In everything I do ....

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Jamesh » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:37 pm

The pieces/parts analysis of time goes like this:

Any instance of time has duration.
We may speak of the age of the universe or the time it takes for light to traverse the diameter of a proton-each segment of time has a duration such that its beginning is not simultaneous with its end.


You need to understand that within my ever evolving theory I do not use the term time in that fashion.

That side of Time, the normal way of looking at it, is a purpose driven measurement of the interrelationship of certain things.

With my view I take the broadest possible approach, so I take away all things. What is left then is causality. The point is that causality is only possible when it occurs over time. It is the action of causality that allows for measured time, but there is still the time that allows for causality to "be active" in the first place.

Causality is dependent on both time and things, which also incidentally means that causality can at least have a partial explanation.

While, Things, are dependent on causality and time, this then implies that Time is dependent on things and causality. It is when you look at time as you do.

So there are two things to note here:

a) The degree of interdependence of Time, Things and Causality indicates that that they attributes of the one thing. Thus they are not primary, not absolute in themselves, but caused.

b) There is more than one way to look at any concept. We can describe Things as both having finiteness (it allows reality to be partialised) and infiniteness (we know it is not finite). We can describe causality as if it were a cause or an effect.

The same applies to time. You are viewing it only as an effect, a measurable thingness. Where as I validly use it in its causal sense.

The missing factor in the above is space, which is also a caused attribute of reality.

In looking at time as also being a cause, then one can properly explore its causal potential -as in what effects could it create, which is what I am exploring with my theory.

Using Time as a cause allows me to unite everything together, and does not conflict with science as science explores the various relationships between things.

The onewayness of time, Times Arrow, is vitally important. All things interact in a dualistic fashion, it’s a two way equalisation street. Causal-Time does not work that way. It has no opposite side. As a cause it is "outside" of things. That is because it precedes things, only when it "is in the initial place in the causal chain, and thereafter" can causality occur and thingness gradually evolve.


The mere act of eternal expansion automatically creates space (as Aether or dimension holder) and changeable space (which involves into things) for the universe - Causalities content.

The mere act of eternal expansion automatically creates a power source for the universe - Causalities action.

Well, that’s as far as I got in response. Will I finish the rest of your post, probably not. no point if you cannot agree with the above.
User avatar
Jamesh
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Dennis Mahar » Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:07 pm

Are you giving Time absolute existence?

I see you are not.
Time depends on human being as far as we know..
Whatever depends lacks inherent existence
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Whatshappening » Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:18 am

David Quinn wrote:
Whatshappening wrote:"The presence of the glob, or the plumb bob, represents an infinite number of absent conditions." That's an assumption, would you provide a logical proof?

When causal conditions produce a green glob in the sky (itself a causal condition), they do not produce a brown chair there (i.e. an absent condition is produced), nor do they produce a fingernail, nor a tree, nor a proton, nor a kidney, nor a written mathematical equation, nor a .... and so on ad infinitum.


Secondly, the claim is inconsistent with experience. Lets go back to plumbing the square post. If what you said is true then there must be an infinite number of out of plumb conditions. Which isn't true, the absence of plumb condition can only occur within 90 degrees(on any particular side). That's not infinite, that's all that's possible.

If you break the plumbing equipment into pieces, there is an out of plumb condition. If a giant bird comes along and plucks it away, there is an out of plumb condition. If it gets swallowed up by a black hole, there is an out of plumb condition .... and so on ad infinitum.


The problem I have with infinite is that it invokes ideas of lack of limits. Reality isn't like that, it has all sorts of limits. The most notable being, only that which is possible has a chance to manifest. The impossible never happens, or at least I've never seen it.

True, things like square circles and married bachelors can never manifest, but that still leaves room for countless possible things to manifest. Reality does contain various limits, but it also has its infinities as well. A single object can be viewed in countless different ways from countless different perspectives; our minds can mentally divide the object into countless different parts in countless different ways.

And reality itself, as a whole, can have no limits since it embraces utterly everything. There can never be a point where reality ends and something else begins.


P.S. Regarding reality responding ...you said you had some ideas. I would really appreciate hearing them first. I'm curious how easily the concept can be understood without the anthropic bias. I'm trying to learn something, so if you're willing to play ...

I've already alluded to my ideas about it. The scenario is causality at play. Countless causal conditions coming together - causal conditions involving how the father came to be there just at that point, how the child came to be there, how the car came to be there, how the road came to be there, how the atoms in the road came to be there, how gravity came to be there, etc, etc, etc - countless causal conditions coming together to produce an event which, in Nature's eyes, carries no significance whatsoever.

-


" nor a written mathematical equation, nor a .... and so on ad infinitum." That statement is not a logical proof, it's a list with the word ad infinitum added.

"If you break the plumbing equipment into pieces", the tool is irrelevant.

"And reality itself, as a whole, can have no limits since it embraces utterly everything. There can never be a point where reality ends and something else begins." You're contradicting yourself, "never" is a limit. Too messy for me. (A rule that leads to the ridiculous is probably ridiculous)

I know infinities exist (mathematics) but they exist within. I'll explain, whenever I build a building it's with specific dimensions. In other words I produce a finite building.

However within that finite building there exists an infinity. I could take an infinite amount of measurements. That being the case does not mean the building, itself, is no longer finite.

Infinity in the case of the building is an incidental condition. Developing structural conclusions based on incidental conditions is putting the cart before the horse.

Reality is everything, "never" is a limit. Limit is inescapable. Just like absence of condition is condition, it's inescapable.

Inescapable
Gary
Whatshappening
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:18 am

Whatshappening wrote:
David Quinn wrote:
Whatshappening wrote:"The presence of the glob, or the plumb bob, represents an infinite number of absent conditions." That's an assumption, would you provide a logical proof?

When causal conditions produce a green glob in the sky (itself a causal condition), they do not produce a brown chair there (i.e. an absent condition is produced), nor do they produce a fingernail, nor a tree, nor a proton, nor a kidney, nor a written mathematical equation, nor a .... and so on ad infinitum.


Secondly, the claim is inconsistent with experience. Lets go back to plumbing the square post. If what you said is true then there must be an infinite number of out of plumb conditions. Which isn't true, the absence of plumb condition can only occur within 90 degrees(on any particular side). That's not infinite, that's all that's possible.

If you break the plumbing equipment into pieces, there is an out of plumb condition. If a giant bird comes along and plucks it away, there is an out of plumb condition. If it gets swallowed up by a black hole, there is an out of plumb condition .... and so on ad infinitum.


The problem I have with infinite is that it invokes ideas of lack of limits. Reality isn't like that, it has all sorts of limits. The most notable being, only that which is possible has a chance to manifest. The impossible never happens, or at least I've never seen it.

True, things like square circles and married bachelors can never manifest, but that still leaves room for countless possible things to manifest. Reality does contain various limits, but it also has its infinities as well. A single object can be viewed in countless different ways from countless different perspectives; our minds can mentally divide the object into countless different parts in countless different ways.

And reality itself, as a whole, can have no limits since it embraces utterly everything. There can never be a point where reality ends and something else begins.


P.S. Regarding reality responding ...you said you had some ideas. I would really appreciate hearing them first. I'm curious how easily the concept can be understood without the anthropic bias. I'm trying to learn something, so if you're willing to play ...

I've already alluded to my ideas about it. The scenario is causality at play. Countless causal conditions coming together - causal conditions involving how the father came to be there just at that point, how the child came to be there, how the car came to be there, how the road came to be there, how the atoms in the road came to be there, how gravity came to be there, etc, etc, etc - countless causal conditions coming together to produce an event which, in Nature's eyes, carries no significance whatsoever.

-


" nor a written mathematical equation, nor a .... and so on ad infinitum." That statement is not a logical proof, it's a list with the word ad infinitum added.

"If you break the plumbing equipment into pieces", the tool is irrelevant.

"And reality itself, as a whole, can have no limits since it embraces utterly everything. There can never be a point where reality ends and something else begins." You're contradicting yourself, "never" is a limit. Too messy for me. (A rule that leads to the ridiculous is probably ridiculous)

I know infinities exist (mathematics) but they exist within. I'll explain, whenever I build a building it's with specific dimensions. In other words I produce a finite building.

However within that finite building there exists an infinity. I could take an infinite amount of measurements. That being the case does not mean the building, itself, is no longer finite.

Infinity in the case of the building is an incidental condition. Developing structural conclusions based on incidental conditions is putting the cart before the horse.

Reality is everything, "never" is a limit. Limit is inescapable. Just like absence of condition is condition, it's inescapable.

Inescapable
Gary


In your mind, yes. I'd say it's more like putting the horse 'somewhere' relating to a cart. The building is finite to your sense of measurement, assuming infinite recursive sets of bits don't exist; you want to use some numbers and reject others without a basis, why?
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:25 am

Jamesh wrote:
The pieces/parts analysis of time goes like this:

Any instance of time has duration.
We may speak of the age of the universe or the time it takes for light to traverse the diameter of a proton-each segment of time has a duration such that its beginning is not simultaneous with its end.


You need to understand that within my ever evolving theory I do not use the term time in that fashion.

That side of Time, the normal way of looking at it, is a purpose driven measurement of the interrelationship of certain things.

With my view I take the broadest possible approach, so I take away all things. What is left then is causality. The point is that causality is only possible when it occurs over time. It is the action of causality that allows for measured time, but there is still the time that allows for causality to "be active" in the first place.

Causality is dependent on both time and things, which also incidentally means that causality can at least have a partial explanation.

While, Things, are dependent on causality and time, this then implies that Time is dependent on things and causality. It is when you look at time as you do.

So there are two things to note here:

a) The degree of interdependence of Time, Things and Causality indicates that that they attributes of the one thing. Thus they are not primary, not absolute in themselves, but caused.

b) There is more than one way to look at any concept. We can describe Things as both having finiteness (it allows reality to be partialised) and infiniteness (we know it is not finite). We can describe causality as if it were a cause or an effect.

The same applies to time. You are viewing it only as an effect, a measurable thingness. Where as I validly use it in its causal sense.

The missing factor in the above is space, which is also a caused attribute of reality.

In looking at time as also being a cause, then one can properly explore its causal potential -as in what effects could it create, which is what I am exploring with my theory.

Using Time as a cause allows me to unite everything together, and does not conflict with science as science explores the various relationships between things.

The onewayness of time, Times Arrow, is vitally important. All things interact in a dualistic fashion, it’s a two way equalisation street. Causal-Time does not work that way. It has no opposite side. As a cause it is "outside" of things. That is because it precedes things, only when it "is in the initial place in the causal chain, and thereafter" can causality occur and thingness gradually evolve.


The mere act of eternal expansion automatically creates space (as Aether or dimension holder) and changeable space (which involves into things) for the universe - Causalities content.

The mere act of eternal expansion automatically creates a power source for the universe - Causalities action.

Well, that’s as far as I got in response. Will I finish the rest of your post, probably not. no point if you cannot agree with the above.


Time is the contrast between energy states, as a 'somehow' geometrically applied probabilities per locals as speed. Time is forwards because of entropy.
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:26 am

We could perhaps concieve these as pockets with variable flows to one another.

Pockets to pockets, pockets with holes in different parts.
Last edited by mental vagrant on Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Dennis Mahar » Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:41 am

Time is the contrast between energy states, as a 'somehow' geometrically applied probabilities per locals as speed. Time is forwards because of entropy.


Does time have independent, objective existence?
Is it 'part' of human being?

Is a planet orbiting a star in a far off galaxy measuring time?

Time is human?

Is time 'mind-stuff'?

Does 'time' exist only in relation to sentience?

Is it a set-up?
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Whatshappening » Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:04 am

Reality is everything, "never" is a limit. Limit is inescapable. Just like absence of condition is condition, it's inescapable.

Inescapable
Gary[/quote]

In your mind, yes. I'd say it's more like putting the horse 'somewhere' relating to a cart. The building is finite to your sense of measurement, assuming infinite recursive sets of bits don't exist; you want to use some numbers and reject others without a basis, why?[/quote]

How am I supposed to take you seriously? When I think about your (above) comments, I see a tendency to overlook the obvious. Think about what you said and what I could infer. (By the way, I re...semble your remark, thank you.)

Re...semble
Gary
Whatshappening
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:04 pm

What is the obvious and how can you know i've overlooked it.

Just because you can create syllogisms or whatever from some statements i've contributed, doesn't demonstrate a flaw in my thinking, but in yours.
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:30 pm

Dennis Mahar wrote:
Time is the contrast between energy states, as a 'somehow' geometrically applied probabilities per locals as speed. Time is forwards because of entropy.


Does time have independent, objective existence?
Is it 'part' of human being?

Is a planet orbiting a star in a far off galaxy measuring time?

Time is human?

Is time 'mind-stuff'?

Does 'time' exist only in relation to sentience?

Is it a set-up?


Measuring time obviously affects it. I doubt time is mind stuff, even if everything i know is me. Objects are modified by energy, i percieve them, i percieve myself, which is changing and knows moments and judges nuance. Unless you are saying i'm the only thing that exists, i don't see where you will go with that thinking, more, why write what i already know to myself, to you. I can't believe the universe is me alone. Sentience realises time and frankly, is times difference function.
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:34 pm

You are saying there is no starting point, gary? An infinity of all infinities. The totality of time, doesn't include the timeless parts. Is this what your saying.
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Glostik91 » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:13 am

I just read most of this thread, and god damn. David, you couldn't have said it any better. Excellent job.
If I have a mind, what has it?
Glostik91
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:13 am
Location: Iowa

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Whatshappening » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:17 am

We human beings have an interesting challenge. It seems ours is unique, only to be shared amongst ourselves. We have all sorts of them, some recognized, some not. The only one's we care about are the ones that matter to us, fortunately we care about a lot. To the extent of searching for life in the stars. It's obvious we want to understand, we want to know. We want to understand not just for the sake of knowing, but so we can deal with our challenges...successfully.

Challenges that are unique to our condition. Ours differs from all other life on this planet. Our level of self awareness is orders of magnitude different. Providing an enabling condition common to our species. Enabling is existential, ours is an existential challenge, but is it unique? In some ways it has to be,living on planet Earth has it's challenges, whereas another planet (x) would have it's own, with, potentially, dramatically different conditions e,g, abundant resources, less gravity, less competition. All variables that affect us existentially. Especially that gravity thing, on earth gravity kills.

The differences are one thing but what about the similarities. Could the minds on planet X and the minds on planet earth develop the same cognitive model of reality? A cognitive model or mind set that, without bias, recognizes or acknowledges reality and our relationship to it. However If we know their conditions are dramatically different, the superficial answer would be no. But hang on a sec, couldn't any similarly minded creature located anywhere recognize reality and their relationship to it. Sure it can but whether it will or not, well who knows.

"In everything I(we) do, reality responds accordingly", is a mind set, a cognitive model, that recognizes and acknowledges reality and our relationship to it. The "I" part is you, the "do" part is relationship (the only way through which we get things done). The "reality" part is everything else besides you and relationship. Think about it, isn't that what's happening. Think about without your anthropic bias, isn't that what's going on.

That mind set rests on 3 concepts, all similarly minded creatures in any circumstance could recognize to help with their existential challenges. It's something we all have in common. Fortunately, it accurately simplifies the challenge, all that's left is learning and some action. There's only three places to look, you, reality, your relationship to it, and only one place to behave.

Alex...these are the things I've learnt, these are what I'm growing, expanding and acting upon. Please anybody, help learn in these areas, objectively.

Objective
Gary

P.S. The concept "accordingly" is a characteristic of reality, belonging in that category.
Whatshappening
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Whatshappening » Fri Feb 17, 2012 12:06 am

mental vagrant wrote:You are saying there is no starting point, gary? An infinity of all infinities. The totality of time, doesn't include the timeless parts. Is this what your saying.


"Form follows function" is a common part of construction, it's not always the case but generally true. They are distinct concepts that often get confused.

Time is but one of many functions within reality. For your cognitive sake be clear regarding form and function, your ability to understand reality depends on it.

For example, "reality is never absent" is a logically true statement addressing form, not function.

Function
Gary
Whatshappening
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Dennis Mahar » Mon Feb 20, 2012 2:50 am

"Form follows function" is a common part of construction, it's not always the case but generally true. They are distinct concepts that often get confused. [quote][/quote]

What is a box?

Some pieces of wood are put together in a particular way to give a certain form or shape.
Then it is called a box. Suppose the box is taken apart and its parts are put together again to give the form of a bench. Now it is not a box. People call it a bench.
The shape changes the name and concept.
If you called the bench a box you would be called a liar.

How did the box come about?

The constructor imagined it.

The pieces of wood are not the box.
The box is the name for the form produced by the arrangement of the pieces of timber.

The form is what he imagined.

Ultimately the box is a concept.

Similarly, bench, chair, house, mountain, man, god, angel and such are concepts.

Such is the nature of mind.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby movingalways » Mon Feb 20, 2012 6:49 am

Dennis: Such is the nature of mind.


The human mind thinks "box." Is The Totality or The Everything human? No.
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1743
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Dennis Mahar » Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:25 am

Wood is a concept.

An analysis of wood discloses a gathering of molecules.

Molecules is a concept.

An analysis of molecules discloses a gathering of atoms.

Atom is a concept.

An analysis of atoms discloses a gathering of neutrons, protons, electrons.

Are we there yet?

Is human a conceptual construct?
Is existance a conceptual construct?
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Mon Feb 20, 2012 6:39 pm

Whatshappening wrote:
mental vagrant wrote:You are saying there is no starting point, gary? An infinity of all infinities. The totality of time, doesn't include the timeless parts. Is this what your saying.


"Form follows function" is a common part of construction, it's not always the case but generally true. They are distinct concepts that often get confused.

Time is but one of many functions within reality. For your cognitive sake be clear regarding form and function, your ability to understand reality depends on it.

For example, "reality is never absent" is a logically true statement addressing form, not function.

Function
Gary


Function is an interpretation of form, it's us giving purpose to stuff in a way that relates to our survival, understanding or somthing between.

I don't think i'm confusing the two, are you saying you have a deeper grasp (which remains insubstantial, for obvious reasons) on reality than i, based upon your assesment of what form and function are? This self cancels because by my definition of yours, you are real but you worship function. How can you separate the two? Do you listen to the noise, all of it?
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Mon Feb 20, 2012 6:46 pm

Dennis Mahar wrote:Wood is a concept.

An analysis of wood discloses a gathering of molecules.

Molecules is a concept.

An analysis of molecules discloses a gathering of atoms.

Atom is a concept.

An analysis of atoms discloses a gathering of neutrons, protons, electrons.

Are we there yet?

Is human a conceptual construct?
Is existance a conceptual construct?


Where does real include imaginary? What is learning? How do you separate types of learning; memories from realisation, perhaps you don't, could realisation be a function of self referential memory? Conciousnous, the advanced learning machine lost.
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Whatshappening » Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:16 am

mental vagrant wrote:You are saying there is no starting point, gary? An infinity of all infinities. The totality of time, doesn't include the timeless parts. Is this what your saying.


Here's the way I see it. Based on, only the possible has a chance of happening the impossible never does. It's an assumption, I'll admit. It's an assumption consistent with my experience. I've never seen the impossible, I've built a lot of stuff.

Lets go to that stuff building for review, because the "way I see it", not only includes my assumption, but experience as well. I am a fortunate person, my experience has been so close to the dirt. I can smell it even sitting here writing.

That's what I start with, every time I go to a new job site. Dirt and weeds that's all there is, it's my job to change that. It's my job to transform job site into structure. Structures you are working, learning, healing, consuming, shopping, pooping, drinking, governing, recreating, and living in. (I think I got them all)

Essentially the process is a transformation from what isn't into what is. I do that by connecting something(s) that already exists in a fashion( in a "relationship") that results in a new building. Sounds simple enough, and it is, once you know what you're doing.

Why is knowing important? How does that help, when all I'm doing is connecting. It's what I'm connecting where the challenge lays. They all have their own personality, if I let them run on their own I've got a mess("reality responding"), and won't get the building I'm intending to build.

I'm being general, but the point is simple. I need to know so I can avoid unwanted or negative conditions. I know negative conditions are possible. They happen, I've seen it with my own (lying) eyes.

So the "way I see it" based on the above, including assumption, is expressed as +1's, -1's and 0. Let me explain, when considering possibilities and impossibilities with conditions the expression seems accurately reflective(of reality). As I'm building I know both conditions (+1 or-1) are possible, those categories are real. The financial crisis is a -1 for most (99%).

There is, however, another category, yet to be discussed. 0 what's that. Fortunately, presumably, I operate based on, only certain things are possible. That by default creates the 0 category. It' a 0 because it represents the impossible.It's a 0 because it's empty. The impossible never has a chance to produce anything. The category itself is real, it's just empty, a 0.

Based on the law of possibility combined with experience the " way I see it" then, is expressed as +1's, 0, -1's. It seems like a, balanced mathematical equation, but, for me, this has nothing to do with math. I have no idea if +1's balance with -1's I can't think that big. It would be something, though, if there was balance(or would that eliminate energy).

