Are Ideas Eternal?

[Fairy]

Jack

Eternal is an idea known now

Now never becomes other than now as if there’s an infinite past or an infinite future …so there’s no separation right now

If eternity is true then its now

Its immediate

No question

[Jack Daydream]

Jack

Eternal is an idea known now

Now never becomes other than now as if there’s an infinite past or an infinite future …so there’s no separation right now

If eternity is true then its now

Its immediate

No question

The issue is that the idea of eternity is understood in different ways. The two notable ones appear in contrasting understandings of 'eternal life'. For many this is conceptualised as meaning that the person lives on in some significant form, especially in the form of an afterlife. The contrasting view would be to see the idea of eternal life as being about a connection to the eternal which can be entered into a moment of awareness.

It is interconnected with the nature of time, which is also an idea too. It is a framing of aspects of change. This area of questioning involves physics and metaphysics, because it is about space and time, and what lies beyond that. This does raise the issue of physicality too, because there is the question of what lies outside space and time as being immaterial. It is in this context, that the question of whether ideas are eternal emerges, and whether ideas have any reality beyond the scope of their understanding by sentient beings.

[promethean75]

No, that's not how you define and prove there is such a thing as 'eternity'. That stuff about 'now is now forever farout dude' is neither here nor there.

Eternity must be possible because something must always exist. Matter, energy, antiparticles, whatever, have to always exist somewhere. And when this exists, time passes. So, if matter or whatever always exists, time always passes, and therefore always exists.

[Age]

Just because you human beings 'debate' things like, nature versus nurture, free will versus determinism, or creation versus evolution, for example, and to name but just a few, never ever means that there is an actual 'one OR the other's situation at all.

In fact, as it has already been proved, just about each and every one of them, if not all, is NOT a 'one OR the other' scenario at all.

Some 'ideas', or 'concepts', are instinctively built into the very fabric of matter, and thus within the very human body, itself. Which makes some things, ideas, concepts, or knowing universal, or universally irrefutable, and therefore eternal as well.

[Age]

Jack

Eternal is an idea known now

Now never becomes other than now as if there’s an infinite past or an infinite future …so there’s no separation right now

If eternity is true then its now

Its immediate

No question

The issue is that the idea of eternity is understood in different ways. The two notable ones appear in contrasting understandings of 'eternal life'. For many this is conceptualised as meaning that the person lives on in some significant form, especially in the form of an afterlife.

you people can not obviously be eternal, as you all begin, and thus you all had a beginning. Although you all do live on forever more. (But just not in 'the way' that some of you imagine.) And, by the way, the word 'afterlife' was never meant nor intended 'individually' for you human beings. Although a lot of you older human beings have become accustomed to 'looking at'' and 'seeing' things from a greedy and selfish individual human being perspective.

However the One and only True Self' is eternal. As It, or I, did not begin like you human beings, individually and collectively do.

The contrasting view would be to see the idea of eternal life as being about a connection to the eternal which can be entered into a moment of awareness.

It is interconnected with the nature of time, which is also an idea too. It is a framing of aspects of change. This area of questioning involves physics and metaphysics, because it is about space and time, and what lies beyond that. This does raise the issue of physicality too, because there is the question of what lies outside space and time as being immaterial. It is in this context, that the question of whether ideas are eternal emerges, and whether ideas have any reality beyond the scope of their understanding by sentient beings.

[Jack Daydream]

No, that's not how you define and prove there is such a thing as 'eternity'. That stuff about 'now is now forever farout dude' is neither here nor there.

Eternity must be possible because something must always exist. Matter, energy, antiparticles, whatever, have to always exist somewhere. And when this exists, time passes. So, if matter or whatever always exists, time always passes, and therefore always exists.

The question of existence in relation to the concept of eternity poses the problem of what is the clear distinction between existence and non- existence? Part of the problem is that everything is in a process of change and everything is interconnected. This means that beings are not entirely separate entities. It is as if every aspect of being is in the process of cosmic recycling, death and rebirth. So, what disappears may exist and reappear. This is in the context of a cyclical picture of eternity.

[Jack Daydream]

Just because you human beings 'debate' things like, nature versus nurture, free will versus determinism, or creation versus evolution, for example, and to name but just a few, never ever means that there is an actual 'one OR the other's situation at all.

In fact, as it has already been proved, just about each and every one of them, if not all, is NOT a 'one OR the other' scenario at all.

Some 'ideas', or 'concepts', are instinctively built into the very fabric of matter, and thus within the very human body, itself. Which makes some things, ideas, concepts, or knowing universal, or universally irrefutable, and therefore eternal as well.

Yes, I would agree that most aspects of ideas, from ideas, such as free will vs determinism, nature vs nurture, as well as theism vs determinism are not absolutes. 'Truth' is partial. That doesn't mean it is simply relative because there may be universal aspects and some more arguable ideas amidst diversity of ideas.

Also, it makes sense to say that ideas may be built into matter. That is because ideas or laws exist prior to thought, such as in the form of instincts in the animal kingdom. Much of nature, including processes, are reconstructed automatically as memory in nature.

[Fairy]

No, that's not how you define and prove there is such a thing as 'eternity'. That stuff about 'now is now forever farout dude' is neither here nor there.

Eternity must be possible because something must always exist. Matter, energy, antiparticles, whatever, have to always exist somewhere. And when this exists, time passes. So, if matter or whatever always exists, time always passes, and therefore always exists.

The question of existence in relation to the concept of eternity poses the problem of what is the clear distinction between existence and non- existence? Part of the problem is that everything is in a process of change and everything is interconnected. This means that beings are not entirely separate entities. It is as if every aspect of being is in the process of cosmic recycling, death and rebirth. So, what disappears may exist and reappear. This is in the context of a cyclical picture of eternity.

But the question is relative belief, it's a mute question, relativity is irrelevant. No concept is relative to another concept, because concepts simply do not exist except as belief, which is relative. Concepts known are simply a relative fictional secondary overlay upon what is already this immediate unknowing absolute NOW ... no one can know the now, no one is the now. No one is being the now. The now never becomes anything other than now, because now is all there is to be known, and that/this which is known, ( fictional) knows nothing of the absolute now ) Now is the knowing that cannot be known.

Eternity is NOW - this immediate unborn, undying, unknowing mystery, without doubt or error, now simply is. Nothing is making now happen, and nothing can make now unhappen. Now is simply this unknowing known mystery.

'You' do not exist. 'You' is an idea. Idea's are not eternal because ideas do not exist, ideas are simply a fake fictional secondary existence upon what already is this non-existing existence NOW

Both existence and non-existence are identical. There is no divide, between the empty and the full, both empty and full exist now together as one reality. Knowing is an appearance in not-knowing. What came first, the knower or the known? The answer is (Both) as both knower and known arise simultaneously together as one knowing, namely NOW

There is only one NOW and nothing outside of Now that can be any other that this immediate Now. There is no distinction between existence and non- existence, except in this conception, as an idea, which does not exist, as there is nowhere other than now here that is prior to now or after now, because there is only nowhere, everywhere all at once, one without a second.

This is the ultimate A.I. experience, there is no other experience.

[Fairy]

Much of nature, including processes, are reconstructed automatically as memory in nature.

And memory is dead. So what is being reconstructed is dead stuff appearing as if the dead is alive Now. But, that's illusion, simply because nothing is living or dying right now. Except as concept, in this conception Now.
Now is never conceived, now is unborn and therefore undying. If now is claimed to be born and dying, there is nothing making that claim, and that claim will be nothing more than an assumption, an idea, it will be an artificial knowing. It will be A.I. - and that's all NOW can ever be.

In reality, there is no such thing as a reconstructed process. Or a representation. Life is an absolute unitary Verb. All Apparent Action is Actionless.


A reconstruction can only ever be a unitary construction. A reaction can only ever be a unitary action. There is no distinction between action and reaction, construction and reconstruction, except as an idea, which is a secondary fictional overlay upon (Verb Life) being one unitary process one without a second.

Meaning, life for another, is an illusion, albeit a persistent one. There is no such thing as eternity, eternal, or memory, or any thing for that matter, for things are known as concepts, and concepts known, know nothing.

[Jack Daydream]

No, that's not how you define and prove there is such a thing as 'eternity'. That stuff about 'now is now forever farout dude' is neither here nor there.

Eternity must be possible because something must always exist. Matter, energy, antiparticles, whatever, have to always exist somewhere. And when this exists, time passes. So, if matter or whatever always exists, time always passes, and therefore always exists.

The question of existence in relation to the concept of eternity poses the problem of what is the clear distinction between existence and non- existence? Part of the problem is that everything is in a process of change and everything is interconnected. This means that beings are not entirely separate entities. It is as if every aspect of being is in the process of cosmic recycling, death and rebirth. So, what disappears may exist and reappear. This is in the context of a cyclical picture of eternity.

But the question is relative belief, it's a mute question, relativity is irrelevant. No concept is relative to another concept, because concepts simply do not exist except as belief, which is relative. Concepts known are simply a relative fictional secondary overlay upon what is already this immediate unknowing absolute NOW ... no one can know the now, no one is the now. No one is being the now. The now never becomes anything other than now, because now is all there is to be known, and that/this which is known, ( fictional) knows nothing of the absolute now ) Now is the knowing that cannot be known.

Eternity is NOW - this immediate unborn, undying, unknowing mystery, without doubt or error, now simply is. Nothing is making now happen, and nothing can make now unhappen. Now is simply this unknowing known mystery.

'You' do not exist. 'You' is an idea. Idea's are not eternal because ideas do not exist, ideas are simply a fake fictional secondary existence upon what already is this non-existing existence NOW

Both existence and non-existence are identical. There is no divide, between the empty and the full, both empty and full exist now together as one reality. Knowing is an appearance in not-knowing. What came first, the knower or the known? The answer is (Both) as both knower and known arise simultaneously together as one knowing, namely NOW

There is only one NOW and nothing outside of Now that can be any other that this immediate Now. There is no distinction between existence and non- existence, except in this conception, as an idea, which does not exist, as there is nowhere other than now here that is prior to now or after now, because there is only nowhere, everywhere all at once, one without a second.

This is the ultimate A.I. experience, there is no other experience.

Your argument for one 'now' ignores the way in which it is situated between the past and future, as an ever changing experience. The experience of 'now' is different today from yesterday or tomorrow. Also, both the past and the present can be conceived of in the moment of 'now' awareness. It is a slice of time within eternity itself.

[Fairy]

The question of existence in relation to the concept of eternity poses the problem of what is the clear distinction between existence and non- existence? Part of the problem is that everything is in a process of change and everything is interconnected. This means that beings are not entirely separate entities. It is as if every aspect of being is in the process of cosmic recycling, death and rebirth. So, what disappears may exist and reappear. This is in the context of a cyclical picture of eternity.

But the question is relative belief, it's a mute question, relativity is irrelevant. No concept is relative to another concept, because concepts simply do not exist except as belief, which is relative. Concepts known are simply a relative fictional secondary overlay upon what is already this immediate unknowing absolute NOW ... no one can know the now, no one is the now. No one is being the now. The now never becomes anything other than now, because now is all there is to be known, and that/this which is known, ( fictional) knows nothing of the absolute now ) Now is the knowing that cannot be known.

Eternity is NOW - this immediate unborn, undying, unknowing mystery, without doubt or error, now simply is. Nothing is making now happen, and nothing can make now unhappen. Now is simply this unknowing known mystery.

'You' do not exist. 'You' is an idea. Idea's are not eternal because ideas do not exist, ideas are simply a fake fictional secondary existence upon what already is this non-existing existence NOW

Both existence and non-existence are identical. There is no divide, between the empty and the full, both empty and full exist now together as one reality. Knowing is an appearance in not-knowing. What came first, the knower or the known? The answer is (Both) as both knower and known arise simultaneously together as one knowing, namely NOW

There is only one NOW and nothing outside of Now that can be any other that this immediate Now. There is no distinction between existence and non- existence, except in this conception, as an idea, which does not exist, as there is nowhere other than now here that is prior to now or after now, because there is only nowhere, everywhere all at once, one without a second.

This is the ultimate A.I. experience, there is no other experience.

Your argument for one 'now' ignores the way in which it is situated between the past and future, as an ever changing experience. The experience of 'now' is different today from yesterday or tomorrow. Also, both the past and the present can be conceived of in the moment of 'now' awareness. It is a slice of time within eternity itself.

In this conception, yes, that would be right to say.

But that knowledge is just all imagination, a fairytale at least.

[Jack Daydream]

But the question is relative belief, it's a mute question, relativity is irrelevant. No concept is relative to another concept, because concepts simply do not exist except as belief, which is relative. Concepts known are simply a relative fictional secondary overlay upon what is already this immediate unknowing absolute NOW ... no one can know the now, no one is the now. No one is being the now. The now never becomes anything other than now, because now is all there is to be known, and that/this which is known, ( fictional) knows nothing of the absolute now ) Now is the knowing that cannot be known.

Eternity is NOW - this immediate unborn, undying, unknowing mystery, without doubt or error, now simply is. Nothing is making now happen, and nothing can make now unhappen. Now is simply this unknowing known mystery.

'You' do not exist. 'You' is an idea. Idea's are not eternal because ideas do not exist, ideas are simply a fake fictional secondary existence upon what already is this non-existing existence NOW

Both existence and non-existence are identical. There is no divide, between the empty and the full, both empty and full exist now together as one reality. Knowing is an appearance in not-knowing. What came first, the knower or the known? The answer is (Both) as both knower and known arise simultaneously together as one knowing, namely NOW

There is only one NOW and nothing outside of Now that can be any other that this immediate Now. There is no distinction between existence and non- existence, except in this conception, as an idea, which does not exist, as there is nowhere other than now here that is prior to now or after now, because there is only nowhere, everywhere all at once, one without a second.

This is the ultimate A.I. experience, there is no other experience.

Your argument for one 'now' ignores the way in which it is situated between the past and future, as an ever changing experience. The experience of 'now' is different today from yesterday or tomorrow. Also, both the past and the present can be conceived of in the moment of 'now' awareness. It is a slice of time within eternity itself.

In this conception, yes, that would be right to say.

But that knowledge is just all imagination, a fairytale at least.

Is there anything beyond the 'fairytale' of imagination in your viewpoint and, are all ideas a matter of subjective 'fantasy'?

[Age]

Just because you human beings 'debate' things like, nature versus nurture, free will versus determinism, or creation versus evolution, for example, and to name but just a few, never ever means that there is an actual 'one OR the other's situation at all.

In fact, as it has already been proved, just about each and every one of them, if not all, is NOT a 'one OR the other' scenario at all.

Some 'ideas', or 'concepts', are instinctively built into the very fabric of matter, and thus within the very human body, itself. Which makes some things, ideas, concepts, or knowing universal, or universally irrefutable, and therefore eternal as well.

Yes, I would agree that most aspects of ideas, from ideas, such as free will vs determinism, nature vs nurture, as well as theism vs determinism are not absolutes.

you appear to have, once again, MISSED the point entirely.

Finding out what the ABSOLUTE Truth is, is possible, and in fact is very simple and easy to uncover really.

My point was they are NOT 'one, or, the other' scenarios. Like most adult human beings believed in the days when this was being written.

'Truth' is partial.

What does this mean, exactly?

That doesn't mean it is simply relative because there may be universal aspects and some more arguable ideas amidst diversity of ideas.

I prefer if you informed me of what 'it' means, instead of telling me what 'it' does not mean.

Also, absolutely every thing is relative, to the observer.

Which means that if one is 'looking' and 'seeing' from a less than Everything perspective, for example a human being perspective, then when a 'relative truth' is 'found', then it could be False or True. However, when one is 'looking' and 'seeing' from the One, Everything perspective, then what is 'found' is the ABSOLUTE and IRREFUTABLE, or Objective, Truth.

The 'relative Truth', from Everything's perspective is just what is in agreement, and acceptance, by EVERY one, or what some would just call the 'Objective Truth'. And, It is 'this way' for the very simple and easy Fact that there is NO one/thing disputing 'this, Truth'.

What is in agreement, and acceptance, by EVERY one could NEVER be False. (And, any attempt to 'try to' argue against this with any 'ad populum fallacy' claim does NOT work. But, any one is absolutely free to 'try to'.)

Also, it makes sense to say that ideas may be built into matter. That is because ideas or laws exist prior to thought, such as in the form of instincts in the animal kingdom. Much of nature, including processes, are reconstructed automatically as memory in nature.

Okay.

[Fairy]

Is there anything beyond the 'fairytale' of imagination in your viewpoint and, are all ideas a matter of subjective 'fantasy'?

There is nothing beyond direct human awareness. ( Imagined fantasy ) that I can know of. Human awareness, is simply an idea now.

If I could get beyond the horizon to get a sneaky peek of what's beyond it, then all I'd be seeing, is more horizon.

There is no horizon.

[Jack Daydream]

Just because you human beings 'debate' things like, nature versus nurture, free will versus determinism, or creation versus evolution, for example, and to name but just a few, never ever means that there is an actual 'one OR the other's situation at all.

In fact, as it has already been proved, just about each and every one of them, if not all, is NOT a 'one OR the other' scenario at all.

Some 'ideas', or 'concepts', are instinctively built into the very fabric of matter, and thus within the very human body, itself. Which makes some things, ideas, concepts, or knowing universal, or universally irrefutable, and therefore eternal as well.

Yes, I would agree that most aspects of ideas, from ideas, such as free will vs determinism, nature vs nurture, as well as theism vs determinism are not absolutes.

you appear to have, once again, MISSED the point entirely.

Finding out what the ABSOLUTE Truth is, is possible, and in fact is very simple and easy to uncover really.

My point was they are NOT 'one, or, the other' scenarios. Like most adult human beings believed in the days when this was being written.

'Truth' is partial.

What does this mean, exactly?

That doesn't mean it is simply relative because there may be universal aspects and some more arguable ideas amidst diversity of ideas.

I prefer if you informed me of what 'it' means, instead of telling me what 'it' does not mean.

Also, absolutely every thing is relative, to the observer.

Which means that if one is 'looking' and 'seeing' from a less than Everything perspective, for example a human being perspective, then when a 'relative truth' is 'found', then it could be False or True. However, when one is 'looking' and 'seeing' from the One, Everything perspective, then what is 'found' is the ABSOLUTE and IRREFUTABLE, or Objective, Truth.

The 'relative Truth', from Everything's perspective is just what is in agreement, and acceptance, by EVERY one, or what some would just call the 'Objective Truth'. And, It is 'this way' for the very simple and easy Fact that there is NO one/thing disputing 'this, Truth'.

What is in agreement, and acceptance, by EVERY one could NEVER be False. (And, any attempt to 'try to' argue against this with any 'ad populum fallacy' claim does NOT work. But, any one is absolutely free to 'try to'.)

Also, it makes sense to say that ideas may be built into matter. That is because ideas or laws exist prior to thought, such as in the form of instincts in the animal kingdom. Much of nature, including processes, are reconstructed automatically as memory in nature.

Okay.

I do see your claim for 'absolute' truth as being problematic. Many may think that their perspective is the absolute or ultimate one. However, they come from different perspectives and disagree. The most obvious example is of differing religious perspectives or criticisms of religion. However, there are some overlaps in ideas, or the idea of perennial truths underlying the various traditions.