Page all of 6 12345>Last »
Topic Options
#47032 - 01/19/11 06:50 PM What is reality?
mabon2010 Offline
member


Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...
I am currently watching BBC's Horizon dealing with what is reality.

An experiment with light shows it is waves and creates multiple stripes on a screen.

Photons then are fired one at a time through two slits on a card, and should produce two stripes on a screen, but it creates three stripes.

Monitoring equipment is installed to see how three stripes are occurring, the photons then only create two stripes.

I am having a WTF moment.

A similar situation is happening with quantum computers that can produce a 1 or a 0, and a second 1 and 0 calculation. When an attempt is made to observe this duplicate calculation the quantum computer ceases doing it.



Edited by mabon2010 (01/19/11 07:07 PM)
_________________________
Monadic Luciferianism is a philosophy of life centered on self.

Top
#47036 - 01/19/11 08:56 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: mabon2010]
Clicks Offline
member


Registered: 06/14/10
Posts: 114
Loc: New Orleans
I've been doing some intermediate personal research into the quantum fields since high school. The more I think I understand what's going on, the more WTF moments I get.

The slit experiment, the quantum eraser gun, and a basic understanding of the Copenhagen interpretation started me off on all of it. Somehow managed to stumble across those while fucking around on school computers during class.

Non-local connection really gets me everytime. I believe that is the principle being applied in quantum processors. When a particle is split and both resulting parts have the same spin, a measurement can be made of each particle by the measurement of just either one of them, and that allows for the processor to do 2 calculations at once, if not more, depending on the design and intended usage.

I don't remember where I read it, but recently (as in within the past year), I believe they are trying to implement the same principle that the quantum eraser gun demonstrates into quantum processors. They think that they'll be able to determine the contents off multiple sources of information through the analysis of just one source. They way I saw it described was you have 4 phone numbers saved, and you are just looking for one that is your friend's. You don't know which is your friends, but somehow, just through testing one of them to see if it is you're friends, it would be able to known what all 4 numbers are for, and consequentally, which is your friend's.

Decently reliable wiki-knowledge:

Quantum eraser experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_eraser_experiment

Non-local connection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

Copenhagen Interpretation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation

Schrodinger's Cat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dingers_Cat


Edited by Clicks (01/19/11 09:00 PM)
Edit Reason: Added two more wiki links
_________________________
Join your local Wizards' Association today!

Top
#47048 - 01/20/11 05:45 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Clicks]
thedeadidea Offline
member


Registered: 08/15/10
Posts: 209
Reality is what one considers 'real' I don't want to go pomo or entertain any dichotmies though these might be useful it simply isn't true. Human beings experience an intersubjective phenomonological interpretation of a reality which although has an objective nature is constrained by experience. As such reality requires an observer. Quantum entanglement is a thought provoing example mabon gave.

Language is not the beginning and end of things in and of themselves but they are in the stories we tell about them. The only way I can reconcile the story of plato's cave personally is to consider the shadows on the wall real too in their own right.

Top
#47052 - 01/20/11 08:11 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: thedeadidea]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
From the root Res (L. "thing"), reality as a term signifies "thingness," and as such carries with it a bias toward the object-pole of phenomenal presentation. To say that something is "real" means that it is an object of a phenomenal state of awareness, and this should be understood as indicating a spectrum of possibility. The more phenomenal states which incorporate said object, the more "real" it appears to be. As all phenomenal possibilities partake of enumeration, mathematics is the most "real" fracticality, and hence the basis for all science.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47110 - 01/20/11 11:19 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Jason King]
thisoldhippy420 Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/20/10
Posts: 12
Loc: illinois
I'm sure perception plays a role in reality! I draw this conclusion is if you and wittiness an event we will veiw the event from separate veiw points!
Top
#47120 - 01/21/11 06:09 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: thisoldhippy420]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
 Originally Posted By: thisoldhippy420
I'm sure perception plays a role in reality! I draw this conclusion is if you and wittiness an event we will veiw the event from separate veiw points!


In french there is a proverb: "Un âne ne bute jamais deux fois sur la même pierre" which can be translated as "A donkey does not stumble twice on the same stone"

Think about it...

Top
#47125 - 01/21/11 09:19 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
thisoldhippy420 Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/20/10
Posts: 12
Loc: illinois
Thats a rather interesting proverb. The donkey could be the event, and the stones the people. No two stones are alike. As the donkey stays the same but the stones change. And so as event stays the same perception differ.

Top
#47130 - 01/21/11 10:27 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: thisoldhippy420]
JysusCryst Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/23/09
Posts: 21
Loc: Iraq
You completely and utter missed the entire point of Fabiano's post, to such an extent that it's almost hard to fathom...

Did you do that intentionally to be a smart-ass, or are you just that stupid?
_________________________
"Learn to value yourself, which means: to fight for your happiness" - Ayn Rand

Top
#47133 - 01/21/11 11:32 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: JysusCryst]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
His replies make my brain cringe like a camel's arse during a sandstorm. I have furniture with a higher IQ than his.

D.

Top
#47138 - 01/21/11 02:28 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: thisoldhippy420]
thedeadidea Offline
member


Registered: 08/15/10
Posts: 209
Idiot, leave here before you embarass yourself further.
Top
#47143 - 01/21/11 03:18 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: thedeadidea]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: thedeadidea
Idiot, leave here before you embarass yourself further.


With all due respect, we do have a team of moderators here who are perfectly capable of deciding when someone should get escorted to the door.

Besides that, all you've done is embarrass yourself by blatantly disregarding the forum rule about one liner posts (how many times is that?), all in the effort to throw your two pennies in to the (off track) mix.

Normally, your post is something I would ignore, but given that you were the recent recipient of the benefit of the doubt, I think I might tread a bit more lightly were I in your shoes.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47152 - 01/21/11 05:38 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fnord]
thisoldhippy420 Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/20/10
Posts: 12
Loc: illinois
Thanks Fnord! I'm mainly ignoring Diavolo and thedeadidea simply because I spoke my mind and there only reaction is to insult me like a weak ass fucking troll.
Top
#47154 - 01/21/11 06:16 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: thisoldhippy420]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
You can correct me if I'm wrong but I didn't insult you like a weak ass troll. As far as I remember I called you so stupid it made my skin crawl when reading your posts.

I however realized (afterwards) it is beyond your capacities to live up to our standards and as such, I PM'd you some good advice. I don't think you took it too serious.

D.

Top
#47155 - 01/21/11 06:17 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: thisoldhippy420]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
To be fair, you made no sense either. Pick up your game and make sense, or else refrain from posting. If English is your first language you should consider reading up on syntax, grammar and spelling as well.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#47166 - 01/21/11 09:38 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: thisoldhippy420]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
Just to be clear, I wasn't defending your post(s) either. I was simply taking small issue with deadidea overstepping his bounds (again).

I would defend Diavolo's posts though. I've learned much from interacting with him as would anyone who took the time to read his thoughts. Ignoring him isn't your best option.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47169 - 01/22/11 03:17 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Jason King]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
 Originally Posted By: J.K.
To say that something is "real" means that it is an object of a phenomenal state of awareness


Would you mean that if there is not subject being aware of the cup which is just now in front of me (as when I'll have left my house), the cup ceases to be real?


Edited by Fabiano (01/22/11 03:18 AM)

Top
#47170 - 01/22/11 05:21 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
Would you mean that if there is not subject being aware of the cup which is just now in front of me (as when I'll have left my house), the cup ceases to be real?


I don't know what King will respond but I would affirm this idea. The cup is only there because you perceive it as such.

Everything outside of your radius of perception stops being real.

D.

Top
#47172 - 01/22/11 07:47 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Phobos Offline
pledge


Registered: 05/04/10
Posts: 50
Loc: France
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Everything outside of your radius of perception stops being real.D.


This is quite a shortcut! I don't understand why perception should equate reality. As far as definitions go, and as J.K. adequately put it, the word "reality" comes from the latin word for 'thing': 'res'. The idea here is that things have an actual, material, existence which is not linked to our perception.

Whether you perceive them or not has no effect on their existence.
_________________________
La République ne reconnaît, ne salarie ni ne subventionne aucun culte.

Top
#47174 - 01/22/11 08:25 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1737
Loc: New York
 Quote:
I don't know what King will respond but I would affirm this idea. The cup is only there because you perceive it as such.

Everything outside of your radius of perception stops being real.


Yet if we do not see friends or relatives for a few years they still age and the next time we see them their appearance is different to us then they looked when we saw them last. Why do they change when they are out of sight and then appear to us older when we see them again?

If I was your best friend and had sex with your girlfriend while you were at work the act wouldn’t be real if you never found out about it? Your suspicions could never be justified until you saw us doing it?

Do you really believe that the world came into being only once you perceived it? Trees, rocks, dirt, airplanes and rocket ships did not exist until you knew of them?

I can imagine cars running on water, yet I can’t see any, nor can I create them with my mind no matter how hard I may try.

Seems like a far stretch to me.






Edited by Asmedious (01/22/11 08:29 AM)
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#47175 - 01/22/11 09:20 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Asmedious]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It sounds counter-intuitive I admit and many people think what is real is real under all conditions. It is and it isn't.

Let's get back to the computer. I find it a useful context to explain this because at some level, one can see it as an extended mind.

When you play a first person shooter, you see the world (game reality) from the game's virtual self perspective. Whenever you move or look around, you see the world as it is there. But where you are not looking, there is no world. The data is only processed into a visual context whenever you observe something and everywhere else, there is no game reality. If you'd look at a cup there, it looks like a cup while observing but the moment you stop observing, the cup disappears and becomes raw data.

