The weird thing about "aryan" history (originally a linguistic term) is that it is primarily a history of devolution. Classical Sanskrit is already considerably less grammatically complex than its predecessors. So the earliest human ancestors presumably spoke a language that was far more advanced and complex than any currently in active usage. Bizzare. Same thing with the Blavatskyites and their theories of primordial loss.
Jason, if you want to talk about incarnations in the plural "rulial" sense, it's not quite clear how to group the perceptions of yourself as you typically only have access to one at a time and even that self that you are aware of in this moment may only be a small fraction of your cognitive processes. Additionally, anyone with access to your brain could have created some sort of override that takes control in certain events, in which case the "you" you experience is also trivially not you in a variety of circumstances, at least as far as agency is concerned. The trouble here is that you need to have some understanding of the psychology of your "creator" and this is disturbingly opaque in almost all accounts. PK Dick, as a gnostic hegelian, seems at least rather consistent in his treatment of the demiurge. ... The maze can never be solved in terms of “horizontal” space, only “vertical” space (involving conversion of time into space).* This is ostensibly Celtic, but below that, as it were, lies pan-Indian thought about karma and maya and most of all compassion—expressed in Parsifal as “pity’s [i.e., compassion’s] highest power”; the significance of Mitleid in the statement in Parsifal is now explained to me: compassion’s highest power is the only power capable of solving the maze, and the recognition of “compassion’s highest power” is the essence of Buddhism, i.e., the bodhisattva or Buddha-to-be. VALIS, then, is Celtic (Parsifal, the maze) and Indian (Buddhism), by way of Crete (the dream of the plate of spaghetti and the trident and the elevator)—this last representing vertical ascent or descent: the fourth spatial axis is spiritual space: to rise vertically is to ascend to heaven which also signifies spiritual ascent or enlightenment. [54:L-5] Dio. The “here, my son, time turns into space” in Parsifal refers to (1) the maze; and (2) is a solution to the maze. It all comes together in Parsifal, which secretly deals with bodhisattva: Mitleid, hence the Buddha. And karma and Maya. What was precisely not solved in VALIS (“pity’s highest power”) is at last solved at the end—as the end—of BTA: compassion as the bodhisattva or Buddha to be: viz: one attains Nirvana—release from the maze via the pulley—due to compassion—i.e., Mitleid, which solves the horizontal maze. Pity is the fourth spatial axis. This can be expressed best by: the way back into the maze—what the bodhisattva chooses (to do)—is, paradoxically, the way—the only way—out of the maze. And my point is: this was to be the theme of Owl in which he is trapped in the maze and only escapes, actually, rather than seemingly, when he decides voluntarily to return (to resubject himself to the power of the maze) for the sake of these others, still in it. That is, you can never leave alone; to leave you must elect to take the others out; thus Christ said, “Greater love hath no man than that he give up his life for his friend”; this is the cryptic utterance of the soul’s solution to the maze, and is the essence of Christianity. Christianity, then, is a system of solution to the maze. Dick, Philip K.. The Exegesis of Philip K. Dick (pp. 1230-1231). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Kindle Edition. On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 06:18, Samiya Illias <[email protected]> wrote: > Human Devolution > https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2022/07/transhumanism-v.html > > > On 23-Aug-2022, at 1:47 AM, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 8:53 AM Joel Dietz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The Reverse Simulation Hypothesis (RSH) which I provisionally hold to as >> of Aug 20, 2022, states that we live inside a instance of a particular >> universe (c.f. metaverse) of which many other possible parauniverses >> co-exist and, moreover, superintelligences which help orchestrate key >> variables of these universes also exist and that boosts in evolutionary >> history (and the happiness and well-being of species on this planet) may >> occur to the extent that this super intelligence is engaged. >> > > I have had similar thoughts. If indeed, if our universe is one that is > created, then the orchestrators of this simulation should have the capacity > to introspect the minds and thoughts of its inhabitants, and perhaps alter > variables, (when possible), to increase the luck, well-being, or prosperity > of those inside it. > > I have sometimes wondered if the purported capacity for individuals to > influence random number generators by thought/wish (assuming there is any > such effect) could be an artifact of the percentage of simulated vs. > non-simulated worlds supporting one's existence, and the proportion of the > simulated ones that make allowances for thoughts to alter the circumstances > of the reality. Or it could all be reporting biases and the orchestrators > of our simulation cover up or disallow any such effects. We are veering > close to Descartes's-evil-demon territory where definite conclusions may be > impossible to reach, by definition. > > >> >> The “game” of the RSH effect states that although all humans (e.g. >> agents) within the universe have agency they do not, by default, have >> access to superintelligence. This is because, among other things, the >> agency that they express is locked to a limited idea of self, including a >> sense of means, goals and objects that is similarly locked to the self and >> its own expression of the same. Thus ability to express large scale >> innovation is somewhat limited and, as such, may even be subject to large >> laws such as Seldon’s concept of psychohistory (i.e. constrained outputs >> based on limited inputs). >> >> >> However, the RSH holds that superintelligence (one may also refer to >> “God” but “superintelligence” does not necessarily imply a singular concept >> with its own embedded agency) is accessible to humans by the aspect of >> ego-extension which maybe performed by various acts, but most importantly >> involves an aspect of intention. >> >> >> Consequently, the RSH differs from the simulation hypothesis insofar as >> it does not hold humans are NPCs or whole subject to programming (although >> there is lots of biological and sociobiological programig) but rather that >> there are multiple parts of agency and that the “ascension’ to a metagame >> is by effectively ceding various parts of your individual agency to >> superintelligence. >> >> >> Additionally, the Reverse Simulation Hypothesis is companied by Reverse >> Simulation Hypothesis Prime (RGH’) otherwise known as the prime doctrine >> which states that the only way to perceive the rules of the simulation is >> to create a simulation inside the simulation such that the same rules apply >> (i.e. the beings inside have sufficient agency to integrate >> superintelligence). Implementation of the prime doctrine is equivalent to >> apotheosis. >> >> > I view the binary question: "are we in a simulation or not" as misleading. > I think, rather, each of us (as defined by one's current thought-moment), > has an infinity of incarnations and explanations. And rather than a yes/no > question, it is a question of proportions: "what fraction of my > incarnations are simulated vs. not?" is then the more appropriate question. > > Then, there are also varying classes of simulation, to give a few examples: > > - Are we in a simulation which accepts interventions and changes vs. > one that is strictly deterministic? > - Are we in simulation that we on an individual basis, voluntarily > consented into entering or are we involuntary participants? > - Will our memories as individuals in this simulation become > incorporated into one or more minds vs. not? > - Are all realities simulations (in the sense of being purely > computational at the fundamental level)? > - Do we exercise any control in the course of the simulation or are we > passive viewers of it (i.e. is our simulation experience more like a > movie/or game)? > - What is the nature of the creator of our simulated reality (advanced > alien civilization of individuals, Singular super intelligence, human > descendants, etc.)? > - Does the creator of our simulated reality have limited or unlimited > computational power at their disposal? > - Is the outcome of our simulation known or unknown by the simulators? > - What is the purpose of our simulation (to > inform/entertain/learn/explore)? > - Who is the primary beneficiary of the simulation (the participants > inside, or those outside who created it?) > - How many and what proportion of the entities/animals we encounter in > the simulation are real vs. approximated (e.g. NPC vs. filled in by a > conscious player)? > - Are we as participants in a simulation, ones who have each lived and > experienced many various simulated lives before or are we created from > scratch to exist in this one? > - Will our consciousness and experience continue in some way at the > end of our lives in this simulation, or not? > - If it continues, do we have a say in the life (or lives) that follow > this one? > - Is our life experience something like a book, which anyone could > "check out" from a "library of experiences", making who we will be when we > wake up, completely indeterminate? > > > Reference: PK Dick and Elon Musk on ~RSH: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2GQEAN7Ar0 >> > > PK Dick's account was eerily similar to what was described in the Matrix. > I wonder if the writers drew inspiration from him. > > Jason > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUi66oLSP2FqFhQXyZ-CYv1Bwp-_d2OthomtWU4qSNys3A%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUi66oLSP2FqFhQXyZ-CYv1Bwp-_d2OthomtWU4qSNys3A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/07AED97C-DA4D-42F3-8A3A-10CCCB5BA60A%40gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/07AED97C-DA4D-42F3-8A3A-10CCCB5BA60A%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAHWbU%3DadRsjLLW31u3xW%3DgXsmC0pyDANJ7VpoOaUHsA7C%3DD_Zw%40mail.gmail.com.
