Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Life
»
The Revolution of Consciusness
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Tycho. Consciousness is not shared because there is availability of diversity of opinion, belief, orientation, attitude, and thought. All these divisions are incompatible and mutually exclusive with a singular universal consciousness. That a single unit of consciousness can transit from one division to another yes even extremes is not indicative of continuity of consciousness but rather the possibility of divergence. Separateneness. Diversity doesn't necessarily mean lack of a shared domain. Look at bees, ants, swarms. The shared domain is the earth, the world. The bees are the humans, the people. They are many, individual, separate. There is not one bee. There is not one consciousness. Of course there's one bee @Muriel. How do you know 'it' is a 'bee'?
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 7/3/2007 Posts: 1,635
|
Muriel wrote:Wakanyugi 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! @Muriel: How would you react if I told you that at least 60% of the things you do, think or believe are controlled by someone else? Yet this is a fact and you can prove it by simply examining your thoughts and therefore actions, over a period of time. Society has invented powerful institutions to ensure this 'facisim' as you call it. They are called religion, government, media, advertising, family, peer groups etc, etc. Even at the most basic level, the autonomy you insist on is a myth. Control - is such a big word. Weighty word. Important word. Perhaps there is confusion of "influence" with "control". For example, your response "influenced" me to write this. You may see it as you "controlled" me to write this (a point requires a rebuttal) through the "action and reaction" but I could have chosen not to respond and how good could the "control" be? Choice. Freedom. Liberty. Autonomy. Even murder. Nothing stops me from coming to you and planting a knife deep in your chest after I have found you. Not my brothers, not pastor, not imam, not president not even capital punishment. I can if I want to. But I choose not to. But others have done it to others. "Control" over them obviously failed. Their "automomy" overrode the "control". Hence "control" is not the word for it is not fulfilled - as it means. "Influence" is more appropriate. I agree. Although the line between influence and coercion is often very thin indeed. But the point is there is almost nothing we do that is not 'influenced.' Even you planting a knife in my chest, I would have to be a co participant in that drama for it to happen. Autonomy, freedom, self control...is a myth. "The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Tycho. Consciousness is not shared because there is availability of diversity of opinion, belief, orientation, attitude, and thought. All these divisions are incompatible and mutually exclusive with a singular universal consciousness. That a single unit of consciousness can transit from one division to another yes even extremes is not indicative of continuity of consciousness but rather the possibility of divergence. Separateneness. Diversity doesn't necessarily mean lack of a shared domain. Look at bees, ants, swarms. The shared domain is the earth, the world. The bees are the humans, the people. They are many, individual, separate. There is not one bee. There is not one consciousness. Of course there's one bee @Muriel. How do you know 'it' is a 'bee'? Because "it" looks like another bee. I have compared "it" to another bee. So there is more than "one" bee. Separate.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Wakanyugi wrote:tycho wrote:Rock, plastic chair, marbles, humans, robots, corpses, . . . all things are alive, and intelligent. That's the new world order.