In our reality the same happens. We perceive a certain reality because we compile it. I don't know the ontological reality but what we know this far is that the raw data we perceive are quanta. What we do is, when observing, process those quanta our perceptions bounce upon and compile a reality out of it. When we don't observe, this reality becomes raw data again.

As such it is only because there are observers, a specific reality exists.

Take colors as an example. Colors are nothing but a specific wave and not until there is an eye perceiving this wave and a brain translating it into a color range, colors exist. The same happens in everything we perceive.

D.

Top
#47176 - 01/22/11 09:48 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

As such it is only because there are observers, a specific reality exists.


I think Robert Anton Wilson does a pretty decent job of traversing this road with his ideas about "Reality Tunnels".

THIS is the short version, the longer one is out there somewhere, but I couldn't readily find it.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
When we don't observe, this reality becomes raw data again.


And that's the rub as we don't all observe in the same way. This is why the question "What is reality?" becomes largely unanswerable.

A different question could be "what is the reason that each person has an individual perception of reality?"
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47177 - 01/22/11 09:53 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1737
Loc: New York
I believe that I understand exactly what you are saying, but in that case isn’t the data itself a reality of sorts?

When data affects change in an area filled with more data, that change is real and exists even without it being interpreted, even if no eyes and eardrums are there to interpret that data (light waves and the sound waves combining it all into the sensory perception of a tree falling in the woods) the “reality” of the data change is still there.

The chain of events in the building up to certain data, and the eventual outcome is specific enough that when several decoding units are there (several eyes, ears, nervous systems) they will most often interpret the data in the same way and will also be affected by it the same way.

The cup while you are there might be just a bunch of atoms shooting around at a certain rate, but even when you leave those atoms are most likely still there vibrating at the same rate as they were before you left. So that data for the cup doesn’t disappear. This can be easily proven by leaving a video camera aimed at the cup and if it is transmitted via satellite image around the world just about everyone looking at the “thing,” will still see it as being there.

So perhaps specific combination of data is the reality while the interpretation of it might not be.
Ok, my brain is starting to hurt again \:\)
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#47178 - 01/22/11 10:00 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fnord]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
There reason we might never understand reality, or at least the ontological one, is that our brains might not be there to understand it, but instead to translate it into something functional for us to flourish in. As such it simply compiles something that is useful to us.

The reason each person has an individual perception of reality is because each person has a unique brain. On average there isn't much difference between the brains of most humans and as such it becomes evident why most people their realities match those of others. That's why I perceive a tree close to similar as you perceive it. Those that perceive realities that are rather different or contain different content, we call brain damaged or suffering psychosis.

Most of us share a general picture but the difference might be in the details.

D.

Top
#47179 - 01/22/11 10:13 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Asmedious]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
The quanta we perceive are again our compilation of the underlying data. Mind you, I don't state there is no reality. I do believe there is an ontological one but we create the veil that hides it.

As such, the cup is nothing but quanta to us but this doesn't imply those quanta inhabit that specific region that cup occupies. At that level, there is no difference between the cup, the table it stands on, and your hand holding it. It doesn't even need to be there to be there for us.

Your video camera idea does not change anything, you only add a step between it; we are still perceiving when we look at the images it transmits. But when we don't perceive, there is no cup. And no video camera either.

D.

Top
#47180 - 01/22/11 10:23 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
Would you mean that if there is not subject being aware of the cup which is just now in front of me (as when I'll have left my house), the cup ceases to be real?


I don't know what King will respond but I would affirm this idea. The cup is only there because you perceive it as such.

Everything outside of your radius of perception stops being real.

D.


This is an old problem in philosophy, but what we've come to understand is that "the tree falling with no one to hear it" is a mistaken notion. A conceptual "tree" will always have a conjoined conceiver. And any particular instance of a perceptual "tree" will likewise have a conjoined perceiver. Noumena, defined as they are, have no perceptors and are thus incapable of being talked about via the empirical discourse.

To cut the jargon and bring it back to Fabiano's Cup, I would say that the cup only has real existence insofar as it can be labeled as such. Diavolo intuited my reply perfectly. Blacklight tipped to you, sir.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47225 - 01/23/11 06:53 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
Would you mean that if there is not subject being aware of the cup which is just now in front of me (as when I'll have left my house), the cup ceases to be real?


I don't know what King will respond but I would affirm this idea. The cup is only there because you perceive it as such.

Everything outside of your radius of perception stops being real.

D.


I'm not surprised to hear this from you D. I find it consistent with your view of the reality (as far as I can grasp it). In other words, this idea fits well in your map, but what happens on the terrain ?

Top
#47227 - 01/23/11 07:32 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: mabon2010]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3138
Describing and defining reality can be done in a number of ways. Various philosophical ideas and thoughts have made the mind ponder about existence and reality.
The keyword when it comes down in describing reality or perceiving it would be the term "assumption".

A certain object can be placed on a field and all kind of measurments can be done. We can calculate the height, volume, mass, shape, functions and material. It might be smelled, felt, seen or heard. But as soon as the observers turn around and leave the field for a while (be it behind a locked door or in the open field) we might assume the object would still be in the same place.

Such is the case of Schrodingers cat, put it in the box and we might assume it will be still alive or dead depending the knowledge we have available. Truth would be that we start to assume as soon as our senses are turned the other way.

Taking Schrodinger as an example once again, I assume his cat was still alive after being placed in the box. When typing to the readers here, I assume you guys are real world people.

Reality in that way is nothing more then an "educated" assumption with thanks to perception and events which enabeled the observer to see and perceive things as they are, leaving possible duality theories (good/bad, black/white,..) and illusions of the brain aside.

Note: While I used assumption/assuming as a keyword I must admit that the term "probability" is equally important and can be used as a synonim for this matter.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#47228 - 01/23/11 08:17 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
I'm not surprised to hear this from you D. I find it consistent with your view of the reality (as far as I can grasp it). In other words, this idea fits well in your map, but what happens on the terrain ?


I don't really understand this question. When you observe the terrain it presents itself as a map; that is all there is to it.

D.

Top
#47229 - 01/23/11 08:59 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Jason King]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
I well understand this and off course it's counter intuitive and most people hardly grasps it.

But it's not new, if I remember well the Buddha gave once this example: if one look at a chariot, he intuitively believes it's well real. However if he starts dismantling it, soon there will be no chariot anymore but just two wheels, an axle, etc. Nothing vanished but intuitively it now becomes obvious that chariot is only a concept which appears less obviously when looking at a heap of parts. I think the Buddha went on in this reasoning by applying to the ego and thus showing how the ãtman can be illusory.

Note you can take it the other way around: before the first chariot ever existed, there were no chariot. One day this idea popped up in some man's mind and by assembling the parts and assigning it some function (i.e. carrying goods) the chariot becomes "real". So, the very first existence of a chariot is in some man's mind...

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
When you play a first person shooter, you see the world (game reality) from the game's virtual self perspective. Whenever you move or look around, you see the world as it is there. But where you are not looking, there is no world.


Even if you see only a part of the virtual world when you're playing in the video game the whole virtual world is well modeled in the computer's memory. There are data representing the whole virtual world even if the computer hides and uncover some of it's part when you're walking around in it.

As we're talking about computers, let's stay in the field for a while. There are some interesting points when looking at data modeling as done in the frame of an IT project. There are techniques such as Entity-relationship modeling used to describe the entities and the relationships between them. There, an entity (such as a customer) has attributes (such as his name, address or marital status). One of the key success factor of the project is a good data design. It's there that it's decided which attributes are of interest in the frame of the project. For instance if the project is made for a fitness center, the customer's weight is probably an attribute worth of interest while the marital status is not. It'l will be the opposite in the frame of tax calculation and both will be probably of interest for a matrimonial agency...
All this for saying that entities are shaped depending on the adopted point of view.

A distinction I find also interesting is the difference between information and a data. An information is a fact, event, object, person... worth of interest in the scope of a project. Data is coded information. For instance the color of an object can be coded as one of {white, black, red, blue, yellow, green} or by the RGB value of it. The later coding is retain more information, it discards a lesser amount of the reality.

Reality can be of an infinite complexity and any model of it we can made is finite and as such will be unable to represent it in its totality.

Having (I hope) clarified this subjectiveness of reality let's come back to my cup. First, I might point out that even when I'll left my house, the memory of the cup is still in my mind. It's not really a perception it but I know that my cup is white and I can bet it'll be there when I'll be back. Second, even if the cup concept I assign to this object vanishes when I cease to think about it, the cup's matter does not vanish as soon as I close the door behind me. In this sense, the cup does NOT ceases to be real when nobody's there for observing it. One can also think about what's happening when I drop my cup on the floor and it breaks. It's not a cup anymore but the weight of all the pieces equal the weights of the cup. There is something which does not vanishes...

I'll finish by saying that even if such conversation is interesting and enjoyable I don't forget that philosophy mesmerizes. You can play with your mind, draw your map as you want but the terrain remains the terrain and coming back to Fabiano's cup might be worth for keeping your feet well grounded on earth...

Top
#47230 - 01/23/11 09:07 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
I'm not surprised to hear this from you D. I find it consistent with your view of the reality (as far as I can grasp it). In other words, this idea fits well in your map, but what happens on the terrain ?


I don't really understand this question. When you observe the terrain it presents itself as a map; that is all there is to it.

D.


I would rather say that YOU make a map of the terrain when you observe it. The terrain just exists, it does not play a role in drawing your map, it's not the actor in this process.

Probably what I posted few minutes ago will bring some clarification.

Top
#47233 - 01/23/11 09:31 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It seems you struggle with the noumena/phenomena. How I see reality is not a purely philosophical perspective. As a matter of fact, you will hardly find any scientist out there that will claim that what we perceive as reality is the underlying ontological reality. Thinking this reality is the reality is called naive realism for a reason.

The cup is a cup because you compile it as such. Your brain creates the cup triggered by something which you can not perceive as is. Invoking the cup in your mind through memory or perceiving it directly does not differ at all, except maybe at the level of detail in this representation. Your brain and thus memory is not error-free. When you don't perceive, there is no cup because you don't compile the cup out of "what is". But this "what is" will be there unless it has a reason to not be. We can call this "what is" data but that's solely to make it easier to understand.

The real bitch is not even this data but the fact that we are also compiled out of data. So what is there that makes the difference?

D.

Top
#47236 - 01/23/11 10:27 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
I'm not struggling, I'm at ease ;\)

The entire point of my yesterday 8:18 post was to point out that there is an ontological reality.

By saying
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
Reality can be of an infinite complexity and any model of it we can made is finite and as such will be unable to represent it in its totality
I think I'm not confusing the reality with the representation of it, I'm not confusing the map and the terrain.

As you don't deny the existence of this ontological reality and I'm well aware that the concept "cup" is not the cup, I don't think our point of views are fundamentally different.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Your brain creates the cup triggered by something which you can not perceive as is
Your brain "creates" the cup either because another brain told you "this is a cup" or because you invented the cup. Only in the last option you create something... that's why this is called creativity ;\)

 Quote:
The real bitch is not even this data but the fact that we are also compiled out of data
Compiled by whom?

The fact is that within your map there is a representation of yourself (and I believe that's the core of your map). Believing [the representation of you] is [you] is indeed naive. Realizing this is one of the first step on "the path to enlightenment" and it's probably the goal of the Buddha to highlight this when he applied the same reasoning he had about the chariot to the ego.

Top
#47237 - 01/23/11 10:28 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
Reality can be of an infinite complexity and any model of it we can made is finite and as such will be unable to represent it in its totality.


YES! And this fact is what gives rise to the phenomenal states by way of partition or delimitation. A while back, either on this thread or the other similar one I started, Diavolo argued that there is no real infinity. I meant to reply, but the thread moved on and I left it on the burner. Even though it may appear otherwise, I read you as saying the same thing, and this forms a cornerstone of my own approach.

 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
Having (I hope) clarified this subjectiveness of reality let's come back to my cup. First, I might point out that even when I'll left my house, the memory of the cup is still in my mind. It's not really a perception it but I know that my cup is white and I can bet it'll be there when I'll be back.


The memory and associated expectation are not the cup, as you acknowledge. These are related percepts/concepts which have no bearing on the noumenal existence of a cup, were such a thing as the latter even possible.

 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
Second, even if the cup concept I assign to this object vanishes when I cease to think about it, the cup's matter does not vanish as soon as I close the door behind me. In this sense, the cup does NOT ceases to be real when nobody's there for observing it.


"There is no spoon, it is only the mind which bends."

"Matter" - ahh, that will make for an interesting thread . . .

My point is that ALL such constructs are built upon mind-dependent realities. To pretend to speak of realities as they may exist independently of mind is to engage in a bit of gibberish. To speak of them at all is to engage them with mind. I do understand your underlying point, however it has proved in no small way intractable to analysis.

 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
One can also think about what's happening when I drop my cup on the floor and it breaks. It's not a cup anymore but the weight of all the pieces equal the weights of the cup. There is something which does not vanishes...


The even more elusive "energy". If, as I read you, you are arguing for a matter/energy substratum independent of observation, I agree. Sort of. The kicker is that this energy is voidness/emptiness, and sums to zero across any proper subset of Dharmakaya. Perception gives rise to the discrete limits (quantum theory of phenomena), which cause universes of manifestation to be created from the infinite potency of the Abyss. But these are not real/physical/material in the way you might hope. They are these things conditionally, as they become (atemporally) habitations of mind.

 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
I'll finish by saying that even if such conversation is interesting and enjoyable I don't forget that philosophy mesmerizes. You can play with your mind, draw your map as you want but the terrain remains the terrain and coming back to Fabiano's cup might be worth for keeping your feet well grounded on earth...


Realism carries a naive impetus that is hard to escape. For those who have engaged such topics analytically (such as yourself), there remains the problem of objectivity - i.e. it is obvious as all hell that there is a "really big thing" which presents itself to us, but which we do not control and exists independently of our choosing it. Understanding this as a nondual presentation of the Nature of Mind is a difficult thing. However, this latter realization actually removes not an ounce of facticity from these phenomenal states of affairs. "It is what it is," and I agree. This is so subtle a distinction it is no wonder it is left to the innermost tantras.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47239 - 01/23/11 11:36 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Jason King]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Jason King
A while back, either on this thread or the other similar one I started, Diavolo argued that there is no real infinity. I meant to reply, but the thread moved on and I left it on the burner. Even though it may appear otherwise, I read you as saying the same thing, and this forms a cornerstone of my own approach.


I see infinite as a construct in an abstract reality. There it only represents something which could be simply called "beyond calculation". It might be a useful construct in that environment and I don't argue it doesn't exist there but it therefore does not exist out of that reality.

If the ontological reality is noumenal, one can not describe something phenomenal to it, which infinity essentially is, and consider it valid or real.

I don't think that out of the abstract field anything indicates towards infinite. I'm of course open to be proven wrong about it.

D.

Top
#47241 - 01/23/11 11:53 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Jason King]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
 Quote:
A while back, either on this thread or the other similar one I started, Diavolo argued that there is no real infinity
I don't want to speak on Diavolo's behalf but I think part of the answer can be found in the fact that I'm a mystic while he's not.

 Quote:
To pretend to speak of realities as they may exist independently of mind is to engage in a bit of gibberish
I know, I know... That's why I don't expect anything out of this thread but the enjoyment of gibberish.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
I don't think that out of the abstract field anything indicates towards infinite. I'm of course open to be proven wrong about it.
I can't prove anything, the only argument I have are my mystical experiences and I'm aware it can be a proof only for me...

Top
#47249 - 01/23/11 12:53 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I'm no mystic indeed; as I debated elsewhere, I see mysticism as a form of psychosis. I however don't intend it as bad as it sounds.

I prefer to stick to logic when analyzing or theorizing, fully realizing I might mess up occasionally and that the tool itself has its limitations. But since I make claims about what reality is not, it is handier than other methods which are more appropriate when making claims about what reality is.

D.

Top
#47251 - 01/23/11 01:36 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: mabon2010]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
 Quote:
I am having a WTF moment.


I had quite a bit on this subject on the old site but that server crashed.

In any event, I gave some of my Cliff Notes on it in this thread:

http://www.the600club.com/topic45612-1.html

Now, I have read the last three pages here and, honestly, it really seems like a semantic dick measuring contest.

Most people have never seen anyone burn to death. I have. And, I can say without reservation, for the guy who is on fire the event is VERY real.

And what about WWII? Did that really happen?

All the same, just because something is real, it does not make it reality:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ersatz
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#47254 - 01/23/11 01:53 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fist]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I'm so sorry for having contributed to this semantic dick contest.

But maybe if you had given some attention to the dicks we were comparing, you'd not have to ask those questions.

D.

Top
#47288 - 01/24/11 07:23 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fist]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Fist, added emphasis by JK
Now, I have read the last three pages here and, honestly, it really seems like a semantic dick measuring contest.

Most people have never seen anyone burn to death. I have. And, I can say without reservation, for the guy who is on fire the event is VERY real.


Unintentional irony is the best kind. Here's me earlier:

 Originally Posted By: JK
To say that something is "real" means that it is an object of a phenomenal state of awareness.


which sounds a bit like the portion of your reply I bolded. The interesting thing is that this realization (pun definitely intended) merely opens a door to the philosophical problem of "reality". Hence all the dick measuring.

Some people (usually the more grounded/pragmatic) tend to view philosophy as useless mental masturbation. You strike me as just such a "brass tacks" kind of guy, which is cool and all. But the thing is, the doors exist whether you choose to walk through them or not (how's that for topical irony?). And even a realist such as yourself can't resist opening one from time to time, even if only to peer through and shake your head.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47289 - 01/24/11 07:39 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
I'm no mystic indeed; as I debated elsewhere, I see mysticism as a form of psychosis. I however don't intend it as bad as it sounds.


I'd love to engage you on this, perhaps in a new (or existing, if you debated it here) thread on the Philosophy forum if you are willing. I'd of course be interested in first understanding how you delimit "mysticism," as that might negate any issues I have with the above quote.

Let me know, either of us can start the thread, although I had eyes on a "Matter" thread as well.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47297 - 01/24/11 11:50 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Jason King]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
I'll surely enjoy looking at your exchanges on this topic and may be I'll even be able to add my 2 cents.

There is already a thread about rational mysticism which could be reused...

Top
#47298 - 01/24/11 11:55 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Jason King]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
When I call it psychosis, I solely talk about those episodes that are called insight, gnosis or enlightenment. I see them as a trick of the brain that gives only an illusion of understanding. I don't know if that can be argued much considering our views upon reality.

D.

Top
#47318 - 01/24/11 09:09 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
When I call it psychosis, I solely talk about those episodes that are called insight, gnosis or enlightenment. I see them as a trick of the brain that gives only an illusion of understanding.


In fact, during these episodes there is no illusion of understanding. There is even no understanding at all. I had to take some difficult decisions in my life and for some I had this strange experience of "gnosis". There is nothing to understand, you KNOW, you just KNOW what's the right option to take.
Often there is an internal battle between your rational intellect who tells you that there are so many reason against this choice and that acting this way is foolish, insane. It's not like an intellectual knowledge, it's much more intense (like you fell it in each cell of your body - and I realize my words will never render the experience).

Then up to you to choose to follow your intellect or your "faith". In my personal case, I never had to regret choices I made based on this knowledge and for some I only understood why this choice was the good one years later. Looking over my shoulder, having now informations I was missing at that time, I only understand it now.

Top
#47319 - 01/24/11 09:33 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
I don't know... maybe we have a natural need to mystify those things we don't quite understand, rather than simply admitting we don't know and may NEVER know. But in my case, I tend to see reality rather simply, with no need for mental masturbations over trees in the forrest falling or coffee cups not being real when I leave the room.

If a tree falls in the forrest and there's no one to hear it fall, whether or not it makes a noise simply is not my concern. It doesn't affect me. Now, the deaf person walking through the forrest might find some measure of importance if he is walking in front of a tree that's falling... but the noise it makes is in his best interests to hear, yet being incapable OF hearing, he might well have to rely on other stimuli to alert him. Rabbits running away, looking back over their shoulders with wide eyes and an "OH SHIT" expression perhaps, or the feel of the tremor of the tree's breaking. But for ME, miles away in a city, perhaps drinking a latte at my desk, it's simply an interesting conundrum for which I have no answer. I KNOW trees fall in the woods. I've seen them there. I can extrapolate in my mind that I have also seen trees fall not in the woods, but as a result of human intervention, and THEY made noise, and common sense might kick in. Or I could lose my common sense in Philosophy 101 and spend days contemplating nothing... the sound of one hand clapping.

And when I come home, the cup will still be there. waiting for me to wash it, or my wife will be there, making noise about why I didn't clean up after my morning coffee and if it weren't for me and my laziness... reality. It's there. You just have to resist the urge to ignore it.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#47325 - 01/25/11 12:19 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fabiano]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Fabiano
In fact, during these episodes there is no illusion of understanding. There is even no understanding at all. I had to take some difficult decisions in my life and for some I had this strange experience of "gnosis". There is nothing to understand, you KNOW, you just KNOW what's the right option to take.
Often there is an internal battle between your rational intellect who tells you that there are so many reason against this choice and that acting this way is foolish, insane. It's not like an intellectual knowledge, it's much more intense (like you fell it in each cell of your body - and I realize my words will never render the experience).


I think you give your brain too much credit. If you understand what a wacky device your brain is and how it functions in creating reality, you might come to understand that it might efficiently be called a herd-mind at more levels than we care to admit. But that's maybe for another topic.

D.

Top
#48364 - 02/08/11 07:27 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Seth_W Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/08/11
Posts: 17
reality is a word. defined and redefined. what is reality to you?




i personally dont care if somethings real or not, if its beneficial you'll find it on my path.

Top
#48382 - 02/08/11 01:39 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Seth_W]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I would appreciate it if you'd only participate into these posts when you have something serious to add.

Thank you,

D.

Top
#48445 - 02/09/11 06:31 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Seth_W Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/08/11
Posts: 17
i find that to be quite serious...reality is a word, its a noise with some definition behind it.reality is something that was here long before us,and were too primitive to completely understand it. in that light, who gives two shits what it is. wake up and make wise choices in this thing you call reality, thats all i meant.
Top
#48498 - 02/09/11 02:41 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Seth_W]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3138
 Quote:
i find that to be quite serious...reality is a word, its a noise with some definition behind it.reality is something that was here long before us,and were too primitive to completely understand it. in that light, who gives two shits what it is. wake up and make wise choices in this thing you call reality, thats all i meant.

I give you full credit for your last sentence.
When referring to oneself with the one letter word it is best to capitalize it. So it is "I" and not "i".
Learn the proper difference between "its" and "it's", "were" and "we're" and "thats"/"that's".
Capitalizing the first letter of a new sentence.

Just a little advice...
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#48505 - 02/09/11 03:02 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Seth_W]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Seth_W
i find that to be quite serious...reality is a word, its a noise with some definition behind it.reality is something that was here long before us,and were too primitive to completely understand it. in that light, who gives two shits what it is. wake up and make wise choices in this thing you call reality, thats all i meant.


Potato is a word too so it doesn't make much of an argument. This debate, or at least the last part, wasn't about reality as we live it but as we perceive it. Being able to think about reality, or of what stuff reality is made, doesn't imply one isn't able to live normally in our consensus reality.

So when you have something serious to contribute about the deeper aspects of reality, feel free. If not, leave this post to those that do.

The obvious is obvious to us too.

D.

Top
#48545 - 02/10/11 06:42 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: mabon2010]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
In the most practical sense, what is 'real' is a function of popular consensus regarding reality - this is how we personally, being human beings, are conditioned to accept reality, it is also the context within which that best allows us to share and interact with others.

When it comes to quantum weirdness and it's relationship to the usual common Newtonian view of reality, it's not a problem. On the scale most comfortable to us, Newton reigns supreme and quantum peculiarities are securely contained to a 'quantum' world. Sure, a quantum computer, it's within concept to imagine such machines becoming common place. But as it is, most of us don't really understand why a binary computer works either - so still, Newton will reign supreme!

The eastern idea of "maya" comes to mind - the delusion of the usual waking world classically juxtaposed against insights that are tough to contain in language.

In practical terms, especially the profound impact observation has on quantum phenomena, the concepts of quantum mechanics dovetail beautifully with concepts of occult power. As a chaos magician I refuse to pretend it is the truth that magic is a quantum 'butterfly effect', but I do hold the idea as a possible model. For me quantum weirdness gives me licence to believe magical weirdness, but ultimately it's about having a story to tell myself about the magic that I can accept, that makes suspending disbelief easy....

Top
#48549 - 02/10/11 07:22 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Diavolo]
Seth_W Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/08/11
Posts: 17
diavolo/dimitri,

i can tell that this could be one of those never ending talks...and fyi, i know how to type properly i just dont normally do it, i figure whether i put the ' in or not people are still gonna be able to make out the word/know what i mean which is all that matters, so i dont see it as an issue. unless what your trying to do is attack every weak point in my message to expose the idiot behind it for what he is because you failed to see my point, which dosnt really bother me.
let me explain myself a little, im numb...i dont give a fuck about much, i have a hard time seeing meaning to things, or reason in things...perhaps i entered this forum to exchange some of my inability to see the point for an ability to be able to see it from a new view, maybe i was thinking someone would tell me how this is important to them. i only know how i feel. i didnt expect to get attacked...although i know stupidity is a great sin in Satanism so i can understand your attacks, but i dont understand your assumptions. i dont consider myself stupid, ignorant yes, but stupid no...conflict of opinions i guess.

this will be my last post in this forum.
so no worries.

Top
#48550 - 02/10/11 08:08 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Seth_W]
Seth_W Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/08/11
Posts: 17
being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.


tell me and I forget. teach me and I remember. involve me and I learn.

Top
#48551 - 02/10/11 08:59 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Seth_W]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3138
Stupid, ignorant,.. it doesn't matter you still didn't take my advice and are still trolling around.
If you want to be taken seriously then start writing properly as I already hinted. Your current attitude and petty post only shows you are intellectualy lazy (I even doubt there is something intellectual unside that brain).

Your ass will be served, you shall be figurally beaten if you don't get your act together. I'm also quite sure that the moderators are keeping an eye on you and their fingers ready to ban.

Fuckhead..
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#48552 - 02/10/11 09:15 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Seth_W]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
Q: How many teachers does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

A: Only one, but the lightbulb has to want it too.

You seem to indicate a passive attitude to learning about Satanism, not to mention the above-mentioned laziness in terms of how you present yourself with seemingly intentionally sloppy spelling and grammar.

Neither of these traits is welcome here. If you want to learn something, either figure it out from what's been written before or engage in reasonable debate.

Simply saying "Reality is just a word" without buttressing your statement with anything is weak, to say the least. Consider that every word is simply a series of sounds with a very real reference point in writing, not to mention being attached to the *idea* that word represents. Often, it even has a real-world equivalent like "chair" or "trophy".

You could have taken any one of those angles if you were smart but ignorant. You did not.

However, if it is as you say, and you have no intention of coming back here ever again, we're not going to have to deal with such a situation arising ever again. I guess time will tell if this is the case.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#48557 - 02/10/11 10:06 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Seth_W]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 862
Loc: Nashville
Seth, I find it interesting that you said, “This will be my last post in this forum.” Then 46 minutes later you posted again.

You seem to have a nihilistic “fuck it all” attitude, and that has merit to a point. Satanism is firmly grounded in cynicism toward what is considered important by society. But that is not the end, only the beginning. The next step is establishing your own path in life, determining what is important to you and working toward it.

Are you being “attacked”? Only if you choose to see it that way. You could also see it as being challenged. Whether you are up for such challenges or would rather play dead is up to you.
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
#48559 - 02/10/11 10:09 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: William Wright]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
I think he should get a shot at getting set up. If he learns, fine. Otherwise, you can trust in your Moderators to sort it out.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#48561 - 02/10/11 10:18 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 862
Loc: Nashville
I remember how fucked up my posts were in the beginning. However, I knew all along that if the moderators just gave me a little time, I’d get on track. Seth is establishing a pattern of ignorance that seems unlikely to change. I hope he proves me wrong.
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
#48568 - 02/10/11 11:54 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: William Wright]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
You guys are wrong, Seth is clearly writing material that is far more compelling and interesting than anything I wrote. The proof I submit, is the evidence of your own responses.
Top
#48570 - 02/10/11 12:18 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: myk5]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"You guys are wrong, Seth is clearly writing material that is far more compelling and interesting than anything I wrote. The proof I submit, is the evidence of your own responses."

If you feel that your writings suck, and fail, then leave.

Everyone gets a chance to show that they have a clue, can compose cohesive thoughts and can back up their opinions. People are usually not banned for being an asshole. They have to do something or say something to earn that ban.

If after 93 posts in 18 days, you feel that you should leave, then go, no one is stopping you. You previously admitted that you are not a Satanist, but more of a fluffy gay bunny looking for a way to market or pimp out chaos magic through your website.

So whatever, stay or go, but make sure your posts stay on topic and have something to do with the thread subject. You have posted enough to know the rules by now.

Morgan
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#48572 - 02/10/11 01:11 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Morgan]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
I posted my reply to the topic at hand. What is real? You don't suppose a reply to a comment honors that comment with your attention, even if negative?

Of course I feel my comments are just fine, that's my right. But because I don't exist in a vacuum, solipsism is fail and I do require feedback, even (or especially) negative feedback.

The labels I apply to myself are red herrings. Calling myself enlightened clearly has no relation to if I'm enlightened or not. I should expect the same of all claims. So after 90 odd postings I've revealed myself to be something? With Satanism my issues are simple - it doesn't feel like 'Satanism' is really leaving Xtianity behind, and the marketing value of Satan isn't in line with what I'm up to right now. On the other hand, a 'dark path' may be just the thing I need to get some real world results. I don't see the utility of a label in following or investigating a dark path however.

Yes, I certainly am pimping out chaos magic at my website, I'm learning a lot from doing that. The fluffiness (which is arguable, but I have offended certain communities thereby) is ultimately a kind of marketing wisdom necessary for said pimping. But it's also a chip on my shoulder, so attack me for my fluffiness, I dare you!

As long as you must know what is real.

Top
#48587 - 02/10/11 08:35 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: myk5]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
I posted my reply to the topic at hand. What is real? You don't suppose a reply to a comment honors that comment with your attention, even if negative?"

Dude,are you on crack? You wrote two sentences. One of which said that your posts suck in comparisons to someones elses. It had nothing to do with the topic.


"Of course I feel my comments are just fine, that's my right. But because I don't exist in a vacuum, solipsism is fail and I do require feedback, even (or especially) negative feedback."

No you don't or you are fishing for a compliment. In a few various posts, you say how much you suck and that you should be banned. In cases like that, no one is holding you here, just don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

"With Satanism my issues are simple - it doesn't feel like 'Satanism' is really leaving Xtianity behind,"


Then you haven't been paying atteniton to anything posted here. If anything, a majority of your posts bring up Christianity, and it was pointed out to you previously that you are the one who needs to get over the Christian bullshit not us.

The fluffiness (which is arguable, but I have offended certain communities thereby) is ultimately a kind of marketing wisdom necessary for said pimping.

If you believe that being fluffy is a benefit for you here, you definitely have not been paying attention to anything that anyone besides yourself has written.

"But it's also a chip on my shoulder, so attack me for my fluffiness, I dare you!"

Dude, I don't care enough about you to attack you. You are not worth my time. Your posts are lame and contribute nothing except to parrot back something you think people want to see.


"As long as you must know what is real."


I know what is real, you are real lame, and in the wrong place.

Next....

Morgan
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#48606 - 02/10/11 11:43 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Morgan]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Well, sorry i've had nothing to contribute that you've found to be of value. If you want such a thing, I welcome your suggestion. I do try to introduce ideas not already present, though you are welcome to condemn them as self evident if that's what you feel.

My two sentences were a critique of spending so much attention on repeating the same complaint to the same person more than once. Because 'what is real' is open to broad interpretation, it's not a bad joke to suggest my comment is 'on topic', alas humor is subjective.

It was a wave of suggested reading on ONA that was giving me second thoughts, I have a bad habit of actually reading something that's suggested to me and associating that which is read with the 'place' its recommended to me. Which is my problem, not yours, I'm l;earning from that mistake -and it was and is a mistake to express my misgivings as i did. No need to forgive me, but I'm not contesting the idea I am in error in this case. I already apologized. No, you don't have to accept.

"you bring up Christianity..." - Yes, and what of it? really? Love and hate are functions of relatedness, their opposite is indifference (not merely theoretical to me, I'm openly Gay). If you truly were beyond attachment to Christianity yourself, that I bring it up now and again wouldn't be something you pay attention to, you might even not notice.

If we're going to speak of 'fluffy' I think we need to define our terms. A context where I could be too fluffy hasn't manifested at this site, the level of sophistication is too high. A less sophisticated community, my suggesting casting a love spell on a specific person that has already spurned your advances is inferior to casting a spell for the lover you imagine that person to be - can enrage and manifest demands for my being banned.

Here's it's just a joke 'cause someone characterized a design element on my site as aesthetically 'fluffy'.

As a designer I feel the worst sin is that of clich'e, so it is precisely this "Satanic" context where 'fluffy' in a design sense has it's greatest utility and possibility - that is of course my personal opinion. But I am also, fundamentally if abstractly, interested in transforming the 'occult' into its opposite. On some level perhaps you understand this and are offended by it - if so, it's a fine reason to be my adversary.

At any rate, thank you very much for be being honest and forthright.


Edited by myk5 (02/10/11 11:50 PM)

Top
#48619 - 02/11/11 01:34 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: myk5]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
Dude, do you actually read what you write or is it more of a mental/typing spewing fest?

Honestly, do you have any idea about the things you write or do you just type to take up space?

Do you read any of the responses to your writings and think about them? It seems like you don't.

Your only comments in this thread were about how your own writings suck. If that was an attempt at humor, it didn't work in light of the fact you have said this in a few different posts where you also wrote that you felt yourself should be banned.

Once again, you wrote...

"With Satanism my issues are simple - it doesn't feel like 'Satanism' is really leaving Xtianity behind."

Meanwhile, in a scan of all the posts here lately, YOU are the only one bringing it up and mentioning it. It would appear that the Satanists here have moved beyond it, while you have not. Thus when you mention a non-existing problem as being a problem on this site, it becomes apparent that you are not really understanding this site or paying attention to the things that are written.

"I suppose that's why I'm not a Satanist. I don't want to shove nuclear waste down the mouths of children - so you should report this comment and have me banned from this site. I'm too fucking fluffy for this site!"

This comment of yours is ridiculous. It shows you don't understand about Satanism or this site, and really don't care to learn anything that disagrees with your own preconceived notions.

Oh, by the way, love spells are generally most often cast by wiccians. It doesn't matter, and since there exists no post on love spells why would you feel you would be banned for writing such? As long as you can back up your reasoning, and express yourself, such a post would not get someone banned from here.

Oh, no one cares if you are gay. It doesn't matter.
This is actually a place where you are judged by your words not who you choose to take as a bed partner.
Being gay does not mean you are fluffy, I find that implied assumption on your part to be kinda offensive.

"But I am also, fundamentally if abstractly, interested in transforming the 'occult' into its opposite."

No, you are not. You actually just want to con people into giving you money by pimping basic occult information. That puts into the same line of work as all the other liars, and christian type charlatans that LaVey decried as jokes in The Satanic Bible.

"On some level perhaps you understand this and are offended by it - if so, it's a fine reason to be my adversary."

I am actually offended and amused by your continued lack of knowledge and understanding of any information presented to you. You just don't get it. You are not my adversary, if anything you are more like an amusing pet who needs to be whacked by a newspaper now and then.

Morgan


Edited by Morgan (02/11/11 01:36 AM)
Edit Reason: added colored quotes
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#48627 - 02/11/11 04:05 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Morgan]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Those are my top 4 fun comments to make fun of? over 90 comments and that's the worst? I feel better already, thanks.

The love spell story is an example of how I have been 'too fluffy' in the past. Sex/Love is a fundamental human carnal desire, all good. In terms of spell casting I tend to improvise my own spells and suggest others do the same simply because what is 'awesome' and quiets the intelligence I believe is not exactly the same for everyone. It's a problem, the calibre of reader of my own website really wants spells like they want cooking recipes. I usually just send them to an article on Hoodoo spells, but I know the rubes would prefer me to write one for them.

I TRY TO turn the occult into its opposite by transforming it into something mundane and ordinary! (it's works - duh!)

My site -it's simply not fair to critique my website without actually reading it at least a little. You're evaluating the entire site by it's front page, much like you evaluate who I am by means of labels despite the content of over 90 posts. You don't look past the label for any more depth. your loss. All the information I present on the site is free (well, an email address for one ebook), and as I promote magic as a paradigm to live within - I take license to post almost anything I'm interested in enough to write about. Self indulgent so I have the ability to write more content.

If you consider my occult ideas too basic, there's material written about business ideas, political rants, ways to raise funds online, graphic design tips, original comics, thoughts on binaural beats with downloads...etc. Surely there's something that could hold your interest.

The master plan, to sell an e-book bundled with a digital success spell, it is exactly hucksterism. BUT, it will have an iron clad 60 day money back gaurantee, the magic will be as legitimate as i can manage* - and the book will be far better than many comparable books (I know that because I've read many of them). I'll tell my readers point blank that the book simply recycles the free site content (rewritten, edited and expanded) - and they will have the chance to evaluate my digital magic* essentially for free as well.

To the best of my knowledge, Wiccans actually believe love spells are 'BLACK MAGIC' (interfering with the will of another is just wrong y'know)....

It's Hoodoo that is rich with all kinds of practical love/lust/money/gambling/revenge spells - often with Christian contamination - but entirely without the 'thou shalt not' of Wicca.

But it doesn't matter.

*Here's a story that relates to occult pimping, digital magic (And perhaps why hoodoo works so well, in my opinion)

As a child in junior high, I was small, nerdy and stunk of dogs (I walked dogs every morning) and was extremely popular to harass by bullies. One particular bully who promised to kick my ass on a given Monday, he didn't show up. And some kids asked me if I knew why he didn't show up - so i bullshitted them " yeah, I cast a spell on his ass!"

As it turned out the bully in question was reassigned to a school for the emotionally disturbed and would never return to our school again. The bullies... they stopped bothering me. But one day one of the kids that had been a bully came to me with a request: would I make a love potion for him?

Of course I said 'yes' and made the most disgusting concoction I could (mustard, mayonnaise, Worcestershire sauce rubbed into baking soda to make a paste I would fill empty gelatin capsules with [my folks kept such capsules around to give our pedigree dogs vitamins and supplements]). I presented the capsules as my 'love potion' to the bully, satisfied the results would be dramatic and negative should he use it....

But... apparently the 'love potion' worked! And thereafter... the rumor mill took over. by the time the stories had spread repeatedly over the course of a month, my admittance into a science high school - that was magic, I didn't walk to school - I teleported! I don't even know half the myths that were created about me.

So, what I learned from that is that is a few things. historical claims of miracle working are highly likely the product of rumor. And having the balls to assert you have magic power, makes the power real to anyone that might believe you even subconsciously! That's why Hoodoo, classically a magic for hire paradigm, has such reliable results (in my opinion), and that's why I believe in the very 'hucksterism' LaVey would condemn.

As for digital magic, sigil magic theory suggests it can work (but of course I only got people to share results after i told them what the image was meant to provide magically, in my experiment). And I'll supplement the process with a thought form. And the huckster paradigm will work in my favor as well. it's all good.

As for yourself, Morgan, you remind me of folks that complain about faggots only to later be revealed to be one themselves. Of course it's not faggots you have an issue with....

Top
#48629 - 02/11/11 05:08 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: myk5]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"Those are my top 4 fun comments to make fun of? over 90 comments and that's the worst? I feel better already, thanks."

Dude, you are an idiot. I have commented on most of your postings.You just don't seem to care about what anyone has to say except yourself and your own preconceived notions. I have explained by using those quotes why you are an idiot. By trying to use misdirection, and slight of hand with words, you still fail. The people on this site are brighter than you give them credit for.

You really need to be hit with a wet newspaper on the nose.

Dude, all you did with this post is prove what I said about you.

As for your gay comment, like I said no one cares. You just seem to have the need to keep letting everyone know. Oh, and before you go judging me about being homophobic, everyone knows I swing both ways. I find your use and terms to be offensive. If anything I would ban you for your slurs against the gay community which at this point I doubt you are a member of.

With everything you say, and perhaphs everything you write is just part of your con job. Thus, maybe you aren't gay at all and its just another attempt at a marketing ploy.

Honestly, you come across as a self hating gay man who is looking for any way to get over his crippling emotional ties to his christian upbringing.

Morgan
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#48654 - 02/11/11 10:43 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Morgan]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It's almost as if he is still seeking bullies, laying down in front of them and asking to be kicked and in such, affirmed he exists.

It must be lonely there in the big city when all dreams are gone and delusions are the last straws.

Morgan my dear; he surely isn't here to learn or contribute. The best method to handle this is doing that what Big Brother does well; erase all that reminds of him. Not because it is important but because it isn't important at all.

To him, that's worse than being banned.

D.

Top
#48659 - 02/11/11 11:11 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Morgan]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Morgan:

My comment about saying the same thing over and over again, it's still part of what is real -eh? I read your comments, I appreciated them the first time. Now you're just irritating.

Pulling my quotes out of context might be unfair, but they are my words, and I've already either clarified or corrected those words, if required, in their original context. I don't feel required to 'rebut' you.

I'm a gay man, I've been one all my life - so in speaking from my own experience and life lessons it naturally comes up. Of course it figures into my aversion to Xtianity, I am a Gay man - duh!

I believe there's space to read my words and understand I'm revealing myself a 'huckster' with those words - why you need to disbelieve my words to believe me a huckster I'm not so clear about. I told the truth from my POV, and you are entitled to not believe me. You are entitled to distort what is real with your confirmation bias, which is what disbelieving me constitutes for you somehow. I'm flattered weirdly.


Edited by myk5 (02/11/11 11:12 AM)

Top
#48662 - 02/11/11 11:30 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: myk5]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
I think Jake or Michael will correct me if I get this one wrong, so I'm just going to make a brief comparison to how I heard of things like this being handled in the heyday of the CoS. In San Francisco ca.1960-1970, homosexual monoculture was struggling to establish itself amidst the cultural landscape of America following the hippie movement.

The more melodramatic and self-righteous who approached the CoS found its apparent sexual liberalism appealing, and went to some lengths to make spectacles of themselves at local gatherings, until it became apparent that no one found their proclivities the least bit shocking or offensive.

Some people, regardless of sexual orientation, are drama queens. If you could make less of an ostentatious display of how you believe yourself to be perceived here, I'm sure many people would be grateful. I don't care which way you swing. It's fine so long as you're fine with it. Just try to behave with some decorum. That's all I ask.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#48676 - 02/11/11 01:36 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Yeah... we had homosexuals in the early Church of Satan. We've since killed them all and buried their bodies in a shallow gave.

Actually being gay was no big deal. There were (and are) places in San Francisco for the most flamboyant of gays, and places where you'd never be able to tell. We all remember ol' Isaac asking for a dick blessing so he could "Roger" Roger, the new bank teller. Sexual diversity was always just the status quo.

Now, if someone had come in, like Richard Simmons and done the "It's FAAAAAAAAABULOUS" routine, I think it probably would have gone over like a lead balloon, not because anyone was homophobic, but because we had work to do and didn't appreciate the pretentious intrusion.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48701 - 02/11/11 06:29 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: SkaffenAmtiskaw
I think Jake or Michael will correct me if I get this one wrong, so I'm just going to make a brief comparison to how I heard of things like this being handled in the heyday of the CoS. In San Francisco ca.1960-1970, homosexual monoculture was struggling to establish itself amidst the cultural landscape of America following the hippie movement.

The more melodramatic and self-righteous who approached the CoS found its apparent sexual liberalism appealing, and went to some lengths to make spectacles of themselves at local gatherings, until it became apparent that no one found their proclivities the least bit shocking or offensive.

That's pretty much it. No one cared about mature, courteous homosexuals; personal sexual preference was intentionally not an issue [with the obvious exception of prohibitions of anyone interested in pedophilia, bestiality, or necrophilia!]. One of the Church's most distinguished IV°s, for instance, was John Ferro, who was homosexual. But you'd never know it from speaking or corresponding with him.

As for the other kind, well:

 Originally Posted By: Diane LaVey to M.A.A. 12/5/71
These fruits are ready to kill each other one minute, and the next minute they’re jumping into bed with each other. We’ve really had it with Satanic fairy godmothers - a new specification in the requirements for the Priesthood: Applicant must be straight!

This, of course, isn’t going to be made public, but it will be an unwritten regulation. All our liberalism with regard to homosexuality has gotten us is a lot of headaches. 95% of all homophiles are about as mature as teeny-boppers. And do they ever love to dish the dirt.

And I don't think that the Church did ordain any homosexuals thereafter, at least not through 6/1975.

The Temple of Set has always been indifferent to homosexuality per se.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#50183 - 02/28/11 03:50 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: mabon2010]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Yes this has much bearing on my philosophy. I was having a nice and creepy, quite satisfying deja vu like when my curses work. Now think for a moment about how ancient Gnosticism and the demiurge creator figure applies to the holographic universe theory. I mean that science is explaining some very old metaphors in great detail. The multiverse and the superstring theories assert a notion that the possibility for a dark reality that does not apply to the laws of causal physics is high.

I just watched this program ('The Secret Life of Chaos' was excellent too on bbc online) and saw connotations immediately with what I recognise through understanding what is the demiurge crime and chaos gnosticism. Something is very close to being discovered publicly that will be devastating to how people perceive reality.

The numinous Muslims also have a metaphysical understanding close to these theories but they accept it more like the grand order of things because people see order and chaos as a matter of understanding of the same thing—cosmos.

Quantum physics open an understanding into what the most ancient religions have been saying for aeons, that reality is a product of your mind, and if you know this, you can change your reality.

However things in my fractal reality have been going swimmingly. I am more isolated in deja vu all the time and soon the destruction of this earth and the arrival of the eternal dark aeon.

Don't worry though, you, the readers fractal reality will have another me in it and the world will still be here shaping itself around your conception. Or by reading this understanding, are you now trapped in my doomed universe.

Although the light is fleeting we may take from the external what we want.

The way I see it is that the end death of the cosmos is the eternal dark aeon, we reach this primordial chaos state upon death but are we already there as causality does not apply to the dark acausal/ primordial Chaos which surrounds the cosmos/ holographic universe. Are we all part of the demiurgos illusion. God created man in his own image, we are fractals. But everything has it's negative side, I just happen to be bringing eternal darkness to engulf this universe, it's no big deal. How magnificent the shadow of the destroyer will be.
_________________________


Top
#50749 - 03/10/11 08:05 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Hegesias]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
I will have to continue and explain the previous post in depth by quoting some established and contemporary theories relating to the holographic universe theory and the multiverse theory, which I neglected to outline in the previous text (thus making me appear quite insane).

Contrary to popular belief I'm not as mad as I may appear, I just have knowledge of Chaos magick theory and I twist a macabre paradigm in accordance to multiverse theory and the gnostic demiurge. This is a duel approach which cultivates the ability to switch off the emotional response to be dispassionate toward the external and even to laugh at danger which is a necessary tool for handling situations imposed upon us as well as for contemplation of what is evil intelligence which is not entirely a separate issue, but for this post I am trying to stay in context of what is reality pertaining to what has been discovered through sciences and what is perception of the world.

