|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2015 22:13:01 GMT -5
Yes, I didn't (and don't) know what to with the idea of love milling around inside of objects, and I'm sure something else was intended, but it seems like it can go nowhere but bad. How much does a pound of love weigh?....And don't say 'No weigh!' Yer right, those bananas are a wacky bunch. Hehe
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2015 22:15:33 GMT -5
I know what you're saying, Andrew. Oh know! That's a violation of the uncertainty dogma! You kant know anything! Shame on you!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2015 22:18:21 GMT -5
I look at being consciousness as being an appearance in/as consciousness, which every thing and non-thing is. The idea of being conscious seems to be an arbitrary labeling of responsiveness. It's easy to put that label on complex creatures, but more difficult with simple ones, and not at all for inanimate objects, like rocks and cars. So I can play along with the labeling when the distinction is persons vs cars, but I'll only play along so far. Hey whatever man, just don't ask Andy's car if it exists, ok? I'm avoiding Andy's car at all cost. I can see myself getting sucked into an existential debate right off.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 21, 2015 23:27:53 GMT -5
Yer right, those bananas are a wacky bunch. Hehe Dr. Emo was watchin' alot of romcom-ckickflicks that month.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 21, 2015 23:31:14 GMT -5
Hey whatever man, just don't ask Andy's car if it exists, ok? I'm avoiding Andy's car at all cost. I can see myself getting sucked into an existential debate right off. Where do you think his ONSTAR would send him if he typed in "home"? "Turn left at the next mauve light unless you stop in the intersection first ..."
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 22, 2015 7:43:09 GMT -5
If you don't notice that the rock is conscious is it because you don't notice that it is conscious or is it because the rock isn't conscious ... Some don't notice the love in everything, is it because love isn't in everything or is it because one doesn't notice the love ... I am not speaking about 'love' in things (as I am not sure, I mean I can't speak about it) but I know that there can be some changes related to some things in accordance with people's thoughts (I am not talking about bending spoons).. I don't wish to sound like "hey there is extraordinary stuff here", though If I understand you correctly I would agree that one can change certain things by ways of one thoughts . Many understand the saying, we are what we eat and we are what we think we are so if we change what we eat and we change how we think then there becomes a level of change in relation to the change we make but something that is inherently conscious cannot be any different no matter what one eats or no matter what one thinks ... lols ...
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 22, 2015 8:41:13 GMT -5
I am not speaking about 'love' in things (as I am not sure, I mean I can't speak about it) but I know that there can be some changes related to some things in accordance with people's thoughts (I am not talking about bending spoons).. I don't wish to sound like "hey there is extraordinary stuff here", though If I understand you correctly I would agree that one can change certain things by ways of one thoughts . Many understand the saying, we are what we eat and we are what we think we are so if we change what we eat and we change how we think then there becomes a level of change in relation to the change we make but something that is inherently conscious cannot be any different no matter what one eats or no matter what one thinks ... lols ... I was more writing about coincidences in one's life, concerning objects, happening in accordance with one's thoughts... but I know it was not clear in my post. It will be an absurd example but let's say you saw an advertisement in a newspaper, you thought some things about it, and the next day you see the ad in a slightly changed way, some words were added, exactly the ones you had thought about it... In these things I am not clear *at all*, about differences in animate/inanimate things or differences in direct/indirect interactions. I just say I came across them a lot. About "but something that is inherently conscious cannot be any different no matter what one eats or no matter what one thinks", I think you are right! Again, I was talking about things' taking different places in an arrangement (of life) I think. Maybe this is about "LOA" but I don't know about LOA. This may be irrelevant but if we take a newspaper, what can we say about its responsiveness? To me the main thing is, there is something that is reflected through it, but the material itself is not 'dead', also. ps. putting this beforehand for the possible fun-makings:
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 22, 2015 8:54:10 GMT -5
I am not speaking about 'love' in things (as I am not sure, I mean I can't speak about it) but I know that there can be some changes related to some things in accordance with people's thoughts (I am not talking about bending spoons).. I don't wish to sound like "hey there is extraordinary stuff here", though And does that say something to you about whether or not that thing is conscious? I haven't decided yet. Some things 'act' on other things, yes, but if the thing that is being acted upon was dead there wouldn't be any change. You wrote to Andrew "The whole world aligns with intention in some way. It doesn't mean it's all conscious." What does it mean then? What is the explanation of "in some way" there? Is there a third thing which arranges the relation of two things?? (I am new to these ideas)
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 22, 2015 8:55:32 GMT -5
Yes, mesmerizing. Btw I laughed a lot while reading the 'comments' under this video, but one of them made me sad, don't know if it's true: it was about the mistreatment of a dog while they were going up on the mountain. Hope it's not true, otherwise, it isn't worth much (imo).. My last babble on the issue: some exciting music goes well with it (more mesmerizing!). The video isn't worth much if a dog was mistreated on the way up? Is that what you're saying? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 22, 2015 9:01:44 GMT -5
Yea it sounds like an absurd question. Perhaps there won't be any answer other than a "no", but it is an interesting subject for me. Btw, not strictly related but if you haven't watched this "Overview" video, I recommend it (19 min). I guess you belong to the 'cogito ergo sum' camp. Ever thought about moving over to the 'sum ergo cogito' camp? You are talking about a big thing here (thanks). I wouldn't think of any of the camps if someone (in this case, you) did not point them out. I am used to running after 'doing', is there any doing there?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 22, 2015 10:21:50 GMT -5
I'm avoiding Andy's car at all cost. I can see myself getting sucked into an existential debate right off. Where do you think his ONSTAR would send him if he typed in "home"? "Turn left at the next mauve light unless you stop in the intersection first ..." I wonder if his car nags him about his driving.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Feb 22, 2015 10:45:22 GMT -5
Where do you think his ONSTAR would send him if he typed in "home"? "Turn left at the next mauve light unless you stop in the intersection first ..." I wonder if his car nags him about his driving. That would truly be.......a back seat driver.........
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 22, 2015 10:54:44 GMT -5
And does that say something to you about whether or not that thing is conscious? I haven't decided yet. Some things 'act' on other things, yes, but if the thing that is being acted upon was dead there wouldn't be any change. You wrote to Andrew "The whole world aligns with intention in some way. It doesn't mean it's all conscious." What does it mean then? What is the explanation of "in some way" there? Is there a third thing which arranges the relation of two things?? (I am new to these ideas) Yes. ZD likes to say the universe is alive. I say the universe is consciousness, which is really the same thing. The reason I don't say the universe is alive is because it may imply it is conscious rather than consciousness, and there is a difference. In the largest context, nothing in the universe is conscious. rather, it's an expression of consciousness. ZD also thinks I overuse the dream metaphor (hehe) but as it's something we've all experienced, it can be useful to demonstrate some illusions. Nothing in our dreams is conscious, (it's all appearances in mind) but everything is consciousness (The person's consciousness, in that context). When we interact with other peeps in our dreams, we can influence them in spite of the fact that they are not conscious entities. We might even have a dialog with our dream car. So how is this possible if the objects in our dreams are not conscious? Obviously, it's because the influencer and the influenced are the same consciousness. I think you're tiptoeing around the idea of manifestation, but there's no need. Manifestation is an actuality, not because things are conscious, or because there's a 'third entity' filling manifestation orders, but because everything is appearance in the same consciousness. It doesn't really mean that the person can manifest. It means that everything in consciousness is part of a singular movement, and separation is just an illusion.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 22, 2015 11:02:17 GMT -5
The video isn't worth much if a dog was mistreated on the way up? Is that what you're saying? Yes. But the video isn't about the moral behavior of the film crew. Where do you draw the line? What if the camera man's wife cheats on him? Does that make the film worthless too?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 22, 2015 11:04:40 GMT -5
I guess you belong to the 'cogito ergo sum' camp. Ever thought about moving over to the 'sum ergo cogito' camp? You are talking about a big thing here (thanks). I wouldn't think of any of the camps if someone (in this case, you) did not point them out. I am used to running after 'doing', is there any doing there? You could run between the two camps, I spose.
|
|