Just a tad of Doug's current reading activities...to
In September, 1991 Doug bought all of Isaac Asimov's
Foundation Series books. In 1992 Asimov transitioned.
He was born in 1920. Look him up in Wikipedia. Fabulous human!
Similar Sidis, Mather, etc.
Doug had been introduced to Asimov by one of his employees,
Eric Bolinger. Eric was doing his Baccalaureate in Physicsc,
he and I were endlessly debating (even then) classical notions
vs. (at that time) 'fictional' memes.
Eric felt that classical physics was final. The truth,
etc. I knew something was wrong, but I couldn't wrap my mind around
to respond in 'physical' terms. This was a part of Doug's motivation
to do something about Pirsig's "dialectic is a genetic
defect in human reason."
Quantonics happened! Quantonics slowly emerged! Quantonics IS!
Asimov's Foundation Series languished on Doug's bookshelves,
unread, unattended, until September of 2014, nearly a quarter
Early editions of that series were published in 1950s
when Asimov was just barely 30.
Much of what Asimov has written resonates what is happening
in our world today. Empires are born, raised, live, and die. Truthings
Upon finishing volume one, Doug wrote at top of last
chapter's first page, "Can Understanding Understand?"
Doug wrote that query since Asimov was using 'understand'
in a classically static manner, as though 'understand' could concretely defy (Petrify, reify,...,)
nature's absolutely quantized evolutionary perpetual ubiquitous
change, chance, and choice ontologies.
Yet Asimov's whole fictional genre was~is about intrinsic
evolution of all reality and all reality's con(m)stitua.
Pirsig's quote Li~la~blurted
itself on Doug's quantum~stagings, "...dialectic
is a genetic defect in human reason."
Asimov's Foundation Series didn't Understand,
wasn't Understanding that defect.
Instead, yet appropriately, Asimov grasped that social organized
(in a flawed hyperc placec-identityc
of dialectic...similar Einstein's bogus, "acceleration is
an identityc of gravityc...")
...was the basic defect in
human reason. Rather, as accelerationq is a symptomq
religionc is a deceitful and
tyrannical symptomc of dialecticc!
Asimov didn't grasp how a
baser flaw of raw (Pirsigean demoted, devalued, socially corrupt)
beneath all centrally-plannedc socialc scalarbations
of mindc and thoughtc.
Asimov was metastatically dis eased (especially) with (corrupt
Ponzi-schematic linguistic) dialectic!
Yet he intuited some quantum~protomemes.
Doug's astonishment was epiphanous!
That momentq is when Doug wrote, "Can
At issue here, for Doug, is self~other oppositionc vis-à-vis antinomialismq of
Understandingc and Understandc vis-à-vis Understandingq and Understandq.
Ultimately, that issue is crux for Doug's answer to this page's
web title, Can Understanding Understand?
Burgeoning with Peircean
abduction, our issue here begs a query
whose hypotheses are limitless...
27Sep2014 - Doug.
"Momentq" as used by Doug means
unstoppable meliorativeq rqcs
Zeno of Elea-esque classical
dialectical zero-latency instantaneousc stoppabilityc.
This page is going to be huge. It will emersce n¤vælty
indefinitely as long as Doug remains a viable living entity on
Doug's next effort here will be to treat 'understanding'
and 'understand' toposically. After that Doug will go back
Heraclitus ("panta rei," change is absolute,
William James (truth is made: potential implication of
evolution, etc.), and
Henri Louis Bergson (truth evolves: implication that truth
evolves durationally, etc.) for benchmarking
justifications of Doug's opus here. Doug's memes include evolution
as a natural intrinsic in a quantum~holographic reality which
begs up to Planck rate holographic flux energy~wellings' quantum~antinomial~complementary
perpetual and ubiquitous
"Let it evolve..."
Doug - 25Sep2014.
. . .
One of Doug's fondest remembrances
regarding understanding is Bergson's (paraphrased) "Change
(radical spontaneity) is simple, State (radical inertia) is Complex."
