Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post Reply
IvanD
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by IvanD »

I ironically said that you must be implying that it does not have the power. As I said, like any person who does not have arguments, you delibarately remained vague. You remained vague as to when and how the system "influences" things. The implication from my side was: You cannot be such a moral monster to say that the system has the power to effectively intervene, but doesn't, and that's acceptable. Elementary, Watson.
Lol imagine reaching this hard to justify a straw-man when in the next few sentences you build on the premise that you're saying was presented ironically.

I don't really care about it but it's funny to see someone as stupid and egoic as you try to make excuses for everything.
Hahaha... ;)) Yeah, it's so sad when even such incredibly smart and eloquent people like you lose their cool - where is this world going to... ;)
The next silly dodge. Neither you nor anyone else gave a real explanation of why the system allows extraordinarily horrific things as the ones I gave as an example to happen.
No, I did, multiple times.
Yeah, only in your own data stream... ;)))
Saying, "b-b-but what about people flayed" isn't a counter-argument.
Now, that's what I call sharp analysis, presented with intelligent humor... ;)
considering the fact that you are a dogmatic defender of the position that the bahviour of the so-called LCS makes perfect sense.
Not dogmatic, you just haven't presented a good argument to anything that hasn't been already covered in your entire time here on the board.
Genius dodge... ;))
For you, this whole discussion here is about winning or losing
Projection lol.
How insightful of you... ;))
You are like an MBT crusader who will defend his "religion" to death.
No I just like being a pseudo-intellectual to pseudo-intellectuals. All of your arguments and your thinking process was weak, and I'm saying that outside of the little egoic game we're engaging in. But I'm done for now.
[/quote]

Yeah, take a break before your head explodes. So much thinking in just one day, it's not good for you - trust me on that one ;)

By the way, it's a good thing that there is no doctrine in MBT, according to which you go to paradise and get 72 virgins, if you die in defense of the faith. Otherwise I bet you would present a great danger for the public... ;)
Human+
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by Human+ »

Lol you spent an hour writing and editing that comment? You're an adult right?

My work here is done.
IvanD
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by IvanD »

Yeah, go to your next adventure, captain logic ;))
VirtualBrain
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by VirtualBrain »

Image
IvanD
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by IvanD »

While I was engaged in this “fascinating” and “enlightening” dialogue with my “intellectual hero” Human+, I noticed that some other people have written statements regarding my explanation why “free will” is an empty phrase. I said already that I won’t continue this discussion. I posted a video by Sam Harris, who eloquently summarizes the problem. Please note that Sam talks to an audience that is very different than you guys. In his talks he explains it for the most part in terms of neuro-science. However: If you pay close attention you will see that he also implies that immaterialism does not open up space for anything that is well described by the phrase “free will”. For those who are interested in the topic - I will give you another video of him. Please pay special attention to what Sam says until 2:40. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1pEfTDHTAI

And yeah, call me a crybaby, but I find it disturbing, if political rebels get skinned alive or children get tortured. In contrast to my buddy Human+, I don’t view such things with neanderthalic cynicism. I simply fail to see how it makes perfect sense that the system would make the effort to put an imaginary friend into the data stream of a lonely child, but would not bother to help a kid that is being tortured in the basement of a psychopath. Contrary to a “beautiful mind” like Human+, I don’t find this a wise prioritizing. (Oh wait, have I strawmanned again… ;))

I think I already have an idea of how most of you view this issue. I don’t think any further discussion of it makes real sense. However, as I said, I might put my question in the Fireside thread at some point in the future. I would be curious to hear Tom’s thoughts on it.

But for now, I will leave this forum for a while. I don’t find the combination of depressing stupidity and sparkling aggressiveness particularly attractive, so I won’t dwell in this forum as long as there are people around here to whom this combination applies. Maybe I am too “egoic” to stand it ;) So, bye for now.
Jdjr
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 1172
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by Jdjr »

IvanD wrote: Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:33 pm While I was engaged in this “fascinating” and “enlightening” dialogue with my “intellectual hero” Human+, I noticed that some other people have written statements regarding my explanation why “free will” is an empty phrase. I said already that I won’t continue this discussion. I posted a video by Sam Harris, who eloquently summarizes the problem. Please note that Sam talks to an audience that is very different than you guys. In his talks he explains it for the most part in terms of neuro-science. However: If you pay close attention you will see that he also implies that immaterialism does not open up space for anything that is well described by the phrase “free will”. For those who are interested in the topic - I will give you another video of him. Please pay special attention to what Sam says until 2:40. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1pEfTDHTAI

And yeah, call me a crybaby, but I find it disturbing, if political rebels get skinned alive or children get tortured. In contrast to my buddy Human+, I don’t view such things with neanderthalic cynicism. I simply fail to see how it makes perfect sense that the system would make the effort to put an imaginary friend into the data stream of a lonely child, but would not bother to help a kid that is being tortured in the basement of a psychopath. Contrary to a “beautiful mind” like Human+, I don’t find this a wise prioritizing. (Oh wait, have I strawmanned again… ;))

I think I already have an idea of how most of you view this issue. I don’t think any further discussion of it makes real sense. However, as I said, I might put my question in the Fireside thread at some point in the future. I would be curious to hear Tom’s thoughts on it.

But for now, I will leave this forum for a while. I don’t find the combination of depressing stupidity and sparkling aggressiveness particularly attractive, so I won’t dwell in this forum as long as there are people around here to whom this combination applies. Maybe I am too “egoic” to stand it ;) So, bye for now.
Sam Harris an atheist on free will:

Harris says the idea of free will "cannot be mapped on to any conceivable reality" and is incoherent.[44][45] According to Harris, science "reveals you to be a biochemical puppet."[46] People's thoughts and intentions, Harris says, "emerge from background causes of which we are unaware and over which we exert no conscious control." Every choice we make is made as a result of preceding causes. These choices we make are determined by those causes, and are therefore not really choices at all. Harris also draws a distinction between conscious and unconscious reactions to the world. Harris argues that this realization about the human mind does not undermine morality or diminish the importance of social and political freedom, but it can and should change the way we think about some of the most important questions in life.
Endarion
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 2:52 am
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by Endarion »

I'm going to be scientific about it for a moment even if it might seem unempathetic---more on that at the end of this post. If my data stream contained something I interpreted as a child being tortured in a basement by a psychopath, my decision space would include (not necessarily be limited to) the following options:
- Asking myself and others why the LCS does not intervene
- Asking myself and others why others do not intervene
- Asking myself why I do not (cannot?) intervene
- Intervening if possible by incapacitating or otherwise stopping the psychopath from torturing the child
- Making others intervene by allerting the police etc.
- Thinking aabout why the psychopath is doing what he is doing
- Thinking about why there is psychopathy, what it means, and how it may be prevented or corrected
- etc. etc. etc.
I can see how each of the above options may be connected with some feedback facilitating spiritual growth for myself, some with more growth potential, some with less. But whatever I choose, my choice is an appropriate expression (projection, mapping) of my intent. If the LCS did magic and somehow paranormally dissolved the problem for me, the said growth potential would no longer be accessible to me. That's not to say the LCS could not prevent suffering and at the same time still leave me with the above options. For example, the system might interfere by replacing the child's FWAU by a non-sentient script. Suffering would cease, but I, not knowing about that, would still face the exact same decision space.
Besides, it is important to note that all perfectly natural outcomes may still be the result of the LCS interfering. Let's say I shot the psychopath. That would be my FWAU translating my intent into a PMR choice, and at the same time it would still be the LCS interfering because I am as much part of the LCS as anyone else. If the child died and subsequent suffering were thus prevented, that also could be the LCS interfering. If a loose brick dropped from the ceiling and killed the psychopath, that may well be the LCS interfering by favoring that particular draw from the ruleset-given probability distribution.
On a side note, when asking ourselves why the LCS might conduct a thought experiment (VR) in which a child is tortured by a psychopath, we might also consider: Aren't we doing the exact same thing in this thread, and for perfectly valid spiritual growth-related reasons? This thought experiment going on here is the way chosen by a subset of LCS to understand the nature of, and reasoning behind, high entropy sequences in simulations.
With all that being said, and all theorizing aside, all these thoughts of children being tortured are really getting to me even though I am aware it's not even happening right now in my district of PMR. My love of children makes me quite vulnerable in that area. So I'll leave it at that for now before getting gloomy or upset.
Human+
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by Human+ »

If you pay close attention you will see that he also implies that immaterialism does not open up space for anything that is well described by the phrase “free will”. For those who are interested in the topic - I will give you another video of him. Please pay special attention to what Sam says until 2:40.
Watched until 2:40 as you said, no real argument and a bunch of assertion. It's already been explained to you how free will is defined in MBT and how it fits into the framework of a VR - which is not the framework of reality that Sam is making his logical deductions from, nor is it the free will we are talking about. Do you think the argument is that we're saying there are no influencing factors when making decisions inside a VR?
And yeah, call me a crybaby, but I find it disturbing, if political rebels get skinned alive or children get tortured


Sure, and why you find it disturbing is part of why the system works. No one is calling you a crybaby for finding people getting skinned disturbing.
I simply fail to see how it makes perfect sense that the system would make the effort to put an imaginary friend into the data stream of a lonely child, but would not bother to help a kid that is being tortured in the basement of a psychopath.
Who said it can't help a kid tortured in a basement? The decisions made by the LCS are contextual to situations, people, future outcomes, and the respect for free will.
Obviously it's not always going to intervene in every instance where something can go wrong because that defeats the entire point of having a VR with consequences as feedback mechanisms...

I don’t find the combination of depressing stupidity and sparkling aggressiveness particularly attractive
Imagine being incapable of understanding what's being said to you for multiple pages and then un-ironically making this comment. lol

Believe it or not – I really do not want to prove Tom wrong simply to please my ego.
bye for now.
I'm sure you'll get it next time.
User avatar
Sainbury
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 6572
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Location: Ocala, FL
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by Sainbury »

Endarion wrote: Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:21 am Besides, it is important to note that all perfectly natural outcomes may still be the result of the LCS interfering. Let's say I shot the psychopath. That would be my FWAU translating my intent into a PMR choice, and at the same time it would still be the LCS interfering because I am as much part of the LCS as anyone else.

MBT Forum March 2011 Pt 1/5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zVk-wbG ... 4DCA8DDF441:33:06
So if you and I are having an altercation first you try to work it out. But if what you want to do is hit me with a stick and I say, “Don’t hit me with a stick.” but you hit me anyway. And I say, “Please don’t hit me with a stick.” And you hit me anyway. Pretty soon I say, “Could you only hit me with a stick once a day.” And you say “no.” And eventually it gets to the point where I have to stop you, or I have to continue to get hit with a stick. That then gets to violence. So it sometimes gets to violence. But now if the first time you hit me with a stick I pull out a gun and shoot you that's different. So one has to use measured steps. One has to never apply violence unless it is a last resort. And it has to be not because you're angry, not because you're upset, not because you're annoyed, not because you don't like personnel or anything like that. All that's coming from ego and that's all coming from fear. It’s the wrong intent. If you're going to stop something from happening that should not happen it’s hurting others then you can go as far as you have to go to do that. You don't just have to just say, “Well, this guy wants to hit me with a stick so I’ll just have to be hit with a stick every ten minutes for the rest of my life. Then that’s just mine to deal with.” You don’t have to be a pacifist. You can stop it. And if your brother, your sister, your wife, your mother, your neighbor, or somebody else comes to you and asks for help and you can help then you should help.

