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.

Why I believe in Astrology, and why it doesn't work for everyone.

Whether the planets and stars and other astrological objects really exert some sort of influence, I don't know. However, there does seem to be a pattern between when certain astrological objects are in certain places in the sky and relative to each other. For those who are skeptics, let's remove the "magical" element.

If something happens once, it's unremarkable. If it happens twice, it's a coincidence. If it happens repeatedly, there must be some connection. Whether or not we have discovered all of the reasons and methods behind the phenomena, there is still the fact that something is occurring.

The process of reading events through astrology has been compiled and expanded over hundreds of years. It started by someone noticing that every time such-and-such planet/star/etc. was in this part of the sky, such-and such happened. Early astrologists mapped out the positions of the astrological bodies, took notes on reoccurring events, or similarities in the personalities of people born under different Signs. When things didn't fall out as expected, they noted how some astrological bodies were aligned or in conjunction with each other, and deduced that maybe this signaled some sort of interference.

Did the planets and whatnot cause the feelings and events that played out on 7/21/10? Maybe, maybe not. Did a large number of people feel something skin to what I described in my blog? Definitely. The fact that there were multiple people on my FB feed talking about having the same feelings of unease, before I looked up and posted my Astrological interpretation, removes the possibility of it being psychosomatic. Not all of the people who posted on FB that day were from the same group of friends. They would not have seen each other's posts, so there is no psychosomatic influence there.

Of course, this was no scientific setup, with a broad range of test subjects in blind conditions. I can't definitively state that everyone's experience was caused by whatever influence was mirrored by astrological events. This isn't the first time I've noticed this kind of thing before, though, and the conditions of 7/21 in particular seem to be pushing the bonds of coincidence.

So, I don't know how the planets or stars assert their "influence." I don't even know if they are actually doing anything at all. What I do know is that there is a surprising amount of accuracy when examining the position of astrological objects in the sky and their position relative to each other. There is a surprising amount of accuracy in just the simplest comparison of all people born under specific signs. A more in depth look at a person's star chart for the day they were born explains any deviations from the basic description.

If I had had the time, I could have compared the various Signs with the "influence" of the day. Then I could have explained how much each Sign would be affected, and how. If I had nothing else to do with my time, and cared to do it, I could have compared a specific person's astrological personality as described by their birth chart to the "influence" of the day, and provided more accuracy, and explanation for any deviations.

As a final caveat, I believe that the strength of a person's will trumps all. Whatever is going on to cause these astrological "influences," if a person has a stronger will than the force of those influences, they will overcome them. People who are very skeptical will have a strong desire to have things fall out any way but the way their horoscope says it should. They will actively work to prevent those things from taking place. A person who just has a strong sense-of-self and willpower will subconsciously feel that something outside of themselves is trying to interfere with their life. They will strengthen their resolve to make things fall out in the manner of their choosing.

Astrology and psychic reading are not absolute. The future is mutable, depending on the choices we make. Astrology and psychic readings can be a great tool or a horrible restriction. It all depends on what you do with what you learn.