Attending that fondness is one of Doug's favorite quotes of Heraclitus
Logos [B1] AKA the
Account [B2] and how,
according Heraclitus, common (sociallyc propagandized, dialectically-mob-conditioned)
folk fail to grasp its essence.
Actually two quotes B50 and B51 combine to proffer Dougs favorites,
"Listening not to me but to the account, it is wise
to agree that all things are one [quantum~coherent]. [B50]"
"They [the mobc]
do not comprehend how, in differing, it [the account] agrees
with itself--a backward turning connection [holographicq nexiq], like that of a bow and lyre. [B51]"
Doug's brackets and italics. Quotes are from many derivative references
of Diels Kranz.
Source Doug uses most often is Jonathan Barnes' Early Greek
Philosophy, Penguin paperback, 1987.
When Doug first read those quotes
he didn't have a[ny] quantum~understanding[s] of what Heraclitus
Doug's first reading was probably part of his work on Pirsig's
If recall serves it was Curd and McKirahan's A Presocratics
Reader, which Doug read first in late 1990s. I like Barnes
Why did few understand Jesus'
"parables?" Why have few even begun to understand Heraclitus'
Doug's opinion claims Jesus and
Heraclitus were natural quantum~Qabalic~gnostics.
"Doug, How can you expect
us to accept your claim in any sense of even partialq validityq?"
Jesus was an Essene Gnostic.
See Elaine Pagels' The Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis.
Pagels' research shows us Jesus was a gnostic.
Pagels was Harvard Chair of Religion for a decade or more (recall).
She is currently Emeritus at Princeton.
Jesus like Magdalene and Didymos
Thomas was an advanced student of Qabala, Autiot, Gematria, Sepher
Yetsira, Sefirot, and Gnosis (descended from Abraham).
Those credentials make them remarkably compatible with modern
Especially quantum ~middle~inclusion,
~fractal~recursion, ~coherence, ~complementarity, ~antinomiality, etc.
Heraclitus came from a wealthy
family and all that Doug has read about him pro and con, puts
him in that same elite quantum~sophist learning tradition which
is more than four millennia durable.
As far as Doug knows, and he has only marginal linguistic qua,
Qabala, its Autiot and Gematria, existed for many millennia prior
Abraham...but how long?...don't know.
Hebrew is a poor sister Anglicanesque derivative of Autiot, almost
useless for any quantum~learning~understandings' adventures.
Dialecticians have, tragically, ruined almost all human epistemology
via their reengineering of human thought
since early Greeks like Parmenides, Plato and Aristotle. A two
millennium old, plus, human tragedy!
Those quantum~especiallies, "...middle~inclusion,
fractal~recursion, coherence, complementarity, antinomiality,
are essence of any successful omniscription of comparisons of
understand and understanding.
Doug - 26Sep2014.
. . .
Let's take a Greek approach to
fathoming 'understand,' and 'understanding.' Greeks impacted,
linguistically, much of Latin, especially in terms of medicine,
philosophy, and religion.
As a result, English (Anglican)
ideasc as platonic concrete were SOM boxed-in...semantically. Unfortunately.
From whence 'understand' in Greek?
What does 'understand' mean in Greek?
It means literally (hylically) hypostasis!
Hypo: under. Stasis: stand. N¤t quantum at
Aristotelean, Aquinian-] Deadness
as a orthodox, dogmatic, axiomatic
given. Substance, [formal
reductive-] residue, [Peter-fied-, petrified-]
as classically, ideally, Parmenidically,
Platonically dead! Absence of livingq,
and lifeq's ubiquitousq and
perpetualq holographicq metabolisisq.
Should we buy into this Greek
BS even though we experience life and its life~death quantum~cyclings
directly? Doug thinkqs n¤t.
Ponder Greek's metastatic, cancerous
linguistic infection of Latin and English let alone other possibilities.
is what Doug means by, understandc and understandingc.
"Doug, What must we do to
meliorate this great linguistic distortion of thoughtq itself?"
Fathom how Autiot and Quantonics
are about quantum~hyper~animare [L.], i.e., quantum~dynamic,
absolute quantal changings',
instillation of lifeq and livingq above
all else, philosophically, linguistically, and spiritually.
Doug's use of 'Fathom,' then,
becomes an exemplar of what Doug means by understandingq
Grasping that lifeq, its comsciousnessq,
its perpetualq livingq~dyingq
and their ubiquitous fractalq recursionq
practicesq persistentq complementaryq~antinomialq
amongq all its EWings...is how sentientsq understandq
and are understandingq.
Lifeq itself, livingq itself, without deathc
as Platonic concretec, rather as unending fractalq~recursiveq
always næw beginningsq...
"In all (only apparent) lifeq~endingsq
cohereq animareq (i.e., instillationq
of) n¤væl lifeq re beginningsq.
(Desiderate your understandingq of Bayt and Vayt.)
Dump classical dialecticians!
Embrace quantum holographicians!
Avoid dialecticians, your enemies,
soundly identified as corruptc. Find quantum~friends,
who will extend themselves, nourishing your own and their pneumatic
Doug - 27Sep,1Oct2014.
. . .
Regarding human passion for understanding, disregarding his colloquial
dialectic, Doug loves Michael Polanyi's:
"I have spoken of our craving
for understanding, and have mentioned
the intellectual [and pneumatic] passion which impels us towards making ever closer
contact with reality.
These passions are powerful forces pursuing high hopes.
Indeed, if the shaping [evolvingq and transemerqingq]
of knowledge is achieved by pouring ourselves into new forms [emerqancyingsq]
the acquisition of knowledge should be found to be motivated by
the deepest forces [quantons(scin,quan)] of our beingq...To
a mind on the alert,
whatever seems intelligible presents a problem and stirs it to
the prospect of di(omni)scovery. Thus will the active [livingq]
mind avail itself
of ever new opportunities to undergo a changeq that
will make it more satisfying to its modifiedq selfq."
Michael Polanyi, The Study
of Man, p. 34 of 102 pages total.
Students of Quantonics, substitute interrelationshipings for 'contact,' memes
k~now~ings for 'knowledge,' n¤vel for 'new,' and
emerqancyings for 'forms.'
Doug's color, bold, Apple Chancery
font, brackets, parentheticals and quantum~subscripts.
See Doug's 2004 original unperturbed quotation of Polanyi.
Our passions and craving for
deeper insights and fathomings of realityq are part
and partial of humanityq. When we lose that, we are
dead, dying: Mawt~Ha~Mawt.
Classical ideas and notions of
socialc organizationc, one
size fits all, religion's dogmac
and orthodoxyc, politicos' One World Order, and
'commonc sensec' are all means of displacing
our passionsq and cravingsq re deeper fathomingsq
Those who attempt to yoke us, chain us, imprison and detend us
in their "we know what is good for you," polemic dialectical
hegemonies are Satan, evil, control freaks.
Only your individual dueq diligenceq in
understandingq selfq and self'sq
roleq ihn realityq can protect you from their
requires your unending vigilance against academic, political,
and religious hegemons' attempts to control you.
Fecundate your passions for understanding, fecundate your cravingq
for individualq freedomsq and their ever~attending
Doug's words enlightenq further Polanyi's, "...
passion which impels us towards making ever closer
[interrelationshipingsq] with reality. "
QELR of 'understand'
Impetus ("impels") as radical~quantum~fecund~vicissitudinality
Doug - 1Oct2014.
Suite 18368 1950 East Greyhound Pass
Carmel, INdiana 46033-7730
©Quantonics, Inc., 2014-2030
Rev. 10Feb2016 PDR
Created: 25Sep2014 PDR
(26-27Sep2014 rev - Add 'Evolution 26Sep2014.'
Add 'Evolution 27Sep2014.')
(1Oct2014 rev - Add 1Oct2014 Evolution.')
(10Feb2016 rev - Add link to 'Genetic Defect in Human Reason'
near page top.)