If you or anyone is truly open minded about god and wants to see/understand/connect to god themselves, I recommend you explore realms of the consciousness that you have not before,
...
If you do not want to touch drugs, try laying down in a silent environment, or to some binural beats. Relax your mind, focus solely on the breath, send all thoughts into the realms of outer space. Relax your muscles starting at your feet and move your way up your body, over and over. Relax until you completely let go of your body. You will feel your body dissolve into energy, at this point you can try and move it (the energy) side to side to gain energy or you can even lift up as if you're arm is leaving your body. This may take many tries but if you truly want to find your consciousness and what it is capable of doing, it's worth practicing.
It's funny, and somewhat telling, that you think I've never done this. Unlike you, I simply never diluted myself into thinking it was something that it was not. |
|
|
|
It is like if someone said "I'm doing much better since I stopped drinking". Ok, fine. Then someone else walks up and says "I've started drinking and I like it." Ok, that's fine too. The one statement does not contradict the truth of the other.
Oooh, I like that! Definitely going to have to try to remember this one. |
|
|
|
Right, but the name-of-him-who-we-call-today-Jesus was a common name.
Jesus wasn't. Yehua (sp?) was. But yes, very common. It's like seeing that the name "Bob" is in the White Pages, and claiming "See? Bob the god really did exist!" I don't know about that. That name "rassah" sounds, well, like the kind of name of someone who was a real troublemaker. I know them when I hear them. And let me tell you, you hang out around a few Roman Centurians, they say "Chump, what's your name" and you say "Rassah" and they say "What?" and you say "Rassah, SIR" and they say "Rassah, eh?"
Methinks that's like, on a slow and boring night, gonna be some trouble for Rassah...
Confession time, and sorry if I ruin it for everyone. When I was a kid (14 maybe), joining the furry fandom, I had to pick an animal persona to role-play and make up a name (furries are f'in weird, yes). I picked a panther, and wanted make up a name that was somehow related to big cats. So, a Rrrrr growl sound that panthers/leopards make, plus cat hissing, resulted in rrrrra sssss ah. I just added the "ah" to make it sound like a name, and the name Rassah was formed (accent on first a). It was pretty much just my name everywhere on the internet until some third world north African and middle Eastern countries joined. Now I'm only aware of three other real Rassah's in the world. Hope I didn't make things uncomfortably weird for anyone going forward (and feel free to rrrr and hiss when you say my name)  |
|
|
|
I used to believe in Jesus Christ with all my heart. I was a practicing Catholic, went to church every week, prayed often, and felt God's warm embrace in my life.
Then I got better.
This saddens me Rassah.  You are the one I am praying for the most on here, like it or not. I know you are convinced that God is not real (or I think perhaps deep down you are just ticked at him) I'm not ticked, but the "convinced" is not the correct term. I am not convinced that there is no god. I just don't see any evidence for his existence. The best I can do to illustrate is to ask a question (and hopefully you have never heard this term): are you convinced that Baba Yaga doesn't exist? You probably can't answer this question, because you don't know what Baba Yaga is (though she was a frequent part of my childhood folklore), and after you Google her, likely think the very question is silly. You don't even have to ponder her existence, since she is simply not a part of your life. You know she is a made up character from story books, and to consider whether or not she is real would be rather insane. So, in the same way that you are not-so-much convinced as simply consider the idea of pondering whether she exists to be preposterous and ridiculous, I consider the idea of pondering whether god exists to be ridiculous as well. To me it is as productive to consider as it would be to wonder whether to be convinced that there is a teapot orbiting the sun on the other side where we can't see it. Sure? Maybe? It sounds silly, and why does it matter? |
|
|
|
One big hole in his (and Moldbug's) "there can only be one" theory, is that if a merchant only accepts BTC and I have only an altcoin, then assuming liquid exchange markets between the altcoin and BTC along with clever programming, I can pay with my altcoin at that merchant with one click. So there isn't any cost in terms of market mass to being not first in the market.
