Posted by johnboy on January 25, 19101 at 10:13:25:
In Reply to: Christ OS posted by Philoman on January 24, 19101 at 12:56:07:
Dear Philo and PxOS Systems Analysts:
can anyone summarize where we are, so far, in the development of this paradigm? where is there consensus? where disagreement?
as i appreciate it, Philo is claiming that PxOS was downloaded, installed or whatever, once and for all, on all computers throughout all of created history (with some variations on the theme as to how this took place retrospectively for those who lived prior to the Incarnation)
metaphorically, some seem to be struggling with how radically new this upgrade was, whether it was a tremendous cross-platform software engineering feat or was simply the latest enhanced version completely debugged after a beta release
one on hand, i think of folks like Tipler (who wrote __The Physics of Immortality__) or Kurzweil (who wrote __The Age of Spiritual Machines__) and i can see a very natural evolutionary trajectory to human consciousness
one the other hand, i recall all of the classical arguments of the "Interpretive Debate" regarding Mystical Experience and pretty much agree with William James that this mind-body discussion is going to be going on forever
maybe we need to separate the process from the product, the methods from the systems? i'm not saying drop them but only suggest we remain always aware of our presuppositions and their far-reaching implications
also, maybe we can embrace a common philosophical approach? much has been accomplished in the field of complexity theory with various emergence paradigms by using a hierarchical scheme for reality; this metaphysics (manner in which we ask questions about reality's fundamental nature) can accomodate both dualists and nondualists, supernaturalists and naturalists, explaining how order emerges out of chaos, allowing for both teleological (purposeful evolution) and nonteleological (aimless, blind chance) hermeneutics (perspectives)
using a hierarchical universe or chain of being, we can imagine how there can be ontological discontinuity that is only "apparent" while not systematically denying the possibility that there just might be a realm, a domain which encompasses our own and which we can but penetrate but not fully embrace --- this domain needn't be thought of as over us, as a level per se, but maybe could be conceived of as a field or something similar
perhaps we struggle as to the origin of the Christ OS upgrade precisely because we very humanly want to identify the precise cause; but need this be so in the age of such quantum realities as nonlocality? psychological realities as synchronicity? biological phenomena suggesting morphic resonance?
perhaps we can turn to the world of holography? of holons? of fractals? or could return to the ideas of Plato? the metaphysics of Aristotle? the philosophy of Aquinas?
maybe, just maybe we needn't abandon causal explanations for phenomena whatsoever and can now grasp the time-honored principles of logical cause, formal cause, final cause and place them back in our epistemological brief cases to be used in physics and metaphysics, biology and theology?
maybe, too, we can admit the inherent limitations which exist by definition and which all of the time-honored traditions recognized; yes, any good theology nurtures mystery, requires the occulting, the closing off of some knowledge (funny, this occurs in physics, too)
i ramble, but i'd like to close by affirming the PxOS metaphor by suggesting that some of the contradictory positions in this forum can be resolved by remembering that statements in the domain of mystery which are "anagogical" are not necessarily in conflict with opposing statements articulated in the realm of science, which are metaphorical
PxOS is ontologically discontinuous = true, anagogically (Fe and Charlotte).
PxOS is ontologically continuos = true, metaphorically (Loretta and Ivan).
PxOS is neither discontinuous nor continuous = true, unitively (Philo and Woody).
These statements can all be true in a hierarchical universe. I
think we can get past our epistemological (how we know what we know)
impasses and ontological (our questions about being) roadblocks, can
keep our metaphysical presuppositions in tact, and still take this
PxOS metaphor for a nice drive in cybernetic country!
Efficient cause may be the engine but logical cause might just be the
transmission.
Let's roll!
So, what are the implications of PxOS for the life of prayer? for the life of charity and service?
thanks,
jboy