Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice  You believe you prove the hypothesis untrue. Put it this way, you can't disprove something unless you think you absolutely know something else. |
Again, NO. We do not know anything to be absolutely true, that's the point. We can disprove something (not absolutely, but moreso than we can prove something) to the point where we can remove it from the realm of possibility or probability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice They do indeed APPEAR to be there. I am not saying that causality cannot be experienced. I am saying that causality does not exist. You are merely experiencing an illusion of causality. |
So it is an illusion that I live? I am the direct effect of my mother's conceiving me, that was the "cause" of my existence. In effect, my parents are a cause, and I am the effect. If I have children, that makes me a cause and them an effect. If you are going to debate that I do not exist, or that I am an illusion, I will counter that I am very real, and very really typing this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice Consider a cartoon. A brick is thrown through a window. The window breaks. Did the window break beCAUSE the brick went through it? No, it is merely a series of images (which appear and disappear to create an illusion of movement). I APPEARS that the brick broke the window. REALLY, the images are just drawn. The artist could just as easily make the window not break as the brick went through it. Witnesses to this event would have called it a miracle. |
Consider REAL LIFE, not cartoons. If I throw a brick through a window, I caused the effect of the brick flying, which caused the effect of the window breaking. I am thus the root cause of the window breaking. The difference between a cartoon and real life is that the window cannot simply be redrawn in real life, it must be replaced. Plus, you can't stab someone with cartoon glass shards, but you can with real ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice Movement in generally is not fully understood in QM theory, but experiments have indicated that particles appear and reappear. This in fact is the case (which I know through other perceptive means.) |
Your "perception" continues to astound me. How did you perceive this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice You and others will in fact discover they do not move at all, they do appear and reappear. Mark my words. |
I'll wait for that day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice Causality is experienced. That doesn't mean it exists. |
See baby analogy above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice The illusion operates in "normal" ways, until it does not. It all depends on perspective. Perspective creates perception (experience). For others, the illusion operates in ways that defy causality. I realize this is something which conventional science rejects, but it does so through ignoring any evidence which it cannot explain, which is not true science. |
Please cite for me an example of something that defies causality, besides the "Big Bang" or creation (of the universe by a "higher power"). I look around me right now, and I see a phone, computer, glass of water, picture frame, and maybe these are just "illusions", although the fact that I can make calls, use the internet, drink the water and hold the picture make me think otherwise. On top of that, the phone does not dial itself, I do, the computer does not operate itself, I do, the water doesn't spontaneously move to my mouth, I must pick it up, and the picture did not take itself, I did. For every effect there is a cause, and if this is simply an illusion, it still operates in the "normal" way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice I assume you mean consciousness. Consciousness is not located just in the skull. Your consciousness does not end at the physical boundaries of your body, but extends out into the universe infinitely. There is no place where you consciousness ends and another begins. It is all one consciousness. There are merely places where it assumes identity (ego), giving the illusion of separation. |
"In the skull" was intended as a joke. And while we experience things that are not part of our body, this does not in any way make our consciousncess without boundaries. To experience these things, they must somehow be interpreted by my mind, be it in sight, hearing, taste, smell, touch, or even thought and dream. Thus, my consciousness does not extend beyond my body. As for the thought of a universal consciousness, I don't even know where to begin. How about "no"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice I did not say you communicated with your car. I said many people do, that it is a common experience. You have quite a narrow filter through which you create your reality. It is very limited. (That is not a bad thing or a put-down, merely a relative observation.) |
No one can communicate with their car, simple as that. You cannot "communicate" with an inanimate object. Perhaps my narrow view of reality is confined to that which is "real". Is that narrow? Not at all, there are many, many, many aspects of the real world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice You would do well to think and talk less, and listen more. Not just to people, but to life itself. As you grow older and activity slows down, you will do so. Then you will understand more of what we are discussing. Until then, you are like a teenager - you know it all. |
You make a lot of judgments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice Not just semantics. You were communicating that the universe needed something - that apartment building included. So obviously you do see a conscious universe. Your only mistake was your belief that it needed your understanding. It does not. But it welcomes it. |
^^^ Utter bullshit, sorry. I did not say the universe needed something, and if you read my rephrasing you would realize that. Don't put words in my text boxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice Also, life is not a process of discovery. It is a process of creation. |
It is both. Discovery for the living, creation for the yet-to-be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice If you believe that, then you have a poor perception of how varied experience and perceptions of reality are, even with physical contact. |
And you refuse to believe that two people may experience the same thing (and I do mean may, but it certainly is possible for two people to be so in-tune that they experience something the same way).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice That is correct, and is what I have been saying - there is no proof. Until you actualize, all of this is merely conjecture to you. As you expand your awareness, you will see why I am saying what I am saying. For now, you are merely holding it as potential (if that). |
The difference is, most of the things I believe in don't need actualizing. I believe in, like you said before, things I can see and hear (and as I added, things I can smell, taste and touch). The things I believe in that are immaterial are confined to my own consciousness, emotions and the like, and my emotions don't travel throughout the universe to all other conscious beings. I already understand why you are saying what you are, but I believe it to be nonsense.