False & True Philosophical Utopias...

[SB_UK]

nothing other than killing moneythe law the savage within matters

... ... ... the savage within killed

~by~

NaturalMoralityselection

[Lloyd Gillespie]

This Post to SteveA…
Illusions__Where’s Their Boundaries Between Reality & False Content…?
When we look into the clear night sky, we see the distant galaxies, or do we. Anyone who thinks we do is witnessing an illusion. Somewhere between here and there, a boundary exists in the fact that many of the distant galaxy’s stars have all burned out. So, what we actually see is a distant holographic universe. This, many know as true, but where to draw that line in our interpretations is a scientific choice, yet also a subjective choice, quite un-resolvable to many. I’m not going to even try to resolve it either. Now, this can easily create a fundamental illusion many end believing has been resolved by science, which it certainly has not. So, iff one chooses to believe facts about what they are looking at in the distant universe, they may very well be believing in an illusion, but the universe, herself, has no real illusions, or does it?

Boy, this can get tricky, so let’s limit our view to our closer realities. Yes, it is true it takes 8 minutes for light to travel from the sun to the earth, but most accept the fact of truly seeing and knowing the real sun is present. There’s not much dis-agreement here. Oh, there’s the occasional kook that wants to argue, but for practical purposes most agree to not dis-agree about this simple system of facts, even though all real objects can be represented by their relational qualities and quantities of contents and attributes. Simply put, all objects content and fields can be represented by a simple algebraic formula of X/X = 1 + IEE, or any object divided by itself to infinitesimals equals the one object plus its isomorphic extensions and entanglements, since it’s really only possible for us to break down the molecular structure that far in nuclear explosions, which we don’t often do. The fact of the object for all practical purposes is one object, containing the simple chemical and biological attributes most of us take for granted. Iff one wants extremely complex conversations to take place, one should premise the subjects with specific categories, so these ideas can be discussed sensibly, especially when they involve scientific as well as metaphysical properties and attributes…

Now, I’ll try to discuss some of your statements I had problems with, Steve, and some I agree with. I believe I have 21 in all. I’ve numbered them so you and others will know they are Steve’s, and my responses will be the letter A. I know this is a bit unfair to take out of context, but there was just too much to deal with whole, and much redundancy of knowns to most, including myself, but I’ll be as fair as possible…
1.I'm requiring that a common line of communication exist between all observations for any of these to be unified. This is a requirement in any branch of science as well as mind or thought etc. Two objects that exist in the same space (and yes, this can be a mathematical space) must share at least one property in common to remain within that common space.

A.I have no problem with the general gist of this statement, except the point that “I’m requiring” part of the statement. I don’t feel you have any right to require anything about anyone. What gives here? And the fact you mention about a common line of communication existing between all observations is obviously not necessary, unless you are using some special/private language, since all that’s needed is observation without communication. My observations are easily unified without communication, just by either external sight, or internal sight of the images/concepts involved. The common space property requirement is fine.

2.Free will depends upon the scale over which the information is viewed.

A.The degrees of free will is an old epistemic argument that’ll probably never be settled. Machiavelli stated that it was about 50% free will and 50% pre-determined will. I concur, though this can vary maybe 90% in either direction, with personality and action. So really, you’ve said the same thing.

3.Well how do you decide which things construct as beliefs that you do or do not happen to believe in?

A.That’s completely our free-will choice, iff we are totally aware of our full abilities of such free-will choice, where the possibility exists, as it does not exist in all cases. Iff acting within the rules of civil liberty, one should accept the golden mean, “Do no harm to others”, but obviously we live in societies where this is quite often ignored. BTW, Kant explained the universal law of liberty, mathematically, years ago, but few realize its simple a priori continuum math potential. (cont.)

[melanie]

Simply

*very* simply

- the ascent of man has been accompanied by an ascent of plane upon which we're anchored
- we're ascending to a
higher plane of consciousness

- this plane lies outside of our physical body

- the plane represents the global mind
- a single structure formed from the elevation of our mind into convergent end-form.

Our incremental path of self-discovery brings us full circle.

~*~

you guys!

End of time as we know it.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

To StevA...
4.Logical consequences of those decisions that can cause an appearance of an obstacle if they resulted in a paradox.
A.I already dealt with the paradox issue in the last post. Why add confusion where it’s not necessary?
5.That there really are no two physical things that are equal.
A.I’d like to see you prove that one…? There ain’t enough words and instruments in the world to do that… Venn diagrams…
6.I'm suggesting that there does exist a determinism, but it is infinite and that it actually constructs beliefs.
A.{False, as you are actually using the God Factor, and it’s not allowed in science; X/X=1+IEE} I do not agree that nature’s natural flow can be classed as determinism_that take’s purposeful will, and nature only has random to uniform evolutions_not determinate will_The God Factor again_Na Da…
7.This can be seen similar to a flow of energy through everything as time, but it can be wrapped, folded etc. into any form in any number of dimensions by differing conscious interpretations on how it's density is altered in space by this compression/superposition of elements within it
A.{Better read David’s posts for time and motion clarity}
8.Filter is part of causes the confusion.
A.Realists do not accept filters as valid science, ever…
9.Ultimately there are not really any limits to what is possible except for ones own limits.
A. {Ambiguities of your language choice are beyond belief} Try creating a replicator of worlds…?
10.I can't imagine anything that this mechanism could not be{meaning being,lg} (it fits any form of deterministic computation because it can also be interpreted as a serial computation.
A.When you can solve the 3 body problem that Perelman is working on, let me know. I’m friends with Dow Chemical’s head physicist. He and I have thoroughly discussed the limits of math and computations of all possible kinds. He also had to use Peirce’s gov. math solutions for his first job at Dow, figuring the entire weights of the complete elements of the earth’s atmosphere. Peirce had worked in these areas in the late 1800’s. He even is the one to suggest a meter of measurement be founded on a sodium light wave, for extreme accuracy. I have his geodesic work on my computer. You seem to put far too much faith in computational complexity’s abilities, that just are not true. That’s from my reading, anyway… It’s a long way between stating semantics and facts…
11.I think I went far enough and found that initial paradox and this is the only way I can think of to untangle it and it has to allow for everything (that I can think of)).
A.Are there bits of cheese, for the mice in the sun?

12.Consciousness was involved the entire time even if that involvement had not grown to or retained a state of memory to the present.
A.Consciousness without a memory field_Kinda cheating nature, ain’t ya?
13.We see events and then try to understand the relationships after the fact as to what caused what.
A.Steve, not all people try to figure causes. I’m one of them. I just let the ideas come to me. I don’t care what causes what, I care how logic can solve/un-cause the world’s over-whelming problems. Causes are just obvious to me, sorry…

14.This reordering is similar to swapping elements along this chain of experience and it's the fundamental process by which any form of computation can proceed.
A.Where computation is capable of proceeding. Here’s a quote of mine: “There exists no mind or machine, sufficiently powerful, to process finity and infinity, simultaneously.” It’s just a simple axiom of the Turing problem…

15.This reordering of events and constructing it into forms is a subjective molding of it that can't be objectively described - people have been trying to explain time for quite a while and it's only when you allow for subjectivity in time that things being to fall into place.
A.Can’t be objectively described cause it don’t happen like that. We objectively construct concepts, as a concept is an object within our feeble little pea brains. We see them_We change them_We know them_OBJECTIVELY_I build a house in my mind_I see and know all the parts objectively, even if internal_Peirce taught this 100 yrs. ago. Not all internal actions are subjective. Subjective is a non-conceptual emotional state, which is actually an abstracted state of any one or all of our 5 objective senses, i.e., we can’t conceive the vision/concept of the pure state of happy, only its visual attributes of physical actions_that’s SUBJECTIVE, but we perceive the feeling. You seem to have a few invalid ascriptions in your thinking process. Best let Peirce be the doctor… Really, we’ve all got skeletons in our closets…
16.I also said that illusions are real. It's really about misperceptions - believing that what one sees "out there" is truly what other things also see "out there".
A.What ta devil does [other things also see “out there”] mean? Have ya gone alien on us…?

17.The rules of construction
A.{complex axioms are usually false} I do not accept very many axioms as valid. I’m a mathematical skeptic beyond what can be related to geometry_something I can physically show by some sort of table, graph or diagram/image…
18.Predetermination fails to provide an explaination for the appearance of free will.
A.{Agreed} No, not agreed. Predetermination is God Factor again_Na Da
19.I tend to believe that the random and purposeless version won't remain a satisfactory explaination{Needs clearer distinctions, lg} and that it's largely just a dodge in trying to explain the complexity.
A.{Major dis-agreement here} And here we have major differences, as I put far less faith in complexities being solved by computation than you. We can generally compute aggregate quantities to solve complexity problems loosely, but to compute all of complexity’s problems is ludicrous. The chemist and biologists have clearly shown this, and it’s why the greatest physicists have used so much statistical probability math, but they full well realize its very limited state. Other physicists and mathematicians, etc., use the ergodic theorem, which all know failed to pan out last Sept. `08. Paul Davidson warned about the ergodic problem in math for years, but the fools didn’t listen_now where are we financially…? I’ll take aggregate probabilities, thank you…
20.We could also call these changes illusions.
A.{That doesn’t make the greater reality an illusion}

21.One version is considered to be real and the other not - in a sense both are real in that the lines did appear curved but they also appeared straight - the paradox is resolved once the manner in which these two different contexts arose and that's often called an illusion


A.A simple optical illusion is not a paradox…
A.Next time, short posts please, or I’m not responding, except tartly…

[melanie]

is not a paradox

Where is space?
It is in Awareness... and while it has no location, all that has location appears in it.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Where is space?
It is in Awareness... and while it has no location, all that has location appears in it.

Hey Melanie, who appointed you god...? Don't you realize how ridiculous that sounds? You should be ashamed of your-self, to commit such harm to your-self in a public forum_You should be arrested, and taken to the cheese factory.

You've god-like given a name and attributes to the universe, that's far beyond your scientific abilities to know__Realize, this is a scientific thread_ideas must at the least be close to science_not in the ozones of Loony-Ville. Can you also name the newest mouse, living in the sun?

[melanie]

Hey Melanie, who appointed you god...? Don't you realize how ridiculous that sounds? You should be ashamed of your-self, to commit such harm to your-self in a public forum_You should be arrested, and taken to the cheese factory.

You've god-like given a name and attributes to the universe, that's far beyond your scientific abilities to know__Realize, this is a scientific thread_ideas must at the least be close to science_not in the ozones of Loony-Ville. Can you also name the newest mouse, living in the sun?

I am not god, God was created by the mind of man, an imaginary concept,
before man there was no-thing, and no God...just this

This immediate self-shining, luminous display of IS-ness belonging to noone.

Science is also a creation of the mind, lets just say, if the left hand side of the brain was to go offline all that would remain is pure unadulterated naked Reality

how could i be ashamed of myself, how can i commit harm to myself when i do not exist.
I am in this world but not of it, you see...whoops there goes another paradox!

I've only got one foot in this loony bin.
I am animation itself, neither this nor that, both and yet neither.

I do not have to include science in my theory, it's already (T)here...No-where & NOWhere Apparently!

PS..Wanted dead or alive-----God

For crimes against humanity ....don't faint.

PPS.. your posts are way too long, and way too wordy, and way too complicated to understand.

Didn't you know.....there is nothing to understand.

[Mikal]

~*~

Existentialism, dissociation, escapism, schizophrenia, freedom from our mortal coil
- all the same.

All relating to our own polar shift
- our own imminent eversion

- our own imminent eversion
- to accompany the eversion in our planet
- in our planet's magnetic N-S conformational context.

More details below.

~*~


Just thoughts

escapist (boredom,fear)
existentialism (intellectual)
freedom - a state of mind

1.schizophrenia
+ mind
2.escapist
+ mind
3.existentialism
+mind
4.freedom (a state of mind)

The local mind is attempting to connect to a global structure which lies outside of our physical body.
(cf the chakra ascent + kundalini)

The imminent planetary eversion is resulting in our essential magnetic 'self' being drawn towards an everted sense of itself -
a disorientating sensation which grows ever more discernible with strength of mind.

A peculiar inside-out~of~body pull.

We have a magnetic dipole within us -
- basal and apical

which is readying itself to flip
- much as the planet will soon experience a magnetic polar shift.

The prediction is that post magnetic pole shift, we'll observe a decrease in schizophrenia-like symptoms

- though where one would have thought that ... ...
... ... wouldn't one expect that unless the Stage II structure of mind (stable to eversion is formed) ... ... ...

... ... won't the metamodel web (Stage II of mind) maintain its integrity post-eversion ?
- kinda' like a spider's web blown one way and then the other.

)
<

~*~

Post summary
We're approaching a planetary pole shift -
- Northern and Southern hemispheres are about to switch places

The reduction in planetary magnetic dipole
- readying itself for eversion

- is having an effect on us (our mind) (our experiential perspective through mind
of
life).

Our minds are feeling the 'pull' to freedom
- where a clear mind (balanced logical structure of mind) is going to prove necessary in maintaining
a
clear
head.

Balanced logical structure of mind -
stability in the face of local magnetic disruption.

Balanced logical structure of mind -
- steadying our feet

helping to keep both of our feet on planet Earth
- feet firmly rooted to the floor

- of course of course of course metaphorically.

~*~

Presumably any imbalance in the structural integrity (to be imagined as a poor, lop-sided, poorly pruned tree) of local minds prior to eversion will give the individual the feeling
as we approach polar shift
- that feeling of
descent into madness
presented in the movie 'Event Horizon'
and
the mini-series 'Lexxx'.

~*~

The mind is coming to an end with the decree that post-eversion, all of the elements of mind which aren't compatible with the group structure
will
simply
be
sheared
off.

Not Occam's razor -
- this 'cutting device' of effective omnipotence (God if you will).

Hi SB...pertaining to the last of your post here (B) this is what the Mayan Elders have said.....

"We are at the crossroads of 'integrity' vs 'self-centeredness, greed, and lust for dominance."

I experienced the Kundalini process and energy in 1994...I've already had the Polar Shift...I survived so there is hope as more knowledge comes out by virtue of our necessity to be genuinely honest about what we are experiencing and our willingness to share our life knowledge....


Regards Mikal

[Mikal]

Yes, I definitely got lucky in that respect

Then again, figuring out how to keep everyone fed and housed etc. can be a challenge too.

Now consider if all these things were gone - no childbirth, no children, no people to feed or take care of etc. which would you choose?

If you want those things, but you want them better - what is that better precisely and how could they be better (again, recognize that similar to my previous post, if this "better" is something that really isn't know in any precise way, then any solution to it will not have a precise effect) *here's a little pause to consider that* ... No fair reading ahead ... You got some ideas? Ok, now do you think that would truly make it better or are you overlooking some things? ... *Insert another pause here* ... ... Did you truly figure out to make all these things better?

If you did, then congratulations. You may have hit upon something great ... if you didn't, then still congratulations because it's also great moving toward a better understanding of how things are related and what things could be on the inside that need fixing first before things on the outside can be made better.

If you didn't do any of this, then that's also fine but consider that without change, things will stay the same - if that's also fine, great, but personally I'm not there yet, though I can at see a pathway that can get there and that's the beauty to me

Hi Steve....

No Children???? End of our civilization. A force greater than us would dispose of our civilization. It more than likely has to do with those words..."go forth and multiply"....

Regards Mikal

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Didn't you know.....there is nothing to understand.

From the ridiculous to the absurd... Short enough...