Re: Mind's Eye Instinct for survival

law created by legislation are little more than an excuse to break them
Allan

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 7:00 PM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Laws enacted by the legislature and enforced by the executive can be
> called a moral code of conduct with regard to a social group.
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 9:52 PM, gabbydott <gabbydott@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hm, how about: ... is about negotiating a moral code of conduct in a group
>> of social beings?
>>
>>
>> 2012/12/9 RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Religion is first and foremost about prayer and worship. There is no
>>> need for that but we must accept a morality code and adhere by it ,
>>> there should be a feeling of love for one's fellow creatures and
>>> tolerance towards them.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 8:41 PM, archytas <nwterry@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Given what they have done with some decent spiritual messages Allan, I
>>> > sometimes think of 'them' as Xstains. I was born into the tradition,
>>> > but thought it was twaddle by the time Sunday school was interfering
>>> > with soccer and cricket. I have no doubt we should focus more on
>>> > spirituality, fellowship, hospitality, goodwill and sensitivity to
>>> > others. I just don't want to base this on a pack of lies, banning
>>> > women from hierarchies, prejudicing gays and xenophobic stuff about
>>> > outsiders and being part of god's chosen. It's hard to think like
>>> > this without being prejudiced against the 'worshipers of the blue and
>>> > white striped rabbit' and purveyors of godswank. The inner danger is
>>> > becoming religiously anti-religious. I'm actually rather touched by
>>> > good aspects of some of the stuff.
>>> > I have no idea why we are clinging to this rock - but I don't want it
>>> > to be about being amused by Aussie pranksters making hoax calls or
>>> > murals celebrating vile killing such as one finds in the Vatican.
>>> > Science clearly provides us no answers to our spiritual plight and
>>> > religion as I witness it internally is largely about future memory
>>> > with less myth in it and less reason to take religion as we might
>>> > otherwise take opiates.
>>> > A colleague working in India is saying his students are reading Mein
>>> > Kampf - more or less replacing the word Jew with Muslim and agreeing
>>> > the plot entirely. We could do with some sensible religion and
>>> > economics to fill the void that leaves people this vulnerable.
>>> > Knowledge of thermodynamics or the biochemistry of life isn't going to
>>> > do that for us.
>>> >
>>> > On Dec 8, 10:01 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> xtian aka christianity
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 8:02 AM, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> > It depends on what religion you are referring to. Very funny line
>>> >> > about Pilate! :-)
>>> >>
>>> >> > On Dec 6, 4:09 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> Sounds like something Pontius Pilate might have used.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> I guess that David Deutsch and constructor theory tries to get back
>>> >> >> to
>>> >> >> reminding science about its root guesses Allan. I take from
>>> >> >> 'Spartacus Ants' sacrificing themselves to destroy slaver ants that
>>> >> >> pre-human biology 'knows' something of survival instinct.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> Descartes had it that until we could get to a point of re-evaluating
>>> >> >> against his radical doubt one had to trust in a beneficent god.
>>> >> >> Whilst we can criticize his system, I think anti-religious science
>>> >> >> misses the beat on issues of how we can live until we know more.
>>> >> >> The
>>> >> >> spiritual thus has its place. There is plenty to avoid in its
>>> >> >> history
>>> >> >> of control fraud, abuse, sexism and war crimes - but plenty to learn
>>> >> >> in terms of grace and fellowship.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> On 6 Dec, 08:15, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > it is not for cleaning hands ,, it just gets rid of smell that
>>> >> >> > you
>>> >> >> > can not get rid of no matter how much you wash.. you just wash
>>> >> >> > after
>>> >> >> > youor hands are clean,, then the smell is gone.
>>> >> >> > Allan
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:27 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >> > > Hm, I have never thought of using a steel soap bar for cleaning
>>> >> >> > > my hands. I
>>> >> >> > > use it occasionally for my pots and pans. And for the more
>>> >> >> > > difficult dirt on
>>> >> >> > > my hands I use a pumice stone or lemon. And more and more often
>>> >> >> > > I wear
>>> >> >> > > gloves or buy frozen and precut garlic and onion. But thanks for
>>> >> >> > > the tip.
>>> >> >> > > I'm sure that one day I'll make use of it. Why not steel instead
>>> >> >> > > of stone,
>>> >> >> > > you're right.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > > On Tuesday, December 4, 2012 7:54:42 PM UTC+1, Allan Heretic
>>> >> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> Well actually Gabby I have this stainless steel soap bar used
>>> >> >> > >> for
>>> >> >> > >> getting rid of ordure off your hands things like onion,
>>> >> >> > >> Garlic ,,
>>> >> >> > >> any strong ordure ,, just tried it on the epoxy smell left
>>> >> >> > >> over from
>>> >> >> > >> fixing my maxi egg coddler.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> now one of the greatest mysteries of the universe,, how does
>>> >> >> > >> it work?
>>> >> >> > >> Allan
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 6:38 PM, gabbydott <gabb...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> > >> wrote:
>>> >> >> > >> > The pointlessness of the points' business. Like Lee, I find
>>> >> >> > >> > the God
>>> >> >> > >> > concept
>>> >> >> > >> > much more to the point. :)
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> > I don't follow Lee's sequencing model - first spirit, then
>>> >> >> > >> > matter -
>>> >> >> > >> > though.
>>> >> >> > >> > This sounds very man-made to me. ;)
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> > As for the storytelling aspect, yes, the Chronos story is
>>> >> >> > >> > much more
>>> >> >> > >> > vivid
>>> >> >> > >> > than the "God created (x) and saw it was good" story. That's
>>> >> >> > >> > true. But
>>> >> >> > >> > the
>>> >> >> > >> > children are less likely to have bad dreams at night. Which
>>> >> >> > >> > is really
>>> >> >> > >> > good.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> > Sorry, Allan, I got carried away. What were you talking
>>> >> >> > >> > about?
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> > 2012/12/4 Allan H <allan...@gmail.com>
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> a series of creation is at best a wild guess with no
>>> >> >> > >> >> supporting
>>> >> >> > >> >> evidence..
>>> >> >> > >> >> Allan
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:42 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> > >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >> > >> >> > You can pinpoint the beginning of this universe but not
>>> >> >> > >> >> > that of
>>> >> >> > >> >> > Creation with its series of universes.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Allan H
>>> >> >> > >> >> > <allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> That is not true the beginning can be pretty much
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> pinpointed .. as
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> for
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> parallel universes that is just a wild guess with nothing
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> to support
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> other than it sounds good. There is more evidence
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> supporting the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> spiritual
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> realm than parallel universes
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> Allan
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> Matrix ** th3 beginning light
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> On Dec 4, 2012 2:26 PM, "RP Singh" <123...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> In my view there is no beginning to creation. There is
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> beginning
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> and
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> end to universes There are infinite no. of universes in
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> parallel
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> and
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> continuously many universes are being born and many are
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> dying ,
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> but
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> Creation which includes infinite universes in eternal
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> time , just
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> like
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> the Spirit, is without beginning and without end. The
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> difference is
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> that the nature of creation is dualistic and the Spirit
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> is
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> non-dual.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Lee Douglas
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> <leerev...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > Hello Andrew,
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > Heh I can envisage many things, but alas many of them
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > are not
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > true.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > I
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > distinguish between two things, matter and spirit.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > Mattter is
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > all
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > that
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > is
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > physical, which includes physical 'matter' and also
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > energy. To
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > me
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > there
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > is
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > no paradox of who created the creator. Before the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > begining there
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > was
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > only
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > God, God in spirit, and God created the creation out
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > of the spirt
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > of
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > God.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > That is all matter comes from spirit.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > On Friday, 30 November 2012 18:32:43 UTC, andrew
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> > vecsey wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> Lee, I can see where all matter has to have an energy
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> component
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> to
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> it
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> because matter is manifested as atoms which have
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> motion in them.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> But I
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> could
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> also envision pure motion without involving any
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> atoms...like a
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> vibration in
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> the fabric of space,
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> On Friday, November 30, 2012 5:53:26 PM UTC+1, Lee
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> Douglas
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>> Heh except of course that when it comes right down
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>> to it.energy
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>> is
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>> matter
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>> and matter is energy.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>> On Friday, 30 November 2012 11:22:14 UTC, andrew
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>> vecsey wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> The paradoxical dilemma of who created the creator
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> can be
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> circumnavigated by the possibility that the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> original creator
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> was
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> not
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> matter,
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> but energy. Just like thinking of anything is much
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> faster and
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> much
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> easier
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> than building it, it becomes conceivable that
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> energy patterns
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> could
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> have
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> evolved in a random chance way and finely tuned by
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> selective
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> processes to
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> reach intelligence similar to how most scientists
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> believe that
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> patterns of
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> atoms and molecules evolved to form intelligent
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> life.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> Energy patterns could have evolved to a point that
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> they
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> manipulated
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> atoms to desired patterns and forms to code the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> information
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> required
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> for
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> life and to allow them to evolve on their own to
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> complex
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> intelligent
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> beings
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> able to wonder at and eventually to solve the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> riddle of where
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> they
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> came
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> from, where they are going and why they are alive.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> Meaning and
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> purpose could
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> then be given to our fleeting moment of existence.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> On Thursday, November 29, 2012 7:55:05 PM UTC+1,
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> archytas
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> ....... All we have in respect of this is to
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> posit
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> creation, begging the question of what created
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> that in an
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> infinite
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> regress. .....We might get to an intelligent
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> state in which
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> creation
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> myths are replaced by something more plausible and
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> Truth
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> comes
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> closer.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> On 29 Nov, 01:41, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > Neil , even after re-transposition how long
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > could the brain
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > live
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > --1000 years , 10000years or maybe as long as
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > the universe
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > ,but
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > ultimately it will die or be destroyed at the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > end - time of
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > the
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > universe. What survives is the Truth behind life
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > and
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > nothing
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > else.
>>> >>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:33 AM, archytas
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > <nwte...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > wrote:
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > What survives is the gene - subject to
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > mutations etc. We
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > are
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > already
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > 'Borg' in the sense of mass assimilation.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > One's mind
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > could
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > be
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > transposed to another substrate (nearish
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > future) - our
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > bodies
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > are
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > currently replaced every 5 years or so- and
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > the new
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > substrate
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > could
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > have nanobots that would allow minds to
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > outlive Lee's
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > 'hope'.
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > Such
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > substrated minds might link in
>>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > super-intelligence and be
>>> >>
>>> >> ...
>>> >>
>>> >> read more »
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
>
>



--
(
)
|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.


I am a Natural Airgunner -

Full of Hot Air & Ready To Expel It Quickly.

--