Tranquillitys Secret Contemplation A Concise Description of Responsive Naturing

This is a concise description of the novel paradigm of Responsive Naturing.

In this paradigm, every natural thing is a living being with an ontogenetic form that defines the potential of that being’s development over its lifespan. This potential is modified — both naturally and accidentally — as the being is informed over its life. 

The intended meaning of “inform” is its original etymological sense as first used in the 14th century: giving concrete form to something,  or to make known in an actual sense, rather than a conceptual one.

The local process of informing a form is what I call a sæculum. Sæculum is the Latin word for the potential lifespan of a human. In my usage a sæculum is the cognizant, but impersonal, responsive naturing of that particular ontogenetic form. This process of being natured is called information.

This word, Information, is the original name of the process of informing.

Note that there is no independent self-nature anywhere, in any being. This means there are no truly independent entities anywhere. Responsive naturing is omni-intrinsic — that is, responsive naturing is a shared intrinsic process within all sæcula. Think of a sæculum as a wave on an ocean of sæcula — the ocean being the potential of all sæcula — except there are no waves, and no ocean, because this process, like gravity, can only be known by the intelligible phenomena it produces.

What is the actual raw material involved here? What is it that sæcula natures? Every complex being is comprised of a sæculum that is entangled in a structured way with other sæcula according to its ontogenetic potential, and those other sæcula are contained within that sæculum. Each and every one of those contained entangled sæcula is potentially entangled in a structured way with more sæcula within them, until a terminal level of sæcula is reached. This will be in the quantum realm. I call this the deeply-nested and recursive organic structure of ontogenetic forms, or more concisely: In Sæcula Sæculorum.

The informing by the sæculum is responsive to what the ontogenetic form’s potential is, given its actual state at each moment. This takes into account what part of that potential is possible Now, given the current context of that and all other sæcula that are actually entangled together. The only constraint being that in each reconfiguration, what is natured is coherently continuous with the potentials and what is possible given the extant context. Certain possibilities and potentials of the ontogenetic form are potentiated by the sæculum’s affective response to what is actualized. These affective responses are the form’s focus of attention, the overall intention, and the desire, if any is within the capacity of each being, so that the affective response boosts certain possibilities in the current context over others. All the entangled sæcula are attentive in some way that is limited by the potential of the sæculum’s ontogenetic form. 

When a sæculum dies, its constituent sæcula, if any, continue or die depending upon each sæculum’s potential and their particular entanglement. Dying means becoming unentangled from the prior entangled sæculum or sæcula, thus becoming merely matter.

“Matter”, as used in this new paradigm, means accumulations, heaps, clouds, mixes, solutions, etc., of natural beings, so that, while the accumulation may have a nonrandom structure, there is no organizing principle — no ontogenetic form — and thus no lifespan, for such accumulations.  Within an accumulation of non-entangled sæcula, the sæcula are matter to each other. Because a sæculum is what energizes the ontogenetic potential of a form, you can think of it as energy, both potential and actual. I see it as a form of gravity, in fact.

This naturing, which we can only know through the evidence of the formal appearances — because they are intelligible — can be seen to have four indivisible aspects:

  (1) That there is no entity involved — neither as a real thing, nor as a being, because that which is real can only be said to be the active principle of the essential naturing of the formal appearances within this Totality, and it certainly cannot be any formal appearance that manifests, such as a supreme being, for that would make that being simply another appearance.

(2) That this active principle is impersonally cognizant — because that is the essential nature of this activity: knowing through the genesis of form (sciomorphogenesis). Cognizance is neither awareness, nor consciousness, as typically understood. This cognizance is an impersonal recognition of what is done — which are denoted as propriogestæ (own accomplishments).

(3) That this naturing is responsive — everything happens as an indeterminate (i.e. creative) spontaneous response to current facts, latent coherent ontogenetic potentials, the contextual extant possibilities, as well as affective intents (attention, intention, and desire), if any, depending upon the capacities made possible by each ontogenetic form. This excludes causal mechanisms and actors, such as that found at the heart of Determinism, Materialism, Physicalism, Pantheism, and Intentional Design, and all of their derivatives.

(4) That each reconfiguration is immediate and timeless — there is no actual time in this paradigm. What is natured are discontinuous reconfigurations. It is the role of cognizance to weave together the coherent continuity between reconfigurations. These prior and posterior reconfigurations are forever entangled with the actualized state of each being, and they are the patterns of understanding that serve to select the current reconfiguration.

Note that the intelligibility of this naturing is only possible because our thoughts and reasoning are similarly natured, and it is the activity of responsive naturing and its cognizance of what is natured that is the repository of all forms, including those that we designate as a priori knowledge and intuitions of logical and mathematical truths. Thus, mentality is actualized within a brain by naturing the thoughts within it. This overcomes the paradoxical impossibility of our thinking our own thoughts because that would necessarily entail that we know what a thought will be before thinking it. 

Going a step further, the evident fact that the salient character of this activity is coherent order — and not chaos — shows that this activity of responsive naturing can be and should be seen, not as a result of a primordial coin-toss selecting which way it would go — order or chaos — but as an ever-present concern to nurture and care for all ontogenetic forms that appear throughout this manifested universe. This is not a soteriological activity, nor is it teleological — it is simply the axiomatic concern displayed by the activity of Responsive Naturing. After all, asserting that naturing could bring chaos would be oxymoronic, just as asserting that order arises from chaos is.

Finally, this naturing can be understood to be a divine creation — however, it is an evident, axiomatic fact without any need for recourse to a divine origin. The difference between these two understandings is a personal choice, without any prejudice either way. 

My understanding is that everything is divine. This paradigm posits a liminal horizon — an event horizon — which separates the impersonal divine origin and the personal actual being that is natured. I refer to that other side as “that of which nothing can be truly said.” And the limen of intelligibility between is what I call a middle way to understanding.

Concern manifests as a certain creativity at play in what response comes to everything that is done. All responses are constrained by the potentials and possibilities in each moment as is evident in the coherent continuity in every reconfiguration. But there is wiggle room in which a certain creativity is discernible. As Terrence McKenna pointed out:

Nature loves courage. You make the commitment and nature will respond to that commitment by removing impossible obstacles. Dream the impossible dream and the world will not grind you under, it will lift you up. This is the trick. This is what all these teachers and philosophers who really counted, who really touched the alchemical gold, this is what they understood. This is the shamanic dance in the waterfall. This is how magic is done. By hurling yourself into the abyss and discovering it's a feather bed.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


Share this post