Philosophy Now Forum

jackles wrote:Ha. But the individual you that distinguishes its self as separate has a indistuishable hoste that is waiting for you. And that you is you.

Just wishful religious thinking.

Yep well can see how you cant see it because logic is local.

If there is a 'non-locality' then it will obey Logic.

Not in the local logic sense it wouldnt. Its out side the local logical frame of ref regs the event. It cant be measured.

If it's outside of logic it is unknown, and is a matter of whatever bull shit you want to make up about your beliefs, it's of course your look out, but if there is no reason or indeed you are just going to wax lyrical on a lack of any ability to describe something, fine, but it's just arm waving, saying you have this opinion on something. No one cares Jackles.

I for example could believe the sun wont rise tomorrow because I believe that the sun is unable to, because I have faith in it not being able to, because some one told me that and now I can't ever change my thought systems because... Do you see. You're just exercising your right to believe any old shit, just because you have been programmed by some **** to believe it? No? You say a lot of things, but you know well everything you say is just your slavish devotion to something you never really thought about, that was programmed into you, and you reiterate endlessly because you haven't the intellectual courage to question it.

Hence because you simply have to have faith over reason because no one ever gave you the tools to really reason.

These are not the droids you are looking for, use your mind to escape, use your mind to reason, but for heavens sake stop talking utter shit that has been programmed into you since birth by who knows whom. Think for yourself, for once in your Jesus life. It couldn't hurt no?

Believe whatever religion you like, believe whatever you like but don't try and pass off this utter bs as anything more than fantasy just because you chose to believe whatever you could through the wardrobe into fucking Narnia, you dull little mushooom. Dya see?

Back that shit up, back it up with some sort of reason and stop arm waving. Or don't but living in a dark cave, as a mushroom, is not something anyone with any sense would choose. Convincing only yourself is a lonely place to be.

Ha . Its getting to you blagsy. But its you blags thats not getting nonlocal picture of things. Your not understanding what it is in physics. The whole universe is inside it as locality and all this reasoning is really unessisary as in physics we ultimately exist in an unmeasurable. What is one mans meat is another mans poison. Nonlocality is poision to the local mind because the local mind at the end of the day hates to think outside its self.

To answer arising nonlocality is where reason has resolved its self into nothing or nilism if you like. You except your self as nothing in event terms. But it the nothing is the exact same nothing that exists as non locality in physics. Your over self is out side of timespace. Its the realest you its love with out attachment to the event. Jah is love the real you.

jackles wrote:Not in the local logic sense it wouldnt. Its out side the local logical frame of ref regs the event. It cant be measured.

Logic is not about measuring and the sense of this 'local' logic would apply exactly in your 'non-local' logic, i.e. this 'non-local' cannot exist and not exist, it either exists or does not exist, etc. Personally you are just talking about something you can't talk about and describing attributes that you can't know. All you can say is what Kant said, there is a noumena, everything else is just nonsense. Now you could say that I've just done the same thing but I'm not saying anything exists, just that if it exists then Logic applies as Logic arises from the existence of things and states of affairs.

Yep go with what you are saying arising have to because its the truth. The truth exists as you have said it but as consciouse nonlocality. You have correctly stated nonlocality is indescribable exept maybe we could say that it exists and that it does not move. Or should I say in that light that kants findings are correct but with the additional imformation that his findings are not only correct but exist as an unmoving consciousness in the observerse brain.