common sense, good sense and reality...

[Peter Kropotkin]

we are told that there is such a thing as common sense
and such a thing a good sense, it takes good sense to be a
doctor, or to hold to capitalism....
we are told that the reason that communism/Marxism is a failure is
because it is way too abstract, communism holds to people as they
ought to be, not as they are...
we are told this, but is this true?
is common sense, actually common sense?

and we have the second half of this problem, which is
in the indoctrinations and education we receive as children..
and continuing into adulthood...
now much of what we hold to be true, is actually just our indoctrinations
from childhood.... that they is a god, is not a question of truth, but
a question of our childhood indoctrinations/education.....

we are indoctrinated into certain beliefs, that there is a god, is
one of our common indoctrinations...... but some claim that
belief in god is a belief in ''common sense''.... it is common sense
to believe in god... as well as ''good sense''... but think about this....
the fact is that we are indoctrinated into this belief... that there is a god,
and what looks like ''common sense'' is really just a reflection of our
indoctrination/education... belief in god makes ''common sense'' because
it jives with our childhood indoctrinations... it is ''common'' because
this childhood indoctrinations of god, is common to most children in
our society.... what makes ''common sense'' is really just a reflection
of our indoctrinations/education... when one says, this is common sense,
this really means it makes ''common sense'', given my own personal indoctrinations
as a child.. this ''common sense'' is in line with my own education/indoctrinations....

so, when someone says, it just makes sense, or common sense, it
really is just a commentary on their own indoctrinations, education....

we actually have no idea what is ''common sense'' because we
haven't challenged our own indoctrinations, education.....we
haven't done as Nietzsche suggested, we haven't overcome our
childhood indoctrinations, education.... we hold them right
on into adulthood and even to old age.... these childhood indoctrinations,
serve as our belief system into adulthood because we haven't taken
the time to see if they stand the test of time, if our beliefs actually
match the reality we are seeing as adults...

this belief, faith in god, doesn't last long if, if one takes the time to
actually think about our world... if our world is this fucked up with
a god, and it is all going to ''gods' plan".... what a really stupid plan...
the reality I see, given my reexamination of my values, tell me that
this reality makes no sense if there is a god, however this
reality, our truth, makes much more sense if we think and hold to
be true, that this reality is more about chance, randomness,
probability.... then this reality makes much more sense/truth.....

now one may try to make the argument, that my own judgement is based on
my own indoctrinations, education... but I spent decades pursuing my own
truths... to investigate what is true and does this ''truth'' match what
I have been told to be true? I see reality with my own eyes, and does
that reality match what I was told, indoctrinated with?

that capitalism is the greatest economic policy ever, is not
true if we were to match our reality, the truth around us,
to the indoctrination of capitalism.... I see the effects of
capitalism on people's life, and it doesn't match the indoctrinations
that I was educated with... and the question becomes, how do we match
the reality we see on the ground, as opposed to the indoctrinations we
are given.....

believers in capitalism gloss over the reality of capitalism.. of those millions
lives lost and destroyed because of the nihilism of capitalism... that nihilism
that negates and dehumanizes people and their values for profits....
now, don't think this little thread is about capitalism, it isn't,
it is about the fact that we are responding to our indoctrinations/education
we received instead of the reality we see on the ground... what about
those millions of lives negatively impacted by the effects of capitalism?
we don't talk about that or even think about that... it is unsaid, forgotten,
and left out of any conversation about capitalism... we see and talk about
the very few winners in capitalism, but do we even think about the
millions of people crushed by capitalism? left homeless and with
food insecurities... where is my next meal coming from? millions
of people are faced with this dilemma... and among those millions, are
children and senior citizens... and that buck or two you give to donations,
how many people will that buck or two, fail to reach? millions of people
will still be starving and homeless because that buck or two, just
isn't enough to solve this perennial problem... it will, as the book said,
it will take a village, all of us, to solve this problem....

and so it is said, that by cutting taxes to the rich, we can solve the problems
of the country.... it makes sense, common sense, to solve our problems
with tax cuts... and yet, it makes no sense whatsoever to solve homelessness
or starvation with tax cuts... there is not logical connection between the two...
you want to solve a problem; you have to deal directly with solutions to
the problem, not some random action that does nothing for the millions
who are homeless and starving... so in thinking about matters in terms of
common sense, means that we must first deal with the indoctrinations/
education that we were taught as children... because we cannot
understand what common sense is until we understand what our childhood
indoctrinations/education are......

Kropotkin

[seeds]

...the reality I see, given my reexamination of my values, tell me that
this reality makes no sense if there is a god, however this
reality, our truth, makes much more sense if we think and hold to
be true, that this reality is more about chance, randomness,
probability.... then this reality makes much more sense/truth.....

Setting aside the utter absurdity in thinking that the blind and mindless processes of chance is a logical explanation for the existence of the near infinite number of solar "systems" consisting of incredibly efficient (and purposeful) fusion dynamos which supply heat, bio-driving energy, and illuminating light to the surfaces of their accompanying planets,...

...again, setting all of that aside, realize that the first part of your problem is that your childhood indoctrination has led you to make the false assumption that if there truly is a Creator of this universe, and if she is indeed a good and loving Being,...

...then she should be picking us up, wiping our snotty noses, and changing our soiled diapers for us every time we make a mess due to our inability to follow a few simple ("Golden Rule") instructions that have been set-forth in pretty much all of the world's religions.

And the second part of your problem is that you put way too much emphasis on the importance (or lack thereof) of the few fleeting moments we spend on earth,...

...when, in truth, all of its negative features and happenstances are merely a part of the necessary means to reaching a far greater end in a higher context of reality.

The bottom line is that you are trying to second guess the motives of a Being who (if she/he/it truly exists) is as far above us humans in scope, intelligence, and consciousness as we humans are above amoebas.
_______

[VVilliam]

Old Soul: The Minds Eye
Trying to second guess the motives of a Being who is as far above us humans in scope, intelligence, and consciousness as we humans are above amoebas.
Effectively
A Machine For Solving Problems
Wonder

Me: I do wonder if amoemas have what is takes to wonder about what human scope intelligence and consciousness has in relation to itself, so the analogy may not be an appropriate one...but the gist is acceptable in that we shouldn't assume "things" about such a Being.

We are limited to the scope of our human form, and therein do not even have access to every frequency available/consisting of the created thing (Universe) with which to try and work out the characteristics of said Being that would have created it.

However, here are some attributes which I think are appropriate to such a Being which we could rightly assume (apply common sense to).

uncaused,
beginningless,
changeless,
timeless,
spaceless,
enormously powerful,
mindful,
imageless
personal (knows itself as it is and can build character into its creations from that foundation)

[seeds]

Me: I do wonder if amoemas have what is takes to wonder about what human scope intelligence and consciousness has in relation to itself,...

They don't.

Indeed, that's the whole point of the analogy, in that lower levels of consciousness do not possess the mental wherewithal to fathom the ontological status of the levels that ascend above them.

...so the analogy may not be an appropriate one...

No need to over-think it, VVilliam, just go with the reasoning in your next line...

...but the gist is acceptable in that we shouldn't assume "things" about such a Being.

However, here are some attributes which I think are appropriate to such a Being which we could rightly assume (apply common sense to).

uncaused,
beginningless,

I disagree, for I believe that the Creator of this universe began in pretty much the same way that we began. To clarify that, see this post: viewtopic.php?p=679694#p679694

changeless,

Well, it's core essence (its unique and personal soul) might be changeless, however the phenomenal contents of its ever-evolving mind (the universe) certainly aren't changeless.

timeless,

Nah, it surely experiences the passing of time.

However, it's simply not subject to the same intervals of time that we experience due to the limiting speed of light that governs the exchange of information taking place between the universe's quantum phenomena, of which our bodies are inextricably entangled with.

spaceless,

In the context of the "All-That-Is," it...

(the mind of God, which contains the entire universe)

...takes up about as much space as your own mind.

Size and distance truly are relative.

enormously powerful,

Yes, but only in the context of the inner-reality of its own mind (again, the universe).

mindful,

Obviously.

imageless

Not true.

It only appears to be imageless because we have not yet been born into the higher (transcendent) context of reality where its (and our) true image will finally be revealed to us.

personal

Yes, personal just like us.

"...As Below, So Above..."
_______

[Age]

...the reality I see, given my reexamination of my values, tell me that
this reality makes no sense if there is a god, however this
reality, our truth, makes much more sense if we think and hold to
be true, that this reality is more about chance, randomness,
probability.... then this reality makes much more sense/truth.....

Setting aside the utter absurdity in thinking that the blind and mindless processes of chance is a logical explanation for the existence of the near infinite number of solar "systems" consisting of incredibly efficient (and purposeful) fusion dynamos which supply heat, bio-driving energy, and illuminating light to the surfaces of their accompanying planets,...

How do you KNOW there are a so-called 'near infinite number of 'solar systems'?

And, what does 'near infinite' even MEAN or REFER TO, EXACTLY?

...again, setting all of that aside, realize that the first part of your problem is that your childhood indoctrination has led you to make the false assumption that if there truly is a Creator of this universe, and if she is indeed a good and loving Being,...

But your OWN childhood indoctrination/s has NOT led you to make False ASSUMPTIONS, correct?

...then she should be picking us up, wiping our snotty noses, and changing our soiled diapers for us every time we make a mess due to our inability to follow a few simple ("Golden Rule") instructions that have been set-forth in pretty much all of the world's religions.

