Karl

How were you saying that ? If you said that you could not tell up from down then that's plausible, but if there was no gravity at all, then there would be no you to observe such a thing. Seriously, this is all for the best ;-) (You know I like playing with the concepts. I find it interesting what people say and like to explore the ramifications, not necessarily to make corrections to that thinking. )

It's not duality it's rank stupidity. Error is error. It doesn't mean we aren't capable of rationality.

Only those of us stupid enough to self harm in order to prove our manhood. Same as bashing in your head to think more clearly. ...I can feel something about hot soup and begging bowl with a Tamrush thingy being formulated ;-)

Stupid people.

You wouldn't know you were here ? You think gravity determines your cognition of self, come on Manitou you cannot possibly believe that ? Surely you have a seperate identity within the universe or you would be unable to make that observation. It's an observation from your perspective. To have a seperate perspective you must have a seperate identity. To have a seperate identity is to accept existence exists.

Mathematics has its place as as a tool to describe empirical knowledge. It's the language of empiricism. Yet, like any language it is capable of distortion and misuse. Because it is of necessity, purely an abstraction, it is capable of flights of fancy that are difficult for the mathematicians themselves to understand are false abstractions. Such is quantum physics when it crosses then attempts to destroy the boundary between existence and consciousness. Existence is identity; consciousness is identification. Consciousness does not change the absolutes inherent in the universe, it can only appreciate them and work within those boundaries. Existence exists prior to consciousness. No amount of mathematical abstractionism will change that. It is a modern version of the story of King Canute.

I go back to the old stick in a glass beaker of water. It looks as if it's bent, that's how the eyes perceive it. That perception is visually accurate, the vision hasn't been fooled, but the mind has made an error in translation. Eventually, even without more advanced scientific knowledge, it's possible to figure out it is something to do with the water causing an illusion. However, even if all the science is done and it can be known for definite how the water refracts light differently, the eyes don't then adapt to that new knowledge. The stick remains bent, even as the brain knows it isn't really bent and knows the precise scientific reason for it. That can be applied to every visual illusion from films, to mirages. It would be applied equally to a perfect hologram. We might first act as if it was entirely real, but after a time we would just walk through it as we might a blinding beam of light on a stage. Turning a hologram into a solid object is kind of possible. A projection of something physical such as high speed air, particles or liquid in a micro fine sheet would be impenetrable. In fact one of the car manufacturers created a pure air windscreen that could reportedly deflect a brick at 70mph so it's completely possible. I suppose if you could utilise powerful electro magnets and metal particles then a certain amount of bending is possible ?

That to me sounds like a conversion from the idea of the primacy of consciousness moving to the primacy of the existence. I know that feeling of being disoriented and anxious when being unable to figure out the context. Also related to what someone wrote on here "first mountains as mountains and water as water; then mountains not as mountains and water not as water; then mountains still as mountains and water still as water". So, that, at first we go through life purely unself consciously- a kind of learning phase in which we aren't super consciously aware of the exact relationship between self/external/internal perceptions. Like being very absorbed in a learning activity when young. Then, at some point (age related?) this changes. The absorption gives way to a super conscious awareness of perceptual positioning. How am I related to self/external/internal. This is where mountain is no longer mountain and lake no longer lake. The feeling is disorientation, not knowing what is real and how it relates perceptually. Then we swap it all around. We aren't in the younger learning phase and we have feet back on the ground without the disorientation. This is mountains still mountains and lake still lake. I can relate to that because I definitely went through it. There was a time I could not tell outside from inside with any certainty. It was as if the learning unselfconsciously had changed into a more focused awareness on how this was happening. Like looking out of a window into the distance for an extended period of time , then the eyes suddenly focus on the window itself and, for the first time realise the window exists there.

Yes, or for that matter, right back to Plato and the Greeks vs Spartans.

It began with forced schooling around 1880. By 1919 it was well under way.

Internet forums. People saying borrow instead of lend. "Can you borrow me that ? Look of startled incomprehension. " I can lend it to you. " "Well, if that's the best you can do, don't bother" "OK" "Meany"

Bees are nice, butterflies too, crickets, pond skaters, mayflies, dragonflies. Bluebottles and Wasps I could do without, but I see that they do have a proper place and function in the scheme of things.

Tell that to your sister.

I found it very easy not to have children though. I just didn't have children by ensuring I didn't have any. If I had wanted them, then I certainly wouldn't have considered them pesky. There isn't a need to reduce population size, what we need to do is to allow those poor countries to trade freely, have property rights and the potential to accumulate capital through their efforts. China was almost entirely agricultural a few years ago and had restrictions on childbirth because of their communist system which prevented ownership and capitalism. A few years later on and a little bit of laissez faire has resulted in a booming economy (which woukd have been sustainable had they not fallen for global financialisation/Keynesianism). Even with a slowdown, they are already having issues with a declining population as is most of Europe.

Watching the Caucuses in Iowa a couple of days ago, I was struck by the protestations against Bernie Danders by one of Clintons supporters. He said that if Bernie became the candidate of choice we would 'end up as bad as Europe'.

If you have what you needed then that's what it's all about.

Doh ! The old myths die hard that's for sure. For every mouth that requires feeding, there must be strength and brains to produce something. The only reason this doesn't happen is that people are prevented from owning property, accumulating capital, or given welfare as a means Of creating dependency. The result is revolution, war, plague, famine. The people who often call for population control are, ironically, are often those who choose to live in major centres of population. They don't choose to live in the millions of miles of empty land because they enjoy the fruits of a mass of people who live, work and trade together. We are no where close to capacity on Earth. It will be the billions of people who work, save, produce and consume who will eventually allow us to leave this planet and find new homes amongst the stars. We need only encourage laissez faire capitalism to flourish and we will get there faster. It worries me that people on a spiritual forum are opting for forced population control which is effectively violence to others in order that the person doing the violence accomplishes his own goals. If people require contraception, the market can do that.

Or Scottish midge, mosquito, tsetse fly and several other disease spreading beasties. Not that the midge is disease spreading, but I have no fondness at all for the little sod. You can add ticks and horse flies to that list.

Of some men. Usually the ones in nice safe places who send the poor to die for lies. I always laugh at those Hollywood films where the hero must save the president/politicians/government buildings. I would love to see these supposed leaders, at the front of a group of men going into battle against a hail of missiles, lead, high explosive, sharp steel and flame. Those who volunteer men for war, should, at least have had experience of real, bloody combat first. If you really are a patriot and are facing an implacable enemy bent on destruction, then our leaders should have the courage to march into battle side by side with the men they command.

A murderous regime seeking to dominate other sovereign states.

We experience existence through the faculty of consciousness. If we are put in an artificial environment in which cause and effect are distorted. Then we adapt to that environment. This becomes our reality, but we aren't happy, just as a slave is not free because his body is a prisoner, then so is his mind. The slave, therefore, cannot use his mind to achieve happiness. The situation with the OP is similar. He knows he isn't happy, but he doesn't know why, he is unaware of the chains, but, they are not obvious physical chains. Rational selfishness means the use of the mind to achieve happiness. If you want to be with people-which is normal for social animals and rational for the purposes of trade, mating, defence, learning, entertainment, companionship-then the ethics that stem from rational selfishness-and at its base existence-are the most effective way of achieving happiness. If you like to help your neighbour, give to charity, celebrate Christmas, give gifts-these are all part of rational selfishness in that they produce happiness if they are done voluntarily. If we are forced to engage in behaviours based on the myth of altruism, then we gain no value from that giving, it feels empty, there is no joy in it. Where we are engaged in trade, then we must give value in order to receive value. It is obvious that we are partaking in an exchange if we give cash for a meal. It's not so obvious that this same exchange is occurring when we give voluntarily without a physical exchange of goods.

Dreadful waste, but that's war.

Don't panic, seek you anti-micro positivism safe space Mr Mainwearing.

Oh yes you don't.

I don't agree that what you have decided disagreed with what you intended to say, didn't actually agree with it.