Engaging with the Ultimate

Paradoxes of Engaging with the Ultimate in any Guise (Part #4)

The variety of understandings of "ultimate" presented above offer a framework through which to consider how it is possible to engage with the quality thereby implied.

Recognizing the Ultimate: Whether or not "ultimate" is merely used for (temporary) rhetorical purposes, how is "it" to be recognized? By comparison with lesser instances? Through whether it "does it for me?

Especially challenging is whether one has the capacity to recognize it -- or to understand its "ultimate" significance. This is made evident in situations where others are not similarly impressed, or one is not similarly impressed by what others qualify enthusiastically as "ultimate" -- as when used in what is judged to be propaganda, marketing hyperbole and puffery.

More sobering is any subsequent ("post-appreciative") sense of not being able to understand what one "saw in it" -- as with relationships previously qualified as "ultimate". Romantic relationships offer the most classic examples, with others evident in conventional employment, social networks, or sects. Also sobering is the possibility that the "truly ultimate" is not an "it" to be explained or understood through conventional frameworks.

These remarks from an individual perspective illustrate the challenge with respect to any global strategy, framed as the ultimate response to a single crisis or a crisis of crises. Who will appreciate the "ultimate" nature of the plan? Who will contest its significance? These questions are evident from current debate with regard to responses to climate change or to the global financial crisis. Clearly the quality of being "ultimate" is then elusive and readily contested. Given the challenges of faith-based governance, the "ultimate" insight -- unquestionable for one region -- is only too readily challenged by another.

The issue might be framed otherwise in that comprehension of the "ultimate" may well involve an intrinsically "inconvenient" truth -- the term used with respect to climate change by Al Gore (An Inconvenient Truth, 2006) -- as separately discussed (An Inconvenient Truth about any Inconvenient Truth, 2008).
Comprehending the Ultimate: A distinction can perhaps be usefully made between "recognizing" the ultimate -- however and by whomever it is presented -- and "comprehending" it to some degree. Importance may be acknowledged but implications may well not be fully appreciated as with the process of awarding medals for "ultimate courage" -- when the nature of the experience for the recipients may well be "denatured" by the medal. This distinction is variously captured in levels of education and experience, or in the many understandings of "initiation" (Varieties of Rebirth distinguishing ways of being "born again", 2004).

The matter may be framed in terms of complexity or appropriateness (Comprehension of Appropriateness, 1986; Dynamics of Symmetry Group Theorizing: comprehension of psycho-social implication, 2008). The problem is evident in the very limited appreciation that one discipline has for another -- let alone for anything of an "interdisciplinary" or "transdisciplinary" nature. It is unlikely that the Ultimate will be well and fully expressed through any one discipline or framework. As indicated by Gregory Bateson, it is more likely to take the form of a connecting meta-pattern -- just as likely to be expressed, to a degree, through poetry or music.
Explaining the Ultimate: The examples above make it clear that explaining what is held to be "ultimate" is exceptionally problematic and inconvenient -- if not ultimately so!. Every effort at representation may be readily contested. Whilst this might be comprehensible in the case of religion, the example of climate change makes it clear that "facts" are themselves only too readily challenged. How would the "ultimate" challenge of an imminent asteroid collision be rendered credible by comparison? How is that process to be compared with other foreseen disasters consequent on resource overshoot? How are proffered explanations to be distinguished from the spurious -- as proved to be the case with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, declared to be an "ultimate threat".

This raises the interesting question of the status of an ultimate Theory of Everything -- which is liable to be beyond the comprehension of most, especially if it is relies upon a multiplicity of dimensions (or universes). How to "explain" the recognition of a world in a grain of sand. And heaven in a wild flower (William Blake)?

