Cycles and Resistance
 

August, 2001

Dear William,

'Resistance' quite naturally functions in Nature: a forest will offer
resistance to the wind. But there is a 'balance of Nature', a 'Ma'at'.
(Ma'at is the ancient Egyptian Goddess of Balance, Harmony and Universal Order)  When this part of Nature I am describing is in balance, the forest will slow down the winds long enough to capture its clouds and cause them to rain.

Balance as a pathology?

A monothinking*, modern monotheist or capitalist will claim that this forest is competing for rain. It is acting in its own best interest. It is acting at the expense of other parts of the same 'Nature' where less rain falls.
*(Monothinking is the direct result of a monotheistic religion and a strictly linear, rational train of thought:  it is the thinking where only polarities exist and abstractions are valued above reality)

These other parts of Nature, deprived of 'some' wind and rain, become 'savannah' or grasslands. Even further from the prevailing wind's source of moisture, Nature eventually becomes a desert. According to this 'either-or' logic, a desert is totally deprived of moisture due to the self-serving nature of the forest. That is the monothinking law of 'supply and demand'.

Balance as healthy adaptation

A sine curve is a mathematical function used for measuring waves and determining wavelengths. One measures the highest point of a wave as well as its lowest point, plots its course, and determines the exact center between the highest and lowest points of the wave. Please note these three characteristics:

1. waves are cyclical
2. waves tend to continue forever
3. waves encounter resistance and this encounter changes the waves.

Now let's take the philosophical tenet or observation that "there is no straight line in Nature." This observation is the result of the force of 'resistance' on all wave functions. The exact center of a continuing sine curve or wave is considered to be a straight line. But it only 'looks' that way on paper. In Nature, all waves seem to curve. The earth itself is the best example: its annual cycle around the sun does not bring the earth back into the exact spot it occupied a year before, because, in turn, the sun also moves along its orbit, probably around the Sirius stars.

The ultimate 'straight line' used to be light, until Einstein theorized that even light bends. Chances are that it, being a wave, encounters 'resistance' and changes its 'nature' or wavelength ever so slightly.

The most practical example of resistance is our lightbulb. The flow of electrons in a metal wire encounters a different metal through which the electrons cannot flow as fast: that 'different' metal, let's say tungsten, heats up and provides light in a vacuum tube. Since the flow of electrons has been interrupted by this resistance, its changes the nature of that flow, electrons are 'lost' and turn into heat and we have to generate more.

The point is that 'resistance' is not a pathology. Resistance is the mirror of co-existence. Everything that exists resists everything else that exists. This commonality of resistance as the basis of coexistence is also at the heart of Quantum Physics. David Boehm aptly summed this pervasive effect we have on everything, including one another as 'participation'. We participate not only in each other's lives, but also with everything else that exists.

Even in Nature, within the basic life forms of a forest, if the forest is too thin and weak, its 'resistance' will be feeble and it will not be able to slow the winds and clouds down enough to precipitate adequate rainfall.  That situation would correspond with the low end of this microecological sine curve. If the forest is too thick and stops the wind for too long, it receives a deluge that will wash away its soil and eventually thin the forest. This situation would correspond to to the high end of the microecological sine curve for this forest.

Since this sine-wave function with its inherent but constantly changing set of resistance represents the 'reality' of Nature, is it an alibi? Is this 'reality' nothing more than a "scientific and political position... for violence and ignorance?"

One of the assumptions about life forms on earth is that they all have the intelligence to adapt to the various resistance Nature serves up and be able to survive - most of the time. They 'observe' changes in resistance somehow and compensate as these changes happen, without being aware of 'history'.

I have written before about 'intelligence'. Joseph Chilton Pearce calls 'intelligence' the condition of harming neither ourselves nor others.  Moreover, 'intelligence' is not a function of the neocortex. Intellect, reasoning, imagination, intuition, these are functions of the neo-cortex.  Intelligence is a function of life itself. Most likely we have it on the cellular level, if not actually programmed into our DNA.

The 'normal status of human beings' is to sense and participate in the 'resistance' that every other being and thing exerts on us. We in turn 'resist' the cold by clothing ourselves and building shelters. We 'resist' space by building vehicles
that help us traverse space. We grease the vehicle axles to lower resistance. In the process, however, we create another sort of 'wind':  Europe and North America, for example, has created the mass importation of oil from wherever they could get hold of it, changing (creating new resistance to) the ecology of the entire world.

The development of the human neocortex itself, with its dual function of
rational as well as irrational thinking has also created a new resistance, a built-in dichotomy. This new brain can be either a gateway to a more complex way of intelligence - adapting to nature - or to pathology - resisting one or the other of our own new brain functions!

