Saturday, April 17, 2010
Movement . . .
Let's begin today by discussing movement. Movement can be defined as the mover's penetration through time and space as a material entity. Movement seems to exist only as a material matter of course. The mover's right to shift from one position to another only exists by way of its material state. There are several forces at play. For movement to exist, we must gauge the amount of time it might take for the material entity to act, the consumption of space as it moves in a desired direction, and finally the intent of the mover to proceed at will. Further, the mover will never act against its will unless a material anomaly exists such as a debilitating disease or duress. Even then the consciousness of the mover remains constant. Is the mover invincible? We conclude in the affirmative since the mover's will is ultimately affected by its material relationship to its environment. The human condition can be largely understood by the paradigm of movement. The movers will to seek peace, wage war, fight hunger and starvation, procreate and raise civilizations is dependable on movement like Carl Jung's collective unconsciousness. Is the mover ultimately good? We cannot say for certain but one thing is true, the mover as a material entity, is quite compromised by its material state. Why - mainly, because it is an everlasting, infinite thing. However, the mover and matter are complementary. The mover will never deliberately cause harm to its material state and its main goal is to prolong its material life by a matter of course. This is quite a testy state of being. Without the movers existence, matter is ultimately, disowned. The material need is transitory so why is movement important. We define movement as an aggregate fulfillment of material obligations that the mover performs as a result of its material existence or for matter, a singular, micro obligation. Think of parents, siblings, friends, colleagues and acquaintances. It is ultimately their movement that is important to us. What they do is more important that what they are? A movement can be highly desirable or deleterious to material livelihood. Thus, we differentiate between material actions and laws and ethics are invoked. Why must the mover act and what governs its movement? Obviously, the need to fulfill material obligations is foremost? The mother who does not care for her young may not want to see her offspring die and thus must act in a positive, sustainable way. Her movement and material relationship to her offspring and vice versa creates a symbolic, worldly action or good. This prism, while shaped by a material interaction is highly dependable on the everlasting mover. Otherwise, matter would be inert and lifeless. The material motion picture, so to speak, is also transitory and governed by the value of time and will ultimately fade like a material memory or vision. Can the mover remember or does matter remember? Is memory a neurological, physical impulse. We cannot know but we know that the two are highly complementary and will act in tandem. However, the mover must prevail since memory is only a material aphrodisiac. Thus, the mover seems more intelligible. The action or movement becomes the summum bonum and the mover's existence in the material universe is thereby, fulfilled. Why move in the first place? The movement that ensues has severe material repercussions. For example, the lion hunting the gazelle, will create a great deal of material duress like the oxygen we breathe. But alas, this is secondary for the lion as a material entity who must fulfill such a material obligation by way of its makeup. The impact that this movement causes is highly material. The mover only lifts the lever or pushes the button. Why? The mover acting in a material realm to fulfill material obligations, when time and space are not essential to its livelihood, is highly irrational. Thus, matter becomes illusory and the movement is primary. Does movement exist outside of matter or does it need to exist. The answer is plainly no since matter is essential for the movement to take place. Does the mover ultimately pass the material, transitory realm and gain infinite life that has no recourse to a three-dimensional world that as material agents, we are compelled to serve. That seems more like the case and we conclude that the mover is transcendental. So, are our material actions also transcendental? Perhaps not, since the movement is not categorical from a material standpoint. The consideration of movement gives us much pause.