Home | Community | Message Board


Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Original Seeds Store Shop: Buy CBD, Cannabis Seeds, Compare CBD

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!)
    #1232959 - 01/20/03 06:40 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)






Mr.Mushrooms;
I'll let you in on a little secret WR sans emoticons (how refreshing). You have noticed that certain "edge" I carry with me. I'll tell you what it is. I have been burned by nearly every authority, every ideology, and every "teaching" to come down the pike. This includes a long list but here are a few of the primary ones:

Christianity
Eastern Mysticism
Science
Amway
A man who tried to sell me a Rolex watch on Times Square

So you see, my friend, I am not only leary of those who mouth the Truth. But I am especially leary of those who follow bankrupt systems that couldn't pour piss out of a boot with directions on the heel.

Now put that in your smipe and poke it.

Idealism? Eastern Zen Bullshit?

I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree with this old dog.

Perhaps someday when I have a bit of time you can explain, in detail, what precious "system" you are clinging onto like a drowning man clutching his last strawman. When that day comes nothing would please me more than to dismantle your "system" and hand it back to you in pieces with a smile from ear to ear on my face.  MM 

Cheers  (tortuously teasing)

Let me see if I can convey my strawman to which I desparatly cling............

Primary premise: We are fundamentaly self aware information loci. We use physical materialism to experience material reality.
Whether the material is illusion or not is irrelevent to existance as physical action has physical consequence which we experience as reality.
Consciousness is a quantum function of the informational scalar forming self aware loci by the coalescence of self replicating information string/loops
These loci exist as potential until they manifest as material at which point they are bound to the physicality of materialism and reference points are estabilshed ie; material reality is percieved.
From this premise I conclude that it is irrelevent whether or not this is all 'real"(I certainly am bound by the rules of the illusion even if it is not"REAL").
Thoughts on "things" binds your perceptions to "things" which may or may not be "real"( a neccesary function of existing in physicality).In fact it is focus on "things" which facillitates our physical existance.
Now if consciousness exists as a quantum informational state interfaced with a material sensory and manipulatory appendage(THE BODY) this focus on "things" guarantees continuance of the material self.As such it is essential for survival of the material vessel.Evolution would have been complete with that alone but we have the ability to go beyond physicality with meditation and certain drugs,what if any function does this serve the physical self if not to remind and touch bases with that which is not physical about us?In a strictly material reality what evolutionary benefit does this ability confer?
So my basic philosophy is
1 Keep the dogma of my grass

2 Real or unreal it matters not as we are bound by the rules of the illusion if that is what it is.

3Philosophies based on sensuality or material perception are incomplete

4 Belief in truth is a lie

5 Truth is subject to conditions

6 absolutes cannot exist in a material plane

7 Obeying the "rules" of material existance does not mean they must be accepted as "Real"

8 Accepting the irrelevance of both quantum consciousness and physical reality is the first step to enjoying their dichotomy and integrating it.

 
9) enjoyment of the experience is a much more valid endeavor than understanding it

Four, five and six ar probably the most relevent to my day to day philosophy of living,and eight and nine make it challenging and fun.

That is about all I'm good for right now.Please disect and return with the promised smile :grin:WR
Oh and as for the lil emotidudes.... :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :grin:

PS I too consider Sclorch a teacher and one of the finest minds I have encountered.I am always intrigued by his thoughtful(yet materialy bound)premises and thoughts. I apologize for butting into your exchange :wink: Now lemme have it OK? I am always better on the ropes!
WR
 


--------------------
To old for this place


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: whiterasta]
    #1233291 - 01/20/03 08:46 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

WR:grin: 

Don't consider this a dodge or a Chrysler product either but as I said in the other thread, "when I have time".  Currently I am editing the Hunting FAQ for the Shroomery in an effort to save lives via correct identification of fungi, moderating 4 forums; giving sagacious advice when and where possible given my limits of wisdom and time, and promoting the rich and various aspects of the Shroomery from within to the various members/lurkers that visit here.

For the nonce this shall have to wait.

It's a pity really.  I enjoy a good dialectic more than most things in life.

