insanezenmistress : i am desperately trying to learn this critical logic
shit
RaaN : it should be taught... but the powers that be would rather everyone
just believed and didn't think at least not for themselves individuals are
the bane of authority,sorry.. undeserved authority
insanezenmistress : ... ya know we pretend that aliens who are more
intelligent that ourselves could come and take over....... but why haven't
the few intelligent among us taken over? i can't even properly judge my
fellow man's ignorance because the powers that control us have never let
me see what we are capable of.
RaaN : It's the first law of management.. there isn't any
insanezenmistress : no law of management?
RaaN : No management. People believe in conspiracies because it reassures them
that even though they are terrible at least there is some order and
control.
insanezenmistress : better the demon i know?
RaaN : not exactly
insanezenmistress : yes i like to think there is a structure that one can
infiltrate but in my clearer moments i think the beast is too
large.......... it must be random i mean they don't hire people to draw the
sublimials and there is no government office in charge of making sure the same satanic symbolism gets repeatedly used in corporate logos.
RaaN : strange attractors the brain is a pattern making machine. seeing
patterns even when there are none. Primitive thinking; the critical thinker
does not believe. Have i sold you on this belief is bullshit idea yet?
Don't believe me that its true but find out for yourself.
insanezenmistress : nearly. no more talking i need to think out loud.
RaaN : pllrrt......
................................................................
RaaN : i never underestimate the potential of human ingenuity..
insanezenmistress: i don't...it is a question of time and evolution..(an
intellectual kind)
RaaN : i consider ignorance belief and so forth to be anathema to the
species.
insanezenmistress : i am not sure i can take a harsh view of belief.... i
can note the flaws but who is to blame if you think in limited extremes..
not the book... not the metaphor of human philosophy.
RaaN: i don't blame any book.. just believers. The speed and capacity of
computer intelligence doubles about every 10 years, at that rate around
2030 a computer will meet and exceed our brain capacity.
insanezenmistress: why should we depend on the thing we create,and devalue
the mind of man?
RaaN : it's a tool
insanezenmistress : we will not use it as a tool
RaaN : Brain-machine interface will have to keep up with the advances
insanezenmistress : i am so not down with that
RaaN : too bad cos it's fairly inevitable.
insanezenmistress : i know we will take the lazy way out
RaaN : you are interface with a computer right now
insanezenmistress : yup
RaaN : so what aren't you down with?
insanezenmistress: and though we have computers feed us and clothe us and
keep track of us....we would give up human beauty, the development of our
natural resources as well as intellect's natural unification's of our whole
minds and enjoy life. we will still not have evolved
RaaN : bullshit
insanezenmistress : we will still kill
RaaN: that may be true or not
insanezenmistress: we could reach higher
RaaN : the evolution of technology is what it is.. the artist will use the
tools
insanezenmistress : sure, and i am not thinking of abandoning the
machine. But, human evolution is not technological invention.
RaaN: says who? the true technological age is still in its infancy but as
it grows so then does science and reason become more difficult to refute.
insanezenmistress : reason is not human totality. humans are not just
reason
RaaN : no but reason is entirely compatible with true spiritual
enlightenment
insanezenmistress : is it?
RaaN : yes
insanezenmistress : when you take your enlightenment with a computer chip
and mnemonic device it is cheating.
RaaN : no, i didn't say that;but basically irrationality is actually
incompatible with true enlightenment'
insanezenmistress: But that is human NATURE. so them zen masters did have
a perfect logic when they told fairy tales or tugged a bell prior to the
enlightenment of another. That kind of logic is not provable not in the
realm of science and reason.
RaaN : to go beyond reason as one does in spiritual awakening it is not
the same as being irrational.
insanezenmistress: explain please
RaaN : and to go beyond reason one must then know the limits of reason
insanezenmistress : yes
RaaN : what is beyond reason is not nonsense
insanezenmistress: ok
RaaN : Zen masters use a form of teaching to enable a student to reach the
limits of reason and see beyond it but the Buddha was eminently rational.
insanezenmistress : when a person attempts to communicate what is beyond
reason it can only come forth in symbol and wordless meaning or in
mythologies... analogies for this thing the speaker is trying to share granted at the point the notion enters the other mind it is already
delusion but if looked into purely it might reveal the underlying
beyond-ness
RaaN : there are many methods.. they are practical.. they serve a
purpose.. and end.. beyond that end once achieved they can well be
discarded
insanezenmistress : yes but my point is to what good is belief... as a
pointer not the act of believe, i mean the story of it
RaaN : it isn't. To believe is to assume an idea as factual and true
without evidence proof or rationality to believe is to cling to a view
insanezenmistress: .... when i say i believe perhaps i mean i can align my
intention into the mythology.. like i can use a jesus parable to express
a deeper lesson and give jesus the credit. i guess i see belief as method
RaaN : No rational person of sound thinking clings to any view but adopts
it as a practical tool pending some more efficient or complete view.
insanezenmistress : and argue for the legitimacy of the method of the
story/method used. But we all cling until we can't, well we cant start off flying can we?
In the perfect atheist world, little children will read stories about
unreal people in untrue situations to engage them, even play with the
imagination to instill a moral or idea. How is religion different except it
is misused?
RaaN : Many concepts are better explained by use of analogy or simile or
metaphor it is the clinging to a given view that is irrational
anti-enlightened.
It is perfectly natural of a human being to employ tools of
whatever level complexity.
insanezenmistress : ok so normal that i pray and it helps me process
shit.
RaaN : pray?
insanezenmistress : openly converse with myself
RaaN : you call that praying?
insanezenmistress : well i express emotions and comfort, faith etc. what
ever
RaaN : you mean out loud?
insanezenmistress : yeah
RaaN : so you talk to yourself
insanezenmistress : sure
RaaN : move your lips when you read too? lol
insanezenmistress : nope
RaaN : i think to myself but the only time a talk out loud when i'm on my
own when i'm mad...err angry
insanezenmistress : so its ok to externalise and pretend but delusion to
belive in it as outside and all important.
RaaN : Maybe it's just therapeutic to pretend
insanezenmistress : yes. i guess we are all like that..........the
disdainable part is what happens when ego gets involved; is that what you
mean?
RaaN : Depends on how you happen to define the ego.
insanezenmistress: When i should think to myself how important i am that
god talks with me.. and how i have some message to get them to
understand.... i need to blah blah blah
RaaN : i'd say believing any of that would be going in the wrong direction
insanezenmistress : Me too but sometimes it is fun to groove on it......or
in some way psyically or physically meaningful at the moment. Like to
get something written but obsession is OUT.
RaaN : No i mean believing that you are talking to god.
insanezenmistress : well god is the only word i know for it really....
RaaN : thoughts arise, actions occur... believing there is an I that does
it .. is just a belief
insanezenmistress : if there wasn't the body would not move. believe has
nothign to so with moving my body.... i can believe the arm will move but
unless the I lifts it in obdience to belief it can't move... er wont move
of my doing... it could be moved but that is belief also
RaaN : a thought occurs to lift the arm and the arm lifts
insanezenmistress : if i chose
RaaN : you huh?
Better look into that
insanezenmistress : ....
if the arm is moved and not by my thought.... wait, the
thought of the pusher of my arm moved
RaaN : you control your arm you control the thought to move your arm.
insanezenmistress : ...lighting my ciggarette and i chose that over waving
my hand.
RaaN: you control the urge to think to move it who controls the you that
does this?
insanezenmistress : i suppose some people would guess it is god.
RaaN: so all your actions are acts of God?
insanezenmistress : kinda, but i don't know how to respond.
RaaN : it's pretty basic.. if i am in control then do i control my
controlling?
insanezenmistress : yes
RaaN : and control my controlling controlling and control that?
insanezenmistress : ok so it goes on.... that must mean it is error.
RaaN : ad infintum how do i get anything done at all?
insanezenmistress : will..you stop the mind
RaaN : do i think.. i think i'll think this thought as i think the
thought? do i decide to decide the decision i am making as i decide?
insanezenmistress :perhaps we do making infinite decisions it is borne
from an impulse....you think the goal and your mind sets about showing you
how...it is fast
RaaN: we don't. The control seems to me pretty much a hindsigth idea.
insanezenmistress : *sigh*
RaaN : no-self
insanezenmistress : what is I
RaaN : not-I......
insanezenmistress : is it the same It for each of us therefore not
individaul? AS in 'you are as much I and i am unto myself?'
RaaN : how do you know I have an I?
insanezenmistress : because of your conscience.. it differs. ...weird that
contradicts huh? it differs because of your view... also you have an I
becasue your knowledge is other than mine and when we agree it is the same
as mine....
insanezenmistress : er scratch that
RaaN : all you see is words on the screen. i could be a spontaneously
arisen program that mimics conversation taking random parts of existing
words from various source according to an algorhythm based on your input; in fact that is really exactly what this you call me is.
insanezenmistress : hum, a feed back loop but, no i thought i meant something different.
RaaN : it's a belief
insanezenmistress : hum
RaaN : A belief in self is ego. Ego is as self with a history. Zen is the
direct pointing at the true nature of the self beyond words and
scriptures. The true nature of the self is no-self..... no-self no-other ....but if
you then say all is one you'd have gone off track.
Imagine all you see is appearance only.. no actual substance behind
it.. like the matrix only no reality to wake up to.
insanezenmistress : you and i are feedback loops of the same infinite
knowledge.
RaaN : that part is easy
insanezenmistress : woo hoo..........
..................................
RaaN : next imagine there is only appearance but nobody seeing it. the appearance is not an appearance of anything nor appearing to anyone
but as appearance cannot be appearance at all
insanezenmistress : sounds like babble.
RaaN : not anything appearing and not appearing to anyone it cannot then
be called appearance but it is appearance only.
insanezenmistress : i just thought, maybe where this leads is the
appearence is in our imaginations
RaaN : whose? no one there looking.
insanezenmistress: mine when i imagine for myself. our's when we imagine we
wake up in a creul world. (this "no one looking is going " bit is going to come back to haunt
me when it comes around, isn't it?) . I look, don't * I count*?
RaaN : that's a belief
insanezenmistress : hum...then what do i see; what do i rationalise?
RaaN : what proof do you really have that there is a self behind your eyes
looking?
insanezenmistress : science shows how all "things" are parts of larger
orginisums. all things have symbiotic function within larger things. our consciousness sould be a thing within a larger being
RaaN: Meister Eckhart, the christian mystic said "The eye with which I see
God is the eye with which God sees me"
insanezenmistress: yes yes
RaaN : think instead that the I that sees that is that which is seen
insanezenmistress : ok..
RaaN: that trying to find where the seeing is leads to realizing that the
seeing is all, without any seer nor any seen
insanezenmistress : yes and that is why we can share ideas
RaaN : and yet we can't latch onto this seeing as some ultimate oneness
insanezenmistress : no.........we cant.........
RaaN : becasue without an i seeing or a thing seen how can it be called
seeing at all?
insanezenmistress : ok
RaaN : see?
insanezenmistress : i dont know
RaaN : lol
........................
RaaN: With no substance or person of god behind experience and no you or
self experiencing there is only experience itself except with no you or
i/it it cannot really be understood as experience
to asnwer you question.. this self is an illusion so is substance or
concreteness
insanezenmistress : i could just as easily not be. anti conscious: and
whos to say that state does not have its own awareness.
RaaN : an illusion caused by the nature of phenomena which fully seen and
the illusion seen as such, is not even that anymore because as soon as you
say the phenomena is real or that you see it the illusion of self and
substance comes back.
insanezenmistress : alright... yes..
RaaN : without being fooled by the illusion anymore the mind thinks the
body acts events occur.. words are spoken responses are given emotions
balance.. the natural tendeny to heal.. the body the mind and the minds of
others naturally occurs.
insanezenmistress : ... i suppose this proces brings a flowing *perfect*
harmony to ones living.
RaaN : go with the flow.. is not you going nor anything flowing
insanezenmistress : yes...ok just its been a while since i looks so deep
at 'there is not an i' that goes with the flow and ascribs meaning or
intent....: ekk my brain is tired
RaaN : the heart beats the lungs breath the mouth eats the body ages death
happens.. nothing is lost
insanezenmistress : a neumonic device might be a loverly gift from satan
about now ...
(((((PS.. i'll have to try spell check later casue it is on the frizt))))))
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
what if, there is no *i*
I am not sure i will be able to recreate the essence of the conversation i had yesternight, but i will try.
I suppose it was an extremely logical direct conversation. But there is the end of it which i cant think is true even if it is logical. That being i am not I.
that appearance has no form; i am not seeing.
my Brain flips over and i think in terms of if that then this...... and this is borne of the implication of that and that and that.... see things are...
But he would then drone on in what really appears to be a circular kind of logic that ends again with there fore i am not.
baffling.
so i exist in my end of not-ness, wondering if there is a flaw in logic.
because no matter how true a thing is... it's implications don't seem to be my experience... it seems i cannot effect my reality according to my will if i am the seeing and the seen. Yet i sometimes see how my reality is completely the one i made. baffling.
hummm
well i know i am off some but... i hope the person wont mind if i quote him and poke at his effigy for all my two readers to see.
*was side tracked... it seems that i accidentally killed my praying mantis female. see i have them roaming freely in the kitchen to help with the roach problem. I am really hurt....
But i pondered as i was taking her nearly lifeless body outside...... was it nerves twitching or was it life?.... and recalling how firmly a human can hold on to the bear is-ness of life, sometimes by shear will when all means are exhausted.
I thought...
this bugs life force. it's conscious.. its will to exist as it is............ is it not the same as my own?
That superiority of race and morality infest themselves as an after thought... This creature's impulse and images of staying conscious are the same as mine. This critter might not be able to think to itself and imagine great poetry's about the winds and the yummy grasshoppers of its youth............ but then one cannot say..... i don't recall being a praying mantis.
unless.... in that whole written experience of what a mantis might be. i have made the appearance of a thing experienced as mantis......... and in the time that i physically experienced the mantis it was and i was it.
now i am not mantis...yet she... the mantis..... continues in her experience of either dieing or recovering in the grass.
i assume.
see that person i was talking with kept marking a place called.."belief"
i guess i am still very tripped up on apparent duality.
brb.....
Quothe.
" insanezenmistress : Wouldn't the world have to give up personal freedom to have the same logic.
RaaN : knowledge is a living thing as vital as humanity itself.. it grows and changes and self corrects... plenty of room for freedom.
insanezenmistress : individuality is akin to personal mythology. Is a personal belief system disdain-able? ( here observe the word disdain-able is to due with the author's not disdaining belief in the way as the Opponent.)
RaaN : true.. you'd have to believe you really exist
insanezenmistress : i think ; i believe i am part of an existence; and it is my perosnal mythology to fancy a war with my bugs.
RaaN: remember no-self.... phenomenology.. how seeing is not found in the eye or the object or the light between.
RaaN : you can alter your way of understanding things to suit a given problem and just as easily discard it in another case.. that's freedom.... however to abandon your senses and lose your integrity would be irrational if not insane.
.......................
Well.... so lets think.......
seeing is not seen in the eye.
at first glance we say to ourselves...it is obvious that i see what it there... right?
then he goes.....
RaaN : association by similarity is primitive infantile thinking btw.
As a child i though the clouds made the wind.. and the trees, cos i'd see them wave.and when i waved a branch it made wind.
insanezenmistress : and Do you think i am engaged an association by similarity in another way?
RaaN : well thinking that having a rational mind would prevent people from having individuality and freedom, that's kind of a nonsequitor. Critical thinking is a learned skill eh.
insanezenmistress : oh hush
........
yes i got stomped ...
well as time would have it i shall have to copy and edit this conversation later on.
