Thread: ClouD, Cyclic, DeathCell, really, zeneyes, etc.

Originally Posted by freak

How is it that electrical impulses in our brains are able to create images in our minds?

What do you mean by "images"? I understand your implication, if you are implying the limitations of science or "proof".

The question cannot be answered by typical science, given a spiritual perspective: I.e. How do we experience, experience? What is seeing the seeing? How is Reality Reality? With spiritual examination, in subject of awareness itself, we would have to enter the realm of non-duality; I.e. the "see-er", "seeing" and "seen" are all one and the same.

You seemed to understand the intent of the question pretty well, really. ;p

The "images" I'm speaking of are the ones you'd see in your thoughts, like when you daydream, imagine something, etc.. I just find it strange that science believes in thought and emotion--both non-physical things and things that require belief--and yet they can't seem to believe in spirituality (though some do). If you can't tell me exactly why something is, or why something happens, then it's not a truth. I can probably take almost any of their theories/laws and go so deep into it that I can make them incapable of giving me an answer. By doing this you make them question their own beliefs; it shows them (unless they're completely blind and close-minded) that everything comes down to belief and conformity. "Absolute truth" doesn't exist. They accuse spiritual/religious people of lacking proof and empirical evidence... but I can ask science things they can't give me answers to and I can accuse them of the same things. Like religion/spirituality, science is nothing but theories and beliefs--accurate, but still theories and beliefs agreed upon by a majority. When I remind them about this, they either call me "bs" or they avoid me all together. They accuse me of being illogical and then proceed to ramble like idiots, or they insult me. It's their loss, not mine. I'm just one of many who hands out a message, and what a person does with it is left entirely up to them.

Another set of questions they couldn't answer me are: What is a number? What's a "9"? They also forget that we discovered numbers and learned how to use them in the way we do. Numbers exist, but what are they really? Can you even touch a number? What does a number even look like? These are things they can't answer me, and they all require belief. They don't believe in other realities, yet they use things that are non-physical, require belief, and don't even fully comprehend them themselves lol.

I'm a person who doesn't like limitations much, and science is one of those. Science is a good thing to know, but it shouldn't control a person's life. It should only be used here and to understand this reality; understanding yourself requires more, and it requires an individual to understand these limitations... but at the same time have the will to transcend them. When a person digs deep and asks questions, questions that are "impossible" to answer, they begin to understand. Self-discovery is not something that difficult to do, but it requires A LOT of patience and questions. You also have to question yourself and your own beliefs, this is how I went down the path I'm currently on. I use to be one of these science types, but after watching The Matrix, asking myself many questions, and re-evalutating my position here, things changed for me.

My goal: To bring both spirituality and science together. I want to do this for myself, and it can be done. I have a few close friends that are going to help me on this mission. Should we succeed, then maybe we'll share our knowledge. You can say I'm a dualist... but really, I don't like being a label.

Originally Posted by howie

Science is a lot like consciousness. It is always present. Always there in some form or another. As humans we did the only thing we could do, the only thing we know how to do with such things. We give them a title. We lable them. With lables begets misconstruing an original premise .

I agree, and we discovered and learned how to use it. I guess you can say science is the "physical consciousness". As we evolved, so did our knowledge and ability to understand physical concepts. What I wonder is how much more we can learn from science. It seems like we're reaching a peak... but no one can truly know. I also believe that our physical bodies have peaked in its evolution, too, and all that is left for us now is evolution of the mind and spirit. I feel that science can help in that, but society also needs to let go of certain limitations and restrictions as well before that can happen. Self-discovery is like scientific discovery... except it's a little more difficult to discover and begin, and it's a personal journey. I had to go through 3 - 4 years of social isolation to get answers, but it was worth it to me. All that time spent alone really makes a person look inside themselves, and when you do that and go deep, you discover a whole other universe within. I'm writing about this universe I discovered, and myself. To actually know oneself is beyond any feeling a person could ever experience.

Originally Posted by freak

The "images" I'm speaking of are the ones you'd see in your thoughts, like when you daydream, imagine something, etc.. I just find it strange that science believes in thought and emotion--both non-physical things and things that require belief--and yet they can't seem to believe in spirituality (though some do).

Yeah, any sense really. We can scientifically analyze how we can detect external stimuli through physical organs; eyes and ears etc. But that doesn't explain awareness or consciousness; spiritual matters. That is far beyond.

Originally Posted by freak

If you can't tell me exactly why something is, or why something happens, then it's not a truth.

All this means to me is that is is not explainable. To be explainable means it can be conceptualized and rational in a measurable way, but most spiritual matters or subjective truths are not rational at all; e.g. intuitive and unpredictable experiences, non-verbal revelations, awareness, etc. We cannot explain the absolute; we cannot write down the truth, but that does not mean it isn't there, or able to be realized.

Originally Posted by freak

"Absolute truth" doesn't exist.

Yes it does, it is simply ignored strongly. We seek answers within the existence of Reality itself, but in doing this, we are clouded from revealing the infinite context - Reality is the absolute truth itself.

Originally Posted by freak

Another set of questions they couldn't answer me are: What is a number? What's a "9"? They also forget that we discovered numbers and learned how to use them in the way we do. Numbers exist, but what are they really? Can you even touch a number? What does a number even look like? These are things they can't answer me, and they all require belief. They don't believe in other realities, yet they use things that are non-physical, require belief, and don't even fully comprehend them themselves lol.

Well we can explain the origins and contexts of all these things, but I think your point is - that they are intangible and that is important. A materialist usually forgets about the fundamental awareness of life, which is intangible and subjective, in fact, it is the only way to know and experience in the first place.

Originally Posted by freak

My goal: To bring both spirituality and science together. I want to do this for myself, and it can be done. I have a few close friends that are going to help me on this mission. Should we succeed, then maybe we'll share our knowledge. You can say I'm a dualist... but really, I don't like being a label.

They have already been united in consciousness/advanced spiritual research, however many like to deny it as psuedo-science because it is probably too radical and is unattractive to their habitual familiarization of old thinking.

Originally Posted by Grod

Observation is part of science, dude.

But just because you are observing doesn't mean you are taking place in science...

Whether you view everything in a science light or not, people are not consciously saying..

I'm looking out my window observing, I am taking part in science.. My next step is...

All this means to me is that is is not explainable. To be explainable means it can be conceptualized and rational in a measurable way, but most spiritual matters or subjective truths are not rational at all; e.g. intuitive and unpredictable experiences, non-verbal revelations, awareness, etc. We cannot explain the absolute; we cannot write down the truth, but that does not mean it isn't there, or able to be realized.

True, but the more you know, the more you really don't know. You get one answer, then another question is born from it, and the cycle continues until you end up at the "unexplained". I'm very expressive and able to place a person into my reality... but I still fail to describe the truths I know. A friend and I are trying to learn how to put the feelings into words, and hopefully we can someday. It's just interesting to me how him and I know the same things, and understand each other without the use of words.

Yes it does, it is simply ignored strongly. We seek answers within the existence of Reality itself, but in doing this, we are clouded from revealing the infinite context - Reality is the absolute truth itself.

Reality is still subjective, which means it's not absolute. It will always come down to how the individual perceives their surroundings, so there could never be an "absolute truth"; there is to a person, but again, it remains as personal opinion. One can accept/deny certain concepts, even though it's true/false to someone else.

They have already been united in consciousness/advanced spiritual research, however many like to deny it as psuedo-science because it is probably too radical and is unattractive to their habitual familiarization of old thinking.

And that's why I want bring it together, put more attention to it and not have it be seen as such. A lot of this "pseudo-science" can only be studied on the internet, and very rarely on TV. It's usually discredited, and a few people I agrue with discredit famous scientists/psychologists who share my beliefs... but I think it's just more out of spite for their hate of me. The day public education puts it into their lessons will be the day both finally came together. I didn't learn about any of these things until I did my search a few years ago, and putting it in the mainstream would make more people re-evaluate everything. Society tends to keep us grounded more than science because of our laws and beliefs, and the material they "program" into our minds. There are ways that I know of that can give a person the information I and many others know, but as you said: it's just "pseudo-science".

Doesn't everyone know that after an age of insert blank age comes the complete opposite?

Food for thought.

Age of realism, age of anti-realism...


Age of Science, age of anti-science

Meh just a crazy thought.

Memory...

In hebrew...

Mem = Liquid
Ori = Light

Liquid Light...

Memories in a sea of forgetfulness...

Liquid light in a sea of darkness...

Originally Posted by freak

True, but the more you know, the more you really don't know. You get one answer, then another question is born from it, and the cycle continues until you end up at the "unexplained".

That's just because it is intellectualisation; and with a naturally defected intellect. Over-thinking and analyzing something endlessly brings more questions. Often the mind can't tell what is relevant either, it is naturally not supposed to. If you are interested in seeking the ultimate reality, absolute truth, Self-inquiry is quite essential. "Who am I"? "What am I" "Who asks the question?" "Who thinks he asks?" "Who thinks he thinks?" "Who 'knows'?" "What am I" "What..." "I???????"

Originally Posted by freak

Reality is still subjective, which means it's not absolute. It will always come down to how the individual perceives their surroundings, so there could never be an "absolute truth"; there is to a person, but again, it remains as personal opinion. One can accept/deny certain concepts, even though it's true/false to someone else.

You are still missing it. You have identified the areas of relativity and individual relationships, but prior to their very existence must the absolute lie.

If I throw an apple in the air, and take a photo of it from a million different positions, there can be a million ways to see it at one point in time. The relationships are virtually drawn from the apple to the cameras, but the apple itself is absolute. Likewise, Reality has to absolutely exist before there is any experience or life - this is known by consciousness, awareness - the contextual substrate of subjectivity itself. This is absolute to most intelligent life forms, e.g. humans, animals, etc.

More examples: Absolute stillness must exist prior to movement. Silence must exist always to perceive sound. Absolute awareness must exist before experience can be registered or known.

Originally Posted by freak

And that's why I want bring it together, put more attention to it and not have it be seen as such. A lot of this "pseudo-science" can only be studied on the internet, and very rarely on TV. It's usually discredited, and a few people I agrue with discredit famous scientists/psychologists who share my beliefs... but I think it's just more out of spite for their hate of me. The day public education puts it into their lessons will be the day both finally came together. I didn't learn about any of these things until I did my search a few years ago, and putting it in the mainstream would make more people re-evaluate everything. Society tends to keep us grounded more than science because of our laws and beliefs, and the material they "program" into our minds. There are ways that I know of that can give a person the information I and many others know, but as you said: it's just "pseudo-science".

I didn't say it was, I said "many like to deny it as psuedo-science". I agree with the validity of the science, so not the skepticism; I do not think it is psuedo-science. I'll PM you some great links.

This is how you're living your life?

Originally Posted by ClouD

This is how you're living your life?

What have you seen so far?

You are still missing it. You have identified the areas of relativity and individual relationships, but prior to their very existence must the absolute lie.

If I throw an apple in the air, and take a photo of it from a million different positions, there can be a million ways to see it at one point in time. The relationships are virtually drawn from the apple to the cameras, but the apple itself is absolute. Likewise, Reality has to absolutely exist before there is any experience or life - this is known by consciousness, awareness - the contextual substrate of subjectivity itself. This is absolute to most intelligent life forms, e.g. humans, animals, etc.

More examples: Absolute stillness must exist prior to movement. Silence must exist always to perceive sound. Absolute awareness must exist before experience can be registered or known.

Well... you got me there :p

I'll take a look at those links later tonight. I tend to function best at night time.