On May 22, 11:04 pm, "bigflet...@
gmail.com"
gmail.com>
wrote:> On May 23, 12:47 pm, zinnic
gate.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> On May 22, 6:53 am, Art
zilch.com> wrote:>
>>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 12:56:03 -0700 (PDT), zinnic
gate.net>
>>> wrote:>
.> > > To explain my meaning:
>>> To avoid the absurdity of a infinite regress, it's time itself that
>>> must have had a "beginning". In fact, I think matter, space and
>>> time are continually (contiguously) being created by the universal
>>> substrate I call consious energy.
>
>> Why do you call energy conscious? Just because you wish it?.
>
>>>This conscious, psychic, and
>>> creative energy exists "outside of" and is independent of matter,
>>> space and time. It's "God stuff" that just IS. It not only forms
>>> everything but it's also "in" everything. Atoms, for example,
>>> are "alive" and teeming with this psychic energy. Thus, there is
>>> nothing that's not alive.
>
>>> Our human psyches, or souls, are also made of this stuff, and
>>> they are also independent of matter, space and time. Our
>>> "real homes" are in spiritual realms also constructed of the same
>>> universal substrate that forms the physical illusion. Our "deaths"
>>> are mere transitions. We are here in earth school learning
>>> lessons, but there are many kinds of schools and many kinds
>>> of lessons. We are in the process of becoming responsible
>>> co-creators.
>
>> And here lies the crux of your inventions. Your terror of the
>> mortality of yourself and your loved ones. I agree it is not fair!
>> Naughty, naughty cyclones and earthquakes deal out death to even the
>> very best of humans!Nature has to be cogniscent of justice because
>> humans are?
>
>> I have no way of refuting your story other than to say it is not my
>> story?
>> Your story is good for you, mine is good for me.
>> What else is there to say when an insignificant part of the 'Existent
>> Universe' insists that it is significant. See if telling it to the
>> exploding mountain, to the earthquake, to the murderous terrorist has
>> an effect. Dream on!
>> Zinnic
>
> Your comments here are great examples of the hypothetical mind at
> work.
That is the nature of my mind. Absent your mystical certainties, I am
content with the hypotheses and theories I infer from inductive
probabilities.
> Realily is what actually happens to you.It is 'those' experiences that
> you learn from.
Gee! thanks BofL. How on earth did you 'divine' that in kindergarten I
skipped Platitudes 101?
>To speculating about earthquakes and volcanoes, is not
> unlike going to a horror movie. A safe haven to observe, and the
> approach of someone who is actually scared of being scared.
I inductively reason that volcanos, earthquakes and cyclones have no
concern for human suffering and loss of life. If you think this is
merely speculation on my part, describe the appeals for mercy that
are effective in moderating the 'cruelty' of such natural disasters.
> Of course, if you dont acknowledge there is an ongoing learning curve,
> then your responses are in accord.
Of course, the antinomy of this is 'if I DO acknowledge there is an
ongoing learning curve then my responses are NOT in accord'.
So where do two non-sequiturs get us?
> You suggest that people like Art and myself are deluded 'dreamers' and
> ask 'how do you know you are not'?
I believe Art and you are not alike! He is his own man. You obviously
need to recruit allies.
> Your questions are often followed by conclusions that you already know
> there are no 'known' answers.
My questions are certainly not "followed" by answers from you or
other mystics. Your 'known' answers are incoherent so, as an
empiricist, I conclude that you do not 'talk' what you are 'knowing'
about'!
> You had your own personal 'earthquake' with your hip replacements. How
> did that change your perspective, if you compare before (anticipation)
> and after the operation?
"Personal earthquake"? No such thing. See above.
Why would it change my perspective! I saw it coming and after the fact
''took steps' until I was able to walk four miles in one hour.
Sensibly, I did not start running again!
I accepted the reality of biological mechanics and adapted to my
changed circumstance. Nothing myst(ic)erious or 'self-realising' about
it.
> The shift in your pov is actually spiritual growth. I agree it is
> a ;dud; word, because of all the religious connotations that go with
> is, just as you respond to 'mystical'.
> The realy meaning is relating to everyday growth, and recognising that
> 'personal ' events change your pov
I guess you 'believe' that I also skipped Platitudes 201!
Your generalities invite ridicule.
Is it "spiritual growth when I change my pov regarding falling as I
ascend a ladder? Is a change in pov always 'generate (productive) or
can it be degenerate?. Both Hitler and Stalin constantly changed their
pov with the 'growth' of evil. Or is your definition of 'spititual
growth' the is acceptance of your pov.
Please Brian, stop sloshing me with such banalities ! Your brand of
'self-realisation' encourages segregation from, as opposed to
immersion in, the realities of life! 'Experience' does not elevate one
to 'life-spectator', it makes one a better life-player!
IMO you claim to be a spectator. Like it or not, we are both life-
players!
Zinnic