Most cultures and political systems have chosen to resist and deny one or the other of these natural functions.  Inasmuch as they succeed with a segment of their population, I can accept the fact that paranoia is pervasive: it is the fear of change. Because the natural flow of our own brain functions has been interrupted and the two different ways of participating in ecology or Nature have been denied or repressed, change now triggers fear. That leaves room for Psychoanalysis.

To claim, however, that every human being has been 'interrupted' or that every human being is born with paranoia is unfounded on the basis of the above argument.

Resistance is natural and resistance is change. The expression, 'resistance to change', therefore, is redundant.

I can no more 'change' pathology or paranoia than a psychoanalyst can. But I can show you that 'change' is a natural outcome of 'resistance' and the progress from one to the other is the essence of life that children relish and enjoy.  I have to ask, therefore, why is it that adults lose their joy while participating in resistance and change?  I can also say and argue that calling life a 'pathology' and calling human beings 'paranoid' is the wrong diagnosis. The gnosis shows that the natural dichotomy of the neocortex does not present a paradox. It would be as if the right eye would question the validity of what the left eye sees from a slightly different perspective! From the eyes, the complexity increases exponentially and we need every level of sensory, 'extrasensory', and neural tools just to maintain balance is a sea of change. But this balance, or homeostasis, is never the same from moment to moment. The difference itself is the sign or evidence of life.

You are denying life itself when you set up the 'Amun' forces as the 'evil' empire that denies 'Aten'. Your own formula shows that there would be no Gnosis without that natural denial:

> Here is the key knot now:
> 0 = Amarna, for it is suppressed by the
> S1 = Amon/Ramsessides that represses the
> S2 = Gnosis that is the knowledge of that all.
 

Gnosis cannot be repressed, because gnosis is the natural outcome of 0 juxtaposed with S1 and comprising 'change'. Like a Sine curve, this change did not happen just once, with Amarna. Your entire thesis, William, is that 0 recurs over and over again, unsuppressable, in different format, now as Oedipus, now as Moses, eventually as Hermes Trismegistus. Then S1 recurs over and over again, such as the Church suppressing the Hermeticists during the Renaissance, and this cycle continues. Do you believe that S2 does not change? That Gnosis remains the same? It cannot! Just as the earth never returns to the same spot in space during its orbit around the sun, so Gnosis is never the same, ever changing with each recurrence of Amarna-Amun cycle or sine-wave. Gnosis is Ma'at. Otherwise you might as well tell an electron to stop spinning.

Daniel
 
 
 
 

From: William Theaux
To: <akhnaton@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 8:06 AM
Subject: [akhnaton] Democracy deserves modern intelligent tool
 

> Replying/following jose's #1673 titled "are these the modern mysteries?" and depicting Gnosis' resuming (after the brief.3.centuries coma following it's Renaissance/re-birth)
>
> An ontology of resistance comes within the psychoanalytic theory. Which means that the manifested (some would say 'reality') is an alibi, and that it is violence and ignorance. This is the human earthly condition:   scientific and political positions are the alibi for violence and ignorance.
>
 It is just emotionally exhausting to stand for this awareness. Yet Modern Times do not offer stoicism (Freud) for sole solution. They do not limit us to the negative (Lacan) either.

> Amonists chemists keep their drugs and engineered code in temples but they spread a theology. I am speaking about academic (i.e. scientific, political, educational) position about Gnosticism; a position which can be described over and over again, yet improving if it can be well distilled, through a formula, or a scale:
>
> There is the 'zero', let's say it is Amarna, Eu-Topia, or Democracy.  Besides, there is the 'one' - this is violence and ignorance; which is  like the snake biting its tail, or its tale. It looks like round zero;   indeed it is a fake zero, also-known-as the 'scientific and political, and educational system'. This is the Inquisition too, that proves alone the presence of evil as a matter of fact. It proves itself. It is the 'Significand one,' written S1.

