- Joined
- 28 May 2006
- Posts
- 9,985
- Reactions
- 2
mmx, so we are the doers and shapers.
Can our consciousness shape where the market ended last Friday? - now you're talking. !
(I don't suppose he lets on what he was smoking at the time
Eminent physicist John Wheeler says he has only enough time left to work on one idea: that human consciousness shapes not only the present but the past as well.
by Tim Folger, Photography by Dan Winters
Our observations, he suggests, might actually contribute to the creation of physical reality. To Wheeler we are not simply bystanders on a cosmic stage; we are shapers and creators living in a participatory universe.
Masaru Emoto, a scientist in Japan, conducted experiments with water. Positively and empirically, it showed that Human consciousness is not only measurable, but it changes matter... we've got the pictures!
We may have more power over matter and reality than we ever thought. See John Wheeler's article, 90 year-old physicist, and colleague of Albert Einstein, gives us the most unusual premise of all: This researcher asks, "Does matter exist if the Human isn't looking?" He is one of the first to postulate that Human consciousness might be a huge energy player in physics (and it's about time). All this is to say that you and I are far more than blobs of accidental walking biology. We might actually have interdimensional power that postures what happens in what we call reality... the earth, the solar system, and our own personal paths. This then, starts to circle the wagons around the word intent...
I love the concept -"Does matter exist if the Human isn't looking?"
This is nothing new. It was an idea first posited by Franz Brentano in the late 19th century. But the idea of intentionality became a force under Edmund Husserl and the phenomenological movement, who I've already mentioned.This then, starts to circle the wagons around the word intent...
Yep you pretty much got it in one. It explains how we can have different views of the exact same "facts" (I can't think of the correct term ATM) or external Objects, because of the different weight each of us puts on them. It also explains actions of schizophrenics etc.2020hindsight said:I love the concept -
but wouldn't that mean that my "reality" would be different to yours? -
(Maybe I wasn't looking when you were - or vice versa )
then again - maybe it is lol.
tf, that is a gem, you're rightagrees wif da "have a good xmas" (wif or wifout the religous trimmings)
but can't help meself mentioning this little gem I heard awhile back:
while i really like u, afraid I'll have to kill u because my imaginary friend doesn't agree with your imaginary friend
and >90% of wars have occured because these imaginary friends don't agree - I feel well able to get by without an imaginary friend
TreeFrog
I am more inclined to go for there being a divinity in human DNA which recognises on some level, the existence of God.
The Church Fathers, of course, agreed, and loudly declared the fact that God is an unchangeable, immaterial spirit who has an entirely simple ("incomposite") nature—that is, a nature containing no parts. Since all bodies extend through space and thus can be divided into parts, it is clear that God cannot have a body.
Clement of Alexandria
"What is God? ‘God,’ as the Lord says, ‘is a spirit.’ Now spirit is properly substance, incorporeal, and uncircumscribed. And that is incorporeal which does not consist of a body, or whose existence is not according to breadth, length, and depth. And that is uncircumscribed which has no place, which is wholly in all, and in each entire, and the same in itself".
agrees wif da "have a good xmas" (wif or wifout the religous trimmings)
but can't help meself mentioning this little gem I heard awhile back:
while i really like u, afraid I'll have to kill u because my imaginary friend doesn't agree with your imaginary friend
and >90% of wars have occured because these imaginary friends don't agree - I feel well able to get by without an imaginary friend
They can't actually prove more than 2 dimensions exist. Husserl demonstrated this. Hence the cubist movement.
I think Epicurus gives the most effective description/ explanation of what God is (and one of my favourite quotes of all time):
Why on Earth would I think a thing like that?Assuming God exists
I agree with 20/20 its a funny quote, but its not a true quote.
Wars are caused by what's in the human heart - envy, greed, jealousy, hate, and love of power and control. Sometimes religion is used as a excuse for these, and some religions use them more often than others, and some sections of certain religions more so than other sectors.
However, the 20th Century put paid forever to the idea that religion is the root cause of war. Secularistic humanism in its different guises killed more people under Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler and others than all the religious wars put together.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?