Hello my former sciforums acquaintances,
I want someone to post the following to my "Reality is..." thread on sciforums to make it clear that I was not Clive who was posting for me. And also to make a save for reputation as a metaphysicist.
Clive was a descent fellow, a bit crazy but descent. I made friends with him during a voluntary stay at a mental hospital last year. He was talented in certain areas like business. Prior to his admittance he owned a small but successful business. Anyway, I want to use this time to discuss my metaphysical experiences which some may categorize as mystical.
When the mind links up to reality and the distinction disappears, panpsychism and universal consciousness become apparent as fact. A photon would "know" how to respond to the observer. It's a sort of link between brain/ mind and the environment. Not only does light respond, radio signals and music from the radio appear to have lyrics that consecutively appear in a rich pattern to the listener. It is a genuine link that is difficult to explain. There was a discussion on sciforums in brain in a vat that said that we have limited access to anything outside the simulation. This is the case with me. I have seen material evidence for universal consciousness in more ways than one in which I was no longer distinct or cut-off from the world but a unified whole with it. If God is the relationship between mind and matter then the two lose distinction during these experiences and so mind is able to influence reality to some degree as entailed in the double slit experiment where a photon "knows" it is being observed. The laws of physics of consciousness and the laws of physics of the environment are merged during these panpsychic experiences and Spinoza's God, the universal consciousness, is proven to be self-evident. But alas, what is acceptable is not what we ourselves create and know but what everyone else does. It becomes a challenge to explain this without being labelled as crazy when you're one of the only people that not merely believes, but knows God is real.
P.S. Consciousness includes thought but it is much more than mere thought. It can also contain the body from without even though it originates from the brain which is a mere machine. Because consciousness is physical, it can affect the physical. This was established in my thread Reality Based Matter on page 7 of General Philosophy. The death of the body does not eliminate the unseen non-objective wavefunction whereby awareness expands to include spacetime in all directions during panpsychism. So yes, there is an after-life for the consciousness and distinction or separation between objects is but an illusion.
Quote:Borrowed from Francis Church with some modifications, a standard belief confirmation form. Just enter your name or someone else's for (first name) and enter the name or whatever the belief is in the area marked (belief).
The thing is this, if you want to believe in something then by all means do so. If somebody doesn't share it then so what? However if you try and support it with unsubstantiated facts, especially on a science forum, then be prepared to face the consequences of your action. Citation would be wonderful but it will be difficult for the problem you've chosen/created. Belief is shared by all segments of society and it can be as ridiculous as you can make it, there's no scale to determine how stupid a belief is. Belief does not care about a person's mental state, wellness or IQ. That said, and if you're feeling frustrated by it all, then take the time to insert the proper terminology into the form below even if you're talking to yourself. I BELIEVE it has therapeutic value and perhaps make you realize that not everyone believes as you do. I just did it using my name and the belief that the form has therapeutic value
(first name) your friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, (first name), are little. In this great universe of ours we are mere insect, an ant, in our intellect, as compared with the boundless world about us, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.
Yes, (first name), there is a (belief). It exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no (belief). It would be as dreary as if there were no (first name with 's'). There would be no faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which believing fills the world would be extinguished.
Not believe in (belief) ! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get to watch the sky to observe (belief), but even if you did not see (belief), what would that prove? Nobody sees (belief), but that is no sign that there is no (belief). The most real things in the world are those that no one can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that’s no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.
You may tear apart the baby’s rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest person, nor even the united strength of all the strongest persons that ever lived, could tear apart. Only faith, fancy, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, (first name), in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.
No (belief)! It lives, and it lives forever. A thousand years from now, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, (belief) will continue to make glad the heart.
Quote:I want someone to post the following to my "Reality is..." thread on sciforums to make it clear that I was not Clive who was posting for me.
That is a bannable offense specifically spelled out in Sci Forums rules. Nobody do this unless you want to be banned from that forum.
(Jan 6, 2017 11:58 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:I want someone to post the following to my "Reality is..." thread on sciforums to make it clear that I was not Clive who was posting for me.
That is a bannable offense specifically spelled out in Sci Forums rules. Nobody do this unless you want to be banned from that forum.
That was my exact first thought.
Then in that case my fellow sciforums acquaintances, I would not want you to get banned for doing so. Thank you anyways.
Syne,
I've been passively reading the Brain in a vat thread and your replies in it.
You cannot deny that the mind is indeed brain and that losing parts of the brain significantly impacts our functioning. What you can argue however is that the body is a hologram and thus our thoughts can be seen by the universal consciousness when it reacts to us during crucial moments or when our thoughts correlate with the immediate environment to awaken or summon a friend in God. Thus consciousness is a shared property by all things with any level of complexity, not just the brain. While it is true that consciousness depends on the brain, thought can exist outside the brain. If we grant this as fact, then the question becomes whether or not there is an after-life or whether or not there is simply a God that makes Itself known only in a single lifetime. Which would seem unfair to those who have never known God. The logic is from above due to the fact that consciousness is not some mystical conundrum but a physical reality.
The holographic principle is increasingly gaining momentum among the professional scientific community and you should use that to argue that the body is simply reality's means of creating differences within sameness or disjoint sets when in fact everything is really One and that their are many levels to reality that are built upon One foundation.
This is the CTMU concept of syndiffeonesis - two things are different because they have at least one similarity in common, namely that they are both real. Such as mind and matter which leads to duality (difference) in unity (sameness).
I can see why you got banned.
While I have the book The Holographic Universe, and it does capture the imagination, it hasn't been experimentally verified nor is it gaining momentum, except perhaps in pseudoscience circles.
(Jan 7, 2017 09:58 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]I can see why you got banned.
While I have the book The Holographic Universe, and it does capture the imagination, it hasn't been experimentally verified nor is it gaining momentum, except perhaps in pseudoscience circles.
I must say I'm a bit surprised by your lack of comprehension and knowledge of the informational nature of reality. You may not have kept abreast with current sciences so that would explain your lack of comprehension of its nature. A simple Google search would correct you in your error. As I recall you were a proponent of universal consciousness. Isn't the ontological reduction of reality to information the best explanation for this? Or am I wrong?
No, I'm not a proponent of universal consciousness. If you have credible sources that show a rise in the prominence of the holographic principle in fields other than information technology (like physics), I'd be interested in seeing them, but I'm not going on a wild goose chase myself.
(Jan 8, 2017 08:56 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]No, I'm not a proponent of universal consciousness. If you have credible sources that show a rise in the prominence of the holographic principle in fields other than information technology (like physics), I'd be interested in seeing them, but I'm not going on a wild goose chase myself.
I do not think my inquiry warrants an appeal to cold and unattached superiority complexes and thought suppression. Such a strategy requires serious attention. So I will attempt to clarify my understanding of the nature of the word "hologram" as used in the holographic principle.
We do not say "All is holographic" by which we mean a 3 D hologram as used in information technology and computer images. Rather, the physical world of atoms and molecules are virtual and the other one is real. Although matter has a level of reality that is very basic and simple while consciousness is a higher level identification. It belongs to a "desert of the real" which can be identified as the entirety of the infinite cosmos which is indeed holographic as used in the theory. The hologram is a projection of a 2 D information structure such as a computer screen into 3 spatial dimensions. This is considered the most workable understanding according to modern sciences. May I ask, what year was The Holographic Principle written?
Universal consciousness is real and you have claimed theism. Now you are claiming otherwise?