I think Neville gets nearly everything wrong, proceeding by repeated assertions. He lacks a lot you have Molly. Tony and Rufus is instructive on who is imaging whom.
On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 4:50:43 PM UTC, Molly wrote: > > A state of feeling as the spark of life's continuity is worthy of a lot of > discussion and contemplation http://www.feelingisthesecret.org/ > and Neville Goddard based his life's work on the notion that putting > ourselves into a state of consciousness with feeling is the mechanism for > the manifestation of reality. You will have to forgive, because he is also > a Christian mystic, siting biblical quotes with the interpretation that > they were clues to this secret. > > Not sure it was such a secret. Every mystical tradition says the same > thing in some form. And science does seem to be catching up. I am ever in > search of the original edition of Einstein's "The World As I See It" that > was part of my university's rare book section and I could often be caught > sitting in the isle reading it for inspiration. There are many subsequent > editions, none as good. He was a brilliant intellect and spirit. > > On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 12:04:56 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote: >> >> The philosophy of an imagination looking outwards is fascinating, though >> relies on rather behaviourist tricks in some guises. Ludwig Fleck had some >> good stuff on what was out now being in, but whose is it questioning. It's >> interesting we had Feynman (who also loved his bee, wacky baccy and >> womanising), Waddington, Medawar, Horton, Soddy and many others while >> social constructivists told us we were 'heartless positivists'. The wrong >> ideas on science still pertain, I think conflated with heartless >> bureaucracy and bossy versions of religion. >> >> The 'state of feeling' is worthy of a lot of discussion and >> contemplation. >> >> On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 2:43:50 PM UTC, Molly wrote: >>> >>> I've saved the paper to read after my nap, Neil. Thanks. Scanning it >>> made me realize how hooked I am on visual organization with header styles, >>> bullet points and all the other nonsense. And how ridiculous I am for it. >>> I'm also intrigued that the paper references Feynman who I love, mostly >>> because he plays bongos and loves his orange juice: >>> https://youtu.be/2Ks8gsK22PA <https://youtu.be/2Ks8gsK22PA> >>> >>> On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 10:11:15 AM UTC-4, archytas wrote: >>>> >>>> I have an internal movie screen, though its presence is intermittent, >>>> sometimes glorious and once traumatic. The way we process information has >>>> multiple logics, including the way memory is not accurate in order to let >>>> us put different jigsaw pictures together for multiple futures. The >>>> universe itself may be doing something like this, with some having time >>>> backwards. >>>> >>>> In a more simple way, imagination allows us to think things through, >>>> and personally I try what seems a reverse of Molly's embodiment - that of >>>> the embodiment of the human in machine. The idea is not to create >>>> androids, but rather imagination that can take us past current limitations >>>> and provide enhancement for human being. Imagination is one way to test >>>> in >>>> virtual reality and not get one's fingers burned. There are accounts of >>>> how >>>> experiencing a Van Gogh played a role in constructing the model of a >>>> galaxy. I even see similarities between Molly's treatment of >>>> non-believers >>>> and attempts to make the semantic web compatible in difference. >>>> >>>> Fascinated by kaleidoscopes as a kid. Fascinated later by how machines >>>> could repeat simple equations at vast speed and produce patterns >>>> (fractals, >>>> chaos) doing something so mundane, yet rather like all 7 billion of us >>>> putting different number values into 2x = y at the same time and linking >>>> up >>>> the pattern. Imagination has a lot to do with pattern spotting. If Molly >>>> looks to spiritual awakening, I tend to look for cosmic code. Her methods >>>> may be introspective, but what was more introspective than Socrates' claim >>>> the knowledge was already in there and could be found through the right >>>> questions? I look out, though suspect these distinctions lapse in good >>>> sense, compassion and non-jealous integration. >>>> >>>> Tony turns some plumbing pipes and a mask into a