~ Philosophically, You Are Going to be Sooooo Screwed ~

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





A Chinese-based sex doll manufacturer has unveiled its plans to create fully autonomous AI-controlled sex robots which would be capable of making decisions without relying on outside control.

DS Doll, a company based in the Chinese city of Dalian that manufactures a wide assortment of sex dolls, is now seeking to revolutionize the industry by venturing into the field of robotics and artificial intelligence in a bid to create "full movement cyborgs", the Daily Star Online reports.






.........................................................









.

[Arising_uk]

The Daily Star.

Still, that'll make you a very happy man then Bill.

[Dontaskme]

I'm still unclear as to what it is you think "mind" refers to? Or even 'thinking' for that matter?

If you are asking what 'mind' is you'll have to give me an idea of what form of answer and from what field would satisfy you?

However as a starter I'd say who this 'mind' is is us and all our minds or at least those that can be bothered with such stuff as philosophising. What our minds are or how they work I think will be best answered by the natural philosophers.

The still question arises..to all natural philosophers ''out there''

Hello, here is a quick shout out to all you natural philosophers ..do you know the answer to what MIND is and how it works?

Arising_uk is waiting for the answer to be revealed to him, as he doesn't know the answer. He just comes up with some random word 'us' as being the owner of the mind.

You know, that 'us' that just suddenly pops aware of itself having come from a state of non-existence and heading toward another state of non-existence...you know, that 'us' that exists between two non-existences.





.

[Arising_uk]

Asusual no response form you to me questions, no surprise you like Bill.

The still question arises..to all natural philosophers ''out there''

Hello, here is a quick shout out to all you natural philosophers ..do you know the answer to what MIND is and how it works? ...

Do you know who the natural philosophers are?

Arising_uk is waiting for the answer to be revealed to him, as he doesn't know the answer. He just comes up with some random word 'us' as being the owner of the mind. ...

You don't understand what 'us' refers to?

My understanding of 'mind' is that it is the ability of this body via memory to re-use the representations that the senses provide without the original stimulus. My understanding of self is threefold, one, it is the awareness that there are others like and unlike ourselves, two, the construct provided by language via the inner voice and three, the groundedness that the body provides of being in an external world.

You know, that 'us' that just suddenly pops aware of itself having come from a state of non-existence and heading toward another state of non-existence...you know, that 'us' that exists between two non-existences. .

Did you not pay attention to how your kids developed? Like 'life' you are reifying 'non-existence'. Non-existence is not a thing it is just not being in existence so there are no two non-existences either side of your existence.

[Dontaskme]

Asusual no response form you to me questions, no surprise you like Bill.

Because Bill and I have all the answers.

You don't understand what 'us' refers to?

No, do you?

Did you not pay attention to how your kids developed? Like 'life' you are reifying 'non-existence'. Non-existence is not a thing it is just not being in existence so there are no two non-existences either side of your existence.

So who is this 'you' or 'your' that can have an existence...that is reifying whether there is non-existence, death, or life?

[Arising_uk]

Because Bill and I have all the answers. ...

And yet neither of you appear to be able to answer a question when put to you?

No, do you?

Yes, it's you, me and everyone else.

So who is this 'you' or 'your' that can have an existence...that is reifying whether there is non-existence, death, or life?

It's you and that you is a you that is a body with senses, memory and language in an external world.

[Dontaskme]

Because Bill and I have all the answers. ...

And yet neither of you appear to be able to answer a question when put to you?

Just because we choose not to respond to a question doesn't mean we don't know the answer.

Yes, it's you, me and everyone else.

Source?

It's you and that you is a you that is a body with senses, memory and language in an external world.

Then You are reifying the 'you' into existence. You are also reifying bodies, external worlds, senses, memory, and language into existence.

[Arising_uk]

Just because we choose not to respond to a question doesn't mean we don't know the answer. ...

Source?

Reality.

Then You are reifying the 'you' into existence. You are also reifying bodies, external worlds, senses, memory, and language into existence.

But in the main they are not abstract things and where they are I don't claim an independent concrete existence for them but this is exactly what you do with your use of 'Life', 'non-existence', etc.

[Dontaskme]

Just because we choose not to respond to a question doesn't mean we don't know the answer. ...

Source?

Reality.

Then You are reifying the 'you' into existence. You are also reifying bodies, external worlds, senses, memory, and language into existence.