This does not mean that I will simply forget the effort you put forth here.  It will go on a list of unanswered threads/posts that I keep in a vault above my bureau.

MM :grin: :laugh: :smile: :wink: 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: ]
    #1233524 - 01/20/03 09:57 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

AAAAArgh Maity you can run but ye cannot hide!!!!!!!,LOL take your time I know what all is involved and do not envy it!I am in full apreciation and agreement re Collecting and Hunting after the tragic incident with Maia.Priorities are definately in order there my friend!I would only add my appreciation for the efforts regarding safety and wisdom as they pertain to fungi and other substances.My deep thanx for all of it! WR


--------------------
To old for this place


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/13/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: whiterasta]
    #1233808 - 01/20/03 11:57 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Now lemme have it OK? I am always better on the ropes!
Alright... just remember not to take any of this personally.  :wink:

A. You're assuming that essence precedes existence.  A major assumption that MUST be acknowledged.  Although we'll never be able to settle this debate via syllogism, I find that since we are bound to the physical, a practical approach is ALL we can really count on.  There is also more than one way of applying this practical approach, too.  Basically, it's an issue of overall coherence.  We all find ourselves with a personal philosophy/paradigm to begin with... but it's how we update (or don't update) this system that is important.  It's not just "whatever works is right"... it's much more complex.  It's more like "if x works now (or before), then x might work again (or now)... and if x has worked 80% of the time, then it is probable that it might work again..."  THIS IS ALL WE HAVE.  If you want to cling to "divine truths" or whatever, you end up making excuses when things don't turn out right.  Excuses are for the insecure.  Be secure with uncertainty and you'll find out what faith really is. 

B. 4,5, & 6 are the exact same message: a rejection of absolutism.

C. 7 Obeying the "rules" of material existance does not mean they must be accepted as "Real"
Again... and you have an excuse as to why you can't ignore this "illusion" of gravity?  It is real until you can PROOVE that it isn't.  It is easily applied to EVERYONE at ANYTIME.
Besides, #2 and #7 contradict eachother.

D. 8 Accepting the irrelevance of both quantum consciousness and physical reality is the first step to enjoying their dichotomy and integrating it.
Bro, this is sophism.  Quantum consciousness?  You sound like Don King.
Find better words.

E. 9) enjoyment of the experience is a much more valid endeavor than understanding it
Holy shit do I have a problem with this statement.
Since when did hedonism become an a priori virtue?

F. 1 Keep the dogma of my grass
Non-doctrines are A-OK in my book.  :laugh:

G. 3 Philosophies based on sensuality or material perception are incomplete
EVERYTHING that we know is based on material perception.  I think you're trying to say something like "Any philosophy based purely on the material world (no metaphysics or spirituality) is flawed".  Let me know exactly what you mean in #3... it's not detailed enough. 


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Sclorch]
    #1233969 - 01/20/03 12:42 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

I now must take a leave of this topic(damn!) for a day(business) I will ponder your assesment and return with a rebutal worthy of your reply :wink: I will ponder your points in juxtaposition with my own and reply in a more clear fashion than time will permit at present.I believe I may have been unclear in my negation of absolutes.And you have misinterpreted my meaning regarding enjoyment/understanding but I will clarify. Hint; thinking wholisticly rather than with reductionism my attempt at reducing the whole of my philosophy into "parts" is more difficult than I anticipated as it is something I have never done in writing before.WR
PS you damn right I will take this personally I am exposing my personal conceptualization of existance to you all(A level of the respect I have for you and MM).This does not mean I will be offended just that I will be forced to address any inconsistancies you point out( a very personal thing agreed?)and no doubt there will be some as I attempt to explain my "reality" to someone I truly believe experiences a "different" reality than I do,merely sharing a framework but experiencing the structure of that framework in different perpectives completely.
In the words of the great Austrian philosopher Schwarznegger"I'll be Back"
Thanx for your time WR   


--------------------
To old for this place


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Sclorch]
    #1234188 - 01/20/03 02:10 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Nice reply Bud! :smile:

You know, on second thought, I might just let you take care of my light work for me.

