Single-mindedness

[Keep Relentless]

Before analysing further on concepts of existence and the universe (and through them God and all physical things), it is necessary to address objective existence, personal existence, and mental conceptualisation.
It seems, through asserting that God may exist with the definition of the monotheistic religions, that we are baselessly assuming that there is objective existence.
That is, that there is physical existence independent of the living being.
We are assuming that what never affects the individual in any way actually exists.

It has been theorised that there are other universes that ours may not interact with and vice versa, and a common way of visualising it is to imagine these universes as soap bubbles that may not interact.
Imagine now that every single living being is in its own soap bubble.
Perhaps they can interact, but they are still separated by an entire realm of existence.
Your realm is independent of all others and so, since your realm is the only one present to you, there are no other realms.
This separation is due to the fact that each apparently conscious being has its own mind and each mind is entirely separated and therefore non-existent to each other one.
The common consensus is that there is the state of existence independent of all beings, that all beings exist through this network of existence, and that each being has its own state of existence which is a by-product of its mind and its senses in interpreting the true or objective state of everything.
In our bubble analogy, each mind is in a separate bubble and the objective state of things is the room of bubbles (or should that be planet of bubbles, at the very least?)
While in some theoretical, abstract and irrelevant sense this is possible, in reality (a reality which also works in theory and logic), as each mind is distinct, the only existence at all is personal.
This means that nobody and nothing is alive but YOU, the self-aware individual, that existence began when your life was born, that existence only exists through you, that it has the potential to cease when you die.
All of existence simply is without any true explanation whether you will choose to perceive the world as it is or choose to acknowledge that which isn't there to you, and therefore is not there at all.
There is a clash here, and it rests solely upon your personal method of understanding and distinction.
It can basically be summarized in whether you will answer yes or no to this question: If something does not exist for you, does it exist at all?
This question may possibly go above and beyond all conceptions of rationality and logic, but if emotions are abandoned sufficiently in the process of decision-making, a very rare gift, the answer is a clear no, and the magnitude of it is an awakening.
As long as you live in your own bubble, that bubble is everything, there are no others and there is nothing objective.
Compassion is the emotion that allows the sense that the answer may be yes.
As we recognize others as apparently conscious, we are nudged by our compassionate nature to empathise as best we can with "their world".
Empathy and all feelings, while often incredibly beneficial or even vital to our happiness (the ultimate goal in life), are largely determined through experience and always change judgement in decision-making, very often for the worse, being far less successful in changing the apparently external to suit us than reason.
Reason does not reject feelings, but makes use of them rather than letting them control the individual and their outlook.
Compassion, being an unreliable product of our make-up, does not change the answer to the previous question.
Compassion is therefore necessary only in its capacity to bring the individual happiness.
Beyond this capacity it is harmful, wasteful, dangerous, unnecessary and far worse than useless.
For the mind we sacrifice ourselves for is not there.

If this outlook is recognized, co-operation will not be.
Under this outlook, the question "Does God exist?", as God is defined monotheistically, is no, as God did not create existence (you). It may exist as the ruler of existence, however, but is not alive (nothing is but you).

[Keep Relentless]

Please, attack these ideas rationally and mercilessly

[austintorn@aol.com]

We are truly separated from each other in our own consciousnesses, a lonely kind of state sometimes, since Vulcan mind-melding is not yet achievable, so that's why we seek out companionship, forums, and other groups, which, ironically, kind of form us much further, thus making the total self a product of everything.

[austintorn@aol.com]

We know that there is something 'out there', externally, beyond our internals, since we utilize material from out there to make things out there that operate out there.

[austintorn@aol.com]

We have to emphasize with others plights since we have mirror neurons that act through what we see. This is how we learn things. When a monkey's mirror neurons act through seeing another monkey digging up a potato from the ground then he learns to do it, too.

[austintorn@aol.com]

Why do we not eat all the scarce food, feeling the other’s hunger? Why are moods contagious? Why do we feel the wish to dance when we see another doing so? Why do I feel your pain when you cut your finger? Why might I get an itch when you scratch yours? How are you “out there” felt by me “in here”? How do your acts become mine, and my acts become yours? Mirror neurons!

Using very thin electrodes, experimenters measured the activity of a single neuron of the premotor cortex in a monkey grasping a peanut. Amazingly, a bit later, an experimenter grasped a peanut—and the same monkey neuron activated merely by watching. This was the beginning of explaining vicarious feelings—the mirroring of others’ behaviors. It seems that free will is not so impregnable; each time I witness your movements, you permeate my stronghold.

It extends to sounds, sensations, and emotions, as well, and so we can feel all of those inside of us, as if we were in another’s shoes. These brain circuits blur the bright line between your experiences and mine. Without these mirror neurons there could have been no learning; but, it goes beyond that and onto intuitive altruism. In many places in the world, people tend to share the wealth. Of course, sometimes, our desire for benefits might outweigh our empathy.

In the military, the general is at a distance that separates him or her from the suffering that their armies cause. The same for weapons that kill at a distance—empathy can then be bypassed in the service of efficiency. Otherwise, it is “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.

Each time we see an action, our mirror neurons mimic and transform this sight into the motor commands necessary to replicate the action; however, a neural gate blocks the immediate output of our motor areas. Behind this gate, we can covertly share the actions of people around us. We feel them, and they thus become a part of our extended self. The brain is ethical by design. It was advantageous to know anothers needs.

[melanie]

We know that there is something 'out there', externally, beyond our internals, since we utilize material from out there to make things out there that operate out there.

Can we step into the 'out there' ?

[melanie]

We are truly separated from each other in our own consciousnesses, a lonely kind of state sometimes, since Vulcan mind-melding is not yet achievable, so that's why we seek out companionship, forums, and other groups, which, ironically, kind of form us much further, thus making the total self a product of everything.

Time for a song ......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ws9D...eature=related

[austintorn@aol.com]

Can we step into the 'out there' ?

Yes, we can walk through the air, feeling it, as re-presented internally.

[melanie]

Yes, we can walk through the air, feeling it, as re-presented internally.

Can we step out side the air?