Your ideology on what ‘Existence’ is.

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

For me, how I see it, sure my bones will still exist, even in ashes. Memory of me may prevail.

But I myself exist while I am conscious, in whatever dimension. I’m a deep thinker, who has learnt not to think TOO deep and get all hung up on it.

It’s just passing time really. I feel the wise area to focus on is simply raising our own individual vibrational field and that of others as a knock on effect.

Precisely.

 

[December Flower]

Existence is any form of particle or electromagnetic wave, sometimes with and sometimes without matter, or in different formations. Existence can also be an idea that was developed into something real, but will still usually be expressed via waves or matter, so it doesn't really differ from anything else.

Dark Matter is tricky, and one of the few aspects of life we still just theorize about, because we have absolutely no clue if it exists. It's very likely, but cannot be counted towards existence.

I don't understand the philosophical aspect here. If I have a thought, and never told anyone about it, will it have existed? Yes, as a string of impulses within my nervous system.

I don't really understand many of the other posts here, time = gravity and gravity = time. Where is the confusion? Or the connection? I'd be happy if someone wants to explain what the point is exactly?

Am I to theorize about the Big Bang being created by quantum fluctuations right now, yesterday and tomorrow, since it happened/is happening/will happen outside our physical universe, ergo outside our time? That's not an "ideology", that's likely just what happened/is happening. I don't even think "ideology" is the correct word here, or do you mean for us to state our IDEAL scenario for existence?

I'd love to be a tree.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

Existence is any form of particle or electromagnetic wave, sometimes with and sometimes without matter, or in different formations. Existence can also be an idea that was developed into something real, but will still usually be expressed via waves or matter, so it doesn't really differ from anything else.

Dark Matter is tricky, and one of the few aspects of life we still just theorize about, because we have absolutely no clue if it exists. It's very likely, but cannot be counted towards existence.

I don't understand the philosophical aspect here. If I have a thought, and never told anyone about it, will it have existed? Yes, as a string of impulses within my nervous system.

I don't really understand many of the other posts here, time = gravity and gravity = time. Where is the confusion? Or the connection? I'd be happy if someone wants to explain what the point is exactly?

Am I to theorize about the Big Bang being created by quantum fluctuations right now, yesterday and tomorrow, since it happened/is happening/will happen outside our physical universe, ergo outside our time? That's not an "ideology", that's likely just what happened/is happening. I don't even think "ideology" is the correct word here..

That’s why I used quotations, and then Theological, and Philosophical in the thread explanation.
They are all different in their own right, yes, you know this obviously. I presume it could have been missed since were on Pg. 2 now admittedly.

 

[December Flower]

That’s why I used quotations, and then Theological, and Philosophical in the thread explanation.
They are all different in their own right, yes, you know this obviously. I presume it could have been missed since were on Pg. 2 now admittedly.

Still drawing a blank Sorry.
I think I'm too stupid or too literal to understand this.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

Some people follow things that would call their stance ideology, others philosophy, others theology.

ideology is doctrine, philosophy, body of beliefs or principles belonging to an individual or group while theology is the study of god, or a god, or gods, and the truthfulness of religion in general.

I left it open for any of them to be included, this was to not allow anyone (that I foresaw when I created the thread) to feel unimportant in their stance/belief.
I hope that clears up the wording.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

Still drawing a blank Sorry.
I think I'm too stupid or too literal to understand this.

Ideology follows suit into Philosophy, almost in very definition. Ideology is doctrine, philosophy, or principles that belong to an individual or group.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

Nobody is stupid, you are not stupid for being unaware, everyone is unaware until they’re made aware. & That doesn’t make everyone stupid, just unaware. You’re fine, no worries.

 

[December Flower]

Unaware of what?
I possess awareness and senses. I can hear, feel, see, taste and smell.
I also have an OK handle on morphogenetics(or whatever the reality behind it is)

But Science suggests enough to know that Death is not the end of one's personal existence. Energy always goes somewhere, it never disappears. So whoever it is one calls "one" will persist through death, in one form or another.

That sort of theorizing? I think the word ideology makes me go bananas, because I don't have an ideal on how the world should be. It just is what it is, and no amount of thinking can change what it is, and knowing doesn't get me anywhere

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

No

Unaware of what?
I possess awareness and senses. I can hear, feel, see, taste and smell.
I also have an OK handle on morphogenetics(or whatever the reality behind it is)

Now your pride is blinding you, you said you were confused, or stupid after I said the definitions of the words I used. I said you aren’t stupid, I wasn’t insulting you, I wasn’t attacking you. Do not get defensive, there’s no need, I promise.

