Perhaps imagination is i formation for us.

We are halved by imagination hence left and right symmetry, it's not an image, it's ours.

people will find imagining the self is easier consistently for that individual; or is it? Is my restrospect, of people I know, good enough?

Imagination is, I think, image projection, but there is more to image than meets the eye.

Three small bubbles could create a special loop together.

What is this 3D bubble engine?

It could be more than image, but is definitely something bold and not something vague to a degree.

I suppose I should add imagination is also reception of image(or X)but maybe that's a unregistered aspect.

More people are getting it around my facebook which is strange, seeing it close.

I'd accept it as moving fast through comms training over nothing. All this break was good.

You are dangerous people.

It's likely not as bad as you think, people can we wasted.

Your children are strong.

It's bad effect is not so mental but more physical - phychiatry this vague association between people and doctors. Nothing ever looks definite, you can be and are contradicted with blind trust. It's all the time boiled to something physical

Maybe you dabble in less important things, but how good YOU truly think that is, is laughable.

Drunkeness brings more insight into the wave.

Not everyone became a sportsman, but people who choose to do it are okay, sometimes they're thinking good.

If you're promoting the heart also promote green.

You have a right to the perfect offense/defense and a perfect judge.

If nature is ever stupid to you with the big bang, you have the right to cause a big bang for each star (you have this right because you are, metaphorically a clean spirit - that experiences hell for evil doing).

I is here and you are there.

I is something to you and and you are nothing consciousness-wise.

What is we?

Perhaps worth study.

I must admit that was a great work.

I was enlightened by it.

I agree that Ms. Pain is a less desirable companion, but Ms. I've Been There, per se, often had a better story than 'it was pleasurable'.

What you don't want, may just be what you need.

No simulation starts out full-fledged. We must discover how to improve it.

Part of this life is doing what we don't want, and that is the sacrifice we are to make('in this hell').

I don't want people to talk down to me, I want to be in charge, but I adapted to that condition.

I've become better through it.

You must create an event to find out new things, such as a big bang(which I think is mostly explored now) or something else.

A cutting-edge event, that's like mining a rock, is how new stuff is found.

If you could encircle a human with power of some sort for the whole of it's life, would this event produce new data?

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the quality of the event.

Yes there are.

New stuff is less associated with what humans can create, and think, but more what gensiers can create and think.

New technology may be more about intergrating sense than higher definitions.

A future movie may be just one big interactable, not just full of special effects.

So there is potential for new ideas. It's probably why the big bang happened.

The geniser was an explosives expert, and not an expert of the degrade.

How is pain bad?

Isn't visual sense data pain, amongst other sense data?

I'm not a mascochist but I do like pain, especially small pain.

I'm both respectful of it, and joyus of what I'm arguing is, greater pleasure, that comes after pain staking.

Would humans have evovled without taking so and so amount of pain?

I think the premise 'Pain is bad', is wrong. Think how lowly pleasure seems in this context.

It seems you've wrote the opposite context, which is fine.

I agree with both I just think your doctrine is false.

I agree universe life is more a hell, but controversial because pain staking has resulted in great heavenly product.

This hell is presumably because of the science that species can perform by using the increased pain sense and freedom.

Hell in this context is not suffering, but like a small suffering; a Matrix-film like socket at the back of the head, outcasted life. Or a job away from home.

Sorry to be lowly here but death may just be a huge re-wind. What can you do?

You need to create a billion big bangs in one attack against the regime to truly find peace...

The modus operandi is to do as good as you can, or 'risk' death. Or maybe I am wrong and it is the way out.

If you suffered you'll likely get a reward - is this a pipe dream?

I don't think so, I believe.

(if people of society weren't such evil people, you have less suicidal thoughts, and you, sufferer, if you weren't so evil previously, you would *apparently* be in a good, or even pole position).

noted. I will maybe start a new thread.

mhmm

I'll tell you what I was more interested in for this topic...

I listen to a song once, it leaves a different imprint than twice, but the second time makes a pattern, subsequently third and fouth are different but still make a pattern, and then a different pattern emerges in tries 5 - 8, after that a pattern is possible but it's not as strict as 1-8.

1. The First Imprint.
2. (with partial memory)The Imperfect Judge.
3. (with a semi good memory)The Crossing.
4. (with good memory)The Perfect Judge.

Without going on to 8, I just want to highlight again that the 2nd listen is a different resound than the 1st and subsequently 3-8, and there's a rather strange pattern to it.

I have called this previously, mathematically, a nexus but I won't build on that just yet.

Any clue what I'm on about? Anyone?

What about a paedophile? Should he/she be open about his/her sex?

He/she may just be castrated for that.

I believe in less harsh punishment for paedophilia, but not for some cases of rape.

'Viewing material' cases do not warrant castration, no matter how much people hate it.

As I just said in a different thread. I don't care about your children as much as, per se, my adult year friend.

I also have respect for the mind and am able to judge that our civilization is very evil.

Some people will urge differently than what's accepted.

If human justice wants to appear moral, then punishing any sexuality is bad, especially prior to the administration of such.

I consider "I will cut your dick off", a worse sexual act than paedophilic urges, and I don't want my children to think this man exists.

To conclude, I believe we should all be able to be open about our sex, but advertising or grooming is bad in some circles.

Populations are unwilling of give up luxuries, which is a major step in habitat renewal.

We focus too much on the problem and not the solution - I bet you never heard 'habitat renewal' before...

In short, you're right, our solutions are poor, but the problem is people's luxury and power in the hands of the weak minded.

Heatlhcare is an alternative. I don't care if you think it's important.

I don't care if you or your children get sick.

I care more about the adult friend of mine getting sick, and if he does, I hope he gets well, but I wouldn't support that we sacrifice, a whole world, to cure him.

Until humans can get out of the weak minded selfishness, we can do as OP does and ignore the problem.

People will be punished for this, some people will have their faces cut, some people, will just not be rewarded.

How is it fair that the same people who expect doctors, cut the cow?

To combat climate change we need to create an emergency, globally. If we are not prepared to do that, as a species we are poor performers.

It's a struggle we must face and not ignore, if we expect to goto heaven.

Those there legitimately ready to face this problem, are respected. Those willing to give up healthcare and burger kings are good minds who will be forgiven for their indulgence in such. So a major part of the problem is the weak minded, and especially those powerful people who support weak mindedness.

This song was released yesterday, I think it's good art.

Two things I like about this, the third stanza that sounds more aggresive than the rest, and the pattern throughout the whole song where the phrase rose gold is used.

I wouldn't have noticed this pattern on listen 1?

When I listen to music I always try to imagine a perfect reconstruction.

The tunes that I imagine to play in my mind are often a notch greater than the source material.

You give a song a chance, as well as be judgemental. Opening this magical box, releasing the sound, not just to focus on but also to lose focus.

If you drift off half way through, that could be an art factor and counts as listening. What? Are we supposed to position ourselves correctly and suppress many forms of involentary movement?

I argue we do hear the entire work, why good art gets old.

Perhaps there are perfect compositions but humans are prone to error, in a composition.

Again, I max out the potential of a sound, in imagination.

If someone could play a sound - that's as great as I can imagine - does it count as 'a music piece', or are music pieces not pieces? Chaos?

I theorize 2 times is always the same, in a sense, subsequently 3, 4, sub sequent order and random. There is a nexus of number of degrade off visual matter.

I don't think language channels our focus.

When you say 'I know', in response to, 'what do we do?', saying I know is just a word.

The process of knowing happened physically as the query was made.

'I wanna talk about carrots'; there I channeled our thoughts to carrots, but am I really focused, and is that the reason for the channelling?

I mean, why did I pick carrots?

I'd differ. I'd say no. The next step is to follow wiki or some derelict, ledged information on carrots.

'Orange', 'food', etc. Pop into mind.

I think words are mallcious to thought process. Again, why carrots?

If I went through the same process of channeling thought - how I do I decide what channeling I want?

Suddenly, I think bulbs, apples or trees. There is no morality here.

Heaven is a good experience; there is no one specific heaven.

The possibilities are infinite; as long as there is growth in knowledge, there is potential for new heavens.

There is also Hell, or an evil experience, and these are often well craft states, not only waste states.

Who does what you would call God look up to?

I believe it to be an energy type; 'God' caters to it.

If there was disharmony(i.e. sending good people to suffer), it would discontinue.

1. You think God, exists.
2. HE created the universe.
3. With what tool?
4. Hence, 'energy type'.

I believe, somewhere, everything makes sense, but we struggle to put the pieces of the puzzle together.

All of the evidence is present, but we are not apt enough to decipher it.

There is a difference between listening to a song once, twice, thrice... Etc.

If you want to conduct science on the greatness of a song, you listen to it several times.

If you want to have it play the best quality in your mind, once. The resound will technically be better, like you want to hear it's effect.



I'm a good judge, I know the man in this art is too feminine for the scene.

Yet, if I was to try and relate to the artist, I wouldn't give it too much thought.

Sorry if I offended you, you stay believing in what you want.

Will people stay this connected after?

It's unfortunate but I think we taught ourselves a great lesson through it. The harmony after chaos, if, you know, doesn't happen.

I don't agree with bullying a country at all.

That needs to stop. It's not beneficent for anyone. It is not the warrior way either. Sorry for those who are affected.

I guess America is trying to trade it's social problem with China, which is a strike of luck but you can't keep the jokes up for too long before, purely attitude will reverse it.

Be good to all colour, creed and nation.

(why am I saying this, people saying 'they eat anything those' like go away).

It - doesn't - matter - how - detailed - your - explanation - is. It's bollocks. There is no man who resembles the Son of the creator and as I suggested before you don't even agree on a metaphor. Christ was written by a human and it's entirely stupid to have that sort of faith in Christ.

I don't care what this author seen. What are his credentials? If he says he was with Christ, it's on his head to provide evidence too, or, it's bollocks.

Some blue blood for testing would be nice, I mean, I'm losing actual faith in complete, boring religious style. Let's pray to God - or not - because as a civilization that has moved forward and lot's of us learned that's doing nothing.

You're holding us back (with specifically your hot headedness).

Do you deserve to get angry at me?
Do you deserve to have your writing, read?

Just get hot headed about it... That will work.

(you could come up now with near enough exactly the same frame of mind, free of God - why don't you? Look I'll show you. I believe I was created, and I have full faith in it and it's work. Did I say God? No.)

Yes, matter.

(1. Matter makes itself significant).

The alternative is that we just give up and think 'nothing matters' though truly things do.

Good and evil are enforced by a judge species, like God, but many, like Gods(but not the tradition).

What is good and evil?

It's machine nature(functioning) to a core time(pre life; consciousness) - like doing a job in a different country.

Be wordless for fucks sake. Wordlessness is important. You can't boil answers to sentences, so think clearly, what it is going on?

You have left a moral-less state at some point, where you had no worries, to become an actor.

Now you're in a moral state, where you perform either at a good, bad or evil rate.

Ask questions such as:

1. How did I get here?
2. How was the universe created?

Without a judge, there can be no morality(self assessment of performance).

If there is no judge, why be good?

A different language is spoke by the gensier, who doesn't think in words, but rather in structure, etc. Is this big bang going to be successful, what is a measure of success?

It would not think in a word, 'something which supports life is good' but rather, 'the big bang has to perform at a certain rate to succeed.' 'I, the gensier, work with simulation, why don't I create bad ones? What do you take me for? I do.'

I guess, generally up higher is the thought of good because it produces more than nothing or parasite which is what evil equates to. There is no religious moral high ground, good just gets higher.

Perhaps one day we'll all be evil...

Jesus is obviously a myth. Come on now.

(this is literally my answer).

I hope this helps understand the mallicious effect of word.

1. I KNOW LIGHT.
2. Yellow, 3, 4....

In 1, wordlessly, you mean 2.

1 = 2.

With word, 'I know light' - to the follow up question, 'what about light?', is an extension that is like a evil dream. It is complete stupidity, you may as well say 2 instead of 1.

If knowledge is just "point (1) and click (2)", it's a type of transmission and reception.

Search your mind for knowledge, is there a pool of all that you know? Yes but it's ineffable.

'Knowledge' as a pool is non existent, you do wordlessly, or do not control this part.

Knowledge as brain transmission and sense data reception is better.

1. Route memory(initial transmit) to put a lightbulb where one is missing(just the socket). Chances are you'll deviate to saying a word or just silence.
2. Coming over your head, out of your control, is the knowledge, or it has already and you're just ego stupid.

It's the right direction but incomplete, per se, gears and other.

We all pop sometimes, but popping usually means your head is deflated and you'll need some time out to inflate again. A way to avoid such, don't pop.

I believe that the geniser was from a stronger matter, our time is slower - it is continually asleep in comparison.

A billion years is a billion years sleeping.

Perhaps the geniser can hold atoms; whereas atoms for us are chaotic, impossible to hold.

'Why' is a query that assesses everything briefly, having an empty/basic(blurry) thought bubble, in the place of a purer assessment that is entirely logical(not an 'empty/basic thought bubble but a complex dream).

'Why am I here?' - life, briefly - and the leading answer on this board 'information'/'enformation'. It seems wrong to answer why with that, that, is more suited for a full assesment, such as assesment of all matter and energy phenomena, not - everything - briefly.

I stand by my former post in this thread.

It seems more a question about mental agility than it is pure mental; not 'what the mind is' but 'why mind exists?' - is it enformation or is that more suited for what?

'Why' questions require more creative and less logical answers; you're not to answer this query like you'd define a word or sum up a formula...

You're going to have a whack at it.

Enformation counts to me as 'continue' - 'you're doing nothing wrong'. Whereas {sensing, acting, science, art, heaven and hell}(my previous post) seems more of an sensible answer impartial as this may be.

Imagine an empty thought bubble, but if you're spermy you may enter it and truly analyse all of it. Like having a dream that you knew was coming - then it is full of what's that help minds to understand the former why. That transition from why to what is changing using the original bubble, not annotating it. So you go in, you annotate all the what - and then you take a look at the bubble again. You say "why are we here?", and you look at all the "1's you wrote next to all objects and subjects, and you say 1 is the answer. Is that right?

No because it's more of a 3 or 4, in a trinitarian or quadritarian way and not a 3 or 4 * 1 way. So, to conclude, why are we here?

Yes, but there is also the spirit, temperament or mood is made up of the continuum of 2.

Want is an active effect of heart whilst believing is passive effect of mind.

Think of them selflessly, in rhythmic proceudure.

(editing this i accidentally pressedsave)

Nothing is stateless, so it also can't be theorized unless we understand it by most common descript, void. That is not even information. It is a pre information circumstance. Something is a state at least. Any something, including us trying to theorize nothing, rely on the beginning referal, and make that jump that nothing is. It is a pre beginning time more accurately. It can possibly be theorized.

Thus it is definitely something and the law of nothing, or to be faced with a moral choice.

Potential and possibility are around.

I like illusions.

If the answer was pleasurable stimulus I have it and your post doesn't.

so you believe there was a man who is the Son of the Creator, or it is just a metaphor? What metaphor?

The author was a man who made everyone worship the protagonist's son.

God would result in insane barbaric people.

Christ is 'thinking too much' in my opinon, requiring doctrine when I can conceive life accurately easily or complexly.

Chances are you're being too creative when the answer is your first, or third idea.

1. To sense.
Our sense units are advanced and can produce lot's of data that may attribute to a lot of good science, from any species, who can collect this data.

2. To act.
Unlike seagulls, humans are more apt to play a central role. In movies, per se, a seagull is less of a Jame's Bond.

3. For science.
The universe is rought with potential, to improve all simulations, to improve planets, etc

it seems to be an event that was more about the genesis than the end product.

The "geniser', did understand the result, but not all it's effect.

4. For art.
Producing art of a high quality can be profitable to any species with the capacity to wonder at it.

If, in life, there are species, who can exploit all universe data (possibly from a multiverse), art is desirable. Imagine the echoes of all the best music.

5. To be punished.
Planet hells are high quality struggles. It is only recently I discovered that there is enough consciousness in existence to support conscio-reincarnation in the universe.

6. To be rewarded.
Planet heavens are often high quality and full of pleasure.

I completely agree, however I would project many more categories.

Thinking to, thinking on, thinking off of, thinking during, etc.

I think dissecting thought in this way is useful, for philosophy of mind; but we should remember our thinking in a whole-form.