Reincarnation

[attofishpi]

----

Age, PLEASE ignore me in this thread and allow Atla and myself to debate without you interfering.

[attofishpi]

Yes I am rude.

Funny thing though is that you come across to me too, as someone who would have an atheist mindset, if it wasn't for that other personality fragment in your head.

From what I've seen, the fragments that end up posing as "God" are usually centered around the older part of the brain (lymbic system, reptilian brain), while you're more centered around the neocortex. Which sucks because it can seem like that this third party entity has a lot of control over your reality and you, you are at its whim.

From where\what are you basing anything above about me on?

I read some of your comments a few years back. Then you even went on to describe some textbook psychotic break you had. It was very standard.

Oh. Ok, so how does this account for just a 'psychotic break' :-

ATTRIBUTES OF GOD (I have ascribed to this entity based on 26 years of empirical experience God interacting with me)

1 - What we perceive as reality, is 'generated' by this entity at THE most finite sub-atomic scale where either an event occurs or it doesn't - ergo, it has binary control over ALL matter, that includes our very own grey matter (if it wishes).

This attribute has been proven to me, COUNTLESS times since 1997.
Which example should I use?
Here's one, not long after year 2000, I was doing a mundane internet tech support job - I had crossed the line - I was in one of the 3 month stints that this entity had me in what I can only describe as HELL, God was doing EVIL to me - very hard to LIVE.
When I got home and laid upon the couch, extremely vexed about what I had just endured in the office (another story) - as I lay there - the word "CONFESS" flashed across my retinas in bright neon.
So there I am thinking - since I was brought up through a Catholic school system, maybe this confession thing is actually a requirement for me. The next day in the office, HELL was on, people calling out random nasty comments, if I simply stated in my mind "Fuck off God" - immediately someone would yell out "Fuck off" - of course nobody else could hear this - it was ALL in my dimension. (I have read plenty of books on physics and so understood the plausible nature of what this entity could do - IF - it is running\generating things from beyond sub-atomic reality.
When I considered I should go to Church that evening, and actually do this 'confess' thing, the very next customer when I asked for his username stated it is:- "mad_if_you_dont" --- now, ya, that is not a normal internet username.
At the time - in my spare time, I was writing a cyberpunk book called Alpha Two - and had been working on a scene where some guy called Eli had been kidnapped (set 100 years in future) - he is trapped my some extortionists in a virtual world - he never knew when he was in the real world or the simulation. So, a bit later when still considering how fucked my reality was yet again, a caller gave me his username:- "hows_eli" - again, not ya typical username. There was another username situation later in the day, but you get the gist.
So to summarise - this entity had access to the qualia of my sensation of sight - flashed "confess" across my retinas - in neon.

In lucid dreams - two of which I met my sage and I asked him not to wake me up. I walked up to a wall and started to scratch the paint on the wall and turned and said to him, this is so real. He told me something very pro_found - but personal.

So above - where I told God to fuck off (in my mind) then someone yelled out immediately across the office the same words back - empirical evidence that this entity has access to my synapses. Also, as above - I only thought (I should go to confession) then that username - mad_if_u_dont came through...

The above is minimal to the totality of 24 years of being TESTED and TESTING IT back, so this is a small but pertinent example as to why I claim God to have this particular attribute.

[Age]

I honestly don't recall ever discussing God with you.

Yeah people with fragmented minds usually have poor memories.

The third party intelligence exists at the most finite scale, operating below sub-atomic reality - it pervades ALL matter, including what is between your ears. I believe it's existence is required for us to perceive anything consciously.

What has you convinced that I am talking shite when it comes to 26 years of interactions (some of which I have described on the forum) with this God entity?

I know a thing or two about psychotic breaks / mind fragmentation / schizophrenia.

How?

[Age]

----

Age, PLEASE ignore me in this thread and allow Atla and myself to debate without you interfering.

If you want to write words in a public forum, then expect that those words might NOT be ignored.

And, PLEASE keep 'debating' with "atla" as doing so IS PROVING True what I have SAID and CLAIMED here.

[Age]

From where\what are you basing anything above about me on?

I read some of your comments a few years back. Then you even went on to describe some textbook psychotic break you had. It was very standard.

Oh. Ok, so how does this account for just a 'psychotic break' :-

ATTRIBUTES OF GOD (I have ascribed to this entity based on 26 years of empirical experience God interacting with me)

1 - What we perceive as reality, is 'generated' by this entity at THE most finite sub-atomic scale where either an event occurs or it doesn't - ergo, it has binary control over ALL matter, that includes our very own grey matter (if it wishes).

This attribute has been proven to me, COUNTLESS times since 1997.
Which example should I use?
Here's one, not long after year 2000, I was doing a mundane internet tech support job - I had crossed the line - I was in one of the 3 month stints that this entity had me in what I can only describe as HELL, God was doing EVIL to me - very hard to LIVE.
When I got home and laid upon the couch, extremely vexed about what I had just endured in the office (another story) - as I lay there - the word "CONFESS" flashed across my retinas in bright neon.
So there I am thinking - since I was brought up through a Catholic school system, maybe this confession thing is actually a requirement for me. The next day in the office, HELL was on, people calling out random nasty comments, if I simply stated in my mind "Fuck off God" - immediately someone would yell out "Fuck off" - of course nobody else could hear this - it was ALL in my dimension. (I have read plenty of books on physics and so understood the plausible nature of what this entity could do - IF - it is running\generating things from beyond sub-atomic reality.
When I considered I should go to Church that evening, and actually do this 'confess' thing, the very next customer when I asked for his username stated it is:- "mad_if_you_dont" --- now, ya, that is not a normal internet username.

What IS a 'normal' internet username, and how do you differentiate between a 'normal' internet username from a 'subnormal' or ' abnormal' internet username?

At the time - in my spare time, I was writing a cyberpunk book called Alpha Two - and had been working on a scene where some guy called Eli had been kidnapped (set 100 years in future) - he is trapped my some extortionists in a virtual world - he never knew when he was in the real world or the simulation. So, a bit later when still considering how fucked my reality was yet again, a caller gave me his username:- "hows_eli" - again, not ya typical username.

Again, what is a 'typical' username?

There was another username situation later in the day, but you get the gist.
So to summarise - this entity had access to the qualia of my sensation of sight - flashed "confess" across my retinas - in neon.

But if you do NOT tell us what you confessed about nor why you felt compelled to, then we do NOT KNOW how this situation led to you KNOWING God exists, in the form you SAY and BELIEVE is true

In lucid dreams - two of which I met my sage

Does EVERY one have their OWN personal safe?

and I asked him not to wake me up. I walked up to a wall and started to scratch the paint on the wall and turned and said to him, this is so real. He told me something very pro_found - but personal.

Again if you do NOT INFORM us of of 'things' like this, then we can NOT FILL IN the 'gaps' and WORK OUT nir UNDERSTAND WHERE and WHY, EXACTLY, you BELIEVE what you DO here.

So above - where I told God to fuck off (in my mind) then someone yelled out immediately across the office the same words back - empirical evidence that this entity has access to my synapses.

Could 'that' NOT have been a COINCIDENCE, AT ALL?

Also, as above - I only thought (I should go to confession) then that username - mad_if_u_dont came through...

WHY did you THINK you NEEDED to go to confession FOR, or ABOUT, EXACTLY?

By the way, was the THINKING you NEEDED to go to 'confession' just because you were brought up or raised in some particular time period and place where some religion known as "catholicism" existed?

In other words was there some UNDERLYING KNOWING that you should JUST BE OPEN and Honest, ALWAYS or ANYWAY, and that so-called 'confession', in the way you IMAGINED, or THOUGHT, it should be done was just because of your past experiences ALONE?

The above is minimal to the totality of 24 years of being TESTED and TESTING IT back, so this is a small but pertinent example as to why I claim God to have this particular attribute.

Could you be MISCONSTRUING some 'things' here just because of some of your 'past experiences'? Or is 'this' NOT possible?

[Harbal]

None of the above

Okay, well I suppose that narrows it down a bit then.

Everything IS consciousness (existence), including the brain.

We are always thinking of two kinds of things: brain and the brain's product which is somehow different; brain and emergence from the brain which is somehow different; brain and consciousness coexisting.

But there aren't two kinds of things. You can test this for yourself. In all of science, any field of science, thre isn't a single scientific fact that would show that there are two kinds of things in nature.

If science knows of only one kind of thing, that thing must be physical, so are you saying consciousness is a physical thing?

[Age]

None of the above

Okay, well I suppose that narrows it down a bit then.

Everything IS consciousness (existence), including the brain.

We are always thinking of two kinds of things: brain and the brain's product which is somehow different; brain and emergence from the brain which is somehow different; brain and consciousness coexisting.

This is because like the company, and the company's product, that is; what the company produces, ARE DIFFERENT so to the brain and the brain's product DIFFERENT.

But there aren't two kinds of things. You can test this for yourself. In all of science, any field of science, thre isn't a single scientific fact that would show that there are two kinds of things in nature.

But the EXACT OPPOSITE IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLY TRUE. That is through science two things have been SHOWN to exist. One is visible matter and the OTHER is NOT.

[Iwannaplato]

But there aren't two kinds of things. You can test this for yourself. In all of science, any field of science, thre isn't a single scientific fact that would show that there are two kinds of things in nature.

It's true. There aren't two kinds of things. There are a long more kinds of things.

[Atla]

If science knows of only one kind of thing, that thing must be physical, so are you saying consciousness is a physical thing?

Well the reply to that depends on what we mean by "physical" I guess.

If we simply mean "real" by physical: yes consciousness is the same as the physical world. It's what science studies too.
That's why science can never find consciousness, all of science is also part of the consciousness that it's trying to find. It's like trying to bite your own teeth, yet we keep trying. This is actually pretty hilariously absurd once we see it, imo.

If we mean "physical" as opposed to "mental", then no. Both "physical" and "mental" are nonsensical ideas, the two sides of an entirely made-up duality.

So returning to the earlier paragraph, we could just as well say that science studies the phenomenal first-person mental world, where by mental we simply mean "real".

[Atla]

But there aren't two kinds of things. You can test this for yourself. In all of science, any field of science, thre isn't a single scientific fact that would show that there are two kinds of things in nature.

It's true. There aren't two kinds of things. There are a long more kinds of things.

No there aren't, but maybe you're conflating two issues here. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. The multiciplity of all kinds of things all fall under the same "philosophical" kind of thing, of which there is only one (and that "one" is: NONE). More than one "philosophical kind" is always made-up by philosophy.

For example mental vs physical is completely made-up.

[Atla]

From where\what are you basing anything above about me on?

I read some of your comments a few years back. Then you even went on to describe some textbook psychotic break you had. It was very standard.

Oh. Ok, so how does this account for just a 'psychotic break' :-

ATTRIBUTES OF GOD (I have ascribed to this entity based on 26 years of empirical experience God interacting with me)

1 - What we perceive as reality, is 'generated' by this entity at THE most finite sub-atomic scale where either an event occurs or it doesn't - ergo, it has binary control over ALL matter, that includes our very own grey matter (if it wishes).

This attribute has been proven to me, COUNTLESS times since 1997.
Which example should I use?
Here's one, not long after year 2000, I was doing a mundane internet tech support job - I had crossed the line - I was in one of the 3 month stints that this entity had me in what I can only describe as HELL, God was doing EVIL to me - very hard to LIVE.
When I got home and laid upon the couch, extremely vexed about what I had just endured in the office (another story) - as I lay there - the word "CONFESS" flashed across my retinas in bright neon.
So there I am thinking - since I was brought up through a Catholic school system, maybe this confession thing is actually a requirement for me. The next day in the office, HELL was on, people calling out random nasty comments, if I simply stated in my mind "Fuck off God" - immediately someone would yell out "Fuck off" - of course nobody else could hear this - it was ALL in my dimension. (I have read plenty of books on physics and so understood the plausible nature of what this entity could do - IF - it is running\generating things from beyond sub-atomic reality.
When I considered I should go to Church that evening, and actually do this 'confess' thing, the very next customer when I asked for his username stated it is:- "mad_if_you_dont" --- now, ya, that is not a normal internet username.
At the time - in my spare time, I was writing a cyberpunk book called Alpha Two - and had been working on a scene where some guy called Eli had been kidnapped (set 100 years in future) - he is trapped my some extortionists in a virtual world - he never knew when he was in the real world or the simulation. So, a bit later when still considering how fucked my reality was yet again, a caller gave me his username:- "hows_eli" - again, not ya typical username. There was another username situation later in the day, but you get the gist.
So to summarise - this entity had access to the qualia of my sensation of sight - flashed "confess" across my retinas - in neon.

In lucid dreams - two of which I met my sage and I asked him not to wake me up. I walked up to a wall and started to scratch the paint on the wall and turned and said to him, this is so real. He told me something very pro_found - but personal.

So above - where I told God to fuck off (in my mind) then someone yelled out immediately across the office the same words back - empirical evidence that this entity has access to my synapses. Also, as above - I only thought (I should go to confession) then that username - mad_if_u_dont came through...

The above is minimal to the totality of 24 years of being TESTED and TESTING IT back, so this is a small but pertinent example as to why I claim God to have this particular attribute.

No offense, but those were bog-standard visual and auditory hallucinations, bog-standard perceived hidden meanings in text etc. That is exactly how psychosis usually starts.

You may say that those weren't hallucinations, that literally was and is your reality, but this is also bog-standard. We don't directly perceive the outside world, instead our personal reality is a representative contruct in the head. And in psychosis, this construct has major malfunctions.

These major malfunctions are often caused by something as dull as brain inflammation. And brain inflamation is often caused by things as dull as autoimmune problems, food allergies/food sensitivities.

[Iwannaplato]

No there aren't, but maybe you're conflating two issues here.

I was being cheeky, though underneath serious. I don't think I am conflating two things. Which two?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. The multiciplity of all kinds of things all fall under the same "philosophical" kind of thing, of which there is only one (and that "one" is: NONE).

So, everything is one thing which is none. I can't get that to make grammatical sense'. Not that all truths can be conveyed in usual grammar, but in any case I don't know what that means.

More than one "philosophical kind" is always made-up by philosophy.

Well, since it all boils down to None, then one philosophical kind would be made up.

For example mental vs physical is completely made-up.

In what context? It certainly wasn't made up by philosophy, that one's old. But it seems like a perfectly useful distinction in many contexts.

It seems like you are talking about substance. Though I'm not sure since the one thing is 'none'. Are you talking about substance?
What is your stand? There is no substance? There is only one substance? (if so, what is it?)

[Atla]

No there aren't, but maybe you're conflating two issues here.

I was being cheeky, though underneath serious. I don't think I am conflating two things. Which two?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. The multiciplity of all kinds of things all fall under the same "philosophical" kind of thing, of which there is only one (and that "one" is: NONE).

So, everything is one thing which is none. I can't get that to make grammatical sense'. Not that all truths can be conveyed in usual grammar, but in any case I don't know what that means.

More than one "philosophical kind" is always made-up by philosophy.

Well, since it all boils down to None, then one philosophical kind would be made up.

For example mental vs physical is completely made-up.

In what context? It certainly wasn't made up by philosophy, that one's old. But it seems like a perfectly useful distinction in many contexts.

It seems like you are talking about substance. Though I'm not sure since the one thing is 'none'. Are you talking about substance?
What is your stand? There is no substance? There is only one substance? (if so, what is it?)

There aren't any philosophical kinds at all, ontologically.

For example when we divide reality into mental and physical, we created two ontological philosophical kinds, in our thinking. Then some things are seen as mental, other things are seen as physical.

But such a division is completely made-up, it's purely philosophical in origin, it only exists in our thinking. And then philosophers wonder why they can't figure out consciousness since centuries. Well it's because they are trying to solve a problem using the same kind of thinking, that created it.

[Iwannaplato]

There aren't any philosophical kinds at all, ontologically.

So, there's no substance? Nothing? I'm still not sure if you're a monist or a nollist.

For example when we divide reality into mental and physical, we created two ontological philosophical kinds, in our thinking. Then some things are seen as mental, other things are seen as physical.

I'm not a big fan of ultimate substance claims. But I do find the distinction useful in some contexts. I think it's a fairly natural, pre-philosophical distinction.

But such a division is completely made-up,

It depends I suppose what you mean by completely made-up? It's not coming from nothing. It comes from our experiences. This doesn't mean the distinction is ultimately correct, but it's not just some random, hey I'll make up some shit contrast. People were describing what they experienced and it seemed like there were two types of things - to many people, even in many cultures. Just as they divided things into elements. Or divided life/non-life, those that did.

it's purely philosophical in origin,

I don't think that's the case. Don't take that as my arguing that there are two substances. I just don't think philosophy is the source of this distinction, nor do I think it is completely made up, given what I said above.

it only exists in our thinking. And then philosophers wonder why they can't figure out consciousness since centuries. Well it's because they are trying to solve a problem using the same kind of thinking, that created it.

So, have you figured out consciousness since you are not blocked by this substance confusion?

[Skepdick]

So, have you figured out consciousness since you are not blocked by this substance confusion?

Is there anything to figure out?

To the question "Am I conscious?" the most epistemically and intelectually correct answer is "I don't know."

Assuming that I am - what would be different about my experiences if I wasn't?
Assuming that I am not - what would be different about my experiences if I was?