My Big Toe Forum

Human without conciseness
Page 2 of 2

Author:  kroeran [ Sat Apr 06, 2013 7:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Human without conciseness

Just to continue the thought experiment....

I wonder if an example of an apparent Awareness Unit without free will, hence without consciousness, might be a dream character or a character in the past or possible future, who is acting according to likely behavior rather than acting from the intent of an IUOC animator.

I seem to recall that OBErs or lucid dreamers have developed techniques for testing a dream or NPMR character for free will?

In this PMR real time sometimes you meet people where "lights on but nobodies home"...kinda makes you wonder.

Technically, a PMR and this PMR is a shared VR dream. It seems odd to me that dream characters (FWAUs acting according to probability rather than free will) would not be part of the toolkit.

Lets take for example a person completely detached from reality and institutionalized. Could this be an adaptive mechanism which permits an IOUC to detach from a very painful and unprofitable incarnation?


Brain Dead?


The phenomena of blacking out when faced with a life threatening horror? I cannot fathom how such a thing could evolve according to the Darwinian mechanism, and in the past smelled as sense of theistic design in this.

Profitable things that exist in life, that do not have a plausible evolutionary source, are indirect evidence that there is more to life than we might think.

For example music. What a strange thing, and imagine a visitor from another PMR without music witnessing this phenomena. How could music possibly have evolved from the Darwinian mechanism?

Author:  DaveMars [ Sat Apr 06, 2013 7:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Human without conciseness

Seth indicated in "Nature of Personal Reality" that the inhabiting consciousness does not reside 100% of the time in the fetus/infant, and that the process of "ensoulment" if you will, is not binary. He also talked often about your consciousness being more mobile and dynamic than we are normally aware of. Think of day-dreaming wherein "you" drift off to some other place while your body is at your desk at work. In this way your consciousness, the Faithful Witness, is not stuck like glue to the back of your skull looking out through your eyes as they stare blankly at the cubicle wall.

Seth said the body is quite capable of living without consciousness' full engagement, at least for a while.

Also, when Explorers moved "out of the way" for a channeled entity to talk with the monitor, one would assume that their consciousness was the "thing" that moved away from the body allowing another entity to speak.

So it appears that the connection between body and soul is flexible, based only on those two points of data, Seth and The Explorer Tapes. Also, most NDE occurences result in consciousness departing the body for a bit, if "departing" can be meaningful in this context. Let's say instead that it was "focused" elsewhere than in sense-experience via the body for a bit.

In the player/character model, it is sort of like being AFK, which any gamer will tell you is wickedly common and not always fatal to the character (unless it happens while whitewater rafting or motorcycle racing or something). Grin.

BTW: I _highly_ recommend listening to the Explorer Tapes. I find them remarkably informative as an augment to MBT. You can hear in them the seeds of much of Toms analysis and synthesis, as well as some things Tom never really addressed overtly.

Author:  Ted Vollers [ Sat Apr 06, 2013 8:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Human without conciseness

Tom has explained in the past that there is not a specific time at which the IUOC becomes continuously 'attached' to an infant as in during gestation before birth (as in concerns about abortions) and even in terms of continuous association with a developing child to perhaps even 5 years of age. He has explained that the percentage of time that the IUOC 'links in' increases with the age of the child during this period. There is apparently much variability and this is a matter of circumstances and the particular IUOC. An infant sleeping a fair percentage of the time and the rest of the time perhaps staring at its toes and fingers in apparent fascination provides little of value to our IUOC and there is apparently a way to short cut a lot of boring material. A matter of running the simulation on automatic and perhaps calling in the IUOC when mommy or daddy starts trying to communicate with the child, it is feeding time, or otherwise when decisions are required of or something is worth paying attention to by the developing infant.


Author:  kroeran [ Sat Apr 06, 2013 8:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Human without conciseness

nice...its sort of how I think the Gospels back up and inform a study of MBT, and MBT backs up and gives explanation to the Gospels (just Mathew, Mark, Luke, John & Thomas), or Ted's connection to mysticism.

its like when driving home from work and you need to turn off at not your normal exit to pick something up

you go into what I call "automatic pilot", daydreaming the whole trip, suddenly you wake up and you are at home, and have completely missed the turnoff.

this dynamic shifting of attention of datastream however might be something different maybe than the process of attaching an IOUC to a sensor platform, which Tom says does not fully integrate till late toddlerhood? Perhaps it is not a different metric and its as simple as that.

then there is Buddhist mindfulness meditation (sit and be in the room, and observe the binary toggle between lucid awareness and daydreaming) which seeks to train the mind to stay in the room at attention to the PMR action.

Perhaps efficiency relates to a solid IOUC connection with minimal noise to sound, and then focused attention on the PMR datastream action, as part of being fully formed and effective.

Author:  Jeanne212 [ Sat Apr 06, 2013 4:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Human without conciseness

I wouldn't be surprised if a similar, but reverse, process happens towards the end of life as in the case of those with Alzheimer's. As the IUOC becomes less able to function in PMR due to PMR brain degeneration, it spends less time attending to matters in PMR. Could it even be possible for that particular IUOC to be already "assigned" to a fetus/infant at the same time, if a quick return to PMR were desired for some reason? It would be sort of like the IUOC having two part time jobs instead of one full time job.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC-06:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited