Re: Mind's Eye Re: Matter

Yo Alan,

 

I'm always up for game, any kinda game really. 

 

 

 

 

On Friday, 17 August 2012 12:49:21 UTC+1, Allan Heretic wrote:

The truth is I really don't know Gabby,,  every time I come up with an original 'new' idea  later I find that some one had the thought earlier.. I am sure there are new ideas out there but as for me they are probably beyond my mental grasp. What I have observed though is kicking old ideas around. Twisting and turning them to examine them from all angles in an effort to clarify and understand what has been said or understand the concept of a principal..

Probably the closest I have ever come to a new idea and concept is the 'Bartonian theory' which by my current evolution of thought it in reality is full of shit.. Now that is not necessarily true because if you only view it by what is our universe, still holds validity.  but the moment it is viewed in context with the Entirety the concept is really full of shit.

The root system concept is maybe a pretty good analysis,,  with many different concepts and ideas contributing to a new idea or ideas.  it is all from the point of view.  I am quite sure I know where the next big scientific break through is coming from , mainly because may people are saying "I don't know" and are looking at the subject..

mean while who is in for a good game of idea ball?

Allan

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:37 AM, gabbydott <gabb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Maybe I misunderstood, but how can you learn new ideas? You can be
taught to follow new ideologies, you can come up with new ideas, you
can appreciate someone's new idea and further develop it, but how do
you learn new ideas? And what is an instinct if it can be overridden
by intellect? Do we not learn to control our impulses? Please, help
me.

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:48 AM, rigsy03 <rig...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> That's risk and growth, isn't it? But why would you open your heart to
> someone you didn't like? New ideas sometimes have to be learned. Not
> sure about the last one because there could be a very good reason your
> intellect cautions your instincts.
>
> On Aug 16, 2:41 pm, andrew vecsey <andrewvec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That might be right for opening your hand. What about opening up your heart
>> to someone you don`t particularly like, or opening your head to some
>> thought you don`t like or to new ideas that are strange to you you don`t ?
>> Or listening to your instincts and acting on them despite your intellect
>> telling you not to.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, August 16, 2012 5:33:37 PM UTC+2, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> > All conscious thought processes and deliberations are the
>> > manifestation of chemical activity in the physical brain , it is the
>> > neural activity in the brain which appear as the will with its
>> > consequent deliberations. I deliberate whether to open my hand or not
>> > and ultimately choose the one , but all this process is preceded by
>> > neural activity and the conscious deliberations and act are just the
>> > manifestation of this. So ultimately I am bound by myself according to
>> > my nature.
>>
>> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 7:07 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com <javascript:>>
>> > wrote:
>> > > I am feeling thirsty and I can choose to quench my thirst or delay it
>> > > for some time , but why do I choose one and not the other ---simple, I
>> > > have to follow God's will as if it was my choice i.e. free choice.
>>
>> > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Lee Douglas <leerev...@gmail.com<javascript:>>
>> > wrote:
>> > >> Indeed!  Or I am thirsty and choose to get a drink later, or it is time
>> > for
>> > >> lunch but I choose to finish composing this one email before I choose
>> > to go
>> > >> eat.
>>
>> > >> On Tuesday, 14 August 2012 12:48:05 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> > >>> I feel thirsty and go and take a glass of water , it is time for lunch
>> > >>> and I go and have it --- this is freedom of choice ,consciously
>> > >>> knowing and acting out the act.
>>
>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Lee Douglas <leerev...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >>> > You speak as if we had no choice, and that we simply obey the
>> > programing
>> > >>> > of
>> > >>> > our bodies.
>>
>> > >>> > I do get what you mean, I disagree, I think you wrong.
>>
>> > >>> > We are again just going around in circles you and I RP, we must
>> > endevour
>> > >>> > to
>> > >>> > brake it.
>>
>> > >>> > So in an attempt at just that let me try it this way.
>>
>> > >>> > Let us stick to the machine analogy.
>>
>> > >>> > If we humans are simply biological machines, what machine are we
>> > akin
>> > >>> > to?
>>
>> > >>> > Clockwork?
>>
>> > >>> > With a clock work device you have not many veriables, and things
>> > must be
>> > >>> > wound up in order for the machin to work, a period of winding,
>> > working
>> > >>> > and
>> > >>> > winding again must occour for the mahcine to work.
>> > >>> > So unlike a clockwork machine then.
>>
>> > >>> > Electirical.
>> > >>> > In an electrical machine you need power source, and input settings
>> > for
>> > >>> > an
>> > >>> > external force to imput commands, or changes.
>> > >>> > So not unlike but not too similar to electric machines then.
>>
>> > >>> > Compturised machines.
>> > >>> > The heart and soul of the computerised machine is the cpu, the
>> > memory
>> > >>> > and
>> > >>> > the programing.
>> > >>> > So maybe we are more akin to the computerised machine that the other
>> > >>> > two?
>>
>> > >>> > Or may be a little of each?
>>
>> > >>> > We can say that the human machine is a self diagnosing, self
>> > reparing
>> > >>> > machine.  But all of this is down to the programing.  We have some
>> > at
>> > >>> > birth,
>> > >>> > let us call this predisposition, but the majority of it is picked up
>> > as
>> > >>> > we
>> > >>> > grow in a particular enviroment, but the more complex the machine
>> > the
>> > >>> > more
>> > >>> > complex the programing needs to be.  As we are constantly adding to
>> > our
>> > >>> > programing via external enviromental influences, there needs be a
>> > way to
>> > >>> > sort the dross from the gold.  Indeed there is, our programing over
>> > the
>> > >>> > eons
>> > >>> > has developed a 'conciousness'.  This conciousness is what we use to
>> > >>> > sotrt
>> > >>> > and refine our programing, and conciouness being what it is, is
>> > capable
>> > >>> > deciding from distinct and differant possibilites, this ability then
>> > is
>> > >>> > freedom of choice.  Our conciouness uses many tools in which to do
>> > this,
>> > >>> > morality and will amongst them, and of course it also takes note of
>> > any
>> > >>> > predispositions.
>>
>> > >>> > We may be machines but we are conciouse, and it is this in which we
>> > find
>> > >>> > our
>> > >>> > Self's burried.
>>
>> > >>> > On Tuesday, 14 August 2012 11:46:19 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> > >>> >> What you think and do is you as a organism that is responsible ,
>> > but
>> > >>> >> you the organism are made of matter and it is from matter that all
>> > >>> >> enterprise arise , as such all your actions arise from the working
>> > of
>> > >>> >> your body and brain which also reacts to the outside environment.
>> > >>> >> Through CBT it is the organism which is repairing itself and you
>> > are
>> > >>> >> the puppet in the hands of this material body. You are the Front
>> > but
>> > >>> >> are made to feel that you are all in all.
>> > >>> >> Thoughts and actions arise from bio-chemical activity and the self
>> > is
>> > >>> >> under the impression that he is free.
>>
>> > >>> >> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Lee Douglas <leerev...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >> wrote:
>> > >>> >> > Okay there are two points on this.
>>
>> > >>> >> > Yes of course genetic predisposition exists, but you make a
>> > mistake
>> > >>> >> > when
>> > >>> >> > you
>> > >>> >> > claim the strengh of it.  It could be that a man is predisposed
>> > to
>> > >>> >> > cancer.
>> > >>> >> > What this means is it is more likely that as he gets older his
>> > chance
>> > >>> >> > of
>> > >>> >> > some cells becomeing cancerous is higher then the man who has no
>> > >>> >> > genetic
>> > >>> >> > predisposition towards cancer; what it is not, is a 100%
>> > garentee.
>>
>> > >>> >> > In a similar vein it may be that I am predisposed towards my
>> > choice
>> > >>> >> > in
>> > >>> >> > child
>> > >>> >> > rearing, but this is not a garentee that I will never smack my
>> > child.
>> > >>> >> > Genetic predisposition, not genetic garentee.
>>
>> > >>> >> > Secondly.
>>
>> > >>> >> > Yes all thought arises as a concequences of the mechanics of the
>> > >>> >> > brain,
>> > >>> >> > how
>> > >>> >> > can it be otherwise.  Yet what CBT does and meditaion and a hell
>> > of a
>> > >>> >> > lot of
>> > >>> >> > mind exsercises is to elicit a physical change within the brain
>> > to
>> > >>> >> > complete
>> > >>> >> > a physcolgical change.  You have a circular effect happing.
>> >  Thought
>> > >>> >> > is
>> > >>> >> > made
>> > >>> >> > by the mechanics of the brain, we know that damage to the brain
>> > >>> >> > causes
>> > >>> >> > changes to the pyscology of the human.  Yet the tought 'I wish to
>> > >>> >> > change'
>> > >>> >> > can make a physical change to the brain.  Change to will in
>> > >>> >> > accordance
>> > >>> >> > with
>> > >>> >> > will.
>>
>> > >>> >> > On Monday, 13 August 2012 17:12:33 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> > >>> >> >> Whatever we think and whatever we do arises as a consequence of
>> > >>> >> >> neural
>> > >>> >> >> activity which precede the thought processes or rather the
>> > thought
>> > >>> >> >> processes are a projection of this activity. When we are offered
>> > >>> >> >> psycho-therapy our brain reacts to it first and the thought
>> > process
>> > >>> >> >> is
>> > >>> >> >> just the consequence , the efforts we make are a result of brain
>> > >>> >> >> activity which precede  them.  What are we without our genes ?
>> > just
>> > >>> >> >> nothing!  What are we without the universe ? again nothing !
>> > >>> >> >> Predisposition is just that, an inclination, without which there
>> > is
>> > >>> >> >> no
>> > >>> >> >> beginning. You have to start from somewhere and you don't do
>> > that
>> > >>> >> >> from
>> > >>> >> >> scratch , you have your predisposition.
>>
>> > >>> >> >> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Lee Douglas <
>> > leerev...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >> >> wrote:
>> > >>> >> >> > Sorry RP, I have to call bullshit on this as you know I would.
>>
>> > >>> >> >> > You talk about genetic predisposition and envirmental learning
>> > as
>> > >>> >> >> > if
>> > >>> >> >> > these
>> > >>> >> >> > are rock solid.  Let us for just a second remember the power
>> > of
>> > >>> >> >> > words
>> > >>> >> >> > and
>> > >>> >> >> > say that a predispostion is exaclty that, not a hard solid
>> > rule
>> > >>> >> >> > and
>> > >>> >> >> > learnt
>> > >>> >> >> > behavour can of course be unlearnt.
>>
>> > >>> >> >> > When a man goes to a mind doctor for reasons of what ever
>> > meantl
>> > >>> >> >> > health
>> > >>> >> >> > problems plauge him, he may be offerd CBT as an aid to getting
>> > his
>> > >>> >> >> > head
>> > >>> >> >> > back
>> > >>> >> >> > in order.  How is it that these technichs work if we are
>> > really
>> > >>> >> >> > all
>> > >>> >> >> > fully
>> > >>> >> >> > bound and fetterd by our genes and our enviroment?
>>
>> > >>> >> >> > On Monday, 13 August 2012 11:54:12 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> > >>> >> >> >> What I would do is limited to my nature and as Lee and I are
>> > made
>> > >>> >> >> >> up
>> > >>> >> >> >> differently his choice would be different , but  that would
>> > be in
>> > >>> >> >> >> line
>> > >>> >> >> >> with the choice towards which he is genetically predisposed
>> > or
>> > >>> >> >> >> environmentally learned. What I mean is that will is a
>> > >>> >> >> >> consequence
>> > >>> >> >> >> of
>> > >>> >> >> >> thought processes which end up in making a choice.
>>
>> > >>> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 3:22 PM, AmandaRheen
>> > >>> >> >> >> <Machiav...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> > >>> >> >> >> > What I understand you to be saying is merely that free will
>> > is
>> > >>> >> >> >> > limited
>> > >>> >> >> >> > to
>> > >>> >> >> >> > the number of possible choices
>>
>> ...
>>
>> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> --
>
>
>

--

--
 (

  )

|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

--