Hijack from Universal Consciousness

[Dave Moore]

Strange, I am no different from anyone else in terms of (example), I read tutorials on YouTube about how to fix my car, or any number of sources that inform me of what is going on in the world.

I was asked what real was to me. My own feelings are more real than my lawnmower.

And I am not talking about facts and information when I talk about what is real. I am saying that my knowledge that I feel energized, for example, is more real that a belief that Gamma rays are a form of energy.

In the first instance, I am actually feeling the energy. In the latter case, I must trust that Gamma rays even exist in the first place.

[Strange]

People who criticise other for reading books, studying, and working hard to learn something always sound to me as if they are saying "I am too lazy and/or stupid to learn anything so I am going to say that being ignorant allows me to be more open minded".

 

Sorry, but no.

[Dave Moore]

They are indeed different colors, even while I'm sure that side by side they are the same.

So what?

You would insist they are the same. but they are not to your awareness. Uou would have to provide another picture to "prove" they are the same.

The correct answer is, it depends on perspective. If MEANING matters more than LATER TESTING, then they are different. If later testing is more important, then they are the same.

I love reading and learning. I spend hours every day studying all kinds of subjects. I love history, Ancient civilizations, and akmost anything I can find that is interesting. It doesn't matter to me if it is fiction to me. I love it all the same.

I do not criticize you or anyone for reading. I'm just saying, there's a vast difference between the consistency of written or learned information and the kind of reality you know is absolutely true. Like knowing you are sad, for example, or the feeling that you will never be as good as your father (sorry).

[Strange]

They are indeed different colors, even while I'm sure that side by side they are the same.

 

 

No, they are the SAME colour. It is delusional to say they are different.

 

If you think your imagination trumps reality then I guess you have a pretty loose grip on reality.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Strange

[Dave Moore]

I said, it depends on your perspective. I know I said that. I'm allowing your perspective but you do not allow my perspective.

Surely you read my comment?

I think it is disingenuous for you to say I am delusional. An oil painting of a landscape might do the same thing but you would also use another sense within your mind to compensate for the artist's "trick". It all depends on the question. Same color in order to make sense, or same color when put under a spectrograph in a laboratory?

Edited March 31, 2017 by Dave Moore

[Strange]

It is not a matter of perspective. The two squares REALLY ARE the same colour. If you think otherwise then you are deluded.

[Dave Moore]

More than a test of illusions, it seems it has progressed to become a test of sanity. And it is not my sanity I am referring to.

Your insistence that I accept your notion that things are not what they appear to be is silly.

I am saying that it depends upon your definition of reality.

 

You insist that reality is what it means to a machine that tests color.

In deciding to paint your house, you would go outside and insist that the house was two colors. The one in the shade and the one in the sunlight.

I would say, just buy one color. Trust me.

[Strange]

You insist that reality is what it means to a machine that tests color.

In deciding to paint your house, you would go outside and insist that the house was two colors. The one in the shade and the one in the sunlight.

I would say, just buy one color. Trust me.

 

 

You have this exactly the wrong way round. There is only one colour. But you are insisting there are two different ones.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Strange

[Dave Moore]

This topic is absolutely the most enjoyable I've taken part in the whole time I've been a member. I can't pull myself away.

Yes, I am saying that there are two colors. I have seen this test before. I know the two squares are the same. I didn't even check.

I also know that they are not the same color to the reasoning subjective mind. Just look at them! Do they look like the same color?

You mistrust your own mind. Your mind is capable of reminding you that perspective and shading have meaning. If they were different colors, the picture would, like you, make no sense.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Dave Moore

[Strange]

That sounds an awful lot like you are trolling.

[Dave Moore]

Then don't be trolled. Find a thread where you aren't so challenged.

