January 28

Lope home Lope themes work in progress bio what's new? buy prints contact Lope

Error and Success, Realization and Actualization, Omnipotence

I have so far talked about two distinct spheres of human interaction with actuality. The first: a sphere of perceiving, sensing, feeling, and thinking based on actuality. From this man forms his reality. This is a movement from actuality to reality. The second sphere is of action and doing. It marshals the hands, feet, and mouth towards action based on perceived reality. This is movement from reality back to actuality.

Error and success, correct and incorrect: What is the measure of success in the first sphere of perception? How can one be correct? As far as one comes close to understanding actuality, one is correct. True success, omniscience, is impossible. It is a moving target, it is infinite. The human, realistic definition of success is the process of moving towards omniscience. A man is correct if he tries to perceive actuality.

Error and success, correct and incorrect: With the second type of interaction with actuality, reality is translated into actuality through action. Here, the measure of correctness is the degree to which actuality conforms to reality. If the man can pick up the rock, throw it, and kill the deer, he is successful. His reality has been carried out and actualized. The second sphere measures success in deeds and achievements.

Realization and actualization: Realization, the movement from actuality to reality. Actualization, the movement from reality to actuality.

The omnipotent ideal: The omniscient ideal is about the idea of correctness, the perfect realization of actuality. This idea has already been discussed. The equivalent ideal in the sphere of action is embodied by a new idea, the omnipotent ideal. The omniscient perceives, knows, and feels everything and has the ability to form a reality that embodies actuality. The omnipotent, on the other hand, acts perfectly. Everything this type wants to achieve in actuality meets with success. Their body is perfect, their hands, their mouth, their ability to change and move and convince. They have the ability to affect actuality, though this typeís faculty for perceiving, knowing and feeling may or may not exist.

The omnipotent ideal: Assume the omnipotent person has senses and even a minimal ability to form a reality. Let us say that his or her reality drastically departs from actuality, in fact, their reality is incorrect. Yet the capacity for the omnipotent type to act is so powerful that they can succeed at anything. Even this personís blurred and hazy concept of reality results in success. Actuality snaps into place when they act. It has no choice, the omnipotent forces actuality to conform to their reality. The omnipotent is the prototypical man of action.

The omnipotent and omniscient problems: The omniscient is master of its sphere but failure in the other. It knows actuality yet cannot act on it. This is the omniscient problem. It has the knowledge to make the most profound and correct of actions, to shape a perfect world, yet its inability to act renders it useless and feeble.
The omnipotent is also a master and a failure. It is all powerful and makes changes at will. Everything bends to it. Yet its understanding of actuality, its connection with it is entirely lacking so that everything the omnipotent does tears apart actuality, brings chaos and death and suffering. This is because it does not perceive, feel or sense a reality. It acts blindly, flailing everywhere, achieving everything in vain.

The omnipotent and omniscient problems: The emptiness and sadness of the two types is such. The omniscient perceives and understands actuality for no reason. It has lost the active part of itself, all knowledge is for naught since it may not be applied and actuality may not become its own. The omniscient cannot help, build, start, create, end, fight, nor settle. It is unable to proceed, having achieved an all-knowing state.

The omnipotent, on the other hand, moves and runs and jumps and acts but does so for no reason. It has lost the perceiving and thinking part of itself, and has no clue why it is acting or what it should be working towards. Imagine this scene. A man, isolated in a tower who has read every book, thought every thought, felt human experience, and comprehends the mind of every man. Immobile in his tower, he watches another man from his window who runs madly from place to place, destroying on a whim, creating what he wishes with no one or nothing to stand in his way. The man in the tower has everything the man outside lacks, and vice versa.

Back to the three plane theory introduction page.
Go the the next chapter Go the previous chapter

Lope home Lope themes work in progress bio what's new? buy prints contact Lope