But in the main they are not abstract things and where they are I don't claim an independent concrete existence for them but this is exactly what you do with your use of 'Life', 'non-existence', etc.

I never implied anything of the sort. I was making assumptions based on what you’d said regarding your belief in death.

Death to me means non existence, but non existence to me is a fallacy. So I’m pointing out some errors of judgement to you which you seem unable to grasp.

.

That there is a someone living and dying is an illusion, that’s all I’m pointing out.

.

[Arising_uk]

I never implied anything of the sort. …

But you do every time you talk about 'life' as tho' it is something other than just living things.

I was making assumptions based on what you’d said regarding your belief in death. …

What belief? It's a fact we die.

Death to me means non existence, but non existence to me is a fallacy. …

What do you mean by 'non-existence? Tell me what you think happens to you when you are dead?

So I’m pointing out some errors of judgement to you which you seem unable to grasp. …

And I'm pointing out to you that you are trying to talk about the noumena and by definition there is nothing to say or know about it so your metaphysic is just based upon some psychological need.

That there is a someone living and dying is an illusion, that’s all I’m pointing out.

So when you die what happens to you?

[Bill Wiltrack]

.







To the poster immediately above this post, the one who is asking soooooo many questions; YOU are trying to understand philosophy in a linear type of way.


Just a heads-up for ya - YOU WILL CONTINUE TO BE FRUSTRATED!


The poster who you have been interacting with is understanding philosophy; real philosophy.

There is a state of being that this philosopher has expressed to you in the recent past. Quite frankly, this poster made you look, well, sophomoric...To put it gently.


We are playing three dimensional chess while you are playing checkers. Even at that, you're game isn't looking too strong...

Philosophy, real philosophy is concerned with a state of being; states of consciousness.



So, you can quote me, quote the other poster you are interacting with here, you can continue to ask us questions that will serve to teach you - THEN outwardly, deny our help.

- in fact, attempt to attack us, because you are made to feel shallow in some sort of way.

And you will continue to do this EVEN AS I JUST POINT THIS OUT TO YOU!



You are a one-trick pony that is stuck in a non-philosophical range of questioning that we respond to - HOPING you will listen.

So, avail me to the response, and structure of your response, that I have just shared with you, in the manner in which all of us envision you will now.









.

[Arising_uk]

To the poster immediately above this post, the one who is asking soooooo many questions; YOU are trying to understand philosophy in a linear type of way.

Actually no, I'm demonstrating one of the cornerstones of Philosophy since the Greeks but you'd not know that.

"... understand philosophy in a linear type of way." What a meaningless gnu phrase.

Just a heads-up for ya - YOU WILL CONTINUE TO BE FRUSTRATED!

Not frustrated at all thanks.

The poster who you have been interacting with is understanding philosophy; real philosophy. …

Actually no, they are doing metaphysics and the song they sing was done better in the C18th.

There is a state of being that this philosopher has expressed to you in the recent past. …

And yet like you this philosopher is completely unable to describe how they achieved it which leads me to believe they are just repeating what they've heard rather than reporting from experience.

Quite frankly, this poster made you look, well, sophomoric...To put it gently. …

Your opinion is immaterial to me.

We are playing three dimensional chess while you are playing checkers. …

I've played 3-d Chess I doubt you've even seen the board.

Even at that, you're game isn't looking too strong...

Well I'll just muddle along then. By-the-by like them you appear to not understand the difference between "your" and "you're".

Philosophy, real philosophy is concerned with a state of being; states of consciousness.

Not really that's just the gnu's new-age schtick. But I also have a bucket load of techniques to achieve such things if you're interested which I'm pretty sure you are not as actually walking your talk is not your game, as if it was you and her would be following the Buddha.

So, you can quote me, quote the other poster you are interacting with here, you can continue to ask us questions that will serve to teach you - THEN outwardly, deny our help.

But you and her never reply to them, why is that, what are you scared of?

- in fact, attempt to attack us, because you are made to feel shallow in some sort of way.

Save your nasty little psycho-babble for those stupid enough to be affected.

And you will continue to do this EVEN AS I JUST POINT THIS OUT TO YOU!

No need to shout! Once more, park your insecurities at the door on a philosophy forum as critique is not attacking you, questions are only a threat to those who don't know what they're talking about.

You are a one-trick pony that is stuck in a non-philosophical range of questioning that we respond to - HOPING you will listen. …

You never respond to a question and pretty much every question I ask has a philosophical point..

So, avail me to the response, and structure of your response, that I have just shared with you, in the manner in which all of us envision you will now.[/size]

My pleasure.

[Dontaskme]

But you do every time you talk about 'life' as tho' it is something other than just living things.

You're interpretation of what I choose to discuss and the context in which I choose to express it is totally off the mark, but hey ho, it's my personal direct experience I'm talking about here, and it's clear that my direct experience is something you yourself do not resonate with, so what can I do about that. I'm simply describing it here. The intelligent consciousness that Bill and I operate from understands that criticizing other peoples direct experiences is just a silly occupation of the under developed un-evolved petty mind that loves to play games/ Quite frankly, we are no longer interested in such trifling activity. Conscious evolution is about real philosophy, one that is now rising above the old boys network mind-set. That old school mentality has long been shed in this one here.

I was making assumptions based on what you’d said regarding your belief in death. …

What belief? It's a fact we die.

It's not a fact, it's a belief, the truth is, you have never known death. You would have to be there in death itself to know you have died, this is impossible since that would require two of you, one to be dead, and the other to witness that death.
Death is one of the biggest lies you have ever fallen for hook line and sinker.

Death to me means non existence, but non existence to me is a fallacy. …

What do you mean by 'non-existence?

I mean non-existence means existence, for existence can never not be existence can it? but what meaning does any concept have without relating it is to something else? Non-existence is existence, full stop, just as Non-duality is duality, just as Non-violence is violence.

Existence IS..but there is no 'thing' existing.That's what I mean.

Tell me what you think happens to you when you are dead?

I don't know, I've never died.

So I’m pointing out some errors of judgement to you which you seem unable to grasp. …

And I'm pointing out to you that you are trying to talk about the noumena and by definition there is nothing to say or know about it so your metaphysic is just based upon some psychological need.

The only psychological need going on in this discussion if your insistence to feel superior in the presence of the enlightened masters. You project your feelings onto others, like the time you accused me of not liking myself. And again here where you make the false presumption that I have psychological needs..so forgive me while I return these false accusations back to the sender.. no one wants your unwanted feelings thanks, and you have absolutely no proof, or any way of knowing if your projections are the experiences of the others.. this is all the work of ego, where the ego feels the need to feel superior for fear of losing face...I don't know if I am making myself clear...

I have repeated many times on this forum that all my knowledge of consciousness aka the self is expressed from my own personal ''direct experience'' and that I have chosen to think a little bit differently than say that of the ordinary conditioned man. I choose to live and express myself from a Nondual context, as I am experiencing it. Just because it does not fit with your own particular model of what constitutes the philosopher's stone of philosophy doesn't make you right and I'm wrong, we are both right, because we are both expressing ourselves from our own unique ''direct experiences'' of how we see reality. I just happen to have been gifted with the brain capacity to be able to turn metal into gold. (metaphorically speaking) ..I don't expect you to understand what I mean by that, that's my personal pearl of wisdom that life has evolved in me as I experience it directly.

That there is a someone living and dying is an illusion, that’s all I’m pointing out.

So when you die what happens to you?

I have never died, so I would't have a clue mate.

Bye the way, your typically programmed responses are just endless worn out clichés born out of the desperation of your ever increasing frustration to understand the Nondual context in which I choose to express myself.

.

Any more questions? I have all the answers at my disposal, that's why I personally have stopped asking myself questions. But I'm here to be of service to others out of the unconditional love I have for myself and others.

.

[Dontaskme]

I'm as a loss that you think there is no-one but think this 'no-one' has a 'true nature', what is having this 'true nature'?

I do not think there is no one. No one is obviously this presence already evident when I stop thinking.
When I stop thinking there is the realisation that there really is no I thinking.


One does not have a true nature. One IS true nature.

The Real Self is the state in which the word 'I' does not arise; not even implicitly as a concept. This might seem like a paradox, "How can it be a self if there's no 'I.'

But when the I arises, the Real is split open," into subject/object, I/you (i.e. duality).

And this journey into binary opposition is sustained by the use of language. Language may have its benefits when it comes to communication (and thus sciences, logic, etc.) but it has no bearing in the Real.

So the Real cannot actually be graphed by science or logic or any system of thought. "So every system of thought comes to a point where it no longer serves us. . . . What the yogis have discovered is . . . no system of understanding can grasp Reality. The only way to grasp the Real is to realize that you are the Real.

Common knowledge to us all because we are this knowledge. No one owns it, they are it.

.

As long as there remains the belief in separate consciousnesses as in the desire to create AI robots, you are basically screwed, since they too will demand human rights to the point where your own enslavement becomes ever more entrapped within the delusion of duality, where true nature and freedom will become ever more elusive.





''No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.''

.

[Arising_uk]

There is no knowledge of what death is, …

The general understanding is its when a body ceases to function but obviously there is no knowing by a dead body as it is dead.

nor of what life is... …

The general understanding is it's the having of a body that is functioning in an external world.

except what the mind makes up....all that can be known is there appears to be a continuous stream of what looks like an unbroken chain of life living itself endlessly recycling from latent to kinetic to latent to kinetic on a constantly sustaining feedback loop... as two sides of the same coin, neither dead nor alive,... …

Something can't be neither dead nor alive. Where is this 'continuous stream of life', can you give an example? By-the-by you are once again reifying 'life'.

but rather having the effect we see in everyday mechanics like a computer that is either offline or online depending on whether the machine is plugged into it's animating source. And notice that while the machine can be either off or online, the source aka electricity the animating spirit of all machines can never be negated. …

Of course it can, you turn off the generator. It's amazing how often this analogy is rehashed, once it was spirits, then fluids, then it was radio signals, now it's computers.

Source is a formidable force that cannot be known, for it is the only knowing there is. …

And you know this how?

Ask yourself what is it that is alive here... …

The body.

and why if it's alive would that aliveness die?... …

The body ceases to functions.

how can life die, and how can that which is dead be alive.It does not make sense. …

Exactly and the problem lies with thinking 'life' is a thing other than being a living thing.

Neither does this belief make sense>>
If you didn't exist before you was born, and you won't exist after you die, WHO is it now that is supposed to be alive and will one day die? …

the body that was born and that will one day die.

please explain who that is..that has suddenly popped into existence between two non-existences? …

There are no 'non-existences' in any sense other than just not being in existence.

..see how that belief does not make sense?

Well that one certainly doesn't but the one that claims we are born, live and die certainly does.

Your philosophy has to explain that..who that is?

A body.

Logic will show you that there is no break in the cycle of reality that can only ever be wholeness in every moment, and so there is no room for separate entities to exist. Who would that separate entity be? ..but a thought!

The problem with Logic is doesn't discover any truth about the empirical world other than what is necessary or impossible.

The electrical impulses are no longer responding to stimuli not because the body is dead, we cannot know what death is, but a cycle of regeneration process is what's probably and more logically taking place, the body has stopped responding to life on a human level, but on a deeper level there are changes taking place that the mind is unaware of and has no direct experience of....the bodies mechanism to process sensory data has temporally gone off line to the mind on a human level, just like it does in deep dreamless sleep, or during anesthesia. …

How come dead bodies never come back online then?

But nothing is dead, because nothing is alive, these are just ideas, thoughts... …

In what?

Notice that a computer will suddenly stop responding, it will crash or freeze, but that does not mean the end, all that's required is a rebooting and all is up and running again. We can compare that to how reality of bodies and form are operating. …

Show me a dead body that has come back to life?

So as usual, you are talking typically from a programmed conditioned mentality about what you think you know about the world, and then state it is not important to ask the question who is the questioneer in search of wisdom and who is it that has called itself a philospher ..who is this I AM that wants to KNOW...philosophy just ignores that bit, it's so darn sure of itself, it never needs to question it...but this is a programme that the mind has conjured up about itself, transferred from one generation to the next, on and on and on and no body ever stops to question the sense of who AM I..who is the questioneer? ..it's okay we don't know that part so we'll just ignore it. …

Have you read any of Western Philosophy? What you talk about in all your posts is known as monist idealism and it's been around since the C18th, although I'm not sure what kind of monist you are as there are a few different types.

Best not ask questions about things we know nothing about... ...

I'd be flabbergasted if you could ask a question about something we know nothing about?

we'll just live with what we believe in, with what we believe are our beliefs, even though we don't know what they are either..but lets cling to belief because without the beliefs we have absolutely no idea who we are, or what we are, or what we are looking at, or why we want to know what we want to know. We'll just keep pretending and making it all up.

We know who we are, we're thinking things, we know what we are, we're primates, we know that we are looking at an external world, why we want to know things is because we are rational thinking things and what we want to know depends upon circumstances.