Wednesday, March 14, 2012

A Finite State Model of the History-Centric Soul

(Work in progress, to be updated)
In this post, we show that the theological soul associated with a History-centric thought system (HCTS) can be adequately represented using a deterministic and finite programmable model (there's an almost Turing Machine like feel to it). As always, feel free to submit substantiated corrections or suggestions.

From previous posts, we know that the human membership associated with a HCTS can be encoded using exactly one bit of information:
1: fully accept the input historical prior P. Output: qualify as a member
0: not fully accept input P. Output: disqualified (all non-humans by default).

There is no other state possible and no other inputs are necessary. Thus HC systems are associated with a finite bounded true/false state, that is only externally controllable and defined only for humans (undefined for non-humans).

Programmable Model Template of History Centric Souls (HCS)
1. HCS have finite starting points denoted T_start and a finite end points (T_end), thus of total duration (T_end - T_begin) and is undefined for any other time.

2. There exists a 1:1 binding-mapping between HCS and human body, i.e., one instance of HCS can be associated with exactly one human instance, thereby precluding the possibility of reincarnation, among other things.

3. The end state of all HCS is collectively and deterministically tied to the acceptance or non-acceptance of the corresponding extraneous input static data set associated with historical prior P (e.g. Nicene Creed). Other inputs are neither necessary nor sufficient.

4. At time T_end, HCS lapse and deterministically receive unconstrained output incentive enjoyable in human form, only if the associated human body validates the static input data within prior P before their mortal end. Thus, infinite reward is at hand regardless of the quality and quantity of all prior finite human acts. This boundless reward is available in an exclusive domain removed from the mortal world and is not accessible to non-members. Note the total absence of causality, sense of proportionality, and Karma, and an exclusive emphasis on continued membership and the keying in of a single collectively valid password.

5. As Rajiv Malhotra notes, the domain of HC God, matter, and the individual HCS are non-intersecting (duality of domains), i.e., the  intersection of any pair of domains = {}.

6. It follows from (4) that HCS of non-members are guaranteed to receive infinite penalty in a non-exclusive domain regardless of how virtuous their mortal life was. 

7. Thus the end state for HCS is deterministically determined, is absolutely uncontrollable by the human and absolutely controllable by and dependent on an extraneous, infinitely distant 'God', i.e., strictly binary: either infinite penalty (-) or unbounded incentive (+), depending only on a single human decision to fully accept or not accept static input data from a historical prior P. There is zero probability of a 'middle-ground' between these infinite extremes showing up in the output, and zero possibility of 'a second chance' to alter an undesirable end-state via rebirth. Claiming ignorance of prior P is not an acceptable excuse either.

8. The starting state (DNA, socioeconomic condition, etc.) of the human form associated with a HCS soul is a one-time randomized draw from an urn, i.e. a human lottery with no chance of a re-draw.

9. At time T_start, all HCS are uniformly scheduled to receive 'infinite penalty' (-∞) upon termination. This default state value is assumed to be sexually transmitted and can be altered (to +∞) only if the human will officially accept the input historical prior P before mortal end. (An example of the direct consequence of this important history-centric property is the aggressive 'harvesting of souls' practiced by agents of Abrahamic theology. In fact, a posthumous attempt was made on the Christian HCS of Mahatma Gandhi recently).

Thus the structural properties of HC soul are (infinitely) different from the 'Atman' of Dharmic thought systems (there are many more differences beyond those addressed here). A key reason for the pattern of a 'bounded, deterministic and programmable model' that repeatedly shows up in Western thought is attributable to a near-exclusive emphasis on history-centrism and its resultant human-centrism, rather than beneficial metaphysics and development (or genuine acknowledgement) of  Dharmic inner sciences that help a human move away from bodily ego and maximize their inner potential. History-Centrism dictates that Yoga may help in the short term, but ultimately, only third-party intervention via a monotheist 'God' can seal the deal (human and HCS being the primary parties). Refer to Rajiv Malhotra's book 'Being Different' for complete details.

No comments:

Post a Comment