Anyone who has ever improvised musically knows that there is plenty of intelligence that is undesigned, spontaneous. This intelligence arises as a response, or as a synergy of multiple responses echoing between different systems.
When improvising, you have to do so within a certain set of laws/rules, fro example staying with a certain key/scale. On top of that, your instrument has to be properly tuned.
Take those laws/rules out of imrov, and you will sound no better than cats screaming in a cat fat. Harshness to the ears
To me it seems simpler to assume that Universe is like a collective improvisation. I suspect that's why I feel the most free when I'm being the most spontaneous- being like everything else in nature. (Oh, and spontaneous is different from impulsive. It's off the impulsive/deliberate spectrum in the way I'm using the terms.)
What if Universe is not a giant closed system that is coherant but rather a pluralistic unfolding of indeterminate multiplicity of interactive systems? And all the intelligence that we so clearly see in Universe is a perpetual synergetic play of a vast multiplicity of systems on various scales? Isn't something like that more consistent with our experience?
I hear where you re coming from....but like I said, there are still the laws/rules in place, limits. Every atom knows where to be. The improv of reality is set within limits/rules/laws/confines.
he Laws of Physics aren't anything like the laws of a society, that is just a metaphor and a poor one at that which reflects the culture of the early enlightenment. Those early scientists used phrases like that because they couldn't let go of the idea of a Creator, and they were trying to frame their theories and discoveries in terms of a depersonalized God, a sort of platonized de-christianized metaphysic which was still monotheistic.
yes understood...I'm not coming from a God or No-God angle. My angles and questions are completely Open. Even with reality possibly being Begingless, the point is there is still something instead of nothing. Hence there has to be some sort of cause or principle that has reality/existence as currently unfolding, in the first place. You can't get something from nothing. If there is nothing, then there is just nothing and that's it!!!!
A more accurate term for the Laws of Physics would be something like 'the regularities humans observe in the behavior of physical systems'. These regularities are described in different languages including the mathemetical, but in any case are just that- descriptions of regularities, of patterns. They are in no way Laws that were laid down prior to the systems that exhibit those regularities by an intelligent designer.
That's cool!!! Call them what you want, laws of physics, regularities, patterns, descriptions, etc. The fact is, they are in place in a very specific and systematic manner.
What do we do when we make something, or create something? We do so with a specific purpose, design, limits, patterns, regularities, descriptions. When we make, we have to do so within the limits and confines of what is and what we know.
IF there was only Random Chaos, then there would still only be random chaos. But out of that, there is structure, regularities, patterns, descriptions. So something has had to cause chaos to form structure, to get something from nothing
for that matter, and tying back into the reflection on spontaneity above, human laws don't describe human behaviors very well, as most of us break all kinds of laws (and mores) all the time as a matter of course. The attempt to control by superimposing Laws on behavior is not very succesful. What appears more succesful to me in generating generally beneficial activity is discovering the spontaneity that is naturally arising moment to moment, and which is deeper than both impulse and repression/suppression.
Human behavior is also limited and contained to a certain range. Human behavior also has laws, egularities, patterns, descriptions