?

Log in

The Ontological Argument and UBT/Telic Recursion in CTMU - Guru George His Blogge
Mysticism, Magick, Philosophy, Politics and Economics
gurugeorge
gurugeorge
The Ontological Argument and UBT/Telic Recursion in CTMU
It strikes me that there's some kind of similarity between the Ontological Argument and Langan's idea of UBT (Unbound Telesis - raw possibility as it were) and the self-refining process arising from it (Telic Recursion).  Telic Recursion is a possibility that's inherent in UBT from yea time (as it were), as merely one of its infinite possibilities; so it must actualize "eventually" (again, sadly as it were - I wish I could put this in more rigorous language and not be forced to rely on poetry - but isn't Metaphysics the poetry of philosophy? :) ).  That's very much like the Ontological Argument saying that the "most perfect being" if conceivable must exist.

I'd put it this way: in the infinite ocean of raw possibility that's the only thing that logically must exist, there's the raw possibility that this infinite ocean of possibility may come to know itself.  The mechanism of self-knowledge that it births out of itself is Langan's SCSPL, which serially actualizes that possibility of self-knowing, and is logically the only thing that can do so.

This is actually what the Ontological Argument was getting at, I think, but its proponents who have seen a pattern here, haven't been able to put it yet in a way that makes sense.  It has been couched in the form of conceivability rather than possibility, leaving critics (like Kant) a point of attack at the point between something conceivable and something actual.
express yourself