mix. Humanity is consuming 1.75 Earths, the carrying capacity is about 0.5 Earths. Therefore we need to shrink the global economy by about 70% to get back within carrying capacity. 100*(1.75-0.5)/1.75. I would like to hear an antidebate after this animation is shared with the participants.
czcams.com/video/yyEEJGoaLd4/video.html
great video. Though I thought the Earth had the resources to support 50 billion?
I heard at least three eco-centric comments in this video and felt they dramatically expanded the potentials for the discourse.
@@polymathpark What persuaded you to think that?
@@AntiGrowthAlliance old statistics.
Nirvana lithium came out 1991 so did the first lithium battery....lithium mining is killing us for ai and disposable vapes...150million dumped in america and killing wildlife....not to mention displacement of the 1st nations again for mining it for ai etc....we arent going to change it unless the dopamine hits get swapped out for real connection(cyrulnik)