Philosophy Now Forum

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 10:49 am

ken wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:

I have absolutely no idea and so I am not ruling out the possibility of one being discovered as it is entirely possible

That is great that you are now openly admitting this as how you wrote before just showed and proved how closed you actually were
How you wrote before showed no sign that you are open to any idea that other things are actually possible to what you already believed

I have never been closed minded to that possibility

You were, what you call, being closed minded.

Saying human beings WILL go extinct because of one or two particular reasons is being, what you call, closed minded.

Can you see HOW if a person says some thing WILL happen, then they are not open to it not happening?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 10:49 am I just think it statistically improbable because of other factors
Merely discovering one does not automatically mean it is suitable as it may very well not be but only time will tell

This does not have much to do with what I was and am talking about. And, hopefully you do know this already, but a just trying to side-track the issue on purpose.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:06 am

ken wrote:
By the way have you ever noticed what you write never really has much to do with clarifying what I actually
mean? Although you might ask clarifying questions like above you are writing from a very narrow even closed
view of what is believed to be true. You are not asking for clarity from the perspective of it could be possible

Why do you expect or demand everything to be understood by me right away

I do not. The emotional part of me feels frustration when it appears that what I am trying to convey is instantly dismissed as being wrong and I am told some thing as though it is actual and true fact, but I know if and when looked into much further it is not really that true at all. I NEVER expect and/or demand any thing of any one. i just want to be heard and listened to, and be accepted and fully understood for who/what i and I really am, just once in my life. All my life i feel like i have had to listen to others and have had to accept every thing that they say as being true when i know for sure that it is not true.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:06 amJust because you know or understand everything does not mean that I do too

Remember the I only knows and understands every thing because It is a collective of ALL things. i, am actually only learning how to express the idea about how I, the collective, know and understand every thing.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:06 amI have already stated that progress for me is on going so it happens over time

A very true statement. I, Consciousness or Awareness, only come about when a self-aware species evolves enough. This obviously happens over time.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:06 amYou appear to be very impatient with me but I am not as educated as you are

Hang on i was the one who first said that i was the most uneducated, simple, and slow one here.

If I am coming across as impatient, then it is not because I am impatient but rather because i feel frustrated that I can not make any person do any thing that they do not want to and because I am only learning how to show others how they can find the answers that they are looking for by them self. There is no rush but I just want to share what I finally discovered and learned, which is how to find ALL answers very simply and easily. This impatience comes out and through the one, which I am using, who is writing this. This is a bit like how the ones, I used who wrote the bible, misinterpreted what I was actually trans and in spiring to them, which obviously has caused a lot of confusion. Now I found another human being who I can use to share things with, but this person was never actually heard and listened to and as such never actually learned how to communicate properly. As is obviously proven by the way the words written here. This person desperately wants to learn how to express better, and it is in the desperation that impatience appears.

thedoc wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:03 pm Science can only report what it observes, science doesn't make up data to suit it's theories and principles like religion does.

Until science knows who or what is observing what's observed, then they'll have a whole different view on reality. Truth is, science does not know who or what is observing reality ..yet they claim to have a great knowledge of the stuff observed in reality, as if they are the sole source of their knowledge. Hence, the scientists are making up the data that they are confronted with to suit their own model of what they believe is ideal and are quite happy to go along with this ideal for as long as others are agreeing with it...but as soon as someone comes up with another idea, the previous idea/theory is tossed away which just proves that they are making it all up...So doc, why moan at the religious people when science is doing same.

What isn't made up is the overwhelming evidence of this silent empty present looker/perceiver that never moves or changes, it is always here, and cannot be tossed away/or rejected.

.

ken wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:33 pm
But the actual reason this happens is all very easily understood and very understandable also. All people are the way they are because of their past experiences. That is WHY human beings are imprisoned. If there is nothing in their past experiences to show them any thing better or show them another way, and they do not freely choose to open up to other ideas about any thing better or other ways, then they will continue to be imprisoned and not be able to find nor discover them - Self.

The beauty of the infinite is there is no rush. The Awareness of ALL-THAT-IS has evolved, and IS revealed soon enough. Human beings come to KNOW Me when they have been prepared and thus ready to.

Yes, I agree, if life has not evolved the awareness of ALL THAT IS in a particular human form then that's not their fault. It's just that it hasn't happened yet...it's not that it will never happen because there is an eternal time for it to happen...so no rush, I agree. It'll happen when it's meant to happen and not a second before.

.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:28 am

Dontaskme wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:

Questions pertaining to meaning or purpose beyond the physical do not apply to evolution because that is a purely physical phenomenon as is
entropy. Whether human beings accept or understand this is entirely irrelevant to the processes themselves. But energy cannot be destroyed
only transferred so in that sense one does not truly die. I am not saying this because I believe in woo [ I do not ] but simply because it is true
Like in scientifically true. And only so. For were it only true [ that is subjectively true ] from a woo perspective I would not be saying it at all

I agree that energy transforms into one shape or another in that there is only energy in formation

But there must be some kind of prior directive intent behind all physical processes including the process that is the human brain function
which can only be an appearance of this living directive ... so if natural selection is a case of discarding one particular species in favour of some
thing better it seems there is a hidden directive appearing to be striving for perfection ... which its already achieved in the human brain that is capable of self awareness ... and it is as and through this mind body mechanism that the universe has apparently become aware of itself ... so I personally dont believe it was by pure chance or by having no purpose

So how do you explain randomness in relation to all of that?

The appearance of randomness in relation to all of that is found and also explained in the way people look at things. Again, it comes down to looking at things from the Mind first, and then using the brain, instead of just using the brain only. To unify ALL theories is explained in how the Mind and the brain work. For example some people do not see that the stars, planets and galaxies themselves are actually alive and living things themselves. This happens when people are looking from the brain only. They are only looking from the perspective of one or some human beings, and those much longer living things actually look dead from this perspective. A bit like a fly or amoeba would think, if they can, that a human being was dead if the human body did not move for the amount of time the fly or amoeba was alive for.

The appearance of randomness at the quantum scale is not that things are actually coming out of nothing or being in two places at the same time is actually happening. It is when human beings are looking at these things from the perspective of a human being they are seeing things that do not agree with or coincide with what information that brain has acquired. The "world" of particle matters appears much different than the "world" of larger objects, but what must be understood is the way particle matters interact with each other and what is seen on this smaller scale IS what actually creates the objects and what is seen in the bigger picture.

Although what appears and seems rather different is actually not that different at all. The only real difference is in the way they are both looked at. Absolutely Everything is relative to the observer.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:28 amAnd why do you think that human beings are the epitome of perfection?

I know you were not asking Me but to Me, human beings are not the epitome of perfection. They are only a part of perfection. They are the ones that God, for lack of better word, needed in order to be able to witness, observe, see, and understand the beauty of and the "world" that God actually creates. God, Life, Consciousness, Awareness, Spiritual Enlightenment, Allah, Spirit, Creator, or whatever other label human beings want to put on that what is, which is said to create, know, and understand every thing, uses human beings' brain and sensory abilities to make sense of the "world" in which we are ALL a part of.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:28 amFor how
do you know that there is not biological life or machine intelligence elsewhere in the Universe more intelligent than us? It is entirely possible

You are right. It is possible.

thedoc wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:03 pm

ken wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:44 am If this is true, then how do you explain the contradictory nature of the theory of general relativity and the theory of quantum mechanics? You are one of the ones who was saying that these two theories are incompatible with each other. If this were so, then how can one of them be better than facts and much more than a speculation or hunch.

By the way I have not had any answers to My clarifying questions regarding What can appear at two places at the one time, et cetera, et cetera. Until I get these answers I will not explain how the two theories are actually compatible. By showing how ALL theories are compatible, then the subject about the theory of Everything can also be known. (But we are a long way of showing that just yet).

Quantum theory and classical physics use different sets of data and facts and that is where the contradiction is, any contradiction that is in the theory starts there.

If I recall correctly it was you who stated that a theory is above facts. Or something like that. There IS only one, and I repeat, only one set of facts, which are some times and generally known as the truth.

There can NOT be differing sets of facts. Sure data can be different, depending on who is actually doing the observing and the recording of data. But facts by definition remain true, no matter who is observing and reporting on them. Any court of "law" can actually show and prove just how much so called "facts" can very easily be distorted. This is solely depended upon the observer and their version or reporting of the facts.

thedoc wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:03 pmQuantum effects, that determine quantum theory, are not bound by human experience. Science can only report what it observes, science doesn't make up data to suit it's theories and principles like religion does.

It is human beings who report what it observes. Science, itself, does not have an eye or eyes to make observations. Science also does not have the ability to actually report any thing nor to make a report about any thing. Human beings do these things, and as surreptituous57 so rightly points out, human beings HAVE biases. Human beings have a tendency, and a pretty strong one at that it will be finally noticed, to find support only for what they already believe is true. This is generally known as confirmation bias.

Rid one's self of ALL beliefs, and be totally and truly honest, then all that is left is pure openness, which obviously can not have nor be biased in any way, shape, nor form.

thedoc wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:13 pm

ken wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:44 am

thedoc wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2017 4:04 pm Too many times in the past I have heard a layman use the phrase "It's only a theory" to discredit a scientific theory that they didn't like, evolution seems to be one of the favorites.

Why was it 'too' many times?

That phrase should not be used at all in that context.

But you are the one who used it. I am just trying to clarify what you meant when you used it.

thedoc wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:13 pm It is only used by people who don't understand what they are talking about.

So, because I tried to clarify a phrase that you used and in what context you were using it, I suddenly do not understand what I am talking about.

But I was not talking about any thing here. You were. I was only just trying to clarify what you were talking about.

ken wrote:
The emotional part of me feels frustration when it appears that what I am trying to convey is instantly dismissed as being wrong and I
am told some thing as though it is actual and true fact but I know if and when looked into much further it is not really that true at all

The emotional part of me does not feel frustration because I am not here to change anyones mind
I just state my position and leave it at that and let others be free to think what ever they want to
Getting frustrated over something that you have no real control over is a waste of mental energy

ken wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:
You appear to be very impatient with me but I am not as educated as you are

I was the one who first said that I was the most uneducated simple and slow one here

Yes you did but even when you did say it it was not true but no one knew that at the time

You are now the most intelligent member here and I am the least intelligent member here

ken wrote:
This person desperately wants to learn how to express better and it is in the desperation that impatience appears

The problem is not with your expression but the failure of others like me in understanding what you are trying to say
Because my mind refuses to accept anything as true where it thinks such a thing cannot be true even though it may
Being open minded all of the time is very hard for me because I am human and cannot always think like a machine
Were I a machine then I could be more open minded because I would only think logically and not also emotionally

thedoc wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:18 pm

ken wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:07 pm If that is what I am going to get, then I will now ask is there any actual video evidence of the "famous" double slit experiment with electrons?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaxmEkVlOVs

It seems that there are quite a few videos on this subject. This seems to be one of the better ones.

Thanks for that link. It seems to confirm what I have said about things depend upon how they are being looked at or observed. Everything is after all relative to or depended upon the observer, and the way they are looking. When looking from the human being perspective only (that is from the brain only) at the larger things in Life then their life-span is much longer so they can appear dead. The opposite affect happens when looking at the smaller things in Life from the human or brain perspective only. The life-span of these things is much less, so they can appear to jumping into and out of existence randomly.

Another aspect of this is that every thing that is observed has already happened and in a sense has already disappeared and thus finished and gone. As obvious Leo was trying to explain, and which I had never thought of before, there is no actual thing space. This is in the sense that there is no distance between objects or matter in length. There however is a distance between events. Although it has to be noted here that there is no actual thing as time, itself, also.

What appears to be happening at any and all scales is relative to how one is looking. The truth can be a lot different from what seems to appear. That is looking from the Mind or from the brain influences what is actual seen, and thus known.

ken wrote: ↑Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:48 am

thedoc wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:18 pm

ken wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:07 pm If that is what I am going to get, then I will now ask is there any actual video evidence of the "famous" double slit experiment with electrons?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaxmEkVlOVs

It seems that there are quite a few videos on this subject. This seems to be one of the better ones.

Thanks for that link. It seems to confirm what I have said about things depend upon how they are being looked at or observed. Everything is after all relative to or depended upon the observer, and the way they are looking. When looking from the human being perspective only (that is from the brain only) at the larger things in Life then their life-span is much longer so they can appear dead. The opposite affect happens when looking at the smaller things in Life from the human or brain perspective only. The life-span of these things is much less, so they can appear to jumping into and out of existence randomly.

Another aspect of this is that every thing that is observed has already happened and in a sense has already disappeared and thus finished and gone. As obvious Leo was trying to explain, and which I had never thought of before, there is no actual thing space. This is in the sense that there is no distance between objects or matter in length. There however is a distance between events. Although it has to be noted here that there is no actual thing as time, itself, also.

What appears to be happening at any and all scales is relative to how one is looking. The truth can be a lot different from what seems to appear. That is looking from the Mind or from the brain influences what is actual seen, and thus known.

An alternate explanation is that there are parallel universes and the photons in one universe are interfering and reacting with the photons in the adjacent universe producing the pattern seen on the screen.

ken wrote:
An alternate explanation is that there are parallel universes and the photons in one universe are
interfering and reacting with the photons in the adjacent universe producing the pattern seen on the screen

In brane theory photons cannot travel between universes where the brane resides on a closed string so other ones
cannot be observed [ assuming that they actually exist ] The only thing that could travel between them is gravity

ken wrote:
As Obvious Leo was trying to explain and which I had never thought of before there is no actual thing space. This is in the sense
that there is no distance between objects or matter in length. There however is a distance between events. Although it has to
be noted here that there is no actual thing as time itself also

Distance between events is actually one of the definitions of time
Also if time does not exist then why is there motion and entropy

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:40 am

Distance between events is actually one of the definitions of time
Also if time does not exist then why is there motion and entropy

There is motion because of the ageless stillness of this ever present silent presence that is awareness observing. Motion and entropy is relative to the observer which never moves or ages.