Family in a Fishbowl / Princess + 0 / reality show......

First topic message reminder :

Here goes Nothing........

The Princess is barely talking to me, and I seem to be holding her kid hostage.......

I guess they’d better send in the SWAT team.  

Just another typical day in the life of the family..... of any microcosmic family........
----------------------------------------------------------
Links to the BPWH Glossary's 

The first is to a partial glossary......... https://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/t251p700-hello-cy-omf-ii-part-2  

And at the top of the glossary is the link to one of the several original mnemonic pages, grouped around April of 2016........ https://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/t236p425-hello-cy-omf-ii-part-2 . 

Well look who it is.

E the wizard of wonderland!

Dan, please swing by and purchase Greenland for us on your way back!

I don't think Conan was successful ...

Lol.

I love it!

Reminds me of my own mission.

Being a missionary is actually an experience I do not regret one bit.


This from Joe F earlier today.

Call you in 15 min? You will want an update Friend!

But then he never called.

Shrug.

Don't know.

Hey, guess what folks, I’m sitting next to my Mormon wife as she reads aloud from an Alan Watts book of her own free will and choice.

She may be an open minded woman after all.

Hot damn!

Michio Kaku: Is God a Mathematician?

https://youtu.be/UEGx96PMiOo

Is God a mathematician?

Sure, he/she may be when he/she is doing math.

My wife reading that Watts book woke up a part of me that has to die.

Having expectations associated with her reading that or any other book is a trap created by an attachment to a desire for something better.

Expectations are delusions.

Letting go of expectations is painful.

There is a treasure hidden within the pain.

I burn.

The reward for letting go is a deeper peace.

Accepting there is no one to share the "still point of the turning world" with is a challenge until it isn't.

“At the still point of the turning world. Neither flesh nor fleshless; Neither from nor towards; at the still point, there the dance is, But neither arrest nor movement." -TS Elliot

We share with others by the way we live our own lives. When we are at peace ourselves then the aroma from our inner garden can overflow and influence the world around us.

Don't know.

Straight on.

This from the mouth of a goat wizard.

Nothing dies I understand.

We don’t understand life or death really

What lives is the real wonder?!

We sing and make love and laugh and cry, whatever those things are.

What is this life?

I don’t know causes it’s just this.

A pretty wise old goat me thinks.

Don't know, but it smells relaxed.

Some interesting skepticism on hints of religious fascism driving Trumps rise.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/10/world/europe/bannon-vatican-julius-evola-fascism.html?action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&module=Trending&version=Full®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article

https://criticalreflectionsonbuddhistthought.org/2017/02/11/fascist-religiosities/

https://speculativenonbuddhism.com/2017/02/11/buddhofascism-b-alan-wallace-for-instance/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog

I am not a proponent of the correspondence theory of truth. I no longer can say, don’t know, while there is much I don’t and never will know. I have the responsibility to learn what I can and to think clearly, so few can and are.

I find Transcendental Realism intriguing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendental_realism#Stratification_and_emergence

We are not one, but we are connected, is the push back to Oneness implicitly evil?

E
bar gum lad,

Thanks for that link to transcendental realism.

It is strange how water puts out fire even though it's made of hydrogen and oxygen?

In my hobbit land there is another substance that makes them all, they used to call it the aether.

Thanks t'old flower. ( Yorkshire greeting)

Hobbit

“I think Allison means instead that transcendental realism is the implicit assumption that the question of whether space and time exist “in themselves” is a coherent one, because he regards “empirical idealism” as itself a form of transcendental realism, and Kant himself defines empirical idealism as the thesis that space and time are mere illusions. The idea, I take it, is that taking seriously the question do our sensible epistemic conditions (space and time) accurately represent how reality is in itself? involves the mistaken assumption that the notion of how reality “is in itself” independently of how we cognize it (i.e., independently of our epistemic conditions) is a coherent one. This is Allison’s second main characterization of transcendental realism: the assumption that there is a way reality is, independently of a perspective on it (Allison 2004: 48).”

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-transcendental-idealism/supplement2.html

Sorry, E,

I find that Wikipedia article on TR to be murky.  

Why don’t you see if you can explain it in one sentence....... as a starter, is it closer to materialism or immaterialism?  

This not place to discuss random philosophies...... so why do you think we should concern ourselves with TR?
.........

Hey, E,

Who the heck do you think you are to barge in here and hijack the thread??

You are welcome to butt right out again.......

.

I was continuing the convo.

TR is science’s possible step toward the middle.

In other news...watch this creep closely below, he might be more foxy than anyone thinks.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/04/16/why-far-right-nationalists-like-steve-bannon-have-embraced-russian-ideologue/?noredirect=on

https://quillette.com/2018/12/01/steve-bannon-is-wrong-but-not-for-the-reasons-you-think/

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/282373/alt-right-now

Those links are not to any conversation of mine.

You need to make a link back to one of my posts.  

Otherwise you are just butting in.

Well, pardon me kind sir. It is connected to materialism discussion. If you are too dumb to put it together, not my problem. I’m not doing all the work for you. See American Dharma connection to Bannon and Dugin. They are eating your lunches, competing eschatons.

You prob still hold to the quaint view history is the story of God revealing itself, are you still a dualist?

All that eastern stuff is like a Chinese finger trap, the harder you push or pull, the more stuck you get.

You have to relax.

This is about political power over principle, period.

Well, Christ represents something, maybe Bernadette Roberts is one of the few Christians on earth who can feel the swell of the wave.

The rest are sleeping still mostly, like you.

Perhaps Blake can assist with that.

Esti...isness...being.

Remember Parmenides, there is The Way of Being and the The Way of Seeming.

Being or not being, one or the other. So you are being, you cannot think nothing. You cannot close your eyes and think nothing. Try it now. You cannot fail to think. So be something.

Esti does not come into being.

“Nothing comes from nothing.”

Being does not go out of being or perish, it is continually unchanging, the same everywhere.

There can be no time, space or motion, those are all part of the world of seeming.

Objects around us are illusions, as there is just the unchanging Being.

Part of the way of seeming.

The way of truth his argument follows has some problems. You can’t think nothing ok, but you can think about nothing. The sense reference distinction, but Parmenides might say you can think about nothing or things with no corporeal existence. He said you can’t think nothing.

Dan is, he exists here. So being or not being? We think being. To be is used in an existential sense.

The way of truth assumes a logically thinking subject.

If this is true, why does he talk about the way of seeming?

You should learn truth and the opinions of mortals, which you can’t trust, the goddess tells us, the way of seeming is deceitful, because she doesn’t want any mortal mind to outstrip Parmenides. She wants him to be able to hold his own in the world of appearances.

One interpretation is the the world of seeming is false, already ruled out by truth. Seeming allows being and not being where truth says one must choose.

Maybe the way of truth is compatible with this false world of seeming. There can be differentiation within being as long as being can always be. It depends on us to allow an existential to be in a world of predicates appearing in being.

We could rule the above out, and take a monist view, there is just one undifferentiated being, which makes it self refuting.

Why would truth refute itself?

Reason on its own can’t tell us about the world. If reason refutes itself, we have to use sense data. This gives us the way of seeming. The way the world appears to us. Seeming appears to be a paradox, as truth ruled out contradictions. The way of seeming might be illogical. Giving us two ways to know being. Sense data seems to violate reason.

Parmenides says it matters not where he began, he will return there again, being is circular. He taught the first dialectician, Xeno, the first stoic.  He has given us a dilemma, I like this last interpretation best.

Start from where we are and work toward first principles and then start again. No one can just start from first principles. One must rebuild their minds. This is the gift of Parmenides, to learn how to start an argument.

Next up Heraclitus, who despised the Human Race. I like him.

Ok, I will look into Aleksandr Dugin.

Fascist Traditonalists.

But something deeper too.

Against the Modern World: Traditionalism and the Secret Intellectual History of the Twentieth Century

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000YHAWO8/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_U_jHwGDbSGVVJPA

Frankly, Gary,

I’m getting a bit tired of tic tacs.  


E,

Thank you for the reference to Sedgwick.  

That is definitely not my cup of tea.  

But it helps to define what I am not.  

I am definitely not a traditionalist, nor even an anti scientist.  

I have no truck with obscurantism or occultism.

I’m not interested in political systems, per se.  I’m fine with democracy.  

The Truth resides in every one of us.  We just have to give it a chance.  

In short, E, the BPW section is for the discussion of the BPW.  It is not for you or anyone else to start a new topic.  

If you wish to discuss politics, you are welcome to start your own section.  

The BPW is about discussing the Truth.  

Only when you have a handle on Truth, is there any point in worrying about its impact on others.  

Thank for your consideration.  


If the Truth is anything, it must speak to who we are, from whence we come, and wither we go.  

Neither the tic tacs, nor the traditionalists speak to any of that.  

According to the BPW, we are of the Source...... we come from the Source, and return to the Source.  

Otherwise, space and time are fundamentally illusions.

You are welcome to argue for or against this thesis.  

You are not welcome to ignore it.  

This applies especially to E and to Gary.  



(cont.......)

Come from the source...return to the source. You will not be here forever, clouds dissipate. This is the Way of Being, truth baby. Space and time as illusions is what I posted about, all the UFO silliness.

That’s in the ballpark of TR.

If Gary puppet doesn’t know what TR is, he’s not up to speed.

You shouldn’t be talking about the BPW, cause like duh, you already live here, you don’t need to convince anyone. You can’t convince anyone of anything really. You should be watching the Traditionalists if you are into eschatology. You should be watching Dugin, as in, this guy is not it, if you are any kind of eschatologist.

All you do is talk about the BPW. I’m not promoting one view over another. So you don’t agree with Parmenides on the Way of Seeming You, nor I, can do better than Parmenides unless the Goddess blesses you. I guess I can only speak for myself, an irrational seeming.

Truthfully I have nothing to really speak about with someone looking to end the world. You are a kind of Traditionalist actually. I’m done with the lot of you who want to change/reboot the world, change yourselves, this is the land of make believe after all. You can fly like the Tibetans if you wanted to. But one must find their arrow and then merge with the arrow. But such things I suspect are lost to the likes of you.

There once was a Son of Apollo named Abaris the Hyperborean, who flew over to Greece on his golden arrow.

He was a Skywalker.

Good evening or morning or whatever.

Dan, have you given up entirely on disclosure politics? The Navy admits the UAP videos are real and a mystery and more importantly they were never intended for public consumption. Ron has been, quite clearly after all these years, on the "not for public consumption" side of the argument.

According to the BPW, we are of the Source...... we come from the Source, and return to the Source.  

Otherwise, space and time are fundamentally illusions.

You are welcome to argue for or against this thesis.  


As for source, sources and returns, I would substitute source, registration and entropy. But the mystery in this interesting development (for the Navy) is determining and assessing the source of the phenomena now registering across multiple sensors, both human and human made.

Dan suggests what is registering is an artifact of the human source. But what if he is wrong?

Is there being without knowing? Is there knowing beyond being? Is mathematics a funda-Mental knowing beyond materialism and does that mean the BPW is actually Tegmark's Level IV?

Sincerely, your source's Devil's Advocate ...

MV as metaphor

Distinguishing sources and returns ...

... with no obstacles visible to a full understanding of the dance of matter and energy in space and time, what aspect of the world would not be amenable to an analysis by physics, again at least in principle?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0510188.pdf

I believe this quote from the above can be mapped into Dan's argument ...

Let me give an analogy. Imagine a world in which there are no periodic phenomena, and hence no clocks of any type in nature. Someone living in such a world may not easily discover the concept of time, and certainly not a concept of a linearly progressing time, that can be mapped onto a one-dimensional line of real numbers. But it would be wrong to draw the conclusion: no clocks no time, hence clocks produce time. Similarly, it is too simple to say: no brains no experience, hence brains produce experience. Reality may be a lot more subtle.

Gary is claiming that Disclosure has occurred with the Navy’s acknowledgement of its being the source of tic tac videos, and that they are actual gun camera footage of a UAP.  

Ok, I’ll agree with that, and that this admission comes with almost no fanfare....... contrary to almost everyone’s supposition, including my own.  

But, if Disclosure happens with no fanfare, is it still Disclosure?  

Well, the historians will have the final word, but, for now, we’ve all been fooled.  Nothing else has changed.  The world goes on just as before.  

There is no hint of a follow through.  Nobody is asking about the message from the stars....... from out there.  

No one, besides yours truly is suggesting that the actual message is that there is no there, there.  

I’m still the only one claiming that we now have proof of the BPWH.



(cont.......)