It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
Originally posted by MamaJ
I for one have not seen proof my mind is in my brain so I speculate my mind is outside of my vessel thats been labled a human body. If my mind is outside of my body then there must be things in space I cannot sense.
A magnetic field can be generated using moving energy and an object called a transformer. This magnetic field permeates the 'physicality' of the transformer, but also extends way beyond the transformer's physical boundaries. I know this because i have built a transformer, allowed energy to flow through it, and measured the presence of this 'field' using tools that act as additional 'senses'.
We could state that because this 'field' extends beyond the transformer, that it is a separate 'thing' , no? But the 'field' could not exist without the moving energy *or* the particular arrangement of physicality that 'transformed' this energy into a field, and further, if either moving energy or transformer are removed, the 'field' collapses.
If we replace 'transformer' with 'body' and 'field' with 'mind', do the above statements remain true?
edit on 14-5-2012 by FRATERPERDURABO because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Jameela
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
Originally posted by Jameela
Both; I must change my self first, then, through my good actions, can influence others to also change.
Why do you feel it is your 'duty' to change other humans? How do you know that what feels right for you, will also feel right for them?
I do not feel it is my 'duty' to change others, I said I believe that if I change myself for the better I can influence others to also change, through my good actions.
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
so: a 'great' thought confirms consensus and a 'terrible' thought shatters consensus?
The opposite of 'great' is 'terrible'?
so great = good?
i was more inquiring about 'magnitude' rather than 'direction' (good or bad). Thoughts are like vectors with both magnitude and direction, yes?
Both are relative to some reference point.
By which reference point would you measure a thought, whether it be magnitude (gravity) or direction (good/bad)? A thing (even if it weigh nothing at all) can not be measured without a zero point (reference) to compare it against.
Originally posted by MamaJ
reply to post by FRATERPERDURABO
Why is there a need for certainty when we observe the Universe as we know it is capable of all possibilities?
The only thing many observe that is certain is "one day people will not see me physically on earth ...one day"......
Is that a certain (true) statement though?
Originally posted by Jameela
Originally posted by AManYouALL
Originally posted by Jameela
Both; I must change my self first, then, through my good actions, can influence others to also change.
If you are needed to influence others to change, who is influencing you to change?edit on 13-5-2012 by AManYouALL because: (no reason given)
All those ones who were able to change the world for the better. Everything, begins with one.
Originally posted by AManYouALL
I AM here.
This IS my faith in action.
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
sort of an "i think, therefore i am" kinda thing?
there is to 'be' and there is to 'do' (or are they the same?). "doing" usually requires choices, which involves judgement (we hope, but not as often as we think), choices are made based upon 'ideas' and options: the one sits within and the other without.
uh oh: getting circular: u see the dilemma, right?
Originally posted by MamaJ
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
Originally posted by MamaJ
I for one have not seen proof my mind is in my brain so I speculate my mind is outside of my vessel thats been labled a human body. If my mind is outside of my body then there must be things in space I cannot sense.
A magnetic field can be generated using moving energy and an object called a transformer. This magnetic field permeates the 'physicality' of the transformer, but also extends way beyond the transformer's physical boundaries. I know this because i have built a transformer, allowed energy to flow through it, and measured the presence of this 'field' using tools that act as additional 'senses'.
We could state that because this 'field' extends beyond the transformer, that it is a separate 'thing' , no? But the 'field' could not exist without the moving energy *or* the particular arrangement of physicality that 'transformed' this energy into a field, and further, if either moving energy or transformer are removed, the 'field' collapses.
If we replace 'transformer' with 'body' and 'field' with 'mind', do the above statements remain true?
edit on 14-5-2012 by FRATERPERDURABO because: (no reason given)
I understand the analogy however are you asking me if i need my body in order to sustain my mind?
Why is there a need for certainty when we observe the Universe as we know it is capable of all possibilities?
Originally posted by AManYouALL
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
so: a 'great' thought confirms consensus and a 'terrible' thought shatters consensus?
The opposite of 'great' is 'terrible'?
so great = good?
i was more inquiring about 'magnitude' rather than 'direction' (good or bad). Thoughts are like vectors with both magnitude and direction, yes?
Both are relative to some reference point.
By which reference point would you measure a thought, whether it be magnitude (gravity) or direction (good/bad)? A thing (even if it weigh nothing at all) can not be measured without a zero point (reference) to compare it against.
Again, this is why I prefer to be the one asking questions rather than answering them. Too many live under the assumption that since we have these wonderful things called words which aid in our day to day lives that they are infallible.
However, words are the absolute worst form of communication because every word means something different to someone else despite having set definitions. When you string them into sentences they take on even deeper meanings which only aids in the confusion.
Rigid indoctrination into the art of using words works for those who are willing to take on the endeavor, but then, what learning has been sacrificed about other things while focusing on agreement over WORDS?
For example, I used the word mind as a label since you applied it to me. It is something we both understand. However, mind to me is much more than what mind is to you. It is etheral and without location. It is spiritual, spatial, and many other words that would only serve to further confuse the issue of who I am and what I am and who you are and what you are. So you see, even mind is totally inadequate for the task.
So, I am who I am.
Even that breeds too much confusion. Now some proclaim "Haha, he thinks he is GOD!"
Yet they remain silent and stupid when I humbly ask, well what is God?
I was going to go back and answer a post of yours that was missed yesterday. However, would you mind if we just moved on?
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
moving on = yes. tho the questions remain unanswered, but since most of my questions remain unanswered, i am ok with a few more.
/grin
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
"However, mind to me is much more than what mind is to you." Through which of my words do you make this conclusion?
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
I have some ideas about 'mind' that would would probably astonish you....
Originally posted by AManYouALL
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
sort of an "i think, therefore i am" kinda thing?
there is to 'be' and there is to 'do' (or are they the same?). "doing" usually requires choices, which involves judgement (we hope, but not as often as we think), choices are made based upon 'ideas' and options: the one sits within and the other without.
uh oh: getting circular: u see the dilemma, right?
I do not see a dilemma.
Everything in space IS circular.
Originally posted by FRATERPERDURABO
/grin
yup. I would say cyclical.
so it basically amounts to *choosing* a reference point, no? For we cannot make judgements without comparisons and comparisons rely upon reference points, no?
yet not all is choice, yes? Whether or not we choose or not, the earth will orbit the sun in 365 (ish) days.
Originally posted by MamaJ
reply to post by FRATERPERDURABO
Im not certain if my mind needs my body. I THINK my mind sustains whether I have one or not because of what my experience has taught me.....if indeed experience leads to certainty which I only specualte it does.
I also speculate due to experience that my mind may indeed be the soul people refer to as being seperate from their physical self also known as spirit. A type of energy that only transforms and never ceases.
Just because my body no longer moves in experience does not mean I no longer exist as I think I am not my body. My true essence is not physical although I can be seen in the physical. Seeing is believing for some.....for some it can be felt.
Originally posted by InspirationEverywhere
Hello, great post.
I'm here to experience this gift in all its awe, I think that covers it.