It's more that I prefer what you say and demonstrate Molly. We have to hope in something simple, though it may emerge from complex work, perhaps the simplexity angle. The imagination, in many childhood studies, is connected with deception and, of course, in the wilderness. Otherwise, without nanoprobes we will never get Allan up to speed as a true heretic! Neville Goddard creates 'black boxes I don't need - they communicate quite well in a compelling logic but I'm left outside it. You don't do this and are more like Abbott, with his sense of humour.
Thanks for the film spoiler Allan - I did try it for 5 minutes but felt it lacked imagination. I couldn't read Terry Pratchett or Harry Potter, even Lewis Carroll. Autistic people often lack the imagination we use in understanding others and perhaps the feelings to work back through. We don't all have to be singers from the same page. Religion can build socially approved epistemic authority, but needs to leave critical space. If we look outwards, much claimed as product of the imagination is dull copy. On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 9:39:11 PM UTC, Molly wrote: > > You don't like many of my links, that's OK, don't mind. Yoga, Vedanta and > Kundalini, as mystical paths, all take feeling into the higher levels of > consciousness. I don't think the practice of the path matters. We all have > our own. I think that knowing the feeling, and returning through the > feeling, is an important way to explore and return to the highest states. I > think the highest consensus state may be simple and silent as Allan > suggests, and I agree that it is how it feels to me also. > > On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 1:08:24 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote: >> >> 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.
