Viability of foreverness

...Monism is quite fine prevented instead of taking objects from the world we take minds out... Laughing

0 Replies

u take minds out?? who r u shitty, showing clearly to wat extent **** is exclusively ****

no one was born for the life it experience, when life is one only then there is no other living while what is sure is that each awareness of being exist since existence is a true reality, **** u till nothing would b out of u and only the **** u r will b inn and out u

0 Replies

@dalehileman,

dalehileman wrote:

Okay Ora, but infinity is pretty big so then if you accept the idea, then at this very instant there must be an infinite number of absolutely identical neighborhoods (“visible ‘Universes’ ”?) in which Ora is chatting with Dale; also an infinite number identical to the latter in every way except that one hair on my head is 0.00000001 cm longer etc etc ad infinitum

Doesn’t your intuition react even a little

No reaction.

But I'll admit that the minority of scientists who think that the universe is actually a finite four-dimensional doughnut are interesting.

I want a lot more evidence before I start believing they are right, however.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

...... that the universe is actually a finite four-dimensional doughnut are interesting.

Very. Do you by the way consider “donut” to be a simulacrum like “flat"

1 Reply

infinity reason is truth, that is why when truth exist then infinity is nothing

actually it is why nothing exist as true reality aware and in peace pleased of being nothing real

infinity is kind of translation to truth quality as absolute superiority always
but also that is why as long as smthg true appear it becomes immediately its onw reality unik in all terms of its existence any clone creations business must b through its reverse

that is why u cant b me nor like me, im unik in extreme terms u cant but b my opposite as long as u want to b, there is no possible else being objectively but me

1 Reply

@imans,

and that is why all powers on existence reach professionnally to b through one life extreme lies evil, it is impossible otherwise to mean objective existence even relatively
ur god must invent allegations known being all false from takin advantage of some knowledge in order to act in powers of lies, so powers over nothing abstractly which become concrete in attacking and violating directly true objects rights, after knowledge and identification of some known relative true existence

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

But if one of you non-dualists makes a statement about your dogma, you seem to resent any questions of that sort.

I can't speak for the others, but to me, questions of that sort are indications that the one asking them hasn't understood my statements.
If I make a statement about "my dogma", I am making an assertion that is based on the structure of my ideas. I am making an assertion about the model I seek to explain reality with. The basis of my assertions is the background on which I understand the issue. Yours is different, and that is why you may disagree. If understanding my assertion requires you to modify your notion of "matter", for instance, and you feel that making the modification is unwarranted, we will never agree, because we are not talking about the same thing.
We assume that 'my reality' and 'your reality' are varieties of 'the reality', and we argue about who is closest to 'the reality', thinking that the one who is closest to this mythical ideal is the wisest/most knowledgable etc..
But all that doesn't matter. I don't believe in 'the reality'.
What I believe in is the experience I am having, and an important question is if it's enjoyable or not. If my understanding of reality is such that it gives me a lot of negative experiences, I will probably benefit from examining the basis I have for making my assertions.
When I make claims like "reality is awareness", I am just taking a "what if" and working my way from there. My basis for making that assertion can be debated from many angles, but in the end it comes down to whether or not you are willing to believe in the assertion, if only temporary, for the sake of the experiment.
It's like with food. You cannot really know if you like something or not until you've tried it. But how much should you eat before you make up your mind?

1 Reply

conscious or awareness reality is different thing to existing reality

what u r describin is not the sense of true existence it is to the sense of individual freedom as the result out of true existence that u r not involved inn

true existence has nothing to do with experience and joys, what u r meaning being ur right is ur individual fact resulting from knowing smthg that happen to b true

true existence so objective realities are exclusively about freedom absolute values realisations out of truth superiority as being beyond all possible the exclusive always fact

that is why u look being from reverse called uni verse, even anything cant b one object, an object by definition is totally independant fact how is it possible to b known as one from outside while there object

reverse bc u reverse the facts and ways, u keep meaning one and urself value while also meaning objective existence meaning ur value too

free individual value is only itself which is nothing to all and any other ever

individuals value is a fact only bc of that, only alone they can b independant then and never having any consequence on object or objective or other and else

while u mean individual value to invest in becoming more and the only reason to objects realities

objects realities are ur reasons not the reverse

true existence so true presence is the reason of individual peace since no infinite then when truth is around

1 Reply

@imans,

Seriously Im, with no agenda sub rosa many of us might like to learn something about you; your age, nationality, religion, education, family, work, politics, world outlook etc etc

With many thanks

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Thank you for engaging me on this, Cyracuz.

Quote:

I can't speak for the others, but to me, questions of that sort are indications that the one asking them hasn't understood my statements.

Perhaps.

If I question one of your statements, bring this up again and we can discuss it at that point. But I can tell you often I do understand the statements…and my questions are appropriate.

