Please define what you mean by "spirit". Thank you. Isn't the material world in a constant state of recycling?
How do you account for memory- the impact of the dead upon the living? I have a crush on Marvell and Donne, btw! :-) Are some happier in their inner world or their outer world? Why? On May 5, 4:31 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Om, > > See my reply to RP, for a fuller explaintion of my belifes. Yes > eternity exists, but for us creatures of matter it does not. Eternity > is the realm of the spirit. > > Yes indeed we are back to labels, that which we label gravity, we do > so in order to attempt an understanding. We are not able to > communicate our thought to each other telephicly, we must use our > labels, I'm sure that you'll agree this methoed is fraught with all > sorts of obsticles, but it is the one we have and so we must use it. > > Exists is another such label, and my thanks to you for defineing it. I > would further define it as that which is. So all creatures of spirit > included. That though is of course a belife of mine, and so you can > agree or disagree at your whim. > > On May 4, 5:26 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > “…We still don't know how gravity works, but we > > are sure that such a thing exists, we see it's effects all around us > > and can apply sciences to measure it. Like time we can see the > > effects of it. Now I'll not discount the idea that the effects of > > time may be down to something else entirly…” – Lee > > > True that we don’t know how gravity works. I’ll add that we don’t know > > what it is either…even though there is a predictable ‘effect’. So, not > > knowing what a thing is nor how it works how do we know that it > > exists? Here I’ll use the understanding of the term ‘exists’ as being > > something that the physical senses see/feel/hear etc. We don’t see > > ‘it’ (gravity). We only see some predictable movement and that > > movement applies to about everything so in this sense it is not unique… > > let alone a unique ‘thing’. Now, one need not agree with this of > > course; however, if not, it would appear congruent to me that one > > could say that god ‘exists’ in the same way. . . something that I > > suggest (in most cases) is but a belief…not any objective ‘existence’. > > > “…The thing with imagining enternity or existing within it, is that > > it > > is just imaginagtion isn't it…” - Lee > > > Yes Lee, if one merely imagines it…it is. However, are you suggesting > > that we do not live in eternity? That eternity doesn’t ‘exist’? These > > are all parts of the examination I suggest. > > > On May 4, 5:02 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Hey OM. > > > > I guess what we are talking about are forces. I see that perhaps you > > > do not count time a s force, or that perhaps our understanding of what > > > time is must be constrained by the type of being we are. > > > > Yes I agree that the reality maynot be wholey how we percive it to be, > > > as you know this has been my stance for a long while now. > > > > Back to forces though. We still don't know how gravity works, but we > > > are sure that such a thing exists, we see it's effects all around us > > > and can apply sciences to measure it. Like time we can see the > > > effects of it. Now I'll not discount the idea that the effects of > > > time may be down to something else entirly. > > > > The thing with imagining enternity or existing within it, is that it > > > is just imaginagtion isn't it. I can also imagine that I'll a tall > > > man with broad shoulders, but the reality of the situation is I am > > > not. > > > > On May 4, 10:34 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Lee, I sense that what we perceive as being 'external' - energy and > > > > movement - is that. However, beyond this, our notions of what things > > > > are...even the letters and associated words for SETI... only exist in > > > > thought...no where else. > > > > > As an aside, for those who may have missed it, SETI has been defunded. > > > > > And, no, I didn't miss your caveat. I just disagree and suspect that > > > > having thought about what one thinks is real, which does include the > > > > concept of time, all one's lifetime...the notion of time becomes so > > > > ingrained in one's world view that it is assumed to be an actual thing > > > > rather than merely a thought. > > > > > Yes, when one *thinks* about such things, they appear to be real. The > > > > operative words here are "appears to be". As a mental exercise Lee, > > > > I'll ask you to do your very best to imagine existing in > > > > eternity...that which has no beginning and no end. > > > > > Got the vision?.....from this perspective (the actual 'reality'), time > > > > just is meaningless... especially if one also imagines no perceiver(s) > > > > involved anywhere at all. > > > > > On the other hand, I do know that there is life and that we, as human > > > > beings do think and project our understandings upon the fabric of what > > > > we project as being 'external' to ourselves. I don't deny this...it is > > > > obvious that we do. It's just that what we project comes from mind and > > > > not from whatever is actually there. What is actually there is not > > > > what we perceives as time...it isn't color (except clear light as TTS > > > > notes...something I've been contemplating for years now...something > > > > that to the rational/thinking mind just can't be grasped)...it isn't > > > > SETI...it isn't shape...it isn't anything that human senses perceive > > > > and then apply some sort of belief about what is being > > > > perceived...based upon previously attached beliefs. We don't in our > > > > everyday mode perceive reality as it actually is. We do use > > > > conventions mind agrees upon...for practicality's sake...its just that > > > > in any ultimate sense, these conventions are nothing more than > > > > that...they are not what is actually there. Remove the observer (and > > > > associated senses) and what exists? Get it? No thinking...no > > > > thoughts...no concepts...no words...no notions of reality.... > > > > > No, this isn't the conventional approach to things ontological nor > > > > epistemological....yet, the exercise can be of enormous value in my > > > > experience. No, I'm not attempting to impose a belief system upon you > > > > or anyone else...in fact, it is almost like a diminution of belief if > > > > anything at all! > > > > > So, yes, how does one think about not thinking!!! > > > > > Well...we have gone down this road quite often Lee...and you stop > > > > after only a couple of paces which is fine. > > > > > For me, I hunger to know beyond my own set of beliefs...which are > > > > almost all things that I've attached to long ago and were formed based > > > > upon words...and, not having created those words...there is little > > > > that I actually know associated with these terms fed to me by others. > > > > > To do this search, deconstruction [of beliefs] seems to be one method. > > > > It isn't a road often traveled nor does it seem to be for everyone. So > > > > be it! > > > > > On May 4, 1:47 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hey Om, > > > > > > Don't be shocked mate you might have missed this bit: > > > > > > ' I must though disagree with you about concepts not existing without > > > > > somebody to concive of them. Sure I could probably think of a concept > > > > > or two where this is applicable, time though is not one of them.' > > > > > > I like you exanples OM, but we know in a scientific way what colours > > > > > are, and yes without the eyes to sense them, they still exist. The > > > > > same with sound waves, yes of course with out the ears to hear and the > > > > > brain to make sense of them, we can ask do they really exist, but the > > > > > answer must be yes. > > > > > > Think of it like this. SETI have been listening to radio waves from > > > > > space for many years now, prior to SETI being setup, where these radio > > > > > signals simply not there? Yes of course they where, we just didn't > > > > > have the now how to listen to them. > > > > > > There is a valid reason why we call somethings inventions and others > > > > > discoverys. > > > > > > I'm trying hard to Grok yoru meaning but you know that old fashioned > > > > > reasoning keeps interfearing. > > > > > > On May 4, 5:43 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > “…Naaaa I do not think that is what you are saying. “ – Lee > > > > > > > Lee, in many ways, it is exactly what I’m saying. > > > > > > > First, a few examples: Color – we perceive color(s)…and different > > > > > > people perceive colors differently for one another too. And I’m not > > > > > > even thinking about the color blind nor the totally blind here. With > > > > > > no human brain, what we know as color just will not exist. There may > > > > > > be some sort of vibration/movement in the universe but there will be > > > > > > no color because it takes a human being to see them. Please don’t > > > > > > add > > > > > > other life forms to the equation, the principle is the same. No > > > > > > perceiver, no color. > > > > > > > That is only one thing. How about country music? Again, while there > > > > > > may be vibrations/movement, without a person to ‘translate’ these > > > > > > vibrations into what we call country music, there just isn’t any > > > > > > such > > > > > > thing. It is a concept (country music) and doesn’t exist without > > > > > > mind. > > > > > > > I really was shocked when you said that you disagreed with me about > > > > > > concepts not existing without a perceiver/thinker! Just how could > > > > > > say > > > > > > a concept of ‘freedom’ exist without mind? It just doesn’t. > > > > > > > Adding a little more, when you bring in ‘labels’, yes, all concepts/ > > > > > > words (labels) are subjective and without mind they just don’t > > > > > > exist. > > > > > > Even when there *is* mind things like say the earth can be > > > > > > deconstructed into atoms and/or molecules etc…stuff that is not what > > > > > > we think about as being the planet. I haven’t gone into this very > > > > > > deeply but hope you grok. > > > > > > > On May 3, 9:36 am, > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
