What is said in those pages is what I try to point out in that everything begins from the nothingness/randomness of the Void. Every concept exists only in relationship to other concepts in a vast developmental structure. So in order to really convey meaning to others, one must be sure that the words used to convey those meanings are defined if there is or develops misunderstanding rather than take the usual conversational shortcut of assuming a uniformity of context and definitions that generally does not exist but still leads to comments as 'I understand' and 'I agree' without any real understanding or agreement.

If you can find the page references for those book pages, the above can be redone more clearly and replace those attempts as I outlined.

Ted

it is as you say. both as you say and not as you say. which is implied in what you say. other words, frames of reference, additional concepts, alternate elaborations. additionally: is wanting physical evidence of something the best way to attack information? is occam's razor the optimal strategy? pondering more than critique. i know some order is needed for growth. is all growth dependent on order? that is more question than pondering. cause i think the focus on order as fundamental is reducing potential.

in some weird way, can growth be seen as increasing the 'physical' world (to the subjective IUOC)? as we get more aware we get more able to manipulate/handle/perceive/understand larger parts of the non-physical. we apprehend more of the functionality and complexity of energy-/consciousness systems: like growing from child to adult here on earth implies an increase of information of the physical (which is actually non-physical), is it not similar "outside"? more and more gets physical to us. conceiveable and available to our 'manipulative' intent. (of love.) pondering more than questioning.

or is that just squeezing the metaphors?

kristian

As Tom has described, Consciousness Space became Conscious as the One Consciousness because free will developed. That is all of those proto IUOCs interacting over the proto RWW had the beginnings of free will as what was internal to one proto IUCO could be transmitted to another proto IUOC and there independently interpreted, subjective reaction based upon free will, by which long path eventually meaning developed as pattern matching in this interchange and eventually consciousness. This development of consciousness was passed as a gift to the IUOCs as NPMRs were created for their interaction. Then more rapid development was fostered by the invention of PMRs with their faster and more intense interactions and feedback.

It is this free will that is permitted to go to extremes that is depended upon by AUM to expand horizons but there must be an evaluation to follow where the wheat is winnowed from the chaff. We do much of this ourselves here in PMR as we act with good Intent and including as necessary the protection of the free will of those not able to defend their own. If we don't do the job adequately and an entity continually falls behind with rising instead of falling entropy, the higher levels of management have the authority to start that entity back at the beginning of the line with a 'clean slate' to develop anew and hopefully on a better path.

As we develop within NPMR (slowly) and within PMRs slightly more rapidly, we lower our entropy as Tom pointed out. This decreases the disorder within our digital 'minds' and increases our functionality so "we get more able to manipulate/handle/perceive/understand larger parts of the non-physical. we apprehend more of the functionality and complexity of energy-/consciousness systems: like growing from child to adult here on earth implies an increase of information".

What we are here for is "squeezing the metaphors".

Ted

:D

Nelson Goodman "Languages of art", page 79-80. http://books.google.com/books?id=e4a5-I ... &q&f=false

"Truth of metaphor does not, indeed, guarantee its effectiveness. As there are irrelevant, tepid and trivial literal truths, there are farfetched, feeble and moribound metaphors. Metaphorical force requires a combination of novelty with fitness, of the odd with the obvious. The good metaphor satisfies while it startles. Metaphor is most potent when the transferred schema effects a new and notable organization rather than a mere relabeling of an old one. Where the organization by an immigrant schema coincides with an organization already otherwise effected in the new realm, the sole interest of the metaphor lies in how this organization is thus related to the application of the schema in its home realm, and sometimes to what the labels of the schema exemplify. But where an unaccustomed organization results, new associations and discriminations are also made within the realm of transfer; and the metaphor is the more telling as these are the more intriguing and significant. Since metaphor depends upon such transient factors as novelty and interest, its mortality is understandable. With repetition, a transferred application of a schema becomes routine, and no longer requires or makes any allusion to its base application. What was novel becomes commonplace, its past is forgotten, and metaphor fades to mere truth."


kristian