KARMA

Originally Posted by TerramineLightvoid

Pot meet kettle. You point to the shadows claiming another reality entirely with no actual proof. That's what's REALLY going on here.

Your little article and the scientists studying Quantum effects on the macroscale. Are pre-supposing based on a clump of 800 particles in an experiment oriented towards one of the most basic fundamental movements(shooting a ball, through a slit). To mean more than it really does. The whole problem is. In the original experiment and in this more recent example. You have actual measurable difference that matters. That you can actually observe these 2 probabilities, thus they both have an actual impact. Hence why you observe both discrete particles, AS WELL AS an interference pattern similar to a wave.

But seeing an 800 atom structure do this does not mean Macro scale. A /Molecule/ is not Macro scale. I will tell you one thing: If this applied to the macro scale we would already know it. It would be too unavoidable. Because every little action we do in our daily lives would count as a double slit experiment. Lemme give you an example. Take your Grandma for instance since that seems to be the favored example to use. Instead of Slits let's use Doors. If your argument was correct then when Grandma goes through 1 door she actually goes through both doors. Not JUST in 2 different universes but actually in 1 superimposed possibility in /this/ universe. You should measure some sort of impact or difference in the room she didn't enter... and in every other room in the building as well... all at the same time.

When someone plays baseball, when they go to swing their bat. The ball would be hit with the force of many bats all landing on the ball at different times and angles. Based upon the superimposed possibility of all the different probabilities of the person swinging the bat at the ball. This is what every scientist means when they say that probability doesn't work the same way at the Macro scale as it does the Quantum. Because the double slit experiment isn't just random nonsense that you get to make up what it means: It specifically means that we are witnessing 2 probabilities for the same object, happening at the same time, within the same universe.

The Macro scale equivalent would be impossible because all these different probabilities of all these different countless objects would be interfering with one another. There's a probability in some alternative universe where an Elephant is currently standing precisely where I am sitting. The double slit experiment MEANS, the elephant in the other probability... would be /SQUISHING ME PHYSICALLY SPEAKING, IN THIS UNIVERSE/. Despite there being no elephant actually physically here. Hence the particle acting like a wave when we SEE it as a discrete object. We never actually SEE the wave with our own eyes.

But you know all of this was overkill. All I really needed to do, to stop you at the door? Was ask you... "So when does the experiment begin when we shoot a macro sized ball through a macro sized slit?"

Again, you are a complete failure in life if you seriously think any of the actual science coming from your mouth... means that "all of life is a lie, we are god and we can do whatever we want herpity derpity!"

Once again, you misinterpret and miss the point of the science and philosophy references I give you, and then you use your rather poor grasp of the scientific theories as erroneous premises for arguments to draw conclusions that don't even follow. My spiritual beliefs are not scientific theories, that is why I bring them to something called a spiritual forum. However, they are conjectured from the implications of the scientific theories I mention, and they do form a coherent structure of how reality ultimately works. It's a shame really. Few people do engage with this subject matter, and when one finally does, he seems to just want to rant in an angry incoherent way and toss insults.
Perhaps if you were a bit more pleasant fellow I would continue to engage with you and explain further, but I can see after a few short posts that this would be a waste of time, a waste of space on the forum, and frankly just plain annoying. You seem to know a little bit about classical physics and the other sciences that flow from it, but your understanding beyond (and even somewhat within) that is poor. You seem to mostly just want to rant at anyone who does not see things through your limited view. And by the way, no, you do not see through your eyes, perhaps if you start by understanding that, you may be able to see beyond your limited scope of vision.
I will leave you to the others if they wish to engage with you, but I really don't see any point in having further discussion with you.
Good bye and best of luck to you.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Once again, you misinterpret and miss the point of the science and philosophy references I give you, and then you use your rather poor grasp of the scientific theories as erroneous premises for arguments to draw conclusions that don't even follow. My spiritual beliefs are not scientific theories, that is why I bring them to something called a spiritual forum. However, they are conjectured from the implications of the scientific theories I mention, and they do form a coherent structure of how reality ultimately works. It's a shame really. Few people do engage with this subject matter, and when one finally does, he seems to just want to rant in an angry incoherent way and toss insults.
Perhaps if you were a bit more pleasant fellow I would continue to engage with you and explain further, but I can see after a few short posts that this would be a waste of time, a waste of space on the forum, and frankly just plain annoying. You seem to know a little bit about classical physics and the other sciences that flow from it, but your understanding beyond (and even somewhat within) that is poor. You seem to mostly just want to rant at anyone who does not see things through your limited view. And by the way, no, you do not see through your eyes, perhaps if you start by understanding that, you may be able to see beyond your limited scope of vision.
I will leave you to the others if they wish to engage with you, but I really don't see any point in having further discussion with you.
Good bye and best of luck to you.