 

This is a thread about consciousness. You are stretching your limitations, Strange. Hard materialists like you are usually not able to see beyond your scientific beliefs. I am not so limited. I have studied consciousness for decades.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Dave Moore

[StringJunky]

Dopamine? You too have no idea how to approach this subject. What if I say that you learned about dopamine by reading about it? Yet, you know one feels energized when happy, and that is far more real than something you believe because you read it.

It is a complete waste of time talking to you if you can't see that.

 

Do you believe in free will?

You might as well talk to a mirror

[Dave Moore]

You were determined to say that, weren't you?

[Ten oz]

Answer: That which I experience.

 

I think you are mistaken in your thinking. assuming things you have read are empirically true.

You must therefore throw out other things that you deem empirically false.

This is entirely assumption.

I only know to be true those things I know to be true. For example, I know what energy is. It is that which I feel when I win the lottery. This isn't a paper definition. It is axiomatic truth. I assume that your definition is more accurate? That energy is something one could plug into a formula?

 

 

Dopamine? You too have no idea how to approach this subject. What if I say that you learned about dopamine by reading about it? Yet, you know one feels energized when happy, and that is far more real than something you believe because you read it.

It is a complete waste of time talking to you if you can't see that.

 

Do you believe in free will?

 

 

I gather each of you believe in free will.

Read and write, Ten oz. Not right. Not just a jab. We all tell on ourselves through riddles and paradoxes.

 

I am redefining energy. Obviously, to use standard scientific vernacular is an assumption only. I have often said, "I feel energized." Or, conversely, "I feel my energy is low today."

 

That definition is also in the dictionary. Why the insistence that I ought to use a scientific definition? Why not a commonly understood one?

Yes, you are using energy as a metaphor. Problem is all you have are abstractions. You are lashing out against standards which would confine your view to something we can discuss and using poor examples and oddly implemented metaphors. When I asked if your real question was "why does the brain release dopamine at that moment" I was actually attempting relate your abstraction to the topic. I thought perhaps you were making a bigger point about the way our perception of the world controls our chemistry and not vice versa. A position which anecdotally could be used to support your veiw about the brain not producing consciousness. I now realize I was putting far too much thought into what you are trying to say . More han you seem to be. You're well off script and no longer referencing the use of consciousness which was your initial purpose in this thread.

[Dave Moore]

I disagree, ten oz..

This is all about consciousness. I know that consciousness is more real than a brain, for example. The mention of a metaphor was interesting. I see the brain as a metaphor for the mind. Are you saying that shouldn't be allowed here? Are you hoping I'll be banned from this thread?

How can energy as I defined it be a metaphor?? if you feel low in energy after a hard day, do you just assume it's a metaphor?

Do you just bounce up and carry on as if you had all the (metaphoric) energy in the world?

Of course not. But I could read an article about energy and still go out for a run.

I am enjoying this. To see you and others come up with such nonsensical statements is definitely energizing me. I don't mean that as a mean statement. It's just refreshing after all the aggravation I suffered on other threads, to know that many reading this thread later will as likely as not snicker when they see the paradoxes in what you and the rest of the team are saying.

I have never said that there's anything wrong with science. Science is great. I like what science has achieved.

But science falls flat on its face when it comes to the study of reality at its core. It's best to back off and let the rest of us deal with it. Your predilection is not geared to deal with the principles involved.

Not an insult, just an observation. We all have our areas of expertise.

[Ten oz]

I disagree, ten oz..

This is all about consciousness. I know that consciousness is more real than a brain, for example. The mention of a metaphor was interesting. I see the brain as a metaphor for the mind. Are you saying that shouldn't be allowed here? Are you hoping I'll be banned from this thread?

How can energy as I defined it be a metaphor?? if you feel low in energy after a hard day, do you just assume it's a metaphor?

Do you just bounce up and carry on as if you had all the (metaphoric) energy in the world?

If I say you are driving me up the wall where is the wall you are driving me up? Is it in your home or mine? The is metaphorical. I am substituting annoyance for wall. When a person feels like they have low energy the word energy is substituting the standard biological process. If you are tired it could be that you have an illness, are hungry, deficient in a essential nutrient, or etc, etc, etc. They are numerous ways to describe it. You say low energy and I say the feeling of being rode hard and put away wet. It is all the samething.