When someone says “there is no ultimate reality independent of an observer”…that is different from one saying, “one of the possibilities is that there is no ultimate reality independent of an observer.”

I have heard people say the former…and I ask my questions. Mostly I get evasions, but I am still going to ask. I figure the people doing the evading will eventually realize they are evading…and may come to an unconscious adjustment to their thinking.

Quote:

If I make a statement about "my dogma", I am making an assertion that is based on the structure of my ideas. I am making an assertion about the model I seek to explain reality with. The basis of my assertions is the background on which I understand the issue. Yours is different, and that is why you may disagree. If understanding my assertion requires you to modify your notion of "matter", for instance, and you feel that making the modification is unwarranted, we will never agree, because we are not talking about the same thing.
We assume that 'my reality' and 'your reality' are varieties of 'the reality', and we argue about who is closest to 'the reality', thinking that the one who is closest to this mythical ideal is the wisest/most knowledgable etc..

Do you know that “the reality” is nothing more than a mythical ideal? If so, how do you know it?

Quote:

But all that doesn't matter. I don't believe in 'the reality'.

So you are saying it doesn't matter because you do not "believe" in it.

Do you know that your “belief system” actually impacts on what the REALITY is…or is it that you are guessing or speculating that your “belief” does?

1 Reply

@dalehileman,

it is impossible u prove the liar u r

what i write kill the questions u said being interesting to know about me, it is much beyond including myself clearly
it shows ur true means to put lies over truth everywhere and constantly for anything u might get in form of lies forces as ur way of being alive

0 Replies

@dalehileman,

dalehileman wrote:

Very. Do you by the way consider “donut” to be a simulacrum like “flat"

The finite four-dimensional doughnut model is for a flat universe.

It is a lot more complex than the ordinary infinite model for a flat universe though, so it should be backed by some substantial evidence before it is accepted as the truth.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

The finite four-dimensional doughnut model is for a flat universe. It is a lot more complex than the ordinary infinite model.....Thanks Ora but you’re ‘way beyond me. Does that mean that the donut is somehow infinite

Sounds contradictory

2 Replies

@dalehileman,

what cant appear finite to u is not infinite, u do not exist but to u, when u cant exist always then u do not exist, what exist is always real more constantly not going and coming back

u r finite as what u identify urself bein, from will being a finite thing for sure since it is exclusively to u , so one
but finite truth is not u, finite truth cant b wills, will by definition is never true so never would b

finite truth is about objective superiority, any fact superiority over objective dimension is a finite stand, since it cant mean more superiority when some dimension exist really, it cant but b superior to that

while of course forcing superiority over dimensions is ruled by infinite truth which keep meaning superiority of nothing to all that, since nothing is true reality so fact superiority constance over lies and forces

1 Reply

@imans,

like principles of human rights are superior rules that oblige all courts judgments to b under its applications, so those principles constitutes finite rules nature more then anyother rules, while they are the most abstract out of everything bc it is superior to everything else

this is the nature of finite being superiority as objective fact, which confirm what i keep saying that objects are of much superior value then u, or one, noone can do object thing

0 Replies

@dalehileman,

dalehileman wrote:

Thanks Ora but you’re ‘way beyond me. Does that mean that the donut is somehow infinite

No. The four-dimensional doughnut model is finite.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

If

Quote:

The four-dimensional doughnut model is finite.

That’s what I had supposed but you can see Ora how

Quote:

"The finite four-dimensional doughnut model is for a flat universe."

sounds contradictory

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

When someone says “there is no ultimate reality independent of an observer”…that is different from one saying, “one of the possibilities is that there is no ultimate reality independent of an observer.”

I take it to mean the same. When someone says to me that god is real, I take that to mean that on the basis of how that person understands reality, god is a meaningful idea.

Quote:

Do you know that “the reality” is nothing more than a mythical ideal? If so, how do you know it?

We fantasize about it, but have so far been unable to verify it's existence. 'Mythical ideal' seems to me to be a pretty good description.

Quote:

So you are saying it doesn't matter because you do not "believe" in it.

No. I am saying that since I believe that 'the reality' is a mythical ideal, I also believe that we have no way of deciding with certainty which description of reality is 'the truth'. That makes the contest of who is most wise and clever ultimately meaningless. The true measure is what our beliefs do for us.

It is my opinion that our materialistic world view leads to a very destructive lifestyle, and that there is cause to examine it.

1 Reply

@dalehileman,

dalehileman wrote:

but you can see Ora how
Quote:
"The finite four-dimensional doughnut model is for a flat universe."
sounds contradictory

I don't see any contradiction.

The four-dimensional doughnut model seems unlikely due to its complexity however.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Good post!
Have you read Fritjof Capra's "The Web of Life" ? It supports your final statement.

1 Reply

Viability of foreverness

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know