Fascinating ideas! Oddly, I've been thinking along the same lines, that what we think of as objective and subjective may be something else entirely. Suppose we use computers as a model to think about these things. Suppose I open a spreadsheet program. Let's say I have a vague idea of what spreadsheets do, but there is no "Spreadsheets for Dummies" reference available. I have to learn how to use it by experimentation.
While the spreadsheet is open, it has rules that govern what happens within the spreadsheet.. If I don't know the rules, I can discover them, and consult with other spreadsheet users who may have discovered functions that I don't know about. The spreadsheet does not do things on its own. I have to interact with it, and to a limited extent, it interacts with me. I can interact with other spreadsheet users through spreadsheets that I share with them. '
Now I close the spreadsheet and open a graphics program. I can put numbers into the graphics I create, but the rules for how they interact are much different from those that govern numbers in the spreadsheets.
Yet, underlying all of that are the binary gyrations of the Windows 7 Operating System (It's true, I haven't upgraded to Win 10). So Windows 7 is the ultimate objective ground level of reality here--- No wait! I have a dual-booting laptop, and I ALSO run Linux, so the OS is not the objective reality.
Maybe its the hardware that's the objective reality here. Nope, can't be that. My sister runs only Macs and can use a spreadsheet I created on her Mac...
So applying all this to the experience of reality that we share-- Geomancy could be like the spreadsheet program. It is a tool through which we interact with each other and with other being(s) that have a different view of (or perhaps a higher vantage point on) reality than our own. I interact with a Geomantic reading, and it has boundaries and rules, but they are more like a framework for meditation that takes me outside of my usual frame of reference.
Interacting with a spreadsheet is similar, in that I can use the spreadsheet to guide my mathematical meditations and arrive at answers that would not otherwise be available to me.
But its more than that. It is also like playing chess with a partner that wants you to make the best possible next move.
Quantum physics says that the presence of an observer changes the outcome of an interaction between particles. That should tell us something about objectivity!
So, no objectivity. Perhaps that is so, but there are games with rules, constructs in which we can participate. When we do, our presences change the outcome.
no subject
Oddly, I've been thinking along the same lines, that what we think of as objective and subjective may be something else entirely. Suppose we use computers as a model to think about these things. Suppose I open a spreadsheet program. Let's say I have a vague idea of what spreadsheets do, but there is no "Spreadsheets for Dummies" reference available. I have to learn how to use it by experimentation.
While the spreadsheet is open, it has rules that govern what happens within the spreadsheet.. If I don't know the rules, I can discover them, and consult with other spreadsheet users who may have discovered functions that I don't know about. The spreadsheet does not do things on its own. I have to interact with it, and to a limited extent, it interacts with me. I can interact with other spreadsheet users through spreadsheets that I share with them. '
Now I close the spreadsheet and open a graphics program. I can put numbers into the graphics I create, but the rules for how they interact are much different from those that govern numbers in the spreadsheets.
Yet, underlying all of that are the binary gyrations of the Windows 7 Operating System (It's true, I haven't upgraded to Win 10). So Windows 7 is the ultimate objective ground level of reality here--- No wait! I have a dual-booting laptop, and I ALSO run Linux, so the OS is not the objective reality.
Maybe its the hardware that's the objective reality here. Nope, can't be that. My sister runs only Macs and can use a spreadsheet I created on her Mac...
So applying all this to the experience of reality that we share--
Geomancy could be like the spreadsheet program. It is a tool through which we interact with each other and with other being(s) that have a different view of (or perhaps a higher vantage point on) reality than our own. I interact with a Geomantic reading, and it has boundaries and rules, but they are more like a framework for meditation that takes me outside of my usual frame of reference.
Interacting with a spreadsheet is similar, in that I can use the spreadsheet to guide my mathematical meditations and arrive at answers that would not otherwise be available to me.
But its more than that. It is also like playing chess with a partner that wants you to make the best possible next move.
Quantum physics says that the presence of an observer changes the outcome of an interaction between particles. That should tell us something about objectivity!
So, no objectivity. Perhaps that is so, but there are games with rules, constructs in which we can participate. When we do, our presences change the outcome.
Is that at all like your understanding?