Identity

Heisenberg · Post by **Heisenberg** » Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:07 am

FishbellykanakaDude wrote: My contention is that a major sub-goal, on the stellar-system level, is the creation of a bio-informational "apex lifeform" whose goal is (will be) to evolve beyond the seeming necessity of the Generational Genocidal Cycle.

That "thing's" goal will then change/evolve into preserving "locale specific ecological beauty" while simultaneously exporting the methods to accomplish that task as far and as quickly as possible.

..but then what?

Beats me. But I'm quite sure I'm several, if not thousands, of "levels" below the ultimate "universal goal".

There is a reading of Dante's Divine Comedy that suggests it is a story of mans progression from the past of ignorance to its eventual end meeting with the divine. Its hard to imagine that "theoretical" goal ever being reached but at the very least it does seem like what the "computation" is striving towards. Understanding intelligence and the human brain does seem like a watershed point in humanity. Materialism will either flourish or die depending on the outcome.

John · Post by **John** » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:22 am

John wrote: > Don't forget to take into account multiple parallel universes.

> Like a multiprocessor computer.

> https://www.space.com/32728-parallel-universes.html

FishbellykanakaDude wrote: > Much like the word "singular", the word "universe" implies "only
> one of them" (although considerably more vehemently).

> There are no "multiple universes", by definition. It there SEEM to
> be more than one, then you simply redefine the "new things" as
> parts of the (by definition) UNI-verse, and the faeries and
> unicorns of the "now biggerer universe" can sleep without worry
> once again..!

> Now, if there SEEM to be an infinite number of them (or of
> anything for that matter) then you've done something wrong, and
> failed to notice something really quite important, though probably
> very very subtle.

> The asymptote is God's way of saying, "WRONG buckeroo! I'm the
> only one on THAT intersection! Try again..."

> Aloha nui! <shaka!>

You can have Fishy's universe, Heisenberg's universe, and John's
universe.

You can have the universe of all red balls, the universe of all green
balls, and the universe of all yellow balls.

You can have the universe of all universes, which would be a member of
itself.

Or maybe it's a multiverse of all universes. But then you could have
the universe of all multiverses.

But you can't have the multiverse of all multiverses, because a
multiverse can only be a collection of universes, and a multiverse is
not a universe.

Heisenberg · Post by **Heisenberg** » Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:15 pm

What's that you say? This form doesn't get weird enough you say. Well then lets crank it up. May be a little messy but tried to keep it somewhat clean.

John wrote: You can have Fishy's universe, Heisenberg's universe, and John's
universe.

You can have the universe of all red balls, the universe of all green
balls, and the universe of all yellow balls.

You can have the universe of all universes, which would be a member of
itself.

Or maybe it's a multiverse of all universes. But then you could have
the universe of all multiverses.

But you can't have the multiverse of all multiverses, because a
multiverse can only be a collection of universes, and a multiverse is
not a universe.

But can we have our cake and eat it too? Is the cake even real?

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

https://www.mygov.in/sites/default/file ... xander.pdf

This near death experience also seems to have some correspondence with Dante's comedy.

Ch 5 on the underworld is interesting. It seems to be the form of ignorance humanity came from much the way Dante suggests.

The rhythmic pounding off in the distance sharpened and intensified as well
—became the work-beat for some army of troll-like underground laborers, performing
some endless, brutally monotonous task.

(shout out to russian trolls)

This sounds to be quite literally "The Myth of Sisyphus".

In the essay, Camus introduces his philosophy of the absurd, man's futile search for meaning, unity, and clarity in the face of an unintelligible world devoid of God and eternal truths or values. Does the realization of the absurd require suicide? Camus answers, "No. It requires revolt."

-wikipedia, the myth of sisyphus

If we take Eben's recollection to be approximately true then this gets really interesting. First it would mean that Camus was exactly on the money in asserting that a world devoid of God reduces to exactly this. What he doesn't realize is that this is quite possibly one of the strongest arguments to believe in God. The only way to transcend this nature would be belief in a higher power. The fact that this ideology is being presented in modern university classrooms is also telling.
-----
From chapter 7

The message had three parts, and if I had to translate them into earthly language, I’d
say they ran something like this:
“You are loved and cherished, dearly, forever.”
“You have nothing to fear.”
“There is nothing you can do wrong.”

