Can Energism fit in a nutshell?

I've been threatening for a while to try to explain my concept of Energism. There's so much to it, so many little side topics that are intertwined with it, that I'm not sure I can explain it all in one blog post. I could probably write a book about it. I'm too impatient to do that though :) I want to explain it now, to everyone, any chance I get. It sounds so preachy and fundy when put that way, but I'm not here to shove it down your throat. I just want to share my P.O.V., on the off chance someone else might agree with me, (which I think is the original intention behind the reason Christians are supposed to "Spread the Word," but that's a whole other ramble.)

So let's see, how to start...

First, why I call it Energism. I think everything  is made of energy. In my mind, I picture energy as the ultimately infinitesimal particle that makes up the building blocks of mass. To me, energy isn't a separate entity from mass, as theorized behind the idea of conversion in E = mc²  but just a part of mass's whole.

From here, my idea wanders from something that seems more reasonably scientific, to a realm that seems more science fantasy. The thing is, I also believe that energy has consciousnesses. for each individual particle of energy, that consciousness might be very simplistic, but gather together groups of energy, and the scope of that group of energy's ability to reason expands. It's like a hive mind, really.

These simple energy particles come together out of the desire to understand their reason for being. Energy particles coming together are like any other group or organization. Together, they have a goal, to share their ideas on what it means to be a particle of energy, and how they can work together to create something greater than they would be as individuals. Let me compare it to a family. A family has different parts that perform different actions to function as a whole. In the same vein, energy particles come together to for the building blocks of atoms. Of course, there are many kinds of families. While some are very similar, some are very different, but in the end, they are all have the same end goal. So, too, energy particles coming together may all form the building blocks of atoms, but they are not all alike. Thus, we end up with similar sized bits, such as nucleons and quarks. Now, when multiple families come together, they form communities. Like communities, the energy bits come together to form neutrons, protons and electrons. Again, different combinations, and different end goals, dictate what form those combinations become. Different communities can be very similar, or very different, in how they come together and the rules the follow, but in the end, they are still a community, and the same goes for the parts of an atom.

Now we get more complex. if you gather more and more communities together in one place, you varying complexities of towns and cities. I see this as a great analogy for atoms. A city needs many things to be able to work together in balance to have harmony. Atoms are stable when they have neutrality. Ions, atoms that aren't neutral, are communities with conflict. There are also atoms that just have a lack that needs filled. Something needs to change.

Now we have the comparison of complex elements to cities that interact with each other. Humans have communities that are perfectly capable of being self-sufficient, but there are others that have needs, or conflicts. Ions are cities that have some sort of strife, because there's an imbalance in their charge. So they either need to get rid of that particle that is knocking things off balance, or they need to bring in a balancing force to bring peace, ie. neutrality. Neutral atoms that have needs are peaceful cities that trade with other atoms for the things they need, just as we humans need to trade with other communities for food, clothing, manufactured goods, services, etc..

This is all common science, put in the form of analogy, but what if it isn't an analogy, so much as life on a different scale of complexity? If sentience exists all the way down to the simplest of particles, then what atoms and compounds are doing is not just some lifeless action performed by soulless things. Atoms and compounds are living, thinking communities, working together and communicating, or even warring and stealing on a smaller scale!

All things are sentient, now matter how small you break it down. From here, we can branch out into pretty much any aspect of Life, the Universe, Everything. In my mind, this concept explains everything from science and the occult. It even gives us the meaning of life. If everything is sentient in some way, then all things are alive. The smallest particles of energy are alive, and must have some motivation for gathering together to form complex groups. On a human and animal scale, existence revolves around attempting to survive, to create new life to replace the old as they wear out and die, and to evolve and adapt. So, to me this suggests that all things are driven by the need to live and evolve. The meaning of life is to live and evolve, to become something greater and more complex than our current form. This is the core of Energism.

Maybe Westboro Baptist Church IS being moved by the hand of God...

Counter-protestors stymie Westboro group 

Soldier funeral protestors leave in less than 10 minutes

Written by

Erin Quinn

Small business is the new Race Card.

Government Says 2 Common Materials Pose Risk of Cancer
By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: June 10, 2011
Government scientists listed formaldehyde as a carcinogen and said styrene may cause cancer, but the main threat is to workers in manufacturing.

There is a part of this article that shows an attitude I find deeply disturbing. If you read about halfway down, you'll find this:

“It will unfairly scare workers, plant neighbors and could have a chilling effect on the development of new products,” said Tom Dobbins of the American Composites Manufacturers Association. “And our companies are primarily small businesses, and this could hurt jobs and local economies.”

While I feel bad for the businesses that get negatively impacted by these reports, shouldn't our first concern be for the health and safety of the people exposed to these products? Yes, if these products get a negative opinion, or are pulled from the market, the businesses that use them are screwed. That doesn't justify continuing to use them.

To add insult to injury, these same people use the same dirty tactic, “You can't do this because it will hurt small businesses!” to argue against health care legislation. Nice, very nice. Downplay the risks behind the tools of a business's trade, then tell the people exposed that they're S.O.L. when they get sick from doing the job you paid them to do, not to mention the people who buy and use your products.

The “Small Business” card has been played far too often, of late, and not just in areas of health. Anything that changes how businesses are run, or the products they use or make, causes a hue and cry to be plastered across the media. Like a flock of hens pecking the oddball until they either fall in line or die, opponents to these innovations or scientific discoveries use legal maneuvers to try to squash them from ever seeing the light of day. Should they manage to peek their heads out in any way, any beautiful feather, any element that casts them in a favorable light, is slashed and picked until all that's left is an ugly, bleeding mess that looks nothing like what it used to.

Imagine if this tactic had been used and was successful when slavery was being abolished in America. The slave industry could easily argue that abolishing slavery would cause numerous people to lose their jobs, and place an unfair burden upon businesses who relied upon slaves for their workforce. I'm sure there were many people who suffered great hardships when they lost their jobs running slave ships, auctioning off slaves, or running businesses who's profit margins were cut drastically when they no longer had workers to whom they weren't required to pay wages. Ultimately, society and business survived. Adjustments had to be made, some people had to find new careers entirely, but time and ingenuity allowed us to adapt.

I'm sure the same thing can happen now. Taking formaldehyde and styrene off the market won't remove the need or desire for products that currently use them. We'll still have dead bodies, we'll still need homes, and our vanity will still long for ways to alter our appearance. If gas and oil use is restricted, we'll still need cars and other transportation. If tougher regulation is enacted to reduce the pollution caused my power plants, we'll still need electricity. People might lose jobs working on oil rigs, packaging embalming fluid, building gas guzzling cars, or in factories making Styrofoam cups, but new jobs will crop up in their place. People who lost jobs in one sector will find new jobs as the industries that take their place grow. The increased demand for bathtubs and boats that don't use styrene in their construction will drive down costs.

Ultimately, it's not the small businesses that are making the biggest fuss. It's the big businesses who don't want to have to spend their profits on researching alternatives, and finding a way to keep those small businesses that rely on them for their products. Small businesses will bite the bullet and move on. It will be hard, and not all will survive, but small businesses are far more adaptable than the media would like us to believe.

So to all of you big businesses out there, stop hiding behind small businesses as an excuse to save money. Making money does not trump the health and safety of our people and our planet. Your CEO's seven figure salary isn't more important than taking care of your workers and doing what's right. You want a real stimulus for the economy? Stop stuffing all of that money into your bank accounts and ridiculous homes. Stop passing the buck off to the consumer and start spending some of that largesse on ways to keep our people from dying, our country from turning into a wasteland, and our society from stagnating into a swamp of economic despair.