Question: Is violence and murder ever a solution?
It depends on the situation. It depends on their Intent and it depends on your Intent. If you look in the bigger picture and you see in the bigger picture that this a lesson something that you can endure and grow from then you should probably let him hit you with a stick every day because that's something that you're going to grow from. If you see that this is retarding or that it is hurting someone else that this is not a good lesson… There is an opportunity to grow now sometimes you have the ability to reach out and grab that. Sometimes you don’t. And we do that a lot with children. If you have a child, and the child is does something wrong. The child goes up and slaps another child and takes their toy. Now you correct that childhood for doing that. If the child does it again you continue to correct them. If they go over and start you may use violence, if you will, to intercede and stop the child because you know they’re going to go over and smack the little kid and take their toy. So you stop them and you try to deal with it. You try to say, “No, that’s not nice. Don’t do that. It’s not your toy.” You try to educate the child. But if they continue to go then you have to physically intervene because it is not appropriate to let this child go around and smack the other children and take their toys. Because it traumatizes the other kids to be smacked and have their toys taken away. And it happens all the time. Pretty soon you're going to create a lot of fear in them and see a lot of damage. So you look at it from a big picture and then decide what it is you have to do that makes that big picture better.
User avatar
Sainbury
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 6572
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Location: Ocala, FL
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by Sainbury »

There can be no argument about free will here past an explanation of how it applies to MBT.

8. Free will is the ability of a Conscious awareness to freely make or not make any of the choices in one’s decision space. Making a free will choice is rooted in the whole Consciousness, not just the intellectual part of a dysfunctional consciousness.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8713&hilit=definitions

Free will is one of the basic principles of MBT. Without consciousness, free will, and time there is no MBT theory. So there is no arguing about those things. If you cannot accept those basic principles then it's time to move on.
IvanD
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by IvanD »

Watched until 2:40 as you said, no real argument and a bunch of assertion. It's already been explained to you how free will is defined in MBT and how it fits into the framework of a VR - which is not the framework of reality that Sam is making his logical deductions from, nor is it the free will we are talking about. Do you think the argument is that we're saying there are no influencing factors when making decisions inside a VR?
I didn't say watch until 2:40, I said pay special attention until 2:40. And just listen to what Harris says, “genius”. He said: “The problem is “free will” is just a non-starter philosophically and scientifically […], unlike many other illusions there’s no way you can describe the universe so as to make sense of the notion of “free will”.” And if you think he just means the physical universe, then listen to the next sentence: “Free will as a concept is so incoherent that it cannot be mapped onto any conceivable reality.” It’s true that he often illustrates the incoherence of “free will” by referring to neuro-science, but if you had a three-digit IQ, you would understand that his explanation (“[…] either our wills are determined by a long chain of prior causes and we are not responsible for them, or they are determined by some random influences, and we are not responsible for them.”) applies to any conceivable reality (as he himself explicitly says). I can assure you that Sam’s position (as with all other prominent philosophers) is that the phrase “free will” does not refer to any coherent concept. Just as I can assure you that Sam is so infinitely smarter than you that it’s ridiculous. In fact, comparing Sam Harris with you is like comparing John Nash with Donald Trump… ;)
Who said it can't help a kid tortured in a basement?
As though the discussion was about can it or can’t it… (My next facepalm.) I’ll make it even easier. Has there ever been a child tortured to death by a psychopath? The answer: yes. Now the question: Why didn’t the system intervene? Oh yeah, I get it, because it’s good for the general spiritual growth – when we hear about such a case, it will sensitize us. So the system will allow such horror for the greater good. And with your caveman cynicism you find nothing strange about the price that the child has to pay here…
Obviously it's not always going to intervene in every instance where something can go wrong
Now, that’s a cute euphemism for the examples I gave (flaying, torturing of children)…
The decisions made by the LCS are contextual to situations, people, future outcomes, and the respect for free will.
So let me get this straight. If your child gets kidnapped and a psycho does some sick things to it – believe it or not, but we live in a world where such kidnappings and torturings have happened – and the system does not help the kid get out, you will explain it to yourself by saying what the LCS does is “contextual to situations, people, future outcomes, and the respect for free will”? Hahahah… Hahaha… ;)) Well, actually I should not laugh, it’s a serious matter. But if it wasn’t so sad, I would say that’s just majestic… ;)
Imagine being incapable of understanding what's being said to you for multiple pages and then un-ironically making this comment.
Yeah, your thoughts are so deep and profound, so complicated… Hahaha ;)) But yes, I got your point. The system allows such horrors to happen for the greater good. So when the child is tortured, the system weighs up whether it should help – it looks “contextual” to the situation, to the future outcomes and respects the “free will”. Did I summarize your vague generalities well, or did I strawman you again… ;)


