Dammit...

Robert Charles Wilson in his novel, Bios, has anticipated most (though not all)
of my vision of cosmic biogenesis as depicted in MY (perpetually) forthcoming
novel, provisionally titled, SUMMA.
In mine, I posit that there are planets in the cosmos where all life forms are
symbiotic with one another and no life form is obliged to prey upon another.
And in many instances all apparently different species are all different stages
of the same life form. Also, consciousness and life are all coeval with one
another--although the forms of consciousness are so radically different
sometimes that they cannot communicate or even recognize one another. That's
Mr. R.C. Wilson's vision.

Of course, MY vision is even more inclusive than Mr. R.C. Wilson's. I posit
also that there are not only stars and planets that are alive and conscious, but
a spectrum of objects between those two that are also alive and conscious
(Pluto, Jupiter, brown dwarfs, etc.), and not only that, but there are living
beings that consist purely of magnetic fields and other forces on the surfaces
of stars, and also in cloulds of interstellar dust and gases and in
intergalactic space, and the nous of all finite entities that subsist after
their endings in something like the Akashic records. After a while, you see, I
think the cosmos gets kind of complicated.

In nearly unrelated news, Michael Gruber has written a sort of "wisdom" book
based on his interpretation of Nietzche, Heidigger and Rudolf Steiner. Nietzche
and Heidigger are my two least favorite thinkers. Heidigger was a fucking Nazi.
Nietzche probably would not have liked them, but much of his writing works to
give them aid and comfort. Steiner is a tolerably sophisticated thinker who
gave some aspects of theosophy a certain veneer of intellectual respectability
with his "anthroposophy" & he is something of a gnostic Christian as well. He
was decent enough to be persecuted by the Nazis. But some of his teachings
promote (see also Alice Bailey) a sort of racism and some are just plain...odd.
Like his belief that children should not be taught to read until they have
acquired their permanent teeth. Anyway, there are people whom I admire who look
to Nietzche and Heidigger, but those folks' interpretations of Nietzche and
Heidigger seem to make them out as being the very opposite of the impressions
that I have of those two thinkers.

I don't understand Gruber's book very well on first reading. I have the sense
from reading his novels that he speaks from a certain degree of first hand
experience, so I'm inclined to think he has something really important to say.

http://gg9-tto.blogspot.com/