4 views of the universe:
Everywhere we look, we see women giving birth to things.
There, a female cow, giving birth to baby cows.
There, a female woman, giving birth to baby humans.
Women gave birth to all of us.
Surely, God must be a woman.
The authorities in all powerful civilizations we have found, are men.
Every day, I go to work, serving beneath the rule of men.
Everything that happens, happens because it is commanded, and it is commanded by a man.
Surely, God must be a man.
We have studied the universe, and we have found that it is a clock.
Everything happens because of the things that happened before it.
Determinism is true.
art by Kiriko Moth
Surely, the universe is a machine.
If there is a God, it simply put the universe to motion, from the outside.
(see also: Spring and Chaos)
We have found that, if the universe is like a clock, it is like an extremely complex clock.
The universe runs the gambit from the very predictable (the motion of planets, asteroids, stars, over the short term,) to the pretty predictable, to the somewhat predictable (the persistance of cities, in the short term,) to the unpredictable (the behavior of humans,) to the the clearly unpredictable (the behavior of subatomic particles.)
We do not know if determinism is strictly true, or if there is a random component.
Unpredictable systems include those we care about the most: human minds, animal minds, governments, corporations, conversations, markets, global networks, ecologies, computers, living bodies, code bases, and mixtures of the preceding.
We will call these, “Living Systems.”
Words such as “creativity,” “choice,” and “emergence” seem to better describe what we observe in the largely unpredictable systems.
The traditional reductionist ScientificMethod yields only weak insight. Worse, we cannot understand how strong insight can be had (by the scientific method.)
The AlexandrianMethods? seems to yield greater insight – we find that the application of patterns and metaphysical maps garners useful results. But we cannot understand why or how, and we cannot understand how to understand why or how. We only know that some patterns generally work, in some contexts, for some systems, from within which they evolved. But they are discoverable, and work pretty reliably, as long as communication is maintained, and they don’t stray too far from the system they evolved in.
Strangely, subjectivity is good. We find that intuition, trained by empirical experience, and native participation within the system, is an excellent discerner of utility. It tends to be efforts towards objectivity that causes problems. Asserting predictability begs for trouble.
“Why is it called nested spheres of creativity?”
Because the living systems are embedded within (or connected side-by-side with) larger living systems, which are embedded within (or connected side-by-side with) still larger living systems.
Large living systems such as the cosmos are predictable on the short term, but there is little reason to believe that they are predictable in the long term. Scientists scratch their heads, and only conjecture. They are skeptical that they will ever know it all.
art by Dana Lynne Andersen
God is a word, for the purposes of communication, to denote the largest living system, larger than us all. The outermost Matrioshka doll, the Universe, of which we know only the tiniest bit about.
The nested spheres idea kind of reminds me of: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/index.html