Lovely and insightive Molly. On e might venture to Berkeley and his oft misunderstood falling tree. The less naive imagination from the stochastic movement of bits of pollen grains to a journey into the stars with tensor equations derived from how a bridge holds together is maybe a bit different. It would be interesting to think, from the good materialist perspective, what people could imagine free of poverty-poverty-threat motivations. I am not good with kids like this, though do manage not to shoot the ones who tie my shoelaces together (I wear slip-ons). Science fiction prototyping is something kids aren't bad at - adults usually stunningly incapable. It has struck me that I never really explain what the technique is to kids and maybe explaining it to adults is a mistake, though I am a veteran of brainstorming with the brain dead.
Something that has been intriguing me of late might be called 'the rules of paradise'. In material terms (other than lusts after 4-wheel-drive Bentleys) "global warming changes everything morally" and the limited paradise of a secure world for all would have to have new rules - many of which run against current values (population restriction is an obvious one - think off disasters in China so intuitively cruel here - and even eugenics). You might not be allowed all your children and Tony and I have touched on our children (grandson in my case) who might have bee denied existence as we their pleasures (etc - if I can conclude something so sensitive so abruptly). Imaging the future and bringing "future memories" to bear in present thinking - which may be my take on your Neville. Some of what needs discussing is not pleasant, but neither is a trip to Mars for people who go unequipped with spacesuits, sending a message there is no oxygen there (little as I'm sure Tony would correct). Brave New World was a rather poor attempt. You are no pusher Molly - though "Top Gear" has a certain connotation .... On Sunday, March 15, 2015 at 12:23:25 PM UTC, Molly wrote: > > I wonder how our lives would change if the majority of people understood > and used their imaginations. I know Neil is right when he points out that > the education systems discourage it. I sat in my youngest son's first grade > class and asked them to imagine a poem as I read it to them Then I asked > them to think about their mothers, and asked how many could see a picture > of their mothers in their mind, even though she wasn't here. 100% could, no > straggling hands raised. We then imagined lots of other simple images, > apple, teddy bear, just to warm up. Then I read the class a short A. A. > Milne poem from the When We Were Young collection and asked them to > visualize it as I read it. Even though my own son was tying my shoe laces > together and distracting giggles were ensuing, each child could recount > their own inner vision of the poem and we all marveled at how very > different they were. I've always found young people happy to work > creatively and don't think many teachers understand the importance beyond > the boring art project.. > > I remember this as I think about how imagination enters into the > communication process. Chris' exercise in translation demonstrates how > translators take all the imagination out of the speaking and the listener > or reader is left to implying imagination to fill in the holes. This is > using imagination as a skill. > > Neville talks about awakened imagination (not pushing Neville, just to > expound on what I think is his important idea regarding imagination.) That > is, the use of imagination in inspiration, breakthrough ideation, > creativity at its finest (leading to manifestation.) Beyond fantasy or > mechanics, imagination takes us into states of pure awareness. Like the > difference between dreaming and lucid dreaming. Using software intuitively > and arriving at E=MC2. Although all of our prior experience and hard work > gets us to the brink, only awakened imagination engaged at this point can > get us beyond, employing our genius. > > I think everyone has it. Not all discover they have it our are encouraged > to utilize it. Indeed, most cultures discourage it. > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 11:10:22 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote: > > We are citizens of Lanikea, a vast supercluster of galaxies with the Milky > Way at one edge, flowing towards the Great Attractor, a kind of > gravitational well our river runs to. Whilst the universe is expanding > away, some material moves towards us and some away. We will collide with > Andromeda in about two-and-a-half billion years, though collide is the > wrong word as what will mostly be colliding is space. We imagine this, > though it fits will a great deal of hard work This work is much tougher, > in my view than that of mystics, though the different work needn't be > uncomplimentary. Let's face it, most people can't even balance the chemical > equations taught at school, let alone do any difficult science. Some may > find this a little superior. I'd just remind people that scientists don't > generally amass great fortunes and are generally rather decent chaps and > chapesses with tendencies towards social equality. > > The imagination is often very limited, perhaps to whatever people do > rather than listen in class or church. We imagine a lot to help us cope > with what is imposed on us, and is hardly surprising in education given how > unsuitable it is to most. I still remember more of the girls in 6th form > than the chemistry. I'm not particularly interested in the religious > imagination - I'd trust to holding Molly's hand or RP's passivity Yet > there is little doubt this imagination is in science. Tony might spot the > patterns better than I. I doubt I'm attracted to the same simplicity as > Molly - yet there are parallels in illusion stripping, which may seem odd > to some amdst mystic talk. The great mystification of our age is economics > and I wonder why those like Dawkins focus so much on religion, other than > to sell books. We can imagine a world without economics and it has its own > Inquisition - for the sky itself will fall without out its liturgies. > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 9:53:35 PM UTC, archytas wrote: > > We actually know something of the embodiment flow. We might consider more > of that in the morning, > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 9:48:35 PM UTC, archytas wrote: > > The wheel really comes off if you tinker with a blackhole in the wrong > way. > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 9:11:36 PM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: > > Whew.. glad someone does.. with out the wheel it becomes difficult to get > the world to go round. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: archytas <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 10:07 PM > Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Embodied Imagination > > I'm good with stub axles. > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 8:52:58 PM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: > > No I prefer to make my own sausage much taster . Right now i am having > difficulty collapsing the black hole in the center of our galaxy so that I > will understand how to remove the stub axel from the wheel maybe it is > easier to comprehend within the reality dimension from which we originated. > Or the active imaginations of common sleep reality.. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: archytas <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 9:42 PM > Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Embodied Imagination > > Preferably not a Frankfurter. > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 8:29:22 PM UTC, archytas wrote: > > If it was Biggly Banger, maybe we all come from the same sausage? > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 8:13:56 PM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: > > I like fire works as long as thee is no need to explain or what makes them > go bang.. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: archytas <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 9:02 PM > Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Embodied Imagination > > Nah! You were always around as I remember! In constructor theory, the > term 'in the beginning' is one we try to be sceptical of. Biggly Bang is > looking more and more like a symbol like infinity.I prefer a 'breaking > containment' theory, a bit like Molly's. Magic has long has such too. > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 7:44:57 PM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: > > According to christian theology in the beginning was God and the word > was with in God. The Word begat the universe.. > > What can i say except the Total Presence has a highly active imagination.. > long before I came into existence.. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: archytas <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 8:38 PM > Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Embodied Imagination > > How anything is made of nothing certainly exercises the imagination - > maybe we have to stop thinking about creation as a necessary part if this? > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 7:21:54 PM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: > > To try and understand the presents you have to use your imagination to get > ideas to make sense.. an example might me trying understand how everything > is made from the essence of the Presence and separate at the same time if i > can visualize the Presence being our solar system.. i then can imagine each > planet being totally separate and at the same time total dependent on solar > system to exist. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: Molly <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 5:10 PM > Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Embodied Imagination > > Your last sentence is a great one, Allan. How is your imagination used in > what you describe there? > > On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 12:02:55 PM UTC-4, Allan Heretic wrote: > > He sounds like a lot of people I have listen to over the years. More than > a few have played it for the money angle, sadly.. for them my favorite > bible verses are "He went and hung himself . . . Go do thou likewise." Let > see the first part comes from Judas betrayal of Jesus and the second part > from the story of the good sarmeratan (sp). There is a lot of crafting to > reach the desired goal as i tried to demonstrate. > > There is a lot of guidance for spiritual development... but i have problem > with the every verse rhetoric..especially in english.. the reasoning is > the english language structure is based off the paragraph or the complete > thought. Often times the sentence creates only a partial idea. To many > people try to justify their bad behavior and actions as spiritual guidance.. > > There are good guidelines ten commandments. Jesus love your neighbor as > yourself .. stories demonstrating examples of proper behavior but not > written step by step instruction. Recently the perspective came forward > that there is a highway to hell and a staircase to Heaven.. that just > demonstrates the expected traffic flow. > > For me spirituality is developing and demonstrating the soul's connection > with the Presence.. that connection determines your position within the > mandala of the Totality of the Presence. Which is beyond my ability to > comprehend. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: Molly <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 2:31 PM > Subject: Mind's Eye Re: Embodied Imagination > > I think much of what is in the public domain is crafted instead of > created, and crafted to sell, so crafted to gain audience action (that > converts to money for someone.) That takes skill, but little imagination. > > I originally discovered Neville when I was exploring the notion of > resurrection, and he wrote a lecture called Resurrection that is I think, > his masterpiece and I have yet to understand. Like Hermann Hesse's Glass > Bead Game, the culmination of his life's work. I read it over and over and > it means something different each time and I understand it more over time. > My husband and I both then read the body of his work from beginning to end > and could understand better the development of his life's work. When > Neville moved from his earlier message that "Your Faith is Your Fortune" to > "Immortal Man" he began losing his audience, at least those who were > looking for get rich quick schemes or mind over matter techniques. His work > moves his audience from duality (The Law) manifest to awareness of our > infinite being, where life manifests for us very differently (The Promise). > "All that you behold, though it appears without, it is within in your own > wonderful human imagination of which this world of mortality is but a > shadow." > > The wonderful thing about Neville, I think, is that he puts out the notion > that the Lord is our imagination. A bold notion that left him lecturing to > the walls at the end of his career. Living in the world of Cesar, or > mortality, or duality, (The Law) we are chasing the laws of cause and > effect that govern us. Recognition is all that is required of immortal man > for manifestation, or non-dual awareness (The Promise) and imagination is > the instrument within us all that takes us there. Because Neville sees > every bible verse as an instruction on using imagination for divine > revelation, those that cannot grasp this are lost in the rhetoric and > connotation of "religion." For him, it is about imagination, not religion. > Because I agree with him wholeheartedly on this one point, I find his body > of work palatable. > > All of the christian mystics that I've read see scripture as a diagram for > living. Neville is distinctive because of his treatment of imagination. I > recognize truth in this notion, because my own imagination creates and > reduces to simplicity for my own divine breakthroughs and recognition. In > sleep and waking life. > > I am certainly not advocating his work as the be all end all for a study > or discussion on imagination. But this one idea of his may be critical to > any intimate dialogue of the subject. > > > > On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 7:56:54 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote: > > I guess my questions generally relate to critical absorption rather than > the passive. We have to know more about why so much in the public domain > is so bland, copied,ice-cream, beer, pets - and what imagination this > feeds. We might wonder where Habermas' communicative rationality > (whatever) shows up - where an imaginative lifeworld exists. > > Much that many feel as imaginative is actually produced by a few simple > rules. These can be embodied in machines, even to the point of narrative > generation. What can we imagine imaginative in the next action flick? Was > one war film made in 1943 and endlessly copied since? The mystics have had > a long run and there is certainly a core. I wonder on potential free play, > rather than institutionalized Utopia of imagination rul > > ... -- --- 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.