Look. If someone has quite limited intellectual capacities like in your case, I am usually not condescending at all. After all, if someone is dense, it’s not their fault. But you are not just painfully dense, you are also aggressive and dishonest. A combination which I sincerely despise. And the fact that this forum attracts people like you says something terrible about how things are going here. Not that I care much, but before I leave here for good, I thought I should use my illusionary “free will” to give a general feedback. You know, “feedback mechanisms”… ;))


Now, I want to say something to all of you. To put it mildly, I am quite disappointed in this forum. And not only because there are clowns like Human+ around here. It’s the general attitude that is being expressed towards people with differing views. It appears to me like quite a cultish place. Sadly, the only thing Sainbury and I agree on, is that I should move on. And that’s what I will do. I have posted now my question in the Fireside thread.
Please, don’t bother to write any more about “free will” or my other critique of the MBT. I am leaving for good and I won’t even read the next post here. After all, my whole stay seems a complete waste of time… Anyway, bye to everyone civilized here. Peace.
VirtualBrain
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by VirtualBrain »

Sam Harris knows nothing about the nature of consciousness and neither do you. Neuro science thinks consciousness is created by the brain. It’s not. The brain doesn’t do anything. The brain is virtual.

You only think you have no free will because you can’t see the man(consciousness) behind the curtain. Your avatar has no free will. You are NOT your avatar. Your avatar has no consciousness and no free will, it does not think, it does not feel. YOU DO.

You are non physical. You do not exist on earth as a human avatar. The human avatar and earth is a virtual projection of your/our consciousness. You are consciousness and as such YOU HAVE FREE WILL.

Consciousness is the concievable reality to which free will IS mapped.
Human+
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by Human+ »

Sam makes the same basic, rehashed argument against free will as just about everyone else from a PMR standpoint. There's nothing particularly interesting or nuanced there.

But now we know the reason why you parrot the same statements about causality and randomness. You haven't actually fleshed out the ideas in relation to the MBT framework and how free will is defined here yet Sam said it so you keep denying everything said to you and parrot the same points over and over again as if they're even relevant to what people are trying to drill into your head. It's an embarrassing scene.
As though the discussion was about can it or can’t it… (My next facepalm.) I’ll make it even easier.
You assumed the LCS, "would not bother to help a kid that is being tortured in the basement of a psychopath." - I said, no, it can do that too just as it can put an imaginary friend in a datastream which was the scenario you tried to contrast with the kid in the basement one sentence earlier. And then I specified why. You're completely lost in your psuedo-intellectual attempt at logic.
Now, that’s a cute euphemism for the examples I gave (flaying, torturing of children)…
I was speaking about a whole spectrum of "bad" - not just flaying and torturing children. Speaking in general to illustrate a point is also more efficient than going through every single scenario of bad things.
So let me get this straight. If your child gets kidnapped and a psycho does some sick things to it – believe it or not, but we live in a world where such kidnappings and torturings have happened – and the system does not help the kid get out, you will explain it to yourself by saying what the LCS does is “contextual to situations, people, future outcomes, and the respect for free will”? Hahahah… Hahaha… ;))
I wouldn't be looking towards the LCS to fix everything in the first place. Actions and consequences and free will are necessary for evolution. Humans can make bad decisions that impact others. Once again, you make no real argument.


But you are not just painfully dense, you are also aggressive and dishonest.

Meanwhile on page 5 - still confused as to what anyone is saying to you so you just repeat the same irrelevant statements about free will and reach hard with an emotional appeal against the LCS.
User avatar
THEONE
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 8:27 pm
Location: The Realm of Men
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by THEONE »

I think we can all agree on free will that there is a likely or many likely outcomes based on the past decisions of that entity.

the purpose of this forum is to answer questions based on Tom Campbell's teachings and our understanding of reality based on this MBT project supported by higher beings in our system.

Tom Campbell teaches free will is real, not an illusion, and you are absolutely making choices because you are conscious. i do not "believe" free will is real, but i understand it to be based on our knowledge of our IUOC's and FWAU's that we have free will to make decisions, even if there is a theoretical probability distribution we are choosing from and a likely outcome for our own entity based on our past decisions.

Sam Harris makes some good points on free will and I respect him as a person, an author and destroyer of dogma, but his limited understanding based on materialism is limited. Frankly, I wish we could have a person like him as good as a speaker as he is supporting this project.

The way we understand it, our own conscious selves are making decisions and not making random grabs from probability distributions of possible decisions. but i am open to any other evidence based on our bigger picture model of reality that this is not true.

"thoughts simply arise in consciousness" as harris says, that is true. there is much that can be said about the limitations of free will. but there is a choice that is to be made. for now, lets all be open minded to the possibility that we are perhaps making decisions and not robots caring out pre programmed outcomes or making random choices from probability distributions.
VirtualBrain
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: Why the MBT does not survive close scrutiny...

Post by VirtualBrain »

THEONE wrote: Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:48 pm I think we can all agree on free will that there is a likely or many likely outcomes based on the past decisions of that entity.

the purpose of this forum is to answer questions based on Tom Campbell's teachings and our understanding of reality based on this MBT project supported by higher beings in our system.

Tom Campbell teaches free will is real, not an illusion, and you are absolutely making choices because you are conscious. i do not "believe" free will is real, but i understand it to be based on our knowledge of our IUOC's and FWAU's that we have free will to make decisions, even if there is a theoretical probability distribution we are choosing from and a likely outcome for our own entity based on our past decisions.

Sam Harris makes some good points on free will and I respect him as a person, an author and destroyer of dogma, but his limited understanding based on materialism is limited. Frankly, I wish we could have a person like him as good as a speaker as he is supporting this project.

The way we understand it, our own conscious selves are making decisions and not making random grabs from probability distributions of possible decisions. but i am open to any other evidence based on our bigger picture model of reality that this is not true.

"thoughts simply arise in consciousness" as harris says, that is true. there is much that can be said about the limitations of free will. but there is a choice that is to be made. for now, lets all be open minded to the possibility that we are perhaps making decisions and not robots caring out pre programmed outcomes or making random choices from probability distributions.
There is only ONE Consciousness(the One is ALL and the ALL are ONE), that Consciousness is called by many names. In MBT we know it as AUM or the LCS. AUM is the infinite source, the ultimate creator, the Man behind the curtain, ALL THAT IS. We as our IUOCs act as neurons within the mind of AUM. IUOCs have no consciousness on their own as they exist as an integral part of the system. They must receive a data stream in order to be self aware. They don’t create data or information directly(only AUM can do this from what can be thought of as nothingness(from which all possibilities of existence exist(infinite parallel realities) or as an infinite field of potential, or AUMasaurus or what ever you prefer). They choose whether or not to interact with or modify incoming data and information. This is the basis of free will as an IUOC.

Our free will as IUOCs is to react or not react and modify as we choose, any incoming data and information from the system which includes messages from other IUOCs or groups of IUOCs or AUM as a whole.

So we have the free will choice of interpretation. Given this choice, why would we choose anything other than Love? Only if we are in fear which ultimately holds no power over love, fear being painful and separative, destructive and love being unity and cooperative, pleasurable, creative. All roads(at least the ones who will survive) lead to love. All Is Love.

Consciousness IS the concievable reality to which free will IS mapped.
Post Reply

Return to “Rants - Negative Opinion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests