Dr. David Skrbina, Unabomber, Panpsychism and Jesus |510|

#2
We can gauge the guest’s frustration by frequency of table slaps.

I haven’t read anything by Ted but if he’s so smart couldn’t he have figured out a better way to gain the desired notoriety? I won’t spend any time reading his stuff. People still read Mein Kampf but Hitler was a lot more successful.

After 34:00 we leave behind the Unibomber and get to more interesting stuff.

Jason Reza Jorjani and his talks on New Thinking Alowed are fantastic in regards to technology. Would love to hear him interviewed. Technology starting with clothes is an extension and externalization of power which modifies the environment ultimately resulting in internal weakness. We cannot survive without clothes or fire so our journey into trans-humanism began long ago.

The Sun might do the job of resetting us technologically… but what technology will be preserved in the DUMBs and carried forward into the post apocalyptic era?

I also don’t like Kastrup because he makes things unnecessarily complicated and invents new vocab that puts up too much of a barrier for entry and also because he refers to us as dissociated alters which is bad marketing.

I also think it’s foolish to propose the opposite of materialism as the answer to materialism. Patternism combines materialism and idealism and so it will be more successful (more useful and more easily accepted by all).

We have to exist in a Monist framework but I think the guest is incorrect that this explains anything. On the contrary Monism is the undoing of all explanations.

The smallest number of concepts that can exist for mind to exist is 3: the fundamental mental/material pattern is Similarity / Difference / Choice. From this Trinity proceeds everything else.

Another problem encountered here is reductionism. We exist in a web of connections that are irreducible complex so reducing things is an exercise that may or may not yield useful metaphors. The now moment is irreducibly complex. That’s why we are experiencing it now. If it were reducible it’s would have already been computed and stored as memory. Life/Spirit/Existence is exploring the boundary of computable and non-computable spaces.

Materialism is a useful metaphor in a limited domain but is a poor ontological descriptor. Scientists in attempt to eliminate bias decided to stop seeing the world as whispy fog and decided to see it as tiny dead rocks. The consistency of observed patterns can be metaphorically described with the sensory experience of hardness solidity opacity. The entire scientific system of epistemology is based on the notion that nature is repeatable. If anything is not repeatable then science is blind to it. So science sees only similarity and leaves no room for choice or novelty which it labels randomness or emergent epiphenomena rooted in randomness. Science doesn’t leave room for a directed non-random prime cause that infuses material touching it on every uncertain non-local boundary

Jesus. You’d think I would have a strong opinion about this but I really don’t. I still think it’s a hodgepodge. Religions or ideologies that are successful must contain some symbiotic elements. Even if it was started or help along as a cynical psyop - a mind worm to make a people easier to subjugate - as that mind worm adapts and evolves to survive it will pick up different qualities and beneficial mythical archetypal stories that provide a mirror for the human condition aiding human consciousness to evolve
 

Alex

Administrator
#3
Ted but if he’s so smart couldn’t he have figured out a better way to gain the desired notoriety?
well put!

We cannot survive without clothes or fire so our journey into trans-humanism began long ago.
nice... I'd love to have Jason on at some point. someone oughta reach out to him.


I also think it’s foolish to propose the opposite of materialism as the answer to materialism.
another nice one! in his defense materialism has grabbed the mic.

I still think it’s a hodgepodge. Religions or ideologies that are successful must contain some symbiotic elements. Even if it was started or help along as a cynical psyop - a mind worm to make a people easier to subjugate - as that mind worm adapts and evolves to survive it will pick up different qualities and beneficial mythical archetypal stories that provide a mirror for the human condition aiding human consciousness to evolve
again, brilliant... you made me smarter thx.
 
#4
Re: The Unibomber
Skrbina exhibited some flavor of hybristophilia with his defensiveness.
Same argument as I have against Mitch Horowitz: What’s with the lack of identification/empathy with the victims, or even just a simple acknowledgement that “Hey ya, it’s good that he’s behind bars for the safety of the public..” and/or “Good that we don’t encourage the behavior..”and/or “Hopefully mankind is headed toward a future which includes rehabilitation at that level/spectrum..”
Red Flags

Re: Panpsychism
True or False: Everything in the universe is connected.
I say True.
So, if True.. and If genuine potentials exist which facilitate things such as Sheldrakes Dog Effect, and Remote Viewing, and even up to Worm Holes, then I don’t know how anyone could argue that those potentials aren’t also active connections.

So, if we agree that all is connected, why would we assume consciousness isn’t participating in ALL of it?

I’m only half way through the episodes. Guilty pleasure to comment anyway.
 
Last edited:
#5
I haven’t read anything by Ted but if he’s so smart couldn’t he have figured out a better way to gain the desired notoriety? I won’t spend any time reading his stuff. People still read Mein Kampf but Hitler was a lot more successful.
I don't know if the position on an armed struggle against the power elite that is different from a totally pacifist one may be freely discussed here. Please tell me, so I know if I would go too far for this forum if I would try to express a non-pacifist position.

I hope, I can say this: Ted Kaczynski is a heroic figure for anarchists, and deservedly so. He is a warrior, a thinker, a martyr. As an anarchist myself, I hold him in high esteem.

"The Industrial Society and its Future: the Unabomber's Manifesto" is short, yet wonderfully written and superbly well-argumented. One may disagree with (some of) the positions expressed here, yet still acknowledge author's exceptional sharpness of mind. Here is the full text, from the Anarchist Library.

Give it a try, Hurm. Whether you'll like it or not, it will worth a short time needed to read it.

If even this is too far, I can remove this post immediately!
 
Last edited:
#7
I tried to reach him with a proposal to make a written interview for Psience Quest, but failed - he never responded.

Hope you will have more luck. ;)
Here's the most recent content by Him that I could find and it is a fantastic well reasoned nuanced response to the guest and Ted and their "solution" of deindustrialization.

 
#8
I don't know if the position on an armed struggle against the power elite that is different from a totally pacifist one may be freely discussed here. Please tell me, so I know if I would go too far for this forum if I would try to express a non-pacifist position.

I hope, I can say this: Ted Kaczynski is a heroic figure for anarchists, and deservedly so. He is a warrior, a thinker, a martyr. As an anarchist myself, I hold him in high esteem.

"The Industrial Society and its Future: the Unabomber's Manifesto" is short, yet wonderfully written and superbly well-argumented. One may disagree with (some of) the positions expressed here, yet still acknowledge author's exceptional sharpness of mind. Here is the full text, from the Anarchist Library.

Give it a try, Hurm. Whether you'll like it or not, it will worth a short time needed to read it.

If even this is too far, I can remove this post immediately!
Okay I read some and skimmed some. He is clearly an intelligent guy and provides a great critique of modern society, leftism, and industrialization. There's a lot there that any thinking person could agree with. Despite that I obviously don't condone what he did killing innocent people to get attention, nor do I understand why such a stupid evil idea arose in his head as he could have had a lot more success if he had simply waited for the technology of YouTube!

Where I disagree:

He believes the power process applied to physical needs provides greater fulfillment and psychological health than when applied to "surrogate goals" because we are biologically adapted to struggle with nature. How can we be sure that this isn't a romantic idealization of archaism unless we have lived both the life of a primitive man and that of a modern man? And I believe the "surrogate goals" of scientific or artistic pursuits can be more fulfilling than that of physical needs... I use technology to learn as much as I can while I can... and at the same time having prepper tendencies, I have a macabre fascination and even look forward to the eventual great contest of the societal collapse. We want whatever we don't have, so the modern man longs for the life of the native and the native longs for the technology and comfort of the modern man.

He seems to have a narrow view of technology. Technology and Truth are inextricably related. Truth is symbolizing something in a way that is USEFUL. Without USE, there is no TRUTH. A tool is useful. A tool is technology. So knowledge and tools inevitably develop together. Tools or technology are externalizations of power that modify the environment which in turn creates internal or physical weakness, but also selects for intelligence because the physical weakness then MUST be overcome with intelligence... so the human who needs clothes and fire cannot survive without the intelligence and knowledge to produce these things. So the advancement of technology is inevitable because it changes our niche which then changes us which then prompts us to perpetuate the changes to our niche.

In other words, he is bemoaning the fall of Adam and longs for the Garden, but the garden has a flaming sword guarding it which can only be taken by force which requires the expansion of our power which happens through technology.

This is the nested pattern of reality in action: Adam's will was externalized in the form of Eve who then convinced him to eat the fruit of knowledge, and then the two became one merging back together and in their union produced offspring that would perpetually strive with the Serpent - the agent of change who brought knowledge/technology. And so we externalize our will as technology (clothes and fire) and then merge with our technology producing offspring (AI agents) in our image and likeness just as we are in the image and likeness of the Elohim who engineered us by either shaping our environment (just as we use an environment to train an AI agent) or with direct genetic manipulation (hard coding).

Environment and organism are inseparable and evolve together. The fragility induced by the environment that is modified by technology creates an organism's dependence on knowledge which improves the organism's ability to attain knowledge (because the dummies will die).

Another thought: he believes that revolutionaries will possibly have to take out the industrialized system after it has become weak almost to the point of failing on its own, but the Earth with its periodic solar induced catastrophes every 6000 or 12000 years seems to have a built in reset mechanism on technology. The apocalypse is the "harvest" where both good and bad seed grows together until the harvest and are then sorted. Earth is like a self-cleaning petri dish designed to refine certain qualities into the organisms present. The big question is: what sort of technologies will be preserved through the next apocalypse and how will that seed the new era? Will we finally produce a viable "egg" of technology which will make it past this point in history or will we go the way of Atlantis and be totally reset to hunter-gatherers and forced to do this all over again?

Edit: one more critique I forgot to include: Systematization is inevitable and is oppressive; however, the process of creating structure also creates boundaries and boundaries are where the marginalized can thrive and in fact they need a boundary to exist upon, so without a system or a structure, they have no niche. Like the coastline fractal problem where you have an infinite boundary on a finite surface: systemization create boundaries and as it becomes more oppressive the spaces become smaller, but the surface area increases and eventually it shatters.
 
Last edited:
#9
Another thought about technology… there are a lot of lines of evidence that we are a “managed” species on a managed planet. Although we have been given dominion over everything on the planet there are “the others” who maintain dominion over us and are partially directing our evolution.

When we domesticate an animal or a plant, we breed into it qualities that benefit us and this often results in a weaker organism that would not survive in the harsher environment and can only survive in the managed environment and care that we provide.

Upon our initiation (fall) into becoming like the gods and acquiring knowledge, the gods put us into a harsher environment and gave us technology to rely upon to dominate that harsh environment. As with a domesticated animal we were made physically weaker and dependent in exchange for increased intelligence and tech.

Now in addition to the amazing geometric coincidences we find embedded in the structure of this planet which are one line of evidence that this planet is “managed”, we also find the amazing coincidence of technological singularity coinciding with planetary catastrophe… a Great Reset if you will… of technology and this reapplies some selective pressures that technology had eliminated.

When the flower of the technological singularity blooms there is a massive cross pollination of knowledge which leads to a tasty fruit of knowledge seeding the next eon and then BAM a blizzard hits and everything appears to have died, but the cycle will repeat with slight changes each time. The catastrophe kills off the tares… it refines the managed population of humans creating a new and interesting stock for the future.
 
#10
Another thought about technology… there are a lot of lines of evidence that we are a “managed” species on a managed planet. Although we have been given dominion over everything on the planet there are “the others” who maintain dominion over us and are partially directing our evolution.

When we domesticate an animal or a plant, we breed into it qualities that benefit us and this often results in a weaker organism that would not survive in the harsher environment and can only survive in the managed environment and care that we provide.

Upon our initiation (fall) into becoming like the gods and acquiring knowledge, the gods put us into a harsher environment and gave us technology to rely upon to dominate that harsh environment. As with a domesticated animal we were made physically weaker and dependent in exchange for increased intelligence and tech.

Now in addition to the amazing geometric coincidences we find embedded in the structure of this planet which are one line of evidence that this planet is “managed”, we also find the amazing coincidence of technological singularity coinciding with planetary catastrophe… a Great Reset if you will… of technology and this reapplies some selective pressures that technology had eliminated.

When the flower of the technological singularity blooms there is a massive cross pollination of knowledge which leads to a tasty fruit of knowledge seeding the next eon and then BAM a blizzard hits and everything appears to have died, but the cycle will repeat with slight changes each time. The catastrophe kills off the tares… it refines the managed population of humans creating a new and interesting stock for the future.
I really enjoyed this whole response. Probably my favorite of your pitches I've read so far. Still fairly new here.
It helped me clarify a beef I have with typical framing of this subject.
How come when people bring up the likely hood of assisted human evolution, they never bring up the Kardeshev Scale? This lack of framing always seems to imply that any species advanced enough to pull it off, or "play god", must be as evolved as life gets..
It creates a strawman for the religious-atheists to attack. And, it fully subverts everything interesting about what it could mean if true.

Not to mention how sad that this framing succeeds in leading many to conclude that their spirituality is merely the result of a gene designed to placate gold miners.

If the Universe had a beginning, I think that implies that it can have an end. And if it began once, it can happen again.. and again.. and again, eternally.

Or maybe (my favorite conception right now) the universe was created or simulated (whichever floats your boat) for the purpose of growth, or eductation, or entertainment, on some higher dimensional infinite scale to which we wouldn't have anything to compare.

To pull this back to Ted and technology,
I struggle to congratulate or amplify any genius who's so short sighted or sloppy to settle for the low hanging fruit of killing innocents for attention, regardless how important the cause. I'd even argue the act hints toward a lack of true conviction with their cause, and speaks more like a "fuck you", which carries a completely different sentiment. Like a suicide note composed only for the pain of the readers by someone just decided to hide and watch instead of dying.
[bangs the Josephus gong and tosses the mallet while skipping away]
 
Last edited:
#11
Real Question: Where's the donate button to get Alex to STOP talking about Josephus?
Seriously though. He has a guest who has an awesome opportunity to talk about the dangers of technology and he doesn't do ANYTHING about it? That's a debate that's sorely lacking and instead we get the same old tired Josephus discussion.
Alex: "Josephus is a Roman psy-op"
Guest: "That's not exactly what the text would imply"
Alex Next Week: "Everyone agrees with me on Josephus"
Jack to himself: "What does this have to do with anything? We will NEVER have a satisfactory answer for certain on this.
It doesn't prove that just because the Romans even did a psy-op with Josephus that this is occurring today."

Why do we care if Jesus was a real person or not? If his teachings were real or not? Let me clarify.
It was a really interesting idea the first time.
A decent conversation to plumb the second time.
Getting over tired ground by the third time.
Now it's just the same thing over and over again. There's no new information. No new accounts. No new ideas that we can get from this.
Can you maybe rebook this guy to talk about the dangers of technology?

As for the evils of the unibomber. That's well known. Of course, the Nazis discovered vaccine technology. If we didn't have that most people would be dead from Small pox, or polio, or scarlet fever, or etc...
From bad beginnings can come good things. Ask anyone who composts.
 
#12
I tried to reach him with a proposal to make a written interview for Psience Quest, but failed - he never responded.

Hope you will have more luck. ;)
I certainly agree he'd be appropriate for Skeptiko,com If you haven't already, pls view his "The Breakaway Civilization" & "Understanding the Grays" on New Thinking Allowed. He's lost his job as a university lecturer over his writings; he's apparently been carefully smeared as anti-Semitic, anti-Arab, anti whatever you wish to fill in the blank. As the old saying goes, "No one kicks a dead dog."
 
#13
Re: The Unibomber
Skrbina exhibited some flavor of hybristophilia with his defensiveness.
Same argument as I have against Mitch Horowitz: What’s with the lack of identification/empathy with the victims, or even just a simple acknowledgement that “Hey ya, it’s good that he’s behind bars for the safety of the public..” and/or “Good that we don’t encourage the behavior..”and/or “Hopefully mankind is headed toward a future which includes rehabilitation at that level/spectrum..”
Red Flags

Re: Panpsychism
True or False: Everything in the universe is connected.
I say True.
So, if True.. and If genuine potentials exist which facilitate things such as Sheldrakes Dog Effect, and Remote Viewing, and even up to Worm Holes, then I don’t know how anyone could argue that those potentials aren’t also active connections.

So, if we agree that all is connected, why would we assume consciousness isn’t participating in ALL of it?

I’m only half way through the episodes. Guilty pleasure to comment anyway.
So true, man, so true! I really enjoyed this interview for the most part, but when Skrbina starts doing this comparative analysis of who killed more people, the president or the Unabomber, my idiotdar starts redlining. Sad but true, I went to high school with a family member of one of the victims of the Unabomber's fucking bombs. The guy didn't show up to school for weeks because his uncle was killed by a bomb in the mail. That same kid ended up with a great NFL career, but I remember, he was devastated.

Also, I don't get this argument against "technology," specifically if some random asshole uses "technology" to kill random people. Isn't a bomb a form of technology? Furthermore, isn't finding a way to package it, get it shipped, another form of using technology? Where does the line begin and end, for what we call technology in the first place?

Rather, I could only see a hatred of technology through a few different kind of lenses, but let us pick one: cashiers. This self checkout thing is the fucking biggest scam that corporations have ever placed upon the public. However, it isn't the "technology," it is the greed of these asshole corporations that don't give a shit about the common people. In effect, they are not only going to make you pay for all your groceries, but they are going to make you do the job of the cashier, too......and you don't get a fucking discount?!? Also, they cut countless jobs when they install this nonsense in every store across America? If the fucking Unabomber had any kind of soul he wouldn't have blown up random people, but rather taken bats to self check out stands throughout America. I know they weren't there during his time, but shit......fuck that guy, you just don't go around blowing random people up and get to be considered a fucking thinker.
 
#14
First and foremost, I fucking loved this episode! Kudos to both, Alex and Dr. Skrbina!

Let us take a few broad strokes here concerning materialism and/or idealism. First of all, I don't think that the "double slit experiment" proves that our consciousness is creating reality. Nevertheless, it proves that our consciousness interferes with measurement. However, we must ask ourselves, what is measurement? When we apply a numerical evaluation of reality, i.e., the interpretation of reality based on numbers, symbols, then we are always making an incorrect synthesis. I don't think the double slit experiment is necessary to prove this fact.....but you can prove it to yourself with a tape measure. For years, I worked as an interior design technician that translated field measures into computer programs. No matter what, the resulting field measure never matched the reality, exactly.

Of course, we could chalk this up as the inability of the field agent to properly measure the space, but the truth is that every person measuring anything will become the presumed guilty party during the installation process. No matter how exact we are with any compound field measure, a margin of error will exist. However, this doesn't mean that we cannot strive to be more exact and more precise. Nevertheless, you cannot ever, no matter what, get a perfect measurement because the space between 1 and 2 is infinite. The application of measurement is only as exact as the objective applied to the desired outcome. In other words, measurement devoid of a goal ceases to have any validity.

What I like about Skrbina is his unfettered dissection of Christianity. Regardless, if this is an internal world being created by our consciousness, then all possibilities abound. I would posit that this "external" world is God, and those laws that bind us to it are scripture, but at the same time, these are not laws at all. Rather, the Creator has endowed us as liberators of ourselves, and these things are only guidelines.
 

Alex

Administrator
#15
He believes the power process applied to physical needs provides greater fulfillment and psychological health than when applied to "surrogate goals" because we are biologically adapted to struggle with nature. How can we be sure that this isn't a romantic idealization of archaism unless we have lived both the life of a primitive man and that of a modern man?
agreed... and one step further... this is just unsupported philosophical bullshit... where was the data to support this idea... how is this any different than daniel dennett, neil deGrasse tyson, richard dawkins "we are biological robots in a meaningless universe"


He seems to have a narrow view of technology.
agree again... narrow... arbitrary... self-serving... self-contradictory.

-- how are any of ted's over-intellectualized pontifications different from anyone else who puts materialism above spirituality. his atheistic version of "god needs our help" falls flat. I never bought it when the christian pedaled it and I don't buy it from this atheist either.
 
#16
I really enjoyed this whole response. Probably my favorite of your pitches I've read so far.
Gracias!

It helped me clarify a beef I have with typical framing of this subject.
How come when people bring up the likely hood of assisted human evolution, they never bring up the Kardeshev Scale? This lack of framing always seems to imply that any species advanced enough to pull it off, or "play god", must be as evolved as life gets..
It creates a strawman for the religious-atheists to attack. And, it fully subverts everything interesting about what it could mean if true.

Not to mention how sad that this framing succeeds in leading many to conclude that their spirituality is merely the result of a gene designed to placate gold miners.
Consider this framing of the subject going back to the kernel of patternism present at every level of creation: reality consists of similarity, difference, and choice. Choice that is not random requires a goal. A goal implies that the goal has not yet been obtained which implies a frustration. Frustration therefore drives goals which drive choice which is the 3rd leg required to create a pattern and everything is a pattern.

Now what would it be like to be a being with complete technological mastery over the cosmos? What would your frustrations be that set your goals that drive you to choose and act and therefore create? Well what do we do when our primary physical needs are easily met? As Ted would say it: what are our surrogate goals in the power process? We can find fulfillment in exploring new boundaries, creating new things (art, philosophy, technology), and reproducing ourselves by becoming parents or attempting to reproduce our consciousness by engineering AI agents. I would argue "the gods" find fulfillment in the same ways. They are exploring the boundary of computable and non-computable spaces which is the limit of their technology which results in the present moment, and they have a desire to reproduce themselves by becoming "parents" or by creating a simulacra of themselves.

And what does a parent do for children? A good parent sets boundaries and progressively removes them as the consciousness of the child develops. A good parent challenges the child.

As mentioned above, frustration is inherently a part of creation, so to create children a "god" must frustrate the child with an oppressive structure and at some point the child will rebel against this oppressive structure and struggle with the parent to obtain more autonomy.

I don't really believe the notion that we were hybridized long ago to be gold miners, but supposing that were the case... any form of oppression can be a chrysalis in which frustration builds assimilating and strengthening will towards achievement of goals resulting in new creation.

I have a strong libertarian streak and am often caught up in raw negative emotional response towards the increasingly oppressive technological systems that attempt to innoculate us with stupidity designed for the lowest common denominator, but I also have to take a step back and realize: when there are no problems, there is nothing to do, so we have literally placed ourselves in a dangerous oppressive labyrinth in which we are not likely to escape just because escaping it is an expression of the creative process that originates from a frustration. And that frustration that drives action is the divine spark... the spirit of creativity in action.

If the Universe had a beginning, I think that implies that it can have an end. And if it began once, it can happen again.. and again.. and again, eternally.
Yes.

Or maybe (my favorite conception right now) the universe was created or simulated (whichever floats your boat) for the purpose of growth, or eductation, or entertainment, on some higher dimensional infinite scale to which we wouldn't have anything to compare.
Yes.

We create AI agents right now by creating a challenging environment, then running agent through the environment, and providing feedback on how close the agent came to the target and how much it fell short of the target (sinned). What is the life review during the NDE if not a kind of feedback that informs the agent (your soul) on how close it came to its goals and how much it fell short (sinned)? We exist in a nested set of goals and feedback loops. Particles have goals (push/pull), your cells have goals, your body has goals, your prefrontal cortex provides another layer of feedback loops with higher order goals, and then your soul which spawned you has goals and you will be judged by you or your soul on how close you came to attaining them.

To pull this back to Ted and technology,
I struggle to congratulate or amplify any genius who's so short sighted or sloppy to settle for the low hanging fruit of killing innocents for attention, regardless how important the cause. I'd even argue the act hints toward a lack of true conviction with their cause, and speaks more like a "fuck you", which carries a completely different sentiment. Like a suicide note composed only for the pain of the readers by someone just decided to hide and watch instead of dying.
Agreed.

[bangs the Josephus gong and tosses the mallet while skipping away]
lol
 
Last edited:

Alex

Administrator
#17
when Skrbina starts doing this comparative analysis of who killed more people, the president or the Unabomber, my idiotdar starts redlining.
haha... agreed... I think even david realized it was a pretty lazy argument... best reserved for college freshmen taking their first philosophy class.

If the fucking Unabomber had any kind of soul he wouldn't have blown up random people, but rather taken bats to self check out stands throughout America.
pure gold!!!
 

Alex

Administrator
#18
First of all, I don't think that the "double slit experiment" proves that our consciousness is creating reality. Nevertheless, it proves that our consciousness interferes with measurement. However, we must ask ourselves, what is measurement?
sure... agrreed... then again, like they say poof is for whiskey not science. I mean we built this ted kaczynski shut up and calculate world were talking about by insisting there's no f****** way that photon being can change just because you look at it one way or another. so falsifying this is a big deal. and that's why there's been a 50-year smokescreen surrounding the double slit experiment. that's why they made it in comprehensible to any normal thinking person. and that's why dean raden's double slit experiment was so important. cut through all the b******* and said ok what this is really about is conscious so let me put a meditator in here and see if he can affect the f****** photon beam... and he did... over and over.



What I like about Skrbina is his unfettered dissection of Christianity. Regardless, if this is an internal world being created by our consciousness, then all possibilities abound. I would posit that this "external" world is God, and those laws that bind us to it are scripture, but at the same time, these are not laws at all. Rather, the Creator has endowed us as liberators of ourselves, and these things are only guidelines.
funny... I thought you're going to make a connection back to the interior design measurement... cuz I definitely see it.
 
#19
Also, I don't get this argument against "technology," specifically if some random asshole uses "technology" to kill random people. Isn't a bomb a form of technology? Furthermore, isn't finding a way to package it, get it shipped, another form of using technology? Where does the line begin and end, for what we call technology in the first place?
Right on. All of these modern revolutionaries/anarchists are just spoiled pukes who use - and would literally die without - the technological and social structures that they rebel against like two year olds having a hate tantrum.

IMO Kazinski was exactly - and merely - one of those and a deranged sociopath on top of that. That is all.
 
#20
sure... agrreed... then again, like they say poof is for whiskey not science. I mean we built this ted kaczynski shut up and calculate world were talking about by insisting there's no f****** way that photon being can change just because you look at it one way or another. so falsifying this is a big deal. and that's why there's been a 50-year smokescreen surrounding the double slit experiment. that's why they made it in comprehensible to any normal thinking person. and that's why dean raden's double slit experiment was so important. cut through all the b******* and said ok what this is really about is conscious so let me put a meditator in here and see if he can affect the f****** photon beam... and he did... over and over.





funny... I thought you're going to make a connection back to the interior design measurement... cuz I definitely see it.
I love cursing Alex, so please, don't stop cursing man! I mean that sincerely. Also, who the fuck is censoring all the curse words on this forum! Fuck that guy, let language bloom!

OK, as far as measurements go, let me elaborate: it doesn't matter how careful you are or how exact that you try to be, nothing ever turns out to be exactly as it is measured. For a while, I thought I was losing my fucking mind. There are always constant, slight variations that cause the idea to not quite line up with the installation. Construction is the business of finger pointing for sure! The architect has his elaborate visions, called the God of the project, and is somewhat aloof to the designer, yet further removed from the various construction trades. The interior designer is often confused with the interior decorator, but they are two totally different modes of thinking.....such as a sculptor to a painter in some respects. I learned to respect everybody's particular trade; whether architect, interior designer, interior decorator, electrician, tile guy, cabinet guy, countertop guy, flooring guy, painter, etc., but most of these people only see things from their point of view......and see everybody else as an idiot! It is amazing how shit still gets built!

I like the mathematician guy you interviewed concerning discernment, and whether or not we should just be silent forever because that was the language of God. In the interview, he was talking about some philosopher that shut the fuck up for 20 years or something like that. I thought that he was figuratively speaking, but it turned out that this "shut the fuck up and don't say anything guy" actually existed. Also, this mathematician, his name escapes me in this moment, said something on the lines of the following: if we are going to speak, and use language, let us be as precise as possible....and so mathematics is the best format for this.

I agree with him on many levels, but I also think that description through language is just as important as mathematics, and maybe even more so because it allows for imagination.
 
Top