History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Dialectical materialism?

January 4th, 2018 · No Comments

We have frequently noted the obsolescence of dialectical materialism here, if that is the right judgment (bad philosophy would be another) but have several times pointed to the odd similarity to the realm of samkhya. In the version of J.G. Bennett, which liberates the subject from the ancient versions (and may be better not called samkhya), we have a perspective that can help to see the confusions of the dialectic in relation to the questions of ‘triads’.
One has to wonder if the confusions of modern multiverse theory could be repaired with Bennett’s different space/time framework: the glaringly obvious issue is that there is a potential of multiple possiblities not all of which manifest.

From the blogbook at The Gurdjieff Con
Here’s a selection from the section on Bennett, an interesting way to understand his ideas of ‘eternity/hyparxis’
This will introduce the classic analysis of Bennett on time: the six dimensional universe of space, time, eternity, and hyparxis…
His discussion actually impinges on Kant with a distinction of factual, esthetic and ethical judgments. He embarks on a series of postulates for the study of natural philosophy. We can move quickly to his unique perspective on the ‘universal validity of framework laws’. Framework is the form in which we experience phenomena. There are four framework determining conditions:
Determining conditions Phenomenal characteristics
Eternity Potentiality and intensity of being
Time Actualization and irreversibility
Hyparxis Ableness to be and cyclicity
Space Presence and co-existence
In a way Bennett’s post-Kantian categories are appropriate because the issue of space-time as constructs of mind must reckon with the kind generalization of space-time that we see here. In fact there may be no real contradiction but we must consider that eternity and hyparxis are not really perceived in ordinary experience in the same way as space and linear outer time. We have to wonder if modern physics hasn’t crashlanded in this realm of ‘eternity’ in the sense of showing parallel independent tracks of ‘temporal’ realization. Also lacking is the hyparxis aspect that might indicate which tracks constitute the reality we experience as members of a universe in motion. It may be that a limited framework has made physicists confuse aspects of potentiality and realization.
The question of hyparxis is not intuitive and we must consider that Bennett who was said to be able to visualize a hypersphere is proceeding in an obscure direction. But his analysis, as often, so foggy at the start can suddenly become intuitive.
The question of hyparxis, at the risk of a botch of our account, might be considered with an analogy: a writer has the plan in mind for a book, but this is still potential, and by analog ‘timeless/spaceless’. As he moves to compose the book the realization is an interaction of the potential idea with a temporal actualization and a series of parallel and/or sequential drafts, in a discontinuous series and or discontinuous set of alternates. The interaction of time and eternity is via the hyparchic dimension as just this discontinuous series as the book takes shape in a directional and willed action of creative writing. Early drafts suffer issues of quality and the cyclical hyparxis interaction with the potential generates an uphill qualitative transformation.
This writer’s World History and the Eonic Effect most probably gives us an example of this triple aspect of the temporal: the temporal stream of history shows an embedded discontinuous series in both successive and parallel (spatially discontinuous) and this is associated with the action to ‘climb Mt. Improbable’. The so-called macro sequence is just this kind of discontinuous realization of potential as the stream of history upgrades with eras of creative action. This phenomenon of the eonic effect in the Axial Age also shows clear cases of the parallel effect as the temporal stream actually (and most remarkably) shows a splitting of synchronous lines in the remarkable ‘transition zones’ of the Axial Age.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment