Mind Over Matter, Matter Over Mind?

[BigUnc]

OooooKaaaayy ....now that all the mis communication is over how about we proceed ladies and gentlemen.


I got a question,more like several:

1. What in the hell is your mind's eye?

2. What's does the various philosophical camps say about it?

3. Where is it located physically?
a. what is the physical process or pathways for "seeing"
without any visual input.

4. Isn't this purely a mental process?
a. How?

5. Can everyone do this?
a. why?
b. why not?


I believe we have one. From personal experience it's a hit or miss thing. Sometimes I can see clearly,other times not so clearly. Trying to understand this more, particularly the various degrees of...... reception??...my bad best way to describe it.

 

[sean69]

OooooKaaaayy ....now that all the mis communication is over how about we proceed ladies and gentlemen.


I got a question,more like several:

I'll have a shot at this...

1. What in the hell is your mind's eye?
Don't really know how I'd define this unambiguously. And I doubt anyone does too.

But off the top i'd say: One's imagination. Vitality. Qualia.




2. What's does the various philosophical camps say about it?
Say about it in what sense? This seems to be a loaded question.

3. Where is it located physically?
a. what is the physical process or pathways for "seeing"
without any visual input.

I wouldn't know where specifically it's located, if at all physically. But since imagination (and everywhere it takes our minds) is an exclusively and uniquely personal experience, I'd guess, reflective of my monist philosophy, that it's somewhere within itself. (I know it probably doesn't make intuitive sense but then again what really does?) And, I don't think it's limited to physiological activity.

4. Isn't this purely a mental process?
a. How?

You're asking a question of making a statement? Either way doesn't this make question #3 redundant?

5. Can everyone do this?
a. why?
b. why not?

Do what? Imagine? If so, yes.

I believe we have one. From personal experience it's a hit or miss thing. Sometimes I can see clearly,other times not so clearly. Trying to understand this more, particularly the various degrees of...... reception??...my bad best way to describe it.

Consciousness is an emergent mental processes, which is fundamentally irreducible/holistic/non-algorithmic.

Take that Big Unc!


J/k. lol.
I'm basically saying I don't believe it can't ever be fully understood through reductive epistemology. (i.e, deconstructing and studying the parts scientificlly or philosophically)

Epistemology meaning the study of the nature of knowledge.
Emergent meaning it's more than the sum of the properties of the parts making up the system
Non-algorithmic meaning what the word implies
Holistic being a cooler way of saying emergent.



.

 

[owl]

Hold on, BigUnc, let me drop what I am finding here, and I will address my findings after the nectar has been gathered...

The use of the phrase mind's eye does not imply that there is a single or unitary place in the mind or brain where visual consciousness occurs. Various philosophers have criticized this view, Daniel Dennett being one of the best-known.(Consciousness Explained, Daniel C. Dennett, Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1991) However, others, such as Johnjoe McFadden of the University of Surrey in the United Kingdom and the New Zealand-based neurobiologist Susan Pockett, have proposed that the brain's electromagnetic field is consciousness itself, thus causing the perception of a unitary location.(Our Conscious Mind Could Be An Electromagnetic Field, UniSci)(Synchronous Firing and Its Influence on the Brain's Electromagnetic Field: Evidence for an Electromagnetic Field Theory of Consciousness, J. McFadden, Journal of Consciousness Studies 9(2002), part 4, pp. 23-50.

First Academic Leads:
(Visual Imagery of Famous Faces: Effects of Memory
and Attention Revealed by fMRI): http://www.ini.uzh.ch/~alumit/ishai_neuroimage2002.pdf

(SYNCHRONOUS FIRING AND ITS INFLUENCE
ON THE BRAIN’S ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD:
EVIDENCE FOR AN ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD THEORY OF
CONSCIOUSNESS): http://ebola.itfais.com/cvm/archives/cemi_theory_paper.pdf

 

[owl]

Consciousness, not thought, higher level awareness, is only effected by the physical in that it responds to the stimuli of the physical.

There are no such things as unicorns, fat men in sleighs driven by flying reindeer, women who fly and apparently walking through walls in an effort to ease the tax burden of dentist everywhere by buying the baby teeth of young children.

There are more people who believe in a man that history does not remember by name-- who is reported to have walked on water, turned water into grape md 20/20, and gave sight to the blind in a book that has admittedly been rewritten by political opportunists and deviant leaders-- than there are those who believe the opposite. The imagination of the human being reigns supreme even more than physical stimuli. It is the imagined sensation that one envisions or impresses on one's self that ignites addictive relapse. The belief that it will feel just as good as it did the last time. It is imagination that buttresses Faith and even determination.

In the context of the political, there is no real science of "race" outside of politics, economics, and sociology. Race is of the imagination. However, it is the imagination that governs the thoughtful. Of course, Pavlov has placed himself in history by showing that even a dog's imagination can be played upon, it just takes a murder here, and a murder there to get humans to jump at the idea of bombing foreign lands, for most of war is a spectator sport that has been manipulated in the imagination by images of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, William Dafeo, Charlie Sheen, or Sylvester Stalone saving the day. Have you ever questioned why the media shows more of the inside of prisons than the ground coverage of the Iraqi occupation, where our sons are coming home from jobs that consisted of them picking up the remains of exploded bodies?

The power of imagination might change something. The power of imagination might get you killed for attempting to stop a war of expansion. Imagine asking Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. about that...

Maybe we need to imagine a new nation...

 

[sean69]

Hold on, BigUnc, let me drop what I am finding here, and I will address my findings after the nectar has been gathered...

First Academic Leads:
(Visual Imagery of Famous Faces: Effects of Memory
and Attention Revealed by fMRI): http://www.ini.uzh.ch/~alumit/ishai_neuroimage2002.pdf

(SYNCHRONOUS FIRING AND ITS INFLUENCE
ON THE BRAIN’S ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD:
EVIDENCE FOR AN ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD THEORY OF
CONSCIOUSNESS): http://ebola.itfais.com/cvm/archives/cemi_theory_paper.pdf

Thanks for the links Owl.

I read the just articles and I have a few comments:

1) The first article by JJ McFaden identifies (p. 6) the hippocampus (long-term memory, spatial navigation) and the neocortex (sensory perception, language and conscious thought) as regions in the brain (limbic system) that show electrical activity when we "think".
Makes sense.

2) That the brain's endogenous EM field (endogenous meaning from within the brain...grey matter, cells) modulates brain processes through and cross-coupling/superpositioning of fields from neighboring neurons.(p. 17)
Makes sense. Makes me think of Molecular Orbital Theory in chemistry and Linear Combination of Molecular Orbitals (LCMO) being a blend of all the states that define the overall molecules electron density.

3) He also talks about ordered regions coupling better than random regions which cancel out EM signal. (p. 13) This also makes sense within the context of electronic/molecular orbitals and lattices.
Makes sense. That's one of the principles behind conductors and insulators.


Here's the theory of consciousness he c/s's

Cemi Theory of Conciousness.
The equivalence of matter and energy, apparent in Einstein’s famous equation, implies that there is no a priori reason why consciousness should be associated with the matter of neurones rather than the em field activity within and between neurones. However, whereas information in neurones in digital, discrete and spatially localised, information in em fields is analogue, integrated and distributed. I note that these latter characteristics are those usually ascribed to the phenomenon of consciousness and are the properties of consciousness that are most difficult to account for in neural identity models of consciousness.
I have earlier proposed (McFadden, 2000) that the seat of consciousness is the brain’s em field and a similar proposal has recently been put forward by Sue Pockett (Pockett, 2000). I therefore examine the proposition that the brain’s em field is consciousness and that information held in distributed neurones is integrated into a single conscious em field: the cemi field.


My basic breakdown of the article:

1) the brain gives off two kinds of energy when its working
2) endegenous brain waves and neural brain waves
3) They can couple constructively or destructively.
4) External influence like sedation or arousal can fuck up or enhance the synchronous coupling (p. 23,24)

McFadden's conclusion

The brain’s em field's informational content will be continually updated by neuronal input until a field configuration is reached that is capable of generating ‘output’ that is downloaded as motor actions or the laying down of memories.

The theory also has much in common with quantum models of consciousness (Penrose, 1995) since both propose a field-level description of consciousness. However in contrast to quantum consciousness models that must propose
a physically unrealistic level of quantum coherence between neurones or microtubules within neurones, the cemi field theory has no such requirement.


Now I've read much of Roger Penrose and Stuart Hammerhoff's Quantum Consciousness model of the brain and they argue that the brain works through QM process in the microtubles in the brain (microtubules are structural components of cells made of biopolymers arrays arranged into lil' nanosized filaments bundled into hollow cylinders which can serve as channels for proteins and neurotransmittors) and that information is stored and processed like a hologram. And asserts that the foundation of free-will lays in the subjectivity of QM events.

Critics of the QC brain model however say that the brain is too hot to allow coherent QM processes and shit breaks down.
Penrose and Hammerhoof counter-argue that local stable "cold" brain states can be generated to "shield" decoherence.

The main draw back of the cemi model is that because of its feild mechanics, the will can't really be free, but deterministic and dualistically structured. (p. 47):

The proposed interaction between the cemi field and neuronal pathways restores to the mind a measure of dualism, but it is a dualism rooted in the real physical distinction between matter and energy, rather than
the metaphysical (Cartesian) distinction between matter and soul. Although the cemi field will is deterministic, it does at least retain a crucial role for our conscious minds in directing purposeful actions. Consciousness is not a steam whistle. As a wave-mechanical driver of free will, it may be the key evolutionary capability that was acquired by the human mind.

last sentence IMO is a cop out.


In response to OWL's comments above, I'd say imagination is everything. Unicorns and the tooth fairy may very well be mental constructs of our imagination not physically real in what our conscious mind perceives as physical. But. How about dream?
REM sleep dreaming is as real as it gets. Only diference from when you're awake is that ...well...you're awake.
Could we all be in a deeper mode of sleep even after we wake up ...still dreaming ...but in a more lucid state?

One simple experiment cn proove this.

Guess...

 

[owl]

LLAM!!!

As much as I enjoy slipping into these "daydreams", I haven't had a good night's rest in a while...

Hmmm...okay...the dream...back to where we started...

states of consciousness represented physically by an alternation of the wave patterns of our brain...it would make sense that we spent most of our phsyical formation in a dream state...

In the sleep state, we are no longer conscious of outer sensations being transmitted from the "plane of physical manifest at the 'time' we last remembered" because our channels of communicating with that 'world'("dimension"?) are shut off for the most part. You can't download anything related to the "immediate" moment, because you are unplugged from the "net", to follow your metaphor.

Just like in the "real" world, however, our dreams have 'rules'; flying is flying because there is gravity. Although you might be the one defying gravity, you are none the less defying a fundamental principle. Those of us who can recall such a dream, may also be able to express the concomitant feeling of exhilaration. For all intents and purposes needed to "experience", or leave an indelible neural connection within the brain as a post of actual "memory", you have "flown like an eagle", or pigeon...or maybe even an Owl...

But you are the "GOD" of your dreams. You are the first and last observer. Not so much in this shared dream of ours.

Something occurs when we are all dreaming, and for the most part we are all dreaming the same dream, but have to take different courses of action depending on the biological and cultural artifacts we enter this dream with. Money is no less an illusion of substantial value than Pegasus is a threat to a Blue Ribbon winning thoroughbred...but we can speak on the symbol "Pegasus"...who won the last Blue Ribbon Derby? (Yeah, I just googled it too...)