-----
Ch.9

Again, from my present perspective, I would suggest that
you couldn’t look at anything in that world at all, for the word
at itself implies a separation that did not exist there

One-ness of everything

The pure vastness separating Om and me was, I realized, why I had the Orb as my
companion. In some manner I couldn’t completely comprehend but was sure of
nonetheless, the Orb was a kind of “interpreter” between me and this extraordinary
presence surrounding me

Interesting because similarly Dante had a guide (Virgil) through his process.

It was as if I were being born into a larger world, and the universe itself was like a
giant cosmic womb, and the Orb (who remained in some way connected to the Girl on
the Butterfly Wing, who in fact
was
she) was guiding me through this process.

This would make sense if God is a higher dimensional being and the universe is contained within God’s reality as a “subset”. The purpose of the universe is giving birth to us?

Through the Orb, Om told me that there is not one universe but many—in fact, more
than I could conceive—but that love lay at the center of them all. Evil was present in all
the other universes as well, but only in the tiniest trace amounts. Evil was necessary
because without it free will was impossible, and without free will there could be no
growth—no forward movement, no chance for us to become what God longed for us
to be. Horrible and all-powerful as evil sometimes seemed to be in a world like ours, in
the larger picture love was overwhelmingly dominant, and it would ultimately be
Triumphant.

Unfortunately for Fishey, it seems that John is right on this point of “multiverses”.

I saw the abundance of life throughout the countless universes, including some
whose intelligence was advanced far beyond that of humanity. I saw that there are
countless higher dimensions, but that the only way to know these dimensions is to enter
and experience them directly. They cannot be known, or understood, from lower
dimensional space. Cause and effect exist in these higher realms, but outside of our
earthly conception of them. The world of time and space in which we move
in this terrestrial realm is tightly and intricately meshed within these higher worlds. In other
words, these worlds aren’t totally apart from us, because all worlds are part of the
same overarching divine Reality. From those higher worlds one could access any time
or place in our world.

God being a higher dimensional being.

Knowledge was stored without memorization, instantly and for good. It
didn’t fade, like ordinary information does, and to this day I still possess all of it, much
more clearly than I possess the information that I gained over all of my years in school.

Information has some sort of connection to this realm but just one dimension of it.

-----

Oh Christians, arrogant, exhausted, wretched,
whose intellects are sick and cannot see,
who place your confidence in backward steps,
do you not know that we are worms and born
to form the angelic butterfly that soars
without defenses, to confront His judgment?
Why does your mind presume to flight when you
are still like the imperfect grub, the worm
before it has attained its final form?

- Dante
(source: https://evolutionnews.org/2011/10/dante ... butterfly/)

Really interesting because Eben describes the underworld as the “Realm of the Earthworm’s - Eye View. Additionally, he makes repeated references to the angles having butterfly wings to the point that the cover of the book has a picture of a butterfly.

------
Ch 12. The Core

This whole adventure, it began to occur
to me, was some kind of tour—some kind of grand overview of the invisible, spiritual
side of existence. And like all good tours, it included all floors and all levels.

similar to dante

In the worlds above, I slowly discovered, to know and be able to think of something
is all one needs in order to move toward it. To think of the Spinning Melody was to
make it appear, and to long for the higher worlds was to bring myself there.

Thought is sufficient for growth?

That doesn’t mean that I saw anything like the whole universe, either in my original
journey from the Earthworm’s-Eye View up to the Core, or in the ones that came
afterward. In fact, one of the truths driven home to me in the Core each time I returned
to it was how impossible it would be to understand all that exists—either its
physical/visible side or its (much, much larger) spiritual/invisible side, not to mention
the countless other universes that exist or have ever existed.
But none of that mattered, because I had already been taught the one thing—the only
thing—that, in the last analysis, truly matters … Love.
Love is, without a doubt, the basis of everything. Not some abstract, hard-to-fathom
kind of love but the day-to-day kind that everyone knows—the kind of love we feel
when we look at our spouse and our children, or even our animals. In its purest and
most powerful form, this love is not jealous or selfish, but
unconditional
. This is the
reality of realities, the incomprehensibly glorious truth of truths that lives and breathes
at the core of everything that exists or that ever will exist, and no remotely accurate
understanding of who and what we are can be achieved by anyone who does not know
it, and embody it in all of their actions.