Leaving you a Cliff hanger.... in the mean time read the Surangama sutra.....TWICE!
THEN
Ponder this segway quote from possibly the same Person toward another person that touches on the same ideas here expounded.....
*groans... wait till next blog....*
I suppose it was an extremely logical direct conversation. But there is the end of it which i cant think is true even if it is logical. That being i am not I.
that appearance has no form; i am not seeing.
my Brain flips over and i think in terms of if that then this...... and this is borne of the implication of that and that and that.... see things are...
But he would then drone on in what really appears to be a circular kind of logic that ends again with there fore i am not.
baffling.
so i exist in my end of not-ness, wondering if there is a flaw in logic.
because no matter how true a thing is... it's implications don't seem to be my experience... it seems i cannot effect my reality according to my will if i am the seeing and the seen. Yet i sometimes see how my reality is completely the one i made. baffling.
hummm
well i know i am off some but... i hope the person wont mind if i quote him and poke at his effigy for all my two readers to see.
*was side tracked... it seems that i accidentally killed my praying mantis female. see i have them roaming freely in the kitchen to help with the roach problem. I am really hurt....
But i pondered as i was taking her nearly lifeless body outside...... was it nerves twitching or was it life?.... and recalling how firmly a human can hold on to the bear is-ness of life, sometimes by shear will when all means are exhausted.
I thought...
this bugs life force. it's conscious.. its will to exist as it is............ is it not the same as my own?
That superiority of race and morality infest themselves as an after thought... This creature's impulse and images of staying conscious are the same as mine. This critter might not be able to think to itself and imagine great poetry's about the winds and the yummy grasshoppers of its youth............ but then one cannot say..... i don't recall being a praying mantis.
unless.... in that whole written experience of what a mantis might be. i have made the appearance of a thing experienced as mantis......... and in the time that i physically experienced the mantis it was and i was it.
now i am not mantis...yet she... the mantis..... continues in her experience of either dieing or recovering in the grass.
i assume.
see that person i was talking with kept marking a place called.."belief"
i guess i am still very tripped up on apparent duality.
brb.....
Quothe.
" insanezenmistress : Wouldn't the world have to give up personal freedom to have the same logic.
RaaN : knowledge is a living thing as vital as humanity itself.. it grows and changes and self corrects... plenty of room for freedom.
insanezenmistress : individuality is akin to personal mythology. Is a personal belief system disdain-able? ( here observe the word disdain-able is to due with the author's not disdaining belief in the way as the Opponent.)
RaaN : true.. you'd have to believe you really exist
insanezenmistress : i think ; i believe i am part of an existence; and it is my perosnal mythology to fancy a war with my bugs.
RaaN: remember no-self.... phenomenology.. how seeing is not found in the eye or the object or the light between.
RaaN : you can alter your way of understanding things to suit a given problem and just as easily discard it in another case.. that's freedom.... however to abandon your senses and lose your integrity would be irrational if not insane.
.......................
Well.... so lets think.......
seeing is not seen in the eye.
at first glance we say to ourselves...it is obvious that i see what it there... right?
then he goes.....
RaaN : association by similarity is primitive infantile thinking btw.
As a child i though the clouds made the wind.. and the trees, cos i'd see them wave.and when i waved a branch it made wind.
insanezenmistress : and Do you think i am engaged an association by similarity in another way?
RaaN : well thinking that having a rational mind would prevent people from having individuality and freedom, that's kind of a nonsequitor. Critical thinking is a learned skill eh.
insanezenmistress : oh hush
........
yes i got stomped ...
well as time would have it i shall have to copy and edit this conversation later on.
Leaving you a Cliff hanger.... in the mean time read the Surangama sutra.....TWICE!
THEN
Ponder this segway quote from possibly the same Person toward another person that touches on the same ideas here expounded.....
""Not-self" does not mean that the personality does not exist, and it does not mean that people are unintelligent and can't talk. It means that there is no being or entity in the midst of those mechanisms and experiences.
Any time I've asked you to demonstrate that there is a being present or necessary for you to have experiences or to talk about them or to feel that you exist, you either ignore the question or give a self-referential answer, meaning that you use the question as the answer.
For instance, if I ask you "how do you know there's a self responsible for you talking" you will say "well if there were no self I wouldn't be talking." That's not a proof, just a belief. I've asked you to tell me where the self is and what it looks like.
Use famous methods for either showing that there is nothing there behind the concept of self, or forcing the person who sincerely answers the question to give a detailed explanation of what constitutes self. You do neither.
You either give a vague answer like "the whole universe" or "the universe looking back at itself in the mirror," or else go back to stating that the fact that we can do, think and feel proves there is a self, which it does not.
Your mystical experiences are valid in their own right, but there is no rigor in how you connect those experiences with the concept of self and not-self as used by Buddhists."
*groans... wait till next blog....*
Thursday, July 30, 2009
A time to Chill
Gentle Reader;
I think i have said all i got. I got no new thoughts or need to explain.
My real life has become worrisome and i am in a bit of a depression, and frankly i have nothing to think about that would not come out as blah blah life sucks blah blah....
And my readers have had quite enough of that.
IF i have a new thought i'll be back.
I am finished with the conspiracy shit... that fear has been replaced by "will i have a home in five months?"
I have been playing a very mindless game on face book....
but my smile is real so don't worry. I just need to not think for a while.
try and apply all the mental stuff to my actual life and maybe get my muscles in shape, and focus on my home schooling again.
loves and good thoughts to all
Justine IZM....
(psssst i am very likely to respond to any co-mentors just i don't wanna pontificate anymore for a while)
I think i have said all i got. I got no new thoughts or need to explain.
My real life has become worrisome and i am in a bit of a depression, and frankly i have nothing to think about that would not come out as blah blah life sucks blah blah....
And my readers have had quite enough of that.
IF i have a new thought i'll be back.
I am finished with the conspiracy shit... that fear has been replaced by "will i have a home in five months?"
I have been playing a very mindless game on face book....
but my smile is real so don't worry. I just need to not think for a while.
try and apply all the mental stuff to my actual life and maybe get my muscles in shape, and focus on my home schooling again.
loves and good thoughts to all
Justine IZM....
(psssst i am very likely to respond to any co-mentors just i don't wanna pontificate anymore for a while)
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Situations
I have watched a movie called "Home".
Is there nothing that will be done?.... is there nothing sacred....is there nothing that we have not done?
Seems quite a shame that .....
oh why should i bother.... what do i expect me and my possibly 6 readers to come up with some solution?
Well yes... frankly, i do... but should we never get to implement them, shall we preserve them for some future?
Perhaps our writings can be the next 2012 disinformation.
I should hope that the size and the changes our climate will be going thru, coupled with the mass die offs from pandemic and starvation, should SHOULLLLLLDDDDDDD........leave some pockets of human survivors.
(funny how the first time we lost lots of achent knowledge, it was the Christians who dun it, but this time we will loose every scrap of knowledge save what fragments have the fortune of being either set in stone or put in the right clay pot. but it is the Capitalists and the Communists, and the many others just trying to compete with Western rape of humanity.
I would advise the person who finds what ever copy of this fragment is left, to use all his efforts in science to find ways to re carpet the lacking top soils.....to manage lava to make land....To find a way to store/compress/ or other wise recycle garbage into oils for generations yet farther off.
I suggest we do not crowd our lands with people, so that everyone would be able to have healthy space and good earth.... i suggest we let the vast places that are deserts and thick forests now, remain....
live within it's space and clear only enough to maintain small towns.
i wonder if deserts will ever be grass lands again. If we left it alone....if we use our water wisely and creeped inland form fertile places into deserts... could we slowly re claim that land? ahhhh the dreams...
Forget them.
toooo many people are poor... too many resources are gone... too much simple vanity rule this world.
We need simpler lives... we need only worry about our immediate concerns... but no.. what we have created in this world.... all built on lies........
shoot even if the movie is hype, isn't a message of wisdom necessary? Seems kinda ridiculous to believe that humans haven't impacted the earth. One fact.... that staggers me every time it comes to mind..... 300 MILLION YEARS of leaves, and animals, and trees, and carbon created oil......and 200 years of dependence has put it back into the sky. I wonder what the facts are one the resources that make up Steel, and other wastefully used items like aluminium foil. I confess i love my aluminium foil but... in the interest of the world do i NEED it?
So many non essential to life....and well beyond minor convinces our production has gone into insane luxury.
Ocean waves of difference could be made if we would find some unity and make socially conscious decisions. Perhaps we can get 30 millions people to eat and send rice to starving places for one month.
Perhaps we could make our own bread... thus changing the ratio of grains needed to make store bought. Making it possible to feed some starving people. What if we made fish a luxury? It once was. You only ate the fish you caught, or if you passed a coastal town, and had a BIG block of ice.
If maybe we made fish available in stores or hatcheries, but not for restaurants. What if we let poor charlie tuna live in peace and make more baby's we can eat later......repentitivly later...50, 75, or 100 years later.
What if we Harvest rats, and chickens, and dogs and cats and rabbits? in stead of so many cows and pigs......
If we expanded the meat market the burden of production might find equilibrium. And of course available in stores and therefore small restaurants, but not cooperation's. All the left over chicken can be canned and sent to some starving place.
IF we would agree to simplify our lives....we have enough convenient and distracting entertainments. I don't want a smaller video camera i was right happy with the big VHS style one.
Stupid little devices... it reminds me of Douglas Adams when we said something about the people where happy as long as they have their digital watches.
IF you are happy with your 300 "friends" on facespace and your extended network and spending 50 meaningless dollars a month on your apps ....then you should be able to blitz your mind out while eating rice and composting and caring about things that are truly important.
The other day my son and i went to Subway. This is a rare treat for us, (we are lower middle class, it is rapidly becoming the new poor) I was talking with him, helping him decide what to have. Seemed normal to me, but i think the people who worked there thought it was strange. or maybe my son was autistic and required such tender talking with. I suppose lots of people are in a hurry and rush their kids along, while they talk on their phones. What ever happened to loving your child?
To be in his face space? To have his real friendship?
I tell ya i fear for this planet
ANYWAY..
If say, and alien life comes to the planet before we all kill ourselves, and they are intelligent, would they not dominate us?
Could not the intelligent of our species dominate it?
OF course you know that once thusly dominated there will be at least 50 years of constant fighting.
Too bad those who dominate will never get to see the possibilities they set in motion. Certainly the governments are willing to aid the world for the price of our souls. No wonder the bible said of you go that way you lose your soul... You lose all the RIGHT to enjoy those things that are the Majesty of being human.
Sure the world will survive and perhaps people to .. just in the nic of time by our green socialism. But will we ever advance?
It is so bad that in order to do right by mother earth we need to repent and give up raping her, and eat only the barest needed, because she is tired... she is sick... and she is very PISSED.
But we are Human....that means we will do too little too late, we will not all "agree" until the decision is do or die. We will not be convinced that if it ever will be do or die then it is ALREADY time to decide because their are infinite numbers ahead of us int he future that need this planet.
Never convinced while our air conditions are churning and our cold drinks smell of coconut and rum and the sweat and blood of a man who lives in a ti shack with his extended family. He does not have a drink, He fears starvation and sickness, he does not have many children, he is not lazy... he works in a factory that bottles your rum.
We think because we cant see it , it is not there. We will wonder who will save us when we live like that. It seems inevitable that when we live in those conditions there will necessarily be a pandemic.
conditions cannot exist like that without some newly formed mutation of death.
but nature normally creates those born immune. Lets hope they will not live life threatening distances from each other, to perpetuate mating.
I have often wondered if the earth may have gone thru this before. Is there a history we have not found? Perhaps there where survives once before. Gawd... we haven't learned a thing.
izm
Is there nothing that will be done?.... is there nothing sacred....is there nothing that we have not done?
Seems quite a shame that .....
oh why should i bother.... what do i expect me and my possibly 6 readers to come up with some solution?
Well yes... frankly, i do... but should we never get to implement them, shall we preserve them for some future?
Perhaps our writings can be the next 2012 disinformation.
I should hope that the size and the changes our climate will be going thru, coupled with the mass die offs from pandemic and starvation, should SHOULLLLLLDDDDDDD........leave some pockets of human survivors.
(funny how the first time we lost lots of achent knowledge, it was the Christians who dun it, but this time we will loose every scrap of knowledge save what fragments have the fortune of being either set in stone or put in the right clay pot. but it is the Capitalists and the Communists, and the many others just trying to compete with Western rape of humanity.
I would advise the person who finds what ever copy of this fragment is left, to use all his efforts in science to find ways to re carpet the lacking top soils.....to manage lava to make land....To find a way to store/compress/ or other wise recycle garbage into oils for generations yet farther off.
I suggest we do not crowd our lands with people, so that everyone would be able to have healthy space and good earth.... i suggest we let the vast places that are deserts and thick forests now, remain....
live within it's space and clear only enough to maintain small towns.
i wonder if deserts will ever be grass lands again. If we left it alone....if we use our water wisely and creeped inland form fertile places into deserts... could we slowly re claim that land? ahhhh the dreams...
Forget them.
toooo many people are poor... too many resources are gone... too much simple vanity rule this world.
We need simpler lives... we need only worry about our immediate concerns... but no.. what we have created in this world.... all built on lies........
shoot even if the movie is hype, isn't a message of wisdom necessary? Seems kinda ridiculous to believe that humans haven't impacted the earth. One fact.... that staggers me every time it comes to mind..... 300 MILLION YEARS of leaves, and animals, and trees, and carbon created oil......and 200 years of dependence has put it back into the sky. I wonder what the facts are one the resources that make up Steel, and other wastefully used items like aluminium foil. I confess i love my aluminium foil but... in the interest of the world do i NEED it?
So many non essential to life....and well beyond minor convinces our production has gone into insane luxury.
Ocean waves of difference could be made if we would find some unity and make socially conscious decisions. Perhaps we can get 30 millions people to eat and send rice to starving places for one month.
Perhaps we could make our own bread... thus changing the ratio of grains needed to make store bought. Making it possible to feed some starving people. What if we made fish a luxury? It once was. You only ate the fish you caught, or if you passed a coastal town, and had a BIG block of ice.
If maybe we made fish available in stores or hatcheries, but not for restaurants. What if we let poor charlie tuna live in peace and make more baby's we can eat later......repentitivly later...50, 75, or 100 years later.
What if we Harvest rats, and chickens, and dogs and cats and rabbits? in stead of so many cows and pigs......
If we expanded the meat market the burden of production might find equilibrium. And of course available in stores and therefore small restaurants, but not cooperation's. All the left over chicken can be canned and sent to some starving place.
IF we would agree to simplify our lives....we have enough convenient and distracting entertainments. I don't want a smaller video camera i was right happy with the big VHS style one.
Stupid little devices... it reminds me of Douglas Adams when we said something about the people where happy as long as they have their digital watches.
IF you are happy with your 300 "friends" on facespace and your extended network and spending 50 meaningless dollars a month on your apps ....then you should be able to blitz your mind out while eating rice and composting and caring about things that are truly important.
The other day my son and i went to Subway. This is a rare treat for us, (we are lower middle class, it is rapidly becoming the new poor) I was talking with him, helping him decide what to have. Seemed normal to me, but i think the people who worked there thought it was strange. or maybe my son was autistic and required such tender talking with. I suppose lots of people are in a hurry and rush their kids along, while they talk on their phones. What ever happened to loving your child?
To be in his face space? To have his real friendship?
I tell ya i fear for this planet
ANYWAY..
If say, and alien life comes to the planet before we all kill ourselves, and they are intelligent, would they not dominate us?
Could not the intelligent of our species dominate it?
OF course you know that once thusly dominated there will be at least 50 years of constant fighting.
Too bad those who dominate will never get to see the possibilities they set in motion. Certainly the governments are willing to aid the world for the price of our souls. No wonder the bible said of you go that way you lose your soul... You lose all the RIGHT to enjoy those things that are the Majesty of being human.
Sure the world will survive and perhaps people to .. just in the nic of time by our green socialism. But will we ever advance?
It is so bad that in order to do right by mother earth we need to repent and give up raping her, and eat only the barest needed, because she is tired... she is sick... and she is very PISSED.
But we are Human....that means we will do too little too late, we will not all "agree" until the decision is do or die. We will not be convinced that if it ever will be do or die then it is ALREADY time to decide because their are infinite numbers ahead of us int he future that need this planet.
Never convinced while our air conditions are churning and our cold drinks smell of coconut and rum and the sweat and blood of a man who lives in a ti shack with his extended family. He does not have a drink, He fears starvation and sickness, he does not have many children, he is not lazy... he works in a factory that bottles your rum.
We think because we cant see it , it is not there. We will wonder who will save us when we live like that. It seems inevitable that when we live in those conditions there will necessarily be a pandemic.
conditions cannot exist like that without some newly formed mutation of death.
but nature normally creates those born immune. Lets hope they will not live life threatening distances from each other, to perpetuate mating.
I have often wondered if the earth may have gone thru this before. Is there a history we have not found? Perhaps there where survives once before. Gawd... we haven't learned a thing.
izm
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
The Words of the Prophet.
http://thephilosophicrazor.blogspot.com/2008/10/danger-of-our-present-calm.html
I am loving this man's book. He talks about our human population problem, our food production rates, and many other things. His book asks deep questions about our governments and values. He presents ideas for solutions and necessary life changes to better ensure humanities survival come what may. He seems to speak from wisdom instead of Ideology. If your a reader of mine check his stuff out and if you like...SPREAD THE WORD. Create think tanks, cause action. (no i don't mean in a hysterical flattered fan kind of way, i mean lets evolve god damn it!)
A tantalizing quote from Philosopher8
"""""And so I proclaim to Humanity: The time has come when we must evolve as a species. We cannot continue to exist virtually as animals when we are so numerous and possess such power to consume and destroy. We are in possession of an entire living planet. Let us behave like we deserve to own it!
Let us not allow ourselves to exist as locusts, breeding and eating until the whole world is forever blighted. We must run our planet and our species in a much more focused, intelligent, and comprehensive manner; not pandering to the short-sighted intentions and cries of the unenlightened majority.
We must seek great power over the affairs of humanity, not out of vanity or greed, but as an adult must learn to govern himself and those around him when the duties of leadership are needed. Casting humanity into a more orderly and potent form is the only way we can accomplish our survival and prosperity.
And just because many tyrants in the past have used similar language to serve their devious purposes, this in no way invalidates the logic that order is superior to chaos. We simply must ensure that the order we establish serves humanity, and not the base intentions of charismatic demagogues like Hitler, Lenin, or Stalin. """
((( i can't wait until i read about your proposals for keeping the leadership balanced. it has been a very difficult thing for me to ponder, how to preempt human evil.)))
""" When embarking upon a voyage as important as discovering a superior form of government, it is essential to approach the problem in an objective and rational manner.
To accomplish this, we must first take a long hard look at our present governments, and at the philosophies that spawn them, to see the flaws in their construction. Once we see what is wrong with these philosophies and governments, we can then take steps to construct new modes of thought and control that do not possess these same weaknesses.
If we approach the problem in a scientific manner, seeking those goals I outlined at the beginning of this work, we may discover the way forward that makes our species both stronger and more humane. """"
We echo each other's thoughts on many counts. Only you are farther ahead of the game in your considerations. I look forward to reading more. I wonder what book(s) could i read that would further help me understand political theory such as it is. I would like to dialogue not just play catch up or praise each other's insight all the time.
my question
(1) Seems to me that in order to implement this new government ...
we would have to greatly simplify what would be normal life and values. We could not maintain the jet set lifestyle, or the convenience lifestyle... a life style change what would be manageable is simple.
And as we are able to maintain and grow a surplus our focus can be scientific or what not...we can systematically grow in technical arenas while maintaining our progress. And not make great lopsided leaps in the sciences but create and educate and implement widely a few advances before inching forward again.
More like living in the 1800's. Back then you had to make your bread, and pound your own corn meal... economies where basic and good things where luxury more than necessity. For many people already in the world such a lifestyle would be a major advancement.
Also it engenders families to care for good virtues and enjoy their lives and dramas, giving us creative, more wholesome citizens. (this is my little house on the prairie theory)
I mean much of our modern lives is engineered to not engender communication or precious moments. And when we go to save the world, people will have to give up most of these silly conveniences so we can feed a few more thousand people with the flour that goes in to tasty cakes.
The Egyptians had a very limited diet...we have a lot of ways to put nutrition into a pill, perhaps we don't need as much farming. I suppose i am asking about food replication huh? But the basic point is perhaps there is too much variety, and luxury foods, in order to sustain life we might need to simplify diets. More dependence on *eekkkk* carbs and less fishing, No Kentucky fried chicken and McDonald's, and good bye Doritos.
Bleak i tell ya. Our modern houses have kitchens the size of a bathroom because people have forgotten how to cook and don't NEED kitchens anymore. Did you know that in Rome, just before the fall people ate food from vendors and seldom ate at home....
such similarity.
I am loving this man's book. He talks about our human population problem, our food production rates, and many other things. His book asks deep questions about our governments and values. He presents ideas for solutions and necessary life changes to better ensure humanities survival come what may. He seems to speak from wisdom instead of Ideology. If your a reader of mine check his stuff out and if you like...SPREAD THE WORD. Create think tanks, cause action. (no i don't mean in a hysterical flattered fan kind of way, i mean lets evolve god damn it!)
A tantalizing quote from Philosopher8
"""""And so I proclaim to Humanity: The time has come when we must evolve as a species. We cannot continue to exist virtually as animals when we are so numerous and possess such power to consume and destroy. We are in possession of an entire living planet. Let us behave like we deserve to own it!
Let us not allow ourselves to exist as locusts, breeding and eating until the whole world is forever blighted. We must run our planet and our species in a much more focused, intelligent, and comprehensive manner; not pandering to the short-sighted intentions and cries of the unenlightened majority.
We must seek great power over the affairs of humanity, not out of vanity or greed, but as an adult must learn to govern himself and those around him when the duties of leadership are needed. Casting humanity into a more orderly and potent form is the only way we can accomplish our survival and prosperity.
And just because many tyrants in the past have used similar language to serve their devious purposes, this in no way invalidates the logic that order is superior to chaos. We simply must ensure that the order we establish serves humanity, and not the base intentions of charismatic demagogues like Hitler, Lenin, or Stalin. """
((( i can't wait until i read about your proposals for keeping the leadership balanced. it has been a very difficult thing for me to ponder, how to preempt human evil.)))
""" When embarking upon a voyage as important as discovering a superior form of government, it is essential to approach the problem in an objective and rational manner.
To accomplish this, we must first take a long hard look at our present governments, and at the philosophies that spawn them, to see the flaws in their construction. Once we see what is wrong with these philosophies and governments, we can then take steps to construct new modes of thought and control that do not possess these same weaknesses.
If we approach the problem in a scientific manner, seeking those goals I outlined at the beginning of this work, we may discover the way forward that makes our species both stronger and more humane. """"
We echo each other's thoughts on many counts. Only you are farther ahead of the game in your considerations. I look forward to reading more. I wonder what book(s) could i read that would further help me understand political theory such as it is. I would like to dialogue not just play catch up or praise each other's insight all the time.
my question
(1) Seems to me that in order to implement this new government ...
we would have to greatly simplify what would be normal life and values. We could not maintain the jet set lifestyle, or the convenience lifestyle... a life style change what would be manageable is simple.
And as we are able to maintain and grow a surplus our focus can be scientific or what not...we can systematically grow in technical arenas while maintaining our progress. And not make great lopsided leaps in the sciences but create and educate and implement widely a few advances before inching forward again.
More like living in the 1800's. Back then you had to make your bread, and pound your own corn meal... economies where basic and good things where luxury more than necessity. For many people already in the world such a lifestyle would be a major advancement.
Also it engenders families to care for good virtues and enjoy their lives and dramas, giving us creative, more wholesome citizens. (this is my little house on the prairie theory)
I mean much of our modern lives is engineered to not engender communication or precious moments. And when we go to save the world, people will have to give up most of these silly conveniences so we can feed a few more thousand people with the flour that goes in to tasty cakes.
The Egyptians had a very limited diet...we have a lot of ways to put nutrition into a pill, perhaps we don't need as much farming. I suppose i am asking about food replication huh? But the basic point is perhaps there is too much variety, and luxury foods, in order to sustain life we might need to simplify diets. More dependence on *eekkkk* carbs and less fishing, No Kentucky fried chicken and McDonald's, and good bye Doritos.
Bleak i tell ya. Our modern houses have kitchens the size of a bathroom because people have forgotten how to cook and don't NEED kitchens anymore. Did you know that in Rome, just before the fall people ate food from vendors and seldom ate at home....
such similarity.
Friday, May 15, 2009
An Askew Veiw
I understand the quoting sources such as wikipedia or comments would not be acceptable in "formal" debate. But I am common and un-properly educated in the schools of personal observation, research , observation and gleaning tidbits of understanding from the understandings i surround myself with.
And this blog is my place to shadow box where it is fine to debate and discuss the wiki's which are a fair representation of the collections of mind's titbit's. IE. I argue with what is "common Knowledge" As the typical debates tend to baffle the casual observer with knowledge they are years and many dollars removed from.
I have been reading " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis "
When you get to the early life section of this article the begins presenting "evidence" in terms of "Suggest" "some research" and what i vaguely relate to guess work. Let's look at it.
""" Evidence of the early appearance of life comes from the Isua super crustal belt in Western Greenland and from similar formations in the nearby Akilia Islands. Carbon entering into rock formations has a concentration of elemental δ13C of about −5.5, where because of a preferential biotic uptake of 12C, biomass has a δ13C of between −20 and −30. These isotopic fingerprints are preserved in the sediments, and Mojzis has used this technique to suggest that life existed on the planet already by 3.85 billion years ago.[27] Lazcano and Miller (1994) suggest that the rapidity of the evolution of life is dictated by the rate of recirculating water through mid-ocean submarine vents. Complete recirculation takes 10 million years, thus any organic compounds produced by then would be altered or destroyed by temperatures exceeding 300 °C (572 °F). """"
I am cirten my point of view is not clear yet to the reader. But it seems to me when the author points to the evidence, he is pointing to a rock. In this rock it shows "time".
ok yes that information is in the rock but since you have not observed 10 million years you arrived at this evidence though math, counting the layers etc.
Please bear with me. I understand that science does grow and evolve so forth and so on.
But sometimes i see people giving all these evidences but when you look at the evidences they are admittedly guess work.
They say the theory of gravity is not comprehended completely. We cannot be authoritative that we have understood the workings of a cell. For one idea there is another.. and each idea does have evidence that suggests thus and such.
AM i off base here?
intelligent guess work.
My other question is ' is there a science that collaborates all the various sciences in to congruity?
and When someone says in rebuttal to the creationist "They think that the laws they observe here have to be true for everywhere" ...does he not eat crow? As science is baffled when the laws of physics break down at the singularity. Oh i bet the person was thinking about the bible.
Here is a tidbit from to and from the comments section of this: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13615-evolution-myths-everything-is-an-adaptation.html
The Person's interpretation of the scientist says: " The scientist says 'this is as good as good as i can get, this theory. Everyone else, whack at it like a pinata and lets see if we can make it better, or disprove my theory and come up with a better one based on evidence.' "
The Agnostic answers "Sounds good and fair. I take issue that your evidence is very like when we look at the sun and watch it move, and then base the science of navigation on it.
And you will only change your mind if i can come up with a study that suggests a flaw in your theory. Or a study that suggests something of my own theory.
But i read in to this remark a little more since to my observation much of what we "know" is arrived at by abstract means, and the Stephen-Urey experiment has yet to create intelligent life, that what you really need is evidence yourselves, you have theories that contradict and sciences that clash. One side of science creating ways to preserve life and another that seeks better ways to exterminate it.
So basically you are asking your would be debater to prove your theory then dis-prove it; or to fail to prove your theory and suggest it is flawed. But science has not proven any of its theories... the theory of relativity is not yet the LAW of relativity. '
Anyway....
The person's interpretation of the intelligent designer says: " The intelligent designer says 'This is how things are made by men on earth. Therefore the universe must be subject to the same laws, so someone intelligent -by man's definition of that word.- must have made the universe.' "
The Agnostic groans and rolls her eyes. "How correct they are."
" alright dude.... great over use of the word "man" to make the ID'er sound all brain washy. And Doesn't physics expect that their laws would be true in the universe? I am sure they might have a theoretical science out there working with "imaginary digits" (please read Stephen Hawkins history of time)
Anyway......
The person to respond to his interpretation of the ID'er says: " There's not really any arguing with that or analyzing it to see if it holds water, because it's based on a closely held philosophical belief, as well as to some extent a desire for that to be true."
The Agnostic sympathises. That must really suck. How many mitosis's have you observed? in order for you to do anything but accept with blind faith your science information you would never be finished with college. And you would , if you look hard enough always find questions.
I understand, being finite humans the mind cannot take in all that knowledge. And the testing procedures would be impossible. i sure wouldn't want to live always proving stuff before i can enjoy it in simplicity. And most humans at some point decide their understanding complete enough to merit FAITH in the seeming general direction of the EVIDENCE.
What spark is it in ourselves that seeks to intelligently design our worlds? And Intelligently reverse engineer the materials at his disposal to see if he can make it for himself?
Is that self reflective and outwardly expressive spark something of divinity? Something of the origin's making?
And this blog is my place to shadow box where it is fine to debate and discuss the wiki's which are a fair representation of the collections of mind's titbit's. IE. I argue with what is "common Knowledge" As the typical debates tend to baffle the casual observer with knowledge they are years and many dollars removed from.
I have been reading " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis "
When you get to the early life section of this article the begins presenting "evidence" in terms of "Suggest" "some research" and what i vaguely relate to guess work. Let's look at it.
""" Evidence of the early appearance of life comes from the Isua super crustal belt in Western Greenland and from similar formations in the nearby Akilia Islands. Carbon entering into rock formations has a concentration of elemental δ13C of about −5.5, where because of a preferential biotic uptake of 12C, biomass has a δ13C of between −20 and −30. These isotopic fingerprints are preserved in the sediments, and Mojzis has used this technique to suggest that life existed on the planet already by 3.85 billion years ago.[27] Lazcano and Miller (1994) suggest that the rapidity of the evolution of life is dictated by the rate of recirculating water through mid-ocean submarine vents. Complete recirculation takes 10 million years, thus any organic compounds produced by then would be altered or destroyed by temperatures exceeding 300 °C (572 °F). """"
I am cirten my point of view is not clear yet to the reader. But it seems to me when the author points to the evidence, he is pointing to a rock. In this rock it shows "time".
ok yes that information is in the rock but since you have not observed 10 million years you arrived at this evidence though math, counting the layers etc.
Please bear with me. I understand that science does grow and evolve so forth and so on.
But sometimes i see people giving all these evidences but when you look at the evidences they are admittedly guess work.
They say the theory of gravity is not comprehended completely. We cannot be authoritative that we have understood the workings of a cell. For one idea there is another.. and each idea does have evidence that suggests thus and such.
AM i off base here?
intelligent guess work.
My other question is ' is there a science that collaborates all the various sciences in to congruity?
and When someone says in rebuttal to the creationist "They think that the laws they observe here have to be true for everywhere" ...does he not eat crow? As science is baffled when the laws of physics break down at the singularity. Oh i bet the person was thinking about the bible.
Here is a tidbit from to and from the comments section of this: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13615-evolution-myths-everything-is-an-adaptation.html
The Person's interpretation of the scientist says: " The scientist says 'this is as good as good as i can get, this theory. Everyone else, whack at it like a pinata and lets see if we can make it better, or disprove my theory and come up with a better one based on evidence.' "
The Agnostic answers "Sounds good and fair. I take issue that your evidence is very like when we look at the sun and watch it move, and then base the science of navigation on it.
And you will only change your mind if i can come up with a study that suggests a flaw in your theory. Or a study that suggests something of my own theory.
But i read in to this remark a little more since to my observation much of what we "know" is arrived at by abstract means, and the Stephen-Urey experiment has yet to create intelligent life, that what you really need is evidence yourselves, you have theories that contradict and sciences that clash. One side of science creating ways to preserve life and another that seeks better ways to exterminate it.
So basically you are asking your would be debater to prove your theory then dis-prove it; or to fail to prove your theory and suggest it is flawed. But science has not proven any of its theories... the theory of relativity is not yet the LAW of relativity. '
Anyway....
The person's interpretation of the intelligent designer says: " The intelligent designer says 'This is how things are made by men on earth. Therefore the universe must be subject to the same laws, so someone intelligent -by man's definition of that word.- must have made the universe.' "
The Agnostic groans and rolls her eyes. "How correct they are."
" alright dude.... great over use of the word "man" to make the ID'er sound all brain washy. And Doesn't physics expect that their laws would be true in the universe? I am sure they might have a theoretical science out there working with "imaginary digits" (please read Stephen Hawkins history of time)
Anyway......
The person to respond to his interpretation of the ID'er says: " There's not really any arguing with that or analyzing it to see if it holds water, because it's based on a closely held philosophical belief, as well as to some extent a desire for that to be true."
The Agnostic sympathises. That must really suck. How many mitosis's have you observed? in order for you to do anything but accept with blind faith your science information you would never be finished with college. And you would , if you look hard enough always find questions.
I understand, being finite humans the mind cannot take in all that knowledge. And the testing procedures would be impossible. i sure wouldn't want to live always proving stuff before i can enjoy it in simplicity. And most humans at some point decide their understanding complete enough to merit FAITH in the seeming general direction of the EVIDENCE.
What spark is it in ourselves that seeks to intelligently design our worlds? And Intelligently reverse engineer the materials at his disposal to see if he can make it for himself?
Is that self reflective and outwardly expressive spark something of divinity? Something of the origin's making?
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Evolution vs Scientific er "intelligent" Design
These are my comments about the Film "Expelled no Intelligence Allowed"
I had never realised how very like the dark ages of yore we modern humans are. I cannot understand why we wont agree that there are some questions we haven't the intelligence nor information enough to discuss with naught but awed curiosity and theory.
We are only able to be conscious of the effect of the "creation" we can only observe the mechanics of the things we see and think, and know only the parts of it and the idea of it that inspire our vision.
What i take form this film is the awareness of how most arguments are won by the attrition of ridicule. Arguments and violence comes from being too proud to admit fallibility. Yet ... to be able to be a person of wisdom and harmony would be truly infallible demeanor For it will always be revising itself and discarding the pettiness which we call Logical.
SO the next time i see amature yet verbally faithful little sci-Nazi's battering a poor faithful soul saying " so do you believe in a child killing god?" That man can answer no but ultimately you do... do you believe in natural selection? How about human assisted natural selection?
Ehh i'd still some how lose the argument by...equivocating.. god bless you.
For alittle clarity to my individual point of view... and perhaps other ways of defending it ..the following articles support me... (er not directly... i am just doing that "right guys" human thing.)
http://www.objectiveness.com/expelled/
OK... now my audience will be fully pre-indoctrinated and amiable to receive the following brainwashing.
Well isn't that what they call it when a person educated themselves in a cirten opinion and try to make a personal case to defend themselves or define themselves?
Lately i have been feel quite hostile to ward reality....yea silly business , i know.
i get inexplicably angry like i have been manipulated into premature surrender, when i see the So called Logical and Rational side using the same rhyme and meter of white supremacists, feminists, Muslims and atheists.
I feel beaten down... over whelmed with other's false assurances, where i am trying to question. Or where my inquiry would like to tend toward the mystical (ie acceptibily unkown)
I hate it that i loose the argument when i say that human beings are not logical.. we are also creatures who define themselves emotionally and make some decisions on blind impulse. We are both right and left brained and make our errors in comprehension by suppressing one over the other.
Males have always battered down the compassion of the Females. They have killed the female form of bravery and power and strength and intelligence, in favor of their own.
Simple psychotic vanity.
I mean if i went around applying to atheists their own "methods" .. if i could... make arguments against men vs women and batter them in to debilitation... just by shouting So testosterone is a blight on this world. You believe in killing others to win an argument. how logical is that?....
But ... due to the irrational vain side those people wish to ignore they would explode in rage... well justified rage because, well, my forced opinion would be wrong. But they will not realise how they are when they believe strongly that they are correct.
I am also trying to keep myself aware how different we are from each other. How we have our individual realities. And what seems clear to me can be completely obscured to another, many others. And of course vise versa.
But i do know this. There inevitably will always be a counter argument or a counter method to every which way there ever will be.
Knowledge will never declare it's end, but wisdom can be ignored completely.
I was thinking, about "expelled" in juxtaposition with Gelieo. How perfect. Against newton. You get the point don't you...
My point is that those men where correct... and even though their little ideas have been improved upon and clarified.... and in most cases complexioned.......they where correct and fought like hell to just get their observation or question explored legitimately.
So if make me bitter to hear self assured Atheists saying " if they discovered any kind of proof for god or the flood or what have you... we ALL would know, they would be shouting it from all the media." well NO DIPSHIT... they will not. How oftian does a human being consider new information. It show blind trust in the leader to think such information would be treated fairly , it CLEARLY is not. How oftian does humanity suppress individuality and try to enforce control and specific idealism? And you would have the faith that truth and fairness are at liberty to public validation?
SO if history repeats, statistically speaking the Intelligent Designers are on to something. We with the foresight that hindsight can offer can just about BET there is an "other" story to what we are.
I don't know college for this... i need... *cringe* logic.
People who HAVE REAL EDUCATIONS.... wrote books that i have read... and in them i learned that major philosophers and even Ricard Dawkins, in his book, taught me that there really is not end to an non falsifiable argument. There is no real end to the debate on god and It's proper interpretation. And there is ALWAYS ignorance.
eh...
someone please explain to me what Equivocating is....
I one made ... or failed miserably at making a point concerning the religion bashing being a red herring the issue that needs looked at is .... here is my quote.. i would not want to be accused of trying to recast my argument, or paraphrasing ...(this perfectly logical stuff is ridiculously difficult)
( i responded to this video, which is an example of the irritating argument fr0m ridiculousness that so reminds me of bigotry and fascism) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBdAHVk2feE
""""" (1) i am an avid reader of comments. I was observing the exchange between izar and darkangel.... and Dark's "debilitating" question was..." do you pay taxes that support war?" as if that makes it so he doesn't have to answer about if he believes god killed babies. And my brains keeps screaming out; but... IF DARK lives in a society, then even he is debilitated. Because we ALL PAY TAXES . therefore we all support the evils of our armies and governments.
(2) i was just waiting for someone else to bring that up. how can you accuse me of supporting the evil army, when you also pay taxes that go to support the evil army? SO the question still remains, did god kill babies? yes.. and izar could have turned it on dark by asking," do you rebel against the evil rules, have you lobbied to end evil? " etc. Face it folks humanity is not very interested in ending needless suffering. so we are all as bad as the baby killing god. Do we believe in OURSELVES?
mattb521 Reply Spam
"Face it folks humanity is not very interested in ending needless suffering. "
The most we are guilty of is omission. This is COMPLETELY different than going out of your way to kill babies and kids, stop equivocating.
"so we are all as bad as the baby killing god. Do we believe in OURSELVES?"
straw man due to your false premise. """"""
I would really like to know why i am so stupid i can't best this. "Strawman" why? Because humans are NOT blood thrisy violent evolved apes? "Strawman", because the people in power really DOOOOO care about the public well being and freedom?
Oh yeah and are you saying that non-religious men have NEVER gone out to DELIBERATLY kill babies (and towns and ideas and pretty wemon) ? Are you saying that murder is NOT a normal feature of human psychological and genetic make up and history?
If the atheist says back..." no murder is not a normal part of us. some people are defective for various reasons. " you can answer back.. "wait, isnt that the no true scotsman argument?"
LOL i had never noticed how their own methods could be turned around. (by them i mean the common person who goes about beating up belivers with their psudeo-educated indoctrinated rhetoric)
eh... i am wrong i just know i am....
they so are they i just cant frame the argument that will be heard.
Izm.
I had never realised how very like the dark ages of yore we modern humans are. I cannot understand why we wont agree that there are some questions we haven't the intelligence nor information enough to discuss with naught but awed curiosity and theory.
We are only able to be conscious of the effect of the "creation" we can only observe the mechanics of the things we see and think, and know only the parts of it and the idea of it that inspire our vision.
What i take form this film is the awareness of how most arguments are won by the attrition of ridicule. Arguments and violence comes from being too proud to admit fallibility. Yet ... to be able to be a person of wisdom and harmony would be truly infallible demeanor For it will always be revising itself and discarding the pettiness which we call Logical.
SO the next time i see amature yet verbally faithful little sci-Nazi's battering a poor faithful soul saying " so do you believe in a child killing god?" That man can answer no but ultimately you do... do you believe in natural selection? How about human assisted natural selection?
Ehh i'd still some how lose the argument by...equivocating.. god bless you.
For alittle clarity to my individual point of view... and perhaps other ways of defending it ..the following articles support me... (er not directly... i am just doing that "right guys" human thing.)
http://www.objectiveness.com/expelled/
OK... now my audience will be fully pre-indoctrinated and amiable to receive the following brainwashing.
Well isn't that what they call it when a person educated themselves in a cirten opinion and try to make a personal case to defend themselves or define themselves?
Lately i have been feel quite hostile to ward reality....yea silly business , i know.
i get inexplicably angry like i have been manipulated into premature surrender, when i see the So called Logical and Rational side using the same rhyme and meter of white supremacists, feminists, Muslims and atheists.
I feel beaten down... over whelmed with other's false assurances, where i am trying to question. Or where my inquiry would like to tend toward the mystical (ie acceptibily unkown)
I hate it that i loose the argument when i say that human beings are not logical.. we are also creatures who define themselves emotionally and make some decisions on blind impulse. We are both right and left brained and make our errors in comprehension by suppressing one over the other.
Males have always battered down the compassion of the Females. They have killed the female form of bravery and power and strength and intelligence, in favor of their own.
Simple psychotic vanity.
I mean if i went around applying to atheists their own "methods" .. if i could... make arguments against men vs women and batter them in to debilitation... just by shouting So testosterone is a blight on this world. You believe in killing others to win an argument. how logical is that?....
But ... due to the irrational vain side those people wish to ignore they would explode in rage... well justified rage because, well, my forced opinion would be wrong. But they will not realise how they are when they believe strongly that they are correct.
I am also trying to keep myself aware how different we are from each other. How we have our individual realities. And what seems clear to me can be completely obscured to another, many others. And of course vise versa.
But i do know this. There inevitably will always be a counter argument or a counter method to every which way there ever will be.
Knowledge will never declare it's end, but wisdom can be ignored completely.
I was thinking, about "expelled" in juxtaposition with Gelieo. How perfect. Against newton. You get the point don't you...
My point is that those men where correct... and even though their little ideas have been improved upon and clarified.... and in most cases complexioned.......they where correct and fought like hell to just get their observation or question explored legitimately.
So if make me bitter to hear self assured Atheists saying " if they discovered any kind of proof for god or the flood or what have you... we ALL would know, they would be shouting it from all the media." well NO DIPSHIT... they will not. How oftian does a human being consider new information. It show blind trust in the leader to think such information would be treated fairly , it CLEARLY is not. How oftian does humanity suppress individuality and try to enforce control and specific idealism? And you would have the faith that truth and fairness are at liberty to public validation?
SO if history repeats, statistically speaking the Intelligent Designers are on to something. We with the foresight that hindsight can offer can just about BET there is an "other" story to what we are.
I don't know college for this... i need... *cringe* logic.
People who HAVE REAL EDUCATIONS.... wrote books that i have read... and in them i learned that major philosophers and even Ricard Dawkins, in his book, taught me that there really is not end to an non falsifiable argument. There is no real end to the debate on god and It's proper interpretation. And there is ALWAYS ignorance.
eh...
someone please explain to me what Equivocating is....
I one made ... or failed miserably at making a point concerning the religion bashing being a red herring the issue that needs looked at is .... here is my quote.. i would not want to be accused of trying to recast my argument, or paraphrasing ...(this perfectly logical stuff is ridiculously difficult)
( i responded to this video, which is an example of the irritating argument fr0m ridiculousness that so reminds me of bigotry and fascism) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBdAHVk2feE
""""" (1) i am an avid reader of comments. I was observing the exchange between izar and darkangel.... and Dark's "debilitating" question was..." do you pay taxes that support war?" as if that makes it so he doesn't have to answer about if he believes god killed babies. And my brains keeps screaming out; but... IF DARK lives in a society, then even he is debilitated. Because we ALL PAY TAXES . therefore we all support the evils of our armies and governments.
(2) i was just waiting for someone else to bring that up. how can you accuse me of supporting the evil army, when you also pay taxes that go to support the evil army? SO the question still remains, did god kill babies? yes.. and izar could have turned it on dark by asking," do you rebel against the evil rules, have you lobbied to end evil? " etc. Face it folks humanity is not very interested in ending needless suffering. so we are all as bad as the baby killing god. Do we believe in OURSELVES?
mattb521 Reply Spam
"Face it folks humanity is not very interested in ending needless suffering. "
The most we are guilty of is omission. This is COMPLETELY different than going out of your way to kill babies and kids, stop equivocating.
"so we are all as bad as the baby killing god. Do we believe in OURSELVES?"
straw man due to your false premise. """"""
I would really like to know why i am so stupid i can't best this. "Strawman" why? Because humans are NOT blood thrisy violent evolved apes? "Strawman", because the people in power really DOOOOO care about the public well being and freedom?
Oh yeah and are you saying that non-religious men have NEVER gone out to DELIBERATLY kill babies (and towns and ideas and pretty wemon) ? Are you saying that murder is NOT a normal feature of human psychological and genetic make up and history?
If the atheist says back..." no murder is not a normal part of us. some people are defective for various reasons. " you can answer back.. "wait, isnt that the no true scotsman argument?"
LOL i had never noticed how their own methods could be turned around. (by them i mean the common person who goes about beating up belivers with their psudeo-educated indoctrinated rhetoric)
eh... i am wrong i just know i am....
they so are they i just cant frame the argument that will be heard.
Izm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)