I was surprised when he said he learned something. I can’t tell much difference between his recent posts and his first entries.
It is legitimate, but cannot be applied as an argument for or against a belief
in the existence (theism) or non-belief in the existence (atheism) of a God.
I’ve been somewhat lost on what’s being referred to. The way Gervais put it, I got it, it’s your choice to believe, so who would we ask, except you. Agnosticism is knowledge based, so it depends on what you know and what conclusions you’ve drawn, which should never be 100% certainty.
I agree, but that applies to all three doors.
In the absence of proof one way or another, everybody is agnostic,
i.e. not 100% sure.
Neither can I. It seemed to me he was pushing what he believed.
Just listen to yourself. I’ll have to go back and see what I said now. But my rule of thumb is that less is more (Occams razor and all). Pretty sure I staid true to that creed in the face of hyper intellectual disregard for the ultimate immeasurability responsible for existence.
Horse shit! The point was that all phenomena and all phenomena are not different things in the non-relativity of the absolute context. Which is the only point I’ve been making this whole time.
Your commentary represents a subset of that super set. Mine too, simply because saying it, is not it.
I got a lot of practice saying the same thing from different angles. Triangulation about the unnameable Tao is all there was ever going to be.
The politics and agenda of this forum was not going to allow acknowledgement of the effort as valid. Which is not my problem.
You better check out Causal Dynamical triangulation (CDT) to see how the universal fabric “unfolds”
My comment about antropomorphization is in regard to your use of the term “Knower” without a qualifying comment.
Who is that “Knower”?
I don’t consider it mine, or anybody’s, problem, that someone on the internet doesn’t agree with some others on the internet.
Presenting this as simple logic, it says a=a. Or spelled out, a doesn’t not equal a. Is that what you meant?
Welcome back.
Just listen to yourself.
We are individuals, who get into arguments with each other, as we push each other to do a better job of enunciating our ideas and arguments. So long as you cling to pretending we are some cabal barring entry to your profanity, it’s just dog-chasing-tail.
What are you attempting to demand we believe? Obviously you have some sort of agenda or you wouldn’t be so upset when any of us post something you don’t agree with.
But that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Obviously I have my ‘agenda’ that I want to discuss when it’s appropriate, . . . so that’s no problem for me. In fact, would love to figure out what you’re trying to say, beyond the ALL simply IS.
Brmckay, the problem isn’t with sharing your ideas and inviting feedback. When I’ve responded I’ve done so in good-faith with no malicious motive towards you, that was good faith feedback from my particular perspective. I’ve always been interested in your response and to see if we could find common ground.
You taking all this offense, what’s it good for? The honesty of other’s can easily hurt a little or a lot, but that’s for your own, you own that and feel that. We don’t. I’ve striven to learn how to process my bruised ego and keep moving forward. It’s what living is about, learning to deal with it.
Instead of taking the past couple days off to reconsider what you are trying to express, and how you are doing it and perhaps even being smacked by some inspiration and to do a major rewrite; and approach it from another direction. Or at least get clearer in your own mind what you are driving at. Instead, you come back only to blame us for your misery once again. That’ll make you sick before your day.
brmckay, post:648, topic:7931
the non-relativity of the absolute context.
On another forum I had an exchange with several other people about the Universe as a singularity with a individual world line .
There are very knowledgeable people who insist that the Relativity of Simultaneity proves that the Universe is not a singularity with an absolute time line.
On spaceships, map-clocks may look unsynchronized.
Right, besides we all have our own frames of reference.
Me thinks we’ve had a century to absorb that lesson, why does it seem like people still talk about it as some great mystery.
I can’t for the life of me figure out how other people perceive this world. I mean do people really think we’re in a fixed space or something? What about absorbing the reality of Deep Time as opposed to our day to day time, and how they commingle? Why is it rare to appreciate that animals have their own perspective of what’s unfolding? Or that we are in constance intercourse with our environment and it help mold who you are, just as you influence that reality in turn. And the wonder all the other interconnections to be discovered once eyes are opened.
