Only God explains fully

GOD: the only complete explanation

ONLY through (P*: Katrina (seen as) Act of God)

….is it possible to read the times* truly, consistently, objectively, wholly, as a completing totality. Without seeing it this way, it is impossible to see these times truly, consistently, objectively, as a completing totality.

(*incl.: the objective epic narrative of American history)

Argument: Without commitment to “act of God”, the hurricane can be seen only in general, comparative parameter, as an instance of a causal law.

This by-passes (though it does not deny) “Katrina’s” particularities – indicated first of all by this name-personified sign-use in reporting and commenting. As if there were an “it” that could be shrunk in communication to a single token. “She”, the grammar then goes, “picked up speed and took off like a guided missile,” one storm watcher put it. After “She” suddenly turned on Florida, up Florida’s, the newspapers anticipated weakening back to tropical depression over Gulf waters. Instead, almost overnight Wednesday/Thursday, a deep, distinct, huge hurricane formed around a well defined eye. The Eye. It was riveting, and returned in iconography. Then, when She slammed ashore near Gulfport, Miss., one man said “it was if she had a score to settle”. Referring to hurricane Camille, l969, also CAT 5, but not nearly as vicious.

This description is unapologetically projective. It uses “Katrina”, as name of the storm, with the images of its particularity. It projects, or calls attention to the projection of, what is left out of any purely scientific description. For the weatherman, for instance, “Katrina’s Eye” is a vortex center, surrounded by a wall of wind/water whirling with great force around it. Through ‘projections’, the group-fantasy content of the experience is expressed. Group-fantasy contents are wholly contained, but not completed, in an individual’s private tokenspace. Thus, I know Katrina as an Archetype, and can discuss Her/Its symbolism (as death mother), but these contents are by no means completed in my grasp of them. They are psychologically intelligible objects

The completed reality contains these Archetypes. Ignoring them may remove them from consciousness, but it cannot negate, only aggravate (by relating to) their dynamic impact. Conscious projection, or what Jung called “active imagination” closes the gap between conscious and unconscious, spirit and instinct. Seeing ourselves momentarily as if being seen from the standpoint of higher totality. Some have used “seeing themselves as through the sun” for such projective purposes – acting out the projection on a literal level – with loss of eyesight (actual story).

These contents are the metaphysical umbilici connecting people on the inner side – “our” group-solidarity, as an entity reproduced through use of signs. They are “there”, functioning, at work, supplying the synthetic transcendental unity of apperception (“blue-wall” of Group TokenSpace ), whether recognized or explicitly related to, or not. “God”, itself, used as a token of the psychic totality completing Him/Itself in history, is such an Archetype. Sigmund Freud recognized this same content under (one meaning of) the Super-Ego (or: Group Ego-Ideal; Ego Group-Ideal). It is (used as) the Token of all Texts, the completion of totalities in One* (*being-word). It would project the First Object of experience (=the placenta, struggling with the fetus, in utero) , as the actual continuously functioning neuro-physical background, imprinted under trauma (of birth)….continued in the Group-fantasy of phantom placenta, a “God in heaven” projected “outside” the limits of our space and time, but “looking in”, watching: judging, punishing. Such is a Freudian Group super-ego. This is being written a. to certify that as a fact: It’s Freudian Group Super-Ego has brought punishment on America. And b. to distinguish this metaphysics, as a commitment, from that of the classical theory of universals, briefly sketched below.


Commitment, universals, and karmic particularity

Why God* (*as completing totality) is necessary:

.. because the totality can be seen as completed only through commitment (to the totalities as complete, that is, “God”). This is the principle of appropriation through participation: what can be known by appropriation through participation cannot be known otherwise, except at a distance. (“You learn by doing. If you don’t do you won’t learn. If you don’t compete you can’t win.”) Commitment to a perspective defined by a true, consistent etc. assignment of names deepens the reaction to objects called by those names, thus adding a dimension to the interaction otherwise lacking.

****
Brief history of how classical and modern metaphysics have favored the universal over the particular (“realism” of intelligible objects), now swept away by post-modern, new age historical singularity, aka New Age Consciousness …

First in classical times came metaphysical commitment to knowledge through reason -- the real as rational.

Since what is rational is what is thought, and what is thought is by general ideas, and causes, this (commitment to the real as rational) leads immediately to the question of the existrence of universals: general names standing for contents wholly contained in consciousness through the signs defining them. For instance, spacial areas enclosed by three straight lines are triangles. “Triangle” is the general name for all such. Truths can be known of all through the definition that states their essence. It has been known since early Sumerian times that the sum of the base and side of a right triangle is equal to the square of its hypotenuse. Triangles are known as “intelligibleectual objects,” because much can be deduced from them as pure geometrical constructs. Determining some of its predicates – for example a right hand triangle with base =3, side=4 – determines others – will have a hypotenuse = 5 (9 + 16 = 25 = 5x5). Similarly with circles. The number called “pi” is the ration of length of the diameter of a circle to its circumference – always 3.142 (approx). So on for other shapes and figures. But these in particular, plus squares, globes, pyramids, cones, tetrahedrons etc., were basic to both ancient and modern science.

What of general names for natural kinds? – living (biological species), inert (chemical elements and compounds), or celestial (sun, moon, planetary beings, and ‘stars”) As objects, these were not wholly contained or completed in consciousness under sign-use, though their formal-definitional meanings were. They were not wholly intelligible objects, but, as demonstrated by regular reproduction of form in the infima species -- like breeding like -- individual life trajectories following some ‘inner’ law-like pattern that was ‘intelligible’ to its material, as purposive order pervades causal. The philosophical position knows as “realism” holds forms exist independent of material instantiation, even for natural kinds. It can be seen that massive experiential evidence supports this view. For one thing, even into modern science, almost defining it, one might say, Descartes was declaring that what was “clear and distrinct” in knowledge of the material world was what was known of it through the “abstract general ideas” projected in the Cartesian space-time projectile co-ordinate schema for all motion.
Through this metaphysical conceit, “universals in the mind” are linked to “universals in nature”. Where our finite minds grasp only the formulae of things that are simple, clear and distinct. The formulae for natural kinds, and all external material causation that manifests a telic totality-completing form, are in the mind of God. (If there is one. Descartes pretends the question can be left open, all the while confidently using the rational human reasoning resources only God’s existence vouches for.) (Textualist clinging to theological umbilicus.)

Two things brought in by (so-called) modernity to break down this metaphysical conceit. 1. Establishment of the genetic basis of biological reproduction. The “inner design” is in the unfolding nucleic acid molecules (DNA, RNA). This replaces the notion that general names, as wholly contained mental content under ANY definition can be used in the manner of token-talisman to gain insight into the text of natural law, except by experiential observation. (Dislodges pseudo-rationalist “scientism” based on occultation of “abstract general ideas in God’s mind” as objective basis of predication.)

2. More generally: the logical analysis of “clear and distinct ideas”, and “necessary truth” as formal conditions of knowledge even in mathematics and geometry, removed the metaphysical foundations of any pretense of general knowledge apriori (apart from experience). This is the Sword of Logical Positivism, in essence: the “elimination of metaphysics’ at a stroke. But only as a projection of alleged synthetic apriori laws into the rational material order. Against that, Logical positivism remains as perpetual bulwark. The day of projectively riding God-commitment piggyback on the machinery of logical and mathematical truth is over. The language of science as intersubjective, verifiable discourse is operationally defined.


*****/ tbc. These old, refuted, false umbilici must be exhumed to be put aside, and make way for New Age re-adoption of God use with proper commitment.