• FalseIdentity
    62
    Hi, I had to move the question here from the mind forum, because it's really more about first causes.
    We want to publish an idea on youtube about how the mind and the universe interact to shape the reality we see. The problem is that the requirements of the youtube format make the concept difficult to explain (short explanation without foreign words needed :( ). We hence thought it would be better to have others review the text first.

    Münchhausen's infinity as a evidence for immortality

    (Video starts with the picture of a burger) What do this tasty burger and your living feeling mind have in common? Easy.
    You just have to reorder and remix the molecules in this burger and abra kadabra you get your brain alias mind. Maybe if you remix the burger in just the right way your mind even wonders if it's a sign of quality if a philosophy video starts with a burger. Of course, there are those nasty intellectually picky people that doubt things can magically appear out of nowhere. A further disadvantage of the theory is that if things can come from nowhere then maybe they can go back to nowhere too.


    But don't panic, there is no nowhere and there never was one. To explain this better let's first imagine that mind and matter are in reality the same. Then become aware that mind and imagination are infinite. If the world is made up of just thought there is nothing like non-thought and hence a true void is impossible.
    To understand this better imagine a mind containing every world you can dream of. And not just as thought but as real matter like you know it.
    Imagine that it contains every culture, every building, and every being ever conceivable.
    It's a place where all possible fantasies already exist and did exist since before the start of time.
    This mind is whole, complete, free of any want or suffering. What you are trying to imagine is a pure and all-knowing eternal mind. Many call this mind god. But if you don't believe in the supernatural you can call it the source mind or the universal mind.
    If you don't succeed imagining this don't panic. We are not build to understand infinity or eternity. But infinity is all around us. For example, it is assumed that the universe is infinitely big and that in the beginning, it was infinitely dense. In Einstein's theories space mathematically consist of an infinite number of infinitely small points. In the math of quantum mechanics, it was only possible to get rid of infinities by calculation tricks. And the idea of infinite worlds can be used to make sense of the observer effect, a quantum physics problem that still continues to baffle us all.
    But why does everything in our daily life, including life itself than look so sadly finite? This might well be the result of a grand cosmic catastrophe that we naively call the big bang.
    Our theory is that directly before the big bang the source mind, God's mind voluntarily reduced and simplified itself. It shrank to the most simple and most easily understandable form available: a point. Call what remains a splinter of god. It is a catastrophe because the splinter lacks almost all of God's infinitely rich thoughts and complexity.
    But every end is a beginning too.
    Out of this small seed, God was able to create us. We are beings that are not like him, precisely because we are not unlimited. This difference in nature separates us from him and therefore frees us to have our own identity.
    Before the universe is expanding there is nothing going on in it; no matter, no time, no events. Just a mad mathematical singularity that defies our logic investigation. How then do you get the diversity back from this super boring point?
    Well, the first step is that you need the universe to divide into two. You need matter and space to get form. From then on evolution first of matter than of life helped to recover some of the lost complexity of the source mind.
    You hence can call evolution a recovery from amnesia. You only recover what you already owned. After the evolution of matter and life came the third age of evolution and recovery: the age of art. And many of us believe the feelings it creates are of divine origin.
    But with what method do we rediscover the source mind's complexity?
    The best explantion comes from Münchausens Trilema.
    The central strategy of this mental trilemma is to ask the following: if God caused the universe who caused God, and who caused the one that caused...and so on.
    This question leads either into a rhetorical dead end. Or it leads to an infinite regress of causes for the universe. Remember it's turtles all the way down! The third option is an infinitely repeating loop of circular reasoning - you really can escape infinity nowhere, as hard as you may try. Philosophy already discovered why we can not solve Münchhausens Trilema. It's because we only know what is untrue and not what is true. When we hence face such a question as "what caused the universe" we try to answer it by first subtracting all the events that can not possibly have caused the universe. This includes any event that came after the creation of the universe. We hope that whatever remains is the one and true cause. This is called deductive thinking. But at the end of this process, we become unsure if we haven't forgotten to subtract an untrue option. We hence start everything from scratch again. This would not happen if we directly knew what's true once we see it.
    Deductive thinking however is destructive thinking too. In your brain, you destroy the answers that you consider false. We suggest that this does not only happen in your brain but that this destruction happens in reality too. Mind and matter could be the same substance, remember? So they can be destroyed in the same moment too.
    In reality, our entire mind might make sense of the world by deleting surplus options and objects until only one clearly identifiable object remains. This skill would only be needed if every object is in reality multiple things and hence can have multiple identities. But this is exactly what we suggest: Every world is multiple worlds, we reduce it to one and thereby create our own world. It's a necessary destruction because we can only understand things when they have one, and just one clear identity. However, we are not in all cases successful in destroying objects until this one understandable identity remains. Quantum particles for example can be in multiple conflicting states at once.
    If something is too many things then it seems to be nothing to us. This happens because objects with multiple identities are information overflow to us. Imagine for example a painter that has mixed all colors there are. This gives no picture you can make sense of, it simply gives black. Only when you subtract at least one color you can see something. And this is the same what our mind does with the source mind: it subtracts and destroys large parts of it, to be able to perceive and feel whatever remains. This will, by the way, be a pure problem of human perspective. Of course just because we refuse to see the source mind this does not mean it's gone.
    Not only does everything happen in God's mind eternally it happens at the same time as well. So the source mind does clearly not obey the laws of human logic. It doesn't have to think this way because the source mind is so smart that he can handle multiple realities at once. But we can't do that. How does destructive thinking create our understandable reality?
    Take this picture as an example: In the source mind, it is an infinite number of pictures. We just through a collective vote agreed that this is the only one that is allowed to stay real FOR US. Yes, we might decide in a vote together what's real for us and what's not. We just do this voting subconsciously, invisibly. Or as another example think about the music you are listening to: if you can hear this sound then an infinitely large number of songs and noises that exist elsewhere had to be shut off to make the melody understandable. Music is like a hole in more music.
    Another way would be to imagine the universe as a photographic negative where everything is inverted. Wherever there seems to be a lot of stuff, there is in almost nothing. Wherever there seems to be nothing there is almost everything. The vacuum of space is filled with the quantum field. And in the quantum field matter just pops in and out of existence at a whim. Can we here witness the process of voting things into and out of our reality live?
    God's utterly confusing mode of thinking certainly feels a bit like the black void that we feared would come after our death or before the universe. But be aware that with a stronger mind you still could perceive and understand stuff where we now perceive and understand nothing.

    The stronger our brains become through evolution the more forms we can allow to become visible. This is because our mind simply can handle more and more forms, it's a self-reinforcing effect. This is our job on earth, remembering and recovering the lost wholeness of the source mind. At least as far as we can, because we probably can't recover infinity. Our body rewards us with good feelings for creating more forms and it punishes us with pain for losing diversity. You never heard about that?
    But you surely heard that our body gives us signals that shall enhance our genetic survival and the numbers of our offspring. This signals, for example, happiness and lust have the same effect as rewarding us for creating new forms and new diversity. It's like we can already feel eternity for a short moment. So all our suffering is in reality connected to the fact that we are just a splinter of god, not whole anymore. When evil like in this case is not something but the lack of something it's called privatio bono. Privatio Bono is literally the privation of the good. The concept is used as a powerful defense against the problem of evil.
    But why could have god not just made us perfect gods and minds besides himself? Well, where is beside the source mind, when matter is mind? The truth is that he could only make us into weaker minds, mentally small enough so that we can be nested into his mind.
    Time and causality exist only because our mind is not strong enough to explore things differently than in a step-wise fashion. Ordering stuff in a causal timeline makes things so much easier to understand too. This explains why Münchhausens Trilema must lead into some kind of circular reasoning. Think about it:
    We cause causality through the simplified paths our weak mind has to take when exploring the source mind. In other words, you are the cause of the universe that you can see and touch, but not the totality of reality. Astonishingly the empirically verifiable part of reality that you cause includes you. Or it at least includes empirical facts about you like for example that you have a body and are a human. It excludes what your consciousness is made of, which is not open to empiric investigation. When we explore brain scans for example we just explore correlates of consciousness and not the thing itself. That you can not empirically understand the nature of your consciousness is already a strong hint towards its immortality: It means you could not destroy enough aspects of said consciousness to come to a clear conclusion of what it is. And this means that there must be something completely indestructible about souls.
    Back to the subject: In the empirical sense you cause yourself and everything around you. This can only work if your consciousness came before your logical thinking capabilities. Otherwise causing yourself would be a textbook case of circular reasoning. Let me explain this better: The non-logic part of yourself is you but in a slightly different version. If your nonlogic alter ego came before your empirically verifiable embodiment, then it can not be held against your predecessor that he had no cause. Why not? Because at the time where this part of you already existed there did not yet exist causes. Causes and logic were something that you created. The nonlogic, non-causal is the eternal source of everything. The Egyptians called it the nun. The nun is a kind of bottomless ocean of disorder and chaos which gave rise to everything that has form. If something came before causes it has no cause in itself and hence must have been there eternally. That Münchausens Trilema either ends you in infinite loops of circular reasoning or that it directly catapults you into the infinite past of the eternal regress is hence good evidence for this type of eternity. And an eternal mind is the same thing as an immortal mind.
    A second hint for the existence of the nun comes from the mathematical unsolvability of Gödel's incompleteness theorem. Gödles thought experiment shows that any attempt to define a clear and complete mathematical logic will again lead to an unsolvable infinite regress. Math can not include the unlogic, but because the unlogic is true, math will always remain incomplete.

    What will it feel like when you die? That can not be understood through words, because words are part of our destructive human logic. But picture it this way: Everything you experience is like a hole in the whole of the source mind. One can not destroy a hole, one can just fill it. Depending on how far this hole will fill you will either become one with the universe or you will become one with the even greater mind of god. If you become god then all feelings of want and sadness will have gone since you are complete again. If you become just the universe such negative feelings will at least greatly reduce as you gained a lot of richness and diversity in the process of blending with everything around you. There is however a third option, the Christian option. We will discuss this option in relation to heaven and the tree of knowledge. Because remember there is a holy book that always warned us that there could be something lethal about our desire for logic, understanding, and control. And this is the book of genesis. Is there a way back to the garden of Eden, if we give up the desire to understand and control god's mind?
  • SophistiCat
    2.2k
    Infinity as a proof for immortality

    (Video starts with the picture of a burger)
    FalseIdentity

    This is excellent. You should've stopped here while you were ahead :rofl:

    Yeah, I did read a bit further than that... Not worth my time, sorry.
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    This is the reason why social media and the internet created the most depressed generation of all time. There is no constructive critique, there is just bashing. People who don't have the time to read the entire text: You are entitled to have an opinion if and only if you know what you are talking about.
  • SophistiCat
    2.2k
    Yeah well, this goes both ways. You are entitled to my attention if you know what you are talking about. And I see no evidence of that. But good luck to you guys.
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    If everyone coming in here wonders how this could escalate so quickly: humans are a hierarchical species, they want to submit each other to build a rank. Submitting means being verbally nasty and snappy to each other. Sophisticat and me now both gave nice examples of being snappy and nasty. Once one has understood this it gets boring. Back to the subject...
  • SophistiCat
    2.2k
    I should still commend you for writing out the texts - much better than just dropping a youtube link, which I certainly wouldn't watch, even with a picture of a burger :) Text is still the best medium to communicate complex ideas.
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    I agree that text has advantages in respect to clarity but this video is directed to the depressive and the overworked too. I have seen a lot of them recently. A video - if it is done well - is more easily understandable than a text when you are down. As due to the lack of "constructive critique" I can only guess what you disliked about the text I will now try to restructure the video so that the more unique ideas come at the beginning and the more familiar ideas (such as monism) come at the end. I hope it will not destroy the understandability of the idea though. That will take time.
  • I love Chom-choms
    65
    If something is too many things then it seems to be nothing to us. This happens because objects with multiple identities are information overflow to us. Imagine for example a painter that has mixed all colors there are. This gives no picture you can make sense of, it simply gives black. Only when you subtract at least one color you can see something. And this is the same what our mind does with the source mind: it subtracts and destroys large parts of it, to be able to perceive and feel whatever remains. This will, by the way, be a pure problem of human perspective. Of course just because we refuse to see the source mind this does not mean it's gone.
    Not only does everything happen in God's mind eternally it happens at the same time as well. So the source mind does clearly not obey the laws of human logic. It doesn't have to think this way because the source mind is so smart that he can handle multiple realities at once. But we can't do that. How does destructive thinking create our understandable reality?
    Take this picture as an example: In the source mind, it is an infinite number of pictures. We just through a collective vote agreed that this is the only one that is allowed to stay real FOR US. Yes, we might decide in a vote together what's real for us and what's not. We just do this voting subconsciously, invisibly. Or as another example think about the music you are listening to: if you can hear this sound then an infinitely large number of songs and noises that exist elsewhere had to be shut off to make the melody understandable. Music is like a hole in more music.
    FalseIdentity

    let me just get this straight, what you are saying is that our mind cannot process everything. So if we saw infinity,i.e. everything then we would see nothing. Either this or we would only see the parts of that infinity that we can comprehend.
    I hope you don't mind me asking these questions without reading the whole thing. I mean, a story is better understood if the author is next to you telling you what everything means while keeping you engaged.



    Also, just a tangent but then couldn't we say that death is to gain the knowledge of everything
  • I love Chom-choms
    65
    But you surely heard that our body gives us signals that shall enhance our genetic survival and the numbers of our offspring. This signals, for example, happiness and lust have the same effect as rewarding us for creating new forms and new diversity. It's like we can already feel eternity for a short moment. So all our suffering is in reality connected to the fact that we are just a splinter of god, not whole anymore. When evil like in this case is not something but the lack of something it's called privatio bono. Privatio Bono is literally the privation of the good. The concept is used as a powerful defense against the problem of evilFalseIdentity

    What the h**l, I don't understand. Please help.
  • VincePee
    84
    And the idea of infinite worlds can be used to make sense of the observer effect, a quantum physics problem that still continues to baffle us all.FalseIdentity

    What's so baffling about it? That it's non-classical? In the quantum field formulation it makes perfect sense. Though taking all paths at once and particles (gauge particles) being created or destroyed is indeed baffling.
  • Hermeticus
    181
    Of course, there are those nasty intellectually picky people that doubt things can magically appear out of nowhere. A further disadvantage of the theory is that if things can come from nowhere then maybe they can go back to nowhere too.FalseIdentity

    How did we get from burgers to things magically appearing? You got me confused from the introduction.

    To explain this better let's first imagine that mind and matter are in reality the same. Then become aware that mind and imagination are infinite. If the world is made up of just thought there is nothing like non-thought and hence a true void is impossible.
    To understand this better imagine a mind containing every world you can dream of. And not just as thought but as real matter like you know it.
    FalseIdentity

    Are you trying to explain here why burgers and our mind are the same? Then how does imagining the mind as a burger explain why the mind is a burger? I don't see an explanation here. You're just detailing your initial statement.

    Our theory is that directly before the big bang the source mind, God's mind voluntarily reduced and simplified itself. It shrank to the most simple and most easily understandable form available: a point. Call what remains a splinter of god. It is a catastrophe because the splinter lacks almost all of God's infinitely rich thoughts and complexity.FalseIdentity
    How do we get this theory? What's the basis of it? So far there's nothing in here that backs up mind=matter, so this comes off as some kind of fantasy origin story.

    I'll leave it at that for now. I'll continue once there is an actual explanation why my mind is a burger.
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    You are the first to understand it, yes infinity would look either like nothing or it would look like that what we make of it to not be confused.

    "But you surely heard that our body gives us signals that shall enhance our genetic survival and the numbers of our offspring. This signals, for example, happiness and lust have the same effect as rewarding us for creating new forms and new diversity. It's like we can already feel eternity for a short moment. So all our suffering is in reality connected to the fact that we are just a splinter of god, not whole anymore. When evil like in this case is not something but the lack of something it's called privatio bono. Privatio Boni is literally the privation of the good. The concept is used as a powerful defense against the problem of evil"

    The last time I explained this it took about half an hour. Maybe it was not such a good idea to try to explain it in just a view sentence. I wanted to suggest that there is a kind of draw in evolution that wants to pull the whole universe back to it's original state - which was an infinitely diverse mind and not as "boring" as it is now. As an analogy: imagine a wire spring, if it's compressed it wants to regain it's original shape at all price. The universe would be like this, it would want to regain it's original shape of infinity diversity and it's suffers as long as it has not achieved it. Because we are part of the universe we will feel the suffering that is required to increase diversity. Is that a better description?

    Yes you are right too: death could be about obtaining knowledge of everything (pantheism) but I guess it will only be knowledge of everything in the actual universe we live in. Which is just an example of many possible universes. Since the actual universe is hence smaller than the universal mind, who for example contains all possible universes this would be panentheism.

    You gave me hope that I will find a way to make this understandable.
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    The burger is a joke about how materialism would see the origin of mind. But this is not our take on it. I thank you for your critique and will introduce the word modern materialism in the connection with the burger to make the distinction more clear. Our own point of view is that the world is more a form of idealistic monism. Since materialism and idealism are both forms of monism there was potential for confusion here, I haven't thought about it.
  • Hermeticus
    181
    The burger is a joke about how materialism would see the origin of mind. But this is not our take on it. I thank you for your critique and will introduce the word modern materialism in the connection with the burger to make the distinction more clear. Our own point of view is that the world is more a form of idealistic monism. Since materialism and idealism are both forms of monism there was potential for confusion here, I haven't thought about it.FalseIdentity

    The burger was not my point. The burger was me catching on to the burger joke.

    My point was that you fail to give any argument why materialism might be wrong and why your theory might be right.

    If this is for Youtube, maybe you should try structuring this whole presentation differently. If you want to engage people on a thought experiment, instead of just throwing them straight into an imaginary world where my mind is a burger, try enticing them first. Why would I want to consider your idea? What's the problems of materialism? What solutions does your idea offer? How does it work out?
  • I love Chom-choms
    65
    The non-logic part of yourself is you but in a slightly different version. If your nonlogic alter ego came before your empirically verifiable embodiment, then it can not be held against your predecessor that he had no cause. Why not? Because at the time where this part of you already existed there did not yet exist causes. Causes and logic were something that you createdFalseIdentity

    I understand what you are saying, there was something without a cause that existed eternally which is what lies at the start of the circular reasoning. Then if someone asks me," which came first the chicken or the egg?" then by our logic I should answer something like," whichever god made first". The eternal God is the origin of the circular reasoning.
    What I don't agree with is the logic and causes are something that we created just to understand the reality that we can perceive. I think that causes and logic should originate from non-logic and the non-causal because if the source mind contains everything then the knowledgeto apply logic and causality should also be in there.
    The Egyptians called it the nun. The nun is a kind of bottomless ocean of disorder and chaos which gave rise to everything that has form. If something came before causes it has no cause in itself and hence must have been there eternally. That Münchausens Trilema either ends you in infinite loops of circular reasoning or that it directly catapults you into the infinite past of the eternal regress is hence good evidence for this type of eternity. And an eternal mind is the same thing as an immortal mind.FalseIdentity

    Just wanted to confirm, you are talking about the duat right, which is what will be left of the world after Aphosis swallows Ra for good.
    A second hint for the existence of the nun comes from the mathematical unsolvability of Gödel's incompleteness theorem. Gödles thought experiment shows that any attempt to define a clear and complete mathematical logic will again lead to an unsolvable infinite regress. Math can not include the unlogic, but because the unlogic is true, math will always remain incomplete.FalseIdentity

    I don't know what level of audience, you target but if they are casual audience then they probably won't understand the Gödel's incompleteness theorem. I know about the Gödel's incompleteness theorem because I like maths and I watch veritaserum but most people don't. Just keep that in mind.
    On that note, why don't you tell me your channel's name? I will be sure to like your video and comment on it. I might subscribe too but I am very strict about who I subscribe to, so I won't make any promises.

    What will it feel like when you die? That can not be understood through words, because words are part of our destructive human logic. But picture it this way: Everything you experience is like a hole in the whole of the source mind. One can not destroy a hole, one can just fill it. Depending on how far this hole will fill you will either become one with the universe or you will become one with the even greater mind of god. If you become god then all feelings of want and sadness will have gone since you are complete again. If you become just the universe such negative feelings will at least greatly reduce as you gained a lot of richness and diversity in the process of blending with everything around you. There is however a third option, the Christian option. We will discuss this option in relation to heaven and the tree of knowledge. Because remember there is a holy book that always warned us that there could be something lethal about our desire for logic, understanding, and control. And this is the book of genesis. Is there a way back to the garden of Eden, if we give up the desire to understand and control god's mind?FalseIdentity

    I understand what you are trying to say, that maybe that apple should not have been eaten and eating it has put us on the wrong path through which we can never actually achieve our goal of becoming one with the source mind but this feels a bit disconnected from the whole thing. When I read this part I thought," Oh we are talking about this now huh." and I had to step back and then I realized how this connected to the whole thing. I don't know if that's what you intended but that's what I felt.

    Again, Please tell me your channel's name. Please,Please,Please :pray:
    I go by the name: Krishang Krishna, with a image of Vegito in the profile. Please read my comment if you tell me your channel name.
  • jgill
    3.8k
    they want to submit each other to build a rankFalseIdentity

    ??
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    In a hierarchy everyone has a rank from the bottom to the top. Submitting means that you fight someone till he breaks down physically or mentally. I am not a fan of hierarchies at all ...If you want to know more about this very evil side of us I recommend this article about depression, point six explains the rank hypothesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_approaches_to_depression
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    At this point I have to admit that the idea to start the video with a joke came from a social media expert that gave the impossible task to attract attention within the first 8 seconds of that video. And it freaked us out too.... Who can explain everything that is wrong with materialism in 8 seconds? So this is how the burger idea was born (would it be less provocative if we choose an avocado or a heap of nuts ?! Burgers are somehow associated with stupidity...) I am as well not sure if a full explanation in more than 8 seconds would be good - because this would be a repetition of what others have already done and youtube, and probably better than we can. We should focus on our unique argument against materialism and make it more clear. What you are right about is that it should be clear from very early on that this is a critique to materialism/physicalism so that the people at least know what they are heading at.

    I guess that the idea is more than a thought experiment. A thought experiment as I understand it in this context should be able to explain everything we see as well as the physicalist/materialist model without creating a logic problem. Alias: it could be true but it is not falsifiable. This our model can do but I think it has a higher explanatory power than physicalism. The higher explanatory power lies in the fact that physicalism can not tell us why the Münchhausens Trilema is not solvable by our mind. This is related a bit to a conclusion by Descartes. Descartes used the example of dreams to show that we have no inner sense that tells us if something is true or untrue. In Münchhausens Trilema we get stuck for the same reason; we have no inner sense for what is true so we try to continue to exclude untrue options in the hope that this will lead to the solution. We are so used to the fact that we can not inductively know what is true, that we don't notice that it is something special that would require a deeper explanation - often in science and philosophy the devil lies in the detail. Our model would nicely explain why we can't know things to be empirically true (our thought influences, shapes, and changes empirical reality so at least empirical truth continously changes). Pure logic truths as obtainable through pure skepticisms might be different from that however (example "I think therefore I am").
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    What I don't agree with is the logic and causes are something that we created just to understand the reality that we can perceive. I think that causes and logic should originate from non-logic and the non-causal because if the source mind contains everything then the knowledge to apply logic and causality should also be in there.@I love Chom-choms


    I love that idea, it shows a high level of understanding of the text! I too guess that the universal mind knows and can predict what a logic of causality would look like but does not use it, simply because it has no useful function for him. I think that causality and logic is something you only need when:
    1. There is more than one mind (and inside the universal mind)
    2. When this group wants to explore the universal mind TOGETHER.
    Let us first assume that the universal mind is there alone and has been for eternity. He knows what a medieval landscape looks like but he will as well know how a moon colony in the year 2300 will look like. In his mind he can jump from the medieval landscape to the moon colony in a second without having to give anyone an explanation as to why that should be logically possible. Or he can rewind the time and skip back at same speed. (For the same reason he can as well completely arbitrary decide what comes first the chicken or the egg, the difference does not matter to him). However if WE would interact with time as arbitrary as this major problems would arise in relation to how well we can interact with each other. Take the grandfather paradox: if you travel back in time and accidentally kill your grandfather you should cease to exist in the common reality because you will never be born. But if you are immortal this would just mean that you would go "somewhere else" inside the universal mind. There you would be completely isolated from everyone you have known so far. Or take the following couple as an example: The wife wishes that the house burns down. The father wants the house to stay. If both could make events as arbitrarily happen as the universal mind the wife would travel into a reality where the house is no more and the husband would travel into a reality where the house still stands. Both would be in different realities now and hence could not meet each other anymore. They would as well have no clue to where their partner would wish to be next so this separation might well be final. This is why we need this voting mechanism that not all realities we wish for come true at the same time. And this voting mechanism at the same time creates the logic of causality that connects us and holds us together from the past over the now to the future. The universal mind however can never lose track of us, because whatever reality we choose, this is still a reality inside him. This is a second reason why the logic of causality should not be important to that type of mind.
    The Nun is something like a pre-world while the Duat is more the afterworld. I am not an expert on Egyptian mythology but both believe systems could be separated by time too? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_(mythology)
    Sadly we don't have our own channel yet, but as soon as we have any video ready I will be very happy to invite you. In a certain sense, you helped to author the video - with all the work that goes into the review - so you would be our VIP :) I guess the video will be as usually watched by 3 philosophy nerds only but the least I could do is give a honorable mention to you and Hermeticus (only if you like of course).
  • I love Chom-choms
    65
    The wife wishes that the house burns down. The father wants the house to stay. If both could make events as arbitrarily happen as the universal mind the wife would travel into a reality where the house is no more and the husband would travel into a reality where the house still stands. Both would be in different realities now and hence could not meet each other anymore. They would as well have no clue to where their partner would wish to be next so this separation might well be final. This is why we need this voting mechanism that not all realities we wish for come true at the same time. And this voting mechanism at the same time creates the logic of causality that connects us and holds us together from the past over the now to the future.FalseIdentity

    So basically, if you have a universal mind then you can just do whatever you want maybe try to go to a world where there are stones that no one can life. NO Problemo :smirk:
    However, we cannot do anything like that because we are chained by the law of causality. We have a beginning and so will have to respect them and we cannot change them. Our comprehension of reality seems so shallow if what you are saying is actually true.
    In a certain sense, you helped to author the video - with all the work that goes into the review - so you would be our VIP :) I guess the video will be as usually watched by 3 philosophy nerds only but the least I could do is give a honorable mention to you and Hermeticus (only if you like of course).FalseIdentity
    Please don't do that. I am a rather shy person.
  • FalseIdentity
    62
    Please don't do that. I am a rather shy person.
    @I love Chom-choms

    Noted, no mentioning of you. I was just looking for a way to say thanks to you because I think you did a great job! It's often the introverted persons who can think best.
    Our comprehension of reality seems so shallow if what you are saying is actually true
    @I love Chom-choms

    It is. There is a scientist who has even calculated why beings that are formed through evolution will always have a shallow understanding of reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYp5XuGYqqY&t=990s The video is 20 minutes long but it is highly entertaining and easy to follow :)

    He explains that it is a problem of time: if you search too hard for the truth in the game of evolution you will die as you will become to slow in the task of surviving. This reminds me of you concluding from our explanation that we would only gain all knowledge in the moment we die. It sounds very similar, in both scenarios ultimate truth is connected with death...or let's call it more friendly: stepping out of the chain of causality to gain the full overview.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.