We can only see what our brain’s filter allows through. The brain—in particular its
left-side linguistic/logical part, that which generates our sense of rationality and the
feeling of being a sharply defined ego or self—is a barrier to our higher knowledge and
experience.

Correlation between logical processing and ego. China and Germany both known for strong logical reasoning.

-----
Also not that I am into those doomsday end of times thing but I just stumbled on this that stood out:

7 Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.
— Revelation 12:7–10 (NIV)

The Christian tradition has stories about angelic beings cast down from heaven by God, often presenting the punishment as inflicted in particular on Satan. As a result of linking this motif with the cited passage of the Book of Revelation, the casting of Satan down from heaven, which other versions of the motif present as an action of God himself, has become attributed to the archangel Michael at the conclusion of a war between two groups of angels, of whom, because of the mention of the dragon's tail casting a third of the stars of heaven to the earth, one third are supposed to have been on the side of Satan, in spite of the fact that the casting down of the stars (Revelation 12:4) is recounted as occurring before the start of the "war in heaven" (Revelation 12:7).
Satan's rebellion has been attributed to a number of motives, all of which stem from his great pride. These motives include:
A refusal to bow down to mankind on the occasion of the creation of man as in the Armenian, Georgian, and Latin versions of the Life of Adam and Eve.[3] A similar view is held in Islamic tradition, in which Iblis refuses to bow down to Adam.[4]
The culmination of a gradual distancing from God through use of free will (an idea of Origen of Alexandria).[5]
A declaration by God that all were to be subject to his Son, the Messiah (as in Milton's Paradise Lost).[6]
Jonathan Edwards said in his sermon Wisdom Displayed in Salvation: "Satan and his angels rebelled against God in heaven, and proudly presumed to try their strength with his. And when God, by his almighty power, overcame the strength of Satan, and sent him like lightning from heaven to hell with all his army; Satan still hoped to get the victory by subtlety".[7]

- wikipedia war in heaven

Pride = ego

Not that anyone could be editing some of these wikipedia articles.

Heisenberg · Post by **Heisenberg** » Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:27 pm

John · Post by **John** » Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:28 pm

Heisenberg wrote: > What's that you say? This form doesn't get weird enough you
> say. Well then lets crank it up. May be a little messy but tried
> to keep it somewhat clean. ...

> But can we have our cake and eat it too? Is the cake even
> real?

The correct saying is "Eat our cake and have it too." The other way
around doesn't make sense, even though that's the way that everyone
says it. Actually, perhaps the way you've used it does make
sense, provided that the cake isn't real.

http://www.lawprose.org/garners-usage-t ... at-it-too/

Heisenberg · Post by **Heisenberg** » Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:54 am

John wrote: Actually, perhaps the way you've used it does make
sense, provided that the cake isn't real.

The cake is a lie, John. I'm sorry I had to be the one to tell you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdrs3gr_GAs

Heisenberg · Post by **Heisenberg** » Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:27 pm

Is GD a part of a collective spiritual awakening???

I believe that humankind has entered into the most critical stages of a death-rebirth mystery. In retrospect it seems that the entire path of Western civilization has taken humankind and the planet on a trajectory of initiatory transformation, into a state of spiritual alienation, into an encounter with mortality on a global scale—from world wars and holocausts to the nuclear crisis and now the planetary ecological crisis—an encounter with mortality that is no longer individual and personal but rather transpersonal, collective, planetary. It is a collective dark night of the soul, a deep separation from the community of being, from the cosmos itself.

Source: http://www.beliefnet.com/wellness/2006/ ... lanet.aspx

Heisenberg · Post by **Heisenberg** » Thu Mar 01, 2018 3:26 pm

I'm beginning to question my division of the information/physical conceptual split. Eben Alexander's subsequent book "The Map of Heaven" mentions the spiritual physical split in which the physical is subservient to the spiritual. This would make sense from the recent posting perspectives. In a sense the spiritual would be more real than the physical. This seems like it could be a plausible, better explanation than a division of information/physical. There is some weird relationship of information in the spiritual world but it's incredibly hard to untangle.

If we revisit the "informational perspective" thread I asserted the prophet generation expands our realm of information. However, if we adjust to this new perspective of information being a subset of the spiritual then the prophet generation would expand the spiritual realm. This, at the face value, even fits better as being a spiritual "prophet".

Obviously just scratching the surface.

FishbellykanakaDude · Post by **FishbellykanakaDude** » Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:02 am

John wrote:
John wrote: > Don't forget to take into account multiple parallel universes.

> Like a multiprocessor computer.

> https://www.space.com/32728-parallel-universes.html

FishbellykanakaDude wrote: > Much like the word "singular", the word "universe" implies "only
> one of them" (although considerably more vehemently).

> There are no "multiple universes", by definition. It there SEEM to
> be more than one, then you simply redefine the "new things" as
> parts of the (by definition) UNI-verse, and the faeries and
> unicorns of the "now biggerer universe" can sleep without worry
> once again..!

> Now, if there SEEM to be an infinite number of them (or of
> anything for that matter) then you've done something wrong, and
> failed to notice something really quite important, though probably
> very very subtle.

> The asymptote is God's way of saying, "WRONG buckeroo! I'm the
> only one on THAT intersection! Try again..."

> Aloha nui! <shaka!>
You can have Fishy's universe, Heisenberg's universe, and John's
universe.

You can have the universe of all red balls, the universe of all green
balls, and the universe of all yellow balls.

You can have the universe of all universes, which would be a member of
itself.

Or maybe it's a multiverse of all universes. But then you could have
the universe of all multiverses.

But you can't have the multiverse of all multiverses, because a
multiverse can only be a collection of universes, and a multiverse is
not a universe.

As is always the case, it depends on what your definition of "<a thing in question>" is!

<insert Clinton joke here>

It's dandy to define "universe" to mean other than "UNI-verse" (one "turn/bend"), but that doesn't change what it actually means.

There is only one existence. There may be a multiverse of universes, as you're defining "universes", but there is only one of them. And that "thing" is THE Universe, as I'm defining "universe".

An interesting side note: "Verse" in english is "derived" from the proto-indoeuropean "wer-2", which actually DOES imply that there are other "verses" (https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/indoe ... l#IR123200), but by placing the "uni" as the qualifier of the "wer-2" it creates the "super type" verse, meaning the overarching singular version of that thing.

There may be many instances of the type "verse", but the SINGULAR verse if what we're talking about when we speak of the "universe".

This is, of course, a niggling topic of discussion, but an important one, in my opinion.

Can we (humanity or otherwise) agree that there really is only one existence? That there really is only one "me" and only one "you"?

That is the real question. Playing "what ifs" in the domain of reality qua reality is the way to madness.

Recursion is a lovely tool, but it is ultimately an illusion, just like "infinity" is an illusion. Nothing contains itself AND more than itself. Other than God himself, and God is the only unknowable. The "job" of the universe is to BE the UNIverse, which is to be the nearly ever receding object of scrutiny. God will ever recede. The universe wonʻt. <smirk!>

Don't be satisfied with accepting that recursion and infinity are real. They are merely pointers to the fact that more is to be discovered.

Aloha nui loa īa nā koʻu hoaloha! <shaka!>

FishbellykanakaDude · Post by **FishbellykanakaDude** » Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:38 am

Heisenberg wrote:...Unfortunately for Fishey, it seems that John is right on this point of “multiverses”.

...The world of time and space in which we move in this terrestrial realm is tightly and intricately meshed within these higher worlds.

In other words, these worlds aren’t totally apart from us, because all worlds are part of the same overarching divine Reality. From those higher worlds one could access any time or place in our world.

...

"All worlds are part of the same overarching divine reality."

..which is my contention.

I, personally, leave out the "divine" part, ʻcuz... obviously.

Reality is the universe, and there is only one of "it",.. again,.. obviously.

Yaʻ know,.. itʻs getting to be REALLY hard to be a simple person, such as myself, around here these days! Iʻm feelinʻ the pressure, people,.. Iʻm really feelinʻ it!!

..all this talk about cake, and Camus, and whether eating or having comes first,.. SHEESH!

Calgon,.. take me AWAY!

Aloha gangies! I REALLY need to get cracking on that damn boat oʻ mine! Woof! <shaka!>

Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Re: Identity

Who is online