Draygomb

Amos Wow Man, Two can't exist without One.

I don't suppose you would care to prove that these things exist:
celestial light
omniscience
omnipresense
omnipotence

What makes you think sound doesn't exist when not heard? Does an explosion not knock over trees if there is no one to hear it?

Heleilu

I think our thought processes are the inverses of each other. You're assuming that somehow all qualities are derived from "absolute" qualities, like saying that all numbers are derived from infinity.
Inductive logic and memories of being a little kid tell me that the "absolute" qualities, like infinity, are derived from finite sequences like the sequence of numbers. Try explaining infinity without making reference to numbers, or omniscience without making reference to knowledge. On the other hand, numbers and knowledge can be explained perfectly well without infinity or omniscience--but with reference to concrete quantities and individual data. Since abstractions are impossible to explain without reference to either concrete objects or previously understood abstract concepts, themselves ultimately derived from concrete objects, abstractions are secondary and objects are primary.

I hope this post made a little more sense than its parent post.

Orpheous99

Originally posted by Amos:

Because the light of common day is extrapolated from the celestial light just as inspiration is extracted from omniscience, time from eternity, presence from omnipresense, and power from omnipotence. If this was not true sound would exist when there are no ears to hear it.

Translation please, I don't speak metaphysical nonsense.

I don't speak on behalf of Christians and in fact argue against reading the bible.

Maybe because the bible is it's own best evidence against believing in the Christian god when read with an uninfluenced mind.

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Orpheous99 ]</p>

Dr. Retard

Instead of supporting your claims, you're just re-asserting them. Here's some advice: try to imagine where everyone else is coming from. Then try to think of some claims they accept that render your conclusion plausible. Then point out these claims and their connection with your conclusion. Maybe then everyone else will begin to take your conclusion seriously.

1. Are fish rational beings? After all, they're sentient.
2. What is a non-rational mind?
3. Here is a pair of opposites: "Everything Amos says is true" and "Everything Amos says is false". Are both propositions true?
4. Why is a non-rational mind necessary for intuition?
5. Why is a non-rational mind necessary for instinct?
6. Suppose that a non-rational mind were indeed necessary for intuition and instinct. Why would faith then become an intuit recognition of reality?
7. What is "an intuit recognition of reality"?
8. Suppose that faith were indeed an intuit recognition of reality. Why would faith then need understanding?
9. What does "faith needs understanding" mean?

However, if you respond with more <a href="http://www.timecube.com/" target="_blank">Time Cube</a> fodder, then don't expect any real discussion.

Amos

1) Yes fish have a conscious mind. They just do not speak your language but can navigate the ocean better than you or me and know exactly (?)where they are.

2) By definition our subconscious mind is our non-rational mind.

3) Good one.

4) Because intuition is the memory of our non-rational mind (soul).

5) Because instinct is the memory of the non-rational mind (soul).

6) Because we are eternal, or real, only in our soul. By real I mean indeterminate (free) and we are determinate in our conscious mind only. It is because we are divided in our own mind that we are temporal in our conscious mind and eternal in our subconscious mind which is incarnate upon us from previous generations and it is therefore that we are who we are and do the things we are predestined to do or inclined to pursue.

7)It is with the "eye of our soul" (subconscious mind) that we recognize reality which is real only because we identify with it. In the end only beauty and truth are real but it is in recognizing our own cultural heritage that we find unity with our creation (who we really are in the "examined life").

8) To get to know the depth, breadth, and width of our own "true identity" which is "the Lord [our] God."

9) I take it that by "faith" here you mean religious faith. That "nonsense" we were told to believe as a child is nonsense until we find our own true self which is when this nonsense begins to make sense because it always was true, or at least grounded in truth, but not quite the way we first believed it to be true. It all had a purpose and nothing about religion should remain unsanwered or it would be redundant and a liability towards our own regeneration. Only knowledge frees and since faith becomes a liability when it remains not understood only faith in images of reality should be taught.

Amos

Orpheous99


It is just by extension that if sound does not exist until our ears interpret the wavelengths that all of our other sense perceptions do not exist until we interpet them.

For example, if you agree that sound does not exist, why would taste exist and if neither exists why would pain, time, light and all the others exist. Because you can feel pain? Try hypnosis or try closing your eyes as I suggested earlier. Hey, better yet, try glossolalia which is non-rational speach.

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

Amos

Heleilu

Thanks and yes it is clear but not what I had in mind.

I would say that we are the sum total of all our qualities and those that possibly exist elswhere do not exist because we have no knowledge of them. The only reason that they can exist elsewhere is because we do not really know who we are and it is in recognizing them elsewhere that we learn, and so learn who we really are.

To me, infinity is a condition of being without beginning and without end and so it really is wrong to assign infinity to anything but existence, rather, to the essence of God in existence. Sure we can string a sequence of numbers into infinity but if 0 is the first numerator it does have a beginning and not infinite according to my use of the word.

Infinite is not the same as eternal because infinity does not have a beginning and no end while eternity does have a beginning but no end. Opposite to infinite is finite which does have a beginning and an end and can therefore never be part of the infinite unless we look at the essence of its existence wherein is found the continuity of infinity, eg. "things change" and it is in this change that infinity is found wherefore the finite is needed to make the infinite known.

The concept eternal is opposite to temporal and makes reference to our extrapolation of time from eternity while we exist outside eternity and 'in time.' It is in becoming eternal that we, as finite beings, become the continuity of infinity, i.e. the continuity of God.

The reason why numbers and knowlegde can be exlained easy is because we conjectured them for conventional use and extracted the science of the day from omniscience. All this means is that the answer must exist in our mind before the illumination occured or the hypothesis could never be an illumination.

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

Amos

Do you think explosions are an exception to the rule or are you confused with vibrations?

Two is not opposite of one. I think there are some qualifications to the argument from opposites but I forgot exactly what they are.

The three omnies are concepts and do not exist in reality but are needed to make science, power and presence known to enhance our our pursuit of happiness (the TOK is desirable for gathering food, pleasure and gaining wisdom in the TOL).

Orpheous99

Originally posted by Amos:

It is just by extension that if sound does not exist until our ears interpret the wavelengths that all of our other sense perceptions do not exist until we interpet them.

For example, if you agree that sound does not exist, why would taste exist and if neither exists why would pain, time, light and all the others exist. Because you can feel pain? Try hypnosis or try closing your eyes as I suggested earlier. Hey, better yet, try glossolalia which is non-rational speach.

Still sounds like nonsense to me.

[ February 22, 2002: Message edited by: Orpheous99 ]</p>

Automaton

The perception of sound doesn't exist if noone is there to hear it. But sound still does.