[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX] |

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |

Jan 26, 1994 11:24 PM

by Gerald Schueler

Math. The recent discussion on math is interesting and I feel compelled to add my own thoughts. Is math culturally independent? Don say, "To say that math is culturally independent though is a tough call to support. if this is the case, then why have not all cultures developed mathematics like we have?" I think the problem here is in our definition of "math." I think that the basic principle of numbers, one, two, three, etc., is culturally independent. Probably basic addition and subtraction is culturally independent. But what can be called "higher math" (certainly calculus would be included here) is probably culturally dependent.' Pythagoras and others have taught that the whole universe is mathematical. But Pythagoras didn't know about calculus (a Newton invention) or differential equations, and so on. Today, we have a whole fist full of mathematical theories and techniques unknown to anyone a generation ago. However, they are all based on the fundamental idea of numbers and their addition and subtraction. Don says, "I think we cannot discuss math as a phenomena in isolation from the cultures that developed (relatively) advanced mathematical theories. There is always a specific metaphysic behind any culture, and such a metaphysic will color what ever social products the culture produces." I agree with this. For example, how a culture defines each number (7 is good, while 9 is bad, and so on) will determine how that culture sees the addition or subtraction of numbers. Most ancient cultures associated letters of their alphabet with numbers, and by using the simple technique of gematria (a Hebrew term for adding up the numerical value of a word or phrase) were able to associate everything in their worldview with a number. Don says, "I am presently reading an excellent sociology book (ref upon request) that shows quite convincingly that space and time are cultural products. That is, concepts of space and time are subject to the concept of *cultural relativism*. Space and time do not exist except as a specific cultural formulation." I agree that cultural relativism exists, and that societies view time and space differently (in fact, I would go so far as to say that each person views time and space differently). However, this doesn't mean that time and space don't exist objectively in an independent sense. This sounds like the old argument that if a tree falls in the woods with no one around to hear it, will it make a sound? I prefer to think that we all share a *concept* of space and time, albeit somewhat different in the particulars. Every human being (I am not sure about animals) has a sense of time and space. The particulars or specifics are not always shared by others - thus the need for clocks and rulers in every society. John says, "The physical reality is too impure to maintain its form (i.e. it is maya). The Math does not work (in a predictive sense within reality) because the Physical is only a mere/crude imitation of the exact forms." I agree with this, but I would submit that chaos is also a factor here, and that mathematical predictions usually include a chaos factor based on experiential data that is almost always close, but seldom exact. Don says, "Mathematics are merely symbolic representations of Nature. Nature is the fundamental factor." I can't really agree with this, although it seems that we are very close to a point where words don't work any more. In a sense, Nature itself is a symbolic representation. Perhaps truth is also a symbolic representation? Here we must leave logic and reason behind and take a leap of faith, which is not necessarily a bad thing to do. My own feeling here is that numbers begin with manifestation. The very concept of duality being manifest or self-emanating from nonduality implies the numbers one and two. We cannot conceive of manifestation without numbers. Again, numbers are inherent in our vocabulary and language, and thus inherent in our human minds. But how we see them and use them is an individual/cultural thing. Don, I like your quotes from Seth. I have most of the Seth books and I have found them to contain a lot of good ideas (like probable selves, for example). Eldon says, "When we look at the *manifest world,* we find that everything takes on form, shape, and movement according to certain mathematical laws ... Looking at the manifest world-any particular globe or plane of being-we find that everything attempts to follow, in its own imperfect sort of way, certain mathematics." Everything in manifestation is in Motion. We can even say that our motion defines our true Self at any point in spacetime. If we could express this motion mathematically, then we could use a simple extrapolation to predict future events. The ancients called such motion magic formulas. The magic formulas of our magical forefathers were nothing more than specific actions or motions to be taken. When a magician repeated a magic word, he would also meditate on its mathematical value - and thus on its correspondences with other words of a similar numerical value. The ancient magical languages also had social meanings for each of its letters (such as Tarot card correspondences) that implied a specific thing or action or feeling. So every magic word had a magic formula inherent in it based on the meanings of its letters. Eldon says, "Space itself is pure, unconditioned, and like mathematics, is in relation to the manifest world ... In a sense, we are space, or rather a locality in space, with a focus and an extent, and it goes with us, it goes to where we are or where we project our consciousness." The ancient Egyptians represented Space as the goddess Nut who they called the Goddess of the Night Sky and often pictured her naked (with nothing hidden). They depicted consciousness as the god Horus, usually shown in the form of a winged globe. These two concepts were often shown together, with the winged globe under a stooping naked goddess - consciousness moving through infinite unconditioned Space. The ancient Egyptians taught that Space (objectivity) and Consciousness (subjectivity) are the primal duality of the universe. It is interesting that they saw space as feminine and consciousness as masculine, indicating a primal sexual duality as well, much like numbers can be viewed as odd or even. Eldon writes, "We might define a plane then as the collection of lives energies and forces that act upon matter in such a way as to constrain it to take on the form and function of a world or universe and all that can be perceived in interacted with thereon." This is very close to the definition that I give in ENOCHIAN PHYSICS. This "collection" is the mathematical set (a union of subsets) of all participating monads. In a sense, life is a game that we are playing, and all of us helped to make the rules. Jerry S.

Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application