Heh as you say Rigsy, this is merely my belife. We know that when it comes to things like God, Ghosts or whatever it is all down to belife. This is merely my way of explaining to my own satifaction the differant between the physical world and the world of spirit.
On May 10, 4:04 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > So activity can be scanned but does that really make it "matter"? I > came across this today: "Today, for instance, we talk of 'matter.' We > describe its physical properties. We conduct laboratory experiments to > demonstrate some of its aspects. But the word 'matter' remains a dry, > inhuman, and purely intellectual concept, without any psychic > significance for us. How different was the former image of matter- the > Great Mother- that could encompass and express the profound emotional > meaning of Mother Earth. In the same way, what was the spirit is now > identified with intellect and thus ceases to be the Father of All. It > has degenerated to the limited ego-thoughts of man; the immense > emotional energy expressed in the image of 'our Father' vanishes into > the sand of an intellectual desert." Carl G. Jung- "Man and his > Symbols" Of course, I thought of you immediately! :-) > > On May 9, 9:37 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > All of which though still take place in the brain. > > > On May 9, 1:57 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 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 > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