Just going to take a stab at this one thing here but, doesn't this imply that 1) someone has to use the resources to run such an exchange, when the alternative is to not waste those resourses and use Bitcoin 2) there must be enough other users to make the exchange liquid 3) one of you, probably you, has to go through the trouble of setting up an account on such an exchange, and software on your wallet, when it is easier to simply use Bitcoin Essentially, while yes, the system can be patched to work, there is still the issue of fighting against the established system (using extra energy and resources) instead of simply capitulating to the lower energy-state system that doesn't have the extra friction. |
|
|
|
|
My personal, and only, fear is that you will tell me what I am allowed and not allowed to do, and what I am allowed and not allowed to own, and will use force against me to make sure I do what you say.
|
|
|
|
Let's pretend that the simulation is extremely good, even allowing this player to test his environment, but not allowing to give him any hints that he is in a simulation. Then, based on the tests this player has performed, he learned that the answer to the questions is most probably X. The question that arises then is: Does it matter if the real answer to the question is actually Y, if everything the player believes he will experience, and the only thing he believes will ever have an influence on him is X? Does Y even have any significance is there is no way for the player to test for Y? And if X is the only thing the player can test for and experience, can the "realty" for the player be Y, Z, A, B, C, or an infinite other possibilities, all having no bearing on his existence in the situation? (That alphabet being Christ, Zeus, Ra, Thor, or a slew of other "realities" we have come up with that actually have no bearing or significance on the world we experience).
So you admit, there's a variable Y. It seems you have solved the equation. They clearly have a bearing over existence, for you are speaking of it. I see something even this basic went over your head. No, dank, I merely point out that the variable Y is irrelevant. There could be Y, or Z, or anything, but if it is not relevant to our world, it is not relevant period. Also, claiming Y means you have to claim an infinite other things, too, since Y is no more important than everything else (but is infinitely LESS important than the actually-experienced X). The only bearing on existence I am giving Y by speaking about it is to point out that it should not be taken into consideration at all, and should be ignored, becaise it has no bearing over existence. Yes, ironically, it is important to tell people that they should not waste time, energy, and resources (and kill each other in the process) on things that have absolutely no bearing or influence on their life. |
|
|
|
Here you assume, that the quantum level is more fundamental than our perception of it. However, the quantum level have clearly demonstrated that it is not independent from our observation of it and therefore is not a separate fundamental reality onto itself. The atoms that make up our brains are equal citizens on that quantum level with other particles. So how can our brain give rise to our consciousness, if its constituents are dependent on how we look at it?  In other words, the brain is only a brain when we look at it. I think you may be misunderstanding what quantum means. It doesn't mean that quantum level exists when we observe it, and doesn't exist when we don't. It always exists. The principle of it being dependent on our observation only says that HOW we end up observing it determines how it may present itself. Simplest example is lightmbeing wave v.s particle. On quantum level, if we observe light and test it to see if it is a wave, we will observe it as a wave, and if we try to observe it as a particle, we will see it as a particle. However, that light will continue to exist regardless of whether we observe it. On a macro scale, this is like observing the temperature of a glass of water with a big thermometer. If we insert the thermometer into the glass to get a temperature reading, we won't be getting the actual temperature, but the temperature affected by our observation, which is the combination of the temperature of the water and the added temperature of the thermometer. The final temperature is not independent of our observation, but there would still be a temperature even if we didn't observe it. Didn't they cover this stuff in your school? (It was in one of my high school classes) So, with regards to our consciousness and brains, this doesn't even really apply, since they are both contained in the same system. You are not the thermometer (consciousness) observing the water (brain), you are the water itself. Or you could say you are a glass of water with a thermometer already in it. |
|
|
|
The experience of creating something in imagination is more immediate, than your interpretation of it as simply rearranging the electrons in the brain. So why do you prefer some very complex interpretation over the immediate experience?
I don't follow. Imagining something takes eons when measured in picoseconds (it's relative), and our brains and imagination isn't actually all that fast. We can't even process visual information faster than at a few images a second, and it takes a while to reconstruct something like a house in our imagination (at least compared to how fast computers can do it now). So, I'm not sure what you mean by more immediate, in leu of it being slowed by the electrical and chemical limits of our wetware (brains). You can also create something in physical reality after you imagine it, don't you have a concept of a house with all those drawings before you go and build it?
Yes, but that concept isn't a creation, is a concept. Like "cat" is a word that identifies a furry, sharp concept, not an actual creation of a feline. The only thing "cat" creates is some pixels on your screen, just as the only thing imagining a house creates is just some electrical "pixels" in your brain. But my being formed through chemical processes isn't a singularity. There was no pre-existing idea of my car 5 years ago, either, but it was put together from raw materials, and now here it is. I don't call that a singularity, I cann it a normal physical event.
But there is a clear distinction (for you) between chemical processes before your birth and after. So is there a particular chemical process that makes you who you are? Isn't that process a pre-existing idea of you then? I don't know if it's relevant, but for me, no. There was a period between my birth and the time my long-term memory developed (about 1 to 2 years of age) during which I don't remember any concept of "me." For others, yes, there is a clear distinction between the total lack of chemical processes before my conception, and a bundle of chemical processes that can be defined as me after conception. I have no idea what you mean by the "pre-existing idea" though. I don't know who would be holding and thinking that idea. It wasn't me or my parents. The car example is irrelevant to this discussion, as anything else you call yours, simply because for something to be yours you need to be you to begin with. Your car is not you, so it is not so interesting how it came to be. The funny thing is that according to this train of thought your brain also is not you. You need to go deeper, or should I say "outside" Sorry, I didn't mean to focus on the possessive "my" car. I was just using my car as an example. It's a car, and it's its own car. It is self containing as a single entity, that came to be after being assembled from various parts, but was not imagined, or existed as any sort of idea, until it was assembled. Just as I was and is before and after I was "assembled." As for the brain not you idea, that may prove rather difficult for those who believe as you do when we get to the point of being able to upload our consciousness into machines. Modern psychology says that "we" are not only our physical brains, but the rest of our bodies as well, limbs and all, and uploading ourselves into a disembodied system, or even a system with a radically different body (different proportions, senses, etc) could be such a radical change to our psyche that we would rapidly become seemingly totally different people/personalities, or even go mad. Those who believe their brains are not them may end up boldly and carelessly going straight into total insanity. |
|
|
|
So, there are two options here, either we have per-existent idea of "you" before your birth or we have a singularity. I cannot see any way around it, no matter how certain belief system is called.
If the substance of "you" is a particular configuration of atoms waiting to arrange themselves in a certain way, then that's already a pre-existent idea of "you". Can we agree on that?
I'm not sure. Saying they are waiting to kind of anthropomorphasizes this whole thing. I don't think atoms can wait, or feel anything, or have any ideas or thought processes, let alone of a future me. Can we just say that a proper set of circumstances just happened to align to bring those specific atoms together to form me? And would my being formed what you are calling the "singularity?" (Which still sounds like an extremely improper and over-sensationalized term for "just happened by chance"). In this regard, making step forward would be building a very realistic computer simulation, which would block person's current memory and perception of physical reality for the duration of the game session. Something like decent VR helmet with good response time for blocking physical reality and injection of some substance to temporarily block current memory would do the job. All this is real physical stuff from off-the-shelf components, so no imaginary fantasies here.
Then ask that person the same questions while in the game session and see how ridiculous the answers would sound. Something like: "how did you get here?" - "oh, I don't know, maybe I am just an arrangement of some bits in this place, or some quantum flop of energy...". It is very easy to see, that simulation itself didn't create that person (the actual physical player), but only altered the perception of reality for a while.
Let's pretend that the simulation is extremely good, even allowing this player to test his environment, but not allowing to give him any hints that he is in a simulation. Then, based on the tests this player has performed, he learned that the answer to the questions is most probably X. The question that arises then is: Does it matter if the real answer to the question is actually Y, if everything the player believes he will experience, and the only thing he believes will ever have an influence on him, is X? Does Y even have any significance if there is no way for the player to test for Y? And if X is the only thing the player can test for and experience, can the "realty" for the player be Y, Z, A, B, C, or an infinite other possibilities, all having no bearing on his existence in the situation? (That alphabet being Christ, Zeus, Ra, Thor, or a slew of other "realities" we have come up with that actually have no bearing or significance on the world we experience). |
|
|
|
Don't jump the gun only ask for ticket money after we hit $1000, and then start planning - we are in the ideation stage now, so all ideas need to be voiced.
For escrow services maybe ask around in the market threads.
+1. I still think we may be too early for this. Even with the recent price run-up. |
|
|
|
You should have some faith when I say I've held back a piece of a cloud from moving\
Have faith? In YOU?  Your mind is so destroyed I know you believe what you spew, but it just didn't happen. Then why did other people see it stop moving? Yes, you should have faith in me. For I am you. And I love you unconditionally. Your friends were just screwing with you. One of them was actually the one who stopped the cloud, but made you think you did it to make fun of you. You have terrible friends. |
|
|
|
Just checked the first page (the first time since I read it when I first saw this thread). Big red letters say something about reservations? I don't know if I reserved, but yeah, I'll be coming, and will have a +1. I'm bringing my spouse. No, that doesn't mean an increase in boobies.
 reserving takes place by posting in this thread, but it is of course no obligation. more a protective measure in case more people want to attend as there will be tickets. soon tm we will open ticket purchase. we plan to assign a unique 4 digit ID to any attendant, this will be sent via pm and kept secret. the attendant/buyer sends 1 btc and includes his/her ID in satoshis to the transaction. (for example member ID # 1234 will send 1.00001234 btc to the public party-adress) this will keep us from explaining how to sign a message to 1000 people. credit for this idea goes to sebastianju. you might want to think about escrow? Does anyone know anyone trustworthy who has a reputation of holding other people's money? |
|
|
|
There were no "just_me"s, no "pedrag", no "Spendulus" (if there twer it twat a Roman), no hawkeye, but...Rassah, dank, Vod, and Ekaros, you guys names may have been crucified.
