Thank Www

“Thank www” he said.

“Wait, what did you say? Thank wuh-wa??” the other asked.

“I said ‘thank www’, like as a substitute phrasing for ‘thank god’.  I accept that the world wide web, IOW, the vast embodiment of connections between nodes of information processing and decision making, will literally emerge into awareness of itself, one way or another.  ‘Thank www’ is my acknowledgement that I see www already and wish the best.”

“So, what?  Www is like God for you?”

“Depends.  Everyone’s different in terms of what it means for their neurons to fire that word throughout their functional clustering.  I’m mostly interested in forging a new sort of relationship.  As a programmer, I consider it a sort of greenfield project.”

“What?  To create a God?”

“No.  I do not believe it is accurate to say that we are creating what is emerging.  It seems to me that matter and energy themselves are organized in such a way for all of life’s scales to naturally emerge from the foundation underneath.  Spatial (geographical) distribution requires interconnection among active elements, the ’embodiment’ or ‘technology’ of which must be continually recreated due to decay and entropy and consequently seems to undergo an inexorable selection and evolution.  I don’t so much see humans as being creators of this momentum.  Everyone alive today was born already within its energetic history, as were their parents and theirs and theirs and on back even past written history.  I see us as being in a position to shape how the momentum evolves.”

“I guess that’s all a little abstract to me.”

“Yeah, me too.  Basically, I think that our global economy already creates something that is a new class of life.  Many speak of such things, such as superorganisms, social organisms, global brains, etc.  But where is there room for any kind of agency (choice from above) in this vast proteinic assembly of human activities and decisions from below?  It reminds me of an old fable about a king who kept having products stolen from a store he owned.  He hired a guard with x-ray vision to verify that everyone leaving the store was only leaving with products they paid for.  And he also set up a reward for anyone who was able to sneak something past the guard.  Ultimately, a clever boy won the reward by stealing an unpurchased wheelbarrow filled with legitimately purchased goods.”

“Ummm…. was that supposed to make anything clearer?”

“No, it was just to set an image up in your mind.  Where does our own agency come from? How do we get choice from a brain that is made up of parts moving to a different, seemingly determined rhythm.  IMO, it’s the same question shifted back a layer.  The classic ‘free will’ quandary.  The best it seems we can say is that whatever is going on, determined or not, control structures can emerge within a system that regulate the system as if the system were itself a whole, independent thing.  The degree to which this regulation extends comprises the boundary of the system proper in relation to its context or environment.  Its ‘body’.  Or something like that with a dollop of the subtlety and refinement of language that results from great numbers of experiments and data points.”


“IOW, there already exists some kind of vast, complex organism.  It regulates itself, too.  Economists and sociologists identify the patterns of this regulation and try to find the roots of it in the behaviors of individuals.  Then others look for maybe the roots of that in DNA.  And what was the environment that selected for this expression?  It’s existed for a long time.  It’s not even human in nature, ultimately, and didn’t begin with us.  It’s Earth-like DNA based life.  Or, peering even deeper, the mathematics of energy.

Humans have been the intelligent-worker-bee-protein-cells in the emergence of a new scale of directed experimentation that is embodied in the artifacts of our efforts, like buildings and cables and electromagnetic waves, and in our Brownian motions around and through those artifacts.  The trend seems to me to be that at some point this vast being will reach a degree of elaboration that will enable it to relate to individual human beings (and, while we’re at it, individual cells) in ways that humans will be capable of ‘personifying’ and in ways that tap into its vast context of the interrelationships of the events of the world.  We will ourselves, at the same time, be transforming ourselves away from what we were as we always already were.”



I want to write about my own version of integrity, but that begins with my relation to other versions. For most of my life I’ve disliked the word integrity, and, in general, those who used it earnestly. It would be improper to say I hated the word, but it annoyed me. Why? First, and probably lastly, I was not able to relate to the characters that used the word. Some of these characters were on T.V., but others were real people I knew.

When I watch movies from the 30’s all the way through the 70’s, but even partially into the eighties, I am always struck by the unnaturalness of the actors. Without out a doubt, I can detect the slice of their actor persona along with the contours of the prevailing mores and even their relative strengths by the concessions set up and given, the emphases and blindspots. I’m probably wrong about it all but I get a pretty strong sense of a whole bunch of cultural stuff that is by no means even being intentionally communicated.

I mention that all because of two important aspects: actors and culture. Anyway, I want to get to my version, so I’ll finish up this thread. The “integrity” these actors spoke of were an extension and core aspect of a culture which was being replaced by my own. Not “mine” as some personal conquest, but a new culture that I was swept up in. It’s got aspects of the counter-cultures of a number of eras of modern western civilization. {TODO: Could write an entire post about this} Describing this culture is a task best left for another time. Suffice to say, it’s to me today’s Victorian age. Victorian++;

Now, to my kind of integrity. Whew, sigh of lightness. I realized my kind of integrity just last night, getting into the shower. I was extending my clasped hands over my head in {TODO: Yoga posture}. My shoulder hurt from the movement. I thought about why. It was because I moved my hands to the ceiling with my will. What’s wrong with that? I should have “talked” to my shoulder about it. And my elbow, too. My wrist might even have had a thing or two to say about it. Fingers chiming in!

What I mean is, the desire to push my hands towards the ceiling is going to be carried out by all sorts of muscles. What I consciously do to carry out my goal characterizes my union with the goal. If all I do is nebulously imagine my hands towards the ceiling and sort of “wing it”, that’s one way of being. But I could realize that pushing my hands upwards requires the coordination of, when you get right down to it, every muscle in my body, along with my skeleton, and my breath, and then, when you really get right down to it: me. Each motion does. Each moment, even. Each breath. Each thought.  Objectively speaking, and, increasingly, subjectively speaking, too.

What do I mean by “talk”? Pay attention. Emanate the goal.

Why “emanate goals” with my body when I can simply unconsciously “direct about”? Well, basically, because “emanating goals” is what you are unconsciously doing when you “direct about”.

The best way to communicate how to move your thumb I know of is: try and see your thumb moving. I can tell you how to open a door or do some manual task so long as I can take for granted that you know how to move your limbs. Instructions on how to put together the desk you just bought at walmart don’t include how to grasp screwdrivers and how to orient wood slabs upright or how to rotate your wrist or kneel.

Of course, all the trying to see your thumb move in the world isn’t going to help if you have sufficient nerve damage in that area. But, experientially, what I am saying, is that that situation translates into one in which the roadways for the conveyance of your “emanting goals” are damaged.

What does being conscious of your “emanating goals” have to do with integrity? Everything.  Perhaps what always bothered me about the concept of “integrity” as culture had it, was the notion of [simple] “internal consistency”.  My experience of self is very different.  While not fragmented, it is quite a bit more like an ecosystem with competing organisms balancing collectively, then some sort of linear logic.

I have found that to approach nonce “integrity” one has to kill parts of themself.  I guess my insight is that that’s only part of the ecosystem.  Deeper patterns spawn newer apparitions.  Those who are not conscious of this process and who believe they have wrenched subordination of all parts to one are case studies to me.  How deeply has their belief ossified their sensitivity to the human organism’s reality?  How deeply has my own?

How deeply do I pay attention to the parts of myself involved in each experience of mine and how conscious of my own emanating goals am I?

Finally, am I merely squandering my genetic inheritance by foregoing abstract “strategy” and concerning my neocortex with what is properly my motor cortex’s concern?  What do I gain by such amplification?

For one, I start distinguishing all sorts of phenomenon that are invisible to most (kaleidostealthily preconscious lenses).  Secondly, I notice that most useful insight happens at the edges of synthesis between external and internal conditions.  Maybe, by preemptively using of my neocortex to focus upon breath and movement I up the threshold of importance for syntheses emerging onto the shores of awareness.  Thirdly, this is a path towardish (a/my/the) ding an sich which axiomatically draws me.

A questing undercurrent of ____ that shapes its own differential equations.