 

Consciouness is more real than a brain you claim yet altering a brain alters ones consciousness. What examples do you have of the existence of consciousness is the absence of a brain?

[Dave Moore]

If one's mind is damaged, it can be said that the "brain" has been damaged. Brain in quotes to signify the metaphoric.

This is not a game I'm playing. I'm saying that virtually everything "out there" is a metaphor. If reality is subjective, then it stands to reason that we project a reality, a sort of stage set that appears in our consciousness as a feature of an objective world.

If I insist that my own reality is the only one, that reality will arise in my awareness to "prove" I am right.

If I, on the other hand, do not insist that my reality is the only one, I will experience a far more varied reality-scape.

I use energy to describe a very real dynamic. I can always feel my own energy.

I am aware that the phenomenon of belief is constantly manifesting in my awareness as real. I am not saying I can control my beliefs. I cannot will myself to fly. Energy is involved in manifestation if that manifestation is dependent upon moving my beliefs.

I feel this resistance to moving my beliefs so I use the term, 'inertia' to describe the process.

Like a weight, beliefs can be nearly impossible to move, or alter.

This would be exemplified by your own difficulty in altering your own beliefs to align with mine regarding this topic.

I do, however, find that I am able to access other realities more easily than most.

I have many meaningful coincidences. I meet people who you will likely never meet, who seem to recognize in me a kinship of sorts regarding my ability to understand their reality, however strange.

You would insist that you would know the difference between subjective and objective reality, but in truth, you are guessing.

You can't prove anything is objective because you are forever limited to your perception of your body and mind.

you are perceiving what you believe but you are not capable of knowing in any real way that what you are perceiving is the only reality there is.

Therefore, you must insist that I, or many others who have experienced what you would call paranormal phenomena are mistaken or delusional or lying.

You must, in order to maintain your energy, agree with the most fulfilling realty you know, the status quo you never drift from.

It takes no energy, and often supplies energy, to agree with the consensus. To go against the consensus is anathema to protecting your energy. You can't risk it. All because of your limited energy to manifest, or "move the mass of belief".

No matter where you go, this 'energy sniffing' replaces truth with agreement, .

It is no accident that the greatest artists who ever lived often suffered greatly. I think of Van Gogh, who was not accepted in his lifetime, and yet who refused to take the easy energy of agreement with his culture. It destroyed him in the same way I have been destroyed in many ways. I have paid the price of holding fast against the consensus.

The danger of this constant sniffing for energy is that it always amounts to ready agreement with those who already share your beliefs and a net gain of energy if you manage to acquire energy through ganging up on a weaker opponent's beliefs. You feel an onrush of energy, and you feel ebullient and satisfied.

Converse to that, someone like myself can surreptitiously thwart you and three others here with ease, because I am a master of energy control and usage. I remain perhaps where I started energy-wise, but I am certainly not out gunned. The litmus test for that is how this thread is perceived by others. They can see what you cannot. That is why you and the other science team members will not outlast me here. Only a moderator might accomplish that, which would make no sense, but who knows?

Even a thread about consciousness might be the wrong place to talk about consciousness.

I am willing and able to discuss this topic until the proverbial cows come home, and I hope I shall.

The understanding of consciousness is a hot topic these days. I see some PHD physicists on the road lecturing on mind and consciousness and I laugh a bit when I see they still append their PHD to their name, hoping that they can attract a bigger audience in doing so, while in fact they appear for the most part to know next to nothing about the topic except "How to attract a mate", or 'How to make you dreams come true", and so forth.

Where energy (money and adulation of fans) is concerned, I recognize an energy sniffer.

Witness Ton Campbell of 'My Big TOE'. He's all over the internet, especially YouTube. He has a lot of it right but the part where he tries to tie it all together is sorely lacking. yet, he is amazingly close.

I will say this; I don't know anyone who shares my knowledge that has not undergone a thing known to Buddhists as an 'Awakening'.

This is a life altering event. When it occurs (Dalai Lama, Sadhguru, Eckhart Tolle, et al) the mind shifts gears. Perception changes. It is like the mind has been supercharged. Awareness becomes extraordinary. Nothing is the same. And one feels reborn in an instant, and sees the dissolution of paradoxes where none were known to be.

I would happily describe what knowledge arises out of this amazing event to anyone who is open and who shows a genuine interest in this knowledge.

You may PM me if you are so interested.

[Dave Moore]

Ten oz. I have repeatedly said that the only energy you will ever know as real will be the energy you feel as negative or positive.

You are incapable of resisting the requirement to objectify energy. To you, it means nothing if it isn't an event that is shared.

Shared means objective, provable, measurable, and physical.

Your own knowledge that is absolutely proven as real to yourself means nothing to you compared to a science experiment.

I do posit that we all experience at any time a state of being that is somewhere between the extremes of negative and positive.

Excruciating pain and mental anguish at one end and sublime glorious ecstasy at the other.

I am saying that this gradation is far more real than a science experiment. It trumps all other comers in terms of importance to the individual. It is only subjectively measurable but it is nevertheless very, very, real.

Life is not a science experiment. It is a deadly serious game we are playing. We need to put our measuring tools away and get on with asking what we actually know already deep down.

If you just decided to try, you might discover some things you never realized you could know. But it ain't out there. What's out there is just a lot of information.

[Argent]

We need to put our measuring tools away and get on with asking what we actually know already deep down. .

Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. That is precisely why I know you are wrong. My subjective experience trumps yours.

[Ten oz]

Ten oz. I have repeatedly said that the only energy you will ever know as real will be the energy you feel as negative or positive.

You are incapable of resisting the requirement to objectify energy. To you, it means nothing if it isn't an event that is shared.

Shared means objective, provable, measurable, and physical.

Your own knowledge that is absolutely proven as real to yourself means nothing to you compared to a science experiment.

I do posit that we all experience at any time a state of being that is somewhere between the extremes of negative and positive.

Excruciating pain and mental anguish at one end and sublime glorious ecstasy at the other.

I am saying that this gradation is far more real than a science experiment. It trumps all other comers in terms of importance to the individual. It is only subjectively measurable but it is nevertheless very, very, real.

Life is not a science experiment. It is a deadly serious game we are playing. We need to put our measuring tools away and get on with asking what we actually know already deep down.

If you just decided to try, you might discover some things you never realized you could know. But it ain't out there. What's out there is just a lot of information.

This is how basically all life on earth exists. A fish doesn't care about what is messurable. A fish just knows what it knows and feels what it feels. A fish swims around responding purely to positive and negatives. A fish spends it whole life trying not to die. Not to lose the "deadly serious game" to those above them in the food chain. Like a drone programed with ones and zeros (positives and negatives). What you are carrying on about is the simplest form of a program.

 

What have you discovered?

[Dave Moore]

I have discovered that no two realities are physically contiguous.

Therefore, we are projecting our consciousness.

Belief steers reality.

Energy, of the personally acknowledged kind, controls the movement of belief.

Belief manifests.

Free will is an illusion, but in the experiential sense, it is quite real.

Determinism is true, but only when analyzed.

None of this creates paradoxes.

Argent, I have no idea what you are talking about.

[Strange]

I have discovered that no two realities are physically contiguous.

 

 

And yet everyone measures the same boiling point of water, the same number of days in a year, the same radius of the Earth, the same spectral lines for hydrogen, etc.

 

If you can get water to build at 50C just by believing it should, I would be very impressed.

[Ten oz]

I have discovered that no two realities are physically contiguous.

Therefore, we are projecting our consciousness.

Belief steers reality.

Energy, of the personally acknowledged kind, controls the movement of belief.

Belief manifests.

Free will is an illusion, but in the experiential sense, it is quite real.

Determinism is true, but only when analyzed.

None of this creates paradoxes.

Argent, I have no idea what you are talking about.

I agree with all of that within the context of the reality one believes within their own mind. A person with schizophrenia can believe the vioces and visions they have are real. Considering schizophrenia is a disorder one doesn't have free will over their delusions.

 

You obviously are referencing people with mental disorders but why not? You already have said more than once that consciousness is not manifested by the brain. So why should it matter if someone has a mental disorder?

[Dave Moore]

Matter in what sense? To whom?

I am not acknowledging any clear demarcation point separating imagination and "reality". I would go as far as to say that the only thing preventing an insane person from manifesting to a far greater degree, in the realest sense, including full-blown physical reality, is the presence of others who manifest a far more stable reality that appears consensual.

In cases I have seen (and this is barring any inborn mental incapacity), is an earlier trauma that has caused a person (usu. a child) to shift his beliefs to compensate for a traumatic condition.

A young man I know has been labelled schizophrenic because he hears voices in his head. He has many other problems, most (if not all) of which I believe are environmentally caused such as often occur with young people who have been through the system.

Labelling is particularly damaging. Statements such as, "You may never be off of this drug", or, "You will probably never be able to work at a normal job.", and so forth, all create expectations that steer beliefs and subjective perceptions and hence, manifestations as well.

This is hypnosis. Yet, it is not that hypnosis is only relegated to the mentally ill. We are all hypnotized from birth to believe in all sorts of things. We are no different than the "mentally ill". We simply have been more efficiently programmed to survive better, and nothing more.

So if you agree with the last post as to how the subjective mind is influenced, a further step will have you deciding if anything exists outside of perception.

If belief is what causes manifestation, you will never experience that which you don't believe, like the idea that belief causes manifestation. Simplified, but that's the idea. You would never know.

 

Strange, you would never know or seen proven that each is manifesting his own reality. That is the most basic part of it. You would have to rely on subjective reasoning. Once you could scale that wall of disbelief, you would find that the world made far more sense than the one you left behind.

Subjective reality makes more sense than objective reality. It explains everything better. Science doesn't know what to do with paranormal things except to deny they exist. They wander in the dark, unable to even imagine that consciousness is the creative force. It is incredibly irrational to think that the brain could create awareness, Almost insane, as far as I'm concerned.

Yet, this is how many if not most humans think. That so-called empirical reality assembles itself as the most efficient means of using our personal energy. Our beliefs are dependent at all times on a limited energy supply. Call it "life energy".

We become experts, hopefully, in economization of our energy through seeking positive beliefs and by limiting the negative ones.

Positive new beliefs may boost our energy but often at the cost of self-awareness. Negative beliefs (Boy it hurts to lift weights) may be beneficial in the long run. "Sniffing" for energy is just that. If money floats your boat, at the cost of long term happiness, your lack of wisdom in pursuing instant gratification will create problems for you down the line. Without self-awareness, you have no means to judge if your decision to chase energy for energy's sake alone is the best tack to take.

Every negative event we become snared by (due to lack of self-awareness) causes us to lose energy. This is the same as saying our beliefs have been rearranged against our wishes.

If, for example, it is better for us to resist moving our beliefs (hence, manifestations) to please our parents as children, we might just internalize but retain, our childhood invisible playmate. In the case of my young "schizophrenic" friend, his mother sold his share of food stamps and sold herself (in his presence) for money to buy crank, and as a means of survival, he rebelled and retained the only manifestations he could trust. His bargaining with his energy probably saved his life.

Edited April 1, 2017 by Dave Moore

[Argent]

Argent, I have no idea what you are talking about.

Sadly, I believe you. As concisely as I can make it: I held up a mirror to your own arguments, and lo, the Emperor was in the altogether.