Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Life
»
The Revolution of Consciusness
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
tycho wrote:@symbols, language has more than words. There's also meaning. The words may not be new, but meaning is always created.
So language has both zero sum and non-zero sum elements in constant engagement.
'I am' is the signifier. The Creator of meaning. 'It', is the signified; the zero sum.
That's the only condition for saying, 'correct' and 'not correct'.
Revolution of consciousness is the awareness of the dialectic of 'I am it'. It's the difference between writing now, and our ancestor's drawings on the caves.
And the dialectic between 'I am' and 'It' is the spark of creation. The source of difference and unity. Meaning,like language is already part of the one.There is nothing to create. The signifier,signified,correct,incorrect,'I am' and 'It' are also part of the one. Your meaning is just as valid as mine.If I am part of the one and I say anything goes,anything goes.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
Muriel wrote:What I know is that there can be no liberty of conscience if all conscience, consiousness is all tethered up together into 'one'.
This Call then is a softening-up of minds to come round to an eventual one world government, a government where free thought, free belief and free conscience will be illegal. Fascism with a universal christ. With chains and bonds for the separate.
I am a renegade.
Liberty! It's a delicate balance.Governments are built on moral authority with such concepts like good,bad,right and wrong and religions are the the dominant force in that domain. The way I see it,the idea is to question religion without questioning the morals.Cherry picking.To strip religion of moral authority without entering into moral relativism.If we enter moral relativism,being a renegade is a matter of perspective.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
symbols wrote:tycho wrote:@symbols, language has more than words. There's also meaning. The words may not be new, but meaning is always created.
So language has both zero sum and non-zero sum elements in constant engagement.
'I am' is the signifier. The Creator of meaning. 'It', is the signified; the zero sum.
That's the only condition for saying, 'correct' and 'not correct'.
Revolution of consciousness is the awareness of the dialectic of 'I am it'. It's the difference between writing now, and our ancestor's drawings on the caves.
And the dialectic between 'I am' and 'It' is the spark of creation. The source of difference and unity. Meaning,like language is already part of the one.There is nothing to create. The signifier,signified,correct,incorrect,'I am' and 'It' are also part of the one. Your meaning is just as valid as mine.If I am part of the one and I say anything goes,anything goes. Does your post have any meaning given by any one?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
symbols wrote:Muriel wrote:What I know is that there can be no liberty of conscience if all conscience, consiousness is all tethered up together into 'one'.
This Call then is a softening-up of minds to come round to an eventual one world government, a government where free thought, free belief and free conscience will be illegal. Fascism with a universal christ. With chains and bonds for the separate.
I am a renegade.
Liberty! It's a delicate balance.Governments are built on moral authority with such concepts like good,bad,right and wrong and religions are the the dominant force in that domain. The way I see it,the idea is to question religion without questioning the morals.Cherry picking.To strip religion of moral authority without entering into moral relativism.If we enter moral relativism,being a renegade is a matter of perspective. Is 'cherry picking' also a matter of perspective? Whose perspective? Why that perspective?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
tycho wrote:symbols wrote:tycho wrote:@symbols, language has more than words. There's also meaning. The words may not be new, but meaning is always created.
So language has both zero sum and non-zero sum elements in constant engagement.
'I am' is the signifier. The Creator of meaning. 'It', is the signified; the zero sum.
That's the only condition for saying, 'correct' and 'not correct'.
Revolution of consciousness is the awareness of the dialectic of 'I am it'. It's the difference between writing now, and our ancestor's drawings on the caves.
And the dialectic between 'I am' and 'It' is the spark of creation. The source of difference and unity. Meaning,like language is already part of the one.There is nothing to create. The signifier,signified,correct,incorrect,'I am' and 'It' are also part of the one. Your meaning is just as valid as mine.If I am part of the one and I say anything goes,anything goes. Does your post have any meaning given by any one? By your argument the 'one'.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
symbols wrote:tycho wrote:symbols wrote:tycho wrote:@symbols, language has more than words. There's also meaning. The words may not be new, but meaning is always created.
So language has both zero sum and non-zero sum elements in constant engagement.
'I am' is the signifier. The Creator of meaning. 'It', is the signified; the zero sum.
That's the only condition for saying, 'correct' and 'not correct'.
Revolution of consciousness is the awareness of the dialectic of 'I am it'. It's the difference between writing now, and our ancestor's drawings on the caves.
And the dialectic between 'I am' and 'It' is the spark of creation. The source of difference and unity. Meaning,like language is already part of the one.There is nothing to create. The signifier,signified,correct,incorrect,'I am' and 'It' are also part of the one. Your meaning is just as valid as mine.If I am part of the one and I say anything goes,anything goes. Does your post have any meaning given by any one? By your argument the 'one'. What do you mean?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
tycho wrote:symbols wrote:Muriel wrote:What I know is that there can be no liberty of conscience if all conscience, consiousness is all tethered up together into 'one'.
This Call then is a softening-up of minds to come round to an eventual one world government, a government where free thought, free belief and free conscience will be illegal. Fascism with a universal christ. With chains and bonds for the separate.
I am a renegade.
Liberty! It's a delicate balance.Governments are built on moral authority with such concepts like good,bad,right and wrong and religions are the the dominant force in that domain. The way I see it,the idea is to question religion without questioning the morals.Cherry picking.To strip religion of moral authority without entering into moral relativism.If we enter moral relativism,being a renegade is a matter of perspective. Is 'cherry picking' also a matter of perspective? Whose perspective? Why that perspective? It is a matter of perspective.Like I said, "the way I see it" and I explained the why.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
tycho wrote:symbols wrote:tycho wrote:symbols wrote:tycho wrote:@symbols, language has more than words. There's also meaning. The words may not be new, but meaning is always created.
So language has both zero sum and non-zero sum elements in constant engagement.
'I am' is the signifier. The Creator of meaning. 'It', is the signified; the zero sum.
That's the only condition for saying, 'correct' and 'not correct'.
Revolution of consciousness is the awareness of the dialectic of 'I am it'. It's the difference between writing now, and our ancestor's drawings on the caves.
And the dialectic between 'I am' and 'It' is the spark of creation. The source of difference and unity. Meaning,like language is already part of the one.There is nothing to create. The signifier,signified,correct,incorrect,'I am' and 'It' are also part of the one. Your meaning is just as valid as mine.If I am part of the one and I say anything goes,anything goes. Does your post have any meaning given by any one? By your argument the 'one'. What do you mean? Any meaning is also part of the 'one'.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
True, any meaning is part of the one; but is there any meaning in your post? Or my post?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
symbols wrote:tycho wrote:symbols wrote:Muriel wrote:What I know is that there can be no liberty of conscience if all conscience, consiousness is all tethered up together into 'one'.
This Call then is a softening-up of minds to come round to an eventual one world government, a government where free thought, free belief and free conscience will be illegal. Fascism with a universal christ. With chains and bonds for the separate.
I am a renegade.
Liberty! It's a delicate balance.Governments are built on moral authority with such concepts like good,bad,right and wrong and religions are the the dominant force in that domain. The way I see it,the idea is to question religion without questioning the morals.Cherry picking.To strip religion of moral authority without entering into moral relativism.If we enter moral relativism,being a renegade is a matter of perspective. Is 'cherry picking' also a matter of perspective? Whose perspective? Why that perspective? It is a matter of perspective.Like I said, "the way I see it" and I explained the why. Is Muriel 'I'? What happens to, 'as he sees it'? Is 'his' 'why', your 'why'?
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Life
»
The Revolution of Consciusness
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|