The first step in chemical analysis is to identify the materials under investigation in terms of their elements. For McLuhan's new science of experience, the first step is to identify where a perception is to be located along what might be called the exclusive-inclusive-exclusive spectrum. (Since the exclusive is fundamentally antagonistic, it always comes in two opposite flavors.)
The perception that consciousness/death is ultimately a monism of consciousness and life lies far out on an exclusive extreme where 'death' is perceived to be disappearingly powerless. This in itself does not make the perception false. However, it does raise the question of what rival perceptions of the consciousness/death ratio are possible along the spectrum and what are the properties and effects of all those different possibilities. (Hence McLuhan's ever-repeated mantra that we need to understand effects before they occur.) In the context of unlimited consciousness and life, Hawking's observation about the need for limit in regard to the second law of thermodynamics is critical. We know from the fact that the universe is not in “a state of complete disorder by now” where “everything would be at the same temperature”, that there is limit. The critical questions then become, what is its nature? how does it work?
The exclusive-inclusive-exclusive spectrum is a rough formalism of McLuhan's observation in his proposal to Robert Hutchins [https://mcluhansnewsciences.com/mcluhan/2017/06/proposal-to-robert-hutchins-1947/]: "Every age has its reigning analogy in terms of which it orients itself with respect to the past and directs its energies through the present to the future. To be contemporary in the good sense is to be aware of this analogy. To be 'ahead of the time' is to be critically aware of the analogy. That is, to be aware that it is only one analogy.” Compare the McLuhan note found and transcribed by Andrew McLuhan from around 1950: "We can only correct the bias of the present time by coming to know it is a time, not the time." [https://inscriptorium.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/the-earwig-when-bisected-fights-itself-so-with-the-arts/]
A spectrum of perception according to its variously weighted ratios functions to enforce consideration of plurality, just as Mendeleev's Table does for chemistry.
Are you familiar with Tralfamadorian Time? It seems relevant re : the inclusive-exclusive spectrum and quantum experience? Can’t wait for your next instalment!
*Slaughterhouse-Five* from 1969 appeared two decades after the McLuhan citations. And a decade before the McLuhan citations Eliot's 'Burnt Norton', the first of the *Four Quartets*, has:
Or say that the end precedes the beginning,
And the end and the beginning were always there
Before the beginning and after the end.
And all is always now.
But 'at the same time' Eliot also saw that 'always now' time is not all there is to it. From the same poem:
Quick now, here, now, always—
Ridiculous the waste sad time
Stretching before and after.
In the decade between the late 1930s and the late 1940s there was no one McLuhan paid more attention to than T S Eliot.
You may want to check out Cormac McCarthy’s last book, ‘Stella Maris.’ It deals with some of the same existential conundrums.
https://twitter.com/brianroemmele/status/1675367136964001793
[part 1 of comment]
The first step in chemical analysis is to identify the materials under investigation in terms of their elements. For McLuhan's new science of experience, the first step is to identify where a perception is to be located along what might be called the exclusive-inclusive-exclusive spectrum. (Since the exclusive is fundamentally antagonistic, it always comes in two opposite flavors.)
The perception that consciousness/death is ultimately a monism of consciousness and life lies far out on an exclusive extreme where 'death' is perceived to be disappearingly powerless. This in itself does not make the perception false. However, it does raise the question of what rival perceptions of the consciousness/death ratio are possible along the spectrum and what are the properties and effects of all those different possibilities. (Hence McLuhan's ever-repeated mantra that we need to understand effects before they occur.) In the context of unlimited consciousness and life, Hawking's observation about the need for limit in regard to the second law of thermodynamics is critical. We know from the fact that the universe is not in “a state of complete disorder by now” where “everything would be at the same temperature”, that there is limit. The critical questions then become, what is its nature? how does it work?
[part 2 of comment]
The exclusive-inclusive-exclusive spectrum is a rough formalism of McLuhan's observation in his proposal to Robert Hutchins [https://mcluhansnewsciences.com/mcluhan/2017/06/proposal-to-robert-hutchins-1947/]: "Every age has its reigning analogy in terms of which it orients itself with respect to the past and directs its energies through the present to the future. To be contemporary in the good sense is to be aware of this analogy. To be 'ahead of the time' is to be critically aware of the analogy. That is, to be aware that it is only one analogy.” Compare the McLuhan note found and transcribed by Andrew McLuhan from around 1950: "We can only correct the bias of the present time by coming to know it is a time, not the time." [https://inscriptorium.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/the-earwig-when-bisected-fights-itself-so-with-the-arts/]
A spectrum of perception according to its variously weighted ratios functions to enforce consideration of plurality, just as Mendeleev's Table does for chemistry.
Are you familiar with Tralfamadorian Time? It seems relevant re : the inclusive-exclusive spectrum and quantum experience? Can’t wait for your next instalment!
*Slaughterhouse-Five* from 1969 appeared two decades after the McLuhan citations. And a decade before the McLuhan citations Eliot's 'Burnt Norton', the first of the *Four Quartets*, has:
Or say that the end precedes the beginning,
And the end and the beginning were always there
Before the beginning and after the end.
And all is always now.
But 'at the same time' Eliot also saw that 'always now' time is not all there is to it. From the same poem:
Quick now, here, now, always—
Ridiculous the waste sad time
Stretching before and after.
In the decade between the late 1930s and the late 1940s there was no one McLuhan paid more attention to than T S Eliot.
https://www.math.arizona.edu/~glickenstein/math534_1011/fundgrp1-2.pdf
“The Gap” between “it from bit” would seem to be where “the action” is! 😎👏🍻
Just so.