terminal 0
unfinished
NEFX - "Primordial Clues for the Shared Roots of Being" Erosive thought is disinclined to view paths of historical, biological, environmental, etc. development as valid except in a straight line due to its rigid conception and prizing of lineage-as-such as the basis of true being and being’s advancement (besides brutality to that end); and thus it is all the more disinclined to take into account the diverse spatiotemporal factors in such development as accounting for divergence of development in both beings and beings’ creations. Beyond such mindsnares, however, it is crucial to ultimate Lightform for beings that beings retain and conceive of the path of multifarious developments across history (notably history of beings) even in categories of epochs and with precise time points in mind for each phase; for this not only further keys one into the factors that go into development in general, including for that very investigating being, but also further illuminates how common the lineage of being, development, and beings’ creations really is, as well as the factors in what may have lead to the general collective forgetting (or, what’s more, never-knowing except through the historical retrospect only ever really investigated and learned by a subset of current beings) of this truth. What’s more, the perceivable perseverance of certain traits in beings, creation, and developmental processes itself to the present day further delineates for the investigating being just how robust certain of these are relative to various internal and external factors. By the same token, the further such phases are investigated, the more their categorization as phases and the like is revealed as insufficient for comprehending the truth of the things within that; even if such was provisionally necessary to reach that level of understanding, much as the bud is necessary to the blossom. This further reveals the mindset and limits not only of such categorization, but of general common or societally ordained thought in general, which in turn yields further insight into the nature of such beings and being itself along the long history of development and where it may yet lead to. In the first place, divergence in development of being and general category of being (as we may conceive of it) may depend not only on divergence from a central or parent category, but on the further travel and exploration of that very category; which development may not necessarily be better (at least insofar as we can accurately judge the supposed “inherent” goodness of subsets of beings) than the subset of beings that did not travel from said starting point and instead remained within a general area or set of conditions…But merely different. The Erosive attribution of true and good development of beings to traits other than those which Erosion grounds geographically in the cradle of a perceived Other, not least of all that area and mode of being which historical and scientific findings have revealed is the cradle of all such being as we conceive of it today, only goes to miss this very point. The further such universal principle is investigated, the more contiguous actors in development of collective being and their contributive actions are revealed, the more that which has been revealed as so divergent is eventually seen as one complex organism unto itself again, beyond the Erosive tendency towards fundamental bifurcation of being. We are thus further behooved to get at the core causes of our particular divergence from the whole collective of beings — we who can even conceive of such truth and articulate it, and possibly read this text. Through however narrow means we may apprehend the precise mechanical details in forgotten or hitherto inaccessible phases of development of beings (and indeed the straining required to view through such narrow aperture may help induce the investigator to greater mental heights through challenge and thus to further plateauing of being and development itself), we may further find ourselves. Here as well do number and metric quantity, especially relative to spatiotemporally present knowns, help us gauge the length and pace of being-development under investigation — especially across multiple similar sources of knowledge regarding such development. Here, the logic and degrees of separation regarding common traits between categories of being relative to ourselves becomes more clear. After all, development can often be cumulative and escalative, in which traits developed by the interfacing of beings with surroundings according to the upper limits of their capacity spur yet further interfacing into at first rather inchoate and subconscious consciousness. Many general categories of phenomena (at least those which beings conceive of, either in their full capacity or just for utility) instigate this process, and by such happening for multiple categories a being may happen into an epiphany regarding their interconnections and the principles underlying all of them.