Why is it so readily assumed that the arguments of an "ultimate leader" or an "ultimate teacher" could be "heard"? For those of religious persuasion, there is clear evidence of the inability of many to hear the "message" -- despite (evidential) claims of miracles . The problem is evident in the marketing of any product promoted as "ultimate", if not "miraculous". The climate change debate has provided a number of instances in which the message of the highest authorities -- whether political or academic -- is not clearly heard.
"Grasping" an Ultimate insight: Any effort to "grasp" the Ultimate is the subject of cautions in traditional lore and mythology, as with the Arthurian tale of the Fisher King and the nature of the Holy Grail. There is even the possibility that any engagement with ultimate reality may call for an attitude reminiscent of "courtship" rather than "discovery" (Beyond Harassment of Reality and Grasping Future Possibilities: learnings from sexual harassment as a metaphor, 1996).

The nature of the reluctance of the Ultimate to being "grasped" may be partially suggested by the challenge of any encounter with a famous artist, scientist, politician or guru. After perfunctory expression of appreciation and admiration, the potential for further exchange is a challenge in its own right. More fruitful interaction may be achieved through the unexpected -- as characterized by humour (Humour and Play-Fullness: essential integrative processes in governance, religion and transdisciplinarity, 2005; Requisite Childlike Cognition for Integration of "Heaven"? 2012).

Given the integrative coherence implied by the Ultimate, there are related concerns regarding the possibility of "ultimate dialogue" (Evaluating Synthesis Initiatives and their Sustaining Dialogues: possible questions as a guide to criteria of evaluation of any synthesis initiative, 2000; Enacting Transformative Integral Thinking through Playful Elegance A Symposium at the End of the Universe? 2010).
"Penetrating" the Ultimate: As with the previous caution, it is possible that the nature of the Ultimate is resistant to "penetration" and calls for other modes of engagement. As previously discussed (Eliciting a 12-fold Pattern of Generic Operational Insights: recognition of memory constraints on collective strategic comprehension, 2011), these merit consideration in relation to the articulation by Steven H. Cullinane (The Geometry of Logic: finite geometry and the 16 Boolean connectives, 2007). How might these be related to the 12 (of 16) "complex" archetypal interaction morphologies identified by Rene Thom (Structural Stability and Morphogenesis:an outline of a general theory of models, 1975, p. 307): capturing, sending, crossing, "almost", fastening, giving, rejecting, failing, taking, stirring, emitting, cutting?
Recognizing oneself in the Ultimate: Various arguments have been made for the fundamental significance of self-reflexivity In the light of arguments for (self) reflexivity (Hilary Lawson, Reflexivity: the post-modern predicament, 1985; M. S. Archer, Making Our Way Through The World: human reflexivity and social mobility, 2007; M. Ashmore, The Reflexive Thesis, 1989; S. J. Bartlett, Self-Reference: Reflections on Reflexivity, 1987; Douglas Hofstadter, I Am a Strange Loop, 2007). There is a case for considering that the very attraction of the Ultimate may derive in part from the manner in which one is reflected or mirrored in it -- as considered in various philosophical and traditional uses of the mirror metaphor. Is it then a question of "dancing" with it in some way? Is the Ultimate the ultimate mirror test of self-awareness, as previously explored (Self-reflective Embodiment of Transdisciplinary Integration (SETI): the universal criterion of species maturity? 2008).
"Enclosing" the Ultimate: The conventional approach to an unknown tends to seeks means of enclosing it in explanation and predictability, better to engage with it (Hilary Lawson, Closure: a story of everything, 2001). There is a case for considering that the Ultimate may deliberately elude such closure and that what is intrinsically valued may correspond more to a dynamic rather than to a static form, as separately discussed (Freedom, Democracy, Justice: Isolated Nouns or Interwoven Verbs? Illusory quest for qualities and principles dynamically disguised, 2011). The Ultimate may then be better understood as a verb (cf. Jason Derr, God Is a Verb, The Huffington Post, 29 July 2010; R. Buckminster Fuller, God is a Verb, Whole Earth Catalog, Fall 1968; David A. Cooper, God Is a Verb: Kabbalah and the Practice of Mystical Judaism, 1998). This is consistent with understandings of the Universe by physicist in terms of system dynamics.

Any encounter with the Ultimate may be better framed by the Zen proverb: Before Enlightenment, chop wood, carry water; after Enlightenment, chop wood, carry water.