₦airaland Forum

DeepSight:
+
Wise, profound and satisfying. Deep. Makes so much sense. If only we could be absolutely sure this is the truth as opposed to something we have made up to satisfy our craving for meaningfulness in a seemingly random and harsh existence.

Because it could still be that this life is just the insane experiment of a cosmic being or beings we can never understand anymore than an ant can understand the internet.

But please take Mother Theresa off that list. Google her issues as described by Christopher Hitchens.

HacheNoire:
You only revealed your class as a Nigerian!

90% of Americans are not better than me in Nigeria! Hard and proven facts!

tctrills:
I
Everyone with their opinions. But I still don't get how your write is an answer or reply to what I wrote. It seems you completely went into another topic please reverse to the old discussion.

tctrills:
Now you are all over the place. You are saying you don't believe the writings of the bible but somehow, you believe Jesus Christ was a great teacher who's teachings benefitted mankind.
It sounds like you are confused to me.
We know that Jesus Christ was a great teacher who's teachings benefitted mankind.from reading the bible. So it's either the stories written are true or not and no matter which, what you wrote doesn't make sense because you are assuming the bible to be true and false at the same time.

DeepSight:
+
My dear triplechoice. Know that I do not ignore your posts. This particular subject is a difficult one and thats why I have tarried in terms of moving it forward even with Reed. I still hope to do so.

triplechoice:
"I have discussed the soul, reincarnation and OBE on this forum., and each time, I have issued a disclaimer that they find no scientific support in the sciences or among mainstream scientists, but does not mean they are not true."

"Not t every truth in the world is scientifically explained. Most people don't know this. The placebo effect, for instance, is used in drug testting and is true , yet it is not scientifically proven. It can be rationally explained to some extent, but not as detailed as scientifically proven truth. Scientists don't know what causes the placebo effect."

"Not being able to put it into words is your own difficulty, not proof it cannot be done. Even Juju, as mysterious as it is , can be rationally explained, how much more the soul, which so many people have directly experienced"

I sense you are hesitant to confidently discuss what you know for fear of being labelled gullible for believing in woo -woo stuff by those who easily dismiss anything not supported by mainstream scientists. This shouldn't be.

If you have a method share it. If you have a direct experience , describe it , and let the evidence speak for itself. Anyone who would dismiss them without examination was never interested in any sincere conversation with you.

KobolanderSegun:
The fact that we can create is proof that we are not programmed. Ai finds it extremely hard to be original ai is trained to copy. Ai at this point in time cannot create anything new.

What is Unconscious cannot create anything because consciousness and awareness are 5 And 6. A man in a coma is Unconscious and he cannot do anything. This goes to show what is Unconscious cannot create Consciousness.

Kalatium:
I had a clean, beautiful timeline in my head when i was a teenager :
Graduate at 20
NYSC at 21
Master’s at 22
Get married by 24 or 25.

Everything was planned like a well-written SOP.
Then Nigeria said, “Relax, I have edits.”

I didn’t even gwt admission early. In my undergraduate days ASUU strike entered like an uninvited guest.
Calendar shifted like NEPA light.
One extra semester became two… then somehow became “just manage it like that.”
Next thing…

I graduated at 27.
At some point, I stopped planning and started observing because in this country, your life plan is just a suggestion. Nigeria is the final editor.

You go draw straight line, life go use biro scatter am .
But here’s the funny part… you still arrive. Just not the way you imagined.
So if your timeline don bend small, calm down.
You’re not behind… you’re just studying in Nigeria.

Still yet to get married

donmik:
But he told you he is not into magic. Or, do you want him associated with magic before you allow him practise his faith?

triplechoice:
A pencil does not choose. It does not have a life. It does not. " decide" anything. The laws of physics hold it together, not sense of self, not memory, not "carved program"

So when you insist that a pencil has an "I" and that it " cooperates". with its existence, you have left the ground where conversation is possible.

/ I have said what I needed to say. I will not follow you further down this path because I know where it leads to

Goodbye

triplechoice:
A pencil does not choose. It does not have a life. It does not. " decide" anything. The laws of physics hold it together, not sense of self, not memory, not "carved program"

So when you insist that a pencil has an "I" and that it " cooperates". with its existence, you have left the ground where conversation is possible.

I have said what I needed to say. I will not follow you further down this path because I know where it leads to

Goodbye

triplechoice:
We are not debating whether all living beings exhibit self -awareness in the same way, or why some seems to express it differently, or even why some hardly ever show it even when they have the capacity to do so.

What we are debating is whether machines have the inherent capacity to exhibit self -awareness at all. I say they don't. .

Ahankara is what gives self -awareness. This faculty is not present in machines. Ahankara is integral to consciousness. It cannot be created in a lab and attached to a machine to make it develop the capacity for self -awareness

Self -awareness is not a matter of degree or expression, it is either present in conscious beings or absent in machines. Your attempt to blur the distinction by talking about variations among living things is irrelevant to the question of whether machines possess any such faculty at all.



The universe is too vast and mysterious for it to be reduced to the mechanical workings of computer system created by humans. What you are arguing is the same as what some argued in the past when they projected the mechanism of the clock onto to the cosmos.

Your attempt to reduce the cosmos to a computer system contradicts the very spiritual truths you claim you respect




Reproduction by living beings to produce their own kind is not the same as manufacturing by humans to mass produce machines that have no consciousness. Insisting they are the same "is a reasoning only you can produce.

Reproduction is not manufacturing. Don't confuse it.


Whether the "I" "does not stop as an idea of self or not". is irrelevant. The question is : Do computers have a sense of self?. Are they aware they exist?. A simple yes or no, not word salad would do



I did not say living beings become self -aware only when they can affirm the metaphor "I am". The metaphor describes the state of being conscious , being aware of ones existence. New born babies are not yet conscious of their own existence, but that does not mean they lack the capacity to develop it later.

Machines do not possess that capacity at all, which is why the can never exhibit self-awareness at any stage
Self-awareness is a matter of demonstration, not affirmation. Stop interpreting literally what is meant to. be a metaphor.


A pencil does not "maintain" its atomic structure. Its atoms are held together by the laws of physics, not by any sense of self. If the pencil had an "I", it would need to be aware of itself, which is not..

You are confusing the passive existence of matter with the active experience of consciousness.




You keep trying to give machines qualities they do not have. They have no mind, no soul, no sense of self. They run programs. That's all

A Mac address is not a soul. It is a label, a static identifier assigned by a manufacturer for network communication. It exist so that routers and switches can send data to the correct device. The device itself does not know it has a Mac address. It does not experience , " I am this device"

Firmware and operating system are not minds or souls. They are programmed instruction. Your phone does not. "wake up and never forgets it's a phone". It powers and runs code. There is no consciousness behind it





You want to blur the lines between simulation and consciousness.

AI replicating the human thinking process is not the same as being conscious that it thinks. An AI is not aware it is thinking nor is it conscious that it exists .


The fundamental basis for self awareness is consciousness. Consciousness , soul, cannot be created and given to machines.

You believe that by assigning a Mac address, ot by writing a firmware, you are conferring the "I am" onto a device. That's like believing that pasting a catalogue number onto a book gives it consciousness
[/b]
I hope you take a moment to reflect on why you need to defend the idea that machines have souls or are self conscious. You are no longer debating but Don quixotiing [/b]

I'm not mocking you. I'm pointing out that this way of thinking is not enlightenment. It is a sign that your mind has become untethered from the basic distinction that make conversation possible, and so the discussion ends here.
Thank you for your time

You are confusing the passive existence of matter with the active experience of consciousness.

A pencil does not "maintain" its atomic structure. Its atoms are held together by the laws of physics, not by any sense of self. If the pencil had an "I", it would need to be aware of itself, which is not..

triplechoice:
You bolded "static identifier" and ",I am" as if they mean the same thing, but they are nott

Since you cannot see the difference let me explain it for you.

Static identifier is a label assigned by a manufacturer while "I am" (Ahankara) is conscious self -awareness of seif.

Static identifier exist as data, not experience while "I am" exist as subjective feeling.

Computers are not aware they have static identifier.. But a being knows it exists

In summary, a static identifier means a computer can be identified by others. It doesn't mean it can identify itself.

For instance , your phone has a. Ip address. That doesn't mean your phone wakes up in the morning and thinks, "I am a phone". It doesn't ponder its existence . You can even change your IP address. But Ahankara is your unique identity which is integral to your being. It cannot be changed anyhow you like.

You have conflated being identified with seif awareness. They are not the same

If you still struggle to see the difference, after reading my clear explanation, then I was correct you have no business debating these topics

You have conflated being identified with seif awareness. They are not the same

triplechoice:
Coming from someone who believes Mac address is equivalent to self -awareness, that is rich.

You think computers and all inanimate objects have consciousness , and proved you cannot distinguish between a static identifier and the experience of ,"I am," .

And now, you want to lecture others about making sense?

The irony is lost in you. Next time don't jump in to debate topics you are incapable of debating.

triplechoice:
Oh. You finally admit you misquoted me ?


Why did you deliberately change my words to misrepresent me and when called out for it, claimed you only carried out syntactic operation for flow and also that the meaning of the original statement did not change?

If the meaning did not change and you knew it wouldn't change after your so-called imaginary syntactic operation, why change it in the first place?
You cannot answer this because you know the meaning changed hence the strange word, "backverting " you invented to make it difficult to disprove you.Now, the latest is "parsing the paragraph" It is a shame

You have spent paragraphs upon paragraphs deflectimg Instead of admitting one simple truth, you were wrong

The ostrich buries its head in the sand. You bury yours in invented words , obfuscation, and false justification. But no matter what you do, the truth has a way of being seen



You have started again. Please can you bring evidence from the thread where I invoked the "gods of Eckankar"? And why would I invoke Eckankar fictitious gods? What for?

I did not invoke Eckankar gods. I was observing that your behaviour reflects on the group you represent. If you say Eckists are "steered towards being themselves", then your behaviour, refusing to admit your mistakes, accusing others wrongly and inventing strange words to justify it , is what "being yourself" looks like, then that says something about what Eckankar produces these days.


Who is the "we" you are referring to here?. No other person on this thread has mentioned the four parts of the mind. You only described three and deliberately omitted the most important one and now want to justify it with a vague "micro -sight" statement, your usual tactics when you don't want to own up to something.

You have projected modem invention, computers onto Eckankar's mythology.


Ignoring "caricature" seeing that it is a "reach" problem and not based on any fundamentals of what I said " , is not different from speaking in tongues. You alone know what you have said there. It is vague.


You are projecting. You don't need to psychoanalyse how my mind works as it won't help you to win the debate. Concentrate on what you have to say. Do that vary well and let the public judge by my response if what you think of me is true. Stop the gaslightimg. That is what I said..

And no, computers have no Ahankara. MAC address and the others don't correspond to it.
.
Arguing that computers have Ahankara proves that you have no clue what it actually is.

MAC address is a static identifier assigned by a manufacturer while Ahankara is what gives animate objects conscious awareness, the sense of "I am"

A computer does not know it exists. it does not wake up and think about its day. It has no subjective experience, no sense of self.

If you think a Mac address is equivalent to self -awareness, you have no business debating these topics. .
.

I understand why a someone like you would defend Eckankar mythology. It is because of what they have made you believe.

It is euphemism to declare that "Eckankar was derived from most, if not all ancient traditions". The reality is this :it was created by Paul Twitchell in the 1960s. He copied from Sikhism, Buddhism, and even Scientology.

The book, "The Making of a spiritual Movement" by David Lane documents this extensively.

"Confession of a God seeker" by Ford Johnson, a former higher initiate of Eckankar who helped to make the group popular all over the world, exposed the truth behind the religion.

But be warned. If you want to read those books, do o so in secret. They are banned books within the group. If any other current member know you have read them or reading them, you would be reported and sanctioned and or even removed from the group.

Twitchell invented a fictional lineage to give his creation credibility. It was heartbreaking and almost affected my mind when I got to know the truth. Not so, for some others around the world. It resulted in suicide and shattered lives. I know of a high initiate in Nigeria who angrily went to the Eck centre in his locality to take back all the items he donated to furnish it. Why? I felt duped after knowing the truth.But I'm a survivor. I survived it. And now, after more than 25 years after, you that found Eckankar on Nairaland, want to tell me what?

Attacking Eckankar fabricated mythology found in books like "The Far country" The Tigers Fangs " and " The Tallons of Time " is not attacking authentic esoteric traditions Twitchell stole from . Those traditions stand on their own. They don't need Eckankar's distortions to validate them

I don't blame those still in Eckankar. I blame the system that traps them, just as I was trapped. But when anyone defends the system's lies, they become part of the problem.


.

You don't understand what "continuum" means. It doesn't mean everything is identical and indistinguishable. It means everything is connected interrelated without fundamental separation.

This is the only response I can afford you for now. It is difficult to make sense of the things you write. The bolded " It's fractal aspect as a Romanesco broccoli" is vague. Too many convuluted statements that is hard to make sense of.

If you edit your comment and send it again, I will reply to it. But for now, no. I can no longer stress myself rereading and rereading. This iis not English. You even used the word " backvert" without putting in quotes . That is you talking to yourself.

.
You murdered science" is not an argument. It is dismissal without substance. If you think I'm wrong about cosmology show me where. Explain how the universe being space-time is incorrect. Provide sources and demonstrate your understanding .

triplechoice:
You have finally revealed your mission on this thread which I already hinted at when you jumped in to misquote me and use it to accuse me of inconsistency.

Now, you have continued from where you stopped after refusing to take responsibility for your wrong accusation of me. I really wonder what you are learning in Eckankar. Eckist are not known to behave the way you do. Too much ego on display.

Listen, I did not say ancient religious texts did not mentioned simulation. Why would they use the word.? I said no authentic esoteric traditions teaches or describe anything that can be compared to how a computer operates. why? . Because what they taught in the past about the creative process, how the world came to be, has not changed

They taught and still teach that the creation of the world was first an inner process before Its manifestation in the outer. The outer is a "reflection" of what went before in the inner.

This same process is what we are here to learn and and master so we become co-creators .

So , what in this can be compared to the universe being a simulation created by advanced beings to trapped souls and harvest them?

I asked you to provide evidence for your claim they were referring to simulation in their own way. What you brought was caricatured version of "As above so below. So below as above" : "Computer up , Computer below" and deliberately omitting Ahankara which exposes everything.

And please don't present Eckankar mythology about the inner world as fact. It's fiction. Everyone knows this ,except members of the group. Even some Eckist are aware but choose to remain silent.

Modified. They teach that the outer universe is not separate from the ones that precedes it. They say there is no inside or outside. Both the inner and outer exist as a continuum. The universe is not an object in space, but time and space itself. Computer simulations , on the other hand, are objects in time and space, created within an existing framework.

This is the difference simulation proponents cannot erase.

So don't believe anyone who tells you the universe is an object created by advanced beings in time and space . They have it backwards.

I carried out a radical research that I am excited to share. I have noted the recursive nature of life and the cosmos. The recursions can not simply be ignored. We must question any theory and even established fact to re-access the truism of such established 'truths'. Even though it was established that Gravity is the reason we are on the surface of the Earth, we should question such established fact which has come to be know as truth.

So dive in deep!

Recursion through out life makes me ponder a lot on the true nature of the cosmos. The Ecosystem is a good example of these recursions, For eg, the Termites are an organized specie, just like humans, they have soldiers, workers, Queen etc akin to Armed Forces, Workers, Kings/Queens etc and they construct this mount which is similar to humans building real estates. If the termites believe we are their God we will never know, and we will never bother to know if they even worship us a Gods.

To make sense of the Universe alignments in Cosmos whether you believe that Earth is Center of the Universe like I now do, or if you believe the Sun is the center of the Solar System, it is equally a reflection of yet another modicum of recursion as Atoms are arranged in similar pattern with Nucleus at the center while electrons moves through their orbit.

Now that you get my drift, shall I begin with the recursion on the digitized platform of spirit.

The Man in the machine will be an analysis of the complex nature of the human body with a piloting mechanism we call Self.

When we read, we consume information in form of data, we store data in the memory, we archive memories in the mind. Yet, these are clearly what CPU components do. Input devices, peripherals, output devices and even the code used in the decryption of the cosmos has been found to exist in the source code of browsers of our WWW.

It begs the question which I intend to answer today, in my way.

Soul OS:
To run a complex machine as the human organism to install a Human Operating System as hypersensitive as SELF you need cosmic kernel. Soul, you might think is one giant 'thing' and you might visualize its form the much you want but you will be surprised that there is possibility that Soul could be as microscopic as things can get. So, whatever your perception might be, do not rule out any possibility for and of its nature.

Self came pre-installed with Soul OS, the interfaces within the brain exist neurotransmitters, the hormones that are chemical messengers that activate enzymes, yet another universe of complex nano tech machines I will be prefer to call nannites. But if Enzymes are catalysts of some sort activated by ingestion food, drinks, smokes etc as well as the environmental factors like pollution, radiations etc, then it is safe the say, that something is controlling the activities of the nannites remotely, using some form of remote controls.

I digressed, but let us return back recursion. The Soul OS came pre-installed, the interfaces are the synapses where neurotransmitters are interfaced with the Biological organism, which means the food we eat, the diets we drink, the smoking we do and all forms of consumption, even of sunlight to the skin, the radiation from the environment are simply CODED instructions given to Self to act a certain way. I repeat, what ever we consume are coded instructions given to the body to act a certain way. Food on the etheric level is a Code input into the Human Body System to act a certain way. Your morphology becomes a reflection of the things you consume, fact. It gets interesting, that Sex Acts activates sex hormones which are also nannites responsibly for the 'sweetness' a by-product of dopemin secretion. This again are transmissions from the neurotransmitters to the brain. And the brain processes the sweetness. Did I digress ? No, the Brain is the Central Processing Unit.

Soul as OS. Brain as Processors of transmission. Information as data. The skin as input device for incoming radiation from the environment. Eyes are input device for information because as we read or look, we are consuming data. Next time you have those teary eyes, the tears gland via its hormones are sending commends to the heat up resistors to secrete tears, akin to the cooling system in our computer systems. Output devices like anus, skin for sweat. The Ear is output device for sound waves just speakers are on the computer system. How can I forget the Mind. The mind is the archive of memory on the ethereal plane, and that is what the Cloud on internet does with the brain holding temporal files that is always in use just something the brain does in humans. These recursion of humans to computer systems is not odd. It is what it is and we must understand that that just like we can code the scripts and write programs and have them installed on the Digital world, we continually on daily basis are exposed to information, and we constantly store these information on our mind, something that we do with Digital world. We must continually understand that from the day we were born, the programming began. From our nannies, to our parents, siblings, extended family, teachers, doctors, nurses, libraries and infact Life. we continue to be received instructions, commands, data, and we continue to act on these informations and ways of life that was taught us by everyone around us. HOW intelligent a machine we are as individuals depend on who our teachers have been, the people we have met, the parents, that raised us and even the scientific community, which is why I ask; WHAT IF WE HAVE BEEN LIED TO ALL ALONG.

If we have been lied to all along the only way I know to solve these issues is de-programming your mind, format your brain and start all over again and that is something amnesia does, and that again is another recursion in the universe. Keep an open mind as I state the direction of my little story.

As above, so it is below; If the solar system is a recursion of the atomic system. If the universe is a recursion of the molecular system. If the organized randomness of the atomic structure is a recursion of the entropy within the universe, what guarantees do we have to believe that we are not part of a Giant Organism of which our Universe is just a microcosm ? As it is above, so it is below. Right ? But what guarantees do we also have to assume that the Giant Organism that our Universe is, is not just macrocosm of a microscopic entity?

I ask this question because we have discovered that there are trillions of microscopic entities we might call pathogens, eg bacteria, fungi, virus etc. These microbes feed on our energies. About probiotcs and antibiotics, Medical science has done substantial work by producing these biotics to manage the activities of these microscopic organisms. But there is a compelling body of work that shows that bacteria feed on our negative energies. Science has found bacteria in the mines they dug in South Africa. The article was titled : THE STRANGE BEAST THAT LIVE IN SOLID ROCK DEEP UNDERGROUND.

bbc(dot)com/earth/story/20151124-meet-the-strange-creatures-that-live-in-solid-rock-deep-underground

Drilling in kilometers into the Earth crust, these bacteria are harder than rock, the are in a state that can not be described as Life/Death for centuries, using carbon dating, we were able to know they live between 3,000 to 12,000 years but I feel the question that they live or die is a function of our consciousness, without consciousness life or death has no meaning. Interestingly, the highest temperature we can expose anything to, does not affect these beasty microbes as they withstand anything including the fall of meteorites through space as they can survive both the heat of the fall and the fall itself. Hahahahahaha

Note that these microbial entities as I will call them feed on energies. So and though you need much energy to survive and your body is about 70% water, just like our planet is 70% water (another recursion), these microbes need 0.5% of water, so they survive on energy, the bacteria survives on energy, especially the negative energy.

My research has taken me to research on the Archons, demons, Djinns, etc and I have compelling evidence that they feed on your negative energy and actually, they engineer the wars, the killings, the hatreds, the fights etc going on in our planet right now ? Some of the voices you hear on your head. Some of those suggestive reminders in your mind, those thoughts of hatred, are remotely projected to you at ethereal by demons, archons, djinns which are basically expressions of spirit. Dont be confused, demons, archons, Soul are expression of consciousness. And the Soul as Operating system, has functionality to allow installation of other apps. Other apps being the suggestive minds, the organic instincts, the reflective signals but the Decision is always on Self to decide on what to act on. Which is WHY you do not punch your mom when the silly voice in your head says you should. We are ruled by something tinier than we can see with our naked eyes.

Our lives can be messed up by these invisible entities. These entities are invisible because they are microscopic in their nature, and of course they are spiritual, after all, everything is a reflection of spirit, even soul.

So when next you think of Soul, dont bother to visualize how it will look like physically, you can’t. To know Soul, you must look into SELF. In looking into Self, I have seen to many things that baffle me so much and I have come to a startling conclusion once again that as we explore our Self we see the recursion of the entire Cosmos, of entire universes. It begs the question, WHY IS IT THAT IN ‘SELF’ WE FIND EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE ? In looking at Life and Self, we find the Universe as recursion of this entity called Self. It therefore means that Astronomy is actually the Study of Ourselves. Each of us is a Universe of its own. The More Selves we become, the more universes come to be.

So, if Self is Universe, and we are all are the Cosmos then, it there fore means that Self is the Conscious flow of spirit projected into VOID from the Source Field.

My advise, take charge of your mind, some auto-suggestions come from negative entities, master your mind, master your soul, fear no fear transmission of demons at night, these are microbes, Bleep with them when you can, after all. If you as Self can master your Soul, then you are the entity in charge of your soul. So, Self is Entity that governs its Universe. When you look out there, you might be looking inside of yourself. As above, so within. We are a Universe, each of us. Self, is the entity that governs its universe. We are God over our respective Universe.

It is a Hologram. When you die here, your universe has been recycle via the blackhole and Self is projected to alternate Universe where life continues. That is why you jet towards a tunnel as photon during Soul Travel.

Its a Hologram.

triplechoice:
This is all noise and a deflection.

You are projecting modem technology onto authentic esoteric teachings and then claiming they support simulation.

What you describe up there about the soul is a distortion of the truth. The pulmonary system in your body moves air. A bellows moves air. Does that then mean your lungs are belows? Of course not. They perform a similar function though entirely different means.

Manas processes information through consciousness while computer through its hardware. Chitta holds impressions as a field of awareness while computer through storage/memory. Finally ,Buddhi, makes decisions through direct intuition while computer through CPU and Algorithms.

These are not the same. A field of awareness is not a hard drive. Intuition is not algorithm. Stop conflating them to prove that the world is a fake code. Eckankar has not taught you that. It's "all in your head ". lol

triplechoice:
You're not the only person I copied.. I also copied Lordreed. The reply was meant for Deepsight not you. The statement " you and Kayouzka" was directed to him, but you took it personally as if it was meant for you. Please go back to see for yourself that I quoted Deepsight to reply him.

'Now demonstrate your "backverting" and bring evidence for your syntactic operation for flow you did. Don't use this as an excuse.

It is normal here to copy others whom you want to read your post. Copying you is not the same as quoting you directly.

You should know the difference. By responding the way you did you created confusion. Any person new here would conclude you are the same as him.

I'm not saying you cannot reply . You can. But don't hold brief for him for answers I demanded from him. I wanted to be sure where he stand on the matter hence the personal question directed at him " what does he believe , not what you believe or know

And what do you mean "I see as your brain works?

Instead of you to defend what you wrote, you want to condescend.

triplechoice:
Please ,I was addressing Deepsight, not you , when I said "you and Kayouzka struggle to answer Lordreed's question" . I want to know where exactly he stands on the matter, I already know your position, but his, I'm not sure of. So please don't react to that part as if you're him or holding up for him.

And there is nothing wrong in asking "how do you know" . The question is the foundation of all genuine inquiry. It is the use of ones critical faculty, not the same as the skeptic's dismissive, "It's in your head" used to brush aside spiritual experiences

Authentic spiritual traditions welcome this question. They don't run away from it. They usually like to respond with , Here's the method. Practice it and verify it yourself ".

As for my hidden posts, what they contained was me demanding that you provide proof of the "syntactic operation " you claimed to have carried out for flow. No such operation exists. Syntax is word arrangement, not word modification, which you actually did

You also claimed the meaning didn't change after your so-called syntactic flow". How can that be ? It was illusion you threw at me there. . And you then invented the strange word "backverting" , which is not found in any dictionary, as your supposed proof. So I requested that you demonstrate this "backverting" and let everyone see if what you claimed is true. But my reply was hidden each time hence my suspicion you weaponised the report button, because the original statement itself needed no fixing. It was perfect. I'm certain you can't defend what you claim or demonstrate your "backverting

Now , look at the difficult to read explanation you gave in this response of yours. Why not edit it for syntactic flow since you claim to be so good at it. writing in such a convuluted manner together with the strange words you invent and use, shows lack of respect for your readers


Please provide proof, not your personal interpretation of spiritual metaphors.

I said exactly that no authentic esoteric traditions teaches simulation. If you claim otherwise, bring the evidence, Specific quotes , Clear teachings. Not vague references. Not your reinterpretation of ancient words through modern technological lens. Like claiming that since the ancients mentioned small particles in their writings, they were actually referring to atoms.

That they ,"all teach it without exception" is your own personal conclusion, not evidence . What reliable source or sources can you provide for corroboration?



You are projecting modem technology onto authentic esoteric teachings and then claiming they support simulation.

What you describe up there about the soul is a distortion of the truth. The pulmonary system in your body moves air. A bellows moves air. Does that then mean your lungs are belows? Of course not. They perform a similar function though entirely different means.

Manas processes information through consciousness while computer through its hardware. Chitta holds impressions as a field of awareness while computer through storage/memory. Finally ,Buddhi, makes decisions through direct intuition while computer through CPU and Algorithms.
These are not the same. A field of awareness is not a hard drive. Intuition is not algorithm. Stop conflating them to prove that the world is a fake code. Eckankar has not taught you that. It's "all in your head ". lol



I'm sure you have another Jesus in mind that you are taking seriously, not the one in the Bible. Jesus said:

"Be sober minded, be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion seeking someone to devour"

I

This is a warning about spiritual vigilance, about staying aware of temptation and moral weakness. It is a metaphor about the dangers of staying from righteous living.

It is not a scientific description of invisible beings harvesting emotional energy from humans. You have taken a spiritual metaphor and literalsed it into fear mongering. No one can harvest your "loosh" without your permission ". Yes, nothing can happen to you without your permission". The truth as its taught within true paths is that there are more benevolent beings everywhere doing everything to help souls come to the realisation of its true nature. And what is soul? If you really know what it is , you would stop this fear mongering.

And where did I say ritualist are stupid?. I never did. I asked Deepsight whether he subscribed to the simulation mythology. I didn't comment on the intelligence of ritualist. You invented that to create an argument I never made.

This is what you do repeatedly. You strawman my comments, then argue against what you wish I had said instead of what I actually said


Finally, I never argued that "loosh" or anything like it doesn't exist. I asked him whether he subscribe to the simulation mythology, the narrative that advanced beings invaded our world in the past, trapped souls, wiped their memories, and since then have been harvesting their emotional energy..

That is a very specific set of claims, but you have now spent paragraphs upon paragraphs to make loosh sound scientific, EEG, DNA experiments , " emotional vectors". "octave harmonics", while completely avoiding the main question. Does Deepsight believe this or not?

You are not Deepsight, so stop answering for him. You are free to respond to what I have said but allow him to answer for himself question that I directed to him personally..

I will respond later to your own reply
.

triplechoice:
And this is why you and Kayouzka. struggle to answer Lordreed's question:: "How do you know?. You have no direct experience of the reality you describe. To your credit, you're honest about this. Others pretend otherwise.

But please make clear your position on this topic. I think you're being ambivalent about it. If you're not strictly advancing simulation like the others, state clearly what you believe. Currently, I assume you have embraced not just simulation but also the surrounding mythology of advanced beings, trapped souls and , "loosh " harvesting. This is exactly why I said no authentic esoteric traditions teaches simulation .

DeepSight:
+
Powerful response. The red-bold particularly resonates with me and I WILL recommend it to LordReed, even if I know it will have no traction with him.

triplechoice:
I will come back later to answer your reply up there, but in the meantime, please do me this favour, which will benefit you too..

My replies to Chieveboy are being hidden despite containing no violations of forum rules. I suspect he has weaponised the report button to trigger auto-moderation for obvious reasons: he cannot defend his position and admit he deliberately edited my comments to misrepresent me.

So please ask him this on my behalf;?

If he claims to be saying the same thing being discussed here, that authentic esoteric traditions teach simulation, then why does he place the words "computer" and "simulation" in quotation marks every time he reference the idea?

This question is part of what my hidden replies contained. I ask him directly but my posts keeps disappearing .

Putting words in quotes like that signals that he is not taking them literally. It means he has a different understanding, one that he won't openly state because he wants to appear in agreement with you while actually holding a different position.

I know what Eckankar teaches concerning the nature of this world because I was once part of the group. They teach that the world was created by Divine spirit as a training ground for souls to attain spiritual maturity and eventually become a co-worker with God. Nothing in their teaching says the world is a computer simulation created by advanced beings


Does he believe this world is literally computer simulation or does he mean something else? And if something else what is it?

I cannot ask him directly myself because my replies are hidden. But perhaps you can.

Thank you.

triplechoice:
No. I won't accept that the above "might be a topic for another day". I see clearly what you did there, and want to address it before we talk about "this science in your own words" .

As you were "watching" from "afar" , the difficulty you thought you observed was not from me . It was from your own inability to comprehend what I commented on, "logically sound and rationally consistent", and my statement that "it's not proof of anything". Yes, that's correct. It isn't.

The exact words are, "rationally consistent". Not your edited version, "rational consistency", which you modified to suit your agenda.

You deliberately, or let me say, innocently, edited, "rationally" in the phrase to " rational" and then placed it side by side with my past comment from another thread where I defined "scientifically proven" as a "rational explanation" of phenomena. Your goal was to imply I contradicted myself and don't know what I'm saying.

But "rationally consistent" and "rational explanation" are not the same grammatical structure with the same function.

"Rationally consistent" is an adjective phrase telling us what kind of argument it is. It is one that is logically sound or one that follows the rules of logic. That's all. It says nothing about whether the argument corresponds to reality. Logic alone is not truth. It is also not evidence. An argument can follow the rules of logic perfectly but still completely false if it is built on a false premise.

"Rational explanation" , on the other hand, s a noun phrase. It answers the question: What kind of explanation is this?. Answer: One that is both logical and grounded in evidence. In scientific terms, that is what it truly refers to.



Your other mistake is that you interpreted "rational explanation" the same way creationist misinterprete the word, "theory" in science . And then argue ignorantly that " theory of evolution" is "just a theory, "just an idea", not proven. But they don't know that in science, a "theory" is a well-tested explanation supported by overwhelming evidence.

So when you quote my definition of "rational explanation" and try to apply it to Bostrom's argument, you're making the same mistake as someone who quotes the dictionary definition of "theory" and applies it to evolution. Context matters a lot. Scientific terms have specific meanings. You can't strip them of those meanings and then claim contradiction.


Bostrom's simulation argument is "rationally consistent", and "logically sound". But it is not a rational explanation of reality, because it lacks evidence. It offers no testable predictions, no observable phenomena, no method of verification. In fact, Bostrom himself in his 2009 paper, explicitly states, "I do not argue that we should believe that we are in a simulation. In fact, I believe that we are probably not simulated" So even the creator of the argument disagrees with how people are using it.

I did not contradict myself or had "difficulty" with anything. Just a distinction you missed, and now a grammar lesson you didn't expect. I will address the other points you raised later. But please address this first.

Steep:
When you steal, lie, fornicate etc it means you are under the grip of sin and hence a slave of sin. Your awakening is actually a delusion, a false knowledge.
For your awakening to say you are not separate from the source (God) shows you are calling yourself God.
Your rejection of the truth shows you belong to the devil.

John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Your Awakening is coming from Satan the first rebel. You are a Satanist even though you deny it.
You rebel against God's word and equate yourself with him.

Jesus was not a man who became God, Jesus is God himself who took upon himself human body. Jesus proved his divinity by living a sinless life and overcoming death by his resurrection and by his exaltation by the Father that at the name of Jesus all creation should bow.
You are just a wretched sinful human like every other human being.

OgaTheTop2:
Nigeria should just divide. That's the solution for everyone. But, you se that Lord Luggard...

Kalulu44:
Why don't you leave that for the various regions to worry about