Civilization is an illusion. It is the culmination of savage success stories being passed down to children hibernating away from vengeful children whose parents where slaughtered by successful savages.

But we all subscribe to the dreams of another.

My only problem is death...what do we wake up to? Do we "wake up"? Are we our bodies, or are we our consciousness? Or are we both?

 

[sean69]

LLAM!!!

As much as I enjoy slipping into these "daydreams", I haven't had a good night's rest in a while...

Hmmm...okay...the dream...back to where we started...

states of consciousness represented physically by an alternation of the wave patterns of our brain...it would make sense that we spent most of our phsyical formation in a dream state...

In the sleep state, we are no longer conscious of outer sensations being transmitted from the "plane of physical manifest at the 'time' we last remembered" because our channels of communicating with that 'world'("dimension"?) are shut off for the most part. You can't download anything related to the "immediate" moment, because you are unplugged from the "net", to follow your metaphor.

Just like in the "real" world, however, our dreams have 'rules'; flying is flying because there is gravity. Although you might be the one defying gravity, you are none the less defying a fundamental principle.

---------------------------------------

You have a good point here. But perhaps astronaughts would probably disagree. The feeling of weightlessness simulators, space aircraft and in space is perfectly in line with the fundamental law of physics - gravity.
Same "rules" and fundamentals, different manifestations.

---------------------------------------

Those of us who can recall such a dream, may also be able to express the concomitant feeling of exhilaration. For all intents and purposes needed to "experience", or leave an indelible neural connection within the brain as a post of actual "memory", you have "flown like an eagle", or pigeon...or maybe even an Owl...

But you are the "GOD" of your dreams. You are the first and last observer. Not so much in this shared dream of ours.

-------------------------------------

True. In a sense. But have you ever had that dream where you are you but in someone elses body and your "dream's eye" sees you as that other person but you experience you as you? (read that back again 3 times then inhale, lol)
An out-of-body experience within an out-of-body experience.
When you think about it, in your dream world, you interact with others just like you do when you're awake.
Might the secret reside in that period when you transition from dream to this reality? While you're waking up?
Have you ever woken up froma dream into another dream? At time multiple times? What just happened?

--------------------------------------

Something occurs when we are all dreaming, and for the most part we are all dreaming the same dream, but have to take different courses of action depending on the biological and cultural artifacts we enter this dream with. Money is no less an illusion of substantial value than Pegasus is a threat to a Blue Ribbon winning thoroughbred...but we can speak on the symbol "Pegasus"...who won the last Blue Ribbon Derby? (Yeah, I just googled it too...)

Civilization is an illusion. It is the culmination of savage success stories being passed down to children hibernating away from vengeful children whose parents where slaughtered by successful savages.

But we all subscribe to the dreams of another.

My only problem is death...what do we wake up to? Do we "wake up"? Are we our bodies, or are we our consciousness? Or are we both?

--------------------------------------------

Everyones problem is death. Well, almost everyone.

In a very simple elegant mathematical equation, perhaps the most important of all physics, Einstien unified energy and matter. It's my guess that (as far as we know) since they both cant be destroyed ... we're good.

 

[sean69]

bump

 

[Andeyhollawho]

bump

I'll be back in later...

 

[owl]

Alright, Sean, I've looked all over the place, what are we referring to when we say, "sympathetic quantum mechanics"?

 

[sean69]

Alright, Sean, I've looked all over the place, what are we referring to when we say, "sympathetic quantum mechanics"?

I don't know. where did you get that from??

 

[owl]

My fault, Shawn, man, I could have sworn there was a point in this thread where that phrase was used, but I can't seem to find it. I might have gotten lost somewhere in that argument about nervous systems, or the sides of the nervous system anyway.

 

[sean69]

My fault, Shawn, man, I could have sworn there was a point in this thread where that phrase was used, but I can't seem to find it. I might have gotten lost somewhere in that argument about nervous systems, or the sides of the nervous system anyway.

OOOoooh! nah .. iw as talking bout the sympathetic and para sympathetic nervous system with respect to the conscious and subconscious responses to stimuli

http://www.bgol.us/board/showpost.php?p=6992749&postcount=72

 

[BigUnc]

Consciousness is an emergent mental processes, which is fundamentally irreducible/holistic/non-algorithmic.

Take that Big Unc!


J/k. lol.
I'm basically saying I don't believe it can't ever be fully understood through reductive epistemology. (i.e, deconstructing and studying the parts scientificlly or philosophically)

Epistemology meaning the study of the nature of knowledge.
Emergent meaning it's more than the sum of the properties of the parts making up the system
Non-algorithmic meaning what the word implies
Holistic being a cooler way of saying emergent.



.

Thanks for breaking it down bruh. The audience appreciates it.


Deep posts owl. I'm particularly interested in the dream states you mentioned. Was "wondering" how is it possible to,while awake, turn off physical sensory inputs in favor of inputs from your mind's eye.

Lot of info in the links you provided. some random thought's,ideas, and images are formulating now. Soon as they can be communicated in a coherent way I'll be back.

 

[owl]

Thanks for breaking it down bruh. The audience appreciates it.


Deep posts owl. I'm particularly interested in the dream states you mentioned. Was "wondering" how is it possible to,while awake, turn off physical sensory inputs in favor of inputs from your mind's eye.

Lot of info in the links you provided. some random thought's,ideas, and images are formulating now. Soon as they can be communicated in a coherent way I'll be back.

Yeah, Shawn has all of us brushing up!

I was referring to the five senses. I would argue that the body shuts down, it is dense ether, or dense wave patterns, it tends towards decay, or energy break down, to sort of stay within the laws of thermodynamics. So, the body itself is shutting itself off from the world, or maybe it is embracing the world more, I usually don't leave anything in the bottle or glass, so I leave it up to everybody else to say if it is half-full, or half-empty.

Whatever the case, the physical body needs energy. It gets tired. The intelligent part of your eyes, can't keep them up forever, trust me, I've tried. You'll find your face banging up against your keyboard...*that's always embarrassing*...your ears will stop picking up sounds, you start hearing the air, or everything simply becomes unintelligible. But your "intelligence" is like New York City, it never sleeps.

*this nigga KANYE!!!*

...sela...

anyphuck man...

What's developing as part of my epistemology is that while your body rests, or the waves get slower, thought waves pick up speed due to the lack of external stimuli and begin to release thoughts held within certain neural connections like capacitors.

Thought is a little bit higher on this totem, and eh, this is where my achilles' heel always gets exposed, I simply don't have "words" for the concepts that exist in my mind, which is fitting because I want to discuss the "concepts, ideas, and intellegences" that we haven't measured or labeled.

I would like to use Freud's "ego" concept outside of his id and super-ego, because from my epistomology, it is the "self" that we think we are that causes the most problem with obtaining a full sensory experience with existence. My biggest handicap, and possibly greatest asset, race consciousness, hurts my sensory development, because there are realities that i must imagine. When I walk past a tree, I don't just see bark and leaves: I also the chlorophyll, the roots reaching deeper underneath the soil, the many or few rings of life the tree has inside it's core, I "see" all these things because some one has shared their "in-sight" with me. Consciousness is collective.

 

[sean69]

Physicist David Bohm on Truth and Perception



"... our thinking process should be called an extension of our perception ... not primarily the accumulation of knowledge which we put into various records."


Wholeness and the Implicate Order by David Bohm. I strongly recommend this book.

Alain Aspect. Who?

Most people probably never heard of this name. But this French Physicist in the early 80's performed, arguably, one of the most important experiments in modern physics which, IMO, would reshape our classical view of how things interact and communicate through space and time.

His famous "split" photon experiments also known as the "Bell test experiments" vindicated the reductio ad absurdum "EPR" interpretation of QM.
EPR stnds for Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen, three physicists who met to discuss the implications of QM on reality. The correlation of observed values of physical quantities vs the values accounted for by a physical theory. In other words, "theory" vs. "reality".

Aspect's experiment showed that the two parts of a split photon were intricately and intimately connected where determining the state (spin state or whatever) of one automatically and instantly "fixed" the state of the other. The particles are said to be "entangled".

(By the way, I don't suscribe to the Standard Model of partcile physics. I think the concept of discrete particles is an illusion.)

EPR said that if QM was a correct theory, then it meant that particles could communicate instantaneously from a distance of any separation in a "non-local" way. Hence the popular phrase "non-local action at a distance". Einstien obviously didn't c/s this because it violated his relativity theory which required "local" communication through space-time by a mediating field limited by the speed of light. So he said that there had to be some extra factor or "hidden variable" that solved this issue that hadn't been accounted for ... yet.

Which is essentially what this paradox boils down to. Physics's search for the "hidden variable(s)". Or the Theory of Everything. The unification of QM and relativity. Which consumes billions of research grant dollars in universities and research institutes worldwide every year.

So what you have is a whole buch of theories/postulates and counter-theories and theories for the counter theories and paradoxes and theories for the resolution of the paradoxes and different interpretations and cunundrums.

But maybe answer is right in front us? The truth vs perception Bohm is talking about ... IMO, I don't think there's any "theory" that will resolve everything. I think it's deeper. It's going to required an entirely different way of thinking ...


One of my favorite Einstein quotes:

"A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us.
Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty… The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. … We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive." (Albert Einstein, 1954)

Even based off our limited perception of reality, everything I see around me, everything i've learned as a scientist, my experiences ... everything ... suggests an interconnected oneness. At the macro- and micro- level. From emergent epiphenomena to the irriducubility of certain phenomena.

But as humans, we'll always have anthropomorphic explanations of why and how ...

 

[owl]

Shawn...my ni...eh...ERGO...

This dude here stays on the job....

 

[BigUnc]

Which is essentially what this paradox boils down to. Physics's search for the "hidden variable(s)". Or the Theory of Everything. The unification of QM and relativity. Which consumes billions of research grant dollars in universities and research institutes worldwide every year.

So what you have is a whole buch of theories/postulates and counter-theories and theories for the counter theories and paradoxes and theories for the resolution of the paradoxes and different interpretations and cunundrums.

But maybe answer is right in front us? The truth vs perception Bohm is talking about ... IMO, I don't think there's any "theory" that will resolve everything. I think it's deeper. It's going to required an entirely different way of thinking ...

A different way of thinking........Exactly!!!

I know Andey gonna pop a vein or something but could i have about 10 mins. of y'all time to watch a short vid.

Sean, you probably already seen this.


David Icke explaining the holographic universe at the Oxford debating society.
Full video here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8198824470106638208&ei=NP_ESNeAKYSKqQOw-5y3BQ&q#



<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oLSdPyEfp8M&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oLSdPyEfp8M&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[owl]

*Per Suggestion of Sean69.

Wholeness and the Implicate Order

Download and Enjoy:

http://rapidshare.com/files/280168583/Wholeness_and_the_Implicate_Order.pdf

 

[sean69]

A different way of thinking........Exactly!!!

I know Andey gonna pop a vein or something but could i have about 10 mins. of y'all time to watch a short vid.

Sean, you probably already seen this.


David Icke explaining the holographic universe at the Oxford debating society.
Full video here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8198824470106638208&ei=NP_ESNeAKYSKqQOw-5y3BQ&q#



<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oLSdPyEfp8M&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oLSdPyEfp8M&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Unc, I'm gonna watch the video (and the full lecture). I'm not evry familiar with Icke but I know he's a conspiracy theorist.

There's a column in The Scientific American called "Skeptic" and a guy named Michael Shermer often writes articles about why people believe in conspiracies. In one of of his articles he coins the term "Agenticity". (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=skeptic-agenticity)
He says that our brains have evolved to be more biased towards computing type I error (false positive, believing a pattern is real when it's actually not) as opposed to type II errors (false negative, not believing a pattern real when it actually is) because the consequences of making a type II error are more severe than making a type I error - with respect to survival.

Makes sense to me. I'm not one to casually brush off conspiracy theories but I believe somethings are just happy coincidences.

*Per Suggestion of Sean69.

Wholeness and the Implicate Order

Download and Enjoy:

http://rapidshare.com/files/280168583/Wholeness_and_the_Implicate_Order.pdf

Owl. You're the man!
Thanks for this.

 

[BigUnc]

Yea Sean, Icke is a big time conspiracy theorist. The full video is 2 hrs long, most of it about his politics.Prolly not worth the time. Just thought it needed to be posted with full disclosure as my reason.

Got another video about 10 minutes long also explaining the holographic universe.

Should have it posted at my next break from studying.

 

[owl]

Intelligences keep forming bodies so that they might study themselves or their dreams/imaginings(images?)...

 

[sean69]

Bump

 

[BigUnc]

Yo Sean, I haven't forgotten about this thread. Still reading Wholeness and the Implicate Order. I'm juggling a lot of things right now and can't seem to find the time to finish it.

 

[sean69]

Yo Sean, I haven't forgotten about this thread. Still reading Wholeness and the Implicate Order. I'm juggling a lot of things right now and can't seem to find the time to finish it.

No doubt.
It's a good book.
I'm reading "The meaning of Life" by Erwin Schroedinger right now.

 

[owl]

DEATH
I was one of those students of 13x(God BODY), and initially i was very hard on anyone saying that there was even a possibility of life after death.
Understandably.
I was being trained politically by means of religion.
Soon, that teaching would cause me to absolve my religion. And all my spiritual understanding was based on empirical reasoning. All praises are due, right?
Force and power.
That was our God. And for the most part, I'm still affectionately tied to that belief.
As my life processes, the less I am able to reasonably hold on to the ideal of a personal god head. Santa and the Tooth Fairy have finally been caught.
And although I love the real version of my childhood benefactors, it still stings a little. My big homie referred to the cognitive dissonance that develops through disillusion as "cracking nuts", a play on what we were teaching in the temple, the words of Malcolm and Fard,"Cracking Atoms."
So.
now.
A little more developed.
A little more trained.
A lot less susceptible to the belief that I should give my life up to someone for their enjoyment of this life. Or, this portion of a conscious angle.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!(right?)
The ultimate question for this thread is what is your conscious helmsman? I have thus far referred to the cognitive body of self-consciousness as the ego. As Shawn has corrected me, most likely humbled himself to accept while I attempted to explain certain hypothesis, and well, understandings;this term of 'ego' has a limited envelop.

So let's discuss the envelop of conscious awareness, 'I'.
I agree with Jung.

 

[sean69]

I'm not familiar with Jung's thesis. But i'll do some raster-scan type research and get back to you on my views on this owl.

 

[sean69]

Bump

 

[owl]

put the good posts where my eyes can see...

 

[OnSlaught]

Nice drops by both you and Owl Sean.

I had to take a 2nd look at the whole back and forth with Andey...that shit was hiilarious. Oh, and no, I'm not sure if I could help you explain the double slit experiment to Andey.

We can all be stubborn and hold to our own "center". I think that's what was happening in the back and forth.

Owl is right, threads like this need to be put in plain sight for everyone!

 

[tical]

 

[sean69]

 

[OnSlaught]

Where you been at man?

 

[sean69]

Where you been at man?

mad busy with school. Yeah, I know ...