Do you charge much? :wink: :grin:

Peace


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/13/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: ]
    #1235047 - 01/20/03 09:15 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Nice reply Bud!

Yeah, well... he deserved a good one.  :grin:

You know, on second thought, I might just let you take care of my light work for me. Do you charge much?

My fees are typically nominal, but it's all contingent upon your definition of "light work". 


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Sclorch]
    #1235121 - 01/20/03 10:06 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

My fees are typically nominal, but it's all contingent upon your definition of "light work".

Well I was thinking, if it weren't too much trouble, of something to disprove Godel's Theorem in reference to buttonion's reply to me in the "Truth?" thread I started some months ago.

That damn thing has been plaguing me and the only answer I can come up with is to cry, "Reductionism!".  :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineNomad
Mad Robot

Registered: 04/30/02
Posts: 422
Last seen: 9 years, 8 months
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: ]
    #1235319 - 01/21/03 03:28 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Okay, man, I take "eastern zen bullshit" very seriously. You have gone one step too far in this thread.  :laugh:

As much as I admire buttonion's Goedel argument, because I do not understand it at all, and as much as I am impressed by your persistence in trying to refute it - but vaporbrains did a good enough job to prove you wrong. The very basic flaw lies in your premise that the formation of mental images is different from feelings in respect to causality - when, in fact, it is only different in quality. Yes, the color "green" feels different from the emotion "sad", and the emotion "sad" looks different than the color "green". In fact, the emotion doesn't look at all and the color doesn't feel at all. That's why one of them is a mental image, and the other is a feeling.

One reason why realism is the accepted mode of thinking, and one reason why it is nearly impossible for people who have never done drugs to get even a glimpse of what lies beyond ordinary day-to-day consciousness - one reason for that is that language re-enforces realism again and again. We often say "something makes me feel sad", but we never say "something makes me see green", when, in fact, the latter is as true as the former.

Suppose we had an object that would make everyone sad. Then I could say:

"Hey! Pass me the sad object!"

With as much realness, righteousness and rigidity as if I would say:

"Hey! Pass me the green object!"

So, how many people do we need to feel sadness on the sight of a dying child, until sadness becomes a property of the dying child itself, independent of perception? How many people do we need in order to turn subjective sadness into objective "sadity" - for lack of a better word in the realists' language? One hundred? A thousand? Five billion? For heavens sake, am I the only one here who feels a little confused when we need statistics to determine truth?

The fun thing is that you do not know how deeply I can sympathize with your realism. But I would love to hear you state, just once, that you are a realist for entirely practical purposes. It is not a logical conclusion based on empirical observations. It is not the distilled essence of 2500 years of philosophy. It is not some divine fucking truth revealed only to Mr. Mushrooms. You are a realist because it works for you. You don't need to hide that behind logic. It's just fine.  :wink:     


Edited by Nomad (01/21/03 03:31 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Nomad]
    #1235807 - 01/21/03 07:25 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Well said Nomad. :wink: :smile:

As I reiterated to WR I don't have sufficient time for complete and thoughtout answers.  But I'll comment in brief on yours.

Vaporbrains, didn't understand my argument and his statements weren't any kind of rebuttal.  Even buttonion's point was slightly off the mark.  And yes, yours just now has a reasonable answer to it.

Trying to understand what I am saying in reference to Locke's confusion about ideas are that which we understand instead of that by which we understand gets us closer to the truth of the matter.

That's all for now. :smile:

I am delighted to have you here btw. :smile:

Cheers 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/13/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Nomad]
    #1236307 - 01/21/03 11:14 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Nomad: ...So, how many people do we need to feel sadness on the sight of a dying child, until sadness becomes a property of the dying child itself, independent of perception?...

