The eyes of God
i)It was really Leibniz who started it all. He suggested that God before time reckons up the worlds, balancing of the evens in them, and their effects, feeling those events as if they were affects. That is feeling them for their effects upon each other – feeling them for their power. Go alone therefore feels events as affect.
ii) And yet one needs a little caution here. God is to in this feeling understanding or judging pure events as such. On the contrary Go proceeds by perception. God therefore judges what is happening, and conceives the universe from all the position of all the people within it at the same time..
iii) The point is therefore that God is judging what is happening in the events from the poison of their effects upon each other.
iv) This judgement is very real. T is not just that a god chooses the best of events, but also and more critically that god actually creates what events happen from within this space.\ Or to put is differently. It is one of the draw backs of the event position that evens exist like cards external to the system. They are to be dealt, and their effects felt. And yet perception doe not really work that way.
v)something happens- atoms split or a clinamen swerve, something happens therefore that engages the universe. But what exactly follows from that action is never clear. The universe is gathered within that happening at many many different layers or levels.
vi) The sub atomic respond with actions of their own and do so immediately. The complex minds of humans respond also, using perhaps the clinamen to ake up their minds or as a final product.
vii) Atomic swerve becomes evens at other places, as elements of the universe feel the swerve take it in themselves an use it within themselves and within the way that they feel about the universe.
viii)This use is both of the level of what they share with what swerved, but also how they are together swing the serving wheeling world to build other realties within.
ix)The French revolution was not merely a matter of atomic swerves (but they played their part). It was rather the building and rebuilding of lives across an ocean of poverty and distress.
x)The distress or the relative wealth of the revolvers did not cause the revolution, but were rather a part in its progress, a pointed in its reactions.
xi)What caused the revolution as rather that strange slippage one finds oneself when random cock-up (losing of the assembly building) provoke collective response, and counter response.
xii) The revolutions then creates across the affective or rather mutual effecting another of a whole serious of different moves and counter moves.
xiii)The event is therefore not a silent factor wanting to be summoned s much as a place that mutuality’s that is exchange of thought an feeling lead.
xiv) Perception God in us and mans is critical in this game. Perceptions works on very many levels. As I perceive a you, a grasp the pink, and the cotton. And yet that gasping always comes wit other level attached, with other element. It the pink cotton I see a body, a human body, your human body, and you have a gun…
xv)the point of the event is then that it defines the point in their mutual that break free, that passion makes one act. It is therefore the point that the delay into which actions, or the attempt for an us to leave a you happens.
xvi) But even here one needs so much care. It is never quite clear where one does leave or whether one has left the passion The fence revolution was often declared ended. The sight of you with your gun is something to haunt a mind. What are you doing to do with it/ Do you even know?
xvii)What an event is is therefore intricately linked to perceptions which pick up many layers or levels in exchanges. Events might define a body in relation others layers. It defines in the clear zone Goes bright eye what every then or everyone else of that like that is of the Sam nature as the body as they are in the event must then allow for about that body.
xviii)It therefore will allow God to follow the affect around.
xix)And yet reaching this point of being for everyone else is always rather tricky. One cannot prejudge it. Their have been after all so many exchanges before overreached it.
xx)More problematically there are no real definitive apriority rules for knowing this is the point, this is the movement that this point of event is reached.
xxi)One might act, and other respond in such a way that they rob one of ones action.
xxii) One might the make a gesture and set ones alight an a revolution might follow- or it might not. Exactly what event one is within it itself therefore not for itself clear.
xxiii)We never know until others tell us or others respond.
xxiv) The exchange we make is therefore I n a sense a genuine open ended one. We make a move. What that move s depends on others reactions. It might end up in a splitting of the universes in itself. it mightn’t. It might split it latter or change it differently. It might not. it might be nothing. It might be…
xxv)the point is that the throw itself for itself is in a sense not enough/ it is not the event. What makes it the event is the defining of the points of exchange at which a split latter happens.
xxvi) An yet so much is assumed to be before that.
xxvii) That is so much is happening to minds an their powers. So much is happening to thoughts. I reach for you blindingly in the dark. I do not know what event we are in(if any).
xxviii) Worse than that I reach for you in some many ways 9incduing those galaxies of atoms and sub atoms I have no real power within). The mechanisms therefore we reach is one that is open at numerous levels and points.
xxix)We might be a part in many stories. We really do not know.
xxx) We are in many stories, and many levelled events.
xxxi)This multitude is therefore defined or focused in event that reach up and through the other levels, pulling their powers a apart.
xxxii)The mutual is scared them of the vent as outbreaks open their power to be at many afferent levels.
xxxiii)And yet this fear is almost a matter of timing. It is no that the mutual needs simply to run for events (it xannot0. It is merely that it must define the best point or at least allow for the event in the best of ways.
xxxiv)Do ties wrong and the entire edifice of operations between levels collapses. A power source becomes a nuclear bomb.
xxxv)The problem of God an the problem of humans is therefore to use the partial perceptions, and eddies and prehensions of possible mutual to come, and all the secret exchanges (including the ones with one wife, and ones child and ones child as wife, and wife as child) to define the point at which an exchange is productive.
xxxvi)That is the point when the event in defining the end of one world and breaking hat mutual exchange into another, does so in such a hidden way that it is not overtly disruptive that he exchanges of that broken world. that is an even which will allow for as a part within it, the exchanges of the previous scenario.
xxxvii) Define wrong and level collide and ignite each other so nothing is left. Define right and who knows where one goes.
xxxviii)Events therefore matter to a God or a man of the premise that they ought, if done right to define the best place form swapping mutual levels. The point hat save the best of all. God chooses therefore the chooses the fabric of the absolute best. He alone has the privilege of acing according to a passion that can hold down the universe into one being. he makes therefore the one world because there is a best, and e is good. His passion for goodness gives us the freedom of singularity.
xxxix) Without God we have n such freedom. We can never know exactly what event we are in.
xl) all we do is bumble around exchanging lives. Entering our babies are dolls, our dolls are our babies, and making the best of things.
xli) Until hat is a journey home alone an odd or even a familiar path suddenly makes the world break apart. Something or somebody we really have cooperated within most of our lives appears in a different aspect or we appear to them in a different aspect, ad the event breaks in.
xlii)That is the point at which an exchange cannot be as it was, or must dance up (or down) register He point therefore that the levels of being collide and shift. The point of danger.
xliii) And yet it is never even now clear what danger there lures at such points of darkness. That is it is not clearly even now who is coming to and for us – who is awaiting in our own dark for an us.
xliv) Bt even here there is an oddness. IT is never clear what event even when the mirror is shattered and one is coming, we are act.
xlv) A series of strange happening and a few meeting are not enough to resolve it.
xlvi) Something is happening. We are moving on. The world s not as it was. That is the mutual is shattered or better it appears strangely compromised, and yet, where does it lead?
xlvii)This is the problem that we demi-Gods suffer, while he does not. He knows as he conceives all points as if their were an affect. We alone therefore have feeling and thinking synthesis zed into one move.
xlviii)We on the other hand feel that we are broken up. Our mutual exchanging world is n more, but it is not clear whether we are cast upon the ocean wave of change or merely gathered into another house. It cannot be clear, an to us at least.
xlix)That is it is never really clear to the protagonists they are in one event or other. They might know therefore that their world has changed, as their exchanges and the scale of their being is challenged and yet his is not really enough. This challenge does not define what event others will take from it. T dos not really define where they are as they act. It does not necessarily define what that vent will be when they have acted, what it will be foot the world.
l)Again following Leibniz all these moments l these exchanges are questions for another to answer. They are questions for other after the event or ourselves at another time. They are so as they are the point beyond us
li)god uses when he chooses this world.
lii) That is they are the conditions for our own existence. The partners that allow us to be part in this world (for god the doyen of the best and for us).
liii)What they are not though are pointers to how the event feels in us or those that are part of it. To be within it to have it a s part in you perception and feeling that run from perception, is not to perceive it as such.
liv) Bit is rather to build something else something other from what is seen.
lv)Strangers tumble into ones mind therefore, but are hooked into a something into an exchange. They re made not quite so strange and become other than odd.
lvi)What I am is therefore broadens or deepens. What I am doing and where it leads muddied in the mutual.
lvii)The An event (elsewhere, always in the gossip of the two and the men and women of the citizens of gossip0 being formed, and yet Like now not what that even is. I really do to as I am creative. All I know is the slipping between the mutual registers the gathering and the rupture, the reaching forward for a way, and the sudden joy in having a way which is to be poured.
lviii)All I know is then theory of God which reaches out from a point in perception towards a world and a galaxy of others. A joy that in the reaction of those others changes what it is and how it feels.
lix) Joy that is not then tied to one event, but rather reaches beyond and through them a joy that patterns perception, scrapping memories in the attempt to reach accords. A
lx)it is therefore the you of the conductor whose random movements are taken up and eddies across ht orchestra who listen as much to themselves as him. That is ho uses his eddying movements and counter movements to build what they this time are making and using. To make as they are making, in what they are making.
lxi) Their perception of him becomes then a part of their building a music which as reception for him and so back again.
lxii)Neither is creative, neither the wave of the batten or the notes are an event as such. What makes the orchestra the event (and going to it matter) is rather the mutualtieis the exchanges beyond sense and beyond the outside folds of the blind universe (sound waves etc). It s the intricate inner interplay of pitch element (including the audience) that create this as an event, and then pitch it across times.
lxiii)Or to put it another way the even must never end,. But it never really beginning either. It is never there in he being. it is rather the point that something elsewhere needed – a series of exchanges stopped. Something happened, a happening which will never need.
lxiv)The mutualities that then made up the event might hook up together again or might substantially (in which case the event will not happen or not happen yet), or might be forced to into one another or break up and look elsewhere or to another. The event marking that passing.
lxv)The perceiving which gives the never beginning is therefore always free to find or already be a part in another event. The mutual is the master of this rug pull .This pot as which the event does not happen and another promises (it is not clear what this other might be). It is merely gathered in the avoidance of the first event.
lxvi)However one needs as God certainly knows not to get carried away here. Event cannot be always eluded otherwise he cannot choose between universe and we could never life or act definitive for others to run within. Our debt to others beyond every immediate exchange in therefore to live in event. Moreover as God also knows events that is the breaking up of our world from outside, the shattering down of exchanges by entropy and chaos will happen anyway. There comes a point therefore where all mutuals end.
lxvii)God chooses the best of world, the point a creation must stop and must act, in such a way that can be pitched straight down a slop of othering times.
lxviii) Mutuals prehend events. They are before and around and through them Thye avoid them as much a possible or until he right time for their meeting – but meet they will in the end.
lxix)It is no wonder that Leibniz say the affect between event (and therefore other than mere mutuals) as a moral problem. Event register our being with everyone else (though times). This domain this being with other as not as a present and not in the lived events (but ultimately in a series of unhooked passions, the passions on individuals), is nothing but the domain of morality.