Is consciousness expansion dead?

[Mimsey Borogrove]

Sheila - you asked several times what the importance is of this to me - why am I interested in various ESP phenomena, what relevance to daily life does it have? etc. Every time you ask this I am paused, thinking why would I not be interested? What I have come to is this:

Moral behavior depends, to some extent, on a belief that there is more to life than chaos. I think having awareness of self as a unique spiritual being gives one's life direction in the choices we make. What value is there if you only live once in making any other choice than a self centered one?

I suppose, you could say, I am making a choice for my children, their children etc, and man as a whole despite the fact I will cease to exist when my body starts pushing up daisies. Or you might say, the worth of a man is how high up the wall he can piss on it , leaving his mark and hopefully it will be indelible ( the Hubbardian smashing of his name into history)

I think it is, in my case if in no other, a facet of who I am - it is a facet of my dualistic nature, and as such, I should understand it to whatever degree I can. Many things in life you don't have to understand, such as how does a cell phone work, to use them. But I feel, this is different.

Does that answer your question?

Mimsey

 

[George Layton]

Getting back to the question - is matter conscious - something occurs to me.

Dualism is the belief that we are constituted of two parts - mind - brain or soul - body the material - immaterial. When you think about consciousness - is it a result of synapses, neurons etc. interacting ? Or is the mind an immaterial thing that influences the brain?

Materialists argue the first, dualists the second, however they have a devil of a time explaining the immaterial portion, since it can't be measured. Hence the materialists seem to have won the day. But is that a false win?

If there are examples of the dualistic nature of man, would you believe them? Would you accept that as proof of the existence of the immaterial?

When you feel someone staring at you, and you turn to look at them, is that an example of materialism, or dualism?

Lets look at quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics shows that the observer can effect the outcome of the observed. Is that not dualism? What physical / mechanical connection is there?

How much of your day are you conscious? Unconscious? A vast part of your day is habitual. When you walk - do you think: I am going to put my right foot forward, and lower it onto the ground. No, you just walk. It's a habit. Virtually every thing you do during the course of the day is unconscious habits. What are habits? Unconscious repetitive patterns of action.

What about animals? Are they conscious or animatrons? Is your dog or cat conscious or a complicated machine made of flesh and blood? What about that fly trying to land on your breakfast? Could it be conscious, or is it an unconscious bundle of habits, choices innate within it, passed down through generations of flies? Could it make a conscious decision the bacon is better suited to it's needs over the eggs? Do all flies make the same choices of food to land on? Are they creatures of habit?

if we look at smaller and smaller divisions of mater, at what point does this ability to choose cease?

When an electron is attracted to one thing or another is that a choice or a habit? The materialistics would argue - no - there is no choice there - but yet quantum mechanics argues the opposite. They do appear to have a choice.

Hence, perhaps the stapler does have feelings of some rudimentary kind...

Mimsey

When you feel someone staring at you, and you turn to look at them and they aren't anymore, did they know you were about to look or were they even staring at you in the first place? Can a person become conscious enough to tell the difference?

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

When you feel someone staring at you, and you turn to look at them and they aren't anymore, did they know you were about to look or were they even staring at you in the first place? Can a person become conscious enough to tell the difference?

That sounds like one of those comedy routines: Did you know that I knew that you knew but also knew you might not know what I knew though in hindsight what you and I knew that you knew was for naught?

I guess you need to be less obvious in looking back, perhaps by glancing at something reflective to see if the starer has gone into stealth mode. Mimsey

 

[George Layton]

That sounds like one of those comedy routines: Did you know that I knew that you knew but also knew you might not know what I knew though in hindsight what you and I knew that you knew was for naught?

I guess you need to be less obvious in looking back, perhaps by glancing at something reflective to see if the starer has gone into stealth mode. Mimsey

The other day upon the stair,
I met a man that wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today,
Oh how I wish he'd go away.

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

Joe Rogan interviews Elon Musk - re: are we in a simulated reality

 

[programmer_guy]

The other day upon the stair,
I met a man that wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today,
Oh how I wish he'd go away.

And Elon Musk will smoke his pot
Then claim again for what is not
The THC that he now feels
will make him think what might be real

-------
Hmm. Maybe this could be modified into an A-A-B-A music lyric pattern.
The A parts could be C major and the B part be the relative A minor.

 

[DagwoodGum]

When consciousness expansion died within Scientology, which was the main reason I was attracted to it in the first place, it was when Hubbard came up with the purely psychotic "OT 3" and furthermore when the old OT levels were replaced with more bat shit body thetan bullshit.
Hubbard apparently had a huge "ser fac", to use their lingo to unravel their strangle web, and "must appear right at all costs" and had the rest of the OT levels replaced with the hideously evaluative, invalidating and introspective new OT levels whereby one was sent chasing his tail like a flea bitten cur in a mind numbing quest to "clean a clean".
Clean in that there never were any bt's - ever!
Then on OT8 you find out it was all bullshit and you were merely mocking it all up!
So all consciousness expansion was killed dead as a door-nail by OT3 and the "new OT levels".
The mere act of having to spend countless years sitting by yourself in the wild goose chase of finding, then talking to imaginary demons killed off any further spiritual growth and consciousness expansion.
This is the type of information they need to make available on Aftermath rather than just limping along showing friendships and families broken apart with consolatory hugs from R&R.
How can they miss the heart of the deception by such a country mile?
When is one of the R's going to spill the beans on the shit that we know that few but he knows?
LRH's Swan Song from the same year as OT3 - 1968,

Did this OT3 business start out as a joke that turned serious when Clam sycophants bought into it en-mass?

 

[JustSheila]

Sheila - you asked several times what the importance is of this to me - why am I interested in various ESP phenomena, what relevance to daily life does it have? etc. Every time you ask this I am paused, thinking why would I not be interested? What I have come to is this:

Moral behavior depends, to some extent, on a belief that there is more to life than chaos. I think having awareness of self as a unique spiritual being gives one's life direction in the choices we make. What value is there if you only live once in making any other choice than a self centered one?

I suppose, you could say, I am making a choice for my children, their children etc, and man as a whole despite the fact I will cease to exist when my body starts pushing up daisies. Or you might say, the worth of a man is how high up the wall he can piss on it , leaving his mark and hopefully it will be indelible ( the Hubbardian smashing of his name into history)

I think it is, in my case if in no other, a facet of who I am - it is a facet of my dualistic nature, and as such, I should understand it to whatever degree I can. Many things in life you don't have to understand, such as how does a cell phone work, to use them. But I feel, this is different.

Does that answer your question?

Mimsey

Mimsey, I understand about belief. I have my own, but it seems an oxymoron to me to believe and then feel a need to continually prove your beliefs to others. To me, it means a person doesn't actually believe, or confuses beliefs with the physical universe. You follow me? Or do you feel a need to get others to believe the same way you do?

For example, I believe I am a spiritual being, so it doesn't matter to me whether I can prove it or not because it can't be proven or disproven. The concept of spirit and afterlife is exactly that - something after life, something beyond life. I am satisfied that to prove something in life that exists outside of life wouldn't be a very productive quest. I am satisfied that others may not agree with my beliefs and may have good reasons to feel differently and I don't feel I'm better than them due to having a certain set of beliefs, either. Sometimes someone makes a good point and it might might change my beliefs. Or not. Or maybe mine might change them, but it doesn't matter either way. Because ultimately, my beliefs are private and belong to me. If someone is interested in hearing them, great, but if not, I'm not interested in proselytizing because the bottom line is my beliefs aren't going to change anyone else's life. They aren't facts, they are beliefs.

Sometimes a person can be helped by taking a broader look at the bigger picture, sure. That doesn't mean they have to believe they are spirits, though. Do you believe that if someone doesn't believe they are a spiritual being, or doesn't believe it in the way that you believe that they are doomed? If so, isn't that the biggest lie in every religion, a built-in excuse to feel superior and treat and speak of others as inferior?

Does it really matter if someone believes in being a good person and bringing out the best in others and believes there is good in mankind or if someone believes he or she is a spiritual being?

I don't think so. In the end, we all die and we either lived well and humanely or we didn't, we'll see an afterlife or we won't. In that way, we're all equal and all the same.

 

[This is NOT OK !!!!]

Consciousness expansion - a term coined by Timothy Leary has come back into vogue.

I recommend Michael Pollan's best selling new book Change Your Mind.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Mimsey, I understand about belief. I have my own, but it seems an oxymoron to me to believe and then feel a need to continually prove your beliefs to others. To me, it means a person doesn't actually believe, or confuses beliefs with the physical universe. You follow me? Or do you feel a need to get others to believe the same way you do?

For example, I believe I am a spiritual being, so it doesn't matter to me whether I can prove it or not because it can't be proven or disproven. The concept of spirit and afterlife is exactly that - something after life, something beyond life. I am satisfied that to prove something in life that exists outside of life wouldn't be a very productive quest. I am satisfied that others may not agree with my beliefs and may have good reasons to feel differently and I don't feel I'm better than them due to having a certain set of beliefs, either. Sometimes someone makes a good point and it might might change my beliefs. Or not. Or maybe mine might change them, but it doesn't matter either way. Because ultimately, my beliefs are private and belong to me. If someone is interested in hearing them, great, but if not, I'm not interested in proselytizing because the bottom line is my beliefs aren't going to change anyone else's life. They aren't facts, they are beliefs.

Sometimes a person can be helped by taking a broader look at the bigger picture, sure. That doesn't mean they have to believe they are spirits, though. Do you believe that if someone doesn't believe they are a spiritual being, or doesn't believe it in the way that you believe that they are doomed? If so, isn't that the biggest lie in every religion, a built-in excuse to feel superior and treat and speak of others as inferior?

Does it really matter if someone believes in being a good person and bringing out the best in others and believes there is good in mankind or if someone believes he or she is a spiritual being?

I don't think so. In the end, we all die and we either lived well and humanely or we didn't, we'll see an afterlife or we won't. In that way, we're all equal and all the same.

Right...

Can't be proven.

No way can I prove any connectiion between myself and the extraordinary and unprecedented success of Boston sports teams

But...

This year I'm transferring the Potential Energy of my book on Amazon into the Kinetic Energy of the Boston Red Sox.

Last night, with sixteen games remaining, they won their 100th game for the first time in 72 years

 

[This is NOT OK !!!!]

Right...

Can't be proven.

No way can I prove any connectiion between myself and the extraordinary and unprecedented success of Boston sports teams

But...

This year I'm transferring the Potential Energy of my book on Amazon into the Kinetic Energy of the Boston Red Sox.

Last night, with sixteen games remaining, they won their 100th game for the first time in 72 years

You have powerful mojo Sensi!!!!

It's now 101 wins.

Thank God your're on the case!

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

Sheila - re: "Mimsey, I understand about belief. I have my own, but it seems an oxymoron to me to believe and then feel a need to continually prove your beliefs to others."

Does communicating about something equal the need to prove it? I admit freely I am positive about the stuff I post, and perhaps that is mistaken as a need to prove?

Mimsey

 

[programmer_guy]

Sheila - re: "Mimsey, I understand about belief. I have my own, but it seems an oxymoron to me to believe and then feel a need to continually prove your beliefs to others."

Does communicating about something equal the need to prove it? I admit freely I am positive about the stuff I post, and perhaps that is mistaken as a need to prove?

Mimsey

If you claimed that you have a labrador retriever dog in your backyard I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that you have an invisible leprechaun in your backyard then I would definitely expect proof.

If you claimed that you had a beef taco for lunch I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that you had a Tyrannosaurus Rex for lunch then I would definitely expect proof.

If you claimed that you traveled to work in an automobile I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that space aliens took you to work in a flying saucer then I would definitely expect proof.

 

[Bill]

Sheila - re: "Mimsey, I understand about belief. I have my own, but it seems an oxymoron to me to believe and then feel a need to continually prove your beliefs to others."

Does communicating about something equal the need to prove it? I admit freely I am positive about the stuff I post, and perhaps that is mistaken as a need to prove?

Mimsey

It isn't just "communicating about something". What you do is a bit different. I paraphrase:

Mimsey: A is true.
Someone: I don't think A is true.​

Mimsey: A is true, here is a link, here is an anecdote, here is another link, A is true!​

Someone: Um... none of that proves that A is true.​

Mimsey: NO! A is true! Here are three more links, here I repeat my anecdote. A is true!​

Someone: Mimsey, all that still isn't proof.​

Mimsey: A is true. Why don't you listen to me! A is true. Why don't you read what I wrote!​

It is perfectly fine that you believe what you believe ... and it is perfectly fine that others don't believe as you do. Accept that and move on.

 

[DagwoodGum]

Sheila - re: "Mimsey, I understand about belief. I have my own, but it seems an oxymoron to me to believe and then feel a need to continually prove your beliefs to others."

Does communicating about something equal the need to prove it? I admit freely I am positive about the stuff I post, and perhaps that is mistaken as a need to prove?

Mimsey

People often put the burden of proof on someone who says something they disagree with so that the onus isn't on themselves as to why they believe the opposite is the truth.
No one wants to even open their mouth or write a post if it has to be a formal thesis with references, footnotes and hyperlinks.
No one can prove what they ate as a child but does this then "prove" they starved?
I've been forced to live a wacky life due to circumstances beyond my knowledge of or control and as a result I hesitate to even mention half the shit that's happened because I'm not about to jump through any flaming hoops convincing anyone that the shit happened exactly as I've described.

 

[JustSheila]

It isn't just "communicating about something". What you do is a bit different. I paraphrase:

Mimsey: A is true.
Someone: I don't think A is true.​

Mimsey: A is true, here is a link, here is an anecdote, here is another link, A is true!​

Someone: Um... none of that proves that A is true.​

Mimsey: NO! A is true! Here are three more links, here I repeat my anecdote. A is true!​

Someone: Mimsey, all that still isn't proof.​

Mimsey: A is true. Why don't you listen to me! A is true. Why don't you read what I wrote!​

It is perfectly fine that you believe what you believe ... and it is perfectly fine that others don't believe as you do. Accept that and move on.

People often put the burden of proof on someone who says something they disagree with so that the onus isn't on themselves as to why they believe the opposite is the truth.
No one wants to even open their mouth or write a post if it has to be a formal thesis with references, footnotes and hyperlinks.
No one can prove what they ate as a child but does this then "prove" they starved?
I've been forced to live a wacky life due to circumstances beyond my knowledge of or control and as a result I hesitate to even mention half the shit that's happened because I'm not about to jump through any flaming hoops convincing anyone that the shit happened exactly as I've described.

DG, Bill said it in a nutshell and Programmer Guy was clear about the sorts of things others ask to be proven. Not normally whether you ate well as a child. Also, the simple statement of "I believe" is usually enough that others don't ask WHY you believe something. A belief is a belief. I've never encountered someone questioning WHY I believe something, though they might counter something I say with a possible physical explanation worth considering.

I've had incredible things happen in my life. Over the years, I've interpreted those incidents in a number of different ways. Not all of them have a concrete physical explanation, but some did. Stuff happens.

Beliefs don't need to be proven. They are beliefs. There are atheists on this board that I've discussed privately some of the weird, unexplained stuff that has happened in my own life, but it doesn't matter whether they believe the same way I do. They didn't have explanations, but they didn't agree with my beliefs, either. We're still good friends because we respect each others' rights to believe or not believe different explanations for different scenarios. That's really the crux of it - respecting others' rights to believe or not believe along the same line. You have a wild explanation and atheists or others shut it down. What do you expect? Atheists might come up with a possible physical explanation for something weird that just doesn't fit and you shut it down. In the end, we can only interpret events that don't have explanations. That is belief or non-belief and it's perfectly fine.

(Gotta run, probably won't be on for a few days. Long work stint.)

 

[Clay Pigeon]

You have powerful mojo Sensi!!!!

It's now 101 wins.

Thank God your're on the case!

The day the season ends most teams go home

The rest to 0-0.

Balls to the wall babylove; I am going to NAIL this sonofabitch!!!

I'm not only playing my Ace in the Hole...

I got another one up my left sleeve which I'll slip out in early October...

My doghouse is on FIRE!!! TINOK and my turds are smokin'

Hope y'all enjoys de show...

 

[Clay Pigeon]

If you claimed that you have a labrador retriever dog in your backyard I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that you have an invisible leprechaun in your backyard then I would definitely expect proof.

If you claimed that you had a beef taco for lunch I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that you had a Tyrannosaurus Rex for lunch then I would definitely expect proof.

If you claimed that you traveled to work in an automobile I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that space aliens took you to work in a flying saucer then I would definitely expect proof.

But if the Red Sox win the World Series AND I turn the parley to get Tom Terrific ring number 6...

It won't prove a damn thing

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Sheila - re: "Mimsey, I understand about belief. I have my own, but it seems an oxymoron to me to believe and then feel a need to continually prove your beliefs to others."

Does communicating about something equal the need to prove it? I admit freely I am positive about the stuff I post, and perhaps that is mistaken as a need to prove?

Mimsey

I enjoy your posts Mims and respect you and what you say

As do many others (presumably) who remain silent

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

If you claimed that you have a labrador retriever dog in your backyard I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that you have an invisible leprechaun in your backyard then I would definitely expect proof.

If you claimed that you had a beef taco for lunch I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that you had a [bcolor=#ffff00]Tyrannosaurus Rex for lunch[/bcolor] then I would definitely expect proof.

If you claimed that you traveled to work in an automobile I would not likely expect proof.
If you claimed that space aliens took you to work in a flying saucer then I would definitely expect proof.

Yep - pollo loco - as I recall birds are descendants of the dinosaurs. And! They can fly! Mimsey