Uncategorized

Creation of Sacred Needs

Sacred Time Seminary’s Professor of Economics
began her presentation on CoReGenesis Theory
“Even Business as Usual economists
would say that phonographs
and bulldozers
and all technology,
all information systems,
have enriched time,
creating new goods and services
that did not exist in prior times.”

On an ecologically deep profound level,
the consuming human needs
these diversely technological systems produce toward
are not new to permaculturally timeless time.
Technical systemic information
merely continued through time to meet permacultured needs
in a different way–
a way of borrowing decompositional loss
from future EarthTribe generations.”

Frustrated, and frustrating,
apt student of Business As Usual Cultural Systems
squirms with both affective and cognitive dissonance,
“I still don’t get exactly why
is it so systemically important
so strategically and logistically profoundly significant.
to comprehend your adage
‘Time, like all eco-normic systems,
only moves forward
as Eco-Centric Prime Relationship In-Formation.'”

Well yes,
responded Eco Professor YinYin,
and no.
Yes,
the ancient term “Tao”
does seem to contain richer nuances of biocultural meaning
than “Eco-Centri-Binomial Prime Relationship In-Formational Theory
of Ecosystemic Temporal Balance Zen-Zeroism Midway Theory
of UniversalYang-UnitarianYinYin Relativity.”

But, no,
I don’t think it is important
for you to memorize it like an algebraic formula,
I believe we have this comprehension
indelibly syntaxed into our DNA/RNA binomial life encryption pattern.
The rhythm of life is four seasonally,
and reasonably,
both deductively and intuitively accessible,
as fractally predictive of revolutionary systemic transitions
within our bicameral information systems themselves,
and as an EarthTribe,
similarly endosymbiotically
and philogenetically enscribed
toward the regenerativity of time’s economic unfolding
and refolding logical fractals.

Yes, yes,
I recall your rhythmed drill:
Without prior bionic negentropic P=N(NP) spacetime network balance,
no ionic balancing universe.
Without prior Brahmanic unitarian, double-bound negative equals positive
natural logic,
then no individual Atmans.
Without yang (P) Ecologic optimally balancing yin/yin (NNP)
then no YinYin Midway Buckminster Fullerian Geometric Systemic
Tipping Boson.

So glad you mentioned our UU Elder,
Professor Fuller.
Yes,
Bucky’s Synergetics, redefined:
+0 Core Vertex = -(-0)[double-bind constant “2” binary prime]) Core Vortex
Eulerian Prime Universal Relationship of Form’s Self-Regenerative Functionality.

Just as Dual-Transparent Cosmology
emerges confluently from +0 Dark Matter =
(-,-)0Dark Progenitive, yet co-arising, Energy of Light =
Universal Commons Metric Permacultural Zeroism Consciousness.

Just as Taoism foundationally premises, predicts,
+0 YangForm =
-(-0)YinYin Midway Double-flowing (reverse/inverse)
Temporally Metaphysical [not limited to Special Case systems]
Unitarian Function.

Just as Permacultural Systems Theory balances co-arising Regenerative Energy with Square-Rooted
4-equi dimensional,
dynamically decompositional co-gravitation
as RNA/DNA life systemic Prime Principle
of Thermodynamic Balance
within Reverse-Hierarchical Win-Win Gaming Systems
of self-optimizing perpetuity.

These diverse paradigms
each appears premised on this more primal assumption
that life and thought and language and ego-identity and consciousness
unfold and refold bi-nomially,
in a P=N(NP) universe
with metric ecological prime assumption default:
+Space = Double-bound (-) Time [nondually co-arising]
as +Mass = Double-transparent -(-0) Centric QBit Informating Network
Ec0PolypathicSoul Ergodic-Fractal Pattern.

Ec0Soul as our DNA ProGenitive Transparency
feels and comprehends
fuels and farms,
consumes and produces,
polyculturally beloved information systems.

“That resonates”
hoped our student of metasystemic permacultural relations.

 

Note: This piece opens with a paraphrase of Charles Eisenstein, pp. 79 and 80, and gains its title as well, from Sacred Economics: Money, Gift and Society in the Age of Transition, 2011. Any misrepresentations or distortions of Eisenstein’s truth are my error, and not intended to speak for Professor Eisenstein.

 

Standard

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s