> At that point we meet the resistance too, which moved Daniel into denying that the normal status of human being was a pathology, similar with paranoia. It turns around a 'mono-thing-in' (a narcissism vestige), until this snake begins to make two:
> http://www.dnafoundation.com/temp03/socgen/sociogen.htm#pic4a <http://www.dnafoundation.com/temp03/socgen/sociogen.htm>
> Then there is the second Significand, written S2. Psychoanalysis identifies Knowledge with this S2.
>
> I found recently Gnosticism associated with Kenosis - a freeassociation that continues with 'Knosis,' a neologism so far which means Knows, of Knowsus, Nous (the Hermetic knot in us), Gnosis. Backed with Orphism (revealing word-juice in poetry aka 'plural' in art - the essential plurality of meaning which makes sense of art) I continues this distinction in calling S2: Knowsis.
>
> Here is the key knot now:
> 0 = Amarna, for it is suppressed by the
> S1 = Amon/Ramsessides that represses the
> S2 = Gnosis that is the knowledge of that all.
> The very clue is that, according to the Freudian theory, it is the S2  that is repressed. From that knowledge point, we enjoy the  perspective which brings to consciousness the pathos of S1.

> Does this rings the meaning of your verse:
> > shall we say democracy is an utopia? i just just can't believe!
>
>
> --------------------
> DEVELOPMENT:
>
> In recent times - as Orpheus turning into Oedipus - there has been an evolution from Gnosis into Knowsis, that can be tacked back in the condensed history of Psychoanalysis (20th century): S.Freud attempted to repel C.G.Jung's Gnosis and in place of the Collective Unconscious, Freud declared the Superego was collective; after that J.Lacan rectified in reminding that Democracy simply mean that Knowledge is collective. Hence we get back in reverse: knowledge->collective->unconscious.
>
> These are just bits an pieces and we are blinded yet, because we have no eyes. Orpheus owes eyes to Phoebus, the sun, as Socrates owes a cock/ergot to Asclepius (btw fred, I am humbled yet with JLB). We have no eyes left, no drug; what shall we miss left? Sex, obviously.

> Of course, we have 'eyes' for TV, and TV for drug; and next is test-tubes-babies for libido.  Isn't this the survival necessity, 'reality,' as Gnosis analysis would say?

> At that point I must comment over the reality show. The French initial Real-TV BigBrother show is still on for a few hours. It will end tonight.

> This is the end of a ceremony that crowns Modern Times. In every nation where this TV program runs in turn there are people who say it is trash, insult to privacy etc. Yet, as a ritual, it is mere Ceremonial Magic - i.e. S2, that 'represents' S1.

> In the same period of time, Tampa, a city in Florida has implemented the ultimate computer software program linked to 36 cameras for scanning crowds in the street. "Tampa is really leading the pack here," CNN says, since the "FaceIt" software which enables face-printing system will allow to automatically recognize any 'wanted' face who dwell in that city.  So in the streets, on the road in our car, our face will be digitally printed for the Artificial Intelligence's eye before it is through familial and business next generation personal computer webcam networks.
>
> I believe it is intelligible that Democracy does not work unless the collective knowledge is implemented with such Artificial Intelligence.

That's the awareness which makes the difference between Gnosticism and Knowsticism I guess.

> What companies have call Knowledge Management was just another alibi for what psychoanalytic formula lead to: Knowledge (S2) has to signify the Artificial Intelligence, (a)

> S2
> ------
> a

> where (a) is aka 'a-par-at-us', this AI system. When S2 represents (a) instead of S1, we, in the Modern Time acquire and gain, or win, the cured meaning, representation of S1 - that does not signifies the pathos anymore, but signifies the Subject of the Unconscious, aka subjectivity; a formula known as:
>
> S1 S2
> ----- <> -----
> $ a
>
> This is how democracy can be. And this way is also the human possibility for leading an ecology.

> Zenon
> on the behalf of
> Dr William Théaux
> <http://perso.club-internet.fr/wtheaux>
> Post scriptum: we must be aware that alphabetisation, ability for reading and writing imposes upon the nervous system and compulsion for 'thinking' which is like an illness. We must not be afraid if the ability for the Letter is transferred to the intelligent aparatus. It may look like Socrates' white light bleaching blank our brains. We must not be afraid but we are.

> This is S1.

> I remember also a conversation with Galileo, aka Verdiglione, who was emphasizing on the division of S1 - instead of S2. S(1/2) was another way to say that one cannot even say half of what we know. This is why we better keep still/silent (sil).
>
> But how could I really kept sil..hence - while Hal comes in with a beautiful demonstrative accompaniment - translated "ay-sooos ee aa" in post#1677. Then he re-rings the rebel bell with post#1681 in here sacrifying a Word to the Nous.
>
> I owe a word to the Nouus, said Aurobindo, so perhaps Theseus, when he died while saying nothing.
>

 

This essay is part of an ongoing discussion.  If you have a comment, an idea or a criticism you'd like to add or share, please send it on the following form:
YOUR COMMENTS
Back to Essay Choices
HOME

 

Next Essay: Abstractions