Ted : It is not at all necessary to understand these things. The system is designed to work with the participating consciousnesses functioning in complete ignorance and totally unaware. But in essence these are not entirely new concepts. Gautama, the Buddha, based a philosophy on this concept centuries ago. And today, many scientists, particularly quantum physicists are groping towards this as the new paradigm of science. Tom's big TOE serves to minimize the 'groping'. This is an idea whose time has come, if you read these forums and see all of the references to research being done in multiple fields.
Brad : I feel that my point was missed in reading this response Ted. My point is, Tom says we have deliberately chosen to be unaware, and essentially that the groping and the learning is what benefits our consciousness in aiding it's growth. Ok, I could accept that as a theory, but, GIVEN that I accept it's a workable theory, and that I COULD test it.. the ACT of testing it (if it WERE actually true in reality) would circumvent that agreement I would have made with my SELF to go through this life in ignorance of what I already knew. In other words, if it were TRULY beneficial to KNOW these things in this physical life, the 'system' would be such that we came into this reality ALREADY knowing.
Ted : You need not be afraid of the bogey men that Tom hinted at 'out there'. You really need to be more afraid of the teenage and up gang in the central city and the suburbs of your own neck of the woods. They are out there. Not to mention the traditional robbers and murderers of our society.
Brad : Ted, I'm sorry, but with all due respect, I find this response TOTALLY bizarre. It feels wrong to me on so many levels (presuming you are a knower or at least a believer of the Big TOE), I don't know where to begin. Ok, on the human psychology level, obviously 'hinting' at big bad monsters existing and saying 'I've seen them, and they're more ugly and more dangerous and evil than anything on earth', then saying, 'but I'm not telling any more.. go and find out for yourself, if you dare!'.. well... we all know how horror movies work.. it's the anticipation of bad things, knowing they are there but not being told what they are, where they are and how horrible the consequences of coming across one. That is what GENERATES fear. Now on the other hand, I'm NOT afraid of gangs of people, nor murderers. I KNOW what these people look like, where they are likely to hang out, etcera etcetera... if a place is dangerous to visit I can find out before going, if a person is known to be bad I can be informed... the point is, people pass on information about what they know, they teach each other and because of that we are less afraid to go out and interact with the world. I am talking about what generates fear here, not the fact that there are or are not dangerous people. If Tom wanted me to be less fearful he surely shouldn't be using the tactics of horror movie producers in order to assuage fear.. human psychology 101 stuff.
But, the most bizarre thing I find in your statement (from the perspective of the big TOE) is that you suggest I should be more afraid of people in a virtual physical life who are constrained more than other more evil entities in another virtual physical or non-physical life. This makes absolutely no sense from the perspective of the big TOE. And, why *should* I be afraid of a murderer *if* this life is just a virtual learning lab, and having *died* I just go on and carry on with my studies. Surely from that point of view (and the whole point of the big TOE as far as I can see) I should be no more fearful of being murdered than I should of losing a life in a video game.. I mean, do you actually 'know' what Tom 'knows' and still think other humans in your physical learning lab are more dangerous to you than other more 'evil' and more 'powerful' negative entities? Hmmmm.
Ted : Your last paragraph amounts to solipsism which is defined as follows:
Definition of SOLIPSISM
: a theory holding that the self can know nothing but its own modifications and that the self is the only existent thing; also : extreme egocentrism
Not a widely accepted concept.
Brad : Well, I'll accept (and if I'm the only conscious entity, then that's as widely as it *could* be accepted ;)) that in fact nothing aside from my consciousness can be proven. That's a fact of MY existence. :) A silly argument really because it can't be proven or disproven, so I'll let that go. My real point was that I could *experience* what I *think* is subjective proof, but that it *could* be an illusion of my mind.. there's no way around this, so I'll ignore it :)