The Only One Truth in the Social Imagination...

Peace on earth, goodwill toward men ~ Merry Christmas!

Agreement Reality is the Social Imagination...

How is one able to conclude that anything is real? Through the senses, right? Or perhaps one can know what is real by shear mathematical genius, or scientific method or even by philosophical discussion? 

Many still hold onto what is real through the experience of the senses; sight, sound, smell, touch and taste. But, even if we can agree that this is largely true, it is the brain/mind that determines what the senses are, what they can do for us as they serve in determining reality. And, what about the brain, isn't just the housing or apparatus for the mind and what is that. 

Most people consider that the brain and mind two different things. After all, what is meaning to one person is not the same meaning for another. And, there are those who follow Pavlov and Watson, Skinner and the like who say that man is no more than an overrated animal/dog. 

Most those 'experts' leave out the social imagination which is where reality truly exists. How/why? Well, there is no reality outside of agreement reality and that happens in the social imagination and no where else. You see, without agreement among us, there is no reality to even debate. We cannot even call the sun a star!

So, go on about so called facts, go on about your histories, your mathematics, your evolution process and I will tell you its all in the social imagination, its only what we agree on that matters. Even the intelligentsia in Greece would tell you that. For them, history is what you make up and the better it is as in fascinating, the more real it is/was. 

Yes, that is quite different from that of today's historians. You see, the Greeks loved their history stories, they studied it not for the knowledge of  facts. On the contrary, they liked their history to support claims on greatness and to that end liberally added ancient mighty kings and gods to their history. Homer's' Iliad and Odyssey are typical cases in point.

And, yes, we can say that that history goes to the victor and the sun is a star but only because we agree on it. Yes of course, some will be loudly claiming I am wrong... the sun is a star without me/you/them. Really? How do you/they know that? And, if they scream is science tells us so... well, that too is only agreement reality.

If we view social reality as an information reality and we should because there isn't any other reality; we can then say that nothing comes into our 'social' information reality (living in our mind as the social imagination) unless there is an absolute source for it.  And, that we must agree on because of the fact that we can agree on anything as information validates the existence of an absolute source of all information. Otherwise, there would be nothing to agree on as fixed... the sun is a star.

In terms of agreement reality - the social imagination, what matters is what compels us to agree. Yes, that is what matters most - what compels. As for the Christian, that would be God and His incarnate - the Creator of all things seen and unseen, in whose essence exists the indestructible truth. The only absolute source of all agreement reality can only contained within an absolute and at the same time incarnate being in whose essence there is no disagreement because there can be no disagreement. 

If you like, a facsimile would be an ultimate quantum computer that understands completely what it is  what is and what we are to it. It is in this sense, what most human beings desire and seek to agree on: an all knowing, compassionate and unconditional loving and merciful source of agreement reality.

Never doubt that we exist in the social imagination, agreement reality and what are we agreeing on? Because if you do, you will no longer exist in agreement reality in the social imagination. Which is in itself all information ever given. But not all information is pure. In a world that has entropy, it looses its purity as it travels around from person to person. So, there has to be an absolute source that can constantly upgrade it, reboot it. For if not, we loose our humanity, our social imagination, our agreement reality. 

That absolute 'information', cannot just exist in our social reality (social imagination) unless there is a cause to enter in and or re-deliver information and in that we agree (Christians) agree that it did enter in.  It is ever present among us. How do we know? The very one thing that tells us this is a fact is that we can agree on anything as a truth especially 'the' absolute truth of what it means to be human, what it means to agree on anything. This is truly supernatural.

Does it matter that all man/people agree on the same things or just some things and disagree on other things or everything? That's a good question. What matters is what compels them to agree in the first place. That is key. Agreement though an outcome of the larger social imagination, it all begins with each and every participant which can agree.

Soren Kierkegaard said that there is no absolute truth in the masses of mere men because real absolute truth exists only in the One created it. As with the game of telephone, who started the information chain holds the absolute truth of it and it weakens as it passing on down the line. And, yet, the holder of the information at the time it is passed believes it is true and agrees with it. Now, as it is passed along as true though even incorrect, its obvious fault is the rate of its decay as it is incorrect.. But, how can we know it is incorrect if we pass it along as if it is true? Because, those who pass it along, agreeing that it is true, pass on a small amount of doubt that it is the absolute truth.

So, the masses start to doubt even though one among them may not. And, those who hold onto the truth are persecuted for it. And, for them who are committed to the absolute truth, they are often rejected as even having received any truth. What is that they say about the absolute truth that scoffers don't like to agree with because they doubt? That there is an absolute source for truth outside of the game of telephone, a source so great that it is the source of all agreement, all social imagination.

2 Corinthians 6:16-17 ~ "And what agreement has the temple of God with idols" [false gods/false information]? None! For we/"you are the temple of the living God". As God has said, “I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their/your God, And they/you shall be My people.” Therefore, “Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch"/use/spread "what is unclean" 'information', "And I will receive you.” I will give the command and save you! "Be my rock of refuge, to which I can always go; give the command to save me" ~ Psalm 71:3.
 

Metaman in the Social Imagination... Really?

The idea posited in a book written by a supposed deep thinking biophysicist is that man is evolving into a transhuman... a new kind of sentient being. That could be but the problem is this... an evolving man doesn't always believe he is evolving. Some believe they were created in the image of their creator. There are even some who think that man was seeded by aliens. If that is the case, why would such a man  think that they/we have evolved at all.  Just would not be in their imagination.

The other problem as we contemplate 'metaman' is that found in this question. Could a 'truly' transformed 'man integrated machine/computer' believe that they evolved from a lesser being, an organic puss puddle so to speak? Not likely. Why? Because, a truly higher form of sentient being such as metaman would never imagine or think or believe that it came from something less than what it is let alone that it was even programmed by a lesser form 'man'. 

Furthermore, we must consider that a truly transformed creature would not/does not consider the past as we do... and so often we have been pointed as being nothing more than apes or even dogs. So, does a monkey consider it was an amoeba or a dog or cow or dolphin. No, because as far as it is concerned it is in a perfect state. 

Anything in a perfect state functions according to that perception of being perfectly made. It does not doubt what it is or contemplate what it was. A 'new' man - metaman would be in a perfect state and not consider his past or maybe not even remember it; and for that matter, he may not even contemplate the future... just like an ape, or a dog or anything other than a man.

So how could we now think that we will be metaman in our future if that creature will never know us - what we were and even if what we did... why would it care/want to know how it came to be. Metaman will never have such a concern. Because, he would be self 'perfectly' made in his mind and what kind of mind could that be? We cannot even image.

Metamen is the destruction of the human being. He is the caterpillar that will become the butterfly and the butterfly will fly away never looking back... what for?If we are to become metaman... we are already dead so to speak, even never existed. We have no future as 'man' and certainly not as metaman... for as him/it, we will not believe we once walked on just two legs, grew and cooked our own food or made up our own minds and dreamed of loving someone, having sex and children, or celebrating holidays with wine and turkey. 

 

And in metaman we will have no past either as metaman will not need one or the need to believe in a past  or even care to remember it if in fact he could. After all, do we remember crawling out from the pond, do we want to go back to that? Do we remember when we became a fish or a cow or an ape? Do we want to spend time reminiscing about those transformation days.

I would go as far to say that metaman will reject any evidence he finds that he was created by or evolved from what he will surely deem a lesser creature.  Now, the evolutionist may or may not agree with this and that is if metaman is our ultimate end... he is the end. Anything that reaches a perfect state has nowhere to go. 

I think that biophysicist forgot we live in a state of entropy and he graduated Harvard. I won't name names but wow what a monkey.

Can there be a progressive social imagination...? Revisited!

Yes, its been a while. Moved to a new location and anybody that has moved knows what that is like. In the meantime, been watching a Netflix series called, "Revolution"; guess, it even played out on a major network from 2012-2014.

Anyway, with all that is going on these days in terms of advances in new technology, global world order and or just plain new order as in a brave new world order and or new (er) social imagination, this series has a not so new take who is behind it all... but, a fascinating vision on how it might happen by means of super technology which gets out of the hands of those who thought they had control. Though quite violent with some sex it is watchable for adults only. 

So, check it out and talk to you later. Oh, and, when watching it... ask yourself whether or not there can be a progressive change in the social imagination or not.

The answer is No... there is no thing new under the sun! So, there is nothing progressive. You say what about new technology, doesn't that change us in a progressive way? Well, if you watch the series above... the answer is NO!

A Progressive Social Imagination.... Can there be?

What does progressive mean? It means to pursue change as in reform. But, when you think about it, change and reform are not the same. Change is change and reform is just that... taking what was and trying to make it look better as in appear to be better than what was. You see, there is nothing new under the sun ~ Ecclesiastes 1:9.

So, how could there be a progressive social imagination, right? Well, some think they have one. Let's take a look and to be fair to the general population who get their knowledge from wikipedia... let's just go there.

Progressivism is the support for or advocacy of improvement of society by reform. As a philosophy, it is based on the idea of progress, which asserts that advancements in science, technology, economic development and social organization are vital to the improvement of the human condition. 

Progressivism became highly significant during the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, out of the belief that Europe was demonstrating that societies could progress in civility from uncivilized conditions to civilization through strengthening the basis of empirical knowledge as the foundation of society.

Figures of the Enlightenment believed that progress had universal application to all societies and that these ideas would spread across the world from Europe. The meanings of progressivism have varied over time and from different perspectives. 

The contemporary common political conception of progressivism in the culture of the Western world emerged from the vast social changes brought about by industrialization in the Western world in the late 19th century, particularly out of the view that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality between the rich and the poor; minimally regulated laissez-faire capitalism with monopolistic corporations; and intense and often violent conflict between workers and capitalists, thus claiming that measures were needed to address these problems.

And, what is wrong with that? Well, it completely lacks the large data threads that compose a society. Its not just enough to want to advocate for improvement or demand better education, jobs, fairness in the workplace, equality...  If you consider the amount of data that is stored in the individual, it is quite vast and layered for within are beliefs, traditions practiced in a place over time which grooms identity. These attributes don't just go away when people are educated, working or 'made' equal. And, exactly how would that be done anyway?

The progressive lives in a shallow social imagination not one carved out over time. Is that really possible? No, but they think they can shed their skin (pretend its not there) by high minded ideas which only leaves them and other people who jump on their band wagon with even less than they started with. 

They start by giving themselves new names, ids, labels, and causes in order to virtual signal their agendas with the aim to gain power and prestige for themselves. They think they can write and enforce universal rules advocating for a world without borders. They promise everyone the world as if everything belonged to everyone in the same way. It just leads to confusion, disillusion and chaos. 

So, what about change and reform? They sound so appealing. Well, they may but in fact, there is nothing new under the sun. Its best to seek a 'reformed' social imagination in the place where you are with those around you in that same place that understand you because they share in the same depth of social imagination as you do from being in a place over time. 

Anything else which is brought in, engineered from the top down is just contrived and made to look like it works for everyone in the same way; but it cannot and it certainly cannot be called reformed because it wasn't reformed by those that had it to begin with grounded in a place. Thus, there can be no new evidence of real reform if you remove place, remove depth of data acquired in a place over time.

Progressive reform at best becomes a barnyard of cluckers looking for feed. Are you one of those progressives?

We Have Assurance in the Social Imagination

I read all the time different sociology papers, the fashion for the times theories and or patterns of social behavior... but there is no thing new under the sun. It just looks that way. There have always been reprobates and there have always been capitalists, conquerors, heroes and victims. And, yes borders in the social imagination have enabled that... the good, bad and the ugly of it all. Tearing down borders to avoid the bad or ugly is a misnomer. For in that wide open borderless state is a gray zone so colorless one would be bumping around... invisible.

Oh Solomon would sing ...what makes any of us able to continue to live, breath and survive are assurances that tomorrow will be and it will be a new day even if there is nothing new under the sun. However we may believe or think that tomorrow will be a new day, assurances are here and now are vital. But whose and on what standard are they based? Many set up by man are either too weak or troubled or too smooth to the touch to hang onto or simply invisible.

What or who can provide the necessary assurances that everyone needs in the place where they are? The Word of God, Jesus Christ! For He alone is the absolute truth and works for anyone and everyone in the place where they are. Within their borders, bordered social imagination. With its assurances that those defining boundaries serve a purpose just for them.

'The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being" ~ Acts 17:24-28.

Be Blessed by His Assurance!

A World Without Borders in the Social Imagination....

Is it possible? Not in the human social imagination...Why?

Because, in order to be recognized as a human being who lives in a place experiencing life: living and working, sharing, loving, laughing, striving, grieving etc. one has to have borders; even in the social imagination. Those borders cause identity: who you are and are not.

People create borders to better moderate their circle of friends, their facebook page and in general their life. They set limits, guidelines, rules and goals. Now, if a person 'individual' does that what about a group of people? Do they create borders in the same way as a group? You bet they do. Is that fair? Its fair to them as they see it being fair. They see it defining who they are and are not and what they want to achieve as a group and they see 'safety in defined numbers'; necessary safety for their family, friends, community and even for their own best interests.

Do people cross borders set by others? Sure they do all the time. Why is that? Because, they want to be in a different place. They choose to be in a different place. They want to be in a different place and they want to be like those people in that place. They see greater safety, greater opportunity and they see a better identity in that place.

Should they follow the rules and or laws of the group/place that they want to integrate into? Sure, because after all they chose to be like them. And, it is to their benefit to know and follow the rules and laws as it will enable their successful integration.

But of course, some non-thinkers, will spout "Can't there just be no borders" as in no rules or laws for integration or assimilation? How could that be let alone work I would say in response? How could one even know who they are and are not or where they are and where they are going without borders? Even those necessary borders in the social imagination which compose who you are and are not; after all, isn't' that where borders begin?

Wouldn't all culture and cultural data be lost? Wouldn't all languages become one and wouldn't all ideas become gray and pointless? Think about it... In order for culture to exist, and for various languages to be spoken and for interesting ideas to be imagined, there has to be differences in the social imagination of groups/societies/countries. So, we accept and or agree that means this thing is not that and this works better here for that reason and this is who I am and that is who you are and I am not.

A world without borders, I can't imagine Not seeing a different face/person on the face of the earth, can you? There is variety because there are borders!

Bumping Around in the Social Imagination...

Is the social imagination morphing into a hopeless bumping around collective mentality?  It seems so... How is that possible? Technology is replacing our livelihood and sense of place. And, moreover, it is changing the meaning of individual lives and families. 

Technology is largely controlled by the power elites who through global top down entities and their implemented systems control work; and thus, control the money. What will the social imagination be able to do?

It will conform as best it can... people will be bumping around. They will live with no permanent sense of place or partner or family because there is no job that can support a home, a spouse or family.

To better grasp how this will come to be, we can look to the past. The communism of the past century is the best and nearest example. Everyone was socialized to care... socially engineered to care - to care about the State. The propaganda used was aimed to get everyone on board with the State. Once it appeared that everyone was cared about the State, then everything else that matter to them became secondary or discarded. Essentially, people had 'equality' but only to the extent that everyone had little to own, little to do and little to care about... Sure, they appeared to look busy, have a life... but people were just bumping around.

Again, the first modus operandi is to get people to love or 'care about' the State because it cares about you and then you can love 'care about' others because they love 'care about' the state as much as you.  Once those at the top see that you care about the State (the), they start a propaganda to get you to collaborate with them to remove caring about anything else that might get you to not care about them and that means to watch out for those who might not be so caring about the State.

 

In the future of the coming global communism, there is already a call for neo-humanism. The new caring mode of being and all controlled by the new 'State' of social media directed from the top down. There won't be the kind of intimacy between people as we know it now (quickly fading) and there won't be concern for gender of any kind. 

There won't be any skilled labor or specialization either since that will be taken over by elites and their robots. People will be bumping around passing small courier packages, hard copy information like official notices, fines/tickets, medical waste and body parts, food delivery, and also some small human comforts to be exchanged along the way. 

People will sleep where they end up at the end of the day (no more individual housing), they will share their day with strangers but they won't be strangers really... just people like them doing the same kind of work: bumping around and not caring about it.  There won't be anything to really care about since everyone has been made the same. Evgeny Zamyatin wrote book about this called "WE"!

And, I just so happen to have a copy...it helps me to keep tabs on developing events...

Walking Away from Truth in the Social Imagination...

We live in a culture that is defiant of any notion of truth. "What is truth?" Pilate asked ~ John 18:38.

What is your truth is not my truth... that is pretty much what Pilate meant.  Jesus said, "Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice" and Pilate said, "What is truth"? Sadly that is where are today in this country and other nations that follow our lead. The Spirit of Pilate is alive today in our universities and governments and churches. We live in a culture that is defiant of truth. We are anti-truth. If that is true, we must ask ... what is truth?

People say there is truth in all kinds of ism (s); for instance, culturalism where in we find 'truth' in the cultural data crystallized by traditions and customs.

Surveys show that 36 and older state that there are no moral absolutes. Why is that? Is it really because there is no truth today? Those at the other end of the surveys tell us that morality and truth depend upon individual preference and circumstances. Here is a list of truth ism (s) being applied today.

Humanism says that man is the truth.
Mysticism says that intuition is the truth.
Skepticism says that no one can know the truth.
Hedonism says whatever feels good is the truth.
Secularism says that the present world is the truth.
Relativism says that in each situation there is truth.
Pluralism says that everyone has a piece of the truth.
Existentialism says that self determination is the truth.
Positivism says that whatever man confesses is the truth.
Pragmatism says that whatever works for you is the truth.

Soren Kierkegaard said that there is no truth in the masses. What did he mean by that? It is exactly what Pilate meant. Kierkegaard wrote, "There is a view of life which conceives that where the crowd is, there is also the truth, and that in truth itself there is need of having the crowd on its side. There is another view of life which conceives that wherever there is a crowd there is untruth ...even if every individual, each for himself in private, were to be in possession of the truth, yet in case they were all to get together in a crowd—a crowd to which any decisive significance is attributed, a voting noisy audible crowd—untruth would at once be in evidence." ~ SK

What is truth? Is there any absolute truth that does not entangle us in lies? Yes, it is the way, the life and the truth ~ Jesus Christ. Those outside of the truth of Jesus Christ hold down the truth of God.... they exchange the truth of God for a lie. And, sadly, this is the hour in which we live. We have a culture and society that has exchanged the truth of God for a lie. It is the departure from or walking away from truth that is our demise and fall (as it was) into doubt, error and into the chaos of a very dark social imagination!

What is Lying in the Social Imagination?

Everybody lies.  It may only be “white” lies, but everyone tells lies or “omits the truth” sometimes.

We start lying at around age 4 to 5 when children gain an awareness of the use and power of language.  This first lying is not malicious, but rather to find out, or test, what can manipulated in a child’s environment.  Eventually children begin to use lying to get out of trouble or get something they want. 

White lies, those concocted to protect someone’s feelings, are not a big deal at all.  The person, however, who seems to feel compelled to lie about both the small and large stuff has a problem. Their problem is having a weak sense of identity within a group, within a larger social imagination. They may feel in a kind of limbo or misplaced within the social reality. They lie to protect themselves, look good, gain financially or socially and avoid punishment. 

Lying often gets worse with the passage of time. When you get away with a lie it often impels you to continue your deception especially if it wins you favor with others.

The other potentially more serious problem is that you can and will forget the real place you had in the social imagination as untruths blend and blur... confusing the old with the new fabricated place. You might imagine getting away with your lies (only if we/you the absolute truth) and we/you could if the social imagination did not have a memory bank of original information; as long as it remembers the absolute truth.

Yes, even in that kind of uncertainty, there could be lies about you that you never had anything to do with.  You see, we can give people the wrong impression of who we are and are not and not because we lie but because we don't have the information they want from us based on what they think we have regardless whether or not we have it. You see, everyone in this world wants something from someone 'information' - they want from us and we from them. This is what the social imagination (our social reality) is about giving and taking; its about exchanges of information that create and build a social construct that becomes a sustained social interaction in which we exist.

So, in a way, we seem to be caught up in vicious circle of exchanges of information which is both lies/truth. Its more often than not that we just often don't have the information that someone or some people want or expect from us.  So, we cannot share, we cannot give what others want from us and so they take from us what they want. We even allow it because we know that we cannot offer what they want even though at the same time we can be taking something from them. In that realization or position, if make something up or we don't make something up, we could lose out either way in the give/take of the social imagination - social reality.

What can and does happen frequently, is that those who want information from us will make up something for us on our behalf when we cannot or do not provide them with what they want.  In the example of, if you are seen with them then that must mean you exchanged information with them. But, as it turns out, you did not have what they wanted and so lies are constructed to make you look bad, or them look good. Or to make you look good just so that they can look good too.

Also, if you do make something up as it seems necessary to do so, and it is accepted as useful or good information then ties/relationships can be won but... based on lies. Can the social imagination be built on lies? Seems so. Its not that this happens rarely, it happens often and even on macro levels between countries. The victor gets to tell the history. The group/person that won the battle whether it was won based on lies or not doesn't matter in long run... only that something was won - information.

Is there any truth out there? For some, it is enough that we just agree on what is the truth of the moment. But, what is truth so that we can know it in the moment? One for sure, there is no truth in the masses...so who is under the mask, its anyone's call or is it what anyone wants him/her to be at a given moment? Perhaps, that is one's moment of truth! That's entanglement reality...! Is there any other?



*Excerpts from online article ~ https://www.today.com/health/why-people-lie-how-tell-if-they-are-2D80554952