Friday, October 1, 2004
I’m drawn into time itself: ever deeper into our Time such that deep time—the intelligence of Earth, so to speak—may express itself in self identity (in the grounding of care), though merely saying that doesn’t make much sense, I realize.
Such a figure of speech—intelligence of Earth—is actually a realist claim about being human: Appreciating our nature is belonging to the intimacy of biology and brain, as if (!) some god saves itself via human mentality—we who can conceive the life of the cosmos evolving. “As if”!—because theistic thinking was just an era in our story.
So, to follow through on such figurative realism, I first think bioglyphically about life (i.e., I need to explicate this kind of thinking). From bioglyphics, I would clarify biotropism (or will do so)—which pertains to human prenatal neurontogeny as well. Then to biosphericality (both global and modular—all this needs explication, of course), through the autopoiesis of epigenesis (both biological and neurological), self-formativity of bioselection (ditto), hybridizing, and individualization (be it speciation or neonatal temperament), to the “reflection” of evolutionarity we are, which hominids released from basic natural selection eons ago. We are essentially cultural creatures, while that’s essentially a potential for individuation (and ‘essential’ is for me a postmetaphysicalist, ontogenic term).
So, we are the ones who inquire into our own mentability. Looking through the primacy of perception and its ontogenically cumulative intuition, we respond to the appeal of grand coherings—in “the search for Meaning,” typically—in humanity’s complex, evolving realities.
So, what’s the nature of creative intelligence?
What’s good—what goods deserve ultimacy, and what about "goodness" itself?
What’s truth, ultimately (beyond the ages of metaphysicalism)?
What’s human evolutionarity, relative to our 21st century hypernet polis?
What’s ultimacy itself?
-- 10:29 PM