C-255. Children of the Expansion
What is the human condition?*
Children of the Expansion. But the Expansion is more than parent. The Expansion is family. We are, IN and OF our selves, expansions. In our becomings … if by developmental diligence we can come to enjoy the CEM that molecular steps made and taken can bring about….
…. So that we are of consequence beyond “things.”** Not just another B-universe thing of nature, humbled by the number of other things and by comparison in body size to other things. Rather, even in our still underdeveloped becomings, perhaps the exemplar of the Expansion’s Frontier, differentiation, extension and CEM, illustrative via our collisions of the Nature of Things’ constants: partial order, consequentiality and discontinuity.
The totality of the human condition, this totality of features we have seriously undercalculated.*** A World of Possibility we have not fully explored – nor explored well (O:S-P). Too locally oriented to situations. One-armed with B-ness and B-speak. Without the operating systems we need for our several selves.# The WE beyond “us” (in both senses). The WE out front of us AT, ON the Frontier of the Expansion.
We’re nothing to brag about, given our history with functionality re needed functionality – our “unsolved problems.” The Expansion, in a manner of speaking, has sliced and spliced its way through the professional domains of chemistry and geology, biology and botany. It deserves our company going further forward … and it’s a “family” thing to be doing.
***
* (Personal note) This is the question that started me, now over 70 years ago, to enter journalism as a professional career in observing and reporting. “Children of the Expansion” is the conclusion I draw from this experience.
** The thing about “thing” is that the term reeks of B-ness and B-speak, of the bias that our focal attention and our Mind technology give body relative to step … as if happenings were adequately served by being regarded as things ... as “things of nature” and not as materiality IN and OF consequence in the Nature of Things -- the Expansion. “It” at least is neutral. Consider too the “big questions” about happenings focused on “it”: “How it works?” and “How to make it?” These are matters of behavioral architecture, after the fact and before the fact respectively … appropriate to our place AT, ON the Frontier of the Expansion, looking “both ways,” forward and not just backward. As much in the S-universe as in the B-universe. Always in the Expansion and subject to its principles. B-speak may say of these questions that “strong interactions” (Asch) are in play. But that is far removed from the needed functionality to which “it” has been or might and ought to be addressing.
*** How badly miscalculated? So much so as to reduce the Expansion’s totality to a one-dimensional (adjectival) feature of a B-ness and B-speak B-universe. It makes modest the pre-Copernican claim to the Earth’s and human’s centrality. It has the flavor of the Comstock Lode story of silver ore cast aside in the search for gold.
# As developmentally via the R-path’s Excalibur. Or, perchance, via an AI initiative to refine the mettle ore of cultures to enable production of a light clothing (ala armor) into which we might step as necessary for needed functionality.
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2021 R. F. Carter
Children of the Expansion. But the Expansion is more than parent. The Expansion is family. We are, IN and OF our selves, expansions. In our becomings … if by developmental diligence we can come to enjoy the CEM that molecular steps made and taken can bring about….
…. So that we are of consequence beyond “things.”** Not just another B-universe thing of nature, humbled by the number of other things and by comparison in body size to other things. Rather, even in our still underdeveloped becomings, perhaps the exemplar of the Expansion’s Frontier, differentiation, extension and CEM, illustrative via our collisions of the Nature of Things’ constants: partial order, consequentiality and discontinuity.
The totality of the human condition, this totality of features we have seriously undercalculated.*** A World of Possibility we have not fully explored – nor explored well (O:S-P). Too locally oriented to situations. One-armed with B-ness and B-speak. Without the operating systems we need for our several selves.# The WE beyond “us” (in both senses). The WE out front of us AT, ON the Frontier of the Expansion.
We’re nothing to brag about, given our history with functionality re needed functionality – our “unsolved problems.” The Expansion, in a manner of speaking, has sliced and spliced its way through the professional domains of chemistry and geology, biology and botany. It deserves our company going further forward … and it’s a “family” thing to be doing.
* (Personal note) This is the question that started me, now over 70 years ago, to enter journalism as a professional career in observing and reporting. “Children of the Expansion” is the conclusion I draw from this experience.
** The thing about “thing” is that the term reeks of B-ness and B-speak, of the bias that our focal attention and our Mind technology give body relative to step … as if happenings were adequately served by being regarded as things ... as “things of nature” and not as materiality IN and OF consequence in the Nature of Things -- the Expansion. “It” at least is neutral. Consider too the “big questions” about happenings focused on “it”: “How it works?” and “How to make it?” These are matters of behavioral architecture, after the fact and before the fact respectively … appropriate to our place AT, ON the Frontier of the Expansion, looking “both ways,” forward and not just backward. As much in the S-universe as in the B-universe. Always in the Expansion and subject to its principles. B-speak may say of these questions that “strong interactions” (Asch) are in play. But that is far removed from the needed functionality to which “it” has been or might and ought to be addressing.
*** How badly miscalculated? So much so as to reduce the Expansion’s totality to a one-dimensional (adjectival) feature of a B-ness and B-speak B-universe. It makes modest the pre-Copernican claim to the Earth’s and human’s centrality. It has the flavor of the Comstock Lode story of silver ore cast aside in the search for gold.
# As developmentally via the R-path’s Excalibur. Or, perchance, via an AI initiative to refine the mettle ore of cultures to enable production of a light clothing (ala armor) into which we might step as necessary for needed functionality.
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2021 R. F. Carter
S