I think that it amounts to a 'just is' perspective, which is something I've faulted other belief systems for also representing. There can be no morality in such a system, because everything 'just is'. With a hand wave, you dismiss the significance of consciousness and of rationality and judgment (which is fundamentally necessary to recognize The Good). It winds up being an inconsequential description of the world with no teeth; properly, we've got a better description in modern physics. Besides his discussion of the One and the Many, there is no real metaphysical substance in any of this; rather, it seems like a rejection thereof, where what remains is merely esoteric-sounding physics. Newtonian physics does a proper job of explaining everything that he is attempting to, without the unnecessary confusion - and rife with confusion all of this is. Notice how without a shred of justification for a moral system, he continues to cite an 'ought', i.e. that we *ought* to behave in kind with the *instincts*. From where or what does this ought arise? The instincts are roundly recognized as acting, when they are not tempered, in total discordance to everything that makes a man, a man. Governed by the instincts, a man becomes an animal. My instincts might regularly have me killing a man for staring at my girlfriend. My instincts would have me eating far too much. My instincts would cause me to masturbate past some small libidinal threshold, in public at any moment that I was aroused by a fit female body. Worse yet, far beyond the masturbatory libidinal threshold, my instincts might cause me to just club her over the head and rape her in a mall food court. This philosophical perspective amounts to animalism, it lacks the very principles which would justify the emanationist cosmology he points to, and I can't help but get the impression that his insistence that 'belief equals holding onto' is really a prescription for the rejection of consciousness, of succumbing purely to the physical and simply *being* a lump of deterministic matter. This is brute materialism trying to smuggle in some vague pantheism. It won't work. It never does. It can't even get as far as the Thelemic 'do as thou wilt', because even Satanism requires a more robust structure to reality than he is willing to admit. I have no real interest in continuing this thread. >All of this together is a simple distraction from ones need to adapt to constant change within motion. We're just particles colliding, baby! Enjoy the ride, Peace. ARM, get your dick out of that grinder, we got some stuff to collide with! @ARM @Energy-in-Motion