The Revolution of consciousness. The demand for a new answer; what's the meaning of humanity? Tycho, don't you think we shall need a new language then to describe this 'new' world order. What does it mean to be alive...do we accord chairs, rocks and marbles the same regard as we would humans and animals? Do all these living things have feelings? Where would morality fit here, if at all? Is it moral to sit on a chair knowing that it is alive? A new world implies a new being. A new being, a new language and definitely a new moral order. Firstly, it's a transformation of human psychology to 'Superman' psychology. God psychology. The chair is made intelligent, and a relationship of mutuality be established. It's a world of cybernetic interelation intensified across the universe.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
Wakanyugi wrote:Muriel wrote:Wakanyugi 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! @Muriel: How would you react if I told you that at least 60% of the things you do, think or believe are controlled by someone else? Yet this is a fact and you can prove it by simply examining your thoughts and therefore actions, over a period of time. Society has invented powerful institutions to ensure this 'facisim' as you call it. They are called religion, government, media, advertising, family, peer groups etc, etc. Even at the most basic level, the autonomy you insist on is a myth. Control - is such a big word. Weighty word. Important word. Perhaps there is confusion of "influence" with "control". For example, your response "influenced" me to write this. You may see it as you "controlled" me to write this (a point requires a rebuttal) through the "action and reaction" but I could have chosen not to respond and how good could the "control" be? Choice. Freedom. Liberty. Autonomy. Even murder. Nothing stops me from coming to you and planting a knife deep in your chest after I have found you. Not my brothers, not pastor, not imam, not president not even capital punishment. I can if I want to. But I choose not to. But others have done it to others. "Control" over them obviously failed. Their "automomy" overrode the "control". Hence "control" is not the word for it is not fulfilled - as it means. "Influence" is more appropriate. I agree. Although the line between influence and coercion is often very thin indeed. But the point is there is almost nothing we do that is not 'influenced.' Even you planting a knife in my chest, I would have to be a co participant in that drama for it to happen. Autonomy, freedom, self control...is a myth. I agree. They are a myth - nowadays. I in the "shadows" too am a myth. A renegade. Fugitive from the all seeing eye of oneness. Mist. Free. Unbound. Separate.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Tycho. Consciousness is not shared because there is availability of diversity of opinion, belief, orientation, attitude, and thought. All these divisions are incompatible and mutually exclusive with a singular universal consciousness. That a single unit of consciousness can transit from one division to another yes even extremes is not indicative of continuity of consciousness but rather the possibility of divergence. Separateneness. Diversity doesn't necessarily mean lack of a shared domain. Look at bees, ants, swarms. The shared domain is the earth, the world. The bees are the humans, the people. They are many, individual, separate. There is not one bee. There is not one consciousness. Of course there's one bee @Muriel. How do you know 'it' is a 'bee'? Because "it" looks like another bee. I have compared "it" to another bee. So there is more than "one" bee. Separate. Another bee? How do you know that's another bee? Why isn't it something resembling a bee?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
How do you know that's another bee?
Knowledge through observation. Through comparison. Science.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:Wakanyugi wrote:Muriel wrote:Wakanyugi 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! @Muriel: How would you react if I told you that at least 60% of the things you do, think or believe are controlled by someone else? Yet this is a fact and you can prove it by simply examining your thoughts and therefore actions, over a period of time. Society has invented powerful institutions to ensure this 'facisim' as you call it. They are called religion, government, media, advertising, family, peer groups etc, etc. Even at the most basic level, the autonomy you insist on is a myth. Control - is such a big word. Weighty word. Important word. Perhaps there is confusion of "influence" with "control". For example, your response "influenced" me to write this. You may see it as you "controlled" me to write this (a point requires a rebuttal) through the "action and reaction" but I could have chosen not to respond and how good could the "control" be? Choice. Freedom. Liberty. Autonomy. Even murder. Nothing stops me from coming to you and planting a knife deep in your chest after I have found you. Not my brothers, not pastor, not imam, not president not even capital punishment. I can if I want to. But I choose not to. But others have done it to others. "Control" over them obviously failed. Their "automomy" overrode the "control". Hence "control" is not the word for it is not fulfilled - as it means. "Influence" is more appropriate. I agree. Although the line between influence and coercion is often very thin indeed. But the point is there is almost nothing we do that is not 'influenced.' Even you planting a knife in my chest, I would have to be a co participant in that drama for it to happen. Autonomy, freedom, self control...is a myth. I agree. They are a myth - nowadays. I in the "shadows" too am a myth. A renegade. Fugitive from the all seeing eye of oneness. Mist. Free. Unbound. Separate. Control and influence are one. Not posting is part of control. The control is the Identity.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
Wakanyugi 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. I don't see how we can avoid questioning morals. I believe we have become comfortable in questioning religion and thus tend to equate this with morals. But morals (having to do with right and wrong) affect even the non religious. To me the big question is the morality of human existence. We are rapidly approaching a point where the existence of the human species will terminally threaten all life on Earth. Is it not more moral then that humans should cease to exist rather than that Earth be destroyed? No it isn't but if all humans are destroyers it is.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:
How do you know that's another bee?
Knowledge through observation. Through comparison. Science.
And so, scientifically you'd compare the observed specimen to a general template derived from observation?
|
|
|
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.
|