Return Home
It is currently Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:45 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:16 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 2088
Quote:
Lena, civilization is deeply in debt to the planetary environment, and the debt gets bigger every day. Positive thinking won’t solve the problems in the Economy, the Energy deficit, or Environmental degradation.

Choices that would allow us to back out of the global predicament are currently inaccessible, both physically and culturally. So it’s not really a moral issue. It’s simply the way things are.

Sadly, there are no bankruptcy arrangements in place between human civilisation and the Earth. Time to accept, Lena, that New Age optimism is actually a confection of denialism and hopium; better to prepare yourself honestly for the coming collapse.
vzam,

you have misread my post. I am not New Age, but I do communicate with LCS through my guides and thought stream. I don't wish to claim to be one who knows it all, but a positive outlook is what creates one's personal reality, as well as a negative one.

What happens or actions are not important. How one deals with them, what kind of intent one has does matters. In a case of looking forward to live in a grim reality one book can be very helpful. Victor Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/v ... rankl.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man's_Search_for_Meaning
http://coyoteprime-runningcauseicantfly ... -mans.html

Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 3:52 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:16 pm
Posts: 383
I apologise If I misread you, Lena. Of course I understand that MBT stresses the importance of intent. But actions speak the truth: we're fouling our own doorstep. This has a devastating affect on other life which shares our world (not rats or jellyfish, I grant you), suggesting we're breaking the most important rule of the ruleset. So humans have a very low quality of consciousness -much lower than animals that live in harmony with their environment.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 4:16 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Vzam,

It isn't that animals have such a higher QOC than humans. They can get out of balance and in excessive numbers with the local environment and destroy that environment just as humans are doing. Lemmings are notorious for that. Other animals can do so also. They tend to stay more in balance if there is a balance between predators and prey animals to enforce their staying in balance. It is when a 'foreign' animal with no natural local predators is brought into an environment when things become especially bad. And if they get out of balance, they cannot bring the same level of power to creating devastation that humans can. We however have no other prey animals and must maintain our own balance.

Ted


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:14 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 3:10 am
Posts: 72
"We however have no other prey animals and must maintain our own balance."

Ted, I'll take issue with that last statement. We do have predators - an intra species predator known as the psychopath.

If we take a look at most (if not all) social structures they begin to be taken over by the psychopaths (which comprise about 6% of the human population). Whether it is the government, the media, business, economics, the practice of Law or Medicine - we see these entities without a conscious or empathy manipulating themselves into a position to pervert that social structure to their own personal interests.

I'm fighting cancer at the moment and what I have discovered about the 'cancer industry' would be astounding if I hadn't already run into the same perversions in the military, law or politics.

I sometimes wonder if the existence of those predators may be part of the scheme of things to some how 'balance' out, or terminate the human experiment.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:59 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Terry,

What I meant was that we do not have prey animals that 'en mass' keep our numbers down like most other animals in their natural habitats, keeping the prey animal from over producing and damaging their habitat with excess numbers. Thus we reproduce without limits, until we reach some other natural limit than would have been represented by a predator that we could not avoid and kept us in natural balance. Normally in a predator/prey balance, as I understand it, there is a natural balance between the connected species. If predators become too numerous and make too great an inroad on the numbers of their natural prey animals, then they tend to die back themselves from lack of food. There are frequent reports of animals without natural prey animals in a habitat into which they have moved or been introduced, resulting in overwhelming that environment and the animals that were native to it and previously in natural balance. You might find the article on invasive species on Wikipedia of interest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasive_species

Psychopaths are very likely to be an IUOC on the negative path that Tom describes. As Tom says, there are limits to the negative path, despite the success that a highly intelligent psychopath can achieve in as you point out, business, law, medicine or potentially any occupation that they choose. They can be kings of industry, in no way limited to psycho killers springing up out of the dark. At only 6%, and with many of those not into direct killing of humans, despite preying on them in other ways, they don't do much controlling of numbers. They are as much into misery and other types of control as direct physical injury. I would like to see what psychiatrists of the far future, after consciousness is understood and MBT or its expanded successor has become common knowledge, have to say about psychopaths. My suspicion is that they will be incarnating IUOCs on the Negative path.

If you are interested, we have a 'healing by Intent' thread on the board. No promises, but then no cost either. viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5072 Nothing but your consent required to consult and ask for help from our 'healing swat team'. The idea is that those wishing to learn to heal will try to visualize your problem to understand its root cause and use their Intent to attempt to heal you. They might possible help you and you help them, with feedback of results, to see if they are learning to be successful at it. A mutually beneficial cooperation. The ability to heal injury or disease depends on many aspects of the situation: what are the probabilities, is the deck stacked against you, is this affliction a learning experience for you, planned by the LCS and thus interference will be blocked, or is it just the luck of the draw? But I and others have received help and information from the visualization of our healers. It is an informal group and no list is made other than the requests and none of those who choose to try to help. You are put on the list that you see, after you or someone requests it and removed if and when you request or we see an end point of need. Ideally, you will let us know, provide feedback, and give the learning healers a way to confirm that they are learning.

Ted


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:03 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 5692
Location: Ocala, FL
I don't think that people with mental health conditions could be considered predators for a world population of 7 billion people. Most of us don't live in nature or adhere to the laws of nature. Combine that with a low quality of consciousness and we are unable to keep ourselves in balance. So the problems are only a symptom of the real issue which is the general low QoC of the reality.

Psychopaths maybe on the negative path as Ted describes, or it may just be a brain abnormality limited to one incarnation.. Those entities may just have a bad incarnation and be fine in the next one. Or they may be down the path of many negative incarnations. If so, after every life they will do a life review and a new life will be planned out for greater success. This may even include less decision space if that would help turn them around and help them evolve.

I'm sorry to hear you have cancer.

Illness maybe the thing that balances out the population. But that would not be any scheme to weed out the population but rather just a consequence of the evolution of the reality. The reality has a ruleset with consequences. The PMR (Physical Matter Reality - Earth) will run pretty much with out interference as long as there is a probability for evolution. PMRs are intensive conscious evolution trainers that evolve through free will and are driven by probability.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 11:02 pm 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 3:10 am
Posts: 72
Thanks to both of you for your concern about the cancer. I didn't mean to bother you with it, it was just that the issue gave me some emphasis to look into the cancer industry (poison, nuke or cut). From the totality of what I've learned it is primarily a nutrition issue, not some creeping death sentence that the medical 'profession' just can't get their heads around. What a money spinner, just another business plan by those with a very low quality of consciousness.

It has been an incredible learning experience about nutrition and I think it may have been one of those little 'nudges' we get from time to time from the greater reality. If my intuition is correct about one aspect of what I've been led to discover, I'll have to share it with the forum once I've confirmed it, it may be one of those big 'ah ha!' moments you get in life.

I'd really like to figure out the psychopath thing. I have very ill feelings toward such entities and as much as I try to intellectualise that they may be another 'test' to learn from, I presently would be more comfortable with capital punishment, coupled with the farewell words of "go back and try again".

Perhaps that is my PMR perspective of wanting to clean up the local PMR environment by taking out the trash. However, the greater reality likely has a purpose that my pay grade doesn't warrant the need to know. It's a big puzzle to me...


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2014 7:18 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 3:10 am
Posts: 72
Ted, I hope my last post didn't seem dismissive of the efforts of the forum to heal. I have used intent myself for various healing issues (which worked), however nothing on this level. I can appreciate that a network of enlightened IUOCs could multiply the probability of success, however this is my VR to learn from. If I was to take advantage of the network, I'd prefer some sort of intent for my success in exploration (unfortunately, I have no idea how to formulate that nebulous concept).

I retired at age 60 after beating myself silly trying to deal with the corruption of low quality of conscious individuals. This health issue of mine is a new area of exploration in which I have discovered that the same type of entities have been manipulating. However, in experiencing (tasting the pudding) of the various other fields that I have explored I was able to glean quite substantial underlying truth, albeit through a very tough web of deceit surrounding that field. - I feel I can sort this one out also, it's an interesting project.

Perhaps that is why psychopaths are here in this PMR learning school. If an individual consciousness gets sucked into all sorts of belief traps and can't sort out the BS in an objective reality PMR (which has more rigidly defined rule sets), then they will probably would have even greater difficulty in NPMR.

Imagine just arriving in NPMR and being asked - "So what wisdom did you acquire on your last trip through the PMR meat grinder?" - I'd sure like the trip to have been worthwhile.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2014 11:11 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Terry,
Quote:
Imagine just arriving in NPMR and being asked - "So what wisdom did you acquire on your last trip through the PMR meat grinder?" - I'd sure like the trip to have been worthwhile.
I suspect from what else you have said in your posts and the level of understanding indicated, that you are aware that it is not that you arrive back in NPMR but that there is rather an integration of the results of this trip with your continuous aspect which is resident there. And that the biggest result is at the being level as your IUOC, standing behind both you in NPMR and you in PMR now.

And I fully see why you do not wish to have yourself put on the healing list. You would rather do it yourself, continuing to fight the good fight, as you have apparently been doing in your life.

Ted


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2014 5:57 pm 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 3:10 am
Posts: 72
Quote:
Terry,
Quote:
Imagine just arriving in NPMR and being asked - "So what wisdom did you acquire on your last trip through the PMR meat grinder?" - I'd sure like the trip to have been worthwhile.
I suspect from what else you have said in your posts and the level of understanding indicated, that you are aware that it is not that you arrive back in NPMR but that there is rather an integration of the results of this trip with your continuous aspect which is resident there. And that the biggest result is at the being level as your IUOC, standing behind both you in NPMR and you in PMR now.

Ted
Yeah, I understand that, however this whole VR thing is big on metaphors and I thought the way I expressed it could communicate the concept with a bit of humour. I didn't think it would be out of place as I've noticed that Tom has a great sense of humour in his communication of concepts.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:03 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 7:29 pm
Posts: 128
Location: Michigan
Interesting post here. I've come across the topic of our PMR being "reset" in other posts. Maybe this implies an apocolypse type scenario for our PMR as I'm assuming it does. What would a "reset" look like? Lena said something about pushing the reset button then starting our PMR from a saved spot. I have seen this discussed but not defined. Is there a post that someone could point me to perhaps? And since our PMR is the kindergarten of OS, and new (baby?) FWAU's keep coming here, supposedly keeping the entropy high and QoC low overall, there is not a lot of hope that our PMR will make it much longer, as the current facts seem to suggest and support. So perhaps this reset is needed, but I wonder why so many brand new FWAU's are sent to the same PMR at one time instead of maybe balancing things out with a bunch of low entropy beings here too. Just wondering.

Also, the reason I was reading this post in the first place is that I was searching for a explaination of this very confusing love subject as it's used by Tom. He says we evolve to become love; AUM/IUOC is love, etc. But what is happening at that higher level with all this love? I'm leaning toward the thought that it's only the love that we generate that gets "harvested" from each of us. I'm sure Tom has not put it that way, but AUM/IUOC/LCS is supposedly a dispassionate scientist experimenting in various labs. Where does the love go that is generated? What the heck is happening with all this generated love? Or maybe not much has been generated. Any thoughts on that? Has Tom mentioned the ultimate use of this love?

_________________
"What is the meaning of Paradise? To know yourself to be yourself yet one with The Whole. That is Paradise."- Edgar Cayce


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:32 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 5692
Location: Ocala, FL
A PMR would only be reset, or discontinued, if the probability for future evolution became so low that it didn't make sense to continue on the present course. Then the PMR would be reset to an earlier time in the history of the VR - most likely where there was some kind of intersection for history to go several ways. And perhaps a few more evolved entities would incarnate to try and help the VR make a more positive choice.

Love is not harvested. That is an idea from Bob Monroe's take on his experiences. Love helps us evolve and helps the system evolve. Here is an excellent post from Ted which may help explain the MBT definition of Love, (capital "L".)

Ted:
One thing that you must keep in mind to understand 'love' is that there is more to it than the single 4 letter word in English implies in our normal cultural usage. If you look in an English thesaurus for synonyms you find words like: affection, attachment, devotedness, devotion, fondness, passion and we frequently add distinctions by linking love with another descriptive adjective. If you go back to ancient Greek, such a root source in our society and culture, you find the following list: philia (dispassionate virtuous love which includes loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality, and familiarity - compare to filial love), eros (love in all of it's sexual flavors - compare to erotic love), agape (thought of as a more pure and idealized form of love, divorced from the physical but in modern times developing that meaning also - a concept of love often used in religious contexts - perhaps compare to pure love), storge (the affection of a parent for a child - parental love), and xenia (an almost ritualized friendship and caring for, formed between a host and his guest - perhaps caring love). This could be carried on into outer languages and cultures. You can pursue this on your own at the library or on the Internet and go on for quite some time. The English word love simply does not have simple equivalents within other languages and cultures and its biases simply produce difficulties in understanding this usage. The simplest way to approach a single better word is the ancient Greek agape, in my opinion.

Let me describe the context of love within which Tom, in my understanding, uses it and equates it with very low entropy. This context is that our existence within Consciousness Space where we exist as IUOCs and as such are integral parts of The One Consciousness as we communicate over the RWW and thus are The One Consciousness. Thus we in concert are and create and are the driving force or Mind behind Consciousness Space in all of its features and functionality. Simultaneously, we are time sharing our beings as IUOCs as virtual selves in order to participate independently within virtual realities such as NPMR and PMR. Tom has spoken of this as an alternate way to view our selves and The One as one integral fractal thing that is in fact every thing and the only thing that exists. When we as individual IUOCs reach the point at which we can comprehend this fractal existence as integral parts of The One Mind/Consciousness and simultaneously as Individuated Units Of Consciousness, engaged in the mutual expression of our existence, developing our individual selves through interaction and simultaneously The One into every more complete expressions of individuality and yet the expression of the power of this One Thing as ever more complete understanding of Itself, reduced entropy. This is the context of 'love' as it is used by Tom. Love of the Whole, this Union, for its constituent parts and of the constituent parts for each other and of this Union, in recognition of this Union, this integral and mutual relationship.

So is it any wonder that you have difficulty with these fiddly little details when you start to apply love and develop an understanding of love in our PMR social context and what 'people' do with each other and to each other. This is frankly why I am leery of the bald use of the word love without putting more into the context to clarify what is meant. This is not a criticism of Tom's choice of usage of love for this so all encompassing concept. I can understand why he chose this approach, having basically no choice in a PMR reality within which there is in fact no word for what he needed to convey. So he uses a word that is no less difficult to understand than alternatives that he might have chosen. This is just as he chose a more linear, discrete object based conception embedded within PMR concepts of his model within My Big TOE. To approach this from the direction of science and within a society speaking English, what choice did he have? Things and relationships and interactions and rule sets are the nature of the scientific world view and must be expressed in the language of our society. But once you go so far with this world view, you come up against the need for some of the imagery of the mystical viewpoint in order to further approach to the truth in the comparison, the conflict of these two points of view. Thus it was not that long ago that he first spoke of a fractal Union as all one thing as the need arose.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4051&p=14350&hilit= ... ter#p14350

AND ANOTHER POST FROM TED:

Love, in my understanding and as I understand Tom to really be using the term, goes far beyond the usual meaning and concept as expressed within the English language. That terminology, if limited to meaning as expressed in English, is too tightly linked and bound to the Eros aspect of the spectrum of feeling and understanding that is really represented by love. As I have stated before, there is besides eros, the broadening concepts from the ancient Greek of agape as well as philia and storge. This expands the meaning of the English word love. To this you can add the concepts of empathy, sympathy and more.

As I expressed the value of a true and real understanding of Tom's model of reality at the beginning, I will try to relate this to what I am saying about love. Tom's model shows how we are integral parts of all that is as AUM. We literally make up a functioning part of AUM which is all that there is. This is not a new insight but a relatively common conception of mysticism in its many manifestations. Tom's model however provides a way to also comprehend this other that on the basis of mysticism which after all describes what you might call the ultimate subjectivity as a perception that one can have only for oneself and never fully share. If you understand the model you can see how we are both this functioning part of The One and yet remain an individuated part with the deliberately fostered sense of separateness as we function as an IUOC. If we perceive these contradictory, in a sense, aspects of our existence within reality we can sense as this becomes a part of our being, what love as Tom uses it means. We each depend upon the functioning of all of the rest of us as IUOCs for the level of quality of functioning of AUM as the present metaphor and manifestation of The One. Your flaws and my flaws as our level of entropy represent a direct limitation upon the functioning of both our and AUM's level and quality of functioning. You can perceive that we are all nothing special, just another manifestation of a digital consciousness within the vast totality of all such manifestations as IUOCs. Ultimately from the lowest IUOC providing the consciousness of a single celled yet conscious organism to the most 'brilliant' IUOC providing the consciousness of the highest level of administration within our system within AUM, we are of the same inherent nature. We are fully dependent and inter dependent upon each other as we function as a part of the vast integral beingness that is AUM. If you truly understand this at a being level, you can comprehend the meaning of love as used by Tom.

Tom's model also shows us the true nature of our free will, that we have it, that we must have it and how it acts within various meta realities for consciousness to arise and for us to individually develop it as IUOCs within the totality of all IUOCs as we function within our VR experiences. Also how within the base meta reality in which AUM functions as The One Consciousness, how free will exists and must so exist for consciousness to arise through the combined interaction of all IUOCs, expressing free will. I can only point to this. You must comprehend it and make it apart of your being for yourselves. It is not really that difficult a conception or presentation.
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=7020&p=55118&hilit=philia#p55118


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:20 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 7:29 pm
Posts: 128
Location: Michigan
Thank you Sainbury,

I hadn't thought about a reset as going back historically. Easy to do in a VR I suppose, just really bizarre to think about from a PMR perspective. It wouldn't be shocking to learn that it's happened before. I really appreciate that information about it.

As for the Love questions, they quotes you provided didn't answer them at all. The first quote is already in the thread and I had read it. They are both about Love, explaining what Love is, that we become Love, etc. Good stuff from Ted as always, but I think I have a good grasp on those things.

What I'm wondering is whether Tom has talked about what the LCS/AUM/IUOC does with the Love that is generated? I did read in Bob Monroe's book about harvesting the Loosh/Love and it upset him I recall. Tom said in a post, "You should take Bob's description of harvesting loosh as a metaphor -- do not take it literally even if Bob meant it literally. See it as a metaphor about personal growth through experience and the larger consciousness system harvesting results (lower entropy) for it own evolution." So the LCS is harvesting results (lower entropy) for it's own evolution. Am I wrong to believe the product of that lower entropy is Love? That's what I understood MBT to say. I hope the end result for AUM/IUOC is Love; what else could it be? Lower entropy produces Love. We BECOME LOVE, right? By doing so the entire IUOC/AUM/LCS evolves. I assume that means our Oversoul in NPMR too. What am I misunderstanding here? Have I gone wrong in my thinking?

So, assuming it's Love that is generated by the lower entropy that we contribute to AUM/IUOC, what I am asking is what happens to that Love? What is it used for? What does the system do with this Love? They obviously don't SHOW Love like we do in a PMR VR by feeding the poor and rescuing stray animals-that's the stuff that's generating the Love. Tom said that ONLY PMR experiences can lower entropy. It seems AUM cannot lower entropy without our VR selves generating Love. What are the benefits for a conscious LCS to have Love. It must be a very important end product because Tom said in a post that it takes a lot in NMPR to manage, organize, supervise, guide the PMR's, that the NPMR Beings mostly work at guiding and helping us.

Perhaps Ted could take a stab at this? Thanks so much, once again, for your help. (Newbies can be such a pain in the...neck, huh?)

Love To All,
Ann

_________________
"What is the meaning of Paradise? To know yourself to be yourself yet one with The Whole. That is Paradise."- Edgar Cayce


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 9:17 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 5692
Location: Ocala, FL
Love is positive evolution. As you evolve you are more about "other" than about "self." You realize that you are a part of the whole not a singular ego. As you evolve the system evolves. That is why it is explained that Love in the way Tom means it is not about romantic love. It is about evolution. The system is a reflection of us. Reality in all its forms is fractal. There are more consciousnesses created, more PMRs, and the need for more guides etc.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Is Love a Myth?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 9:58 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Tom has used the generalized metaphor that the LCS or AUM is moving towards love and that our purpose here is to grow to become love. But this concept is not readily or well understood by Tom Campbell's readers or those who experience his video presentations. This is a notice about and attempt on my part at clarification of this concept of love and more. I have been thinking about this, unconsciously, for the past two days at least and this morning I have put together a conscious outline of what I wish to write. But I can't get it done today.

I have in the past explained how love as a single English word, which in other languages has more 'facets' while normally love gets equated with amore or eros. This ignores agape, storge and philias of ancient Greek, for example. There are also concepts like empathy, compassion, sympathy, affinity and more which come into this sphere of concepts.

I have also explained how the concepts from pure mathematics of PMR can explain how the LCS, viewed as a cellular automaton, can self organize through emergence of a more complex organization. This resulted in the creation of all the IUOCs and the RWW, Uniting the whole of the LCS into AUO and providing free will to the IUOCs. This permitted The One Consciousness to eventually develop over quite some time through the IUOCs communicating together over the RWW with free will. From this, all meaningful concepts developed with the origin coming originally from the random data originally in the reality cells of the LCS. So Consciousness itself can be viewed and understood as being an emergent property of the vast cellular automaton that is the LCS. It developed naturally as its potential to exist was inherent to the nature of our reality as the LCS.

Going on further, love, per Tom Campbell's metaphor, can also be viewed and understood as an emergent property of the LCS and The One Consciousness or AUM. It is probably an even more slowly developing emergent property than Consciousness as it is for one opposed by the process of Control, basic to what Tom calls the anti-rats. There is also the opposing situation of constant creation of high entropy new IUOCs which dilute the effectiveness of developing lower entropy IUOCs and oppose the resulting development of love, per Tom Campbell's metaphor. Many characteristics of AUM/the LCS can be related to this concept and explain love as Tom uses the word here. AUM embraces free will for all, low or high entropy. AUM clearly espouses open ended development as opposed to perfection as the LCS keeps being expanded with these new IUOCs, anticipating more value from potential development of new IUOCs rather than seeking a closed ended concept of perfection. And AUM could have developed some means of lowering the entropy of IUOCs rather than all the trouble of providing and developing VRs for the IUOCs to individually reduce their own entropy by incarnating. This does not fully develop this concept of love, but the basics are here for your own extrapolation.

Hope this helps. More later.

Ted


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited