Reality = That which is/That I am. 0. Potential = Being 1. Actual = Becoming (actualization) God = Creative Intelligence. We are all It, to an unknowable/inexhaustible extent, as the facets of a Diamond are' both' distinct from each other 'and' the Diamond itself. Love is the recognition of our shared Being.
It answers whether or not the natural universe has purpose or if it’s mechanical and aimless. That’s at least one thing it answers. Remember, a dead, mechanical universe still comes with “miracles” in order for it to be anything at all and do what it does in the first place. One example is the “something from nothing” scenario of the big bang theory.
I love how Layman throws out the word “holographically” around 28:30 and then Andrew diverts the conversation. the difference between east and west I suppose
@@M_K171 i guess I took it as Andrew chuckling at the idea that life is an illusion (an eastern idea). holography creates the look of something real without it actually being real. maybe it wasn’t the best choice of words, but the way I understand it, process tries to reconcile the ideas of the universe being energy, but also tactile in its unity at the same time.
Well it’s a part of the same system as he was explaining, but they are distinct parts in the system, in which the parts work together to make the system, and without one or the other it would not work.
Another dope chat, layman been putting out bangers lately.
Great chat. Real cutting edge stuff
Love me some Layman!
Brightens my day 😻
- TransChristianBuddhistTAOistPagan . . . Integralist
'Divine'
BOTH Creator AND Creation ~
NonDual . . .
Creatoration . . . ing
🙏
One question I have is, why Whitehead and not Bergson?
💓 The Art of Becoming.
Reality = That which is/That I am.
0. Potential = Being
1. Actual = Becoming (actualization)
God = Creative Intelligence. We are all It, to an unknowable/inexhaustible extent, as the facets of a Diamond are' both' distinct from each other 'and' the Diamond itself.
Love is the recognition of our shared Being.
Does the idea of the panentheistic god explain anything at all that can't be explained by natural, evolutionary, emergent processes in the universe?
To answer that, I propose reading a paper on the difference between pantheism and panentheism.
It answers whether or not the natural universe has purpose or if it’s mechanical and aimless. That’s at least one thing it answers. Remember, a dead, mechanical universe still comes with “miracles” in order for it to be anything at all and do what it does in the first place. One example is the “something from nothing” scenario of the big bang theory.
I think it can explain conciousness and what starts the big bang
I love how Layman throws out the word “holographically” around 28:30 and then Andrew diverts the conversation. the difference between east and west I suppose
What’s your point?
@@M_K171 i guess I took it as Andrew chuckling at the idea that life is an illusion (an eastern idea). holography creates the look of something real without it actually being real. maybe it wasn’t the best choice of words, but the way I understand it, process tries to reconcile the ideas of the universe being energy, but also tactile in its unity at the same time.
DoBeCome_r_d_ing 🙏
TheParadoxicalMystery
of NonDual . . .
ConcreteAbstractions
🙏 😹
NonDual . . . 'InDependent . . . InSeparability' 😹
Well it’s a part of the same system as he was explaining, but they are distinct parts in the system, in which the parts work together to make the system, and without one or the other it would not work.
Layman thinks he’s smarter than he really is.