Book (English)


Dievo šokis

Kaip gyventi






Juodraštis? FFFFFF

Užrašai EEEEEE

Klausimai FFFFC0

Gvildenimai CAE7FA

Pavyzdžiai? ECD9EC

Šaltiniai? EFCFE1

Duomenys? FFE6E6

Išsiaiškinimai D8F1D8

Pratimai? FF9999

Dievas man? FFECC0

Pavaizdavimai? E6E6FF

Istorija AAAAAA

Asmeniškai? BA9696

Mieli dalyviai! Visa mano kūryba ir kartu visi šie puslapiai yra visuomenės turtas, kuriuo visi kviečiami laisvai naudotis, dalintis, visaip perkurti. - Andrius



See also: {{Structure}}, SecondaryStructures, {{Everything}}, {{Something}}, {{Nothing}}, EverythingVAnything, RepresentationsOfAnything, EverythingWishesForAnything.

Kas yra betkas?

  • Anything is the {{Structure}} of {{Life}}.
  • Anything is what we can concern ourselves with.
  • Anything is {{Open}} and {{Bounded}}.
  • Anything is not {{Nothing}}.
  • Anything is what is alive.

Susijusios sąvokos

Gyvenimas, tai Betko dvasia

Betko atvaizdai? yra šeši būdai rinktis.

  • Together with choosing itself, they make up the {{Sevensome}}. Choosing is Anything itself, thus not a representation of it.

Valia yra betko atvaizdų? vieningumas.

Viskas ir betkas

{{AndriusKulikauskas}} Note: this section describes a direction which I took in August and September of 2003. I was looking for a deep way to arrive at the basic structures. I thought a lot about how everything and anything may reach out to each other and have empathy for each other. I also drew on my thoughts on the fifteen principles of life in Christopher Alexander's The Nature of Order. This approach is fundamental to my thoughts on general structure.

Activity and Structure of Everything and Anything

Activity evokes structure - recurrent activity establishes structure. Structure restricts activity. The relationship between structure and activity is yet loose, and this looseness is slack. It is a rule of thumb, a pattern.

Everything is the structure of God. Everything is evoked by God's activity of going beyond himself. God goes beyond himself into the good.

Good is slack, and this slack is given by the looseness between activity and structure. Activity evokes structure - this is increasing slack (because the structure is new, and so therefore is the slack). Structure channels activity - this is decreasing slack (because the activity is already there, and can only be restricted)..

The activity of everything is to go beyond itself. Everything is, hence is; and is not, yet is. This is the division of everything into two perspectives, for the sake of existence.. Everything is open and unbounded, and so it goes beyond itself into the bounded. (0+2=2)

Activity is the operation +2. Anything is open and unbounded, it is the onesome, the division of everything into one perspective. Everything goes beyond itself into anything. Anything (in the abstract) is the example of everything.

The activity of anything is to recur. Anything is open and bounded, hence recurs. Anything recurs in three ways: in taking a stand, in following through, and in reflecting. This is the division of everything into three perspectives, for the sake of participation. (1+2=3)

Everything may not go beyond itself, and so there is nothing: closed and unbounded. Anything may not go beyond itself, and so there is something: closed and bounded. There are four perspectives in parallel.

The representations of everything: everything wishes for nothing, something, anything, everything. (Something is not everything, nothing is not anything). These are also properties of God. Representation is the providing of scope. Everything and Anything have Empathy

Everything has empathy for anything through the representations of the threesome. Everything has empathy for anything in various degrees. The representations of the threesome express such empathy. The degree of empathy is given by the number of states that are recurring.

  • 3 recurring states: be, do, think
  • 2 recurring states: one-all, many
  • 1 recurring state: object-process-subject
  • 0 recurring states: necessary;actual;possible because truth is eternal, not recurring

Anything has empathy for everything through shifts. The members of the threesome can (by way of the representations) be understood as going beyond themselves, as shifts from one state to another. Representations allow us to think of isolated perspectives, not just the entire whole.

take a stand:

  • possible => necessary
  • subject => object
  • many => one
  • think => be

follow through:

  • necessary => actual
  • object => process
  • one => all
  • be => do


  • actual => possible
  • process => subject
  • all => many
  • do => think

These are shifts from one perspective to another. Gradation is the Empathy of Everything for Anything

Everything goes beyond itself, in its empathy for anything. It has empathy for anything, both outside the system, and within the system. This is expressed by the gradation.

The gradation distinguishes experiences within the system and outside of it. As anything, and as everything. It expresses the living of the representations of the threesome.

We may distinguish:

  • without system: here I mean that the parts (the topologies) exist together. This is God's perspective, that of the participating representation of the threesome.
  • within system: here I mean that the parts (the topologies) stand separately. This is life's perspective that of the parts of the threesome, the topologies.

These are perhaps maps between God and good, for example: survival is the glory of God, glory is the survival of good; security is the intent of God, intent is the security of good; acceptance is the example of God, example is the acceptance of good; self-esteem is the love of God, love is the self-esteem of good; opportunity is the work of God, work is the opportunity of good; self-fulfillment is the command of God, command is the self-fulfillment of good. And so on. Gradation is the interpolation between God is God and God is good. Also, think about how this relates to the eightfold way: God is glory, God is intent... (=blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted, blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth...) God is agent, God is beneficiary... (faith, virtue, ... without system within system necessary glory love actual intent work possible example command

without system within system subject agent instrument object beneficiary theme, patient process goal, experience location

without system within system many morphism substitution all induction examination of cases one construction of algorithm construction

There is also a gradation of secondary structures which should be kept in mind: divisions, criteria, topologies, argumentation, verbalization, narration. Although this is perhaps not a gradation, in that it is three states, and three shifts between those states.

Gradation provides the conditions for will - it makes it possible to participate within a system, and also without it. More Thoughts on Gradations

There are three gradations (the Kiparsky gradation, the methods of mathematical proof, and Maslow's hierarchy of needs) and they arise from injections into the life choices. They relate to the three non-cyclic representations of the threesome. They serve to relate God's extrasystemic point of view (where all topologies work together) and life's systemic point of view (where each topology stands separately).

The perspectives of the gradations are what we identify God with. They are thereby an interpolation from God is God to God is good.

Presumably the other injections likewise connect God's and life's points of views.

We may think of there being two perspectives: without system and within system. How may they think together? Apparently, they are each first expressed in terms of a representation of the threesome. Perhaps this allows us to have perspectives, to treat them each separately, and associate them. These perspectives are either without system or within system. [Question, problem: what dictates the order of these topologies?]

Next, we take up the perspective (it is given spirit). For example:

  • subject without system is agent, its perspective is Do I truly like this?
  • object without system is beneficiary, its perspective is Do I truly need this?
  • process without system is goal/experience, its perspective is Is this truly real?
  • subject within system is instrument, its perspective is Is this truly problematic?
  • object within system is patient/theme, its perspective is Is this truly reasonable?
  • process within system is location, its perspective is Is this truly wrong?

The "taking up the spirit" is of various degrees, each giving rise to a different primary structure. The degree is given by the number of vantage points that it introduces: 0 for needs, 1 for doubts, 2 for expectations, 3 for trials. Perhaps this gives the amount of disruption to the original symmetry between the representation of the threesome within and without system.

The point of view of Anything is the stage which Everything has created for its own participation of every sort. Here it makes sense to make a subtle distinction between God and Everything, as they have different implications, like an answer and a question. - "Everything" is that which was alone, and then took up the challenge to go beyond itself, and to create situations where it is, and where it is not, and consider whether it arises. Everything is the ultimate question. - "God" as that which arises from this challenge, which demonstrates its necessity by arising even from the least favorable situations. God is the ultimate answer. "Everything" and "God" get related through us and our world. This is the source of slack, this distinction between Everything and God. Technically, this is an equation "God is the unity of the representations of Everything". The representations are the many ways of thinking about, and the unity is the unique way of caring about them all. Coherence is another way to say "unity of representations". God is the coherence of Everything. The Answer is the coherence of the Question. What creeps in here is the concept of slack, that fleeting gap between the Question and the Answer. We've presented two very different ways of thinking about this slack, it can be increasing (as in the case of the questioning), or decreasing (as in the case of the answering). Slack has precisely these two representations, we think of it as either increasing or decreasing. "Good is slack", in other words, good is the coherence of slack, good is the unity of the two representations of slack. Everything has exactly four representations. - Everything wishes for nothing, is self-sufficient - Everything wishes for something, is certain - Everything wishes for anything, is calm - Everything wishes for everything, is loving These are the four different ways of thinking about the entirety, and God is the unity of these different ways. We can add slack to each of these representations of everything:

  • Everything is self-sufficient, has no needs, but with slack there could be needs!
  • Everything is certain, has no doubts, but with slack there could be doubts!
  • Everything is calm, has no expectations, but with slack there could be expectations!
  • Everything is loving, has no trials, but with slack there could be trials!

We can likewise add everything to each of the representations of slack:

  • Slack is increasing, in the face of any question, but with everything it faces Everything, an Ultimate Question.
  • Slack is decreasing, in the face of any answer, but with everything it faces God, an Ultimate Answer.

"Good" is the fact that this is the same slack. The concept of anything brings all this together! This is because we think of anything as either everything with some slack (by which everything can be related to the "anything" that faces us), or as some slack in the face of everything (by which anything can be related to the "everything" that faces us) . Every way that we think of anything, we are defining it in terms of choices that we are making regarding it.

  • In the face of needs, we're driven to choose "No"
  • In the face of doubts, we're driven to choose "Not Yes"
  • In the face of expectations, we're driven to choose "Not No"
  • In the face of trials, we're driven to choose "Yes"
  • In the face of answers, we're driven to choose to "Not Choose"
  • In the face of questions, we're driven to choose to "Choose"

We're driven to choose, in each case, because that kind of choosing is the only activity that maintains our independence. These are the six representations of Anything, in which are embedded the four representations of Everything, and the two representations of Slack. Life is the unity of these six representations, Life is the coherence of Anything. Life is the drive to choose. What is the whole point? "Life is the fact that God is good". The coherence of Anything is the fact that Everything and Slack are coherent together. Whether Everything or Slack are coherent separately is an additional question. The Conditions for Structure

Gradation expresses the development of the conditions for structure. A whole series of conditions unfold from the activity of everything. These are conditions for the structure expressing the connection between everything (the nullsome) and anything (the onesome).

nullsome onesome - system twosome - existence threesome - participation foursome - knowledge fivesome - decision sixsome - structure sevensome

The sixsome is the condition for structure, and onesome is the condition for system. The gradation is in this way also the interpolation between the nullsome and the sevensome, between spirit without system and spirit within system. Nullsome, onesome, twosome, threesome have four representations. Foursome, fivesome, sixsome, sevensome have two representations. The goodness of God is in the connection of these coherencies. Any kind of spirit within the system arises from spirit without the system. The spirit, in going into any system, is its spirit.

Not wishing expresses what is beyond everything. The scope of everything is given by wishes, by its representations. What is beyond everything, beyond its scope, its wishes, is given by not-wishes.

  • Needs: not wish for nothing.
  • Doubts: not wish for something.
  • Expectations: not wish for anything.
  • Trials: not wish for everything.

Note: the section below is questionable or perhaps simply dubious.

Gradation expresses the conditions for structure as not-wishes. We can consider the gradation as the identification of the characteristics of structure with not-wishes: survival system as need security existence as need acceptance, social participation as need self-esteem knowledge as need opportunity decision as need self-fulfillment structure as need

agent system as doubt beneficiary existence as doubt goal, experience participation as doubt instrument knowledge as doubt theme, patient decision as doubt location structure as doubt

morphism system as expectation induction existence as expectation construction of algorithm participation as expectation substitution knowledge as expectation examination of cases decision as expectation construction structure as expectation

We understand the not-wishes as dilemmas of the conditions for structure. We can understand the not-wishes as questions which the gradations ask. need for survival system as need? need for security existence as need? need for acceptance, social participation as need? need for self-esteem knowledge as need? need for opportunity decision as need? need for self-fulfillment structure as need?

Do I truly like this? system as doubt? Do I truly need this? existence as doubt? Is this truly real? participation as doubt? Is this truly problematic? knowledge as doubt? Is this truly reasonable? decision as doubt? Is this truly wrong? structure as doubt?

Expectations are defined by searching and finding, both within the system, and without it. Peace: not search and not find, without system. Suspense: not search and not find, within system. We experience these conditions when we feel the dilemmas of the members of the gradation, and we consider them as searches. sad: search and not find, without system system as expectation? disgusted: not search and find, without system existence as expectation? happy: search and find, without system participation as expectation? surprised: search and not find, within system knowledge as expectation? afraid: not search and find, within system decision as expectation? excited: search and find, within system structure as expectation?

God is good. The spirit, in going beyond itself into system, is spirit in system, and goes beyond itself within that system - it cares for others instead of itself. The scope of God is given by the degree of empathy, feeling, experience. Everything feels for anything through:

  • living, experiencing (be, do, think)
  • searching (one, many, all)
  • giving attention (object, process, subject)
  • revealing (necessary, actual, possible)

As in the mind games of the representations of the threesome. Anything lives by them, and they inspire anything to go beyond itself, to renounce itself on behalf of others, through shifts: experiences, searches, giving attention, revealing.

Structure connects the threesome, as the feeling of everything for the activity of anything by way of shifts, and the living of the representations of the threesome as the feeling of anything for the activity of everything in going beyond itself.

Gradation expresses the separation between anything and everything. Shifts - representations of the threesome - express their identification. So we move from gradations to unity in representations.

Betko atvaizdai

See also {{Anything}}, {{Representations}}, ExpressionsOfTheWill.

===What are {{Representations}} of {{Anything}}?===

  • The ways of {{Choosing}}.
  • Negative constraints, as opposed to the positive constraints given by the RepresentationsOfEverything.

===Related concepts===

The SecondaryStructures are closely related to the representations of anything.


God's concern grows when he has one wish that is already satisfied, and another wish that is not yet. His wishes can be ranked in their order of satisfaction: Nothing, Something, Anything, Everything. He generates structure when he places himself, having a particular wish satisfied, in a framework where his broader wish may not yet be satisfied. A representation of Anything expresses this fact that he is the same God by reason of his slack. Andrius , 2002.02.07

A way to explore structure is by attempting to alter it. In the case of everything, these attempts fail. However, everything responds as a mirror, and so our failures mirror the structure of our minds. Such attempts share some general features: they have us focus on one representation of everything , and then have it apply to itself another representation of everything. What happens? The first representation offers no choice of perspectives, whereas the second representation offers a complete set of choices of perspectives. We find that the second representation changes without the first representation changing. Our attempts to alter everything fail, but we generate structure that mirrors our attempts. [6/00, Andrius Kulikauskas]

These representations of anything give the various ways that God emerges. Consider the representations of everything. Each of them is an eighth perspective that we take up only by making irrelevant seven other perspectives that provide its structural context. Let us ask the following question: Can we have a structural context without having the matching eighth perspective? We raise this question by applying a structural context to a nonmatching perspective. Apparently, the latter must be of a lower level of reflection. Our question is variously expressed by the six representations of anything. In each case, the answer should be No, because we expect that God emerges. The matching perspective should emerge from the way that the nonmatching perspective responds to that structural context. [11/00, Andrius Kulikauskas]

If we represent anything, then we may consider it as everything, in which case we have the same four representations as does everything. Or we may consider it apart from everything, but then such knowledge is only approximate, which explains why the two additional representations that we have do not apply to everything, for which there are no approximations. [11/00, Andrius Kulikauskas]


Naujausi pakeitimai

Puslapis paskutinį kartą pakeistas 2014 birželio 08 d., 06:53