In summary I'll make one more assumption. The expression +1's, 0, -1's is an unchangeable part of reality. Not much of an assumption, though. We operate, get stuff built, knowing this to be true. We work the one against the other while gaining comfort from the middle. While always remaining in the present.

Present
Gary

P.S. I'm just "saying"(MV) this is the "way I see it". If anyone has any corrections please don't hesitate. (From your own experience...Please:).
Whatshappening
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby jufa » Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:32 am

What you presented is a very good pattern of execution. However I do not see the beginning nor ending structure as a possibility, but a reality within the sub-conscious. All this is secondary from my point of view. To me the the entire format is initiated by thought, analyzed, then objectified in vision, and subjected by design. What is not included in all this is the unknown, which to me is the impossibility which cannot be a +1, -1, nor 0 until occurrence. Here again thought become the engineer.

What I am saying is from beginning to end thought is the visionary, the architect, builder, and finally the initiator which produce effect.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa


http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
jufa
 
Posts: 673
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Dennis Mahar » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:54 am

Mind and matter or,
physical and mental events are mutually dependent.
Neither is more real than the other.

there's a causal stream of physical process proceeding event by event, moving always.
there's a causal stream of mental process proceeding event by event, moving always.

Participatory.

The physical does not exist independent of conceptual designation.

'Box' cannot exist until conceptualised, nor without physical.

A mind that conceives of an electron,
that electron does not exist independently of that mind conceiving it,
that mind does not exist independently of that electron it conceives.
It's assumed that electron is retroactive, that there always were electrons.
The experience is electrons 'come into existence' at the instant a mind conceives it.

Today's world and equipment will soon be no more as mind imagines new possibilities for being.

600 years ago they were riding horses, lances poised, in jousting contests as an ordinary/ everyday event.
Who could have dreamed that shit up?

It all seems to be carried out in a mood that there's 'something at stake'...
very emotional, like a desparate bid for survival.

Can you hold the intricate web there in the mind's eye?
Get that detachment experience?
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby mental vagrant » Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:57 am

Dennis Mahar wrote:Mind and matter or,
physical and mental events are mutually dependent.
Neither is more real than the other.

there's a causal stream of physical process proceeding event by event, moving always.
there's a causal stream of mental process proceeding event by event, moving always.

Participatory.

The physical does not exist independent of conceptual designation.

'Box' cannot exist until conceptualised, nor without physical.

A mind that conceives of an electron,
that electron does not exist independently of that mind conceiving it,
that mind does not exist independently of that electron it conceives.
It's assumed that electron is retroactive, that there always were electrons.
The experience is electrons 'come into existence' at the instant a mind conceives it.

Today's world and equipment will soon be no more as mind imagines new possibilities for being.

600 years ago they were riding horses, lances poised, in jousting contests as an ordinary/ everyday event.
Who could have dreamed that shit up?

It all seems to be carried out in a mood that there's 'something at stake'...
very emotional, like a desparate bid for survival.

Can you hold the intricate web there in the mind's eye?
Get that detachment experience?


It doesn't last long, untill distractions take over.
unbound
User avatar
mental vagrant
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Dennis Mahar » Tue Feb 21, 2012 5:27 am

It doesn't last long, untill distractions take over.


yeah,
mind and its objects.
spinning wheel.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: In everything I do ....

Postby Whatshappening » Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:21 pm

mental vagrant wrote:
Whatshappening wrote:
mental vagrant wrote:You are saying there is no starting point, gary? An infinity of all infinities. The totality of time, doesn't include the timeless parts. Is this what your saying.


"Form follows function" is a common part of construction, it's not always the case but generally true. They are distinct concepts that often get confused.

Time is but one of many functions within reality. For your cognitive sake be clear regarding form and function, your ability to understand reality depends on it.

For example, "reality is never absent" is a logically true statement addressing form, not function.

Function
Gary


Function is an interpretation of form, it's us giving purpose to stuff in a way that relates to our survival, understanding or somthing between.

I don't think i'm confusing the two, are you saying you have a deeper grasp (which remains insubstantial, for obvious reasons) on reality than i, based upon your assesment of what form and function are? This self cancels because by my definition of yours, you are real but you worship function. How can you separate the two? Do you listen to the noise, all of it?


It's not all about us, that bias (anthropic) keeps popping up.

Popping
Gary
Whatshappening
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:02 pm

PreviousNext

Return to GENIUS FORUM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest