by dan Mon May 01, 2017 6:24 am
Last evening, I received the first written 'portal update', in the form of an email from Ron to me, with copies to the other three principals. Contained therein is the first explicit definition of the Portal. In the past I would have simply posted this one paragraph email to the forum, but I will attempt to comply with the new protocol by paraphrasing, where possible.
This definition, the first of its kind, appears to contradict my previous inferences about the nature of the Portal. The only previously stated definition named the portal as a 'pod'. The Princess then implied that an artifact at her 'aunt's' house in Islamabad was a portal. I've referred to this artifact as the Wishing Well.
Ron has reiterated that I not post any more emails. I can, however, post excerpts from the Chronicles, a monthly newsletter chronicling the activities of the Princess. He claims that there was nothing in the email about the Portal that has not been covered previously in the Chronicles. Well, I do attend to the newsletter, but I've never picked up on any such descriptions..... my bad.
The Portal is now described as a living being, and twice the being is mentioned in conjunction with a partner, who is thereby granted the ability to travel in time and space. But this living being might also be considered a product of technology. Hmmm........
Well, Transhumanists, for example, declare that sapience, and whatever degree of consciousness may or may not attend sapience, may be replicated artificially. The above statement appears to adopt this Transhumanist manifesto. I emphatically do not.
Apparently I missed the the Chronicle previously describing the Portal. Apparently Ron missed the memo where I declare that the crux of my entire belief system is Personalism.
With materialism/atomism, atoms are taken to be the be all and end all of existence. With personalism, persons are the be all and end all of existence. Personalism is a specific form of immaterialism or idealism.
The standard definition of the noun 'being' provides three definitions....
1.) existence
2.) the nature or essence of a person
3.) a real or imaginary intelligent creature
Is Ron a Transhumanist? He certainly is a technologist, by profession. In the course of a drone training class for Kashmir Robotics, Ron made a casual reference to a drone as something that thinks. I interrupted, and described the difference between 'weak' and 'strong' AI. He acknowledged, at the time, that he was not espousing strong AI. Has he flip-flopped? We'd better find out.
Jesus invented Personalism, simply by declaring himself to be one with the Creator. In the remainder of the prophetic tradition, Personalism is only implied, at best.
The other traditions, generally speaking, espouse the transmigration of the soul, which is the main belief of animism. As an animist, you do not ontologically distinguished between the taking of human and animal lives, for instance. This belief seems fairly to describe the royal beliefs, especially when it comes to dealing with poachers and other miscreants.
When I discuss eschatology, particularly with Ron, he seems to have embraced the idea of an impending ELE. I emphatically do not.
noon--------
Am I hereby being disloyal.......?
Well then, Ron&Don, I guess you'll just have to fire my ass.
Anyway, we now have a Portal being. This being is described as living. Does the mean it is a biological entity, or could it be an EBE?
For the record, I'm stating that any portal being is necessarily an EBE.
At the same time I'll say that all of us are potential EBE's, but, in practice, we remain biological.
It has been implied that the Princess is a portal person, and the Footmann is her partner who is transported. That's portaldom for dummies.
What then of the pod, the wishing well and the actuators? What then of the RAM and UFO's, etc?
I have often quoted my esteemed source, Rick Doty....... you can't fly the craft without the critter.
Ergo, alien technology is nothing without the aliens, or Aliyah.
And, come to think of it, I'd have to say the same for human technology...... it functions only with humans. Hmmm...... and what about autopilots?
Autopilots function only within the global aegis of 10^10 of us. For instance, our electric devices do not function on the other side, especially given the inferred fact that (our) objects cannot be transported to the other side.
(cont......)
Last edited by dan on Mon May 01, 2017 9:40 am; edited 1 time in total
Yesterday at 8:36 pm by U
» Why are we here?
Sat Nov 23, 2024 7:59 am by dan
» OMF STATE OF THE UNION
Fri Nov 22, 2024 10:22 pm by U
» Disclosure - For U by U
Thu Nov 21, 2024 10:08 pm by U
» The scariest character in all fiction
Thu Nov 21, 2024 6:47 pm by U
» Uanon's Majikal Misery Tour "it's all smiles on the magic school bus"
Sun Nov 10, 2024 9:36 pm by Mr. Janus
» What Music Are You Listening To ?
Sat Nov 09, 2024 12:34 am by U
» Livin Your Best Life
Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:55 am by Post Eschaton Punk
» Baudrillardian hauntology - what are some haunting truths to our reality?
Sun Nov 03, 2024 3:07 pm by dan