ourselves each creating our own heaven or hell, "
It is a problem in life, not just death.
On Nov 9, 4:06 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You amaze me Neil with your knowledge, showing me just how little I know,
> it also reminds me
> that there really are no new ideas that some one else has not thought of
> before people just rewrite it trying to express it clearer. this
> solipsistsis interesting including the zombie part lol earlier discussion.
>
> maybe it is not as foolish as it might seem, to me and y weird preception
> of things in a way is just that.. As I see the world as just that the
> object is to rejoin the creator (in death or in rebirth or how ever you see
> it,)
>
> On our departing of this world their is and accounting of how we lived,
> responding to our abilities.. when separating from this life there is an
> accounting where we recall our actions of our entire lives.. and also
> once again understand what it takes to be one with the Creator The problem
> will probably come from shame and we will separate ourselves each creating
> our own heaven or hell,
>
> I really have no idea how it happens or just what happens just that
> something happens.. .
>
> Many beliefs have to much similarity.. even my thought are as if they are
> all ready known. To each belongs their own existence. I think the greedy
> will really give themselves a surprise some how I do not think it will be
> pleasant..
> I know weird
> Allan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 9, 2011, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > They intercourse the paradigmatic synergy up paradox junction Allan.
> > K Dick once wrote of a 'group of solipsists' who treated any not in
> > the group as objects of their own mind's creation. I've always
> > thought the aim of materialism is that point where it hardly matters,
> > so we can get on with being spiritual in leisure space created by
> > sharing what work needs doing. Look at the way we could ban Chazwin
> > and so on and you can see 'manners' at work in a corrosive way - they
> > never quite ban poverty do they?
>
> > On Nov 9, 8:02 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Maybe the worst prisons around like the ones use for gangs
> >> but a good idea..
>
> >> oddly though I think if I am right they will have a real surprise coming
> >> at their death especially when they find there is no wealth and the world
> >> they know disappears,, I know it sounds funny they will create their own
> >> hell far beyond what you and I can imagine,,
>
> >> If one is supposed to live a spiritual life.. how does a person justify
> a
> >> life of material gain at the expense of others?
> >> Allan
>
> >> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:01 AM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Many of my scientific colleagues believe the kind of bureaucrats we
> >> > have to suffer deserve long prison sentences - then we'll hang them!
>
> >> > On Nov 8, 8:55 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > to limits moneys access to politics is what is going to have to
> happen,,
> >> > > not allowing corporations involvement at all.. but like the problem
> will
> >> > > be greed and the need for secrecy. the politicians will not like
> having
> >> > > ever word recorded and every word said to them,, and extreme
> penalties
> >> > to
> >> > > violating the rules including prison time for all involved.. and
> loss of
> >> > > all money for family members and relatives especially if the source
> of
> >> > the
> >> > > money is the person violating the laws
>
> >> > > it will not be popular with the 1%
> >> > > Allan
>
> >> > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:11 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > Point 11 has traditionally been the Marxist line. The modern ones
> >> > > > like David Harvey talk of 'surplus capital' chasing ever
> diminishing
> >> > > > rates of return. I see the problem as us not being able to get
> what
> >> > > > we sensibly want, like warm homes without vast energy bills and the
> >> > > > environmental knock on and meaningful engagement as the social
> animals
> >> > > > we are. One of the interesting things at the moment is that there
> are
> >> > > > similarities between the usual right wing hatred of taxation and
> the
> >> > > > extent to which we are all 'taxed' by the rich and their Monopoly
> >> > > > games with money - how much of our work is funneled away by
> financial
> >> > > > services that increasingly look like organised crime or so Bill
> Gates
> >> > > > can 'redistribute on our behalf'?
>
> >> > > > One question has to be the extent to which we may be understanding
> >> > > > what's been going on 'unconsciously' and may be able to respond at
> >> > > > that level. Every test we can do shows that people are not
> appraised
> >> > > > of the facts, but the danger with this is that we then treat
> everyone
> >> > > > as morons for not knowing. I have classes I can teach to pass
> maths
> >> > > > tests at the end of a day's teaching with some in them who can't
> >> > > > remember the basics the following day when I try to push on to what
> >> > > > matters. These same people are often pretty competent at actual
> tasks
> >> > > > involving the maths if I routinise the stuff into software choice.
> >> > > > One can do this with quite complex social reasoning - but 'who
> writes
> >> > > > the software' remains an issue. And at bottom Gabby isn't the
> problem
> >> > > > about trusting anyone to do the planning because we fear they will
> rip
> >> > > > us off or turn 'totalist'? And behind this another fear that we
> can't
> >> > > > do the planning ourselves without creating such monsters?
>
> >> > > > On Nov 7, 7:35 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > Yep, that's where I see IT having accepted their position too.
> >> > > > > the following day
>
> >> > > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > > In point 11 *It *seems the corporations and the people who
> lead
> >> > them
> >> > > > are
> >> > > > > > already social paths
> >> > > > > > Allan
>
> >> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:11 AM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
>
> >> > > > > >> What strikes me on public dialogue is that we get a lot of
> >> > opposing
> >> > > > > >> views put forward that are all based in ideology that can be
> >> > stripped
> >> > > > > ...
>
> >> read more »
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário