Space & Consciousness

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by Dan Rowden » Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Only Bert can understand Bert; it's part of the nature of Bertness.

User avatar
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by Leyla Shen » Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:36 pm

marcothay wrote:Oh...shit (pardon my language),
I think we are derailing from the main subject of this thread.
Anyway let me answer to your latest comments.
Let the thread take its natural course; it’s all about creating space (viewpoint of dimension), after all, no? All you need to do is extend your anchor points, marcothay …
I will pm you as soon as I can about the 9 dynamic,
I think you should do it here, but—OK.
but you brought up the concept of "pan-determinism" without defining it.
Fair enough. Pan-determinism, Scn Tech Dictionary—the willingness to start, change and stop on any and all dynamics, i.e., it follows from responsibility, which is the willingness to assume the status of full cause.
I will do it for you: Pan-determinism is an ability to see and experience two or more self-determinations. As an example, lets take two chess players who are self-determinate
to win the game, ok?

Well, a pan-determinate individual can play the same game with himself and get the same exciting that two determinations (players) have.
No, it’s not at all about getting “excitement”! Not by Scn definitions, at least.
The trick is in the ability of a pan-determinate individual to choose and interchange between cause and effect, or know and not know, between right move and wrong move*...

A pan determinate "consciousness", in few words, is able to create and be,in the same time, a dichotomy (two opposites)!
Well, given the above definitions, I think that’s a strange interpretation, no? It’s about the willingness to BE both the winner and the loser in order to effect right action across the dynamics.
There are not Absolutes in this universe, can you see it?
There are at least logical absolutes. For example, like this:
4) INFINITY-VALUED LOGIC: Absolute right (true) or absolute wrong (false) unobtainable.
Is that or is that not absolutely true, or is it only gradiently true?
For example right and wrong on a vertical scale, everything above the center would be more and more right, approaching an infinite rightness, and everything below the center would be more and more wrong approaching an infinite wrongness.
It is important to realize that the "center" on this "virtual vertical" scale is just an arbitrary factor; in fact it could be positioned anywhere on the scale without changing the concept of this logic!
I’m not sure I understand your point. By definition, the centre (zero) of this gradient scale of right/wrong is necessarily the point where anything above is more and more right and anything below is more and more wrong, with zero as the point of neither right nor wrong. That’s a very definite, even if “arbitrary,” position.

Now, Scn ethics are utilitarian in nature; “greatest good [rightness] for the greatest number of dynamics”:
The gradient scale is a way of thinking about the universe which approximates the actual conditions of the universes more closely than any other existing logical method.
One is still required to assess from the point of zero (neither right nor wrong), then, at what point on this scale the “condition of the universes” exist before one can act in the direction of rightness.

How is this to be done, exactly, without the two-valued logic of right and wrong, as you have used it above at *—the right move is that move which...?
Between Suicides

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:40 am

Dan Rowden wrote:Only Bert can understand Bert; it's part of the nature of Bertness.
ahah... that is a good one.
And maybe a truthful one

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:09 am

To Leyla
Let the thread take its natural course; it’s all about creating space (viewpoint of dimension), after all, no? All you need to do is extend your anchor points, marcothay …
Not so sure here what you mean.
I think you should do it here, but—OK.
9th and 10th dynamics are defined in DNC & SCN Tech dictionary

No, it’s not at all about getting “excitement”! Not by Scn definitions, at least.
I didn't said that, please read it again.

There are at least logical absolutes. For example, like this:
4) INFINITY-VALUED LOGIC: Absolute right (true) or absolute wrong (false) unobtainable.
Is that or is that not absolutely true, or is it only gradiently true?
It is still gradiently true.
I’m not sure I understand your point. By definition, the centre (zero) of this gradient scale of right/wrong is necessarily the point where anything above is more and more right and anything below is more and more wrong, with zero as the point of neither right nor wrong. That’s a very definite, even if “arbitrary,” position.
In an infinite values scale there is not 'zero' or 'center' at all.
One is still required to assess from the point of zero (neither right nor wrong), then, at what point on this scale the “condition of the universes” exist before one can act in the direction of rightness.
Again, there is no point of zero and the condition of your universe is dictated only by you.
And the "rightness" in your universe is just what you decide it be,
How is this to be done, exactly, without the two-valued logic of right and wrong, as you have used it above at *—the right move is that move which...?
Ok, if you can experience and feel what is right and what is wrong that means that you can be both, and the so called "center' what is, if not just be what you have decided to be or to stay on a scale

User avatar
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by Leyla Shen » Fri Jan 30, 2009 8:17 am

marcothay wrote:Not so sure here what you mean.
OK. I’ll get back to it.
9th and 10th dynamics are defined in DNC & SCN Tech dictionary
So they are, but the 9th isn’t at all about responsibility—if anything, the 10th is:
9th aesthetics
10th ethics
(from the Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures (PDCs))
Nevertheless, the defn. for the 10th goes like this, the 10th dynamic “would probably be ethics” – “dynamics” being defined as life drives/impulses. Frankly, I see this as a subdivision of the 7th, myself.
I didn't said that, please read it again.
Well, this is what you wrote:
I will do it for you: Pan-determinism is an ability to see and experience two or more self-determinations. As an example, lets take two chess players who are self-determinate
to win the game, ok?

Well, a pan-determinate individual can play the same game with himself and get the same exciting that two determinations (players) have.
Can you rephrase, as I cannot seem to glean anything else from it that what I already have.
It is still gradiently true.
So, to be really clear, it’s both absolutely and gradiently true that absolutes are unobtainable?
1) In an infinite values scale there is not 'zero' or 'center' at all.

2) Again, there is no point of zero and the condition of your universe is dictated only by you.
And the "rightness" in your universe is just what you decide it be,

3) Ok, if you can experience and feel what is right and what is wrong that means that you can be both, and the so called "center' what is, if not just be what you have decided to be or to stay on a scale
Isn’t (3) contrary to (1) and (2)? In relation to (2), what about when your universe comes into conflict with the other two universes despite its rightness; the MEST universe and the universe of others (Fundamentals of Thought [FOT])? This would certainly raise problems regarding (3)’s “just be what you have decided to be, or to ‘stay on scale’ (what do you mean by that?)” and this is exactly the point where you would fail to be both—fail to be pan-determined, by definition. It is also the point, therefore, where your space, movement and capacity to effect change contracts into self-determinism.
Between Suicides

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:32 am

but you brought up the concept of "pan-determinism" without defining it.

Fair enough. Pan-determinism, Scn Tech Dictionary—the willingness to start, change and stop on any and all dynamics, i.e., it follows from responsibility, which is the willingness to assume the status of full cause.

I will do it for you: Pan-determinism is an ability to see and experience two or more self-determinations. As an example, lets take two chess players who are self-determinate
to win the game, ok?
our will continues from and is formed by preceding efforts, and so our further deliberations will again predetermine our future will, 'free' or not to control our instincts by transference.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:16 am

The trick is in the ability of a pan-determinate individual to choose and interchange between cause and effect, or know and not know, between right move and wrong move*...

A pan determinate "consciousness", in few words, is able to create and be,in the same time, a dichotomy (two opposites)!

Well, given the above definitions, I think that’s a strange interpretation, no? It’s about the willingness to BE both the winner and the loser in order to effect right action across the dynamics.
the precept of Ethics could be Pan-inbuilt(integral), for any essentially 'logical proposition' is Ethical( equitable to everything else)

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:53 pm

dejavu wrote:I'm enjoying observing this thread! Spin it... Infinity over nothing. All self-seekers! All pre-occupied with belief! All human!How does one approach eternity?! (:D) Nothing is static!

I know that if intelligent people will bridge the distances between themselves they can will the world. Give birth to their best and begin! I know there is also a danger of this not happening! Such levity, such gravity, such talk!
no exception, everywhere the playlist wails "I got music, I got rhythm" and everyone asserts that he is as good as everyone else. YES! - rhythm with what? the blind-worm cycle? and as good as who? no man is equal to the gods, neither his soul nor his better self. if superior to another, the virtuous man does not state it, concerned that he is with his inferiority.

from the phenomenal-alogical world we infer our unintentionally invalid argument, hence our fictions are provable, or not by such argumentation by moral philosophy. our fiction of geometry must therefore be our method of proving fictional evaluations.

the purest and most concentrated essence of monotony: all things alike and equal.

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:35 am

To Leyla

I have to admit that your knowledge about Scn texts is better than mine.
In fact "responsibility" is not a dynamic.
But I still think it is important to assume responsibility for the existence of this MEST universe.
otherwise we will never be able to come out of it.

May be I need to study Scn basics before to really understand what Ron's philosophy and
discoveries are really about.
What is your advise?

But I stay with my own understanding on the definition of pan-determinism:
"the ability to synchronize (thus being above) two or more entity's considerations, be them
opposite or not. ( The Creation of Human Ability).
Or to experience two o more self-determinations (FOT)

I believe (not written anywhere) that an able "consciousness" (Thetan) could actually BE and controls two or more human bodies at the same time.

I've to correct my self when I said:"absolutes are not obtainable",
what I meant was: "absolutes are not obtainable in this particular mest universe".

the second factor (Ron's Factors in 8-8008) says "the decision at the beginning and ever (no time thus the infinite ?) is the decision of TO BE".
In my personal opinion means also that it could have been a decision of NOT TO BE.
I'm right? So there is/was a choice there, before deciding?

Or at this level we are just speculating? (the last factor of Ron)

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:59 am

But I stay with my own understanding on the definition of pan-determinism:
"the ability to synchronize (thus being above) two or more entity's considerations, be them
opposite or not. ( The Creation of Human Ability).
Or to experience two o more self-determinations (FOT)

I believe (not written anywhere) that an able "consciousness" (Thetan) could actually BE and controls two or more human bodies at the same time.
I can conceive God in You ,and You in me - a new Anthropolatory: God in us and in all potencies: I am a Pantheist 'as if'. we cannot adopt the 'as if' and love all things as ourselves, but we can love ourselves 'as if' all things.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:19 am

I believe (not written anywhere) that an able "consciousness" (Thetan) could actually BE and controls two or more human bodies at the same time
the gibelike ape, the smiling God, both beckon and will endow.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:52 am

Dan Rowden wrote:Only Bert can understand Bert; it's part of the nature of Bertness.
the stoic does not teach by incitement or dogma but by exemplary acts: neither does he indurate himself by seperation from the world and emotional self-frenzy. his abstractions are spaciously amoral, vista'd acceptances, and if desired, anodyne. he is never lost when realising himself in othernesses. he is a solipsist, self-dependent, demanding only from himself, seeking no privileges; which does not preclude his giving and accepting gifts.

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:07 am

bert wrote: I can conceive God in You ,and You in me - a new Anthropolatory: God in us and in all potencies: I am a Pantheist 'as if'. we cannot adopt the 'as if' and love all things as ourselves, but we can love ourselves 'as if' all things.
Dear Bert
I appreciate what you are expressing about your own universe, I believe that you are a very creative Being and sometime poetic too ( aesthetic band ).

But the fact that remains, is that you too, are still entrapped in a material body and even if you are able to get out from it, you are still not able to get out from this universe, isn'it?

Again, The appearance of EXISTENCE if is being looked from the level where Man is found, is however the opposite of the above statements. That because Man is operating on a secondary opinion that says that physical mechanics are real and his personal
considerations are less important.
That is an inversion and thus he is operating in a way to not alter his basic considerations. He is continuing to invalidate himself and of course he ends up to ponder, ponder, ponder and hypothesize the existence of a different or others' determination of matter-energy-space-time-life form ( like a God or gods or a Big Bang or a Tao or something else).
Although He is participating in the continuous creation of those finite things, he is giving credit and power to them.
Thus, he fall in a fallacy of considerations that he is just a small or even null and void part of the "reality" been observed.

In few words, we are on the same boat!

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:10 am

Let me continue on this thread from the point of:.. (by the way, I would like to thank all of you
for having expressed your own considerations which are very helpful to me to better understand
and better define the path I'm on)...

"INFINITY-VALUED LOGIC: Absolute right (true) or absolute wrong (false) unobtainable in this
universe. Because if they are, so the equation +1 confronting -1 is equal 0 and David
consideration of "each cause has a cause, thus cause-effect could not exist",
could be right but in that case we should not experience a thing (absolute Zero).

But using Gradient Scale of the Relative's Logic terms like good and bad, true and false, right and wrong, know and mystery, alive and death (consciousness) are used only in conjunction with gradient scales. For example right and wrong on a vertical scale, everything above the center would be more and more right, approaching an infinite rightness, and everything below the center would be more and more wrong approaching an infinite wrongness.
It is important to realize that the "center" on this scale is just an arbitrary factor; in fact it could be positioned anywhere on the scale without changing the concept of this logic!

It tells you right away that "consciousness" or awareness have to be
defined on a gradient scale: eg. molecules are less aware than cells, which are less aware than plants, which are less aware than animals, which are less aware
than homo sapient, and so on.

It also tells you that an absolute consciousness ( like God) could not be obtained but only approached.

It tells you that an absolute nothingness can't be fully obtained but only approached.

It tells you that an absolute infinite ( 8th Dynamic) can only be approached, thus superior dynamics could exist.

But the most important thing to all of us, is, that it tells you that there is a path, a road
on which everyone could "walk" and obtain greater states of awareness and truths.

It tells you that eternity could be good or bad for you, depending on what you decide it be.
( universes in expansion or in contraction?)

Having said that, I would like to go back to how define SPACE in terms of points of view,
and try to demostrate that space could not exist for you if you don't exist as an observer of
it.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:55 am

dejavu wrote:dejavu:
I'm enjoying observing this thread! Spin it... Infinity over nothing. All self-seekers! All pre-occupied with belief! All human!How does one approach eternity?! (:D) Nothing is static!

I know that if intelligent people will bridge the distances between themselves they can will the world. Give birth to their best and begin! I know there is also a danger of this not happening! Such levity, such gravity, such talk!

bert:
no exception, everywhere the playlist wails "I got music, I got rhythm" and everyone asserts that he is as good as everyone else. YES! - rhythm with what? the blind-worm cycle? and as good as who? no man is equal to the gods, neither his soul nor his better self. if superior to another, the virtuous man does not state it, concerned that he is with his inferiority.

from the phenomenal-alogical world we infer our unintentionally invalid argument, hence our fictions are provable, or not by such argumentation by moral philosophy. our fiction of geometry must therefore be our method of proving fictional evaluations.

the purest and most concentrated essence of monotony: all things alike and equal.
Space and consciousness.

The virtuous man daren't become a creator lest it kills him. In servitude he expects to be spared. Societal acceptance forms the greater part of his satisfaction.

A bridging of distances between noble natures is never a weakening or loss of the differences that distinguish them from oneanother. The common resistance to it, due to its diminishing the general feeling of 'equality', is nothing compared to the difficulty that exists in its realization owing to the tendency of these natures to be swallowed up by the demand for their greatest talents: love, and education.
by bert on Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:01 pm

living in agreement with any preconceived thesis or ideal may be as crippling as living up to any worn out group-respect,cliché,or whatever absurdity; the disguises of the Ids are many.
therefore the Stoic adopts his own virtue and behaviour to which he by singleness automatically responds.his instincts healthily brought back to life ,he smells out all falsity and fallacy.he does what he so wills and takes all responsibility - thus the virtue.do as you please ,to whom the pleasing is the law.only what you represent has sincerity and the potent form of affection.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Tue Feb 03, 2009 5:35 am

marcothay wrote:
bert wrote: I can conceive God in You ,and You in me - a new Anthropolatory: God in us and in all potencies: I am a Pantheist 'as if'. we cannot adopt the 'as if' and love all things as ourselves, but we can love ourselves 'as if' all things.
Dear Bert
I appreciate what you are expressing about your own universe, I believe that you are a very creative Being and sometime poetic too ( aesthetic band ).

But the fact that remains, is that you too, are still entrapped in a material body and even if you are able to get out from it, you are still not able to get out from this universe, isn'it?

Again, The appearance of EXISTENCE if is being looked from the level where Man is found, is however the opposite of the above statements. That because Man is operating on a secondary opinion that says that physical mechanics are real and his personal
considerations are less important.
That is an inversion and thus he is operating in a way to not alter his basic considerations. He is continuing to invalidate himself and of course he ends up to ponder, ponder, ponder and hypothesize the existence of a different or others' determination of matter-energy-space-time-life form ( like a God or gods or a Big Bang or a Tao or something else).
Although He is participating in the continuous creation of those finite things, he is giving credit and power to them.
Thus, he fall in a fallacy of considerations that he is just a small or even null and void part of the "reality" been observed.

In few words, we are on the same boat!
starting as child and until death we seek and enjoy a fill-in reality, unwittingly making a parallel. we instinctively imitate the fact that we are the substitute of a greater reality - ever seeking compensation by substitution, for being substitute; a double paradox.

by relativeness we are as particles endowed with a vital principle coming forth from the passing gradually of becoming. likewise by relativeness we are greater than anything we conceive or know. our accomplishment is in our greater reality as individuals( by originality).

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:07 am

???????

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Thu Feb 05, 2009 7:51 am

marcothay wrote:???????
what is conceivable when we can not conceive even what we are conceiving?

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Fri Feb 06, 2009 5:58 am

by bert on Sun Apr 20, 2008 9:20 am

any fact or fiction has no difficulty in finding relatables as supporting evidence , because everything has a 'point of connection' and a period of reality when it is immediate and simultaneous as regards place and time. our difficulty is to re-evoke the past 'as now'*, so we accept the 'semblance of' (make-belief, religion or faith) as the substitude of real belief, which needs no reality other than its own. what you cannot conceive as yourself is yourself as another reality.

* : the 'as if' world impaired with the subconsciousness.
there is an essential subjective approach to Reality. belief must be made personal along symbolised charges with meaning, along individual lines. tradition is the crystallized belief of others ; it may express, but it cannot release the life force. my notion of reality is located in the fleeting mutual interaction between the terminals of Ego and Self. Ego being the self 'as now', is melting into Pure Consciousness which is neither Self nor Ego, neither subject nor object. it is the unbalanced, not-this nor-that, both of them fluid yet fixed in a unity of voidness beyond conception. this state is the unconceived, inconceivable, and from which no conception to fresh becomings is necessary.

the 'As If'(consiously false), Hans Vaihinger discovered, plays an enormous part in science, world philosophies and life.
the 'as if' being impaired with the 'as now' indicates the transference of belief from subconcious to conscious immediacy.it is the selfhood of quiddity where the ego at any moment is the total yet fleeting reification in terms of time and space; cognized as delusive conceptions bred from an distorted conceived word-symbol from the primal Id. so, what is spatial and temporal is bereft of reality, for reality is the inconceivable, always.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:50 am

dejavu wrote:I don't know bert. Nor do I know how Marcothay could possibly demonstrate that the existence of space is dependent on its observation. I think it 'stoical' not to dwell on what we don't know (as though we could), but to move upon our knowledge. I think that we should begin by looking at how our observation of space affects it. Does it after all? To what sphere are we bound? To what degree do we desire that space be our own?

Is it a question of possession?
when you are a recidivist to all pretences...when one sees one's own reflection everywhere and sees everything as in oneself, then you become Stoical.

I believe in the not-knowing in all knowledge; in my own incomprehensibility; ever complete - never complete. in Ego as my full-known height.
cognizing our cognition is our whole mentation: I do know not only that I know , but how little I know of my own omniscience.

know that nothing can be known which at least connotes that you know that you can not know. I assert that that Knowledge is the potential of knowing ultimately all things. "all is illusion", "the intelligence is false","all is unreal","no direct experience of personality".and thus we have the rreality of illusion as one delusion falsifying another. for if the reality we are all aware of is unreal and we, illusionary automata without personality, and everything false, how can we know whether it is illusion or know of an Absolute from our unknowableness?

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:04 am

Talking about knowingness; ( not "knowledge" as this is still evolving by means of knowing data, info, perceptions, etc..., thus rendering you as an effect instead of cause)
Here is a "simple" exercise for you and all of you guys that are following this thread:

First, think and write me at least 10 things that you currently don't know, which you don't mind (disturb) to know.

Second, tell me 5 things you don't mind that others know.

Third Make up something worth (or not worth) knowing.

Please follow that sequence.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sat Feb 07, 2009 6:59 pm

dejavu wrote:
I don't know bert. Nor do I know how Marcothay could possibly demonstrate that the existence of space is dependent on its observation. I think it 'stoical' not to dwell on what we don't know (as though we could), but to move upon our knowledge. I think that we should begin by looking at how our observation of space affects it. Does it after all? To what sphere are we bound? To what degree do we desire that space be our own?

Is it a question of possession?
when you are a recidivist to all pretences...when one sees one's own reflection everywhere and sees everything in oneself, then you become as the Stoic.

we surround our acts with such a blandishment that no thought is pure: a clearance, reorientation, purgation and re-believing becomes necessary to disentangle desires. so, conation often entails a struggle resulting in unfruitfull and strange afterbirths. therefore weed out the clinging hindrances of prejudice, conventions, creeds that have intertwisted in the processes of thought, desiring a body which deprive of efficiency your ability and makes strangers of your words and acts, and a tactless act of the inbred urge. we must make an Abraxas of our desire, to cross all irrelevancies.

bert
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:08 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by bert » Sat Feb 07, 2009 7:14 pm

I think that we should begin by looking at how our observation of space affects it. Does it after all? To what sphere are we bound?To what degree do we desire that space be our own?
the inbetweenness of cause and effect is a sensuality(I'm rather a sensualist than a spiritist): we are always experiencing more, or less. experience is inter-between to all purpose and desire and only partly disclosed to Ego. Real and Vivid experience goes deeper, often-times within lightning reactions, as when the mind releases an compulsory entity, a 'thought-symbol' reconciling or destroying fallacies, for the upstep of values.

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:04 am

I should write this comment on another thread that is currently active,
but I prefer to discuss here because I feel that it is more appropriate
because both "emptiness" and "nothingness" have to do with SPACE.

Before "emptiness" could exist, you still need a space in which nothing is in IT (is "IT"a thing?)

Before a "nothingness" could be conceived you still need to conceive a somethingness,
or... the other way around, right?
Is it or isn't so?

What is an empty space, by the way?
Try this little experiment: close your eyes and
"Imagine an empty space" (absolutely noo thing in it)

......Can you do that?
If so, what is the source (point of origin) of that space?
And how you limited (bounded) that space?

One more question to the ones(not everyone can do it) able to mock it up:
Is that space has time in it?

marcothay
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Space & Consciousness

Post by marcothay » Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:32 am

Going over this thread, my attention was taken by a few comments,
in particular David Queen's phrase: "anything which comes into existence has countless effects."

David, what you mean with "come into existence"?
I believe that this "thing" has to be first observed before to assert "it" exist
Or "it" would exist anyway, even if no one is observing it?
If so, how you can conceive the existence of something(ness) if no one is able to observe it.

Is this universe still make sense even if no one is pondering about it?
If it still makes sense considering that no "consciousness" is looking at it,
a question ( I wonder what that question origin from) still remain:
" it make sense to who"?

Also, the word "COME" (into existence) has a connotation that is not well defined.
Do you mean that everything COME into existence by itself?

I still believe that before something to "exist" need a Space to do that!

Post Reply