Hi.
We don't have a lot of time,
or, well, I guess you do,
but I don't,
so let's plunge right into the first big question:
Which came first, form or function?
False dichotomy. No such thing as a totally dysfunctional form,
and no such thing as changing function without some form
distinguished against a static background, or understory.
OK, that was quick!
Not really,
it just seems that way to you.
Whatever,
what about space and time?
Which came first?
Same question.
Same answer.
Space adds formed place
to time's potentiating and exforming bilateral linear function.
All right,
so hypostatic paradox meets coincidental evolution
as co-arising time travel,
I guess.
About time.
So you say.
And, yang and yin?
Same question.
Yang empowers Time's flow
while Yin unfolds as yin-yin nondual co-implicating bicamerality,
delineating bilateral,
binomial time and co-gravity frequencies,
synergetic regenerative strings and cycles and tipping points,
mutually revolving gravity waves;
Double-binding,
like not-not injunctions
and co-arising natural intelligence
as accessible as the nearest co-mutating cells,
inductive intuition,
subconscious non-languaged awareness
of integrating communication as cooperative communion
emerging from an enthymematic holding place
of polycultural multisystemic Black Hole dual-dark love
subconscious nonbeing,
co-giveness,
Fore-giveness,
mutual subsidiary solidarity
and coredemptive navigation from past stimuli,
pulling, inviting, seducing, branching
toward future's ecojust karmic response,
ecological reconnections from past to future in each present moment,
Re-genesis of The Tree of Co-Arising Death and Life,
fear of too-brief time's revelation, revolution,
between death and life and rebirth
yielding both further death and purgation
and further freedom and facility and harmonic diversity
of eco-species and uniquely ego-centering song;
until we sometimes overheat our climatic landscapes
with less than fully optimized cooperative function.
Wow!
Was that good for you?
I don't know how many nested climaxes you intended to create there,
but, anyway,
what about dark and light,
black and white,
dispossession and possession of transparency?
Same question.
Black is white light's full octaved closed-set form
as light is emergent black's informating octave-ergodic dark-dense function.
So is that like a color wheel observation
or some kind of cosmologically universal statement?
Yes.
The ultra-violet spectrum completes time's full octave frequencies,
your human natured atomic picture frame,
the outline of a tree
including the tree's equivalent subterranean understory,
and undervalued root system.
Undervalued by egocentric left-brain dominant culture,
not by right-left bicameral balancers
and health/wealth harmonizers
and polyculturists,
all the way back to shamans noticing naturally seasoned
cycling systems of birth and decomposition
and then new birth again.
You did it again,
that thing
when you sound like you're channeling Bucky Fuller
and you start talking about one thing
and then pulling words about some other irrelevant thing,
turning analogical coincidence
into ecological correlates.
Yes.
I suppose that's how language evolved
to iconically place-hold neural memory patterns
of synaptic crisis and aptically benign eco-norms,
structured as DNA fractals,
cycling octave holonic frequent flow functions.
I'll take a pass on even pretending
connections between DNA's structure
and revolving articulation of syntax.
How about the chicken and egg?
Which came first?
What's the difference?
I don't know.
It's one of those questions philosophers like to ask.
No.
I mean, what's the difference between a chicken
and its egg?
Well, one has feathers and wings
and sometimes lays an egg
and the other is sort of oval
and smooth hard-shelled,
and gooey inside.
This chicken you are asking about,
did it lay the egg
you are asking about,
or
did this chicken emerge from the egg
you are asking about?
Or, maybe both,
at different stages of chicken with egg development?
If so,
then I guess they too evolved coincidentally.
If I may comment off record here,
you keep asking questions about evolutionary production
and consumption cycles,
as if progenitive decomposition,
metamorphic transitions
through self-renewing stages of paradox
were not the reverse face of regeneration,
as if we could have mature plants
during summer's contenting heat
without cold hibernation
of winter's dissonant contentiousness,
or any concept of optimized cooperative living
without something we fear as death,
loss of corporate-structured life.
I told you I would only do this interview
if you promised to not critique
our stupid questions.
There is no such thing,
but some are much more perennially
and permaculturally productive than others.
If you say so.
What would be the most insightful question I could ask you
and please go ahead and answer it too.
Save me some trouble.
Why is the duration of your DNA's life potential
measured only with egocentric
"Closed Set Universe" rooted quantitative values?
Because "Open System" inductive/consumptive life-form balance
is only perpetually (not conclusively) defined
by eco-ionic production of (0) sum binomial root systems,
double-crossing Eulerian prime relationship spacetime function.
The beginning and end of your DNA string
appear terminal rather than transitional
if you identify your self as ego,
rather than as your co-operative portion of eco-regenerative consciousness.
OK, well, thank you for that,
I think.
How do you feel about the ground covered so far?
Anything else I should ask?
I wish you would give higher priority
to ecological and feminist justice platforms.
What's the difference
between a feminist agenda
and an ecological platform?
Nice job;
very excellent question.
Which came first
is like asking which is the producer
and which is the later consumer,
when these functions emerge coincidentally
throughout a life,
a dream,
a generation.
Copyright © Gerald Dillenbeck | Year Posted 2015