I'm a naturalistic person who has great empathy with nature and other beings so that side of Satanism does not need as much cultivation. The anti-cosmic Satanism is a tool to attain self control and non reaction to the external. Because I used to be so aggressive and emotional, calculated sinister means have been sought over the years to attain self-mastery and this includes a culmination of nihilism..

I believe in one intrinsic meaning in my reality. "empathy", including dark empathy with nature and other beings.

And what I need to exist in this way is."dispassion", which the anti-cosmic pestilent thought can polarise.

This being said I can post my findings and understandings as to what is reality. Bare in mind I am very much grounded in a naturalistic paradigm and explore nihilistic and macabre thoughts within metaphysics to gain perspective and also preserve the object which is to assert Will to Power into the world.


Ok

Bohm suggests that an intense heightening of individuals who have shaken off the "pollution of the ages" (wrong worldviews that propagate ignorance), who come into close and trusting relationship with one another, can begin to generate the immense power needed to ignite the whole consciousness of the world. In the depths of the Implicate Order, there is a "consciousness, deep down—of the whole of mankind." It is this collective consciousness of mankind that is truly significant for Bohm. It is this collective consciousness that is truly one and indivisible, and it is the responsibility of each human person to contribute towards the building of this consciousness of mankind,

Bohm also believes that the individual will eventually be fulfilled upon the completion of cosmic noogenesis. Referring to all the elements of the cosmos, including human beings, as projections of an ultimate totality, Bohm notes that as a "human being takes part in the process of this totality, he is fundamentally changed in the very activity in which his aim is to change that reality, which is the content of his consciousness." Bohm is intuitive that the human person and mankind collectively, upon accomplishing a successful noogenesis, will come to fullness within that greater dimension of reality—the Cosmic Apex.

Bohm refers to this ultimate level—the source of the nonmanifest—as the Subtle Nonmanifest, something akin to spirit, a mover, but still matter in the sense that it is a part of the Implicate Order. For Bohm, the Subtle Nonmanifest is an *active intelligence* beyond any of the "energies defined in thought."

Trying to describe the Subtle Nonmanifest, Bohm states that the "subtle is what is basic and the manifest is its result." T îve intelligence "directly transforms matter." And finally, Bohm says it straight: "there's a truth, an actuality, a being beyond what can be grasped in thought, and this is intelligence, the sacred, the holy."

Bohm poetically thinks of this cosmic Subtle Nonmanifest in a state of meditation. But what is it doing? Meditation means "to reflect, to turn something over in the mind, and to pay close attention." Without explanation, Bohm wonders aloud that while we meditate on that which we term the subtle nonmanifest, does the Subtle Nonmanifest concentrate on *its* Subtle Nonmanifest?" Does this mean that the Cosmic Apex ponders upon something beyond or outside of itself? Possibly Bohm is considering the infinite potential of what he terms "multidimensional reality." He might also be thinking of the possibility of Something Separate.

Here is an excerpt from a website on the multiverse theory and how it applies to the individual. It has been revealed that the Creator has fashioned the work of His hands "in His own Image." Realize now that the universe of your perception: the people, places, objects, and interactive processes once thought of as "containing you--but still essentially separate" is nothing more than a gigantic self-portrait, painted in continually expanding, repetitive patterns in every direction into infinity. This is so because, in order to perceive something, a person has to interpret the images that are being fed to his brain. With that interpretation, the observer becomes the creator of his personal reality. The grid through which all images and information passes is made entirely of each individual's unique vibratory essence. Therefore, his reality always "looks like him".

And finally my thoughts.

The end of the phenomenal universe may seem to be a long way off, but just as a dead star shines brightly in the night's sky though long since dead; Life is a flash of fleeting light. The senses perceive the deadlight of a dead star

What does this mean?

Acausality does not function within causality so the dark alpha and dark omega are the same thing and surround causality which is fleeting. The order (including Earth) being much like an island which is formed by the building blocks of the universe which come from in infinite sea of disordered building blocks. In this we see that although the blocks are ordered and structured everything eventually returns to disorder. This is not Chaos itself but merely uninterpreted order. Chaos is the unmanifest possibility before emerges the order so that new order can emerge whether this is perceived as order or disorder is irrelevant in regards to what is Chaos What is important is to recognise that the individual may act independently in opposition to the external Will of the collective whole. The individual pathes the path to uncertainty back from whichever abstraction he may be at as all paths lead back to the crossroads of Chaos in ones mind where opposites come from.

By assertion of the nihilist dialectic into and over opposites (order), and by cultivating the anti-cosmic pestilent thought with deliberate abuse of the laughter/laughter Chaos magick principle, the external does not control the individual and I know from experience that fearlessness, ruthlessness and heartlessness results from an extreme adversarial mindset. Why? Because the individual may laugh at anything corporeal from others dying to having his life threatened to receiving violence to administering it, because his desolate laughter has no opposite nor causal manifestation as his hate is primordial, pure and universal, and beyond paroxysmal emotion with no discrimination of the target; friend, foe, dead, alive—all are meaningless before his adversarial inspiration. This is not a means to an end but a stage by which new intrinsic value can emerge. Whether this is to perceive a simplified or more complex reality is up to the individual and their ability to allocate intrinsic meaning to what had been preserved and made stronger.

In this we see that the individual is beyond the limitations imposed by how others expect him to react. The external does not control the individual, he sees through it's illusions, he recognises the darkest principle that perpetuate from the brightest stratagem of light. The individual is the darkest principle, the centre of which is personified by Satan— the highest principle of Chaos, his adversarial essence and Will are the same, the consciousness is merely the mediator and not the centre of the individual as ego is a mixture of the Will and the external influence and so the individual mocks the foolish demiurgos in essence not in ego—the ego is the work of the demurgos illusion and has no power over the individual. The consciousness is the observer of the natural world, the individual is not tantalised by extrinsic factors other than to recognise their objective relevance. The individual will realise that intrinsic meaning can be found in materialism but that such is not his base to exist. Dark empathy does not have a bearing on the anti-cosmic pestilent thought because the very essence of the objective is to respond independently from the external. Only in extreme circumstance should one summon the anti-cosmic pestilent thought, for madness will result if the thought is summoned carelessly, for it will ensnare all of ones reality in madness because the blackest intrusion possible into the human psyche is what the thought is.

The demiurgos being the phenomenal, external form of the idea of the world, which the individual has been imprisoned by—the ego. Through active and passive nihilism, annihilation of this world which has been imposed (especially by society) opens the dark uncreation stage, The Dark Night of the Soul, from which the emergence of absolute new can emerge from absolute nothing, or to come back as demiurge or to simply not exist at all ie suicide which I do not condone because the magnificence and irony of ones corpse cannot be perceived after death. So, reality is the challenge of the self. With discipline and willed actions, the individual shapes his life's reality through his minds reality. The incorporeal Will of the individual is a link to the Dark acausal, the primordial uncreation state which is reached instantly yet timelessly through the gate of death (linked to through the death of the ego). This is the Dark acausal where physicals and linear causal time are not relevant and lawless creation is possible. The incorporeal Will, the dark subconsciousness of the individual is part of the ineffable Source, the non-existence, the black deluge of uncreation, both the timeless catalyst and the end death of the universe which ensnares the bastard demiurgos from alpha and omega—primordial Chaos.

The incorporeal Will of the individual is part of the Chaotic unmanifest and opposes the ordered Will of the corporeal cosmos. Whether Chaos is part of the individual or part of a dark divine force outside of cosmos is not important, the importance is the objective which is to spit upon the very fabric of reality and oppose everything by arrogant laughter, thus the external has no control over the individual—he laughs at suffering, death and the enemy itself—matter. The individual laughs at death, including his own, for it is his entertainment to mock that which tries in futility to control him. Pointless you say? Such extreme adversarial intent is meaningless you say? If one finds intrinsic meaning in ruthlessness and evil for all purposes of victory over life itself then transcendental anti-cosmic nihilism is the path of finding intrinsic meaning to adversarial intent itself, the individual is uncontrollable as any external force is below that of his adversarial Will, the consequence of being in control of his reality and embracing hatred for all that is in reality is what diminishes all external cause and effect, all influences are diminished. There is no spiritual prize nor ultimate goal of sustaining the filthy light ridden consciousness after death, no, the intrinsic meaning is an obsessional love affair with her strange shadow—the only presence of beauty is the dark purity of death which embraces all that suffers humiliation in the light. The scythe smites all.

One-pointedness meditation into the abyssal mind reveals that the light is fleeting but that we may take from the external what we wish and create our reality within the infinitesimal multiverse. Unfortunately we are joined by the veil of matter and have a collective consciousness which serves to preserve and perpetuate the demiurge crime as citizens of the multiverse consigned to a collective whole in the universe. However the anti-cosmic Satanist is the multidimensional heretic seeking the lawless dark. What is at the end death of the universe? Probably eternal frozen blackness, but that's better than an existence of unwillingly cooperating in an implicate order which the individual did not ask to be apart of.

So, reality for me is to empathise with nature and simply be my nature, at the same time, theories and contemplations about what nature might be upon closer inspection only serves to preserve and fulfil my sensual existence as a human being that is in resonance with nature and that this is my reality and fate to respond to nature, still something resides beneath the surface veil, an epistemic distrust of the openly visible.

Death to cosmos. The scythe smites all.
_________________________


Top
#50787 - 03/11/11 12:58 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: Hegesias]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1646
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:
What is at the end death of the universe? Probably eternal frozen blackness, but that's better than an existence of unwillingly cooperating in an implicate order which the individual did not ask to be apart of.


The individual will always be subject to some sort of external influence... unless, of course, there is no "individual" to exist due to a slight case of eternal frozen blackness.

Gnosticism and other such derived dualisms amuse me to no end, seeing heretic after heretic twist the words of Genesis around like some kind of a mad carnival wheel, until one can no longer tell the difference between God and the Devil.

Satanism, in part, is a way of addressing the proverbial "problem of evil". Bringing a "demiurge" into the picture, however, is only begging the question, as it only ends up reintroducing the problem in a more subtle form.

The Cathars were right about one thing, though-- Satan is indeed the Kosmokrator and God of This World. The catch is, though, there is no "other world", and, contrary to Ophite metaphysics, nothing existed prior to Chaos, because Chaos is the fundamental essence of reality.

I don't see a hard line that divides the "manifest" and "unmanifest"-- or the "causal" and "acausal" if you prefer. The known laws of physics break down if you look deep enough into the abyss, but it's more of a nebulous gradient of human understanding if anything. I don't mean to imply that rational science can systematically categorize everything, but rather stress that consciousness is only a small outpost in the middle of a vast and unknown dark reality. In opinion, such a metaphysical conclusion would negate the need to bifurcate objective reality on a fundamental level.

So I suppose you could call me a sort of monist. I don't see any particular structure of reality as "better" than another, because it's either the devil you know or the devil you don't, except in the end, it's all the same Devil.


Edited by The Zebu (03/11/11 01:01 AM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#50797 - 03/11/11 06:56 AM Re: What is reality? [Re: The Zebu]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Yes the demiurge in my literature is only the phenomenal form of it's idea, the world of light by which the individual perceives it, and thus the individuals ego which he is shackled is a series of illusions mistaken for the centre of self.

I can't post here because I already posted it on another forum "first 5 books". But anyway here is something else closer to home from me. In short, humans perceive patterns that repeat revealing that the world is of a holographic nature, this is simply a human perspective and related to how our brain works. Realities are born and collapsing at the same time and order and disorder are only human perceptions and not the Chaos of which I speak. The Chaos of which I speak of would be the primordial dark Alpha and dark Omega surrounding the universe from before the big bang and after the eventual heat death of the universe, the membranes of the eleventh dimension which catalyse the creation of matter are the stage of lawless possibility where the chain reaction occurs. And yes this is present within nature all the time, the most simple input conditions at the stage of unmanifest potential are the conditions from which causal evolution perpetually occur.

The thing we have not been able to understand is how the initial emergence of creation is catalysed without external stimuli. Would this be something to do with infinitesimally obscure changes we cannot detect? Or is this down to the elusiveness of what is known as "The God Particle" apparently responsible for assigning mass to matter.

We are said to be vibrations and this I feel is only a partial truth for all seems to be pointing towards consciousness, consciousness being nothing to do with to my realisation of self, consciousness is only the observer of the enemy as action toward the external is always aggressive/assertion and inaction would be passivity ie. compassion, an inactive state the external has imposed on the individual rendering him docile.

The demiurge's trick is to delude the individual in the senses and make him carry on a linear path perpetuating his species to project the filthy creation; a fixed fate as in the implicate order of things would impose.

The Individuals Will is apart of the dissolving impulse of Chaos which seeks to re-establish primal formlessness. Chaos seeps forth to reabsorb all matter from Alpha and Omega making it once more apart of it's timeless fog.

Basically taking "As above, so below—macrocosmos being apart of the same fundamental fabric as microcosmos and vice versa— The universe being the same as God and God being the same as man", and recognising that some of us are so inclined to be bringing about the endless dark aeon which will invade the cosmos with disharmonic energy blanketing every conscious being, ensue theunstoppable deluge of darkness flooding forth into and out of the dark subconsciousness. By channelling the anti-cosmic pestilent thought into and out of one’s dark subconsciousness, we can attain the dark gnosis making us more apart of the source thus dissolving both the internal and external false light of the bastard demiurge.

As above, as is below! The interconnected children of light will be consumed at their most vulnerable. You must end your world. You must wake up. A global consciousness shift is happening and because of this the slaves of the demiurge will become enlightened, but it will be a false enlightenment. Why? The black hole or seed of all that comes into existence expands into atomic structures in the second dimension—the infinite building blocks of creation. The third dimension and the solar system is the focus for manifestation of matter. It is herein that existence arrives at a reflection of what is communicated/created from thought. Now what is wrong here is that the vessels of false light are perpetuating the crime of creation and thus we are against this in full force invading the cosmos with disharmonic energy darkening and quickening the subconsciousness of humans. Seed the anti-cosmic pestilent thought to bloom! the effect is fractal and irreversible, feeding the inner darkness of humans, this way darkening the world’s collective soul and bringing about the endless dark aeon.

The days go by in a matter of moments and everything continues as I have foreseen. The bifurification of reality is at hand, the homo nullus will remain shackled to their aeon of light, comfort and numbing stasis. The black oceans of Chaos come to flood the false creation, washing away all illusion.
_________________________


Top
#51813 - 03/27/11 02:41 PM Re: What is reality? [Re: Fnord]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

As such it is only because there are observers, a specific reality exists.


I think Robert Anton Wilson does a pretty decent job of traversing this road with his ideas about "Reality Tunnels".

THIS is the short version, the longer one is out there somewhere, but I couldn't readily find it.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
When we don't observe, this reality becomes raw data again.


And that's the rub as we don't all observe in the same way. This is why the question "What is reality?" becomes largely unanswerable.

A different question could be "what is the reason that each person has an individual perception of reality?"





Reality having an actualised material existence is only that which is linked to our perception?

We as part of a cosmic design, we perceive a very small amount of necessary raw data. We are no different than ants, deep sea jellyfish, or amoeba's; the less complex organism is experiencing the ecosystem designed for it's sustainable reality. We as humans are flawed because our perception is just broad enough to glance into space both outer and inner, this is where the threshold of infinity begins to blur our perception because we are designed to react within the ecosystem on this planet and nothing more.

Somewhere along the lines, humans began on a path of absurd abstraction and has since been making more and more abstraction, fractal intelligence which serves no purpose but to realise that everything outside of the ecosystem is unnecessary. We can increase our propensity to experience/compile raw data but what is the point other than this abstraction being interesting and at the same time removing us from nature.

DNA is the building blocks of phenomenal life, it has been found in space. Human kind is no doubt inhabiting countless other ecosystems on countless other planets which closely mimic Earth and by setting out into space with "our" perception as the hub, we'll finally find more of the same boring reality. What is the point except to acknowledge what is already there. Instead of reaching out into the raw data which is not necessary to experience we experience less of our natural reality.

For example, look at how finely tuned a wolf pack is compared to the shambling unsynchronised humans walking about who think they are so clever and interesting and vast. Humans abuse consciousness and only perceive infinity because we are designed to live on this Earth as finite ecosystem beings, this is our reality and everything outside of that is unnecessary.

The "cup" is still at home after leaving for work because a "cup" is a formation of raw data compiled by your innumerable likenesses who are also the same existential apparatus as you. All consciousness merges to form the phenomenal reality which is raw data we move through in a limited spectrum.

Collisions are the occurrence of vibrations vibrating at the same level which make the matter solid. We are by design, limited in the way we move through raw data and limited to perceiving raw data insofar as our design allows, we are humans, an apparatus such as a microscope, it can delve into the most interesting details in it's focus but the entire world outside of it's lens is still there and still of the same building blocks as what is in focus. When we attempt to perceive what is out of focus we encounter infinity which is merely raw data which we are not designed to experience.

Visualise an island formed of visible data floating in a sea of invisible and formless data, the island of matter is made of ordered raw data, this data flows from an unlimited disordered sea of raw Chaotic data, and although the data we experience is finite we may take from it what we want. The external does not control the individual, he is both the apparatus and head scientist of the experiment, reality is the raw data being analysed, when the experiment reaches conclusion, the answer for what is reality would be, "that was reality".

So to me reality is ordered Chaos. The implicate order is only the phenomenal form of it's idea which we as humans perceive and with the illusory nature of light who's to trust an apparatus designed to collectively perform a specific function which has nothing necessary to do with what lies outside of its lens focus. We encounter the illusion of infinity, the illusion of space and separatism, the illusion of time. These illusions are all necessary to force our being into focus for no purpose but to exist, propagate and sustain in our ecosystem. Our perception is a feeler for that which is necessary.

We learn nothing but what is already there, only because we are all of the same design do we differ superficially. Our fractal intelligence is synthesising it's realisation and together we fill in the gaps. The Reality tunnel theory states that, with a subconscious set of mental "filters" formed from our beliefs and experiences, every individual interprets this same world differently, hence "Truth is in the eye of the beholder". This to me says "flaw" because the usage of words is not decisive enough, rather we do not experience "differently" but we neglect to experience raw data in entirety being flawed in our perceptions to a greater or lesser degree. Raw data is there, if we were to experience it all, there would be no limitation and thus no causality, no reality as we know it.

Our perception is designed just fine as if we were to look out into space and view everything it would be a solid mass of light due to seeing every star, every particle, even the dark matter reaching into infinity, like looking into and past thick snowfall. We are limited for a reason and this is what makes reality "seem" vast and interesting, really it's hideous particles and energy which is experiencing itself, Most Satanists choose to focus on nature and individuality and this is the illusion that gives us purpose and vitalises us, being in tune with our ecosystem.

I never found anything else to be as bleak and desolate as science. I often wonder why the need to value life exists to advanced scientists, would they not view reality as a hideous mass of particles and realise their limitations are what makes them "feel" unique. Would it not be a dispassionate way to view life making one totally immoral and unloving to humans and all life? Surely human life is worthless matter cursed with consciousness to entertain it with knowledge until the joke meets conclusion?
_________________________


Top
Page all of 6 12345>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.085 seconds of which 0.003 seconds were spent on 89 queries. Zlib compression disabled.