static 'creature' that >>>> 'moves' with perspective and focus. I let it ride in my mind - though I >>>> could just hate him for his talent (I don't). I more the kind of chap who >>>> would borrow any left over pipe to keep the washing machine running. >>>> >>>> Any looking out is always experienced in the internal-virtual. We >>>> think the universe is beige. Space may be fluidic, elastic (more Hooke >>>> than Newton), potentially catapult-like so we could evade the limitations >>>> of space-time by standing still in moving space. Imaging outwards was a >>>> William Blake theme - http://ttj.sagepub.com/content/25/4/495.full.pdf >>>> - dramatic unveiling of the inter- action of varied human personalities, >>>> with its gradual focusing of atten- tion upon the two major protagonists, >>>> and with its brilliantly skillful dis- closure of a symbolism which leads >>>> the imagination outwards in widening ... experiments in gender, both >>>> socially and artistically, can remind us all of the constant bravery >>>> necessary to force the universe of the imagination outwards. >>>> >>>> Albert Einstein suggested that the elusive, additional element needed >>>> for high achievement in science is a "state of feeling" in the researcher, >>>> which he called "akin to that of the religious worship per or of one who >>>> is >>>> in love," arising not from a deliberate decision or program but from a >>>> personal necessity. Others are more down to earth. With eloquent >>>> simplicity >>>> P. W. Bridgman wrote, "The scientific method, as far as it is a method, is >>>> nothing more than doing one's damnedest with one's mind, no holds barred." >>>> But as good as they are, neither remark nor the occasional anecdotal >>>> confession is much help for discovering what we are after. Peter Medawar >>>> put it this way, though a bit harshly: "It is of no use looking to >>>> scientific papers, for they not merely conceal but actively misrepresent >>>> the reasoning that goes into the work they describe... .Only unstudied >>>> evidence will do-and that means listening at the keyhole." >>>> >>>> Free paper here - >>>> http://eppl604-autism-and-creativity.wmwikis.net/file/view/20013446.pdf/201762974/20013446.pdf >>>> >>>> Of course, imagining anyone will read so as to shake themselves from >>>> non-participation is imaginary. The self-importance of the petty gossip >>>> may be rather like a rabbit hole world. What we can imagine has already >>>> been warped by what is so easy to soak up from the 'garbage in' system, >>>> including not being able to get over oneself as the centre of the >>>> universe. >>>> I was taught about the irrational and spasmodic nature of science from >>>> books written in and before the 60's. Molly is closer to this than the >>>> frauds pretending science is rational. >>>> >>>> On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 12:02:58 PM UTC, Molly wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The idea of embodied imagination (Jungian) introduces the notion that >>>>> through dreams, imagination presents us with a complete reality that is >>>>> different from our waking reality, not constrained by logic or >>>>> rationality, >>>>> and based more on our individual archetypal system of symbols. My latest >>>>> thinking is that we carry this system into our waking conscious life, but >>>>> are less aware of it because of the constraints our rationality imposes >>>>> when awake. This system may be what calls us into a spiritual awakening >>>>> to >>>>> more fully integrate all levels of consciousness. >>>>> >>>>> Several years ago I was invited (all expenses paid) to the Lucidity >>>>> Institute <http://lucidity.com/> in Hawaii for a month long study in >>>>> dreaming and consciousness. There have been a few invitations I regret >>>>> not >>>>> feeling free enough to accept in my life and this is one, but my mother >>>>> in >>>>> law was in hospice in our home and those love ties reign. Even as a kid I >>>>> paid attention to my dreams and it has been for me, a life long >>>>> fascination. It has led me to understand that there are states of >>>>> consciousness in both waking and sleeping that are the same peak states, >>>>> just the movie on the screen has a different tone, like the difference >>>>> between Brooks' Blazing Saddles and Polanski's McBeth. >>>>> >>>>> I think that imagination is the mechanism that puts the movie on >>>>> screen in all circumstances. >>>>> >>>> -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
