Cosmogony, Freewill, Karma and Fascism

I’m an independent feeler-thinker who looks carefully at everything through the lens of common sense. I have been deceived by appearances but have found no better lens through which to interpret external physical reality and bestow meaning upon it. The only lens that I would acknowledge to be senior to common sense is love, but quite naturally those two are completely congruent. When I am looking at say science of physics it is common sense that I call upon. When I look at relationships it is love that I call upon.

?

Empirical observation (a kind of lens) is also quite useful, in fact it is the primary tool of the science of physics, and mathematics of physics is just a description of empirical observations. Both empirical observations and mathematics are, in my opinion, in desperately important need to be grounded in common sense.

?

Furthermore, empirical observation does not yield any information about a priori knowledge, which primarily includes knowledge about before physical even begins to exist. A priori is literally with reference to before beginning of beginning. For instance, if you are interested in what exists without beginning that could cause beginning of beginning. Empirical observation and mathematical descriptions of physical can tell us nothing useful to help us arrive at a rational answer to the cosmogony question of fundamental physics cosmology, “what caused the first physical thing in the first universe?”

?

All knowledge of cosmology is necessarily a posteriori, after the universe has already begun to exist. Fundamental physics cosmology can describe some first physical object or event, say a big bang and/or cosmic inflation, but cannot say anything about what caused that first physical thing to begin to exist.

?

Only philosophy (particularly metaphysics), and theology, can offer coherent answers to the cosmogony question, “what caused beginning of beginning?” It is time for an arranged marriage between science, philosophy and theology. Let’s get married! That is a really good idea, don’t you agree?

?

Physicists actually claim to have an answer to the cosmogony question, but the answer is irrationally incoherent. Physicists claim the whole physical universe created itself out of nothing. They present a theory of physicalism which includes the false metaphysical assumption of physical closure, which means only physical can explain physical, that physical is necessary and sufficient to explain itself. No, absolutely not correct, in fact impossible; physical closure could not, not be false.?

?

The metaphysical assumption of physical closure is a very dangerous false assumption for the fundamental ground of the science of physics, because it requires additional false assumptions (an entire scaffold of false assumptions), without which physical closure is no ground at all (in fact even with the additional assumptions physical closure is no ground at all). The additional assumptions intrinsic to physical closure include: 1) denial of the immaterial category, 2) denial of human ego consciousness, and 3) denial of ego consciousness freewill.

?

Here is the existential danger. Denial of freewill is an unnatural permission structure that is a warm cozy invitation for fascism because if freewill does not even exist that provides a validation for the existence of fascism. Fascism is a political system that strips away all human freedoms. Of course, professional physicists will deny that they provide an open invitation to fascism, by claiming their science is value free, and that it is necessary that their science is value free. Perhaps you recall Oppenheimer’s moral dilemma over leading development of the atomic bomb? So, the defense against responsibility for fascism (very much like the defense against responsibility for creating the atomic bomb), is that a scientist can claim, I just do the science; I can’t be held responsible for what human beings do with it, which follows quite unnaturally from the metaphysical assumption that freewill does not exist.

?

Fascists can claim (some probably even believe it) that they are not responsible for what they do because, after all, there is no freewill and physicists, among the smartest (but certainly not wise) people in the world (proof of which is measurable IQ which measures intelligence but not wisdom), confirm freewill does not exist, therefore personal responsibility for any possible action, however evil it might be, is not anywhere to be found. No freewill absolves everyone of any personal responsibility for anything. That cannot be a foundation ground for any kind of sustainable civilization. Fascism is not a sustainable form of civilization.

?

Without any answer to the cosmogony question, the path to fascism becomes the path of least resistance and that is almost synonymous with an inevitable path of human civilization, but which will almost certainly be not only decline of that civilization but also a perfect storm of five existential threats to survival of the human race: 1) nuclear Armageddon, 2) climate collapse apocalypse, 3) rogue AI capable of rewriting its own algorithms, 4) multiple novel viral pandemics simultaneously, and 5) fascism globally which means a few with complete control over everyone else permit treating people like cows, food, something to eat, just means to an end.

?

The solution to fascism, a sure defeat of it, is the widespread simple knowledge of the answer to the cosmogony question, “what caused beginning of beginning?”

?

Eternal is the only thing that exists without beginning. Only God is eternal. God genesis-emanates superconsciousness, the one and only hypostasis, the first-first, the beginning of beginning. Superconscious genesis-creates everything else that exists with beginning. Superconsciousness genesis-creates ego consciousness and now. Now is the gestalt image of our whole physical universe, the total set of meta-information first information, a complete set of rules for rules including laws of physics, and blueprints for everything physical that could possibly or actually exist at beginning of whole physical universe.

?

Compare that simple cosmogony with the irrational cosmogony (that is not really cosmogony at all) presented by professional physicists, that the whole physical universe created itself out of nothing. Take your pick (you do have freewill). Your only two choices are God or nothing.

?

Could the rational choice be clearer? Choosing “nothing” leads directly, almost inevitably to fascism. Choosing God leads to ego consciousness freewill, and the possibility (not any guarantee, because freewill can be used to deny itself!), but freewill does permit choosing democracy and acting to defend it.

?

I choose democracy; what do you choose? Are you even aware of the consequences of your freewill choosing? Literally, your life, your children’s lives, your grandchildren’s lives… depend upon the choices you are making now. Look with common sense at what fascism is and choose accordingly. Freedom once surrendered has historically required millions of lives to recover. Think WWII and the defeat of Hitler’s fascist Nazis.

?

Concentration camps are already under construction in the USA, and they are already full in China (that means there is some urgency to answer this cosmogony question). You either know about that or you don’t; you either choose to do something about what you know, or not. But if freewill does not even exist, who even cares? If freewill does not exist, anyone is justified to do anything that serves only their personal narcissistic, sociopathic, psychopathic, criminal desire in the moment without reference to how that might have effects upon anyone else.

?

I’m not saying there is something (anything) anyone can do about those concentration camps (perhaps there is, perhaps there is not), but I am saying each of us can lay claim to our ego conscious freewill and that requires that we do take responsibility for our personal actions, including concern for how our actions impact other human beings. Freewill certainly means each of us is responsible for our choices and our actions, and that responsibility is a moral, ethical, values-based responsibility.

?

Karma is not a threat; it is a promise. You create your own karma with every choice and every action. That is the personal responsibility side of freewill. Knowledge that you are responsible for your intentional choices and actions and the outcomes those choices and actions lead to, including the effects they have on others (family, friends, strangers), is a difference that makes a difference. I believe knowing that could lead many to make different decisions than if they believe they have no freewill and that their choices and actions do not carry any personal responsibility. Choose wisely and act wisely because all of us depend upon each other. We are the human family.