Instead we as a people worry about the stock markets, political BDG’s, shopping, sports or hey how about that football,
{I happened to be watching last night’s game and the replay showed that hit, helmet straight into his solar plexus, and Oh shit I thinks, that was the “sweet-spot.” I know of kids & baseball, smack that area right when the vagus nerve is firing the ‘pump’ command and the heart stops. Given that there was no trauma I was surprised at how much time they spent on the field, seems he should have been strapped on that board and loaded and run, CPR & Dfib can be done in the vehicle. Get to the ER now! Rather than fumbling away those first irreplaceable minutes. [EXCEPT, (after reading a comment from real doctors I need to own my foul and make a correction.) the docs on the field had all the equipment they needed. a couple decades of experience has shown that given that same situation, remaining right there, not moving the patient, administering aid since doctor and equipment was right there, was probably what saved the young man’s life, though he’s still in bad shape. FWIW at least it sounds like my reading of what happen was correct. ]*
But beyond that the reactions and comments from the commentators and the players - the utter shock, like the world had stopped. Possible death on the field - and I think, what their fantasy wars are interrupted by real life. Then totally besides the point of the brutality of the sport, is the little matter that these same people, who are never satisfied with all they have, and who constantly demand more, more.
I mean the CNN commercials are a hell of sociological study, (or worse the commercialization of kiddy land) and never ever think of all the misery others have to live through in order to provide all the stuff we toss out in with obscene casualness.
But all hearts have stopped because one of their athlete warriors gave his all (actually he’s still with us as of this writing …). It’s a personal tragedy for sure, I’m not being dismissive of the pain for him and all who loved him - but just seeing how insulated and coddled so many demand to be. The Hollywood nation turns into the Disney nation, protect the unborn, deny lunch programs, and arm all the living. Amen
Everything is relative to everything else.
Truth is but a hot-desert-highway-mirage reflecting the distant horizon.
Now,… as for “Honesty,” that’s a whole 'nother discussion.
You understand what singularity implies right? Now apply that to Reality. (as in the non-relativity of the absolute context)
You ask that as if there is an answer that is correct. That’s not how I understand it. It’s something that math arrives at when the rules break down. Like from this article:
Physicists know that this conclusion is incorrect. Though the Big Bang theory is enormously successful at describing the history of the cosmos since that moment, just as with black holes, the presence of the singularity is telling scientists that the theory — again, GR — is incomplete, and needs to be updated.
IMO, a singularity is a timeless, dimensionless plenum with all the energy of the current universe, which by Bohm’s definition comes to:
The Energy of a Trillion Atomic Bombs in Every Cubic Centimeter of Space!
Michael Talbot and David Bohm (in quotes) in Talbot’s The Holographic Universe, Chapter 2: The Cosmos as Hologram, p.51 According to our current understanding of physics, every region of space is awash with different kinds of fields composed of waves of varying lengths. Each wave always has at least some energy. When physicists calculate the minimum amount of energy a wave can possess, they find that every cubic centimeter of empty space contains more energy than the total energy of all the matter in the known universe!
Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum, and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves. The universe is not separate from this cosmic sea of energy, it is a ripple on its surface, a comparatively small “pattern of excitation” in the midst of an unimaginably vast ocean. “This excitation pattern is relatively autonomous and gives rise to approximately recurrent, stable and separable projections into a three-dimensional explicate order of manifestation,” states Bohm.[12] In other words, despite its apparent materiality and enormous size, the universe does not exist in and of itself, but is the stepchild of something far vaster and more ineffable. More than that, it is not even a major production of this vaster something, but is only a passing shadow, a mere hiccup in the greater scheme of things.
https://www.jacobsm.com/deoxy/deoxy.org/h_bohm.htm
[12] Bohm, Wholeness, p.192
http://www.gci.org.uk/Documents/DavidBohm-WholenessAndTheImplicateOrder.pdf
Oooooommmmmmmm The IS-ness of the cosmos.
As some other ones’ might describe it.
I’m curious about what you think we people are supposed to do with that information?