That's a very clean piece...
Green can be MEASURED... it is objective.  Sure, name-to-color pairing is arbitrary (thus subjective), but the color green is merely a range of light frequencies.
Sad is not measurable in the same sense as green is... sad is on/off (though the ON is an unmeasurable gradient).  You can be more sad or less sad or not sad... but THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE STANDARD for sad.  Sad isn't an inherent property of anything... it requires perception.  Sure, one can do the same thing for green and say, "if a tree falls in the forest... blahblahblah..." or "blah blah... Shrodinger's Cat proves... blah blah blah".  To that, I say WHATEVER.  And I will agree that "language re-enforces realism." 


Nomad (to M_M): You are a realist because it works for you. You don't need to hide that behind logic. It's just fine

Thank God for the practical application of realism...  :laugh: :grin: :smirk:
*thinks briefly about writing a manifesto on heteroabsolutism... then realizes that books aren't all that efficient anymore*   


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineNomad
Mad Robot

Registered: 04/30/02
Posts: 422
Last seen: 9 years, 8 months
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Sclorch]
    #1238270 - 01/22/03 03:00 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Green can be MEASURED... it is objective. Sure, name-to-color pairing is arbitrary (thus subjective), but the color green is merely a range of light frequencies.

Okay, green can be measured. That means, basically, that we have a machine where I can put a green object into, press a button, and the machine tells me: "This object is GREEN. " Right?  (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

Sad is not measurable in the same sense as green is... sad is on/off (though the ON is an unmeasurable gradient). You can be more sad or less sad or not sad... but THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE STANDARD for sad.

I see you do not like thought experiments :wink:

I can understand that, but it makes it impossible to come up with an argument. Every meaningful argument involves thought experiments. So, for the hell of it, could you please accept the rules of THIS ONE? We have a parallel universe. In this universe we have a lot of objects. Some objects make everyone sad. (Please notice: Everyone.). Some objects make everyone laugh. Some objects make everyone feel weird. There are no objects which make some people weird, and some people sad. But there are objects which make everyone feel a little bit weird, and a little bit sad.

Wouldn't it be reasonable that we can somehow measure the sadness of these objects?  If we knew everything about that universe, we surely could build a machine which measures sadness. Hell, if I knew everything about your brain, I could build a machine which measures the sadness of objects to you. (Non-determinism doesn't matter here.) In our parallel universe, measuring sadness could be very complex. Or it could be as simple as measuring green.

So, is sadness in our parallel universe objective, independent of perception?

And if the answer is YES:

How many color blind people do we need in this universe until green becomes subjective?
 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineNomad
Mad Robot

Registered: 04/30/02
Posts: 422
Last seen: 9 years, 8 months
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Sclorch]
    #1238384 - 01/22/03 04:20 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Sure, one can do the same thing for green and say, "if a tree falls in the forest... blahblahblah..." or "blah blah... Shrodinger's Cat proves... blah blah blah". To that, I say WHATEVER.

And by the way, that is completely off-topic. I don't think you have a clue what I am trying to get at. That is my fault, I'm sorry. I should have quoted the "Truth?" thread before I replied here.

In "Truth?", Mr. Mushrooms argued that, when we look at a glass of wine, we are looking at the same object, but when we feel joy because of the glass of wine, we are feeling different emotions. That, as venerable Mr Mushrooms used to say, has no foundation in either science or philosophy. We are not looking at the same object, we are looking at similar mental images of the same object. I don't see how you could possibly deny that.

The sole purpose of my last two posts is to refute that argument by a simple thought experiment.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineNomad
Mad Robot

Registered: 04/30/02
Posts: 422
Last seen: 9 years, 8 months
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: ]
    #1238394 - 01/22/03 04:25 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Mister, you are the master of side-stepping. I hope you know that. It's a compliment.  :laugh:

I, too, am delighted by your presence. But I would be even more delighted if you could just state that realism is pragmatic. It's that easy. But I see you won't do that, so never mind.

Trying to understand what I am saying in reference to Locke's confusion about ideas are that which we understand instead of that by which we understand gets us closer to the truth of the matter.

Pointless generalization. In meditation, an idea is that which I understand. "Oh, here's an idea. Let's see, where did that come from? Holy shit, it was preceded by the formation of a mental image! Let's have a closer look at that. It's a memory, isn't it? No, wait... it's an expectation. Is it green? Is it sad?". In normal conditioned life, on the other hand, an idea is that by which I understand: "Damn, just dropped my glass of wine. Fuck gravity."

 


Edited by Nomad (01/22/03 04:26 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/13/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Nomad]
    #1238573 - 01/22/03 06:11 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Sclorch: Sure, one can do the same thing for green and say, "if a tree falls in the forest... blahblahblah..." or "blah blah... Shrodinger's Cat proves... blah blah blah". To that, I say WHATEVER.
Nomad: And by the way, that is completely off-topic.
Is it?
Nomad: Okay, green can be measured. That means, basically, that we have a machine where I can put a green object into, press a button, and the machine tells me: "This object is GREEN. " Right? (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
I was trying to avoid the "but someone still has to read what the machine says (~open the box)... so it's not objective... everything is subjective...".
Connect the dots, man.

When a thought experiment becomes merely a "what if?", you're right... I have a problem with them.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: Nomad]
    #1238987 - 01/22/03 09:09 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

I, too, am delighted by your presence. But I would be even more delighted if you could just state that realism is pragmatic. It's that easy. But I see you won't do that, so never mind.

Thank you. :smile:

Realism is pragmatic.  (I aim to please) :wink:

Now what that means to me might be slightly different than you.  But for the nonce, let's feign agreement. :wink: :smile: :laugh:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineNomad
Mad Robot

Registered: 04/30/02
Posts: 422
Last seen: 9 years, 8 months
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: ]
    #1241202 - 01/22/03 10:09 PM (14 years, 6 months ago)

Thanks.  :laugh:

:cool: 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/13/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: ]
    #1241287 - 01/22/03 10:48 PM (14 years, 6 months ago)

Realism is pragmatic.

Finally.
Now we can work on that coherence issue... you know, how YOU (M_M) mix metaphysics in there... hehehe

Of course, we have all the time in the world for that, so I'm in no rush to see you knighted a heteroabsolutist. HA ha ... hehehehahahaMUHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!

It's true though... beings bound to subjective experience can only go so far as to say that something worked or didn't work at X point in time. It's the ultimate meme... and it's recombinant.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: whiterasta]
    #1245285 - 01/24/03 08:44 AM (14 years, 6 months ago)

I am taking a stab at describing Quantum Consciousness first.Consciousness is a non localized,non measurable intangible,Would you not agree?Now in the absence of quantum theory explain the realists view of the intangible concept of consciousness?A true realist would have to acknowlege that consciousness must be an illusion as it cannot be measured(only brain activity,not actual consciousness),localized or experienced in any way beyond the subjective.In the abscence of a better term I use Quantum consciousness to describe that which a true realist must acknowlege cannot be materialy described,there fore cannot truely exist.
Quote:

Primary premise: We are fundamentaly self aware information loci. We use physical materialism to experience material reality.
Whether the material is illusion or not is irrelevent to existance as physical action has physical consequence which we experience as reality.
Consciousness is a quantum function of the informational scalar forming self aware loci by the coalescence of self replicating information string/loops
These loci exist as potential until they manifest as material at which point they are bound to the physicality of materialism and reference points are estabilshed ie; material reality is percieved 



Neither you, MM, or sclorch are educated enough in advanced quantum theory to fully grasp this concept as it is not quantifiable or able to be experienced by our subjective sensorium(realism).Too many philosophy classes and not enough quantum mechanics

Quote:

Now if consciousness exists as a quantum informational state interfaced with a material sensory and manipulatory appendage(THE BODY) this focus on "things" guarantees continuance of the material self.As such it is essential for survival of the material vessel.Evolution would have been complete with that alone but we have the ability to go beyond physicality with meditation and certain drugs,what if any function does this serve the physical self if not to remind and touch bases with that which is not physical about us?In a strictly material reality what evolutionary benefit does this ability confer? 




This question remains unanswered unless you know of a dog who believes in God

Quote:

1 Keep the dogma of my grass(self explanitory)

2 Real or unreal it matters not as we are bound by the rules of the illusion if that is what it is.(Poorly stated should have said:We are bound by the "rules"of the reality we percieve)

3Philosophies based on sensuality or material perception are incomplete(they have no explaination for the phenomenon of consciousness beyond incomplete mechanical models)

4 Belief in truth is a lie(Belief in truth is absolutism)

5 Truth is subject to conditions(there are no absolutes that can be proven to be so)

6 absolutes cannot exist in a material plane(unless someone has dicovered magnetic monopoles)

7 Obeying the "rules" of material existance does not mean they must be accepted as "Real"(Unless one cannot grasp that "real" is a function of material experience)

8 Accepting the irrelevance of both quantum consciousness and physical reality is the first step to enjoying their dichotomy and integrating it.(you do accept the difference between thought and thing,right,thought is the tool for creating symbols to represent "reality" as well as an independent phenomenon of it's own separate from that which it interprets.)


9) enjoyment of the experience is a much more valid endeavor than understanding it(Should have said "enjoyment of the experience is valid AND key to understanding the dualistic nature of existance")

 




Quote:

(MM)So you see, my friend, I am not only leary of those who mouth the Truth. But I am especially leary of those who follow bankrupt systems that couldn't pour piss out of a boot with directions on the heel.

 



Were I to be proselytizing my belief mode this statement would be relevent,but as I am not I will chalk it up to you being so hurt by the belief systems you outlined.But since I am not trying to convert anyone to my modality and am placing it out for criticism, this statement is a mere emotional response.

Sclorch I have not forgotten you  :wink: As I said I would ponder all points made and respond,Well I am still pondering your words and developing my response(I do like to think things over well when handing thoughts to someone who's intellect is as sharply honed as yours)

In case it isn't obvious I am not a classicly trained philosopher or an eastern mystic.I am I guess a new thing a "Quantum Realist".Yeah realism is what gets our physical body from point A to point B.But it is the Quantum nature of consciousness which allows our minds to expand(mental expansion what an"unreal" term.As in "how much bigger is it? LOL)
Finaly When heteroabsolute realism can acurately describe the location and nature of the tool it uses to "create itself" (consciousness)then it will take it's place as a description of reality.The inability of realism to do this basic task invalidates it as the sole defining modality to existance.
Now when my hard drive cools back down I'll post more nonsense for ya'll.WR :wink:
(only one lil' emotidude just for you Sclorch)
PS I do appreciate the feedback and criticism! I have no doubts my perspectives are growing from digesting this reading,for that I thank all of you! WR

 
   


--------------------
To old for this place


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/13/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) [Re: whiterasta]
    #1246023 - 01/24/03 02:06 PM (14 years, 6 months ago)

Realism has little to do with Heteroabsolutism.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Original Seeds Store Shop: Buy CBD, Cannabis Seeds, Compare CBD

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Does psychology attempt to explain the consciousness? Ayrios 1,233 11 09/23/04 03:02 AM
by DigitalDuality
* viruses prove dna has a consciousness
( 1 2 3 4 all )
1stimer 2,913 62 01/20/04 08:00 PM
by SkorpivoMusterion
* Research into Consciousness Interfacing with matter
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
gettinjiggywithit 6,605 92 08/13/05 09:40 AM
by gettinjiggywithit
* Fuck . Astral Projectorary thingy in my eye.
( 1 2 all )
YellowSubmarine 2,041 25 08/15/03 06:10 AM
by fireworks_god
* Reality: the reflection of conciousness.... nubious 365 1 06/29/03 03:22 PM
by Boppity604
* Are you hostile to the idea of the evolution of consciousness?
( 1 2 3 all )
exclusive58 2,586 42 01/08/05 07:03 AM
by Cosm
* (Human) Consciousness
( 1 2 3 4 all )
trendalM 4,227 64 01/03/04 07:49 PM
by Deiymiyan
* Conciousness... ego ... physical body justthiz 1,366 10 03/20/02 03:42 PM
by cHeMiCaLoRaNgE

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Jokeshopbeard, DividedQuantum
2,336 topic views. 4 members, 8 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Avalon Magic Plants
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.064 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 21 queries.