Thread by @Apotheiite

You misunderstand.

Body resides within soul as its activity, so union necessarily cannot be accidental. Sense faculties are product of the soul's prior activity expressed through its body; it cannot be 'of the body' in and of itself as bodies do not intrinsically possess senses.

https://twitter.com/_arrus/status/1417695212244070407

To say the sense faculties are a "necessary component" of an activity within its prior cause violates the principle of procession. As prior to sense faculties (SFs), intellect within soul gives rise to SFs alongside the rest of the body within which the SFs are integrally part.

It is not that intellect has adorned the body with sense, nor especially as you say that it has done so out of obliged necessity to complete its own essential act, but that the activity of soul achieved via intellect has integral to its bodily generation the SFs.

As body is within soul and not vice versa, SFs are not "necessary" for intellection but are a participant within intellection's activity. This must be so, else we violate the nature of processional priority and lend to believing a disordered and inconsistent ontology.

https://twitter.com/_arrus/status/1417695214236409865

The human soul, following upon its priors, generates to give expression to the goodness of its inner activities, and so generates the body which it fills with the senses as a mirror of the goodness in the apprehension of goods.

However, the human soul's primal error was in becoming incapable of distinguishing between the goods of intellect and the goods of sense (their expression), it truly desiring the former but mistakenly identifying them to be the latter.

Why is explained in the soul's failing to retain the noetic vision. By the eternal ancient law that all beings must be maximally receptive of The Good, our processional lateness has us subject to a magnitude of priors that we receive dually as both intellect and their expression.

Our turn away from intellect's unity with its expression towards a sole fascination with expression alone is owed to the familiarity of expression. All expressions are later than us (as all bodies must be later than all souls), even though their causal intellects are our priors.

As the expressions of superior intellect are later than our own intellect, our intellect draws knowledge from the expressions far more easily than it does via higher noetic contemplation. Worse, it even finds initial satisfaction in this as all expressions mirror prior intellect.

It is by our 'falling' into this spiritual 'laziness' that our ignorance is brewed and we come under the influence of fate. We neglect the director and seek it within the directed. Our senses then, originally an imitation of our intellection, become our mode toward intellect.

However, we're privileged over the individuated souls of fauna and flora, as unlike they who are so far removed from intellect that they've lost vision of it entirely, our place grants a twofold Mind which brews an intuitive inner duality- it's false, but indicative of otherness.

Without needlessly lengthening this response by expounding on self-otherness, what's clear is soul's expression is both deeply connected to soul's activity, but is also subject to a procession of prior intellection and their later expression.

Although soul is prior to expression, its own expression-act comes ontologically after the expression of prior intellects. Soul's expressed (i.e. bodily) activity thus is in retrospect, and by this we can account for how life adapted to an environment extant prior to itself.

And by this same process we can begin to understand why reincarnation doesn't necessarily give rise to an accidental association between soul and body.

In saying "reincarnation", we tend to think of it as something that will happen and not as something that already has.

But in truth, our reincarnation into another life is done via that same manner which brought us into our current life. The essential activity of the soul doesn't alter from one life to the next, but rather remains intent upon the apprehension of expression via expression.

So long a human soul retains this intent, it will forever "reincarnate", continuing to regenerate its own expression among the expressions in search for the full reception of goodness it desires. The only change within this is the expressions it experiences in its search.

It's by experience that a soul is driven to alternate its expression- whether it be for better or for worse. The experience a soul either enjoys or suffers informs it about the nature of goodness, as every expression is a signifier of the corresponding intellect which caused it.

It's by the repeated cycle of the soul's activity that it gradually hones a better and superior understanding of goodness, harmonising its own inner activities and expressions with the cosmos of intellective expressions, discovering gradually the path towards true wisdom.

Every expression that soul cultivates, or in other words every life it chooses to live, occurs because the soul has chosen to seek goodness through that life, and thus is never an accidental association but always and can only ever be an intended and willed act.

So I imagine the obvious immediate rebut: "So a soul chooses to express itself by being born into a life of disability?"

No: the human soul is not master of the whole cosmos, and so when it is not harmonised with it, it will suffer shortcomings, such as being born disabled.

This is not accidental in the sense that the soul whimsically fell upon the disabled body. Rather, it willed itself to it, ignorant to the "cosmic winds" which are more powerful than it and influence life's outcomes. No philosopher's soul would be born accidentally disabled.

But eventually once the soul has harmonised itself and consolidates knowledge of the path to true wisdom, it pursues it and begins to realise the intellectual life over the expressive life.

The soul at last learns the true origin of goodness and breaks the spell of false dualism that ruled over it for so long, thus finally achieving gnosis and attaining the noetic vision, and henceforth overcomes its ignorant pursuit of expression, conjoining with the divine itself.