It's not that quantum behaviour means anything in particular; it's just that quantum behaviour is interpreted in different ways, including the 'Copenhagen interpretation', which seems to be most favoured, and the 'many worlds interpretation' among others. Some explain entanglement as a higher dimensional phenomena... and so on, but no one actually knows what it means. There is a calculation which makes accurate, correct predictions - and there's speculation about what that might imply - like a variety of stories we can use to make 'common sense' out of it all (even though those stories are pretty crazy!). I have no idea what it implies in any spiritual sense except to mention the observation which is integral to the process.

Kamma is a different paradigm altogether because the 'cause' is volition. Buddha claimed that kamma is volition, which means not that kamma is some of reward or comeuppance, but this moment of intent. Framed in that way, it impels one to be self-aware, and by knowing the volition one knows just what they do. People are often compelled by their reactivity to form ill-will, and all nature of aversion to their circumstances, as well as impulses of greed etc. and so forth. The teaching suggests that we be aware of these tendencies within ourselves and eliminate the impure urges that generate suffering while cultivating beneficial mindstates of goodwill and positivity that generate happiness.

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by TerramineLightvoid

Yeah no, your ****ed up parents are not the world. They are not even remotely indicative of what 99.99999999% of the world is like.

Here's the world: Rape is 1000% illegal. Particularly, rape of children and minors is so universally hated and despised that being a child rapist is to be everything that is anathema to society and humanity and is a very dangerous and deadly road that is extremely unforgiving. If you don't change your ways, a painful death is inevitable. If you do you will forever be marked with a stigma.

When I said there will never be a world where rape is acceptable. I meant where it's legal, where you walk outside and you see your neighbor raping someone, and everyone else sees it and just smiles and waves at your neighbor as he rapes. Or even just on the Rational level, there will never be a world where Rape is logically arguable as being Amoral or morally acceptable.

TLV, hello there.
You are right that rape is never acceptable morally. You're right that there is an underlying truth, or morality, that we (humanity) are still in process of apprehending in its barest and simplest outlines.
But you are wrong that rape is a rare occurrence. Rape and sexual assault are commonplace in all societies. And even in Western societies, it is well-known that out of 1000 rapes, only a handful will be prosecuted, with only a literal few (2-3) resulting in a guilty verdict. Men can and do rape, assault, and coerce women sexually with abandon and with a near-100% certainty of no repercussions. There apparently is no stigma so long as a man can cast a woman as a "prostitute" or otherwise disparage her character. The visceral hatred of too many runs so deep that they foam at the mouth at the thought of women getting their comeuppance through rape, so it's no work at all for any one man to simply slur a woman's character, cast her in a poor light and be done with it. It's more or less the same tired story each time.

Many rapes probably now occur in the West outside of marriage but historically this was the primary place it occurred. Marital rape was not even illegal till 30-35 years ago. Child brides and marital raping of children is common and even legal worldwide. Sex trafficking of women and children as slaves is estimated now annually to outnumber the historic peak annual slave population in the Americas.

This speaks to the reality you experience (where you consider rape or its possibility to be rare), versus the reality that all women experience and/or live with daily as an ever-present occurrence or threat, a perpetual reality-in-the-making. Clearly, for all we say that "ideally" rape and sexual assault are bad, we do not in fact act as such on the ground, day-to-day, in our dealings with one another. Words without right-aligned action and behaviour to back them are beyond meaningless -- ask any woman or child who's dealt with this.

On a last note...the situation you describe with the raping &/or murdering of neighbours has in fact happened many times in the recent genocides of the last and current centuries. We cannot rely on social norm, which may at time permit or allow unspeakable atrocities. Nor can we rely solely on civil or criminal law, poorly enforced if at all. We can only rely on the Law of authentic love and right alignment toward one and all. This Law is the foundation of karma.

I haven't read the thread, but I'm fairly certain that changing the ever-present universality of rape and sexual assault on earth has everything to do with karma and ownership of intent, thought, word, and deed --
and nothing at all to do (in essence) with the quantum realm, for all that's a fascinating topic.

Peace & blessings
7L

[Altair]

There's people who believe they can ''create their reality'', in the most literal sense. But there's a mistake in seeing the choices presented with having absolute freedom without consequences. To put it simply, we won't fly by just flapping our arms when we jump off a building. Having strong beliefs to the contrary won't save us. People on drugs can believe such things and act upon it, they have strong belief but then it kills them. Same way some of us may think we can smoke, drink, or eat junk year in year out without consequences. Eventually reality will catch up with all of us..

I have spoken out against solipsism and extreme relativism a lot because these are dangerous philosophies. They're morally questionable and can lead to unhealthy outcomes, either to the enthusiastic follower or to others, people or animals. There's a sense of ''I can do as I please, it's all relative'' or ''It's all illusion'' and all of this is not really well aligned with any notion of karma..

If we are divine beings of love and compassion than it makes sense to try and live in accordance with that, and don't just have an ''anything goes'' mentality about it. True, in practice we are never purists but we can all try our best. So sure, there is relativism, but any extreme relativism is as nonsensical as claiming to have zero impact or collecting zero karma as an incarnated human in this world. We can recognize relativism, but some go overboard using it as a means to excuse any activity or claim anything is possible..

Originally Posted by Gem

It's not that quantum behaviour means anything in particular; it's just that quantum behaviour is interpreted in different ways, including the 'Copenhagen interpretation', which seems to be most favoured, and the 'many worlds interpretation' among others. Some explain entanglement as a higher dimensional phenomena... and so on, but no one actually knows what it means. There is a calculation which makes accurate, correct predictions - and there's speculation about what that might imply - like a variety of stories we can use to make 'common sense' out of it all (even though those stories are pretty crazy!). I have no idea what it implies in any spiritual sense except to mention the observation which is integral to the process.

Kamma is a different paradigm altogether because the 'cause' is volition. Buddha claimed that kamma is volition, which means not that kamma is some of reward or comeuppance, but this moment of intent. Framed in that way, it impels one to be self-aware, and by knowing the volition one knows just what they do. People are often compelled by their reactivity to form ill-will, and all nature of aversion to their circumstances, as well as impulses of greed etc. and so forth. The teaching suggests that we be aware of these tendencies within ourselves and eliminate the impure urges that generate suffering while cultivating beneficial mindstates of goodwill and positivity that generate happiness.

They may be in different paradigms, yet I see karma and quantum mechanics intertwined with the former depending at least somewhat on the latter. Volition is defined in the online dictionary as “the faculty or power of using one’s will.” But in Newton’s universe, it is far from certain we have a will. If the universe were just a giant clock, and we are only cogs in that machine, with our actions and even our thoughts just being the results of cause and effect, then how can there be volition. In short, there is no “we” and there is no “I”, just predetermined events playing out according to deterministic laws. Quantum mechanics replaces that determinism with probabilities. Granted, the amplitude of those probabilities are rather shallow under most parts of the wave, but the wavelength is as wide as the universe, so the possibilities are virtually limitless. Whatever the event that will eventually be realized and witnessed from that probability wave, it will not “be”, until observed, and I could be that observer. Here the outcome of the next event is not necessarily deterministic. Here if anywhere is the point in reality where I have the possibility to be shaping it. The fact that I may have done so may get obscured by the merging of countless such events at the macroscopic level, but that seemingly deterministic macroscopic world dynamically emerges from the totality of all such probabilistic quantum events. Mix in a bit of kaos theory, and who knows, my little butterfly sized quantum flap could mushroom into a macroscopic storm of events. As we study the neurons, molecules, and atoms that make up the brain, we continue to find cause and effect relationships. Assume this path does not deviate and follow this chain to its logical conclusion and we become nothing more than the totality of those events, an effect. Thankfully, it does deviate. While it is not proof of free will or my existence, it does offer a possibility that it and me are real, we can exist. In this aspect of quantum craziness, I see a toe hold for free will, a chance that I am not just a sequence of causes and effects. That I am more than just an effect, but perhaps can affect who I am and everything around me. I can be there to own, and perhaps realize, my intentions. I can exercise volition, and have a chance to affect my karma.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by ketzer

They may be in different paradigms, yet I see karma and quantum mechanics intertwined with the former depending at least somewhat on the latter. Volition is defined in the online dictionary as “the faculty or power of using one’s will.” But in Newton’s universe, it is far from certain we have a will. If the universe were just a giant clock, and we are only cogs in that machine, with our actions and even our thoughts just being the results of cause and effect, then how can there be volition. In short, there is no “we” and there is no “I”, just predetermined events playing out according to deterministic laws. Quantum mechanics replaces that determinism with probabilities. Granted, the amplitude of those probabilities are rather shallow under most parts of the wave, but the wavelength is as wide as the universe, so the possibilities are virtually limitless. Whatever the event that will eventually be realized and witnessed from that probability wave, it will not “be”, until observed, and I could be that observer. Here the outcome of the next event is not necessarily deterministic. Here if anywhere is the point in reality where I have the possibility to be shaping it. The fact that I may have done so may get obscured by the merging of countless such events at the macroscopic level, but that seemingly deterministic macroscopic world dynamically emerges from the totality of all such probabilistic quantum events. Mix in a bit of kaos theory, and who knows, my little butterfly sized quantum flap could mushroom into a macroscopic storm of events. As we study the neurons, molecules, and atoms that make up the brain, we continue to find cause and effect relationships. Assume this path does not deviate and follow this chain to its logical conclusion and we become nothing more than the totality of those events, an effect. Thankfully, it does deviate. While it is not proof of free will or my existence, it does offer a possibility that it and me are real, we can exist. In this aspect of quantum craziness, I see a toe hold for free will, a chance that I am not just a sequence of causes and effects. That I am more than just an effect, but perhaps can affect who I am and everything around me. I can be there to own, and perhaps realize, my intentions. I can exercise volition, and have a chance to affect my karma.

That would mean there is effect, and cause, but the cause is not an effect, and I agree that is the case because there are various ways one can 'react' to their circumstantial experience, however, to react is essentially to generate volition as one enters the dynamic of being adverse to one thing and desiring another, and that dynamic is essentially the process of kamma. It is rather obvious that how we might react to our circumstances affects the nature of future outcomes, so I don't think that is in doubt, and to react with aversion is the harbinger of hatred, malice and all nature of ill-will; and with desire, craving and greed, which are doubtlessly destructive in nature, and a dischordant, disruptive vibe to them, which in turn manifests in terrible outcomes, firstly by making us disturbed and unhappy in ourselves, which we spread to everyone around. Those we effect in such a way might then also react adversely and perpetuate the ill-will, which is then their own kamma.


That is why I think it is most important to develop an ability of mindful quietude and stillness which is regardless of circumastances and to remain stable minded in a sort of self-centre so that reactivity doesn't get out of hand and overwhelm one's sense of contentedness. Then, for example, a nasty ill-intended person might do something to hurt me, which is their kamma, not mine; unless I start reacting to their affront - which is then my kamma. Then I start generating misery in myself and end up projecting it around me... generally creating bad vibes, which in turn manifest in adverse outcomes.


It could be thought of as volition effecting the collapse of the field as the vibe we give off begins to determine what we experience, but the most important principle here to consider is, the cause, volition, is not an effect. We do not have to react to circumstances and be subjected to the cycle of 'cause and effect' where each cause is equally an effect and vice versa. We could simply remain even minded regardless of what happens and not become compelled by circumstances.


This is not really a 'free will' story. It is only 'free' in the sense that the 'will' we generate is not dependent on what happens to us; not 'free' in the sense that we control everything that happens. For example, we can understand that a person who generates ill-will toward us is generating their own suffering, which brings a compassionate volition in us rather than a reactive, hateful one. If the offender has the power to bring about ill-will in us, then we begin to generate 'bad kamma'. We immediately start feeling miserable and give off a bad vibe which, in turn, disturbs others all around us.


I think this is the lesson of Christ being tortured and asking for his tortures to be forgivened, because he understood their acts were born of ignorance and 'they know not what they do'. His torturers were unaware (ignorant) that the volition they generated was their own misery, and Christ was compassionate about that, rather than hating them in return. This did not make Christ's circumstances any better, but at least Christ was not generating ill-will, which would be bad kamma within himself, as he was subjected to the bad kamma his torturers generated.

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Altair

There's people who believe they can ''create their reality'', in the most literal sense. But there's a mistake in seeing the choices presented with having absolute freedom without consequences. To put it simply, we won't fly by just flapping our arms when we jump off a building. Having strong beliefs to the contrary won't save us. People on drugs can believe such things and act upon it, they have strong belief but then it kills them. Same way some of us may think we can smoke, drink, or eat junk year in year out without consequences. Eventually reality will catch up with all of us..

I have spoken out against solipsism and extreme relativism a lot because these are dangerous philosophies. They're morally questionable and can lead to unhealthy outcomes, either to the enthusiastic follower or to others, people or animals. There's a sense of ''I can do as I please, it's all relative'' or ''It's all illusion'' and all of this is not really well aligned with any notion of karma..

Hello Altair. Agreed.
These concepts are well worth discussing further...as perhaps many haven't fully spent time with them.

Solipsism is the belief that ultimately there is only the self -- it is narcissism at its purest. Solipsism and extreme relativism (anything goes) are both the foundation and the outcome of a society founded on amoral utilitarianism. It's an ourobouros of derivative, consumptive self-absorption.

Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Utility is defined in various ways -- and when it is amoral, it can be assumed to be concerned only with the perceived interests and well-being of the self...or perhaps any group furthering the momentary interests of the self.

Amorality is believing and exhibiting indifference to and not abiding by the moral rules or codes of society. Note that an amoral action by one person could be considered immoral by a specific society, depending upon the moral code of the society. YET if your society actively promoties amorality, then of course if you are stronger and more powerful, then you may assert your right to perpetrate grave harms on others regardless of the individual or common good. Their rights no longer exist, or exist only at your whim.

Clearly, amoral utilitarianism is incompatible with either humanitarian rights or representative democracy and will tend toward both chaos (suffering) and authoritarianism (might makes right). Yes, I'd say any strong divergence from authentic love (actively seeking and willing the good of the other) at either the individual or the social level is dangerous. Extremely so.

It's worth a much deeper look at these "mainstream" social norms of the last half-century or so. Norms we've grown up under. At just how destructive and toxic so many of them are. At what is put forth as "acceptable" and even "good" and "right" by mainstream society. And at what cost this comes to you or to me or to any of us...and thus to all of us.

If we are divine beings of love and compassion than it makes sense to try and live in accordance with that, and don't just have an ''anything goes'' mentality about it. True, in practice we are never purists but we can all try our best. So sure, there is relativism, but any extreme relativism is as nonsensical as claiming to have zero impact or collecting zero karma as an incarnated human in this world. We can recognize relativism, but some go overboard using it as a means to excuse any activity or claim anything is possible..

Yes, and yes. Yes, we are that. And yes, if we deny that which we are, then certainly all those other things you describe would be and in fact ARE commonplace (denying karma, denying the equal worth and value of all others, etc).

Peace & blessings
7L

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by ketzer
They may be in different paradigms, yet I see karma and quantum mechanics intertwined with the former depending at least somewhat on the latter. Volition is defined in the online dictionary as “the faculty or power of using one’s will.” But in Newton’s universe, it is far from certain we have a will. If the universe were just a giant clock, and we are only cogs in that machine, with our actions and even our thoughts just being the results of cause and effect, then how can there be volition. In short, there is no “we” and there is no “I”, just predetermined events playing out according to deterministic laws. Quantum mechanics replaces that determinism with probabilities. Granted, the amplitude of those probabilities are rather shallow under most parts of the wave, but the wavelength is as wide as the universe, so the possibilities are virtually limitless. Whatever the event that will eventually be realized and witnessed from that probability wave, it will not “be”, until observed, and I could be that observer. Here the outcome of the next event is not necessarily deterministic. Here if anywhere is the point in reality where I have the possibility to be shaping it. The fact that I may have done so may get obscured by the merging of countless such events at the macroscopic level, but that seemingly deterministic macroscopic world dynamically emerges from the totality of all such probabilistic quantum events. Mix in a bit of kaos theory, and who knows, my little butterfly sized quantum flap could mushroom into a macroscopic storm of events. As we study the neurons, molecules, and atoms that make up the brain, we continue to find cause and effect relationships. Assume this path does not deviate and follow this chain to its logical conclusion and we become nothing more than the totality of those events, an effect. Thankfully, it does deviate. While it is not proof of free will or my existence, it does offer a possibility that it and me are real, we can exist. In this aspect of quantum craziness, I see a toe hold for free will, a chance that I am not just a sequence of causes and effects. That I am more than just an effect, but perhaps can affect who I am and everything around me. I can be there to own, and perhaps realize, my intentions. I can exercise volition, and have a chance to affect my karma.

Ketzer, hello there. I largely agree with everything as you've stated it here.
The main point is that your volition as =consciousness with awareness and clarity of intention) is impactful. It is, I agree. However, it's important to note your consciousness is impactful even without awareness of your intent. Your consciousness is impactful regardless -- and hence the notion of generating much mindless ill will, fallout, and bad karma if we are not mindful and centred. Even the untrained, unaware consciousness of a sentient being has a reliable, measurable impact on our reality at every level, including the most minute, quantum level (i.e., the observer effect, etc).

You are right to assert that this effect is present in our "large-scale" reality as well, and that the sum of all consciousness and manifest outcomes in each moment comprise our reality, and that we as sentient beings contribute to this reality, which has both physical (manifest) and non-physical aspects. The origins and maintenance of this totality of reality from moment to moment (so to speak) are quite logically not solely the purview of us or any other beings who currently exist (are centered in our being) within the physical reality or realm of existence, but that's another discussion entirely.

Originally Posted by Gem

This is not really a 'free will' story. It is only 'free' in the sense that the 'will' we generate is not dependent on what happens to us; not 'free' in the sense that we control everything that happens. For example, we can understand that a person who generates ill-will toward us is generating their own suffering, which brings a compassionate volition in us rather than a reactive, hateful one. If the offender has the power to bring about ill-will in us, then we begin to generate 'bad kamma'. We immediately start feeling miserable and give off a bad vibe which, in turn, disturbs others all around us.

I think this is the lesson of Christ being tortured and asking for his tortures to be forgivened, because he understood their acts were born of ignorance and 'they know not what they do'. His torturers were unaware (ignorant) that the volition they generated was their own misery, and Christ was compassionate about that, rather than hating them in return. This did not make Christ's circumstances any better, but at least Christ was not generating ill-will, which would be bad kamma within himself, as he was subjected to the bad kamma his torturers generated.

Gem, hello and well said. I would say the "free will" as you define it is the only free will that matters. If free will meant you control your world, then others have no free will &/or their free will is limited by your whims and dictates.

The recognition that free will is just that -- the intrinsic ability of all sentient, self-aware beings to determine our choices in the moment regarding how we will respond, act, speak, and intend or think -- is one of the sweetest of all things. Even if forced to act, we must submit our will to this coercion. Even if broken in spirit for one lifetime or several, the damage is not eternal, exactly because we can take meaningful decisions and choices in each now moment in any one lifetime or beyond. This free will (as properly understood) cannot be taken from us...it is part and parcel of our consciousness as sentient, self-aware beings.

We may fail to recognise, accept, honour and hone this intrinsic aspect of the self in each one of us. But we can never be parted from it, as it is fundamental to who we are at centre.

Peace & blessings
7L

[TerramineLightvoid]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Once again, you misinterpret and miss the point of the science and philosophy references I give you, and then you use your rather poor grasp of the scientific theories as erroneous premises for arguments to draw conclusions that don't even follow.

Yeah I don't see how, as I described in explicit non-laymen scientific terms. What it FUNCTIONALLY means. You just hate that I pointed out fundamentally problematic implications that can be deduced by what QP shows us. There IS a higher meaning to it all and QP is going to lead to complete revolution of our comprehension of existence. But where it SEEMS to go from my perspective is in showing how "destiny" works and how we can influence our path due to the "unset" nature of reality. Reality can be what we want, but not in the sense that we just wish it to be. At the macro scale, wishes still are and always will be... granted by adhering to and respecting the physical laws. You want money? You get a job. You want to fly? Build a plane. You want to live forever, master Biology. Pray for a fish, maybe you'll luck out once in your life to find one just flopped up on a shore line. Learn to fight, you'll obtain countless fish over the course of your life. Etc.

Aspiration, Hope, Prayer... are about POTENTIAL... and you only realize Potential through Action. Also I wanted to add on and point out, that even if you had somethin goin with the QP... that does not even remotely touch upon Philosophy or Metaphysics. That doesn't touch upon whether or not it's OKAY to create whatever world you want. Which is the biggest concern. When you say "all of life is an illusion"... you're dismissing the lessons learned. It doesn't matter if we are living in a dream or simulation or whathaveyou... Morality is an objective truth outside the scope of the physical universe. It is PURELY unavoidable philosophical and metaphysical truth.

To give an example of people who think like you... In pedophile communities, they rationalize in their head that all the science which tells them they are wrong, that it's all a lie. A convenient lie by the government. Because they rationalize this, they can then twist what little evidence they can find to try and claim it validates their sickness as "natural" and even going so far as being delusional enough to think that sex with children is the true default and that fully mature and developed women... are "old ladies". Yes it's not the same reasoning per sey, but it's the same FUNCTIONAL theme. Of claiming there's a greater truth which renders our world whether physical or societal... False, Made Up, etc. My thing is following the most classical argument that I think therefore I am, the nature of the argument suggests that the reality we percieve must in some way shape or form be /real/. Other or higher realities do not invalidate other realities.

All it does is show that our world isn't the /center/. But there are also Higher Truths, which transcend the /physical/ universe. Hence why some people choose to persue climbing the ladder of "enlightenment". I love science and consider myself a Master Scientist, I love learning the physical laws. I am mastering Biology currently but have spent a lot of time in Physics and Mathematics. As well as Computer Science. The point being, I probably know way more than you. It's my intention to be the smartest person on the face of the planet, I invest way more time studying and I study countless entire domains of knowledge to simulate being as close to All-Knowing as possible.

To say that I have a bad grasp of the concepts I talk about is to vastly underestimate me.

My spiritual beliefs are not scientific theories, that is why I bring them to something called a spiritual forum.

Yet you MUST concede that spiritual beliefs ARE and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN, the most dangerous. That someone can believe salvation is to drink poisoned coolaid. How many people went down the road you went? That it just turned into insanity and delusion?

Especially because, we must be humble enough to recognize our disposition's in life. I am professionally diagnosed with Aspergers, and I hate to say it but it gives us an Edge... it truly is Savant Syndrome. It most certianly is where "Genius" truly comes from. Or High Functioning Autism in general. I have truly always been significantly more intelligent than my peers, and they most often recognize it too. But even I know that until I put in the work and I make sure I am what I claim... that I must act like everyone is my equal... but moreover I must be able to recognize the patterns. The average person is... the average person. Even the average person may gleam certain knowledge which will lead them down the path to try and become exceptional... but if they aren't prepared and if really they are vastly underestimating just how average they really are(the vast majority of people). Then they will end up opening their mouth and sounding like an idiot to anyone who actually knows what they are talking about.

Especially what are the odds that you're not just Average Joe and that trying to reach beyond your bounds will only lead to corruption? In fact if you really wanna tussle over it. I'll tell you right now. The moral philosophical truth that I know, is that Corruption is a pervasive force in the universe and it does everything it can to slip in through the smallest of cracks. People being lead to Blaspheme reality itself, to ignore Reality/God. Are being lead by the Void to destroy. They think they are saving people or saving themselves, but they are ONLY /undoing/.

However, they are conjectured from the implications of the scientific theories I mention, and they do form a coherent structure of how reality ultimately works. It's a shame really. Few people do engage with this subject matter, and when one finally does, he seems to just want to rant in an angry incoherent way and toss insults.

I think my post was EXTREMELY coherent and you just want to whine because I ripped the silver spoon out your mouth. You're not on an entirely bad track but it's dumb to be replacive or reductive with Truth. Truth is an infinite complexity, a Singularity. So ultimately our reality is real. It may not be all there is but we will never be able to escape where we came from, even when we've traveled far away. We will always remember the tiny seed of knowledge that is the entire collection of current human knowledge today. It will always be at the center of what we know, with everything else added on top. Because we wouldn't have reached wherever higher place... if this place hadn't of existed. Just like "I think therefore I am". We were here... as we are now. It's an inevitability of how we end up getting where we do down the road. That we started here was the beginning of the Causality.

Perhaps if you were a bit more pleasant fellow I would continue to engage with you and explain further, but I can see after a few short posts that this would be a waste of time, a waste of space on the forum, and frankly just plain annoying. You seem to know a little bit about classical physics and the other sciences that flow from it, but your understanding beyond (and even somewhat within) that is poor. You seem to mostly just want to rant at anyone who does not see things through your limited view. And by the way, no, you do not see through your eyes, perhaps if you start by understanding that, you may be able to see beyond your limited scope of vision.
I will leave you to the others if they wish to engage with you, but I really don't see any point in having further discussion with you.
Good bye and best of luck to you.

Just because I don't currently technically know most of the more advanced levels of physics down to explicit detail. I've always known more than I am "qualified" to and my journey into outright MASTERING the Sciences has only just begun. But I spent a lot of time in the abstracts and listening to the people who know their stuff. The only reason I started with Biology was because it interested me the most when I was a kid. But I think also because when you consider scale, if I'm going to learn ALL the sciences... I'm gonna want to be able to comprehend complexity packed into a dense and small scale. Like say the incomparable complexity of every facet of human and animal biology.

Atoms, to Molecules, to Tissues, to Organs, to Organ Systems, to the Body. The nervous system being the control center with all these different computational parts and chemicals and transmitters, etc. Even just the skin on a human being is incredibly complex and detailed. But everything from that to even the atom organization and composition of every molecule. Surely if I learn that, and THEN learn the bigger overarching position. I'll be able to put EVERYTHING into perspective in reference to each other.

But who knows where it will take me. Typically the average Human specializes. So they have maybe 1 to 3 at most different expert level knowledge bases. With 4 or so "adept" level knowledges. I've calculated if someone was relentless and spent as much time learning as possible through their entire life in terms of the average lifespan, how many skills they could learn. The result was 100x what people learn in their entire life time. It's just like Physical Fitness. The vast overwhelming majority of people do not work out at all, and if they do... they don't go very far with it. Often giving up, cheaping/slacking, or settling for stagnancy, etc. But then you have your rare few who are dedicated to the lifestyle, ranging from above average to body builders. I lie somewhere inbetween... plus I have the anomaly of having high stamina despite being quite bulky. Thus being able to move fast despite also being pretty swole, and being able to last long.

The point being. You are just trying to throw back what I say to you, to me. But it doesn't work because odds are you aren't the exception... whereas I know for certain I am. Imagine where you will be 5 years from now. 5 years from now I will likely have MASTERED at least 3 primary sciences. Which just becomes the beginning for a lifelong journey of becoming a Master Scientist. What I mean by Master Scientist is.... well on top of everything I said about the average person. Also consider that the average scientist barely learns much real knowledge from other scientific disciplines. On the high end you typically at most see a scientist who also knows 1 or 2 other disciplines well enouhg. Never before have what I described, exist. Even Einstein was largely a specialist.

Imagine what it would be like to know in explicit detail ALL of the sciences. What it must be like, the intelligence... the comprehension... the sheer and utter esoteric singularity bubble of being so far beyond any other human on earth. It doesn't exist because it has yet been that someone was born who had the Determination to wield it. I'm the Thanos of Science, seeking to piece together the disperate "infinity stones" of Science to become the closest thing we can currently conceive of to God.

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Ketzer, hello there.

Hello back at you and thank you for the good discussion.

“If free will meant you control your world, then others have no free will &/or their free will is limited by your whims and dictates.”

Very true. I do believe we can control everything in our reality, and yet it would seem we do not do so. Why? Perhaps, we are not willing to pay the price. My home is my castle, and I can have it anyway I want, but for one exception, I can’t force anybody else to live in it with me. Exercised to the extreme, one’s free will can become one's prison sentence, served in solitary confinement.

Since I have had a request for more pooh wisdom, I thought I would add this one, it seemed to want to be here.

“I think we dream so we don’t have to be apart for so long. If we’re in each other’s dreams, we can be together all the time.”
― A.A. Milne, Winnie-the-Pooh

For there to be an “I”, I must have free will. I must have independence, and so I do. And yet, though my free will is essential to the very existence of my self, I am driven to compromise my independence in my desire for connection with others.
For there to be “others”, they must have free will. If they are controlled by my whims and dictates, then they are not others, but just a reflection of me. And God knows, I am a hard person to live with.

“However, it's important to note your consciousness is impactful even without awareness of your intent. Your consciousness is impactful regardless -- and hence the notion of generating much mindless ill will, fallout, and bad karma if we are not mindful and centred. Even the untrained, unaware consciousness of a sentient being has a reliable, measurable impact on our reality at every level, including the most minute, quantum level (i.e., the observer effect, etc).”

Yes, you are quite right. I do agree one must be mindful of one's impact on others, as far as one can see and understand it from one's own centered position. One can reliably know that one’s actions will have an impact, but the magnitude and direction of that impact is of course much more difficult to reliably measure, or often to even observe. I suppose that even though the probabilities involved may be low, the butterfly might feel an awesome responsibility with each flap of its wings. It is perhaps a good thing the butterfly does not know much about probabilities and kaos theory, else the weight of its choices might cause it to decide to never fly at all. Which I think would be a loss, as I generally find them pleasant to watch fly as they hop from one flower to another, and I expect they generate far more gentle breezes then hurricanes.

On the other hand, I am pretty sure that one careless moth caused that hail storm that ruined my screens the other day. It will never try that again, I squashed it good and flat!