No they do not. You really aren't making an effort to understand. It's written out so obvious that indeterminism or acausality do not explain anything. They are a self-gratifying concept only. At least you could admit that is all that the theories offer, they offer no further explanation.
I am okay, you are okay, and everyone is okay. We're all living our lives. The only conflict is in terms of "argument" which is removed from the empirical. We can give power to argument, or not. We can make "argument" the prevalent issue, or we can allow reality to be.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I am okay, you are okay, and everyone is okay. We're all living our lives. The only conflict is in terms of "argument" which is removed from the empirical. We can give power to argument, or not. We can make "argument" the prevalent issue, or we can allow reality to be.
Argument does not do anything to the nature of reality.
Reality is not that which exists in your head, which seems to be what you are concerned for "letting be".
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
It's not an easy developmental stage, by any means. It's like being in the carnival funhouse. It feels insane, that's for sure. Many here can attest to it. The point is, you are chosing it. It seems it is predetermined, and even though you consciously fight it and degrade it, your whole Being is here, on Purpose. Being has a way of doing that to our egos. When our egos are the tip of the iceberg of our Being, and we get so caught up in that tip-of-the-iceberg view, we cause ourself inner conflict. Surrendering to Being is the harmonious, conflict-free option.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
It's not an easy developmental stage, by any means. It's like being in the carnival funhouse. It feels insane, that's for sure. Many here can attest to it. The point is, you are chosing it. It seems it is predetermined, and even though you consciously fight it and degrade it, your whole Being is here, on Purpose. Being has a way of doing that to our egos. When our egos are the tip of the iceberg of our Being, and we get so caught up in that tip-of-the-iceberg view, we cause ourself inner conflict. Surrendering to Being is the harmonious, conflict-free option.
I am not fighting an inner predisposition to your belief system. I'm sure everyone who arises at your mystical conclusions feels an inner desire or predisposition to that belief. That is not true for me, I do not need a fundamentally mystical explanation or theory in my life. What I need is a good solid theory that provides further explanations for the behavior and nature of human beings. A theory that is reproducable, adaptable, has evidence supporting it and has a null hypothesis. Determinism provides all of that stability in a theory of human nature. Indeterminism provides nothing but the personal gratification equivelant of the belief in the tooth fairy.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Argument does not do anything to the nature of reality.
Reality is not that which exists in your head, which seems to be what you are concerned for "letting be".
I've been saying throughout this thread that reality is not that which exists in any of our heads. Our existence is what is real--our thoughts are ego and are about separation and illusion.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I am not fighting an inner predisposition to your belief system. I'm sure everyone who arises at your mystical conclusions feels an inner desire or predisposition to that belief. That is not true for me, I do not need a fundamentally mystical explanation or theory in my life. What I need is a good solid theory that provides further explanations for the behavior and nature of human beings. A theory that is reproducable, adaptable, has evidence supporting it and has a null hypothesis. Determinism provides all of that stability in a theory of human nature. Indeterminism provides nothing but the personal gratification equivelant of the belief in the tooth fairy.
What I am saying is that if you consider it "insanity"-provoking to be on this board, and if you resent the consequences, and the call to inner resolutions, etc, and yet you are here most days contributing so much energy, the conflict is between you and your Being.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
What I am saying is that if you consider it "insanity"-provoking to be on this board, and if you resent the consequences, and the call to inner resolutions, etc, and yet you are here most days contributing so much energy, the conflict is between you and your Being.
The problem is with "inner resolutions" or intuition. Is that reality is often times counter-intuitive. I'm sure you believe the earth rotates around the sun and is round. That is all counter-intuitive. For if you try to feel the rotation of the earth you cannot and if you look at the horizon it appears flat. Do not be deceived by your "inner resolutions".
The reason I contribute so much energy is out of concern for social progress and mutual understanding of all human behavior. All I want is for people to stop using the black-box of free-will to halt further explanation, to end the causal chain and rest all blame on a single individual. It is harmful. It's absurd. The exact same logic that "proves" God is being employed to "prove" free-will. You call it "Inner resolution".
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I've been saying throughout this thread that reality is not that which exists in any of our heads. Our existence is what is real--our thoughts are ego and are about separation and illusion.
Don't you think it's a bit ironic that you make this claim, then in the very next post tell me to seek resolution within myself, i.e. within my head. First you say reality exists independently of what I think, then you tell me to use intuition to achieve a greater understanding of reality.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Don't you think it's a bit ironic that you make this claim, then in the very next post tell me to seek resolution within myself, i.e. within my head. First you say reality exists independently of what I think, then you tell me to use intuition to achieve a greater understanding of reality.
I have thoughts and I have opinions. I've mentioned, also within this thread, that they are valuable as tools, when we realize our thoughts and opinions are not the reality of our Being. By using our thoughts and opinions to serve the whole Being, we are harmonious. When we identify with our thoughts and our opinions, thinking they are us, that's when we get distorted.
I use different contexts depending on my purposes in each moment. In reality the objective/subjective exists in the whole. It is not actually split in two, putting one or the other in a vaccum like the human psyche tends to see it. I support everyone resolving the false duality between that which is within and that which is outside of us, in order to be realistic. People continue to see these concepts in a fragmented, separate fashion when the inner lenses are fragmented. When our inner conflicts are unresolved, we project our lack of resolution outside of us, onto the real world.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
The problem is with "inner resolutions" or intuition. Is that reality is often times counter-intuitive. I'm sure you believe the earth rotates around the sun and is round. That is all counter-intuitive. For if you try to feel the rotation of the earth you cannot and if you look at the horizon it appears flat. Do not be deceived by your "inner resolutions".
The reason I contribute so much energy is out of concern for social progress and mutual understanding of all human behavior. All I want is for people to stop using the black-box of free-will to halt further explanation, to end the causal chain and rest all blame on a single individual. It is harmful. It's absurd. The exact same logic that "proves" God is being employed to "prove" free-will. You call it "Inner resolution".
This is what the "I" in you wants. The "I" is the ego. Your Being is taking you into the existential realm, where you will learn some huge things about the millions of maps that people perceive. I tell you this so you can have this context through which to learn consciously. You can certainly opt to ignore it and continue to learn unconsciously. My sense of you is that your dissonance to this idea will have you being vocal in your disagreement. And your strongly intuitive self will eventually embrace this truth, consciously. Probably sooner than later.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
The problem is with "inner resolutions" or intuition. Is that reality is often times counter-intuitive.
I am all for science, objectivity, and what both uncover. I am against false-science egoism, and the human flaws that are weilded to continue the illusions of false dichotomies. I said earlier that the existential types on this board welcome knowledge and information. They are so willing to learn new things and embrace what is counter intuitive. Existentialism DEMANDS and depends on full integration of objectivity. Each existentialist understands the value of objectivity, or they would not be--and are not--at the level of existentialism. Where they bristle, and go into opposition is when their strengths, being the understanding of personal individual infringement is violated. They know you have stepped out of bounds when you do this.
For the record, any of the scientists you have presented info for, who are in the public eye, have gained their positions of power because they can focus on their agenda without infringing on others, and without crossing those lines. They have earned those positions of power by making the resolutions I refer to. As you can also someday do.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
This is what the "I" in you wants. The "I" is the ego. Your Being is taking you into the existential realm, where you will learn some huge things about the millions of maps that people perceive. I tell you this so you can have this context through which to learn consciously. You can certainly opt to ignore it and continue to learn unconsciously. My sense of you is that your dissonance to this idea will have you being vocal in your disagreement. And your strongly intuitive self will eventually embrace this truth, consciously. Probably sooner than later.
Angelica. That sounds incredibly self-centered, condescending and ignorant.
The 'I' in me is a pattern of what I know. It does not want to achieve ignorance, it wants to achieve understanding. You are terribly misguided by your intuition, dangerously so. This is not a matter of cognitive dissonance. I am not torn between mystical explanations and real observable and useful explanations.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Angelica. That sounds incredibly self-centered, condescending and ignorant.
The 'I' in me is a pattern of what I know. It does not want to achieve ignorance, it wants to achieve understanding. You are terribly misguided by your intuition, dangerously so. This is not a matter of cognitive dissonance. I am not torn between mystical explanations and real observable and useful explanations.
I am all for science, objectivity, and what both uncover. I am against false-science egoism, and the human flaws that are weilded to continue the illusions of false dichotomies. I said earlier that the existential types on this board welcome knowledge and information. They are so willing to learn new things and embrace what is counter intuitive. Existentialism DEMANDS and depends on full integration of objectivity. Each existentialist understands the value of objectivity, or they would not be--and are not--at the level of existentialism. Where they bristle, and go into opposition is when their strengths, being the understanding of personal individual infringement is violated. They know you have stepped out of bounds when you do this.
For the record, any of the scientists you have presented info for, who are in the public eye, have gained their positions of power because they can focus on their agenda without infringing on others, and without crossing those lines. They have earned those positions of power by making the resolutions I refer to. As you can also someday do.
I urge you to apply this thinking to yourself. You seem to be projecting on me your own flaws. Your post prior to this one is again in direct conflict with this post. This is the second time you've contradicted yourself.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
The 'I' in me is a pattern of what I know. It does not want to achieve ignorance, it wants to achieve understanding.
Yes, it is the pattern of what you know. That is what the ego is--the part of us that interfaces between the outside world, and our Being. I completely agree you want to achieve understanding. The issue is that for all the "I" knows, it doensn't yet know what it does not know, so sometimes it denies it's own ignorance.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
That was a self-fulfilling prophecy, parlor tricks, mind games. Nothing more. It certainly reflects the shallow nature of your illusions and the strong emotional attachment you have to them.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
That was a self-fulfilling prophecy, parlor tricks, mind games. Nothing more. It certainly reflects the shallow nature of your illusions and the strong emotional attachment you have to them.
Either that, or I'm simply right. Be sure that the "audience" will judge for themselves.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Yes, it is the pattern of what you know. That is what the ego is--the part of us that interfaces between the outside world, and our Being. I completely agree you want to achieve understanding. The issue is that for all the "I" knows, it doensn't yet know what it does not know, so sometimes it denies it's own ignorance.
Are you on drugs?
My whole point is that I don't make assumptions about what I don't know. I don't base my knowledge on intuition because of the potential fallaciousness of doing so. You on the other hand feel a need to have a complete understanding, you erroneously fill-in the parts you don't know intuitively.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Either that, or I'm simply right. Be sure that the "audience" will judge for themselves.
So that is it? It's about the "audience"? This is a social endevour for you to prop your ego up on a higher ground?
Think about this statement, really think about it. Look at all the finger pointing you've done. The self-projection onto me. See the irony.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Your post prior to this one is again in direct conflict with this post. This is the second time you've contradicted yourself.
I take full responsibility for resolving my own inner conflicts. If you are perceiving conflict with what I say or believe, that's your responsibility.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
My whole point is that I don't make assumptions about what I don't know. I don't base my knowledge on intuition because of the potential fallaciousness of doing so. You on the other hand feel a need to have a complete understanding, you erroneously fill-in the parts you don't know intuitively.
I'm talking about the known, base workings of the human ego.
-- it is the part of us that we relate to, that we think is who we are.
-- this tiny part that we relate to is merely the tip of the whole iceberg of who we are.
-- The ego is the interface between all of who we are, and reality.
When people align with the ego only--with what they are conscious of at any give time--and overlook the unconscious that powers all of our actions, we are out of touch with our power, or unempowered. This creates our human problems, and when people turn the finger outside, and blame others for their problems, they show they are in the grips of the ego, rather than integrated within. This is "normal" at this time. It is a small percentage of people who overcome this and become integrated.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Think about this statement, really think about it. Look at all the finger pointing you've done. The self-projection onto me. See the irony.
If you want to tighten up the NLP effects, keep in mind that I respond better to "auditory" and "kinesthetic" words like "Do you HEAR yourself"?? "Can you FEEL what you are saying with that statement?... just a tip....In NLP terms, you are using words that you would respond to in your suggestive attempts, not myself.
As for the "audience", the audience judges individuals on what they say and do, not for what others attribute to them. When someone attributes a negative trait to another, studies show that observers who hear this attribute the negativity to the source who is speaking negatively. It's basic association.
When I'm in a positive flow and being responsible, I would be very happy if your words were in anyway encouraging others to take a deeper look at what I'm saying. It can be influential.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Clearly you aren't as empowered or self-actualized as your ego lets on Angelica. I'll leave you to think about it for now, I have to head out to a hair appointment. Perhaps we will pick this up at a different time.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Clearly you aren't as empowered or self-actualized as your ego lets on Angelica. I'll leave you to think about it for now, I have to head out to a hair appointment. Perhaps we will pick this up at a different time.
Enjoy!
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I'm talking about the known, base workings of the human ego.
-- it is the part of us that we relate to, that we think is who we are.
-- this tiny part that we relate to is merely the tip of the whole iceberg of who we are.
-- The ego is the interface between all of who we are, and reality.
When people align with the ego only--with what they are conscious of at any give time--and overlook the unconscious that powers all of our actions, we are out of touch with our power, or unempowered. This creates our human problems, and when people turn the finger outside, and blame others for their problems, they show they are in the grips of the ego, rather than integrated within. This is "normal" at this time. It is a small percentage of people who overcome this and become integrated.
It's like this, in quantum physics there is something called particle-waveform duality. Quantum particles (electrons) appear to behave as wave functions, but when an electron detector is used in the experiments they appear to "collapse" and behave as regular matter, like a ping-pong ball as opposed to a soundwave. The theory put forth by "What the BLEEP do we know?" and anaesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff and mathmatical physicist Roger Penrose, amongst others, is that Consciousness as an ethereal self-sufficient force collapses the wave-function and creates reality. As Dr. Joe Dispenza claims in the movie "I create my day". Similar phrases are repeated throughout the film, such as "We create reality" etc.. etc..
It's all absolute non-sense and only a few lunatics actually believe it.
I'm familiar with teh relevant particle/wave duality thing. I was also thinking that it was utter crap to relate that in some way to consciousness. ]I frequently run across people using valid statments in an invalid context yto appear superior.
It's interesting that an anaesthesiologist purports to understand cnsciousness when it is a well recognised failing that we do ont yet understand how anaesthetic agents really work or to put it another way, how we induce unconsciousness deliberately. That would be a good starting point to understanding consciousness, certainly a lot easier to model than producing consciousness.
It's like this, in quantum physics there is something called particle-waveform duality. Quantum particles (electrons) appear to behave as wave functions, but when an electron detector is used in the experiments they appear to "collapse" and behave as regular matter, like a ping-pong ball as opposed to a soundwave. The theory put forth by "What the BLEEP do we know?" and anaesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff and mathmatical physicist Roger Penrose, amongst others, is that Consciousness as an ethereal self-sufficient force collapses the wave-function and creates reality. As Dr. Joe Dispenza claims in the movie "I create my day". Similar phrases are repeated throughout the film, such as "We create reality" etc.. etc..
It's all absolute non-sense and only a few lunatics actually believe it.
"The reality of wave function collapse has always been debated...Note also that the physical significance ascribed to the wave function varies from interpretation to interpretation, and even within an interpretation, such as the Copenhagen Interpretation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavefunction_collapse
If this is the case--that this is something that is debated, has numerous interpretations of the facts, and is not at all considered absolute within science, I wonder how you can so strongly pick a side and state is like it's absolute fact, when it's not known to be. Facts are one thing, but in the case of this subject, there are many different interpretations. By picking a side, you entitle yourself to denounce those who interpret it a different way, demonizing them with good/bad, right/wrong thinking made of judgment, which is no longer about fact.
These are the various interpretations according to wikipedia, alone. And we know wikipedia only touches the surface of subjects:
-the Copenhagen interpretation
-the so-called transactional interpretation
-in a "spiritual interpretation" in which consciousness causes collapse.
-interpretations based on consistent histories
-the many-worlds interpretation
-the Bohm interpretation
-the Ensemble Interpretation
"One of the paradoxes of quantum theory is that wave function seems to be more than just information (otherwise interference effects are hard to explain) and often less than real, since the collapse seems to take place faster-than-light and triggered by observers."
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Q: Now that's just disrespectful.
A: Now Q, we've rehearsed this.
Q: Sorry. I was supposed to ask 'what do you mean?' It's like that's all I ever get to ask.
A: I don't mean anything. Least of all disrespect. Interesting that Angelica didn't reply.
Q: Perhaps she considered it unworthy of reply?
A: She is Obedient, that is for sure.
Q: Now that's just disrespectful.
A: I don't think so.
Comments
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Argument does not do anything to the nature of reality.
Reality is not that which exists in your head, which seems to be what you are concerned for "letting be".
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I am not fighting an inner predisposition to your belief system. I'm sure everyone who arises at your mystical conclusions feels an inner desire or predisposition to that belief. That is not true for me, I do not need a fundamentally mystical explanation or theory in my life. What I need is a good solid theory that provides further explanations for the behavior and nature of human beings. A theory that is reproducable, adaptable, has evidence supporting it and has a null hypothesis. Determinism provides all of that stability in a theory of human nature. Indeterminism provides nothing but the personal gratification equivelant of the belief in the tooth fairy.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
The problem is with "inner resolutions" or intuition. Is that reality is often times counter-intuitive. I'm sure you believe the earth rotates around the sun and is round. That is all counter-intuitive. For if you try to feel the rotation of the earth you cannot and if you look at the horizon it appears flat. Do not be deceived by your "inner resolutions".
The reason I contribute so much energy is out of concern for social progress and mutual understanding of all human behavior. All I want is for people to stop using the black-box of free-will to halt further explanation, to end the causal chain and rest all blame on a single individual. It is harmful. It's absurd. The exact same logic that "proves" God is being employed to "prove" free-will. You call it "Inner resolution".
Don't you think it's a bit ironic that you make this claim, then in the very next post tell me to seek resolution within myself, i.e. within my head. First you say reality exists independently of what I think, then you tell me to use intuition to achieve a greater understanding of reality.
I have thoughts and I have opinions. I've mentioned, also within this thread, that they are valuable as tools, when we realize our thoughts and opinions are not the reality of our Being. By using our thoughts and opinions to serve the whole Being, we are harmonious. When we identify with our thoughts and our opinions, thinking they are us, that's when we get distorted.
I use different contexts depending on my purposes in each moment. In reality the objective/subjective exists in the whole. It is not actually split in two, putting one or the other in a vaccum like the human psyche tends to see it. I support everyone resolving the false duality between that which is within and that which is outside of us, in order to be realistic. People continue to see these concepts in a fragmented, separate fashion when the inner lenses are fragmented. When our inner conflicts are unresolved, we project our lack of resolution outside of us, onto the real world.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I did not tell you to seek resolution within yourself.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
For the record, any of the scientists you have presented info for, who are in the public eye, have gained their positions of power because they can focus on their agenda without infringing on others, and without crossing those lines. They have earned those positions of power by making the resolutions I refer to. As you can also someday do.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Angelica. That sounds incredibly self-centered, condescending and ignorant.
The 'I' in me is a pattern of what I know. It does not want to achieve ignorance, it wants to achieve understanding. You are terribly misguided by your intuition, dangerously so. This is not a matter of cognitive dissonance. I am not torn between mystical explanations and real observable and useful explanations.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I urge you to apply this thinking to yourself. You seem to be projecting on me your own flaws. Your post prior to this one is again in direct conflict with this post. This is the second time you've contradicted yourself.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
That was a self-fulfilling prophecy, parlor tricks, mind games. Nothing more. It certainly reflects the shallow nature of your illusions and the strong emotional attachment you have to them.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Are you on drugs?
My whole point is that I don't make assumptions about what I don't know. I don't base my knowledge on intuition because of the potential fallaciousness of doing so. You on the other hand feel a need to have a complete understanding, you erroneously fill-in the parts you don't know intuitively.
So that is it? It's about the "audience"? This is a social endevour for you to prop your ego up on a higher ground?
Think about this statement, really think about it. Look at all the finger pointing you've done. The self-projection onto me. See the irony.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
-- it is the part of us that we relate to, that we think is who we are.
-- this tiny part that we relate to is merely the tip of the whole iceberg of who we are.
-- The ego is the interface between all of who we are, and reality.
When people align with the ego only--with what they are conscious of at any give time--and overlook the unconscious that powers all of our actions, we are out of touch with our power, or unempowered. This creates our human problems, and when people turn the finger outside, and blame others for their problems, they show they are in the grips of the ego, rather than integrated within. This is "normal" at this time. It is a small percentage of people who overcome this and become integrated.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
As for the "audience", the audience judges individuals on what they say and do, not for what others attribute to them.
When I'm in a positive flow and being responsible, I would be very happy if your words were in anyway encouraging others to take a deeper look at what I'm saying. It can be influential.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
What if they had an Ego, and nobody came?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I'm familiar with teh relevant particle/wave duality thing. I was also thinking that it was utter crap to relate that in some way to consciousness. ]I frequently run across people using valid statments in an invalid context yto appear superior.
It's interesting that an anaesthesiologist purports to understand cnsciousness when it is a well recognised failing that we do ont yet understand how anaesthetic agents really work or to put it another way, how we induce unconsciousness deliberately. That would be a good starting point to understanding consciousness, certainly a lot easier to model than producing consciousness.
"The reality of wave function collapse has always been debated...Note also that the physical significance ascribed to the wave function varies from interpretation to interpretation, and even within an interpretation, such as the Copenhagen Interpretation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavefunction_collapse
If this is the case--that this is something that is debated, has numerous interpretations of the facts, and is not at all considered absolute within science, I wonder how you can so strongly pick a side and state is like it's absolute fact, when it's not known to be. Facts are one thing, but in the case of this subject, there are many different interpretations. By picking a side, you entitle yourself to denounce those who interpret it a different way, demonizing them with good/bad, right/wrong thinking made of judgment, which is no longer about fact.
These are the various interpretations according to wikipedia, alone. And we know wikipedia only touches the surface of subjects:
-the Copenhagen interpretation
-the so-called transactional interpretation
-in a "spiritual interpretation" in which consciousness causes collapse.
-interpretations based on consistent histories
-the many-worlds interpretation
-the Bohm interpretation
-the Ensemble Interpretation
"One of the paradoxes of quantum theory is that wave function seems to be more than just information (otherwise interference effects are hard to explain) and often less than real, since the collapse seems to take place faster-than-light and triggered by observers."
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Q: Now that's just disrespectful.
A: Now Q, we've rehearsed this.
Q: Sorry. I was supposed to ask 'what do you mean?' It's like that's all I ever get to ask.
A: I don't mean anything. Least of all disrespect. Interesting that Angelica didn't reply.
Q: Perhaps she considered it unworthy of reply?
A: She is Obedient, that is for sure.
Q: Now that's just disrespectful.
A: I don't think so.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.