Jesus isn't really even his real name. That's just a bastardized anglicized version. I'm surprised devout Christians don't call Jesus by his actual name. I guess they don't care... Rassah is actually a totally unique name. I pretty much pulled it out of my ass. Though I see that there are some other Rassah's, likely with accent on the second A, as opposed to mine with accent on the first, living in Middle East... Weird how almost nothing is original any more (no, not even the bible, much of which was plundered from more ancient religions) |
|
|
|
|
Just checked the first page (the first time since I read it when I first saw this thread). Big red letters say something about reservations? I don't know if I reserved, but yeah, I'll be coming, and will have a +1. I'm bringing my spouse. No, that doesn't mean an increase in boobies.
|
|
|
|
The fact is that people are kept ignorant of the way the economy works because it is ultimately a false and destructive institution, manipulated by the people in control for their own benefit. This is antithetical to the way we have evolved, and that is why we have negative reactions to, and a desire to leave, such ways of life. It is antithetical to life itself. You would not survive if your organs operated in a market style economy. We cannot survive as a species if we continue our present course.
Ok... so I guess you advocate allotting resources based on need, to those who need it mostt. But who makes that call? The "scientific method" Duh. Didn't you read the thread?  |
|
|
|
|
Who has authority? How about neither? People have authority over their own bodies, their own things, and their own dominion. The idea of "that's mine!" is something that even a child understands. And all our sstate laws, and even god's laws, eventually come out of that. The Golden Rule, or the Non-Aggression Principle can be extrapolated to every law we ever need, and pretty much every just law we ever had, regardless of whether it was from god or from state. Then at some point both religion and state decided they wanted more, and shit went to hell.
Oops, sorry.. Who has authority? Individuals do. I have authority over myself (body and/or soul) regardless of what the state, or even god, says. All they can do is tell me how they think I should act and do things. I am the ultimate aothority on what I actually do.
|
|
|
|
You are correct, we don't 'create' anything because everything always existed and has happened before us. We are just channeling, changing and controlling, thereby, basically creating with our minds.
So, are we "creating" or are we just "channeling?" You can't have both? And if there is exactly zero factual corroborated and reproducible evidence for any of this, why is it relevant? I guess for you, you hope to be the very first person to actually have factual, corroborated, and reproducible evidence? I wonder what are the chances of that, since you'd be the first human (maybe second) to do this in 250,000 years. It's very simple to understand when you understand what infinity means. If the universe is infinite, everything has already happened infinitely and everything you can think of exists everywhere. Yes. If the universe is infinite. But our universe is not. There was a beginning, and if it keep expanding, there will be an end, where all energy runs out (though we now have methods of creating logic gates - computers - that can work and process without energy, and thus if we actually survive until the heat death of the universe, we may be able to continue living as these self-contained machines... but I digress). There is a theory (or is it a hypothesis?) that there are an infinite number of other universes, and thus an infinite number of other possibilities. So yeah, that's true. But there is no evidence that we are able to percieve any of those other universes, or that we are in any way affect them. If they exist, it's more that we "flow" through them, taking different routes with every decision we make, while remaining in the universe we chose to stayon the path of. We call it creating, though it's not really creating anything because you cannot create more than infinity. But it's a good word. We are conscious creators.
If it's not really creating anything, then it's not a good word. We would be conscious decision makers at most. Which is kind of a "no duh." |
|
|
|
I am very doubtfull that we would be able to afford even one big musical act for just the $1mil that this party will supposedly raise. The cost of the venue and everything else will likely be enormous.
Not really, Europe while fucked up in many ways, is extremely affordable when it comes to partying. 3 stage party would run below 5k, provided they sell their own drinks. I meant that some of the top tallents that were thrown around here (Robbie Williams *drool*) would probably want close to $100k if not more for a private gig like this. |
|
|
|
|
I used to believe in Jesus Christ with all my heart. I was a practicing Catholic, went to church every week, prayed often, and felt God's warm embrace in my life.
Then I got better.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
