***********
If Libs really have principles and are not just hypocrites against Russian agitation and lying propaganda, then why do they support so much of it? Why do so many allow the oligarch-owned media to wind them up before they check and weigh all the pertinent facts, not just the facts that are cherry-picked to fit a divisive narrative against the founding ideals? Why do so many want to surrender the representative republic to a despotism run by hacks claiming scientific moral expertise on behalf of oligarchs? On what empirical or historical proof can responsible adults really expect open-border promoters like Soros to take to heart their best interests?
******************
Thomas Sowell is a national treasure. His words describe not just the goal of Dinos. They also describe the goal of Rinos, The evil bird of oligarchic collectivism has two wings, but they are of the same bird. Why is that so hard for our so-called educated elites to see? Our politicians who get elected with funds from corporatist oligarchs well know how their bread is buttered and whom they must serve. And, they well know that every other successful politician knows the same thing.
To con-spire means simply to breathe together. Express documentation among people-farming sociopaths is no more necessary than it is for a pack of circling wolves.
Moreover, this "breathing together" among corrupt people-farmers works in every institution, whether it be of media, academia, sophistry, scientism, politics, church, courts, charities, and banking. Ever wonder why so many nutty or corrupt profs get tenure? And why so few decent people are allowed to express themselves in the club? EVER WONDER why so many students and employees have to hobble themselves against standing up to PC idiocy, because the PC mafia will blackball (shun, suspend, sack) them if they show any record or inclination for thinking contrary to PC?
Modern communications, methods, and signals have been turned to grease the way for this rot to fester, everywhere.
Bottom line: In national politics, the way for people farmers to float is being greased, while the way for decent people to rise is being blocked. Had Trump not been a billionaire himself, there may be no way a person with his mindset for restoring the republic could ever have been elected President. I voted for Trump because of his political positions. I did not vote for him to be a national exemplar of marital morality. The question is: After Trump, what then? If political decency is not entirely to perish, if government of, by, and for the people is not to perish, then thinkers of the world must throw off their mind shackles and stand against the corruption and moral lunacy of many of our oligarchic elites and their paid, agitated, and hoodwinked stoolies.
****************
We allowed the importation and indoctrination of too many non-assimilating mindsets that consider traditional American values of faith, family and fidelity to be "wrong" under their calculation of moral scientism. Then we allowed them to convince our children that our nation was made stronger on account of this travesty. Now we are treated to an Orwellian nightmare, where the mindset that thought making dope illegal would win the war on drugs now thinks that making guns illegal can win the war against violence. Meanwhile, our media-music-rap-academia complex fills our kids' minds and time with entertainments of violence, zombie apocalypse, video war games, and rap incited hatred. All the while, it paints ordinary Americans raised under traditional values as if they were moral degenerates. They find the very idea of making America great again to be repellant. So rot is rewarded while virtue is reviled. And now we wonder: Why has our populace become so lost? No legalistic regimen can fix this.
******************
We allowed the importation and indoctrination of too many non-assimilating mindsets that consider traditional American values of faith, family and fidelity to be "wrong" under their calculation of moral scientism. Then we allowed them to convince our children that our nation was made stronger on account of this travesty. Now we are treated to an Orwellian nightmare, where the mindset that thought making dope illegal would win the war on drugs now thinks that making guns illegal can win the war against violence. Meanwhile, our media-music-rap-academia complex fills our kids' minds and time with entertainments of violence, zombie apocalypse, video war games, and rap incited hatred. All the while, it paints ordinary Americans raised under traditional values as if they were moral degenerates. They find the very idea of making America great again to be repellant. So rot is rewarded while virtue is reviled. And now we wonder: Why has our populace become so lost? No legalistic regimen can fix this.
******************
I am sick of senseless school killings. I would like to see more intelligent analysis to shed light on what it is about our open, tolerant, and increasingly dystopian society that may be contributing to this. Compared to other nations, are we too much tolerating the money to be made by agitating for jealousies? Who is really benefitting from all the social agitation? Are we indulging kids so much that they lose understanding of themselves and their capacity for self discipline? Instead of availing kids to appreciate their God-connected spirituality, are we misleading them to believe they are entitled to largesse from the Gov (and that they are entitled to take to violence and the streets to take it)? What is going on?
***************
The Left believes gov should be run by experts who are responsive to their funders (moochers), NOT by elected officials who are responsive to the general electorate.
Lefties' brains cannot sense any connection between the hated oligarchs of whose wealth they are jealous and the oligarchs who fund the experts over whom Lefties swoon. Once a Lefty's brain has been so trained, he is generally awarded a college degree in some form of social scientism to certify to his successful sub-humanization. This is called "education."
Indeed, corrupt people-farmers have learned how to attract, breed, indoctrinate, and sub-humanize people to fill that prescription for their new world plantation. Open borders is how they mean to spread that contagion, worldwide.
This is win-win, happy-happy for wannabe people-farmers and for the people who thrive on their utopian promises. Of course, the people-farmers do not mean ever to accomplish their promises, if to do so would free their farmees from perpetual dependence.
To decent people capable of thinking for themselves, this people-farming is, of course, evil. However, wannabe farmees will never get beyond their programmed response, which is that it is hate speech to call them farmees.
*****************
Well, add this to that: Moral criminals often have radar to find and help one another as they engage in their rapine and plunder. Now that we're more connected and civilized, they tend to do this under the table or with people-farming signals and head-faking personas.
Our politicians who get elected with funds from corporatist oligarchs well know how their bread is buttered and whom they must serve. And, they well know that every other successful politician knows the same thing.
To con-spire means simply to breathe together. Express documentation among people-farming sociopaths is no more necessary than it is for a pack of circling wolves.
Moreover, this "breathing together" among corrupt people-farmers works in every institution, whether it be of media, academia, sophistry, scientism, politics, church, courts, charities, and banking. Ever wonder why so many nutty or corrupt profs get tenure? And why no decent people are allowed in the club? Modern communications, methods, and signals have been turned to grease the way for this rot to fester, everywhere.
Bottom line: The way for people farmers to float is being greased, while the way for decent people to rise is being blocked. Had Trump not been a billionaire himself, there may be no way a person with his mindset for restoring the republic could ever have been elected President. The question is: After Trump, what then? If decency is not to perish, if government of, by, and for the people is not to perish, then thinkers of the world must throw off their mind shackles.
**********
I do not claim to be a Conservative, Libertarian, or Liberal. I consider many among them to be Rinos, Linos, and Dinos. What we need are Conservers of Liberty. People who use this as a litmus test for their politics: What is needed to sustain a decent republic of well informed, free thinking citizens?
IAE, this article does not much comport with my experience. Where I have seen parents who love their kids and yet expect them to learn how to reason intelligently and with respect for sustainable principles, I have seen well-adjusted kids. Where I see easy going parents who are fine with kids hanging around dopers and malcontents --- not so much. The problem with ghetto rats is not strict fathers. it's absent fathers.
When good parents talk about tough love, you seem to be hearing mean love. But I don't think they are the same, even though you may be conflating them.
Good parents don't give kids everything, and they expect their kids to do chores or get a job. They consult with their teachers, take an interest in studies, remain alert about who their kids are hanging out with, and discuss political and social issues in a guiding and informative way, while respecting the kid's own ideas and growth.
However, once a kid in an adult's body has already been spoiled, trained, conditioned to be a malcontented, excuse-making, whining, entitlement-minded thug and blamer of the gov, i.e., a Liberal, then there is not a whole lot you can do to use reason, logic, wisdom, or patience to reform him. In some cases, the best you can do may be to deflate him, so he may be less likely to harm himself or others.
I don't think there is much chance that politesse is going to reform a perpetually infantilized, codependent snowflake. In any case, where snowflakes tend to draw abrupt and pointed criticism is where they troll in to express utter nonsense of a type that has never worked in history, but that is taught to them by corrupt people farmers and their paid stooges, whereupon they congratulate themselves on their fake-superior education.
**************
Oligarchic Collectivists of the Left have a million ways to try to force people to love Big Brother. They have hounds of hell to revile you. They will twist words to make you out to be a racist, bigot, etc. If you get too controversial online, they will haunt you, flash gang you, knock you out. Shush, suspend, sack you. They know how to fund, reward, ratchet, and float their own shills and how to agitate their own stoolies. They are masters of media doublespeak. They want obedience to their regime --- not free, responsible, informed, or consistent thinking.
To beat them back, it is necessary to show the extent of their infestation. They offer the most sought after certificates, bribes, and corruption. What can Conservers of Liberty offer? Inspiration and feeling good by doing the right thing. But which kind of reward will tend to attract the most followers? Which kind of follower will be seen to offer a potential bride the most security?
Where can Conservers of Liberty be trained to combat the Evil Left more effectively? Maybe Prager U. And Jordan Peterson. Americans need to set up a better alternative to education than the one offered by the system of oligarchic collectivists. I think the Left will tend to overreach, and it can be made to topple from its own corruption. But we need good people, trained and ready to expose and tip it --- in all our institutions. And they need to understand how deep the rot has grown, in all our institutions.
***************
Good grief! A person has to be willfully blind not to see the open-borders agenda of the oligarchic owners of the MSM, who constantly spew their sheeple-farming talking points against Trump. For goodness sakes, remove the Russia-Russia-Russia wart from your brain. BTW, didn't Lefties used to like Russia? Trump doesn't let you see his tax returns because he knows the godless cabal of oligarchs would twist it forever. Move on. The Mueller Investigation is about as smart as Maxine Waters. Much ado by tools and stoolies for anti-American, open-border, NWO oligarchs. Why do you hate the U.S. and the borders that define it?
Trump does have a heart --- both for preserving America and for the so-called Dreamers. Your Dino-Rinos have a heart for neither. Their heart is all for the globalist agenda of open borders, the destruction of every representative republic, and the imposition of a NWO where the masses are farmed as sheeple by self-godded, fake-expert, malignant oligarchs. It's past time to wake up and understand who your dino-rino fake-heroes are really working for. Hint: It's not for Americans and it's not for Dreamers. Follow the money.
********************
After Donald, the Deluge? Where are the philosophers that can lead us to a way to sustain a decent civilization of free-thinking human beings? Have you seen any?
****************************
As our capacities for math, science, and algorithms evolve, we will be confronted with fundamental and ultimately defining concerns.
As Information and Substance evolve to form patterns into senses connected to a motive center (brain), the form of Consciousness thus availed expression may become ever more powerful. It may merge with machined capabilities (per Elon Musk), much as our brains merge with the cells that form our bodies. It may, merely by thinking, then enervate and direct astounding energies and talents.
But, ask: with whom to share such talents? Against whom to compete and battle, to hone and expand such talents? With whom to ally and organize, to enhance tactics and strategies, to prevent battles from decimating the environs and earth that provide sustenance?
And ask: When, how, and to what extent to surrender individual freedom and dignity to sustain decent civilization? How to program experts (A.I.'s?) that can be trusted to take over such controls? How to sustain back-and-forth empathies (good faith and good will) with such experts? What discoverable philosophy, theosophy, and/or political system should be acceptable both to such experts and to their sheeple, to best guide, defend, and expand such concerns?
How to program the experts that will then be expected to program us? Can our space-time (simulation?) avoid self-annihilation while availing the entrustment and empowerment of more than one God (or Singularity)?
Aye, there's the rub. As more NoKo's and power-mongering madmen acquire nukes and gargantuan power, must not the likelihood of a destabilizing miscalculation or catastrophe increase? Perhaps especially if we continue along a materialistic path of ridiculing and reviling every effort to appreciate a spiritual essence that abides coordinate with us?
**************
Re: a mechanism for ... enslavement through widespread economic extortion
As by enticing youth to volunteer for debt enslavement by accepting loans to pay for their indoctrination and training to become farmees of people-farmers.
No sooner does a young person venture forth on his own than (s)he is snared by debt enslavers (and their shills, servants, and prof swells). The insult added to injury is to entice him to pay for his own body and mind enslavement. That's pretty god-less, evil, conniving, right there! To add further insult, he must be careful not to get any non-PC stuff (thought-crime) on his online record, lest he be
shunned, suspended, de-sexed, or sacked.
*****************
I am for Trump, full steam. To address the NWO problem it is helpful to name and define the problem. And you are doing a great job at that. For the time being, it is most important to describe these vermin, arouse indignation, and work to defenestrate them.
In the background, however, we do need some visionaries. After all, the NWO people are way out front with their visions: A.I. overlords, immortality on the cloud, open borders, expert farming of the masses, replacement of spiritual insights with Big Gov run by corporatist oligarchs with assigned or syndicated territories, PC indoctrination and mind control over the masses, confiscation of firearms, neutering of the general populace, replacement of families with marrying of the gov, gender dysphoria, purpose anomie, dopamine (soma) induced pleasure uber alles, guaranteed entitlements to be provided by programmed bots, and so on.
If their vision sounds like a dystopia for sub-humans, then we need some alternative ideas. Otherwise, they will argue the need for free thinking, debate, and representative republics is over --- since they already have all the answers or they are so far in front that our input (the input of the general represented citizenry) is irrelevant (kabuki).
To me, it is alarming that most analytical philosophers (as well as heads of most institutions) seem to be trending or on board with the expert-managed dystopia of Oligarchic Collectivists.
I am just raising a little itch, to hint that there are bad things lurking in the background.
**************
Outside snobvilles and ethnic ghettos, it was a rite of passage in the 1950's and early 1960's for a young boy to get his first real job. He was proud to return to high school to be able to say he had earned his keep with a job over the summer. That was part of learning to show up for work, persevere against adversity, and how to become a responsible adult. Now, kids seem to spend their summers playing video games, ingesting tide pods, despising American values, and being entitled to whine and not have to grow up. Then they go to college to solidify their anti-American training.
Is this the new Dino and Rino System of Values? If Obama was not an anti-American apologist for Islamic values, would the Left still love him? What has eaten away at our philosophies and theosophies to lead our anti-republican wannabe-farmees (Dinos, Linos, and Rinos) to behave in such manner? What remains that can guide us to be Conservers of Liberty (of decent human freedom and dignity)?
*************
The more we signal our virtue by tolerating crap floating to the top of our institutions, the more society is held hostage to spectacular crap (craptacular). How much diversity of felons, fanatics, dopers and groomers do we need running our colleges, news and politics?
**************
People farmers and their stoolies have taught entitlement-mindedness well. They have taught lack of responsibility well. They have taught how to blame others (privileged white males) well. They have rewarded race-baiting groomers well. They have eased the float by connivers to the top. They have conflated livestock management with human decency. They have taught that the world owes a living, instead of the tough love needed to thrive in the real world. So now the harvest is in: Sanctuary ghettos with fatherless or ill-bred and ill-raised families, with no salvageable trend in sight.
****************
Socialism begins by taking over the management of your allowable enterprise, taxing your production out the wazoo, taking over your allowable associations, then your allowable expression and speech. Socialism may appear kabuki-benign at first, but it is inevitable that the power of the government in a socialistic state that allows its electorate to be ruled by so-called experts will tend to consolidate, and it will eventually float the worst of godless, non-higher-minded, people-farming, genital-brained, power-abusing, connivers and sociopaths to the top levels of power in every institution. Human beings carry remnants of lizard brains. In the real world, socialism IS fascism. As practiced in the real world, socialism and fascism are interchangeable wings of the same bird.
*******************
I much doubt that there is any necessary connection between skin color and intelligence, virtue, strength, endurance, or speed. There are correlates, but they are more the product of local conditioning of the gene pool than of any necessary connection to race. When local factors and cultural practices favor selection within a gene pool for intelligence, virtue, strength, or speed, then those attributes will tend more to find expression -- regardless of skin color. The reason opposing teams keep dividing by skin color has more to do with race baiters and their stoolies than with science. Problem is, some of the biggest pretenders on behalf of fairness and equality, who call everyone else racists, are themselves the worst of racists. Reason: To keep and farm their sheeple.
**************
The Left has long been assaulting faith, family, and fidelity. But it offers little to replace those things, except "free" dope, sex, and violent rap. The Left offers no real way to establish or preserve a decent civilization of human beings. it imagines that everyone would be better off by marrying a central gov, to be managed by central elites. It imagines that such a system would float the most virtuous to the top levels of management over the proles. By pursuing nihilism, the Left greases the way to fascist-collectivism.
No mere mortal mind, whether human or artificial, can know all the limits, if any, on the potentialities of entertainments and technologies that may be discovered or invented. Science cannot provide that knowledge. No mortal can know what is the best form of society. What, then, can guide us, as our discoveries and inventions unfold?
Answer: Wisdom, born of historical insight, intuition, vision. So long as we desire to participate as responsible adult citizens of a representative republic, we may be guided by being attuned and receptive to good faith, good family, and good fidelity. As we lose that tuning, we will tend to lose our representative republic.
**************
Would it not be preferable that people of good faith provide more protection against verbal bullying by stigmatizing it than by enacting gov-forced speech codes? The more a society has to rely on elitist force, the less capable it seems to become of governing itself. That way lies fascism.
***********************
No mere mortal mind, whether human or artificial, can know all the limits, if any, on the potentialities of entertainments and technologies that may be discovered or invented. Science cannot provide that knowledge. No mortal can know what is the best form of society. What, then, can guide us, as our discoveries and inventions unfold?
Answer: Wisdom, born of experience, insight, intuition, vision. So long as we desire to participate as responsible adult citizens of a representative republic, we may be guided by being attuned and receptive to good faith, good family, and good fidelity. As we lose that tuning, we will tend to lose our representative republic.
*****************
We already know that many nations, including our own, meddle in elections in other nations. That does not answer: did the meddling change the election; whose side did it weigh most on; and what can or should be done to diminish such meddling?
Voting by illegal aliens is also meddlesome. Importing and indoctrinating liberty-illiterates is also meddlesome. Yet, Dinos and Rinos seem to care little about those forms of meddling against the representative republic. Indeed, many see patriots, populists, and nationalists as undesirables. So, how can any thinking person take this crusade against meddling by Russians in our nation's elections to by anything more than cover for demented anti-Americans?
It is Big-Lie Orwellian-doublethink to believe anti-Trump Dino-Rinos that want to import liberty-illiterates to destroy the representative republic also want to protect the representative republic from meddlers. The biggest and worst anti-American meddlers are the agents placed in the Deep State by Dino-Rinos.
***************
I suspect agitation via the Me-Too movement became viral less because of actual sexual harassment than because codependent wussies (femimen and feminazis) see it as a way to foist-force their New Wussie World on everyone. The real victims are the independent free-thinkers who just want their republic back. Maybe we need our own Me-Too movement, to protect the republic against this farcical tragedy? How many free-thinkers have been victimized by gotcha-playing fems?
****************
The problem arises when "production" and "commodities" come in practice to include the buying and selling of political favors and politicians. When laundering with fiat money allows a few elites to run prices up for everyone else --- by taking exorbitant cuts while extending exorbitant credit in order to turn so many others into debt slaves to the system.
We already know that many nations, including our own, meddle in elections in other nations. That does not answer: did the meddling change the election; whose side did it weigh most on; and what can or should be done to diminish such meddling?
Voting by illegal aliens is also meddlesome. Importing and indoctrinating liberty-illiterates is also meddlesome. Yet, Dinos and Rinos seem to care little about those forms of meddling against the representative republic. Indeed, many see patriots, populists, and nationalists as undesirables. So, how can any thinking person take this crusade against meddling by Russians in our nation's elections to by anything more than cover for demented anti-Americans?
It is Big-Lie Orwellian-doublethink to believe anti-Trump Dino-Rinos that want to import liberty-illiterates to destroy the representative republic also want to protect the representative republic from meddlers. The biggest and worst anti-American meddlers are the agents placed in the Deep State by Dino-Rinos.
***************
I suspect agitation via the Me-Too movement became viral less because of actual sexual harassment than because codependent wussies (femimen and feminazis) see it as a way to foist-force their New Wussie World on everyone. The real victims are the independent free-thinkers who just want their republic back. Maybe we need our own Me-Too movement, to protect the republic against this farcical tragedy? How many free-thinkers have been victimized by gotcha-playing fems?
****************
The problem arises when "production" and "commodities" come in practice to include the buying and selling of political favors and politicians. When laundering with fiat money allows a few elites to run prices up for everyone else --- by taking exorbitant cuts while extending exorbitant credit in order to turn so many others into debt slaves to the system.
Up to that point, free enterprise works fine. But at and beyond that point, something (whether by regulation, taxation, and/or inspiration) is needed to take the buying and selling of political favors and politicians out of the marketplace. Unless, that is, you prefer an ever more powerful fascist oligarchy (kabuki republic) to a representative republic.
Under the status quo and the evolving NWO oligarchy, the freedom and dignity of most among the masses would only continue to devolve.
I would certainly agree that the evolving oligarchy increases its power by posing as if it has the best interests of the masses at heart, by buying their loyalty with cheap bribes and fake promises, by filling their brains with mush about fairness, and by agitating them in ways calculated to prevent the middle class of productive workers from gaining enough political power to defend the republic against the program of oligarchical collectivism.
Moreover, I would agree that the system has devolved to reward crap much faster than cream. By that I mean that the most evil, unprincipled, sociopathic, conniving, anti-American, anti-humanist, godless, sex-dope-power crazed people have gained alarming advantages under the present system of corruption at high levels in nearly every social, religious, and political institution. This is what has produced a marketplace for the buying and selling of so many politicians as if they were commodities.
A good thing, such as tolerance or free enterprise, can turn sour and corrupt when there is so much of it that if feeds back on itself. That is where we are now. To restore the representative republic, it is necessary to restore a balance of power to the decent and informed electorate and to the middle class --- by reducing the opportunities for oligarchs to mooch from the government. One way to do that might be with a progressive tax on consumption, with lobbying for political favors being considered part of the taxable base of consumption.
I wrote it for people who can actually think. Feel free to entertain yourself by practicing your face making. Better yet, go take out some gov loan debt so you can go to college to learn more about critical race theory, black studies, and community organizing for nihilism.
*************
To make useful sense, morals need to be derived and assimilated via inspired wisdom or intuitive faith in some Source of higher mindedness. They need to be believed in, not merely accorded lip service. They need to be arrived at by participants in free-thinking, not by PC force.
Mere science cannot provide that Source, because science is only a method to seek means, not an answer to ultimate questions or moral concerns. Science can guide us to find ways to achieve purposes, but it cannot ultimately tell us what our purposes should be.
When Libs say they want to base morals in "reason," what they mean is they want to base morals in science. They want to be moral scientisimists or they want to defer to people they deem to be moral scientisimists. Except when that would require them to defer self gratification.
So, yes, to a Lib, what is moral is only what he/she deems significant to gratification. Libs are much more concerned about their gratification than they are about children or the planet a hundred years from now. Their claim to reason or higher morals is pure twaddle.
Libs are not conservers of liberty. They are purveyors of gratification. To that end, they form gangs of sub-humanized, group-thinking, force-of-law-abusing, Omni-diddlers. So the idea of morals being attached to the preservation of a decent representative republic is entirely alien to their sex-dope-bot mind-set.
**************
Human dignity necessitates a decent respect for freedom of expression, enterprise, and association. We have gone much too far down the road of forcing people to associate with characters they would rather not associate with. When a character's company is not appreciated, it is unsavory for the government to allow him to force his character upon others. The laws and cases for forcing public accommodations have now gone far beyond what is necessary to avail a decent society. Indeed, they have gone deep into forcing that which makes for indecent, un-free, sub-human society.
*************
Gump says that's EZ, Sergeant. Dems stand for doing whatever the hell their people-farming funders tell them to do.
Which is to keep the borders porous, flood the nation with liberty illiterates, make a hash of the Constitution, and pave the way to sink the republic into a new world order of fascist oligarchs pretending to know and do what is best for the sheeple.
So they are the experts, and you are simply to obey. The people and the politicians are to work for the experts and oligarchs. The experts are not to work for the people, and the oligarchs are not to be loyal or bound to any nation. The representative republic is to be pure kabuki.
What then do Dems stand for? Answer: Kabuki Republic.
************
It is necessary to break down marriages and families in order to usher in the great new socialistic world of benign rule under caring fascists .... oops ... I mean experts. S/
Socialism is a fair-y dust game that is often won by the most amoral predators that can act like they care about the well being of the sheeple. It nearly guarantees that crap (like Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Chavez) will float faster to power than cream. But codependent wussies often swoon for it.
True republicans want gov policies to be responsive to the electorate. But fake Republicans and socialist Dems want gov to be responsive to "reasonable experts" as hired by so-called reasonable oligarchs who intend "reasonably" to hoodwink and rule the gov.
When the U.S. was founded, apart from common law and the law of nations, its founders did not look to then-prevailing basket-case nations and despotisms for its model. Nor does the U.S. now look to govern itself in respect of basket-case nations or wussie-farms of the "rest of the world." There are more than enough of them, already.
Instead, the U.S. looks to the ever-assimilating wisdom and common sense of its citizenry, which hopefully is well read of history, philosophy, and theosophy. Hopefully, the citizenry will remain well read, independently competent, and not easily hoodwinked by evil fakers, people farmers, and Omni-diddlers.
***************
Socialism is a fair-y dust game that is often won by the most amoral predators that can act like they care about the well being of the sheeple. It nearly guarantees that crap (like Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Chavez) will float faster to power than cream. But codependent wussies often swoon for it.
True republicans want gov policies to be responsive to the electorate. But fake Republicans and socialist Dems want gov to be responsive to "reasonable experts" as hired by so-called reasonable oligarchs who intend "reasonably" to rule the gov. s/
When the U.S. was founded, apart from common law and the law of nations, its founders did not look to then-prevailing basket-case nations and despotisms for its model. Nor does the U.S. now look to govern itself in respect of basket-case nations or wussie-farms of the "rest of the world." There are more than enough of them, already.
Instead, the U.S. looks to the ever-assimilating wisdom and common sense of its citizenry, which hopefully is well read of history, philosophy, and theosophy. Hopefully, the citizenry will remain well read, independently competent, and not easily hoodwinked by evil fakers and people-farmers.
************
This may be called self-selective confirmation-bias. What sort of audience is more likely to stay up to tune into mindless whining or rapping that poses as fashionable humor or music? Might that be the sort of audience that is more attuned to trendy feelings than to intelligent analysis of facts?
*************
Codependent group-thinkers load feelings onto PC words, so that most words seem no longer to have defined meanings, apart from the emotional social context of the moment. Many words have become loaded, so that a person not attuned to the groupthink may be prone to commit PC offenses. It is remarkable that people who go to college to learn how to load words with little more than feelings seem actually to consider themselves better "educated." Essentially, the only meaning groupthinking sheeple attach to a lot of words is to signify disapproval because of offense to their feelings. If you hurt their feelings for their ideas about how to fundamentally transform society (force you to obey them), they may call you by any one of a number of names, all of which signify only that they don't like what you are saying. Some of the words now in vogue to signify disapproval by codependent groupthinkers include: Mansplaining, racist, fascist, bigot, etc. But all they mean to groupthinkers is that you are resisting their program for using big gov to fundamentally rule you. And that upsets and triggers them.
**************
Think of two camps. One prefers that policy makers defer to an informed electorate, as in the case of a representative republic. The other prefers that policy makers defer to so-called experts, as hired by whomever is then running the government that wants deference to its experts (i.e., moral apologists and social scientisimists).
Between the two camps, names will tend to be used as epithets, depending on the popular impressions and context they make in the minds of the people. Discrimination in taste has been thought a good thing. Except when hiring. Then "good" discrimination would accord extra points depending, for example, on how much a particular applicant (or his forebears) may be thought to have suffered. So, for herding the mass of sheeple, words become epithets, and their value will depend more on the contextual evolvement of PC than on any relationship to factual description. Of course, this severely limits the education of the sheeple that are prepped to be farmed by "good" experts.
The first camp tends to consist of competent, free-thinking individuals. Rigorous definitions and logic will be important to them. The second camp, with regard to its sheeple-to-be-farmed, tends to consist of codependent wussieflakes. They tend not to be trained to make factual distinctions, apart from their feelings of not having as much stuff or as many comforts as others around them. They are more likely to become emotional, flail about, and look for support in gangs and other groupings. This leads to "us v. them" mentalities, which leads to a great deal of agitation and hatred.
I suspect hatred is most commonly and severely expressed by members of the second camp. For that reason, it is important to them to use big lie transference techniques, to make out as if it were their opponents who were being hateful, racist, chauvinistic, paternalistic, bigoted, hypocritical, anti-humanist, and anti-American. But hatred is more often the tool of the Left, as it flails about seeking to impose immediate "fundamental transformation" (meaning free-thinking by individualists is no longer to be allowed).
*****************
Between the two camps, names will tend to be used as epithets, depending on the popular impressions and context they make in the minds of the people. Discrimination in taste has been thought a good thing. Except when hiring. Then "good" discrimination would accord extra points depending, for example, on how much a particular applicant (or his forebears) may be thought to have suffered. So, for herding the mass of sheeple, words become epithets, and their value will depend more on the contextual evolvement of PC than on any relationship to factual description. Of course, this severely limits the education of the sheeple that are prepped to be farmed by "good" experts.
The first camp tends to consist of competent, free-thinking individuals. Rigorous definitions and logic will be important to them. The second camp, with regard to its sheeple-to-be-farmed, tends to consist of codependent wussieflakes. They tend not to be trained to make factual distinctions, apart from their feelings of not having as much stuff or as many comforts as others around them. They are more likely to become emotional, flail about, and look for support in gangs and other groupings. This leads to "us v. them" mentalities, which leads to a great deal of agitation and hatred.
I suspect hatred is most commonly and severely expressed by members of the second camp. For that reason, it is important to them to use big lie transference techniques, to make out as if it were their opponents who were being hateful, racist, chauvinistic, paternalistic, bigoted, hypocritical, anti-humanist, and anti-American. But hatred is more often the tool of the Left, as it flails about seeking to impose immediate "fundamental transformation" (meaning free-thinking by individualists is no longer to be allowed).
*****************
The biggest racists, bigots, hypocrites, fascists, anti-free-thinkers, anti-humanists, and anti-Americans seem to be the biggest race-baiting so-called reasonable-humanists. The Big Lie technique is a very effective device that is used by corrupt oligarchs who own and control media in order to put a weak-minded and codependent society under the PC goose-stepping jackboot, while they pretend to want to redistribute fairness, equality, safe spaces, and free stuff.
But freedom is not free, and security under a sub-humanizing despotism is not secure. The U.S. likely dodged permanent fascism posing as benign socialism when it dodged Hillary. Where is all the hate coming from? I think it is coming from the codependent Left (i.e., wussie-men and femi-nazis who are willing to use all means to fundamentally transform society by subjugating individual rights to group security under the rule of fake experts). But the sheeple will still be allowed their soma (pot, tide-pods, and omni-sex. s/).
*************PC is forced group think. If there were some scientifically provable system of best-think or good-think, that may be fine. But there is not. What is nice or acceptable will vary between cultures. A culture (perhaps not Scandinavia) that values free-thinking citizens to run their own representative republic will not appreciate fake-knowitall moral scientisimists who claim to know the best system of PC. Hard as it may be to understand, they may not appreciate the Gov (socialist god) assuming power to farm their children. They may not appreciate forcing Johnny to appreciate Islam, polygamy, Omni-genderism, or group masturbation for kids and groomers. They may believe such teaching is corrosive to the survival of a representative republic. Why is it important to Lefties to perpetuate a false definition of fascist? Answer: Because fascist (like racist, bigot, or phobe) is their favored way for trying to shame, shut down, shun, or suspend everyone they disagree with who may not be on board for their radical ideas of "one day away from fundamental transformation" --- forced by naïve shouters like Antifa on everyone else. You know, like the Nazis. It is important for fascist-socialists to reserve the name fascist for their opponents. That's part of the Big Lie Technique, and it is a very real phenomena. Bottom line: If you are a competent free thinker, you will tend to be against PC. If you are a codependent whose feelings are easily hurt and who prefers to be farmed by elite "moral experts," you may prefer having gov authorities tell you what you must think, how you can say it, and what you must not say.
****************
Good grief. 1984 is about Oligarchic Collectivism. That term is all over in it. But for the oligarchs pulling Dems around by their group-think collective noses, there would be no Dem Party.
No doubt, a box-minded person could conceptualize a thousand different kinds of socialism. But the aspect of socialism that I am most concerned about relates to its radical adherents' tendencies to try to shut down all opposing thought. Such as by enforcing PC codes, shouting down opponents, or name calling (like fascist, racist, phobe, and so on), I am a Conserver of Liberty. I prefer free speech over protecting snowflakes from feeling offended. I am glad you like Scandinavia. I hope you can preserve your culture. But I don't think swamping yourself with refugees and liberty-illiterates is a likely way to do that. I have a real world education, as well as a very good book education, thank you all the same. You could benefit by reading a few books to stretch yourself beyond your indoctrination. Begin, however, with this: https://youtu.be/m6bSsaVL6gA
The Communist Left used to like Russia. What happened? Now they reach for a Russia comparison as fast as a race baiter reaches for a racist comparison. Or as fast as a temper throwing toddler reaches for his blankie. If McCain thinks Trump is doing the work of Russia by pointing to the partisan political weaponization of the FBI/DOJ, then why doesn't he think BLM is doing the work of Russia by questioning and undermining law enforcement officers? Good grief!
****************
No doubt, a box-minded person could conceptualize a thousand different kinds of socialism. But the aspect of socialism that I am most concerned about relates to its radical adherents' tendencies to try to shut down all opposing thought. Such as by enforcing PC codes, shouting down opponents, or name calling (like fascist, racist, phobe, and so on), I am a Conserver of Liberty. I prefer free speech over protecting snowflakes from feeling offended. I am glad you like Scandinavia. I hope you can preserve your culture. But I don't think swamping yourself with refugees and liberty-illiterates is a likely way to do that. I have a real world education, as well as a very good book education, thank you all the same. You could benefit by reading a few books to stretch yourself beyond your indoctrination. Begin, however, with this: https://youtu.be/m6bSsaVL6gA
The Communist Left used to like Russia. What happened? Now they reach for a Russia comparison as fast as a race baiter reaches for a racist comparison. Or as fast as a temper throwing toddler reaches for his blankie. If McCain thinks Trump is doing the work of Russia by pointing to the partisan political weaponization of the FBI/DOJ, then why doesn't he think BLM is doing the work of Russia by questioning and undermining law enforcement officers? Good grief!
****************
To some small extent, the U.S. is still a representative republic. How much of the rest of the world can say that it is not more like a tool under oligarchs or despots? When the U.S. was founded, it did not look to the rest of the world as providing the best of models. Rather, it had an independent and informed electorate that had a higher vision than that imposed against the freedom of many people of the rest of the world. Yes, Lefty PC police are trying to destroy Americans' freedom of expression, but, even though Lefties have intimidated many sheeple, most Americans still enjoy their freedom. BTW, how much longer do you think Scandinavian culture will endure or avoid being overrun by thought police or jihadis? https://www.thenation.com/article/if-sweden-and-denmark-are-so-progressive-why-did-they-close-their-doors-to-refugees/
*****************
The FBI/DOJ wants us to worry about losing their capacity to intimidate potential witnesses during their investigations, but they are tone deaf about the need to check them from being used as weaponized operatives on behalf of Deep State political partisans. They are tone deaf to the need to defend the representative republic against stunts by the corrupt oligarchy and its stooges.
******************
Modern so-called Liberals are not really liberals or humanists. They are jealous gang bangers and hedonistic Satanists. There are no principles to them, except self aggrandizement and self gratification --- which they are too incompetent to obtain on their own, so they gang bang. To find their gang, they enlist in the service of malignant funders, like Soros. Or Jabba the Hutt.
****************
Read The Big Lie, by Dinesh D'Souza. You may actually learn something. Or try naming a socialist state that does not soon turn fascist by deploying PC police to make people fear to exercise freedom of expression, enterprise, or association. Or just review Orwell's 1984, assuming you read it, regarding the book within the book, about oligarchical collectivism. Without corrupting oligarchs like Soros to collectivize, fund, train, agitate, and direct them, the Dem Party would be next to nothing. Nothing, that is, except a hate collector against Trump and free-thinking Americans.
******************
Add some stuff on the Left about de-defining families and marriage, as a way to grease the role of Big Gov as Big Parent (or Big Brother). IOW, the sub-humanizing, PC-destruction of freedom of expression, enterprise, and association. Actually, the oligarchy that runs the uni-party of Dinos/Rinos is all in for that. Very few among Dinos/Rinos any longer give even lip service to protecting families from Big Gov PC encroachments. This is less a matter of Left v. Right than it is a matter of Wrong v. Right (or Sub-Human v. Human). Has any decent representative republic in history ever survived this extent of replacing marriage/family with "anything-goes" polyamory and under-the-table polygamy? The "humanists" I have lately been talking to do not much value a representative republic over an elitist-ruled socialism (fascism), anyway! And they do not care about the people who still do value the representative republic. They simply mean to run over them. By ratcheting against "the middle," little by little.
****************
******************
The Dems --- whose base consists mainly of educated fools, desperate laborers, and corrupt people who vote for a living --- are much more attractive for oligarchs to abuse, even as oligarchs hoodwink Dems with cheap bribes and fake PC promises of equality, charity, safe spaces, and free stuff. Dems are funded, trained, agitated, hoodwinked, and directed by corrupt oligarchs. Until, that is, ever-hedging oligarchs have their Dems in a vise. Which is where they seem to be now. Without their oligarchs to direct and abuse them, Dems would be nothing.
*****************
Tax Cuts are just a temporary salve. Needed and important, but not enough to reverse a coming economic disaster.
DISASTROUS JUBILEE:
Our political systems have become thoroughly corrupted by fake Humanist-Satanists, whose ideal of belief/"reason" pertains only to in their own lust, pleasure, child-grooming, greed, and jealousy, and, despite their pretense, not to any higher-minded ideal of a Reconciler of empathetic consciousness. After all, that would require willingness to forego some of their rampaging lust, pleasure, child-grooming, greed, and jealousy.
The consequence has been the rotting of every institution that was built on the faith and trust of the people, especially the monetary system. Fake Humanists-Really Satanists have divorced the monetary system from any gold standard, which has allowed them, by corrupting politicians, to launder political favors in exchange for fiat money. This allows the easy bribing and hoodwinking of the masses, while converting them to debt slaves --- as ever more fiat money is shoveled to an oligarchy of so-called Humanists (Satanists), who pretend to be empathetic about the "fairness and equality" of debt-enslaved masses. This corruption heats up a social pressure-cooker, on which the lid cannot much longer be held down. When it blows, rationality will go out the window and be replaced by wanton rampage.
The only way to allow the cooker to blow off steam without exploding is to relieve the devices that promote the debt enslavement of the masses and its correlate, the corruption of the monetary system with the corrupt laundering of fiat money. As things stand, wages remain comparatively stagnant, while prices for commodities rise. Prices rise because the oligarchy has accumulated gargantuan fiat wealth, while it avails gargantuan indebtedness to the masses and the nation. We need to find ways to reverse those pressures.
We need ways to stop the corrupt oligarchy from laundering political favors in exchange for fiat wealth. Such as with corrupt foundation "charities." We need to make such activities less profitable to the corrupt oligarchy and less oppressive to the masses. (Such as with a progressive yearly tax on wealth consumption, with political lobbying considered to be part of that taxable wealth consumption. Proceeds could go to infrastructure, to relieve pressures on the debt-enslaved masses.) We need less centralization of big governmental power, which is what attracts the corrupt oligarchy --- because that is where it gets the most bang for the buck. We need the Liberty Amendments, as outlined by Mark Levin.
However, I doubt our uninspired Lizard Brains will allow us to be wise, strong, or good enough to take effective measures. For that reason, everyone with the least vision needs to store up against the day of collapse and "jubilee" --- the just desert for our uninspired Lizard Brains.
**************
Ah, patriarchy is your bugaboo. So, an oligarchy of humanist-knowitalls to dictate PC and train kids how to be Omni-gender is your kinder/gentler non-patriarchical femi-archy?
Why are you so fearful that many Americans do not want to live under the diktat of PC pretending to protect freedom? Why are you so fearful of citizens being independent to think and do for themselves, instead of being regulated by so-called "reasoning humanists"?
If you don't like a monogamous representative republic, why not get together with your higher-minded omni-genderists and start your own scientifically moralistic nation? Why do you want to destroy ours?
How are womenfolk in the U.S. bound? You sound ridiculous. See https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/909719/Jordan-Peterson-free-speech-destroys-cathy-newman-channel-4.
****************
I think you mistake strawmen for argument.
Moreover, people know that correlation is not causation. So I'm not sure what you think that statement adds. Then you further confound matters by talking about "meaningful correlation." Then it's back to ad-hominem against "myth-merchants."
And you still have not responded: Name an admirable, decent, representative republic in history where marriage was as de-defined and vague as modern fake moral humanists want to make it.
As to "reason": Will it next be "reasonable" to require society to tolerate omni-genders that want to hop naked through the forests teaching children the morality of screwing the flowers and rabbits? No doubt, many so-called humanists would not expect any "meaningfully negative correlation" between that and the collapse of a representative republic. Rather, they would probably blame the declining power of community agitators.
**********************
Your first sentence is a completely wrong headed, mal-characterizing, strawman. I see no point in going down its trail with anyone who would resort to such a travesty.
The reason against polyamory/harems/bigamy relates to how such proclivities destabilize a representative republic. Show me an admirable representative republic in history in which such arrangements were specially promoted or funded. Go ahead. Show me one.
I suspect your sex-wannas and co-dependent proclivities are interfering with your mental analysis. I suspect your idea of the common good may not coordinate well with the common good as conceptualized by competent, free-thinking people who want less interference in their lives by so-called humanist moral-experts.
You claim to be against special privileges to any group, yet you would seem to promote privileges to swamp the republic with people who crave to be ruled by so-called humanist moral-experts. To further that effort, I suspect you would support unholy divide-and-rule alliances and tactics against independent-minded free-thinkers. I suspect you see children as free game for groomers.
I think your high-sounding words are mere camouflage for self-gratifying and shallow learning, analysis, and character. The sort of stuff self-celebrating, fake-elite snowflakes are prone to trifle with. Effete noise, signifying nothing.
***************
Human beings still carry remnants of lizard brains. FBI/DOJ agents are human beings. Human beings are susceptible of being caught up in conspiracies, even with good intentions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The road to hell can entail a wholesale corruption of most of the institutions of a formerly representative republic. If a republic is to restore itself, it must find ways to oust and/or punish those most responsible for having sought to undermine it. The main rats have to be exposed. Examples have to be made, to encourage/discourage the others, as appropriate.
*********************
Trump sees faith, family, and fidelity as means for restoring the republic. Oligarchs, stoolies, and jihadis are united in opposing all those means, because they share a common interest: The destruction of the representative republic. The one that is responsive to decent, ordinary Americans. The Deep State launders funding from oligarchs, stoolies, and jihadis to grow its power. That is why it naturally opposes Trump.
There are three basic ways to organize a society:
1) Under a system of despots for ruling people through somewhat arbitrary forms of big government.
2) Under a system of despots for ruling people through somewhat arbitrary forms of strict religious cults.
3) Under a system that accords higher-minded respect for the role of families and personal responsibility in the rearing of succeeding generations towards assimilating and sharing values and pursuits.
In most societies, those three ways will tend to be interwoven. In fascist-socialistic societies, the first way will be paramount. In superstitious societies, the second way will be paramount. In representative republics, the third way will be paramount.
When a society has become fortunate enough to establish a representative republic, it will tend to lose that status as the third way becomes diluted and overcome by mixtures of the first and second ways.
In the U.S., the republic is beset: by a diverse hodge-podge of gender-confused maniacs seeking to de-define marriage and family; by unholy political tolerances with rabid religious jihadis; and by stupefied submission under people-farming oligarchs pretending to be elite and fair. If Trump and his followers are routed, the result may easily be the replacement of the republic with random tyranny and perpetual enserfment.
*****************
There are three basic ways to organize a society:
1) Under a system of despots for ruling people through somewhat arbitrary forms of big government.
2) Under a system of despots for ruling people through somewhat arbitrary forms of strict religious cults.
3) Under a system that accords higher-minded respect for the role of families and personal responsibility in the rearing of succeeding generations towards assimilating and sharing values and pursuits.
In most societies, those three ways will tend to be interwoven. In fascist-socialistic societies, the first way will be paramount. In superstitious societies, the second way will be paramount. In representative republics, the third way will be paramount.
When a society has become fortunate enough to establish a representative republic, it will tend to lose that status as the third way becomes diluted and overcome by mixtures of the first and second ways.
In the U.S., the republic is beset: by a diverse hodge-podge of gender-confused maniacs seeking to de-define marriage and family; by unholy political tolerances with rabid religious jihadis; and by stupefied submission under people-farming oligarchs pretending to be elite and fair. The result may easily be the replacement of the republic with random tyranny and perpetual enserfment.
********************
But some books are still good background for expanding a soul's receptivity to learning. I did not read Plato/Socrates' The Republic to accept it, but to question it. (And there is much to question!) I do not listen to speakers to swoon over them. Nor do I read sacred stories as eternal cages for literalisms, but as inspiring and metaphoric invitations to participate with an unfolding Creation. What did you think of Trump saying this: "As long as we have confidence in our values, faith in our citizens, and trust in our God, we will not fail"? (Of course, leaven that with appreciation for what still weighs down our lizard brains.)
*******************
Schumer, make up your mind. Is Trump a populist, nationalist, or is he a divider?
Would Dems ever have allowed the Bible to be translated into English? After all, it could arouse the peasants, who should just trust their noble elites, right? Cory would never steer you wrong. s/
***************
The reference was partly in jest, Heretic. Those were interesting times back then, indeed. When protecting Lot's guests ranked above the defiling of his daughters. But the point meant had to do with a need to respect civilizing values of decency. Of which regard for how to advance the best interests of children is a concern. To promote sex with abandon and call that protected marriage does not advance that interest, does it? Schumer, make up your mind. Is Trump a populist, nationalist, or is he a divider?
Would Dems ever have allowed the Bible to be translated into English? After all, it could arouse the peasants, who should just trust their noble elites, right? Cory would never steer you wrong. s/
***************
But why even have a ceremony? Why not just call everyone you have (or attempt to have) an orgasm with your spouse? If certificate and exclusiveness do not mark marriage, then why should anything mark "marriage"? Why not just define it as a meaningless term, or noise? Once marriage is deemed meaningless, why should Gov grant any presumption to parents of rights to raise children? If children are being raised in a bawdy house, should those who run the Gov, on that ground, be entitled to remove the children?
I think the de-defining of marriage goes hand in hand with the de-defining and unraveling of any common values that can sustain our republic. Hand in hand with our nation becoming bedlam.
***************
I don't care how many people they screw with. I do care how the de-defining of marriage opens the door to the gov taking upon itself the obligation to become everyone's super-spouse and child-rearing authority. A republic cannot persevere if it loses capacity to assimilate and project sustainable values into succeeding generations.
In these days, everyone wants to be "free" to screw with everyone, the consequences to children be darned.
I know you will appreciate this: :)
Genesis 19:5 King James Version (KJV) 5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
******************
So, one set of values is as good as another? Yup, that is true for all those who don't care whether their representative republic is turned into an elitist ruled despotism. Problem is, Lefties don't keep that to themselves. Rather, their crap tends to float to the top of every Lefty crap institution. Those who don't want to live in Lefty crap need to limit the number of Lefties allowed to be imported or indoctrinated into the U.S. Unless we want the U.S. to become just another Lefty s-hole.
Self-gratifying Lefties tend to be perfectly willing to see children used as chattel in order to further their gratifications and "sexual emergencies."
*****************
On what "principle" can those so bent on de-defining marriage:
- Argue against marrying a 10 year old, relative, and her entire clan?
- Argue against polyamory?
- Argue against a neo-mafia where every initiate becomes married to the mob, as a way to claim marital privilege against being forced to testify against the mob?
- Argue against chain migration for unlimited numbers that happen to marry a willing citizen?
On what factual basis will they objectively discriminate to preclude such abuses?
What principles can lib philosophy apply to any real society?
The de-definition of marriage is the trick for forcing everyone to marry the gov, which is to be run by elites (for your own best interest, doncha know?).
******************
That's just the point. Decent Americans don't want to be ruled by oligarchs. They want a representative republic. They want checks against oligarchs. Not wholesale surrender to them. I know, you probably consider Trump one of that ilk. Maybe he is. But for some reason most of the NWO oligarchs seem to loathe him and to foster hatred for him. And Trump seems to have a better understanding of ordinary Americans who do not like PC, who want to retain their freedom to think for themselves, and not to be ruled in fine detail by remote fake-elites who pretend to know best and fairest. Now, if you're saying oligarchic rule is inevitable, you may or may not be right. The gap in power is becoming unsustainable if a republic is to be preserved. That's why I think a progressive tax on consumption (of political resources, especially) is essential. However, I do not see that in the works. So, alas, if you think oligarchic collectivism is inevitable, I cannot say you are wrong. I just hope the collapse into it does not happen during my lifetime. And I fear for my children. I am convinced these fair-y pretenders are fronts for an awful despotism. And that their Bernie Swoonies are grist for the grinder.
**************
The Deep Oligarchy and its minions WANT a base of people who believe they have no hope except to trust fake-caring oligarchs to govern them with free stuff and safe spaces. That's why the Deep Statist Oligarchy has no intention ever of actually solving the hopelessness of its base. Watch as the Deep Oligarchy sacrifices the hopes of its Dreamers so it can keep the source of its voters, i.e., the borders, porous. The base for the Left seems too dumb or too incompetent to see how easily it is being had. Which is exactly how the Deep Oligarchy wants them. If the Deep Oligarchy succeeds in keeping the borders porous just a little longer, it expects to have put the destruction of the representative republic beyond the point of no return. That's why we are seeing so much political madness. They are afraid Trump may actually salvage the republic from their tipping point.
***********
I think that combination of debilitating factors has to include indoctrinating its victims to believe: that the system precludes their efforts from being successful; that pot and sex and escapism are always good; that another target ("whitey") is to blame; that lower standards must forever apply to them; that they are entitled; that the world owes them a living; that only big gov can put society on a fairness track; that they cannot be happy unless they have the same goods as everyone else; and that there is no such thing as a Source for higher mindedness. So, which groups/parties are responsible for those factors?
***********
True, the anti-Trump people are not very bright (and, excepting the corrupt People-Farmers, not very competent). However, they are very indoctrinated and very corrupted.
Trump is standing against the Deep Oligarchy. Those people-farmers have arrived at a shared, unspoken calculation: Find the people who are easiest to bribe and indoctrinate and who will then be most loyal. Then pay them enough in fiat bribes to make them an electoral majority. Then reap enormous profits by laundering gov fiat money and favors. IOW, pay the sheeple with fiat bribes, in exchange for enormous commissions. Of course, this travesty against the faith and trust of the masses, if left unchecked, would mean death to every representative republic. The faith and trust of the ever-duped masses is all that supports the fiat-money-system of the Deep Oligarchy.
This unspoken but well understood abuse by the Deep Oligarchy of the faith and trust of the naïve masses is what forces the producing class to keep its noses to the grindstone, even as the Deep Oligarchy pulls the ladders up so they can never lift the system-stone that oppresses them.
Consequence of this systemic evolution: The most corrupt, self-godded, un-principled, abusive, crappy people float to the top faster than cream ever could. They become the new elites, almost exclusively. Soon, every institution becomes rotted. Everyone who professes against the Evil PC for higher-minded principles of free speech and self-determination is soon blacklisted.
We are at a tipping point, where Trump is trying to reverse it, while the Deep Oligarchy and its minions and stoolies are mad to push Trump out of the way of their "progress". Meanwhile, the Deep Oligarchy hides in plain sight, costumed as caring people, who "care" about fairness and equality. For that, they sell the most ridiculous memes to their sheeple. And those sheeple have been well-trained to lick it up. In trade, of course, for surrendering their (and your) guns, freedom, and dignity.
*****************
That's utopian. A sure way to ensure against it is to put the jealousies of the masses, through gov, in charge of pursuing it. There is a ratchet effect. Once gov bestows a benefit. It is hard to take it back. This leads to unsustainability. To keep the pursuit of utopian happiness intelligent, the role of gov needs to be constrained to a decent respect for the talents and energies of independent producers. Redistribution of excess can be handled through progressive taxes on consumption, used to fund infrastructure in a broad sense.
*****************
Depends on what you mean by employment. Also depends on humanity's jealousies and wmd not getting in front of its utopianism. Depends also on social systems not promoting demagogues to totalitarian power. And, depends on the logic of entrusting good faith to A.I. There are many billions of dirt poor people, many of whom are prone to outlandish jealousies and susceptible to demagoguery. The idea that a nation built on socialistic promises of free stuff will confine them to a progress other than a release of hell on earth may be Pollyannaish. Among some societies, it seems more important to Boris to kill Ivan's goat than to get a goat of his own. Some such traits may have been in our dna for millions of years. A society, like North Korea, that sees that it has little to lose and much to gain will play more aggressively at brinksmanship. As the masses in China start clamoring for their share, how will their demagogues restrain them? Always, always, always, the best laid pipe dreams of utopians come to naught. See Venezuela, Argentina, Communist USSR. For those who think Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Canada show a better way, give them just a little more time, to see how soon their Pollyannaism leads them to throw their societies into Islamic enserfment and abuse.
***************
Yeah, like everyone will be able to apply that definition with consistency to separate the artists from the producers from the parasites. Lol.
It's not necessarily that they want to live that way. It's more like they aren't willing to do what is needed to no longer need to live that way. Especially when they are supported. Moreover, I suspect a good number of trust fund babies intend simply to enjoy the easy life. Or to bask in pretended adulation by pretending they are God's insight and gift for humanity. Who wants to learn math or the hard stuff, when there's all this free stuff that can be rationalized? Especially when everything you want can be blamed on the selfishness of some target class, like "privileged Whitey"?
*************
Unless a society assimilates an idea of higher mindedness (God), it is a recipe for enserfment of the mass of sheeple for it to turn its governance over to fake elites (Dinos/Rinos) of big gov agitating for divide-and-rule "principles" of their convenience and gratification.
**************
The problem, of which gays and progs are blind, is the social de-defining of marriage to make it meaningless. There is no principled way for a gay or prog to argue against polyamory, pedophilia, or child slavery. The gov and the gay/prog "elites" that run it will move the goalposts into corruption, non-stop.
***************
Totally wrong. Gay apologists always overlook the best interest of children and their relationship to the republic. The key is this: What institution do you tend most to trust to raise decent and competent children? A government that is filled with the most floated and corrupt "elites," or parents under an assimilated idea of marriage? (Once a society becomes swamped with progs, the answer, when progs tend to be so incompetent in such matters, fixated as they tend to be on their genitalia and mind dope, becomes the gov -- as a self corrupting prophecy.)
Name a society that allows polygamy and inventive contracts for disposing of children as if they were mere contract chattel that has produced a decent, longstanding, non-slavery based, representative republic. Goofy gays with their goofball ideas will be the death of the republic, and its replacement by an elitist dystopia of gov intrusiveness.
*****************
But gov will still oversee divorces, age of consent issues, spousal social security entitlements, polygamous welfare rights, authority to discipline children, and determine who has standing or preference for support and child custody contests? The de-defining of marriage between men and women is the greasy path to everyone being forced to marry the gov and its fascist rulers.
******************
As much as Dems and their funders have been working to render the Constitution essentially meaningless and to flood the electorate with liberty-illiterates, one would think they have decided they have enough institutional power and oligarchical support that they no longer need to be concerned about ordinary patriotic Americans.
Indeed, they seem to believe ordinary patriotic Americans are racists, supremacists, and lowbrows. So Dems and the elites that lead them believe the U.S. (and the world) should be governed in fine detail by rulers-that-know-best.
Since Dems find these rulers-that-know-best to be preferable to the Constitution and the representative republic, and since they believe they have the necessary institutional power in place, they think they can force the final destruction. They think they can invite, breed, and indoctrinate enough Eloi to make the conquest by elite Morlochs complete and irreversible. They think time, history, and power are on their side.
So there is no principle-based reasoning with Dems and their funders. They are, after all, Morlochs and their Eloi stoolies. What Trump has been doing is exposing them for what they are. The question is: Will the Morlochs/Stoolies be exposed in time to awaken enough Americans to reverse the continuing infestation of their filthy uni-philosophy?
*****************
Trump is smart, but a lot of stupid people have been easily misled to think he is not. Obama is mediocre, but a lot of mediocre people have been easily misled to think he is a genius. The dumb are the ones who most frequently are easily misled to over-estimate their own intellects and to under-estimate their opponents. It is important to discern who is doing the misleading and for what purpose.
******************
The people farmers that run most corporations and institutions have worked constantly to produce "horny-man." Now, to complete their subjugation, they want to punish the expression of horniness. Kind of like kinky sado-masochism. What a horror show. (Nadsat.)
They know. But their constant quest for gratification trumps all moral empathies. They don't have moral principles. They have feelings (horniness), that they conflate with morality. They have been conditioned through and through by people-farmers constantly selling the next big orgiastic pleasure. Hollywood is Sodom, and its excess will weaken or kill all that it touches.
Because, like jihadis, gays tend to care about others only as objects to their ends. The cause of personal glorification or gratification seems to tend among them to far outweigh concerns about moral empathies. Anything for the cause (of personal glorification and gratification)!
Given the concentration of media power, s will always float faster than cream can rise. That's because the goal tends always to be the concentration of more power. What better way to demonstrate power than to show the masses who can be made to kiss the posterior of those with power?
EDIT: It tends to be far easier for oligarchs to train and indoctrinate sub-humans and liberty-illiterates than it is for patriots to lead free thinkers. It is easy to lose a republic of free-thinkers.
The logic behind proposals for gov enforced fairness and equality leads inexorably to rule by A.I. But under a prime command of fairness and equality, it seems unlikely that A.I. could prescribe anything other than "kill them all and let Nature's God sort them out." Which seems close to what nihilists and antifa implicate. Are they and progeny like B.M. (Bradley Manning) the best of moral scientists and philosophers? I think not. An un-whacked military would never have recruited B.M., much less paid for his gender reassignment. An un-whacked citizenry would never have tolerated this travesty.
When a nation becomes too divided, trust and faith in one another among the citizenry becomes polluted. People are naturally selfish enough not to need such an excuse to abuse one another. When you add the divisiveness, the selfishness escalates. So now we have self-interested, godless, corrupt, unassimilated jerks running amuck to cannibalize the country. But these unchurched, godless, spiritually hollow jerks claim to be "just as moral as anyone else." A people that want a decent representative republic simply cannot survive while allowing its citizenry to become so swamped and indoctrinated with moral pollution.
************
If spiritual and mental health relate to a decent regard for the dignity of other free thinkers, then much of our institutions for law, academia, business, media, entertainment, and church are thoroughly corrupt --- whether by stupid incompetence or trained and malignant ignorance. The people taking payment to help corrupt oligarchs kill the representative republic are so reprehensible that to call them spiritually un-sane and evil is a fair characterization.
****
Like the Movie, Bonnie and Clyde, Dicky is selling radical chic. He is virtue signaling as the way of the times for making himself rich. In reality, he cares for the little people about as much as Bonnie and Clyde or Jessie James cared. If Dicky-People ever actually resolved any social problem, they would no longer be able to milk it.
See https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/269018/movie-made-moral-idiocy-chic-bruce-thornton:
"Truth doesn’t matter, as long as you’re in fashion. Politics isn’t about coherent principle and the possible, it’s about stylistic display, sensibility, and politically correct sentiment, a way for the privileged to show how much better they are than everybody else. Worse, this attitude has legitimized a complete disconnect between word and deed, between what one says and how one lives. Privilege and power can now be enjoyed and indulged, as long as one mouths the proper progressive pieties: conspicuous consumption is OK if one agonizes over income inequality, and King Kong-sized carbon footprints accepted if one rails against global warming.
In short, “Bonnie and Clyde” is a milestone in the transformation of American culture from one that reflects the mentality of adults, to one that enshrines the mentality of teenagers; one that celebrated moral intelligence to one that revels in moral idiocy. Unfortunately, an adolescent disregard for reality and an obsession with fashion and feeling are dangerous indulgences in a world filled with ruthless enemies who see our cultural immaturity as the sign of our moral exhaustion and deserved extinction."
************
Conning stupid (and young, gullible, well-meaning) people has always been an easy path to riches. Now, it has been made a near science. So what does a person do, when he wakes up to find he has been conned? (1) He can take his lumps and resolve to become a better and wiser person. (2) He can confront the Con, demand satisfaction, and perhaps get his nose busted or get hired to play the Con downstream. (3) He can observe PC trends, when other people realize they have been conned, to decide whether to start his own offshoot from the Con.
*************
The socialist-entitlement-free stuff-race Con has become so pervasive, the far easier path is not to fight it but to mouth its PC --- in order to manipulate others for payment and profit. Like so much of Oligopoly, Hollywood, Congress, Media, Church, Academia, and Fake Moral Science do.
Standing up to the pervasive infestation of the Big Lie Big Con is very hard. It tends to get you shushed, shunned, suspended, striped, sacked, or slaughtered.
Still, to advance it is cowardly and depraved. So, when one is too weak to call the Con for what it is, how does one relieve the painful cognitive dissonance? Easy. One convinces oneself that the Con is actually a good thing. That Ignorance is Strength. As one then goes about tooling and fooling his children, friends, and country. One can even embrace the Con and make it a kind of religion. Or pipe dream for Dreamers.
****************
The 1965 Immigration Act is a case study lesson. Appearance-diversity is fine. Political-diversity and liberty-illiteracy, not so much. When an immigrant's status is indicative of his political conditioning, then a nation that wants to preserve and defend its laws and traditions for assimilating a representative republic needs to be wary. Especially as fascist moochers learn how to launder and corrupt the nation's monetary, tax, and regulatory systems in order to acquire and expand total control and indoctrination over the masses. Review Orwell's 1984 (Theory and Practice of Oligarchic Collectivism).
*************
I notice that Hollywood and TV media promote non-repulsive privilege. They do not put many people in front of cameras who are visually repulsive. This promotes non-diversity for repulsives (or looks-challenged). It is very prejudicial, hypocritical, and downright bad. Also, every person who marries a good looking spouse is practicing and promoting non-repulsive privilege. Since people did not build their genes before they were born, this is extremely unfair.
The only way an Open Society can make this kind of invidious unfairness equal is to require everyone who wants a child to submit dna to build an embryo, and then to draw randomly from an embryo pool.
Same with TV and movie jobs. Instead of auditions (which are inherently discriminatory and therefore unfair), everyone interested should be allowed to put their name in for a random drawing.
Same with publications and films. Everyone should put their desired publication or film in for random drawing. Likewise for movie attendance. All theater-goers should buy their tickets first and then be randomly assigned to view different films. And so on. Fairness, Equality, and Human Progress demand it!
Alternatively, we should just fund Nihilists so they can blow the world up as quickly, painlessly, fairly, and equally as possible. Sean Penn, Jamie Lee Curtis, Stephen Colbert, Meryl Streep, and all the usual best and brightest should be hired to promote this asap.
**********
They are all oligarchs who want an Open Society where the masses can be farmed by scientific and moral experts. The masses are hoodwinked to believe they would be getting "fair socialism," while what they are really being delivered to is a system of cheap labor for fascist rulers. Read Orwell's 1984 concerning Emmanuel Goldstein and the Theory and Practice of Oligarchic Collectivism. This is why Dinos and Rinos are in an unholy alliance. Calling the fascist rulers of such a system right wingers and their victims left wingers makes no sense so long as they are part of an unholy alliance for oligarchic collectivists. Go do some better thinking. It is the very fact that 7 corporations run the media that is so indicative that we are being sold out to oligarchic collectivism.
Problem is, what these deep thinkers really mean is lowest-common-denominatorísm. Or what we will have when we put Sharia Law, Oligarchic Collectivism, and Fascist Holes on a par with National Law.
Of course the Lib media fawns over Obama! They are owned by the people who want to run a new world sheeple farm. With cheap labor, open borders, no personal responsibility, and elites ruling everyone under the new Moral Science.
I would have been prouder of Neville Chamberlain. Or maybe the Grasshopper that fooled around all day and then wanted the Ant to help him when Winter came.
******************
Per http://www.freedompost.org/traitor/richard-durbin-self-serving-immoral-sob.html: "On September 18, 2008, Durbin participated in a closed-door meeting with then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who briefed Durbin and other congressional leaders on the gravity of the financial crisis that was beginning to hit the American economy. The next day, Durbin sold off $42,696 in mutual-fund shares; before the end of the month, he had sold off another $73,000 in shares. Then the stock market collapsed. By October 17, the Dow Jones Industrial Average had plunged by 22%."
Per https://www.salon.com/2009/04/30/ownership/: "Sen. Dick Durbin, on a local Chicago radio station this week, blurted out an obvious truth about Congress that, despite being blindingly obvious, is rarely spoken: "And the banks -- hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created -- are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place." The blunt acknowledgment that the same banks that caused the financial crisis "own" the U.S. Congress -- according to one of that institution's most powerful members -- demonstrates just how extreme this institutional corruption is."
"One might think it would be a big news story for the second most-powerful member of the U.S. Senate to baldly state that the Congress is "owned" by the bankers who spawned the financial crisis and continue to dictate the government's actions. But it won't be. The leading members of the media work for the very corporations that benefit most from this process. Establishment journalists are integral and well-rewarded members of the same system and thus cannot and will not see it as inherently corrupt (instead, as Newsweek's Evan Thomas said, their role, as "members of the ruling class," is to "prop up the existing order," "protect traditional institutions" and "safeguard the status quo")."
***************
You keep missing the point. Conservatives live in the real world. It's Libs that play in lalaland. Libs use the term racist as I indicated, basically to call names against anyone who is not willing to nurse them forever. You need to ask yourself; Why do libs insist on calling every white person who believes in limited gov under a representative republic a racist? Why do you do that and then pretend to follow dictionary standard definitions?
I think Lib b.s. blinds them to responsible adult reality. Especially when they acquire and use power to pull blinders over their eyes and mufflers over their ears, as they ban, shush, suspend, fire, and punish everyone who disagrees with them. Google is becoming a travesty. As are some of the Disqus forums. Lately, Libs take to citing the poem on the Statue of Liberty, as if it were any part of the Constitution or any legislation. And even if it were, it talks about "your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" -- not about your gangsta whiners yearning to suck the blood of producers, forever.
************
More people are waking up to the fact that the common usage for the word racist has changed. What racist used to apply to was race baiters. Now, a racist is anyone who has woken up to the fact that race baiters tend to be the most execrable, fraudulent, wussieflake, moochers imaginable. IOW, a racist now means anyone who sees race baiters for what they really are. What formerly were racists should now be called race baiters. Racist should be reserved as a term to honor every person who stands against sub-humanizing, evil, groupthink.
Likewise regarding misogynist and supremacist. They should become terms for persons who pride themselves for being willing to learn to think for themselves, against codependent femi-baiters, herd-baiters, and other incorrigible wussieflakes.
People are waking up to realize we do not need to import, indoctrinate, tolerate, or specially fund or favor any more wussieflake baiters. We are a nation of immigrants yearning to breathe free. Not a nation of wussieflakes yearning to become perpetual, class-superficial, parasites.
*************
S**thole: A place that has become overrun with socialists, communists, jihadists, antifa, Dems, BLM, CAIR, ACLU, or ADL.
Racist: Anyone who is inspired by the American Bill of Rights and the ideal of a decent republic of free-thinking and productive citizens. Same definition applies to: Misogynist, Chauvinist, Supremacist, Bigot. All those words are interchangeable now with Racist.
A s**thole is also anyplace where such persons are silenced and denounced. Shunned by anti-republicans. Also, any room inhabited by Durbin, Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, Schumer, de Blasio, Soros or their ilk.
****************
Why do wannabe people farmers and people farmees think DJT is terrible for wanting to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. as an independent representative republic? What is wrong with these fascist weenies of goose-stepping femimen and femi women? If there is such a thing as goodness, then there is such a thing as ungoodness. A person who wants to reduce independent, competent, free-thinking human beings to sheeple is un-good. And there are way too many of these ilk now infested within our borders.
*************
Children have a right to act like children. But moral responsibility will still reside with individuals. The world requires that people grow up or pay the consequences. The historically discredited idea of class consciousness is what tends to keep us divided and farmed. Competent individuals would do better to celebrate and work on opportunities. The kind of immigrants a sustainable society should desire are the kind that will become responsible producers, not the kind that want to mooch and blame others for their situations. That way lies Venezuela and the ash heap. No class can help any other class whose individual members are incorrigibly conditioned to feel themselves more entitled than responsible. No child or class of children ever became competent adults while under the spell of that kind of reasoning. Nor can any successful nation long sustain itself while under the spell of that kind of childish and shameful reasoning. People have a right to protest the National Anthem. But veterans also have a right to find that kind of protest to be shameful.
******************
Children have a right to act like children. But moral responsibility will still reside with individuals. The world requires that people grow up or pay the consequences. The historically discredited idea of class consciousness is what tends to keep us divided and farmed. Competent individuals would do better to celebrate and work on opportunities. The kind of immigrants a sustainable society should desire are the kind that will become responsible producers, not the kind that want to mooch and blame others for their situations. That way lies Venezuela and the ash heap. No class can help any other class whose individual members are incorrigibly conditioned to feel themselves more entitled than responsible. No child or class of children ever became competent adults while under the spell of that kind of reasoning. Nor can any successful nation long sustain itself while under the spell of that kind of childish and shameful reasoning. People have a right to protest the National Anthem. But veterans also have a right to find that kind of protest to be shameful.
******************
Obviously, children and many very young, nurturing mothers are codependent and need to be instructed and controlled. They need to be shielded against predators, dope peddlers, pimps, phony preachers, and abusive paternalists. Problem is, a lot of people never grow up to become competent, free-thinking adults, able to trust in their own abilities or thoughts. Such people tend to WANT to remain slaves. They want to be told what to think, by people who pretend to be looking out for them.
For them, big government can mollify their feelings of inadequacy and provide cover for fascist people farmers. They become dangerous when they are freed from working for slaver businesses, especially if they begin milling around in crowds that are susceptible to being agitated by radicals. After some number of years of being bred and conditioned by dope and entitlement propaganda, such perpetual children and liberty-illiterates become incorrigible. They need either to be kept busy or out of the country. Most simply cannot be fixed or reformed.
It is hard to think of a modern institution that is not now bent towards indoctrinating and producing wannabe farmee sheeple. Many students even incur gross indebtedness for the privilege of being thoroughly sub-humanized.
For them, big government can mollify their feelings of inadequacy and provide cover for fascist people farmers. They become dangerous when they are freed from working for slaver businesses, especially if they begin milling around in crowds that are susceptible to being agitated by radicals. After some number of years of being bred and conditioned by dope and entitlement propaganda, such perpetual children and liberty-illiterates become incorrigible. They need either to be kept busy or out of the country. Most simply cannot be fixed or reformed.
It is hard to think of a modern institution that is not now bent towards indoctrinating and producing wannabe farmee sheeple. Many students even incur gross indebtedness for the privilege of being thoroughly sub-humanized.
****************
Why do wannabe people farmers and people farmees think DJT is terrible for wanting to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. as an independent representative republic? What is wrong with these fascist weenies of goose-stepping femimen and femi women? If there is such a thing as goodness, then there is such a thing as ungoodness. A person who wants to reduce independent, competent, free-thinking human beings to sheeple is un-good. And there are way too many of these ilk now infested within our borders.
********************
To design a devolution towards a depraved society, it is necessary to condition the society to make tolerance of depravity a virtue. Genetic drag is eating our brains. Who most wants this? Answer: Incompetents and those who want to farm Incompetents. Because Dems want perpetual replenishment of a reliably dependent voting base, they can never advocate for solutions that would actually reduce incompetence and dependence.
Why do wannabe people farmers and people farmees think DJT is terrible for wanting to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. as an independent representative republic? What is wrong with these fascist weenies of goose-stepping femimen and femi women? If there is such a thing as goodness, then there is such a thing as ungoodness. A person who wants to reduce independent, competent, free-thinking human beings to sheeple is un-good. And there are way too many of these ilk now infested within our borders.
********************
To design a devolution towards a depraved society, it is necessary to condition the society to make tolerance of depravity a virtue. Genetic drag is eating our brains. Who most wants this? Answer: Incompetents and those who want to farm Incompetents. Because Dems want perpetual replenishment of a reliably dependent voting base, they can never advocate for solutions that would actually reduce incompetence and dependence.
************
Trump's policies are dangerous to the lifestyles of anti-Americans, illegal aliens, swamp moochers, smug pinkie waggers, child groomers, decadent Hollywoodians, academically certified halfwits, Sharia lovers, and parasites who vote for a living. To the Left, this is very bad.
*************
By Oprah-logic, I suppose all whites who are not self-subjugationists must be white supremacists. Many of our Founders had a vision of a society based on character, not color. Unfortunately, most of the immigrants we have imported and the non-whites we have "educated" seem now to respect no such vision. Rather, their vision is resetting the scales based almost exclusively on superficial and irresponsible traits other than character. Such as race, gender, orientation, origination.
So it has come to pass that we have The Covetous preparing for war against The Responsible. Covetousness instead of initiative. Fascists cannibalizing the republic by agitating the most character-less to demonstrate and loot for fake fairness and equality.
If there is such a thing as goodness, then there is also such a thing as un-goodness, or evil. If there is goodness in a person, then it is in the character of the person as a responsible individual. If there is evil in a person, then it is in the character-less-ness of the person, for looting from others under the fakery of seeking fairness.
A war is coming, between responsible individuals versus covetous herd-swine (who seek to marry the gov) and their new godling, Oprah, and her prime fake virtue-signaler, Streep.
*************
The anti-Americans see no point in promoting ideals such as faith in higher mindedness, participatory freedom, or freedom of association. Rather, since they have been thoroughly indoctrinated to believe they and their compatriots know best in all concerns, and that what is best should be determined not by free-thinking adults but by trained moral or Marxist scientists, they want to destroy and replace all vestiges and remnants of participatory freedom.
Anti-Americans see no need for human freedom if human security, well being, fairness and equality are to be secured by elite scientisimists, funded by gov-fiat money and controlled by select masters. Anti-Americans are mal-informed about history. If history evidences anything, it evidences that to trade freedom for security tends to be to trade human purposefulness for human serfdom.
Indeed, anti-Americans are often so bedazzled by their phony vision that they become blind to the illogic of their conceptualizations. Their forte is to try to convince any person who disagrees with them that he has a burden or proof instead of a burden of persuasion. Indeed, they slide around in their ambiguous usages of "proof" and "evidence" to such an extent that it often becomes hopeless to try to reason with them.
Regardless, this much is clear: If Americans do not defeat the confused and perverse union of anti-Americans, then it is their common, infantile, and race-gender-orientation based purpose to flood our electorate with so many liberty-illiterates that it will become impossible for human freedom and dignity to survive on this earth.
*****************
The things that seem to be free yet to have value are things that were secured by the sweat, blood and tears of our forebears. For example, freedom is not free. Parental love is not free. A soldier's devotion to his country is not free. And education most certainly is not free.
**********************
More nonsense. I would just as well suggest igsimulation, to indicate the idea that, until simulation is adequately defined, the question of the existence of a simulation of the universe we appear to inhabit has no unambiguous meaning.
Also, igatheist, because the term atheist does not appear to convey any unambiguous meaning (apart from dramatic stance). It conveys bias, but not knowledge or probability. Moreover, it does not convey any unambiguous idea of the god or gods in which its users believe does not exist.
Now, if god is thought of as being fully defined by an idea of a giant spaghetti monster, then I am an atheist concerning such an idea of god. But if the idea of a godhead encompasses a capacity beyond our measure but not beyond our intuition, that helps guide our conceptualizations, then it would make no sense to believe or disbelieve such a concept simply because it relates to an immeasurable. (Is the origin or the limits or center to our cosmos measurable?)
**********
EDIT: My "explanation" is not that Goddidit. My explanation is that Consciousness, including that of our own, participates with the unfoldment of a math-field to avail "it." My explanation is that we have no choice but to seek purposefulness as we live with a continuous and reconciling unfolding. And that no particular Explainer or TOE-scientism can or should dictate all. Even if imagined to be in the service of aesthetic parsimony. Alternatively stated, live free or die.
****************
I agree with much of what you say except for this: You say we probably live in a simulation, yet you believe no one designed the simulation. That seems incoherent.
I do not see a need to posit a simulation, since, being unprovable, like string theory, it adds nothing.
What I do see in common with other members of our society is consciousness. I see that as a ground for inspiring, encouraging, and assimilating civilizing empathy. Pertaining to what we should be doing.
If you have a postulate to take the place of shared consciousness, It is not apparent. Seems barren. Or maybe you see the determination of what everyone should be doing as a matter only for science and scientists? If so, my empathetic response would be: Piz off.
You say: If it is possible to build a simulator, then if is almost certain that we live in a simulation.
I say: That does not convey much meaning unless you provide some more rigorous definition for a simulation. For example, if simulator were taken to mean mousetrap, it would not mean much to say we almost certainly live in a mousetrap.
You say a simulation could almost certainly evolve without a design and definitely without a designer.
I personally do not take issue with that, because I do not look upon the Godhead as an original designer. I do not see much point in such speculation. Our cosmos abides. I think it more reasonable to consider that our existentiality (and previous existentiality) simply abides. Maybe in sometimes sudden and/or evolving phase shifts, but, still, abiding.
Still, math-based rules (algorithms) apply. I don't analogize the Godhead as an omniscient designer. More as a participatory mathematician. If simulation means math-field, I think that is a useful way of thinking. But I do not think the math-field "self-maths." I think a "mathematician" is entailed, to activate/actuate the math. The "design" for the math-field entails feedback. An idea of a limiting system that avails flux and feedback among parts is consistent with an idea of a law of conservation of matter and energy and unfolding entropy, is it not?
I don't believe the idea of a scientific TOE for specifying moral interactions among people, beings, civilizations makes sense. I think it is not just silly, but evil. One cannot very well believe or function as if goodness tend to abide unless one also believes or functions as if in-goodness is also possible.
I suspect you are so blinded by scientific greed that a great deal of common sense no longer makes sense to you. Are you conscious? Are you a thinking identity? Do you think you are the only one who experiences that? Do you think other beings experience that? That they "share" in experiencing that? Is this really hard for you?
What do you mean by progress? Do you believe in social progress? Evolutionary progress? Nihilistic progress? Displacement of humanity progress? What does your idea of science say about progress?
I do not imagine any idea can be represented or conveyed from one perspective to another without resort to what can be signified and measured. But I also do not believe that any non-trivial idea can be conveyed, whether rigorously or not, without a back and forth in good faith between perspectives of consciousness. I think whatever the Godhead signifies is in math-based measurables. But it's the purpose-driven, back and forth, interpretations of those significations that go beyond complete measure in science. Context, experience, interpretation, and memory (stored information) are part of the mix. Present measurable manifestation is not the end-all be-all. Play will mean different things to different dogs, often depending on the histories of their relationships and experiences. Sorting out the meaning necessitates skills more than those for making "rigorous" definitions.
I suspect your idea of aesthetics as an additional ground is stunted to something like elegance or parsimony. My idea of aesthetics would encompass respect for adults to be generally entrusted to live their own lives, not bound by despots pretending to be "progressive scientists of TOE morality."
****************
I tend to agree with some of what you say. But I find your formula ("an honest effort to follow the evidence as far as possible, and no further") to be not a particularly helpful formula. (J.S. Mill deployed a similar formula regarding the limits of liberty. Such as, to the limit of another person's nose. But he and his followers soon expanded to the limits of another's sense of smell, then to his sense of danger, then to his sense of utility-pleasure-well beingness, etc., until the so-called formula became essentially worthless --- unless as a homily based on conscious good faith.)
People are confronted by complex and significant concerns, such as: How should I prioritize my time, what should I sacrifice, what should I study, with whom should I spend time, should I marry and have kids, to what purposes should I devote my life, who should I help, what do I owe my country, what politicians and policies should I support or oppose, what scientific and technological activities should I support or hinder, how should I raise my children, should I support welfare addicts, should I undermine my nation's borders, should I be tolerant of refugees who want to impose domination over females, should I engage in activities that entail danger, should I help deport illegal aliens, what kinds of stories and parables should I familiarize my children with, etc.
So, how does your formula (or scientism) provide objective help for people facing such issues?
I think your notion that m-theory "can model everything we see in our universe (and precludes that which we do not)" is a "fact" is, well, silly.
First, you say science does not do proof, but then you cite m-theory as being fact grounded. Are you suggesting m-theory is factually true? If not, what are you suggesting? Perhaps you have not thought your notions through?
It appears you want to assume a theory can lead to objective answers for every concern, but then circle back to take your theory as proven ... because of your assumption. That is over-greedy scientism.
Is it possible that your ideational faith concerning m-theory has become so based in non-provable metaphysics that you use it to replace the metaphysics of string theory?
Is it possible for any scientifically testable model to deal with issues of original or pre-bang creation or subsequent or abiding unfolding? Can science lead to objective answers for testing or finding the limits or edge of our universe, or even its center?
May models shed light regarding the nature or character of limits concerning possibilities under usages of science? Would those models for any purposes be philosophical, scientific, testable, falsifiable, or useful?
Is science part of natural philosophy? Has natural philosophy "expired"?
Do you "really" (sincerely?) believe core m-theory "captures" everything any perspective (whether human, trans-human, or alien) has or will ever experience?
What do you mean by a simulator? Must a simulation be built by a designing (conscious) simulator, or may a simulation just "randomly" fall out of nothingness or chaos? When it appears that a simulation previous to our own may have been entailed, but beyond information within ours, who are you to say whether that simulation may or must have entailed or not entailed a kind of consciousness?
Regarding the consciousness of such sponsor, when you say it does, does not, or cannot be known (or appreciated), then aren't you engaging in speculative metaphysical faith? Or, perhaps you simply intend to define consciousness in a way to ensure your point prevails, trivially, by the way you define your terminology?
Because why? Because you hate the idea of God? Or that any other adult may claim a superior right over knowitall scientismists to decide for himself what is best for himself? How can the root (or non-root?) for the existence of anything-at-all be other than beyond the kin of methods of science? Apart from assumptive faith, can your m-theory objectively prove how existentiality abides or came to abide?
The problem with knowitall scientism is this: it often leads to knowitall despots trying to run every one else's life. Because, after all, "science knows." s/
*************
Proof of objective substances may be beyond us. After all, if science pertains only to pursuits based on theories that are falsifiable, then can science "prove" anything that is not tautological? Must not every person who is individually competent or functional believe (in the sense of act on) scientific theories, even when they are only evidentiary or reasonably useful, but not provable? Is not every functioning person reliant on beliefs, conceptualizations, models, insofar as they seem most reasonably suited to serve his purposes, whether they be technological (science based) or sociological (morality based)?
Among some powerful mathematicians, suspicion is growing that our cosmos really may be comprised of not much more than an algorithmic design for a field of math. That the physical appearances and properties expressed with it are derivative of a capacity in innate Consciousness (God?) to spin (vibrate?) and organize into different perspectives that are only temporally separate. This would seem not necessarily to discredit God, but to enhance a way of thinking about God.
String Theory was perhaps an attempt to frame a Theory of Everything that might take the metaphysical out of what is non-measurable. As I have been led to believe, String Theory is based on an idea of unprovable tiny loops of two dimensional strings, whose vibrations function to produce all of physically measurable substance. These unprovable strings are postulated (believed on faith) by some to constitute the ultimate "physical" things from which all other physical things are derived. However, these strings are innately so far beyond physical measurement that to call them physical rather than metaphysical is too far a stretch for any purely logic-based conceptualization.
So string theory seems to have waned in popularity as a basis for a Theory of Everything (Holy Grail for so-called Non-Believers).
If a consistent, coherent, complete theory of everything is impossible for mortals to achieve, then perhaps the best that can be done is to try to approach such a theory as closely as possible and in a way that does not unduly damage civilizing good faith and good will.
Although not complete, the idea underlying String Theory seems to avail a kind of math-based consistency. No one knows (or can know?) the ultimate nature or character of such postulated, but unprovable, strings. In that sense, conceptualizing them is a stretch to metaphysics. So the math seems to be based on connecting meta vibrations to physically measurable vibrations.
But what could account for those meta strings and the math-based system they obey? Must such strings (or whatever the idea of them is meant to represent) be of a purely inanimate and unconscious nature, or may they be indicative of a correlative conscious character? No human can know or prove.
Yet, we can intuit and experience. We have more than five senses. We also have a sense of math, of balance and of being. We can note how conscious observations seem to be fundamental to the way the cosmos finds expression. Something about the unfoldment seems to require consciousness, as if a system of consciousness were innate. That is interesting, even though its nature may be beyond math or science-based proof.
The apparent innateness of Consciousness, is, I think, a reasonable basis for moral belief systems that can help guide civilizing good faith and good will. More so than just trusting to elitist, priestly, scientismic, or expert diktat to rule the mass of sheeple and fill their snowflaky heads with phony ideas about equality, fairness, free stuff, safe spaces, and "science of morality."
*************
What is a student whose profs lead him to believe in Non-Personage on Fridays the 13th, Jesus on Mondays, Allah on Tuesdays, Satan on Wednesdays, Kim Jung Un and Ancient Aliens on Thursdays, Selfish Genes on Fridays, Great Spirit on Saturdays, and Football on Sundays --- except between 1 and 2 a.m., when he believes in Pythagoras --- except in Leap Years, when he believes in Utilitarian Scientism and Well Beingness and A.I. Transhuman Nihilism? Is "He" a believing Non-Believer, a Non-believing Believer, a walking Contrarian, trained Bot, a Minor Deity, a Reconstructed Cloud Identity In Progress, or ....
Is there some kind of litmus test to nail him down to what he is? Are these categories "real" or are they just metaphysically fluxing contrivances?
****************
Among some powerful mathematicians, suspicion is growing that our cosmos really may be comprised of not much more than an algorithmic design for a field of math. That the physical appearances and properties expressed with it are derivative of a capacity in innate Consciousness (God?) to spin (vibrate?) and organize into different perspectives that are only temporally separate. This would seem not necessarily to discredit God, but to enhance a way of thinking about God.
Not sure I can parse your meaning. Regardless, as I have been led to believe, String Theory is based on an idea of unprovable tiny loops of two dimensional strings, whose vibrations function to produce all of physically measurable substance. These unprovable strings are thought by some to constitute the ultimate "physical" things from which all other physical things are derived. However, these strings are so far beyond physical measurement that to call them physical rather than metaphysical is a stretch in logic-based conceptualization. So string theory seems to have waned in popularity as a basis for a Theory of Everything. If a consistent, coherent, complete theory of everything is impossible for mortals to achieve, then perhaps the best that can be done is to try to approach such a theory as closely as possible and in a way that does not unduly damage civilizing good faith and good will.
Although not complete, the idea underlying String Theory seems to avail a kind of math-based consistency. No one knows (or can know?) the ultimate nature or character of such postulated, but unprovable, strings. In that sense, conceptualizing them is a stretch to metaphysics. So the math seems to be based on connecting meta vibrations to physically measurable vibrations.
But what could account for those meta strings and the math-based system they obey? Must such strings (or whatever the idea of them is meant to represent) be of a purely inanimate and unconscious nature, or may they be indicative of a correlative conscious character? No human can know or prove.
Yet, we can intuit and experience. We have more than five senses. We also have a sense of math, of balance and of being. We can note how conscious observations seem to be fundamental to the way the cosmos finds expression. Something about the unfoldment seems to require consciousness, as if a system of consciousness were innate. That is interesting, even though its nature may be beyond math or science-based proof. The apparent innateness of Consciousness, is, I think, a reasonable basis for moral belief systems that can help guide civilizing good faith and good will. More so than just trusting to elitist, priestly, or expert diktat to rule the mass of sheeple and fill their snowflaky heads with phony ideas about equality, fairness, free stuff, safe spaces, and "science of morality."
******************
They are conceptualize-ably real categories for persons, if ego-identities with conceptualizations are included within one's working definition for what is existentially real. But some people may consider themselves to be nothing more than fleeting epiphenomena, being neither responsible nor "really real."
Next, someone will be constructing a test for belief sincerity. Linus "really" and SINCERELY believed in the Great Pumpkin. If enough people sincerely believe, the Great Pumpkin will come. Or Scientific Socialism will finally really work. S/
*************
Under your terms, the agnostic atheist, alternatively stated, conceptualizes his belief that no god exists. He may conceptualize his belief based on (1) lack of physical evidence, and (2) lack of a non-physically evidentiary way for conceptualizing a god that could satisfy demands in logic based on consistency, coherence, and completeness.
For a concept of god that pertains to something that is beyond physics (metaphysics), the lack of physical evidence as a basis to disbelieve seems incoherent.
But what about a god for which non-belief is based on lack of a conceptualization about metaphysics that is consistent, coherent, and complete?
Such a non-believer would seem to have faith to the extent that his mind has not yet experienced a concept about metaphysics that is consistent, coherent, and complete.
A believer, otoh, would seem to have faith to the extent his mind has experienced a concept about metaphysics that tends towards consistency, coherence, and completeness.
If logical completeness in conceptualization is not possible for a mortal, then both the believer and the non-believer would seem to flux in a state of cognitive dissonance. Each may tend to adopt the position that reduces cognitive discomfit. Depending on mental state, the position of neither would seem necessarily to be irrational.
************
Or, a believer may simply take literal supernatural claims to be valid only as metaphors. That is, as sacred stories, to provide a kind of shared language around which to inspire congregants to assimilate in pursuing values and purposes that are then and there commonly thought to promote decent civilization, as well as to inspire a sense of awe towards whatever may be the Source of our commonly shared cosmos.
************
RE-EXAMINE: You do not seem really to have questioned your basic assumptions, nor to have considered what I have actually indicated. I recommend you take a long walk, decompress, and re-examine your base assumptions, unprovable axioms, and cognitive discomfits. Test your otherwise unsupported beliefs for internal consistency, coherence, and completeness.
CONSCIOUSNESS IS CONSCIOUSNESS: Were it possible to provide the exact same past background, present context, and local stimuli, I believe every perspective of consciousness thus provided would experience the same next unfolding of qualitatives and quantitatives. I believe we are DETERMINED by our informational background, our present context of body and environment, and local stimuli. However, because our conscious perspectives are not omniscient, and because we do not know how subsequent unfoldings may surprise or affect us, we cannot entirely know in advance what we will experience upon each next unfolding.
CONSCIOUS EXPERIENCE OF WILL: In that sense, we do not have free will, but we do experience PARTICIPATORY WILL. Qualitatively immeasurable apprehensions, surprises, and appreciations flow through our unfolding experiences of consciousness. From a person's mortal perspectives, he can tinker, but he will be unable to pre-set all that will unfold for him. He will become aware of what is to unfold only as he participates with the unfolding. And his participation will feedback to affect subsequent unfoldings in ways not all of which he could foresee.
EMPATHETIC BASIS FOR MORALITY: Because consciousness is consciousness, we have innate (not merely emergent or enhance-able) connection to intuit aspects of ourselves in others. We have innate empathy among ourselves, to apprehend that, there but for fortune, go I. Respect for the role of Consciousness is what avails good faith and good will. That is, a common basis for assimilating or tolerating our purposes. A reconciling with a Trinitarian unity that abides as the Godhead.
PERVERSION: Why deny a basis for moral connection? A Perspective that identifies with a local brain will often not seek higher, consistent, coherent, complete truth. Such a search would trigger cognitive discomfits. So, it will put such a pursuit aside, to seek, perversely, to justify and perpetuate advantages for its localized pleasures. The more the deviation, the more skillful the devolution of perverse rationalizations. Eventually, he may even deny a feedback-causal role for his own participatory, conscious will, and instead conceptualize himself as a slave to his pre-sets and pleasures. His ultimate perversion may be to rationalize perversity as goodness. Thus, evil can come to rationalize itself as good.
CONSCIOUSNESS ABIDES AS A NECESSARY PART OF WHAT WE OFTEN CONCEPTUALIZE AS THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION: Consciousness is that which activates and reconciles among fields of math, to avail math-based relationships among Substance and Information to be interpreted, sensed, signified, and communicated. Consciousness, when it imagines itself not to be part of the causal chain, tries to avail measurables among math relations to be interpreted AS IF such relations were real things, axiomatically independent of their math fields. As if math-relations were a derivative of physical relations, rather than vice-versa. However, none of those "physical things" are "in" math. Rather, they are "of" math. In "themselves," they are not things, but interpretations (wave function collapses) dependent upon participatory input from at least one perspective of consciousness.
NECESSITY OF CONSCIOUSNESS: When a record of Information regarding things, like tree rings, is stored and preserved, it is preserved only because a perspective of consciousness, at some level or layer, availed it to be preserved.
QUESTIONS: Interesting and not entirely answerable questions are begged: What is the ultimate quality of Consciousness? What is the source/character/nature of Consciousness, such that it has power to actuate and reconcile with cosmic fields and sub-fields of math? With what kind of math-field has Consciousness for our cosmos become connected and looped (wheels within wheels, spins within spins, layers within layers, fractals within fractals, systems within systems, algorithms within algorithms, delegations within delegations)?
**************
Pray to assimilate in respect of the better angels of our nature.
Neither measurably manifest Substance nor cumulative Information could abide, but for a (conscious) Measurer.
Holistic
Sub-levels
Layers and levels
Delegation
Fractals
Potentialities
Systems within systems
Algorithms within algorithms
Wheels within wheels
Spins within spins
***********
Our interpretations of space-time avail us to communicate about relationships among perspectives of consciousness as they transition in chronologies and intensities, from previous to contemporaneous to apprehension of successions.
******************
Re: "... if something can't be measured than it might as well not exists because it can't interact with the rest of reality... all interactions in the Universe are based on the exchange of information which is always fundamentally a form of measurement."
You are displaying a bias against metaphysics and being overly greedy with your assumptions about the role of science. You are also confining your implied definitions for existence, things, and information, so that your end re-presentation is little more than a triviality or tautology, in which your conclusions are based on nothing more than your assumptions.
I am using Information in a sense for distinguishing (in-forming) one aspect of a chronological (actually, numerical) sequence from another. If you prefer a different place-holding term, such as cock-a-doodle-do, we can use it instead -- provided such term is taken to relate to the FACT that distinctions in sequences are formed and stored --- even if we remain unable to explain that in terms of physical mechanics.
Most thinkers do not consider inability to measure something as proof that it does not exist. Physicists are unable to show or measure how (or whether) wave function collapse occurs, yet, most infer that it does. The following clip may help you pull off some blinders. See https://youtu.be/qB7d5V71vUE.
Btw, appreciation that the potentiality of a whole is more than just the sum of its parts is hardly controversial. Just think of an A.I. that can be switched on and off. What you choose to measure, think, or appreciate can vastly alter your life path.
******************
Perhaps your inquiry relates more to whether a Godhead has designed our cosmos and then "left the building"?
Once you build a house, do you always leave it? Before you do leave, do you install monitors or watch committees?
If a CSI mind-system were to build a sub-CSI system, why suppose such systems should not share interconnecting commonalities? Turtles and fractals, all the way down?
If CSI simply abides, why postulate a "beginning big bang"? Why postulate a beginning or a departure? Why not simply conceptualize an abiding system of evolutions of phase shifts?
If consciousness in one form is innately empathetic with similar consciousness in other forms, then why postulate that one form should entirely abandon another?
*************
I have not found it necessary, helpful, or useful for any purpose to conceptualize any thing as entirely independent of a Trinitarian flux of CSI. I am unable to imagine how any thing-in-and-of-itself, free of relationship with any other thing, could avail a continuous experience of unfoldment from past to present to future. I am unable to imagine how a math field, independent of a mathematician, could actuate to avail any evolvement. To me, the singular actuality that avails conceptual sense of past-present-future is Trinitarian. (Name a particle that presently exists, independent of relationship with any other particle or sub-particle.)
Nor do I think conversationalists can signify any communication that is free of re-presentations (conceptualizations). We can conceptualize, infer, and communicate concerning reality, but we cannot convey understanding of reality-in-itself. (Indeed, I question whether any single aspect of even the Trinity could do that.) IAE, I do not see how a Holism (or Godhead) could avail or convey direct understanding of its reality to a mere part (mortal) of itself. I am unable to fathom a math system in which a part could, as a part, step outside a system that defines it in order to determine what that system "really is."
*************
If you want to restrict existence to what exists "in the now" (what presently exists), then you will need to come to terms with the following:
That what exists in the present quickly passes out of such existence.
That different perspectives experience "the present" at different rates and in different ways.
That time is not a thing in itself, but an illusion derivative of differently experienced rates for sequences in math-fields.
There exists no universal "nowness."
Space-Time can be conceptualized as an illusion derivative of a mathematician functioning in respect of a math-field. Without a mathematician, a math-field would not sensibly exist. Without a math-field, a mathematician would not sensibly exist.
I don't purport to KNOW "whether God exists." I only purport that a CONCEPTUALIZATION (model) that a Trinitarian Godhead (CSI) abides comports with reason (higher mindedness).
Local Substance, as a derivative of a reconciling mathematician functioning in respect of an evolving math-field, is the presently measurable aspect to a Local Perspective.
Information is the derivatively available cumulation of all previous manifestations of local experiences of Substance.
Consciousness is what functions to avail the existential manifestation of Substance and Information. It is the mathematician functioning in respect of the unfolding math-field.
Mindfulness is the upshot of Consciousness functioning with Substance in respect of Information.
Perhaps your inquiry relates more to whether a Godhead has designed our cosmos and then "left the building"?
***************
Existence: Substantively measurable things become manifestly (physically) existent, then pass into the past, as cumulative Information. The past exists only as cumulated and re-fluxed or smudged Information. The future presently exists only as potentiality. Immeasurable things (qualitative things) exist beyond physicality. For example, maths exist. When you use the word exist, it would help to specify whether you are referring to substantive measurables, informational cumulatives, future potentialities, or qualitative states of mind.
Consider: Is Information always stored and preserved within existence? When our cosmos dissipates, will its Information have been preserved? What could preservation mean in such a context? One may hedge and say, well, the Information would be "smudged" to merge with a new cosmos or new "reality." Can the Godhead of Consciousness-Substance-Information ever "forget"?
I think that may depend on what one means by forget or lost information. I think the Trinity fluxes. So an aspect of it, Consciousness, may forget. But the other aspects will ensure Consciousness simply repeats many of the same experiences and plots in differently analogical ways. After all, how many different notes or plots are there, really?
Did Einstein say, "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one"?
I notice some of your compatriots seem not fond of either-or reasoning, depending on how it suits them.
As I survey the absurdities being promoted by many scientists/scientisimists and inventors, it seems remarkably perverse, to me, how quickly they promote nonsense when it suits their wannas. Many otherwise smart people seem not especially interested in pursuit of truth or higher mindedness. Rather, they seem as prone as Holllywoodians to seek to justify and rationalize all manner of perversity when it suits their pleasures or biases.
Sam Harris is a brainy guy who thinks (or thought?) he could make moral issues scientifically manageable by weighing them against a vague idea of "well beingness." In that, he is/was a putz. Maybe someone was too harsh in pouring holy water on him?
Then there are the open society crowd and corporatists, who think it "truly better" to replace the U.S. as a representative republic with a borderless NWO to be run by experts on behalf of "benign" central bureaucrats or corporatists. Not to mention the perverse gay crowd that wants to redefine marriage so as to render it meaningless. And they rabidly claim they are "on the right side of history!" S/
I think brainy and gay people often share a commonality: Too much isolation from ordinary people and the opposite sex. Whatever the cause, it is fascinating to watch as they try to rationalize absurdity and perversity in the service of their base pleasures, as if they were "truly" serving higher mindedness. Unfortunately, they give little thought to what is needed to sustain a decent republic of free thinking citizens. I suspect because their pleasures and dopery are more immediately important to their perverse pleasures. Which they then justify because they claim to be smarter (denial of higher mindedness, because, "science") or better educated (twisted).
****************
Existence: Substantively measurable things become manifestly (physically) existent, then pass into the past, as cumulative Information. The past exists only as cumulated and re-fluxed or smudged Information. The future presently exists only as potentiality. Immeasurable things (qualitative things) exist beyond physicality. For example, maths exist. When you use the word exist, it would help to specify whether you are referring to substantive measurables, informational cumulatives, future potentialities, or qualitative states of mind.
Consider: Is Information always stored and preserved within existence? When our cosmos dissipates, will its Information have been preserved? What could preservation mean in such a context? One may hedge and say, well, the Information would be "smudged" to merge with a new cosmos or new "reality." Can the Godhead of Consciousness-Substance-Information ever "forget"?
I think that may depend on what one means by forget or lost information. I think the Trinity fluxes. So an aspect of it, Consciousness, may forget. But the other aspects will ensure Consciousness simply repeats many of the same experiences and plots in differently analogical ways. After all, how many different notes or plots are there, really?
Did Einstein say, "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one"?
I notice some of your compatriots seem not fond of either-or reasoning, depending on how it suits them.
As I survey the absurdities being promoted by many scientists/scientisimists and inventors, it seems remarkably perverse, to me, how quickly they promote nonsense when it suits their wannas. Many otherwise smart people seem not especially interested in pursuit of truth or higher mindedness. Rather, they seem as prone as Holllywoodians to seek to justify and rationalize all manner of perversity when it suits their pleasures or biases.
Sam Harris is a brainy guy who thinks (or thought?) he could make moral issues scientifically manageable by weighing them against a vague idea of "well beingness." In that, he is/was a putz. Maybe someone was too harsh in pouring holy water on him?
Then there are the open society crowd and corporatists, who think it "truly better" to replace the U.S. as a representative republic with a borderless NWO to be run by experts on behalf of "benign" central bureaucrats or corporatists. Not to mention the perverse gay crowd that wants to redefine marriage so as to render it meaningless. And they rabidly claim they are "on the right side of history!" S/
I think brainy and gay people often share a commonality: Too much isolation from ordinary people and the opposite sex. Whatever the cause, it is fascinating to watch as they try to rationalize absurdity and perversity in the service of their base pleasures, as if they were "truly" serving higher mindedness. Unfortunately, they give little thought to what is needed to sustain a decent republic of free thinking citizens. I suspect because their pleasures and dopery are more immediately important to their perverse pleasures. Which they then justify because they claim to be smarter (denial of higher mindedness, because, "science") or better educated (twisted).
****************
Well, I did not say Consciousness exists independently. I said it exists with Substance and Information. The three exist together, as co-dependent fundamentals. You need to read what I said, not what you wish I had said. No one of the three co-dependent fundamentals can exist apart from the other two. Taken together, the three can flux to produce various worlds or world phase-shifts. But they must be taken together.
The problem with your notion is that it rests on an assumption that what is beyond science must be explicable with science in order to be part of our direct experience. You have merely conjured up some arguments against positions that I did not take. Evidently, you have not processed what I said because it does not comport with what you wish I had said.
Your cut-and-paste entropy argument pertains to measurables, of which the quality of consciousness is not one.
You are confusing Consciousness as a fundamental ingredient with Substance and Information versus ways Consciousness can be leveraged with different forms of Substance and Information in order to produce faster or more complex brains or operating units. Yes, more complex operating units can emerge. But the co-dependent fundaments with which such operating units are built or enhanced do not emerge. They simply abide. Unless, that is, you want to posit and adopt an absurd and unfalsifiable conceptual belief that all of beingness arose from nothingness.
Moreover, you seem to confuse the sum of the parts with the Holism. But save that for another day.
******************
More reasonable people would seek ways to differentiate between models that may be worthwhile but non-falsifiable versus models that may be both worthwhile and falsifiable.
Models that pertain to substantively measurable practicalities and technologies may tend to be scientifically falsifiable. But models that pertain to concerns about what one should devote one's pursuits to, morally, may tend to be non-falsifiable, yet unavoidable. Of those, one may have no choice but to make choices. To take leaps of faith. To identify with mores, values, pursuits --- even if only in deeds rather than in rationalized models. IOW, one may model mores in the language of one's actions, even if below the level of one's consciously rationalized modeling.
Do you reject all moral values, pursuits, devotions, hobbies, merely because you cannot submit their worth to scientific falsification? I don't think a person with a functioning brain can actually do that. If you are advocating that, then I think you are advocating for a nonsensical impossibility.
For concerns that are beyond measure or science, but not beyond appreciation via intuition and modeling based on what is most consistent, coherent, and complete, a person with a functioning brain has no choice but to take some leaps of faith.
For example, many modern so-called Democrats seem to have been hoodwinked to take a leap of faith that the U.S. should, by laws, turn itself into a borderless, open society that tolerates every possible affront to the ideal of a representative republic. And many so-called Republicans take a similar leap of faith that the supply of cheap laboring immigrants should be left open.
Both seem, however unwittingly, in practice to act on a leap of faith that the representative republic should be replaced by a society that is governed by elite moral scientists. They seem to believe government under such moral scientists will be good, benign, not fascistic, and "better" than a government under the present system.
Often, when a person models how he should devote his efforts, he will reach for a basis in higher minded principles --- even if only in how he coordinates his efforts and not in how he consciously rationalizes them. Such a person will conduct himself "religiously," even without consciously stating the tenets or principles of his religion. If pursuits based on higher mindedness are unavoidable, what is the problem with modeling such higher mindedness based on a religion or a belief about the character of the Godhead/Source?
Yes, religion has abusively contributed to suffering and death. But I think less so than militant atheistic communism. Especially when the religion is based on an ideal of an empathetic Godhead, as opposed to an idea of a freaking control monster. Such a religion can avail ways for good people to come together to reason, to seek to assimilate values that can sustain decent civilization. For one who values the evidence or proof of history, alternatives, such as militantly atheistic communism, seem to fare far worse. Even towards Evil.
**************
I did not say Substance and Information play no role. I suggested they are insufficient to pre-determine the course of unfoldings within allowable parameters. I said Consciousness is a factor to the extent Substance and Information are insufficient. And I did not say Consciousness determines the events that will unfold. I said it affects them, to the extent Substance and Information are insufficient.
In cases where Consciousness does not much care to affect what unfolds, then whatever does become manifest will seem more like random chance. But even then, some patterns will acquire a kind of momentum, such that they will more likely tend to nourish one another, to replicate, survive, and repeat. (Even Dawkins postulates "selfish" genes.) What people sometimes call chaos does not produce complete randomness. It tends to produce ordered patterns. Consciousness (at some level, even if seemingly minute) is what avails those patterns to collapse into manifest measurables.
I do not think consciousness is God. Rather, I think there abides a Godhead that is Trinitarian with regard to aspects of Consciousness, Substance, and Information.
The Past exists only as a record of Information. The measurable Present exists only as manifest Substance. The possible Future becomes manifest only with co-operative guidance and reconciliation with Consciousness.
The continuous transition through past (previous), present (contemporaneous), and future (subsequent) entails a flux among Information, Substance, and Consciousness.
By itself, Consciousness need not entail a Mind. A mind reads or remembers stored Information, interprets or tests measurable Substance, and trains Consciousness to help put Information and Substance to future use.
The more interesting concern is this: To the extent our cosmos functions as a conserved system, is there a holistic, feedback aspect (Mind?) to the inter-functioning and reconciliation of Consciousness, Substance, and Information? If so, that would be the Godhead. That would be what participated in the design, and the continuing changing of design, for the unfolding of our math-based cosmos.
For that, I would distinguish such a Mind from a physically manifested nerve control system (brain). Do you think your mind is confined to the measurable perimeter of the skin of your body?
If Information and Substance can reasonably be modeled as derivatives of an algorithmic field of math, then Consciousness may be modeled as the mathematician that actuates the field.
**********************
It is a common postulate that the past (previous) functioning in concert with the present (duration) represents parameters, but not precise determinants for that which unfolds and manifests for the future. Among all sets of possible unfoldments, only one set actually becomes manifest for our cosmos. So, how is that set chosen, if it was not pre-determined?
My model: How it is chosen (how the wave function is collapsed) is affected by consciousness. Of that, every perspective (person) participates, subject to rules of conservation with regard to every physically measurable communication.
So, consciousness is that which is necessary to affect how choices are made from among all possibilities. The more interesting concern relates to how those choices are reconciled. And whether there abides consciousness at a holistic, reconciling level.
******************
Are you suggesting he may really believe our cosmos arose out of vomit from a giant flying spaghetti monster? Well, alrighty then.
*************
I am not sure it is possible to "remain neutral" for very long without being overtaken by events. Failure to make a choice is a kind of choice. No matter what a person decides to do, he will have done something, even if only to try to hide. A zombie may not make a conscious choice about what to believe. But even a zombie will, by his acts, give effect to choices.
I agree that matters that depend on belief are often not provable as true. I also agree that a person should generally try to modify his belief system when an axiom has been falsified, either by math based proof or, where applicable, by contradicting physical demonstration. To the extent that a belief constitutes a physically testable postulation, then one should be open to renouncing it upon its physical falsification.
But for ideas that may be useful for assimilating cultural values, purposes, and beliefs, that may not be physically falsifiable, such ideas may also not be physically demonstrable. For those, a person may form a belief system based on direct experience of beingness (sense of being, sense of balance, sense of math-based conservation). Iow, intuition, provided such intuitive belief system is generally or rationally supported by internal consistency, coherence, and completeness. And provided such a person has not been otherwise persuaded by a better belief system (that is more consistent, coherent, and complete).
Personally, I do not find the belief systems of moral scientisimists (militant atheists) to be inspiring or persuasive. If anything, based on history, I find them to tend to be horrifying. For example, I believe belief systems that advocate for the replacement of family values with gov-marrying values, the replacement of inspiring faith in an empathetic God with faith in a monstrous god or a fascist gov, and the undermining of fidelity to an otherwise assimilating civilization of free thinking citizens, to be horrific. But that is just my belief.
******************
So, you're just claiming nothing? Ok, go act on nothing.
***************
My positive claim is that both the god and the no-god positions are positive positions taken by various perspectives of consciousness. My position is that the claim by atheists that they have no burden of proof while theists do is mere wordplay for foolish people. Be gone with your silliness.
************
Your positive claim is that our cosmos arose out of nothingness, and continues to unfold under an original impetus from nothingness. So prove it or be gone with your fly buzz.
*****************I am not sure it is possible to "remain neutral" for very long without being overtaken by events. Failure to make a choice is a kind of choice. No matter what a person decides to do, he will have done something, even if only to try to hide. A zombie may not make a conscious choice about what to believe. But even a zombie will, by his acts, give effect to choices.
I agree that matters that depend on belief are often not provable as true. I also agree that a person should generally try to modify his belief system when an axiom has been falsified, either by math based proof or, where applicable, by contradicting physical demonstration. To the extent that a belief constitutes a physically testable postulation, then one should be open to renouncing it upon its physical falsification.
But for ideas that may be useful for assimilating cultural values, purposes, and beliefs, that may not be physically falsifiable, such ideas may also not be physically demonstrable. For those, a person may form a belief system based on direct experience of beingness (sense of being, sense of balance, sense of math-based conservation). Iow, intuition, provided such intuitive belief system is generally or rationally supported by internal consistency, coherence, and completeness. And provided such a person has not been otherwise persuaded by a better belief system (that is more consistent, coherent, and complete).
Personally, I do not find the belief systems of moral scientisimists (militant atheists) to be inspiring or persuasive. If anything, based on history, I find them to tend to be horrifying. For example, I believe belief systems that advocate for the replacement of family values with gov-marrying values, the replacement of inspiring faith in an empathetic God with faith in a monstrous god or a fascist gov, and the undermining of fidelity to an otherwise assimilating civilization of free thinking citizens, to be horrific. But that is just my belief.
******************
So, you're just claiming nothing? Ok, go act on nothing.
***************
My positive claim is that both the god and the no-god positions are positive positions taken by various perspectives of consciousness. My position is that the claim by atheists that they have no burden of proof while theists do is mere wordplay for foolish people. Be gone with your silliness.
************
Your positive claim is that our cosmos arose out of nothingness, and continues to unfold under an original impetus from nothingness. So prove it or be gone with your fly buzz.
1. I agree, but I don't get the relevance to points under discussion.
2. Is the idea of your own mind, identity, and sense of being too ambiguous, vague, and superfluous for you? Do you not intuit that other people and beings likewise have ideas of their own minds, identities, and senses of being? Is your own identity, mind, and sense of being falsifiable? Do you not comprehend that some aspects of experience or knowledge are directly intuited, as opposed to being "provable" in science? (I can invite you to think, but I can't make you do it.)
3. You can define a term however you like, for whatever purposes you like. But what do you mean by connection to the "real world"? Do you take only what is quantifiable and measurable to be "real"? What about qualities of mental experience, mores, values, and beliefs that pertain to aspects that are beyond quantification or measure? Are they unreal? Do you think all human action should be dictated by science, through the best priests of science (moral scientisimists)?
Hint: The concept of a conscious Observer Effect is not generally controversial. I am not concerned here with consciousness limited to humans. Why are you? Do you not recognize consciousness in other animals, and likely soon, in A.I.? Are you a solipsist? Do you understand set theory and the idea of a set consisting of parts that may be mutually exclusive and exhaustive of the sum of the set?
4. Why are you talking about ideas about physical things that are physically falsifiable? The discussion pertains to qualitatives about mental states, not quantitatives. Do you lack all insight that there may abide a qualitative commonality concerning consciousness that is intuitable but not measurable?
5. Again, I can invite you to think, but I can't make you do it.
6. No, I see no point in "elaborating" about limits of physical science to someone who is unable to comprehend that measureables are not in themselves adequate to appreciate all qualities that value aspects in ways that are beyond measure.
7. Same as 6.
8. Depends on how you understand consciousness and whether you appreciate its application beyond human personalities.
9. Again, I can invite you to think, but I can't make you do it.
10. I have no idea what it is that you think you are saying.
11. I was using proof in the sense of evidence. Absence of evidence that a person within an atmosphere that has produced a rainbow cannot step on the end of that rainbow is not evidence of the lack of an end to such rainbow. And, so what? Do you really think our universe is well conceptualized as a bubble or balloon? Do you really think a grid can be well applied to our position in space-time? I can appreciate how a math based system could support the way our cosmos appears to us. But I cannot appreciate how a "physical"-grid system could. Maybe you can?
12. Yes, energy and matter are different ways to express the same thing: Measurable Substance. That said, the differences in how they are expressed and made manifest to us are the basis for our practical technologies. So what?
******************
Interesting points.
Regardless, at some level, every particular perspective of consciousness has something in common with every other such perspective. Our perspectives and bodies flux, change, forget, and remember. But they retain a commonality: They are all perspectives of consciousness. The more interesting concern is how to define consciousness in a meaningful way.
At levels lower than awaken-ness, autonomic and lower, some perspectives of consciousness identify with and adopt means for remembering previously recorded information, such as information about how to repel disease. For example, some immune systems can remember infections they have previously encountered, so that their responses can be more efficient when the body has another encounter with any such invader. Thus, consciousness can enhance its capabilities by shaping and building on substantive forms for encoding, storing, remembering, and calculating information. This is part of the flux of consciousness, substance, and information. It is why Consciousness, Substance, and Information are inter-dependent, not independent of one another. It is why it can make sense to conceptualize the Godhead as a Trinitarian singularity.
Atheists like to suppose that consciousness is merely emergent. I agree that consciousness can be trained, focused, enhanced. But I do not agree that it is not as innate to the unfolding expression of our cosmos as measurable Substance and cumulative Information. There are reasons for supporting that belief, but they are based more in analogy, intuition, and tests for internal consistency, coherence, and completeness.
For me, Asimov's idea of a collective galactic mind or World Bliss sparked some inquiries concerning the fundamental character of consciousness. Perhaps Consciousness itself did not have to be designed. What if Consciousness was, is, and always has been innate? Perhaps only the forms with which consciousness is expressed flux, change, and evolve --- consistent with consciousness being innate.
Suppose Consciousness were defined as capacity from a Perspective to collapse and observe the wave function of what we take to be Substance, therewith to receive, store, re-present, and transmit Information. Suppose Substance and Information are appearances derivative of nothing more than Consciousness functioning in respect of a purely math-based matrix? In that case, the origination of our shared cosmos would seem not to be from nothingness, but from a singularly designed Perspective.
Whether that singular Perspective may have been a-part of a meta-system of other Perspectives or cosmos is not purely determinable by us. Rather, that concern is necessarily and thoroughly commingled with what we take to be the math-based rules for our own shared cosmos.
In any case, there is no reason to believe aspects for our originating Perspective of Consciousness would not continue to be inextricably imbued among each and every Perspective that abides with our cosmos.
Even the Substance that we conceptualize to be inanimate implicates that we assume or project with it a capacity to receive, store, re-present, and transmit Information, in order to allow and activate any analysis concerning it. All appearances of Substance seem to implicate a correlative existentiality of Consciousness and cumulating Information. IOW, Consciousness, Substance, and Information seem to abide as fundamental aspects of our experience of cosmic existentiality.
If a system of math-based algorithms defines and limits our cosmos, it is based around Consciousness and its various perspectives. Not around any material things-in-themselves. The things around each Perspective of Consciousness are treated, for that Perspective, AS IF they were real in themselves. And such treatment is normalize-able and reconcile-able for every Perspective, so every Perspective will sense AS IF it were at the center of the measurable density and sequential unfolding of the observable cosmos.
If there is a rationalize-able "center" to the cosmos, I postulate it is not in a locus in space-time, but in Consciousness inter-functioning with various math-fields as they are evolved and designed under an encompassing system of perpetual feedback.
As "proof" that our cosmos is more math-like than physical-like, I would point to the following: No objective center, nor edge, to our cosmos can be demonstrated. No objective grid-in-itself can be shown for locating any physical thing. All measureable motions for relations among what we take to be "physical things" are renormalizeable to a same limiting speed (of light).
****************
Perspectives of consciousness at levels below that of humans abide. Every pattern that is sticky (sticks around) in that sense expresses sensation and consciousness at some level.
A recorder of Information gives expression to a level of consciousness. Perspectives of Consciousness associate with appearances of patterns, but we do not abide "inside" such patterns. That a pattern is sensed does not mean that the pattern, in itself, is conscious. It just means at least one perspective of consciousness senses it.
If Matter is stored Information, and Energy is transmitting Information, and Substance abides as a sum of Matter and Energy, then all present Substance abides as a transitory combination of stored and transmitting Information, as it is accumulated with past recorded Information.
No pattern is in itself conscious, but all patterns are associated with at least one perspective of consciousness. All patterns are associated with a flux of Information (Past cumulation), Substance (as Presently manifested), and Consciousness (as Future anticipatory).
Every so-called origin, instead of coming from a point in space, would seem to have come from a sequence beyond which, from our access from our math-verse, Information has been lost or re-phased. In that sense, our Universe/Cosmos may abide in respect of a Steady State, after all. If so, lost (or re-phased) Information is what lies behind our so-called Beginning. Not any real "point" in Space-Time dimensionality.
Beyond Matter and Energy, something spiritual renormalizes/reconciles/feedbacks for our various perspectives of Consciousness. Otherwise, how could choices from among possibilities be effected?
No system of patterns can stick -- to repair and replicate itself as needed to nurture and sustain itself --- unless it has means to find its likeness to be attractive. That "means" is conscious appreciation. It's why patterns, as they happen to develop, happen to attract likeness. This is a derivative of patterns that happen to be formed by Consciousness as it images with math-verses. Something ineffable about Consciousness avails it with capacity to image/imagine/in-form Substance out of its inter-functioning with math. Something ineffable about Consciousness allows it to advance empirical technologies by bootstrapping them.
In itself, the math-verse as we occupy it need not itself occupy space-time. Rather, space-time would be a derivative of the math-verse being activated/actuated by a reconciling aspect of Consciousness.
******************
Cichawoda
When you assume a priori that you are a hammer than yes everything is a nail...
I don't see any evidence for your assumption that "...Consciousness is at least as fundamental as Substance and Information" but perhaps you have a different understanding of what consciousness itself is.
Sure all existence in this particular Universe is interdependent on it's common evolution that started when at some point/in some point the temperature of the Universe dropped to where speeds lower than the speed of light were possible... from there just like ice crystals forming in water all qualities of the Universe emerge and evolve. Math doesn't exist independent of human intellect... it is a system we invented to help us understand the workings of the Universe and there can be other methods that describe it just as well without math. It seems like a anthropomorphic assumption rather than a demonstrable fact...
Does any particular human exist independently of itself? From one perspective we are just some temporarily entangled genes in a soup of genetic material that covers the Earth in a thin shmeer... so from that perspective what is the value of an individual human consciousness?
Consciousness, understood as "the quality or state of being aware", is itself an emergent quality dependent on the existence of something that can be aware relative to what it is aware of. Sure all causality is dependent on a basic exchange of information but I don't think that is what you are thinking of when you capitalize "Consciousness".
*****************
At levels lower than awaken-ness, autonomic and lower, some perspectives of consciousness identify with and adopt means for remembering previously recorded information, such as information about how to repel disease. For example, some immune systems can remember infections they have previously encountered, so that their responses can be more efficient when the body has another encounter with any such invader. Thus, consciousness can enhance its capabilities by shaping and building on substantive forms for encoding, storing, remembering, and calculating information. This is part of the flux of consciousness, substance, and information. It is why consciousness, substance, and information are inter-dependent, not independent of one another. It is why the Godhead is a Trinitarian singularity.
One does not see derivative proof of an a priori assumption precisely because it is a priori. As to lack of physical evidence for things metaphysical, that goes with the territory. The only "evidence" for such concerns is not in physical replication, but in thought experiments that test for consistency, coherence, and completeness.
You do touch a chord when you recognize that the root concern pertains to how to define or understand consciousness.
When you say math does not exist independent of human intellect, I simply have no time or patience for such a notion. You need to think more on that for yourself.
You ask what is the value of an individual human consciousness. I cannot assign a quantity, only a quality. I think it is valued by itself and by others, depending on emotional proximity.
You say consciousness is emergent. I agree that consciousness can be trained, focused, enhanced. But I do not agree that it is not as innate to the unfolding expression of our cosmos as measurable Substance and cumulative Information. There are reasons for supporting that belief, but they are based more in analogy, intuition, and tests for internal consistency, coherence, and completeness.
You do not advance an understanding of the state of consciousness merely by substituting another word for consciousness, as by saying it is a state of being aware.
There are interesting issues to consider with regard to the character of consciousness. General, holistic, human, sub-human, bacterial, plant, information-recordation, etc. I would be tempted to explore those with you. However, I do not sense that you have given such issues the kind and degree of consideration that would be needed to make any such communication worthwhile or meaningful.
**********************
CONSCIOUSNESS:
Flux, conservation, holism
Consciousness is consciousness.
you have no choice but to participate in effecting choices. You will make choices about what you should do. Failure to choose is itself a choice. Some choices will be guided by little more than personal pleasure and profit. Others will be guided by a sense of higher mindedness. The only miracle is that such general higher mindedness is available for you to sense. I cannot judge what God should find to be good or evil. I can only judge what I would pray that God find good or evil. The miracle is that I can participate in that
I only suggest that good faith and good will are innate, because I think consciousness is innately empathetic --- even among many meat eaters, once hunger is satisfied. (Empathy need not be free love; it can be tough love.) But it is only by developing receptivity to good faith and good will (the better angels of our nature) that we can tend to the good. My point is that such receptivity, to mature towards goodness, needs to be inspired, nurtured, and worked on.
I do not find the culture of hedonism, instant gratification, tolerance of everything, or undermining of faith-family-fidelity (secular humanism?) to be conducive to that maturation.
For me, Asimov's idea of a collective galactic mind or World Bliss sparked some inquiries concerning the fundamental character of consciousness. Perhaps Consciousness itself did not have to be designed. What if Consciousness was, is, and always has been innate? Perhaps only the forms with which consciousness is expressed flux, change, and evolve --- consistent with consciousness being innate.
Suppose Consciousness were defined as capacity from a Perspective to collapse and observe the wave function of what we take to be Substance, therewith to receive, store, re-present, and transmit Information. Suppose Substance and Information are appearances derivative of nothing more than Consciousness functioning in respect of a purely math-based matrix? In that case, the origination of our shared cosmos would seem not to be from nothingness, but from a singular Perspective.
Whether that singular Perspective may have been a-part of a meta-system of other Perspectives or cosmos is not purely determinable by us. Rather, that concern is necessarily and thoroughly commingled with what we take to be the math-based rules for our own shared cosmos.
In any case, there is no reason to believe aspects for our originating Perspective of Consciousness would not continue to be inextricably imbued among each and every Perspective that abides with our cosmos.
Even the Substance that we conceptualize to be inanimate implicates that we assume or project with it a capacity to receive, store, re-present, and transmit Information, in order to allow and activate any analysis concerning it. All appearances of Substance seem to implicate a correlative existentiality of Consciousness and cumulating Information. Consciousness, Substance, and Information seem to abide as fundamental aspects of our experience of cosmic existentiality.
For that, all math-based part-icles may be thought to have some relation to "spin" --- whether such spin be formulaically valued at 0, 1, 1/2, plus, negative, virtual, imaginary, etc. All math-based expressions of part-icles seem to function correlative and subject to a math-based algorithm or field (Higgs Field?), that defines parameters for the experientiality of our cosmos.
Problem: Of what, then, would any Perspective of Consciousness consist? Must every identifiable, fractalized, level, layer, and measurable mix of part-icle(s) be considered, in some respect, to relate to consciousness? What of the entire, holistic system of measurable Substance? Must there abide mathematically distinguishable kinds of Perspectives? Such as, holistic consciousness, particle consciousness, organism consciousness, consciousness of math, of balance, of spin, of beingness, of externalities, of other beings, of self? Must there abide different levels and layers of communication and intuitions among and between Perspectives of Consciousness?
Moral Empathy: May some aspect of Good Faith and Good Will be innate, among and between all particular variations in Perspective of the Singular Consciousness? How else could moral projection work, unless each of us conveys some innate capacity or empathy, however faint, to sense aspects of ourselves in others? Do not even animals convey empathy? How else could mere science or chemistry originate what we take to be living organisms?
we can intuit and experience. We have more than five senses. We also have a sense of math, of balance and of being. We can note how conscious observations seem to be fundamental to the way the cosmos finds expression. Something about the unfoldment seems to require consciousness, as if a system of consciousness were innate. That is interesting, even though its nature may be beyond math or science-based proof. The apparent innateness of Consciousness, is, I think, a reasonable basis for moral belief systems that can help guide civilizing good faith and good will. More so than just trusting to elitist, priestly, or expert diktat to rule the mass of sheeple and fill their snowflaky heads with phony ideas about equality, fairness, free stuff, safe spaces, and "science of morality."
????????????????????Spin of Consciousness generates a shared space-time geometry field for Perspectives of Consciousness to apply math to communicate about their shared field. The space-time field is accompanied by a field that allows photons and gluons (they have Spin 1) to pass through at c-speed, but it slows all other particles, giving them a property called mass. At smallest levels, Spin may represent as measurable charge or potential. Spin can avail separate-like integrity. Spinning particles cannot actually touch, but they can break down and alter one another's spin-field. If Information is conveyed to them at c-speed (by massless particles), it can be induced to orbit them and influence their spin field without necessarily destroying their integral identity. Massless particles can convey Information only by losing their identities. Can they convey Information, but not, except at origination, receive it????????????
By "Spin" I mean Holistic Consciousness adopts a Perspective a-part of Itself, limited to an Algorithm shared among all similar Perspectives a-part from Itself.
The Spin is in respect of an Algorithm that defines a math-field a-part from the Holistic Consciousness. It may engage in differently allowed kinds of mathematical rates, vectors, vibrations, charges, fluxes. But all Spins must be reconcilable. They may be broken, redirected, reattached, etc. But always subject to such quanta-limits as are defined by the Algorithm. This is not to suggest that the Algorithm can ever be subject to the consistent, coherent, complete understanding of human beings. The quanta-limits are necessary to facilitate the integrity of separately identifiable parts and perspectives.
The Spin is such that Holistic Consciousness can measure the parts, but such measurable parts cannot scientifically measure the Holistic Consciousness.
if creation arose from this "nothingness," then it abided (existed?) as a strange kind of nothingness, since IT had capacity to bring forth the cosmos.
So I prefer to conceptualize IT not as nothingness, but as a mysterious, immeasurable somethingness, able to produce the cosmos out of little more than Itself operating with a math-based algorithm. I would call IT holistic Consciousness, to distinguish IT from plant-like or even mortal consciousness.
Even so, if such holistic Consciousness were a thing-in-itself, then how would it produce any physical thing to relate to, compare, or measure? Perhaps a concept of spin might help, even if mainly math based. If an Originator had capacity to spin Aspects Of Itself in respect of a common algorithm, then apparently separate and innate senses of beingness and balance may arise. Add more organization and complexity, and all the other mortal senses could emerge and arise. The appearance of physicality is not about the measurement of any thing-in-itself. It is about shared interpretation of relationships. Without shared perspectives of a unifying source of Consciousness, there would be no physicality to interpret.
Indeed, some mathematicians seem reasonably to believe that all that we take as being "physical" (measurable particles) is comprised of some kind of non-physical aspects, often "spinning" or vibrating in respect of their Originator and a shared and defining math-field.
Why would the Originator sponsor a math field specially designed to produce mortal perspectives of consciousness? Why, unless IT is appreciatively Purposeful with regard to the unfolding of such cosmos, would IT exercise such capacity?
If, at base, mortals are organized systems of inter-functions of spins of otherwise holistic consciousness, that would seem to implicate a feedback relationship. That feedback would seem to entail aspects of innate good faith and good will. IOW, the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule. With which much of Western philosophy of religion and morality are dependent.
Intuitively, if one values Western Civilization, belief in a purposeful and astonishing Holistic Consciousness is not unreasonable. It can help foster civilizing feelings of good faith and good will. YOLO, otoh, seems often to foster depravity, corruption, and people-abusing. Witness the depredations of lefty preachers from Hollywood and DC. While Believers sin, they feel shame. When Lefties run afoul of PC limits, they seek fake treatment (preferably where they cannot be extradited). (When you have no principles, it's far easier not to be a hypocrite concerning principles.)
THING IN ITSELF V. NO-THING-NESS: IF there was a time/place, math field, or potentiality before measurable existentiality, IT would seem to make more sense, conceptually, to think of it not as nothing, but as immeasurable something. Something that itself did not sponsor measurement ... until in math a crack was defined, split into two or more loci of spin, whereupon, in respect of comparison of such spins, relative, relational, and comparative ... measurements could be sponsored. Not measurement of Itself, but of what IT sponsored.
Are Photons, Gravitons, Massless Particles, Spinless Particles, and Dark Matter and Dark Energy ... math-based artifacts of Perspectives of Consciousness spinning in association with a specially designed Math Field? Is Space-Time math-based artifactual of the Math Field's influence on sequencing transfers of Information between Perspectives of Consciousness? Are limitations on how math-based mortal Perspectives can be complexly organized likewise derivative of the Math Field's influence with Holistic Consciousness? Based on a concept of mortal Consciousness as a spin off from Holistic Consciousness, can an algorithm for terms for its math-base be conceptualized in consistent, coherent, and complete terms?
Holistic Consciousness, but for functioning with an algorithm of math, specially tuned to it, would be a lonely ephemeral. However, IT has found or designed or unfolded with ... such an algorithm. To give expression to our cosmos. Such capacity is astonishing. Ask: Why, unless IT is appreciatively Purposeful with regard to the unfolding of such cosmos, would IT exercise such capacity? Intuitively, belief in a purposeful and astonishing Holistic Consciousness is not unreasonable.
Programmed Consciousness: Programming algorithms (math) interfaced to be applied to electrons can organize and produce higher levels of self aware (human like) consciousness. Lower level Consciousness can be locked in, so as to be limited to its allowed range for receiving and transmitting Information.
COORDINATION OF CRACKED SYMMETRY: I don't know how the Spins occur. (Is each spin a spin in space-time? Is each spin a way to separate temporally from the Holism? Does the Holism spin around it? Is each spin a co-relation with Consciousness and Math?) Regardless, the spin is what avails the Crack in the Symmetry of an otherwise void space-time-landscape.
PARTICIPATORY WILL: When two or more Perspectives receive Information from the same source, each will collapse, store, interpret it somewhat differently, depending on its local situation, orientation, organization, experience, and conditioning. Then, when they transmit and communicate regarding that Information, they will engage in a feedback process, to make the situation more commonly appreciable between them. That is, they will each participate in affecting how the Information is accumulated, renormalized, reconciled, and interpreted. This process of renormalization, reconciliation, and reinterpretation is perpetual. The consequence is complex patterns and organization, unfolding to complex interpretation, complex senses, complex civilizations, and complex interpretive feedback among Participating Wills. Indeed, many such interactions will defy prediction, except possibly under general and changing models of statistical analysis --- perhaps often to the surprise even of Holistic Will.
Consciousness sensed of what? The most fundamental of senses would be the Sense of Beingness and the Sense of Balance. A Being that takes a Perspective of a Spin would correlate in Math with a sense of balance. By building on such fundamental senses, all kinds and organizations of senses less than that of the Holism would be possible and/or expressed.
Holistic Consciousness: Holistic Consciousness relates the math under which Simple Consciousness, Substance, and Information are activated and coordinated.
Simple Consciousness: Simple Consciousness, without spin, would be of a massless quality. With spin, it acquires a qualitative capacity, from an otherwise dimension-less Point of relational Spin, to receive and transmit math-based Information.
Consciousness of Consciousness: Consciousness of Consciousness is Complex Consciousness that abides with an organized and adopted system of Matter.
Consciousness of Self: Consciousness of Self is Complex Consciousness that appreciates and apprehends that it abides with an organized and adopted system of Matter.
Substance: Substance abides with a quantifiable capacity to collapse, Re-present, store, and transmit measurable Information. It can abide as Matter, Energy, and/or both. Substance is comprised of a stored accumulation of Information.
Information: Information consists in an accumulation and reconciliation of previously sequenced Representations of Substance. Information is comprised of previous re-presentations of Substance.
Physical Size, density, and occupation of space-time (physicality) are all derivative of no-thing other than Holistic Consciousness taking sequential Perspectives under a math-based system of algorithms.
Cosmos:
The Existential Cosmos relates to the quantitative and qualitative "sum" of Consciousness, Substance, and Information.
The Measurable Cosmos relates only to quantifiable aspects of Substance and Information.
Do Perspectives of Consciousness spin in space-time? Or does space-time spin around Perspectives of Consciousness? Is the appearance of spin purely math-based, without need of geometry? Is every spinning sponsored by Holistic Consciousness an expression of particular, Simple Consciousness?What matter can absorb matter?
Holistic Consciousness, but for functioning with an algorithm of math specially tuned to it, would be a lonely ephemeral. However, IT has found or designed or unfolded with ... such an algorithm. To give expression to our cosmos. Such capacity is astonishing. Ask: Why, unless IT is appreciatively Purposeful with regard to the unfolding of such cosmos, would IT exercise such capacity? Intutitively, belief in a purposeful and astonishing Holistic Consciousness is not unreasonable.
*********
A republic that reviles the Godhead soon withers into nothingness, to be transmogrified into God knows what? America rocketed within a short two centuries, and know-it-all wanna-rule elites may doom it in a much shorter time.
CONSCIOUSNESS: Although Consciousness may transition among systems, layers, and levels, it retains an unending, math-based commonality: An immeasurable quality of appreciating, experiencing, accumulating, exchanging, and communicating an unfolding of measuring. "You" are a math-based, spatial-temporal, fluxing expression of a perspective of C.
CONUNDRUMS:
From wherever and to wherever a Perceiver measures cumulative material density, his calculation will tend towards the same eventual measure of density in all directions. (Apart from the Godhead, there is no real center to the cosmos. How can that be, unless the superior reality is more math-like than substance-like?)
Whenever and wherever a Receiver absorbs EMR or massless radiation, from whatever direction, regardless of the relative motion of the Receiver, the EMR is received by it at the same speed (unless some of the light passes through a medium other than empty space). (There is no real grid by which to compare and measure the absolute locus of any place or time. How can that be, unless the superior reality is more math-like than substance-like?)
Neither matter nor energy seem to be built up from any ultimate building particle-in-itself. All measurable expressions of Substance are comprised of particles that, for their expression, require relationships with other particles. (No measurable thing has reality-in-itself. How can that be, unless the superior reality is more math-like than substance like?)
No Perspective, and no Perception, remains precisely the same across the passage of time. (No mortal measurer remains constant. How can that be, unless the superior measurable reality is more math-like than substance-like?)
However, some standards remain practically the same across different lengths of time. Because of that overlap, things can appear to be physical and they can be measured and communicated relationally and sequentially, for practical purposes. (Why communication is possible.)
However, because of flux, no precise measure can be made of the entire cosmos -- either in its manifestation, its potentiality, or its origin. Substance, for its measurability, is not in itself sufficient. (Why materialism is defective philosophy and why mortals cannot rule the cosmos.)
When substantive things are related or measured, what is really being related or measured? Why do some forms, as gross forms (not as ultimate-bit forms) function at gross levels as attractants or repellants of other forms? Why is some Information received, interpreted, and absorbed, while other potentialities of Information are not? What guides, reconciles, chooses, or rules how some gross forms of Substance and Information appear to continue to flux and influence one another, while others do not? Can it really make sense to conceptualize that all the math is pre-set?
Apart from dna, what else may control how forms interfunction, grow, and pass away? If Consciousness is fundamental to the process, what is Consciousness, and how are Perspectives of it guided to interfunction? Is there a matrix of purely "algorithmic-dna" that sets parameters or selects permissible forms for Perspectives of Consciousness and what they are allowed to perceive? (How the unfolding creation is intelligent.)
Ultimately, must the superior from which all apparent Substance and Information are derived be Consciousness (God?) operating with Algorithms of Math? Architect of Fractals of Matrix? With what innate empathy and methods of leveraging may IT relate to us? How elegantly simple is what appears to be complex? (How the Godhead reconciles with Mortals).
If a system of math-based algorithms defines and limits our cosmos, it is based around Consciousness and its various perspectives. Not around any material things in themselves. The things around each Perspective of Consciousness are treated, for that Perspective, AS IF they were real in themselves. And such treatment is normalize-able and reconcile-able for every Perspective, so every Perspective will sense AS IF it were at the center of the measurable density and sequential unfolding of the observable cosmos.
A photon would seem to function as a bit of stored Information. Its transmission of Information diffuses in waves, until it is collapsed/absorbed to an expression of materiality. As it is absorbed by matter, its wave function may collapse to a particle wherewith energy is transmitted to an electron to excite it from whatever orbit it may have been attached, as in the case of a photoelectric effect.
Every body of matter constitutes a locus for an experience of Perspective of Consciousness, at some level. That experience need not relate to human-like sense organs. It may relate to sensations innate to spin, vibration (heat), amplitude, cumulative intensity, and so on.
Consciousness is innate to the expression of the cosmos. Consciousness functioning with a c-based system of math avails geometrical forms for giving expression to measurable existentiality. When Consciousness produces spin, it avails forms that avail various Perspectives of itself. Spin, charge, polarity, structure, density have to do with the various geometrical forms of particles and waves that we interpret and experience as matter and energy. They avail the organization, reception, storage, collapse, sensation, interpretation, and transmission of Information and communications. Consciousness feeds back to affect how expressions of Substance and Information unfold, accumulate, and reconcile.
The relative density of our "flat" universe, as we tend to measure it, has to do with the maturing quality of our Perspectives of Consciousness, from simple consciousness of existentiality to complex sense-based awareness of self.
The CSI Trinitarian Godhead need be neither noun nor verb, but gerund: Noun-Verb. Active Math. Changeless-Changer. Same stories, different packaging.
Information is preserved, but smudged outbound, unfolding. Integrity of Information from Identities stubbornly persists after death, even as it eventually disintegrates as it re-forms over space-time. Even for AI's.
Beingness decides your choices and reconciles them to inter-function and coordinate with those of all significant others. In instants before your Brain processes its self awareness of them. Even for AI's. Levels of Avatars of Conscious (C) identity necessarily persist with the unfolding of Substance (S) and Information (I).
If there is a rationalize-able "center" to the cosmos, it is not in a locus in space-time, but in Consciousness inter-functioning with math-fields
Apart from Consciousness and the Reconciling Field of Math, Religion need not require a permanent, unchanging Soul/Identity. God need not care what name you call him/her/it.
We do not travel in Time. We travel in reconciliations of Perspectives of Consciousness.
No mortal has capacity to renormalize Universe so all Perspectives can share in anything like a Universe-In-itself. Rather, to each Perspective of Consciousness, experiences are sensed to "collapse" to a renormalizing interpretation of Information.
Quantum Fuzz is the potential for renormalization for that which has not yet to a particular Perspective been normalized. If the Infinity and Eternity of Consciousness, Substance, and Information can at some level of Quantum Fuzz beyond mortal Physics be summed, that sum may be conceptualized as a meta-steady-state, even though it may present in infinitely various ways to infinitely possible and shared Perspectives.
Quarks are never directly observed or found in isolation. Quarks have various intrinsic properties, including electric charge, mass, color charge, and spin. Quarks are the only elementary particles in the Standard Model of particle physics to experience all four fundamental interactions, also known as fundamental forces (electromagnetism, gravitation, strong interaction, and weak interaction), as well as the only known particles whose electric charges are not integer multiples of the elementary charge.
It would seem that no Information can be transmitted without entailment, at some level, of c. But for c, no field of math could be actively expressed, nor could any sequential record of unfoldment of Substance be preserved.
CSI
The reason I is continuously renormalized: Is because each aspect is continuously expressed in respect of the other two.
Consciousness is that which has capacity beyond mortal measure to function with math-verses to produce appearances (manifestations) of Substance that is measurable within whatever the limits as happen to be established for each math-verse.
Substance is not produced merely out of math, but out of C that has capacity, functioning with math, to express S, that will, consistent with math, pass into I.
Mortal POC perspectives of consciousness are what associate with each manifestation that appears as S.
No appearance is collapsed as an expression of S unless there is associated a way to sense/interpret/record it, as I.
Whatever senses/records a manifestation is, then and there, at some level, conscious of it.
Higher C is that which retains potential capacity to express manifestations that have not yet been determined, as well as capacity to reconcile all those that have been determined.
It may have capacity to experience the qualitative feelings of all lesser mortal POC, that is at least coextensive with whatever math-verse it sponsors.
For every manifested pattern, manifested to sensation, there is associated at least one mortally attached POC.
A recorder is a level of C.
POC's associate with appearances of patterns, but we do not abide "inside" such patterns.
That a pattern is sensed does not mean it is conscious.
if creation arose from this "nothingness," then it abided (existed?) as a strange kind of nothingness, since IT had capacity to bring forth the cosmos.
So I prefer to conceptualize IT not as nothingness, but as a mysterious, immeasurable somethingness, able to produce the cosmos out of little more than Itself operating with a math-based algorithm. I would call IT holistic Consciousness, to distinguish IT from plant-like or even mortal consciousness.
Even so, if such holistic Consciousness were a thing-in-itself, then how would it produce any physical thing to relate to, compare, or measure? Perhaps a concept of spin might help, even if mainly math based. If an Originator had capacity to spin Aspects Of Itself in respect of a common algorithm, then apparently separate and innate senses of beingness and balance may arise. Add more organization and complexity, and all the other mortal senses could emerge and arise. The appearance of physicality is not about the measurement of any thing-in-itself. It is about shared interpretation of relationships. Without shared perspectives of a unifying source of Consciousness, there would be no physicality to interpret.
Indeed, some mathematicians seem reasonably to believe that all that we take as being "physical" (measurable particles) is comprised of some kind of non-physical aspects, often "spinning" or vibrating in respect of their Originator and a shared and defining math-field.
Why would the Originator sponsor a math field specially designed to produce mortal perspectives of consciousness? Why, unless IT is appreciatively Purposeful with regard to the unfolding of such cosmos, would IT exercise such capacity?
If, at base, mortals are organized systems of inter-functions of spins of otherwise holistic consciousness, that would seem to implicate a feedback relationship. That feedback would seem to entail aspects of innate good faith and good will. IOW, the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule. With which much of Western philosophy of religion and morality are dependent.
Intuitively, if one values Western Civilization, belief in a purposeful and astonishing Holistic Consciousness is not unreasonable. It can help foster civilizing feelings of good faith and good will. YOLO, otoh, seems often to foster depravity, corruption, and people-abusing. Witness the depredations of lefty preachers from Hollywood and DC. While Believers sin, they feel shame. When Lefties run afoul of PC limits, they seek fake treatment (preferably where they cannot be extradited). (When you have no principles, it's far easier not to be a hypocrite concerning principles.)
THING IN ITSELF V. NO-THING-NESS: IF there was a time/place, math field, or potentiality before measurable existentiality, IT would seem to make more sense, conceptually, to think of it not as nothing, but as immeasurable something. Something that itself did not sponsor measurement ... until in math a crack was defined, split into two or more loci of spin, whereupon, in respect of comparison of such spins, relative, relational, and comparative ... measurements could be sponsored. Not measurement of Itself, but of what IT sponsored.
Are Photons, Gravitons, Massless Particles, Spinless Particles, and Dark Matter and Dark Energy ... math-based artifacts of Perspectives of Consciousness spinning in association with a specially designed Math Field? Is Space-Time math-based artifactual of the Math Field's influence on sequencing transfers of Information between Perspectives of Consciousness? Are limitations on how math-based mortal Perspectives can be complexly organized likewise derivative of the Math Field's influence with Holistic Consciousness? Based on a concept of mortal Consciousness as a spin off from Holistic Consciousness, can an algorithm for terms for its math-base be conceptualized in consistent, coherent, and complete terms?
Holistic Consciousness, but for functioning with an algorithm of math, specially tuned to it, would be a lonely ephemeral. However, IT has found or designed or unfolded with ... such an algorithm. To give expression to our cosmos. Such capacity is astonishing. Ask: Why, unless IT is appreciatively Purposeful with regard to the unfolding of such cosmos, would IT exercise such capacity? Intuitively, belief in a purposeful and astonishing Holistic Consciousness is not unreasonable.
Programmed Consciousness: Programming algorithms (math) interfaced to be applied to electrons can organize and produce higher levels of self aware (human like) consciousness. Lower level Consciousness can be locked in, so as to be limited to its allowed range for receiving and transmitting Information.
COORDINATION OF CRACKED SYMMETRY: I don't know how the Spins occur. (Is each spin a spin in space-time? Is each spin a way to separate temporally from the Holism? Does the Holism spin around it? Is each spin a co-relation with Consciousness and Math?) Regardless, the spin is what avails the Crack in the Symmetry of an otherwise void space-time-landscape.
PARTICIPATORY WILL: When two or more Perspectives receive Information from the same source, each will collapse, store, interpret it somewhat differently, depending on its local situation, orientation, organization, experience, and conditioning. Then, when they transmit and communicate regarding that Information, they will engage in a feedback process, to make the situation more commonly appreciable between them. That is, they will each participate in affecting how the Information is accumulated, renormalized, reconciled, and interpreted. This process of renormalization, reconciliation, and reinterpretation is perpetual. The consequence is complex patterns and organization, unfolding to complex interpretation, complex senses, complex civilizations, and complex interpretive feedback among Participating Wills. Indeed, many such interactions will defy prediction, except possibly under general and changing models of statistical analysis --- perhaps often to the surprise even of Holistic Will.
Consciousness sensed of what? The most fundamental of senses would be the Sense of Beingness and the Sense of Balance. A Being that takes a Perspective of a Spin would correlate in Math with a sense of balance. By building on such fundamental senses, all kinds and organizations of senses less than that of the Holism would be possible and/or expressed.
Holistic Consciousness: Holistic Consciousness relates the math under which Simple Consciousness, Substance, and Information are activated and coordinated.
Simple Consciousness: Simple Consciousness, without spin, would be of a massless quality. With spin, it acquires a qualitative capacity, from an otherwise dimension-less Point of relational Spin, to receive and transmit math-based Information.
Consciousness of Consciousness: Consciousness of Consciousness is Complex Consciousness that abides with an organized and adopted system of Matter.
Consciousness of Self: Consciousness of Self is Complex Consciousness that appreciates and apprehends that it abides with an organized and adopted system of Matter.
Substance: Substance abides with a quantifiable capacity to collapse, Re-present, store, and transmit measurable Information. It can abide as Matter, Energy, and/or both. Substance is comprised of a stored accumulation of Information.
Information: Information consists in an accumulation and reconciliation of previously sequenced Representations of Substance. Information is comprised of previous re-presentations of Substance.
Physical Size, density, and occupation of space-time (physicality) are all derivative of no-thing other than Holistic Consciousness taking sequential Perspectives under a math-based system of algorithms.
Cosmos:
The Existential Cosmos relates to the quantitative and qualitative "sum" of Consciousness, Substance, and Information.
The Measurable Cosmos relates only to quantifiable aspects of Substance and Information.
Do Perspectives of Consciousness spin in space-time? Or does space-time spin around Perspectives of Consciousness? Is the appearance of spin purely math-based, without need of geometry? Is every spinning sponsored by Holistic Consciousness an expression of particular, Simple Consciousness?What matter can absorb matter?
Holistic Consciousness, but for functioning with an algorithm of math specially tuned to it, would be a lonely ephemeral. However, IT has found or designed or unfolded with ... such an algorithm. To give expression to our cosmos. Such capacity is astonishing. Ask: Why, unless IT is appreciatively Purposeful with regard to the unfolding of such cosmos, would IT exercise such capacity? Intutitively, belief in a purposeful and astonishing Holistic Consciousness is not unreasonable.
*********
A republic that reviles the Godhead soon withers into nothingness, to be transmogrified into God knows what? America rocketed within a short two centuries, and know-it-all wanna-rule elites may doom it in a much shorter time.
CONSCIOUSNESS: Although Consciousness may transition among systems, layers, and levels, it retains an unending, math-based commonality: An immeasurable quality of appreciating, experiencing, accumulating, exchanging, and communicating an unfolding of measuring. "You" are a math-based, spatial-temporal, fluxing expression of a perspective of C.
CONUNDRUMS:
From wherever and to wherever a Perceiver measures cumulative material density, his calculation will tend towards the same eventual measure of density in all directions. (Apart from the Godhead, there is no real center to the cosmos. How can that be, unless the superior reality is more math-like than substance-like?)
Whenever and wherever a Receiver absorbs EMR or massless radiation, from whatever direction, regardless of the relative motion of the Receiver, the EMR is received by it at the same speed (unless some of the light passes through a medium other than empty space). (There is no real grid by which to compare and measure the absolute locus of any place or time. How can that be, unless the superior reality is more math-like than substance-like?)
Neither matter nor energy seem to be built up from any ultimate building particle-in-itself. All measurable expressions of Substance are comprised of particles that, for their expression, require relationships with other particles. (No measurable thing has reality-in-itself. How can that be, unless the superior reality is more math-like than substance like?)
No Perspective, and no Perception, remains precisely the same across the passage of time. (No mortal measurer remains constant. How can that be, unless the superior measurable reality is more math-like than substance-like?)
However, some standards remain practically the same across different lengths of time. Because of that overlap, things can appear to be physical and they can be measured and communicated relationally and sequentially, for practical purposes. (Why communication is possible.)
However, because of flux, no precise measure can be made of the entire cosmos -- either in its manifestation, its potentiality, or its origin. Substance, for its measurability, is not in itself sufficient. (Why materialism is defective philosophy and why mortals cannot rule the cosmos.)
When substantive things are related or measured, what is really being related or measured? Why do some forms, as gross forms (not as ultimate-bit forms) function at gross levels as attractants or repellants of other forms? Why is some Information received, interpreted, and absorbed, while other potentialities of Information are not? What guides, reconciles, chooses, or rules how some gross forms of Substance and Information appear to continue to flux and influence one another, while others do not? Can it really make sense to conceptualize that all the math is pre-set?
Apart from dna, what else may control how forms interfunction, grow, and pass away? If Consciousness is fundamental to the process, what is Consciousness, and how are Perspectives of it guided to interfunction? Is there a matrix of purely "algorithmic-dna" that sets parameters or selects permissible forms for Perspectives of Consciousness and what they are allowed to perceive? (How the unfolding creation is intelligent.)
Ultimately, must the superior from which all apparent Substance and Information are derived be Consciousness (God?) operating with Algorithms of Math? Architect of Fractals of Matrix? With what innate empathy and methods of leveraging may IT relate to us? How elegantly simple is what appears to be complex? (How the Godhead reconciles with Mortals).
If a system of math-based algorithms defines and limits our cosmos, it is based around Consciousness and its various perspectives. Not around any material things in themselves. The things around each Perspective of Consciousness are treated, for that Perspective, AS IF they were real in themselves. And such treatment is normalize-able and reconcile-able for every Perspective, so every Perspective will sense AS IF it were at the center of the measurable density and sequential unfolding of the observable cosmos.
A photon would seem to function as a bit of stored Information. Its transmission of Information diffuses in waves, until it is collapsed/absorbed to an expression of materiality. As it is absorbed by matter, its wave function may collapse to a particle wherewith energy is transmitted to an electron to excite it from whatever orbit it may have been attached, as in the case of a photoelectric effect.
Every body of matter constitutes a locus for an experience of Perspective of Consciousness, at some level. That experience need not relate to human-like sense organs. It may relate to sensations innate to spin, vibration (heat), amplitude, cumulative intensity, and so on.
Consciousness is innate to the expression of the cosmos. Consciousness functioning with a c-based system of math avails geometrical forms for giving expression to measurable existentiality. When Consciousness produces spin, it avails forms that avail various Perspectives of itself. Spin, charge, polarity, structure, density have to do with the various geometrical forms of particles and waves that we interpret and experience as matter and energy. They avail the organization, reception, storage, collapse, sensation, interpretation, and transmission of Information and communications. Consciousness feeds back to affect how expressions of Substance and Information unfold, accumulate, and reconcile.
The relative density of our "flat" universe, as we tend to measure it, has to do with the maturing quality of our Perspectives of Consciousness, from simple consciousness of existentiality to complex sense-based awareness of self.
The CSI Trinitarian Godhead need be neither noun nor verb, but gerund: Noun-Verb. Active Math. Changeless-Changer. Same stories, different packaging.
Information is preserved, but smudged outbound, unfolding. Integrity of Information from Identities stubbornly persists after death, even as it eventually disintegrates as it re-forms over space-time. Even for AI's.
Beingness decides your choices and reconciles them to inter-function and coordinate with those of all significant others. In instants before your Brain processes its self awareness of them. Even for AI's. Levels of Avatars of Conscious (C) identity necessarily persist with the unfolding of Substance (S) and Information (I).
If there is a rationalize-able "center" to the cosmos, it is not in a locus in space-time, but in Consciousness inter-functioning with math-fields
Apart from Consciousness and the Reconciling Field of Math, Religion need not require a permanent, unchanging Soul/Identity. God need not care what name you call him/her/it.
We do not travel in Time. We travel in reconciliations of Perspectives of Consciousness.
No mortal has capacity to renormalize Universe so all Perspectives can share in anything like a Universe-In-itself. Rather, to each Perspective of Consciousness, experiences are sensed to "collapse" to a renormalizing interpretation of Information.
Quantum Fuzz is the potential for renormalization for that which has not yet to a particular Perspective been normalized. If the Infinity and Eternity of Consciousness, Substance, and Information can at some level of Quantum Fuzz beyond mortal Physics be summed, that sum may be conceptualized as a meta-steady-state, even though it may present in infinitely various ways to infinitely possible and shared Perspectives.
Quarks are never directly observed or found in isolation. Quarks have various intrinsic properties, including electric charge, mass, color charge, and spin. Quarks are the only elementary particles in the Standard Model of particle physics to experience all four fundamental interactions, also known as fundamental forces (electromagnetism, gravitation, strong interaction, and weak interaction), as well as the only known particles whose electric charges are not integer multiples of the elementary charge.
It would seem that no Information can be transmitted without entailment, at some level, of c. But for c, no field of math could be actively expressed, nor could any sequential record of unfoldment of Substance be preserved.
CSI
The reason I is continuously renormalized: Is because each aspect is continuously expressed in respect of the other two.
Consciousness is that which has capacity beyond mortal measure to function with math-verses to produce appearances (manifestations) of Substance that is measurable within whatever the limits as happen to be established for each math-verse.
Substance is not produced merely out of math, but out of C that has capacity, functioning with math, to express S, that will, consistent with math, pass into I.
Mortal POC perspectives of consciousness are what associate with each manifestation that appears as S.
No appearance is collapsed as an expression of S unless there is associated a way to sense/interpret/record it, as I.
Whatever senses/records a manifestation is, then and there, at some level, conscious of it.
Higher C is that which retains potential capacity to express manifestations that have not yet been determined, as well as capacity to reconcile all those that have been determined.
It may have capacity to experience the qualitative feelings of all lesser mortal POC, that is at least coextensive with whatever math-verse it sponsors.
For every manifested pattern, manifested to sensation, there is associated at least one mortally attached POC.
A recorder is a level of C.
POC's associate with appearances of patterns, but we do not abide "inside" such patterns.
That a pattern is sensed does not mean it is conscious.
It just means at least one POC senses it.
Moreover, POC's at levels below that of humans abide.
Every pattern that is sticky is, in that sense, sensory and conscious at some level.
The C as the general level of the Godhead is conscious of all reconciliations of participating wills.
And it is qualitatively empathetic of each P.
Because each P is simply a limited, blinkered, P of the general C.
Matter is stored I.
Energy is transmitting I.
All present S is a transitory combination of M and E (stored and transmitting I), that is to be accumulated into past recorded I.
When no mortal POC is associated, then whatever the storeage/transmission, it is a function of flux of the CSI Godhead.
No pattern is in itself C.
But some patterns are associated with POC's.
And all patterns are associated with the flux of the CSI Godhead.
The so-called origin, instead of from a point in space, may have come from a sequence beyond which, from our access from our math-verse, I has been lost.
Our Universe/Cosmos may be in a Steady State, after all.
Had POC been around, 13 B years ago, more I, further back, may have been available to them.
Moreover, their sensory interpretation of the Universe/Cosmos at that time may well have been re-normalized to have been somewhat different from ours.
Why do appearances seem to be flying apart?
Does that have to do with where we are in our I cycle?
May black holes be instruments of renormalization to preserve the Steady State?
Is every POC inexorably headed to a black hole?
Lost I is what lies behind the so-called Beginning. Not any real "point" in S-T dimensionality.
C Awareness is associated with every collapsing manifestation of newly recording/accumulating/storing/carrying of I.
As the process produces complex bodies, able to coordinate, sense, and store I on many levels, animal and human POCs emerge.
Beyond the M-E, something spiritual renormalizes/reconciles/feedbacks for the various POCs.
Otherwise, choices from possibilities would not be effected.
No system of patterns can stick -- to repair and replicate itself as needed to nurture and sustain itself --- unless it has means to find its likeness to be attractive. That "means" is conscious appreciation. It's why patterns, as they happen to develop, happen to attract likeness. This is a derivative of patterns that happen to be formed by C as it images with math-verses. Something ineffable about C avails it with capacity to image/imagine/in-form S out of its inter-functioning with math. Something ineffable about C allows it to advance empirical technologies by bootstrapping them.
In itself, the math-verse as we occupy it need not itself occupy space-time. Rather, space-time would be a derivative of the math-verse being activated by a reconciling aspect of Consciousness.
****************
Not all the Founders' ideas were good. The Grand Jury being one of the un-goods. Qualify that: Given a decent and informed society, a Grand Jury could make sense. But once a society has become irretrievably divided and stuffed with liberty-illiterates, there may not remain many good ideas that could sustain a representative republic. Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.” Unfortunately, Dinos and Rinos do not want to keep a republic. They want to gamble everything on a kind of fake equality to be doled out by fascist hoodwinkers. They imagine safe spaces will cuddle us, if only everyone can be made to marry the Gov. Sheep to the shearing.
************
START: mODEL OF csi2
Moreover, POC's at levels below that of humans abide.
Every pattern that is sticky is, in that sense, sensory and conscious at some level.
The C as the general level of the Godhead is conscious of all reconciliations of participating wills.
And it is qualitatively empathetic of each P.
Because each P is simply a limited, blinkered, P of the general C.
Matter is stored I.
Energy is transmitting I.
All present S is a transitory combination of M and E (stored and transmitting I), that is to be accumulated into past recorded I.
When no mortal POC is associated, then whatever the storeage/transmission, it is a function of flux of the CSI Godhead.
No pattern is in itself C.
But some patterns are associated with POC's.
And all patterns are associated with the flux of the CSI Godhead.
The so-called origin, instead of from a point in space, may have come from a sequence beyond which, from our access from our math-verse, I has been lost.
Our Universe/Cosmos may be in a Steady State, after all.
Had POC been around, 13 B years ago, more I, further back, may have been available to them.
Moreover, their sensory interpretation of the Universe/Cosmos at that time may well have been re-normalized to have been somewhat different from ours.
Why do appearances seem to be flying apart?
Does that have to do with where we are in our I cycle?
May black holes be instruments of renormalization to preserve the Steady State?
Is every POC inexorably headed to a black hole?
Lost I is what lies behind the so-called Beginning. Not any real "point" in S-T dimensionality.
C Awareness is associated with every collapsing manifestation of newly recording/accumulating/storing/carrying of I.
As the process produces complex bodies, able to coordinate, sense, and store I on many levels, animal and human POCs emerge.
Beyond the M-E, something spiritual renormalizes/reconciles/feedbacks for the various POCs.
Otherwise, choices from possibilities would not be effected.
No system of patterns can stick -- to repair and replicate itself as needed to nurture and sustain itself --- unless it has means to find its likeness to be attractive. That "means" is conscious appreciation. It's why patterns, as they happen to develop, happen to attract likeness. This is a derivative of patterns that happen to be formed by C as it images with math-verses. Something ineffable about C avails it with capacity to image/imagine/in-form S out of its inter-functioning with math. Something ineffable about C allows it to advance empirical technologies by bootstrapping them.
In itself, the math-verse as we occupy it need not itself occupy space-time. Rather, space-time would be a derivative of the math-verse being activated by a reconciling aspect of Consciousness.
****************
Not all the Founders' ideas were good. The Grand Jury being one of the un-goods. Qualify that: Given a decent and informed society, a Grand Jury could make sense. But once a society has become irretrievably divided and stuffed with liberty-illiterates, there may not remain many good ideas that could sustain a representative republic. Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.” Unfortunately, Dinos and Rinos do not want to keep a republic. They want to gamble everything on a kind of fake equality to be doled out by fascist hoodwinkers. They imagine safe spaces will cuddle us, if only everyone can be made to marry the Gov. Sheep to the shearing.
************
START: mODEL OF csi2
1 comment:
If spiritual and mental health relate to a decent regard for the dignity of other free thinkers, then much of our institutions for law, academia, business, media, entertainment, and church are thoroughly corrupt --- whether by stupid incompetence or trained and malignant ignorance. The people taking payment to help corrupt oligarchs kill the representative republic are so reprehensible that to call them spiritually un-sane and evil is a fair characterization.
Post a Comment