Jean Gebser & Robert Anton Wilson: The Micro & Macro of Consciousness

Disinfonauts!  I spoke the other day at the Jean Gebser conference and had a great time learning more about the unsung muse of consciousness conversation, Jean Gebser.  As I read his magnum opus, The Ever Present Origin, I immediately saw a direct correlation between Gebser and Robert Anton Wilson.  If you would like to see what I mean, take some time to check out this presentation.

, , , , , , ,

  • Simon Valentine

    recently i’ve been considering that it’s (this is, we are, world is) [the first time] (#?) conscious growth stopped – did it get stuck, or did it come to stop evolution? maliciously? like a modulus? modulus, modulus, modulus. i tend to grow horns more than passing from transience (in mathematical/computational/physical studies), in the so-known retroactivate way of claimence, into … stagnant aesthetics of a reflective divinity. unless i’m going to start talking about ‘nothing’ (amon) or computer technology, anyway. god is a storage technology. a mnemonic. a memory device. a math. point A on a harp of which ‘who’ is point B. string theory? heh.

    the entropy recipe appears in many places. 3 spacial dimensions, confusion, and “time”. atomic analysis. carbon valence. calculus solutions to n-body problems. average number of “# step thinker” (game theory, fighting counter-move, etc).

    … that “reality” is its own solution … that “thought” is its own solution … etc. “dichotomy fallacy or else!” >.< instead, focus on induction, subtract, and math. lol. to remain stuck in such a transcience (i can only count to four) is one thing – learning its equilibrium in order to establish the basis necessary for metamorphosis or ascension is an entirely … :p … transpondent phenomenon.

    consider equilibria to be an abstract distillation of reality tunnels, and also true in the converse, that reality tunnels are a specific species of equilibria … and not solely connected to human awareness. the tree fallen in the forest made a sound that no one heard, mostly, until people got all technological and %*@).

    *edit* i just caught an indra (inception) … calculus may be used in engineering, and if reality tunnels are constructed so similarly … well i'll leave yall to wonder about the roof

    • Sean

      I tend to follow very heady obscure occult sciency talk pretty well…..but I have literally zero idea what you just said…at all. Totally lost.

      • Simon Valentine

        i take it you’re not here to stop evolution! think of it as a sort of transience + Cantor’s infinities. with some Nash and a splash of cynicism towards religion/orthodox/group.

        a lot of my coloring stems from my research, so given that you lack that, and it currently lacks “a doctrine presence” (working on it…), it’s not surprising. not to mention my track record.

        looks like there’s some resurgent theorem-proof pair generation in there. colored as butterflies in this case. lined images as “modulus”. yikes. sorry. NP stuff.

        don’t think too hard about it unless that’s a choice pattern that you’re into and embark on as a vocation (or hobby. or pastime. or…). or ask questions, direct and specific, or generic and sectioned.

        tunnels, trips, imaginary lands, stories … i prefer obscure if not ominous wisdom as a landing strip for sarcasm or mockery, but honestly this was just my (abridgment of) reaction to the video with today’s latest creative effort (research). i wish you well, lost or not.

        • Sean

          Is that a response to me? I’m honestly not quite sure.

          I didn’t mean to knock you. You seem intelligent and your mind certainly has a unique vocabulary of expression.

          But….language is a two-way street. Otherwise, it’s not really language. If a speaker communicates something to a listener…something that ONLY the speaker can unravel, while the listener has no idea what to make of it…then it’s not really language. It’s something else. Maybe even something interesting. But it’s not language.

          You said: “a lot of my coloring stems from my research, so given that you lack that…”
          I lack the research you’ve done? How would you know? I assure you, we probably read the same stuff. I honestly think your posts are interesting….I just wish I could make sense of it…any of it.

          Language only works when both the speaker and the listener have a shared lexicon of context.

          For instance….what if I said the following….

          The transmogrification of the nautilus is part and parcel ocean-stasis(or bio-luminary?) to the Nth degree…but more apt to the Fth degree. N? F? Chart the perigee betwixt the chasm and you mull over the marrow of mankind(is it a shell or a lung?) These machine women with machine livers live lives left to lively Lent observers. Let who to whom? (Thor? Need it be?) Each opulent pearl is potent with opalescent “paraDIMES.” Or pennies, or nickels, or quarters. No Quarter? Mr. Page would disagree. Mrs. Page would abridge the lime light…eat the lime, and bathe under a red light tonight.

          :)

          Having said all that…while I can’t parse out what you’re actually saying…at least it’s interesting! There’s a sort of occult poetic flow to what you say. Like a Terence McKenna lecture filtered through the pen of James Joyce. All I would say is…if you indeed have an interesting take on the world…it would be a shame if that was lost on people who would otherwise be receptive to your ideas.

          Anton Wilson and McKenna were both deep into their own minds, invented novel words whole-cloth, and were keen on communicating in a way that was orthogonal to the status-quo. BUT….they also were master communicators…able to translate the chaos of their minds into a vessel that made sense to others. If it weren’t for THAT skill…both would have sounded like a crazy guy on the subway…speaking in a language known only to themselves.

          • Simon Valentine

            there are ‘certain’ ((again with the “is it self”, here; it is a sub-problem which deserves its own focus and ‘chapter’ … e.g. “vexamorph”)) translations of “translation” of which i am aware and consciously make effort to avert, study, consider … like a joyce particle collider learning a holistic paradigm or a heuristic algorithm?

            the idea that there is no self, but none of the ideas of that idea, instead, the ordersarrangementspattern[research]. the puppets tend to hang themselves, tongue in cheek.

            you’ve got me thinking in the channel again … hype systems … equilibrium … vexamorph … sub-analysis … but on to your vocabularic word painting. Galois. equal worlds interpretation. Vantage Point. (need i say i’m getting a biologist’s parallactical take on some abstract stuff) number and function and the land in between as a core edifice concerned with the ineffable relatability of stuff. receptiveness and niche? (not sure of specifics here but …) archtypical “time” and it’s relation, one related picture being thunder (and its relation to lightning).

            attempts to value a world as a whole? or in part? (i raise an eyebrow and leave the spider webs; i see the drow come later) … ‘attack’, ‘transience’, ‘fight’, ‘sole directive not ignored and thus initialized’, niche is a pole dancing attention whore, static, dividing forever the greeks and the trojans. who spiral into hypnagogic niche.

            egregations .. when the first is last but last is not first.

            mr. page and counter-part must be at odds concerting “all must come together” vs “these come apart”, but there’s at least 4 branches from that in at least two directions.

            for how could we, not being segregate from the many, know the solution to two-body, when indeed it is not two-body, but many-body And purportedly purportedly many-force?

          • Guest

            Each thought is a complex consideration of 2 options. Weighing between 2 states, 0 or 1 at the basic core of the thought. Even if you have 3 options, you are still weighing things up for each, yes/no, just 3 times.

            “Divide by 2″ as a rule for creating reality, a statement, a mantra – divide a thought by 2 and you get 2 more realities – hence consciousness creates reality – when you consider all the different languages in all the different universes and hear them at the same time, “Divide by 2″ becomes the sound of Om.

            Of course, it’s more than sound, it applies to all waves and matter, so Om is everything all at once (including you the thinker of thought – you create(d) yourself). Om is the oneness in the form of a word we can understand in this particular language, in this particular universe / reality.

      • Simon Valentine

        life went along
        until we all arrived
        made homes of silent trees
        cockroaches in our hair
        wipe them out and come along
        we’re going all the way
        i know you can’t see it
        that’s how [it] designed it
        indirect determinate

        the world and its iteration
        is only a consideration
        now that we have arrived
        what was it doing
        where was it going
        how did we pit stop
        maybe we’re coming
        maybe we’re with it
        maybe we let it go

        go to the next one
        mating planets in a plane
        landing a signal within mundane
        terracotta mundus
        birthing its sentience
        customs cut all apart
        knives in the fishes
        bees in the wishes
        another broken riot of a heart
        touch it to see char
        creatures gone too far
        intellect of a faaaart

        … as yet to be finished

  • Gnome Voynich

    Each thought is a complex consideration of 2 options. Weighing between 2 states, 0 or 1 at the basic core of the thought. Even if you have 3 options, you are still weighing things up for each, yes/no, just 3 times.

    “Divide by 2″ as a rule for creating reality, a statement, a mantra – divide a thought by 2 and you get 2 more realities – hence consciousness creates reality – when you consider all the different languages in all the different universes and hear them at the same time, “Divide by 2″ becomes the sound of Om.

    Of course Om is more than sound, it applies to all waves and matter, so Om is everything all at once (including you the thinker of thought – you create(d) yourself). Om is the oneness in the form of a word we can understand in this particular language, in this particular universe / reality.

  • Julian West

    This is quite disappointing, and a complete misuse of Gebser’s work. Gebser right from the start dissuades his readers against ascribing such notions of “growth” to his presentation of discrete mutations of human consciousness. E.g., pg 37: “[W]e must exclude from our discussion as far as possible such misleading notions of ‘development’ and ‘progress.'” Again, pg 38: “We have selected the term ‘mutation’ … because it best describes the discontinuous nature of events that occur in consciousness … Moreover, it allows us to maintain the very necessary detachment from such concepts as progress, evolution and development.” It seems to me the speaker here has either not actually read Gebser’s text (“The Ever-Present Origin”) or is willfully misconstruing Gebser’s admittedly subtle intent and meaning. 2 Thumbs Down!

21