================================================ Subject: Re: NCR: Climatic turning points.. Wonderment From: "Creed - 7M3 - Live" To: Date: Wed 23 May 2001 21:29:25 -0400 ================================================ fmn wrote: > Sometimes I wonder how come I always have to change my opinion on > things -- so extremely. I guess it's the pendulum concept, it's like > you need to find a balance, so for some time you swing between the > extremes - the problem is: I never seem to stop in the middle.. > hehe.. I guess my mind doesn't know of the non-existence of a > 'perpetuum mobile' ;-) > If you are talking about not having set in stone views. Then I suffer the same problem. .. An earlier lister once got into it with me on my sort of "swinging" from one view to another. --- Let's just say that it is being a "chef" with ideas. Add a pinch of that and a spoon of the other. We keep adding and taking out "ingredients" until we feel that it "tastes good" to the mind. The person that flamed me was on the aid of manmade chemicals to keep a "level ground" I believe she was "manic-depressive". so she couldn't comprehend the "swinging" ideas. It might be that it is a perpetual interaction of the mind on its chemical mixing to fire our synapses. Or it might be that we are more "plastic" with our ability to connect and disconnect networks of arrays in the brain. Either way! I love the imbalance. > We evolved the senses that we do have because they were what was > necessary for our lives, at least prior to civilization. Additional > senses and additional realities must have very little impact on us, > because otherwise it seems that we would have evolved to deal much > more efficiently with such things. > > yep, that's a very convincing way of putting it.. I guess it's one of > those theories that are based on functionalism, i.e. if it's necessary > it'll stay and if not it'll go (very low diction here btw.. hehe) - > but that's also the main idea behind the theory of evolution.. and it > is convincing, I have to admit it > I don't think that the senses fall away and come about from the need of them. I believe it is more to the fact that the advantage is to the most able to survive. I believe that about evolution. But also know that it is more survivable from mortality now with technologies. The weaker. (would die if not for our machines and devices.). Since something interrupted thier ability to survive a natural birth. Be it a malfunction of the gestation period by the mother or a chance weakness of thiers to the environment. Therefore, senses are not a strict guide to us having them or not. Maybe those that could not survive the natural state have more senses than us. Which took away from their natural survival ability. Maybe thier development was faster in other aspects. Which stalled thier physical development. -- But contrary to the survival of the fittest. The strongest species would be one of the stronger animals of the earth. Not us humans. > As it is, we must work with our, own, physical reality, regardless of > what lies beyond it (or even deep within it, if necessary). > > That statement gave me a lot to think about. I mean the "regardless of > what lies beyond it"-part sounds like a fatalistic-deterministic > attitude and it's like giving up the seeking.. but hey, I know what > you meant here, (cause this is exactly what I had on mind) it's just > that now that I hear it from you (in a slightly different version) > I've noticed a different aspect to it and it's rather sad to accept > this sorta materialistic attitude - although I know you didn't mean it > that way. Oh gosh, I hope you understand what I want to convey here.. > hehe.. btw. an interesting phenomenon: notice how things change when > other people say them - getting back to the topic though: I've tried > to imagine many people inside my mind, each of them having a different > opinion as to change my perspective of thinking in "I" category which > is a "normal" state of mind and if you want to figure something out > you have to try diverse ways and be creative and so on, so that's > where that idea came from... now don't suspect me of the > split-personality syndrome here.. hehe.. > I'll go with the more scientific here. It is the compulsion of organisms to fight to survive. it seems that you might have seperate, but areas of the brain that can communicate with each other. but have thier own characteristics and independent storage. sort of multiprocessors that make or break connections at will. Though, sometimes they have thier independent contact with the "conscious" controller. -- I'll skip the doubt of the unknown and lack of having a sense. Why can't we see heat! Like a thermal imaging camera changes to light that we can see. Why do we have to rely on our sense of touch? Is it really the best sense? I could probably use such a sense! > I have already questioned my own ideas so extensively that there is no > longer any need (at least, until the next climactic turning point in > my noetic processes, whatever that is and whenever it occurs - the > last one was in February, so we'll have to see). > > E X A C T L Y, man have you been cheating in your metaphysics > examination lately? > > quote: "I cheated in the final of my metaphysics examination: I looked > into the soul of the boy sitting next to me" (Woody Allen) ;-) > > "Sophisticated words?" "Highly professor-like sentence structure?" > I didn't think that I had either one of those, I just write what comes > _naturally _to me. Perhaps 'tis a talent, but unfortunately 'tis not > the sort of talent with which I can make any money! > > hehe.. .. and "naturally" is indeed > (like Jim said) not the same for everybody between my "naturally" and the Jackson's "naturally"> > > > Naturally (! or ?) - but not to argue over definitions. I'll take meaning number "one million three" JC > Ewa > > /my climax seems to be my fall, my firm belief - my doubt. As evening > comes my breath to store, my resolutions turn to dust to resurrect at > dawn/ > > > -- We don't claim Interactive EasyFlow is good for anything -- if you think it is, great, but it's up to you to decide. If Interactive EasyFlow doesn't work: tough. If you lose a million because Interactive EasyFlow messes up, it's you that's out the million, not us. If you don't like this disclaimer: tough. We reserve the right to do the absolute minimum provided by law, up to and including nothing. This is basically the same disclaimer that comes with all software packages, but ours is in plain English and theirs is in legalese. We didn't really want to include any disclaimer at all, but our lawyers insisted. We tried to ignore them but they threatened us with the attack shark at which point we relented. -- Haven Tree Software Limited, "Interactive EasyFlow" To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp