I would put it in the spirit but respect your opinion(s). Brain scans capture images, so they would be material, I guess, but the consious and unconscious seem immaterial until they are translated into a visible form- from the written or spoken word to action of some sort. How do you account for dreams? For thoughts that pop up from "nowhere" and have no relation to reality? For the imagination? Modern man is self-conscious about his thinking believing himself a rational creature more than an animal- but is this entirely true? Or hubris?
On May 9, 6:02 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > Rigsy I would put thoguht in the matter cateogory. > > On May 7, 5:47 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > So is thought spirit or matter? > > > I may not understand spirit in the same way as you, lee. I am trying > > to think of spirit/matter in degrees somewhat like the degrees of > > shading between black and white- nine values to human perception. > > > Yet humans have given God, ghosts, angels, demons material forms so I > > wonder if it is believed humans cannot conceive spirit independent of > > form. > > > On May 5, 9:14 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Hey Rigsy, > > > > Spirit is all that exists that is not matter. Think God, think > > > ghosts, angels or demons, if you belive in such. If you do not then > > > at least I hope that is a little clearer. > > > > On May 5, 2:48 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 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 > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
