On Being and Action - Part One

In the following series of blogs I will be discussing all those big questions concerning the nature of the universe and its creation, along with the nature of free will and the possibility of the existence of god(s).  Open your mind and follow along.  If nothing else, this discourse will at least give you a chance to see the bigger picture.  Enjoy, and thanks for reading.

There are two opposing forces that govern every action that takes place in the universe.  On the one hand, there is a positive, creative force by which all things come into being and increase their order and involved relation to each other.  On the other hand there is a negative, destructive force which brings the current state of things to an end and generally decreases the orderly relation of all things to other things. 

That aspect which is commonly attributed to human being alone, i.e., free will, or the will to choose, at any point, the direction of ones actions, is in fact a law that holds for all things.  Free will is seen not only in the actions of human beings, but in the will of all events of existence.  Take for instance the movement we have recently been describing as the big bang.  This movement , as we would have it, is a movement from the extreme unity of a singular entity into the ever-widening universe.  This ever-widening is like the continual expanding of a balloon: as you blow the balloon larger and larger, the patterns on the surface of the balloon continually expand.  Things move apart, patterns get wider, and fragments disperse.  If we take the idea of entropy seriously, then this expansion implicitly involves a movement toward disorder.  Not only are the patterns of the universe expanding, they are in fact deteriorating.  Patterns of the way things once were are no longer recognizable patterns.  The links between those fragments of the original unity continue to decrease.

Such a trend of the activity of the universe should be considered as an example of a negative, destructive force.  And yet, just as I have explained that such a force is always coinciding with an opposing force of positive creation, it is reasonable to imagine that the movement which we describe with the big bang theory also has its opposing movement or force.  If the movement by which all the universe follows is one of entropy, then there must also be an opposite movement: a movement by which all things move from infinite fragmentation, infinite separation, towards unity and complete organization.  If there are clear patterns in the universe which tend by a law of entropy to decrease in their organization, then there must also be some sort of movement which increases organization and moves all fragments toward a singular unity.

The way I have been discussing these opposing trends is generally cosmological: it focuses on the 'big' things of existence.  But these trends can also be seen on the level of the tendencies of living beings, whatever 'living' means in particular. Even the phenomena of life and of death could be described as two instantiations of these two sides of all action.  However, can we not see the same two trends in human activity itself?  Look at those two sides to free will: if considered in the most general terms, the choice that is to be made at every moment is either a yes or a no.  Do it, or not do it?  Make it or not make it?  And so on.  Even in those cases where there are many options to choose from, one always chooses to either go or not go in which ever direction they choose. 

Take for instance the choice to either build something up or break something down.  Such is a very basic general movement observed in the actions of human beings.  One  might choose to build up systems of value by which one brings things together and increases the "orderliness" of the things around him, or one might choose activities which lead to a decrease of order: war is a very potent example of this, for it is inherently an action which moves to decrease the order of a particular set of things.  For example, the actions of war in a particular region tend to decrease the current order present in that place.  Yet, such an example gives us an opportunity to see a possible explanation of the wider relation between these two movements.  War is always a force of destruction directed by another force: that of order.  In war, the destruction of one entity or region is always directed by an urge to increase or create the order of another entity.  When a country invades its neighbor, it wreaks havoc with the intention of benefiting the order of the invading country.  If we take this example as a indicative of a wider tendency of the universe, then we can safely assume, at the least, that any action which tends toward destruction is directed by an opposing action of ordering or creation. 

It should be noted that the way we have been describing this so far is quite one-sided, for it assumes, if you will, that the chicken precedes the egg.  We cannot safely assume that the destructive is always ordered by the constructive.  We must also consider the possibility of the opposite: that the constructive, likewise, is a movement directed by the deconstructive.  Take again the example of war.  War is not simply a willing to decrease order.  Rather, it takes huge amounts of movements toward order in order to carry out the destructive actions of war.  Armies must be organized, bureaucracies must be established, even "rules of war" are often put in place to ensure that the very effort is held within the control of the acting entity.  Tactics are developed.  And what are war tactics if not a momentary organizing of "things" for the sake of the destruction of other "things"?  We must consider the macroscopic instance of this trend.