And the second part of your problem is that you put way too much emphasis on the importance (or lack thereof) of the few fleeting moments we spend on earth,...

...when, in truth, all of its negative features and happenstances are merely a part of the necessary means to reaching a far greater end in a higher context of reality.

How, EXACTLY, could there be an ACTUAL so-called 'higher context' of 'reality'?

The bottom line is that you are trying to second guess the motives of a Being who (if she/he/it truly exists) is as far above us humans in scope, intelligence, and consciousness as we humans are above amoebas.
_______

But NO one/thing is 'above' or 'below' "another one".

'Things' are just at DIFFERENT levels along the evolution continuum of REALIZATION, COMING-TO-KNOW thy 'Self', and ACTUALIZATION.

'you', human beings, are just along 'this continuum', in this One and ONLY Universe and reality, of COMING-TO-KNOW thy 'Self'.

There is OBVIOUSLY NO 'other' 'reality' NOR 'higher context of reality'. 'you', human beings, have just NOT YET REACHED UNDERSTANDING and FULL REALIZATION of this One and ONLY Life and 'living Reality'.

[VVilliam]

However, here are some attributes which I think are appropriate to such a Being which we could rightly assume (apply common sense to).

uncaused,
beginningless,

I disagree, for I believe that the Creator of this universe began in pretty much the same way that we began. To clarify that, see this post: viewtopic.php?p=679694#p679694

The post does not convey to me anything re your point but I think that perhaps you are saying that you believe the Creator Mind emerged from the created thing?

I don't agree with that particular belief because the other explanation is that the Creator Mind (Universal Mind) is the eternal reality and that which it then creates is the temporal image (currently what we call "the physical universe") which it can then - by degrees - explore through being the consciousness within the creation it made for that exact purpose.

This is then where emergence comes into play - as from our position within said created universe - it appears that every consciousness emerges from the physical thing it is engaged within.

The appearance of emergence has to do with our limited view of the overall experience.

changeless,

Well, it's core essence (its unique and personal soul) might be changeless, however the phenomenal contents of its ever-evolving mind (the universe) certainly aren't changeless.

Exactly. They are temporal whereas the creator-mind has always existed.

Which is to say, the creator mind can and does "change its mind" and still remains eternal.

timeless,

Nah, it surely experiences the passing of time.

However, it's simply not subject to the same intervals of time that we experience due to the limiting speed of light that governs the exchange of information taking place between the universe's quantum phenomena, of which our bodies are inextricably entangled with.

Again - the "timeless" attribute (and all attributes mentioned) is significant to its quintessential state - where no created thing exists. It is simply experiencing itself without any created baggage.

spaceless,

In the context of the "All-That-Is," it...

(the mind of God, which contains the entire universe)

...takes up about as much space as your own mind.

Size and distance truly are relative.

Again - I am describing the quintessential state. Size and distance cannot apply relative to that state, because nothing is created in which to reflect or measure off of, thus "size and distance are irrelative.

enormously powerful,

Yes, but only in the context of the inner-reality of its own mind (again, the universe).

Again, this one is "after the fact" of its quintessential state - when it has entered/emerged into that which it created.

mindful,

Obviously.

imageless

Not true.

It only appears to be imageless because we have not yet been born into the higher (transcendent) context of reality where its (and our) true image will finally be revealed to us.

"Promises. Promises."

In order to reach that quintessential state all that is created would have to cease and then the only reality would be it. The Creator Mind.

Universally Itself.

That would have to be the "true image" - nothing to reflect off of- but its true self - absent of any props (mirroring devices).

We don't need to "wait" for that day as we can imagine it immediate as "Imageless" while also understanding that any image presented as being the true image of creator-mind will be a "false" one....no matter how far up the heavenly chain we care to excel to and become witness to.

personal

Yes, personal just like us.

In the sense that "we" are not "each other" and all have a sense of self...

"...As Below, So Above..."

Not this universe. (There is a fine line between "over-thinking" and "under-thinking", seeds.)

In this Universe, there is only "in" and "out".
"Up" and "down" (below/above) are not relative to the nature of said Universe.

Re that, the only "out" is for the creator mind to return to its quintessential state - there is no "out" beyond the creator-mind. From that point, there is only "in" and this is where any "beginning" of a created thing is identified. The "in" point of contact between the creators thoughts and the subsequent actions which happen as a result.

The "true" state of the creator mind is the timeless state where it is the only mind that exists...which is still the case when said mind "becomes" other minds within the experience of its creation. The supposed "other minds" are all actually related to the only mind that actual exists...and if these were to "return" to their most natural state, "they" would not think of "themselves" as anything other than the creator-mind...(however this is not to say that such "other minds" are not an aspect of "memories created" and possibly "keep" or "saved"...

...all in all "over-thinking" is underrated.