But Science suggests enough to know that Death is not the end of one's personal existence. Energy always goes somewhere, it never disappears. So whoever it is one calls "one" will persist through death, in one form or another.

& That sounds like a wonderful belief you have, but to call it an empirical fact is of the utmost arrogance. Many leading scientists call us stupid for believing a “one” whatever their one is. Be it Christian God, otherwise, or even Brahman as reality. You cannot prove your side any further into reality than I can my own, nor a scientist their own. Not until we die, will we know for sure.

That sort of theorizing? I think the word ideology makes me go bananas, because I don't have an ideal on how the world should be. It just is what it is, and no amount of thinking can change what it is, and knowing doesn't get me anywhere

The Archaic meaning of Ideology: the science of ideas; the study of their origin and nature.
Aka, what you’re calling nature, science of idealism, science/study of origin.

In the end you’re just not completely understanding the post I believe, so if this doesn’t help you. That is all I can do, you’re maintaining an ideology/philosophy/or theology when you discuss the idea of what existence is.
Nobody can absolutely prove it, not yet.

~ Have a good day, I really do hope this helps to understand. If it does not, maybe someone else could try to explain.

 

[AutoTripper]

I'd love to be a tree.

If I have to come back, I’ve given this a bit of thought over time, weighed up some odds, and I’ve decided I’d opt for a Sleeping Beauty carnation.

A thousand year deep, restful Kip sounds good right now. I’m not too keen on the Prince kissing me awake, but even that’s probably better than being a penguin with freezing balls, eaten by a killer whale at age 4.

Really, I’d rather not come back, but go somewhere else instead.

But I’ll take Sleeping Beauty over the Penguin any day lol.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

Really, I’d rather not come back, but go somewhere else instead.

Same, existence is pain, especially within Advaita Vedanta.

 

[AutoTripper]

Same, existence is pain, especially within Advaita Vedanta.

Yes, but I posit also, without pain, none of us would likely make it past childhood in this physical world where it’s a necessity signal for indicating problems and weaknesses, part of the package of incarnating on this plane.

We just would never know when something was wrong without pain. It lets me know exactly when and where I have a respiratory infection that needs treating, and so much more.

The pain, basically is like a guide and push to attempt to heal. So ironic like that.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

Yes, but I posit also, without pain, none of us would likely make it past childhood in this physical world where it’s a necessity signal for indicating problems and weaknesses, part of the package of incarnating on this plane.

We just would never know when something was wrong without pain. It lets me know exactly when and where I have a respiratory infection that needs treating, and so much more.

The pain, basically is like a guide and push to attempt to heal. So ironic like that.

Within Advaita Vedanta that wouldn’t really hold to their belief, they believe that everything is an illusion reflected from Brahman. The one Reality, one Soul, one Existence, that once you perceive/reach Brahman.
You cease to be separate, you are now one with Reality again,
> but from my PoV you’re right. Without pain, we would undoubtedly harm ourselves direly fast.

 

[December Flower]

No

Now your pride is blinding you, you said you were confused, or stupid after I said the definitions of the words I used. I said you aren’t stupid, I wasn’t insulting you, I wasn’t attacking you. Do not get defensive, there’s no need, I promise.

& That sounds like a wonderful belief you have, but to call it an empirical fact is of the utmost arrogance. Many leading scientists call us stupid for believing a “one” whatever their one is. Be it Christian God, otherwise, or even Brahman as reality. You cannot prove your side any further into reality than I can my own, nor a scientist their own. Not until we die, will we know for sure.

The Archaic meaning of Ideology: the science of ideas; the study of their origin and nature.
Aka, what you’re calling nature, science of idealism, science/study of origin.

In the end you’re just not completely understanding the post I believe, so if this doesn’t help you. That is all I can do, you’re maintaining an ideology/philosophy/or theology when you discuss the idea of what existence is.
Nobody can absolutely prove it, not yet.

~ Have a good day, I really do hope this helps to understand. If it does not, maybe someone else could try to explain.

I apologize, I have no pride, another concept I don't understand.
It seems like I have to state this in many conversations, I'm Autistic, hence my trouble understanding you fully. I'm not mocking you, or being arrogant, I have trouble understanding the need to discuss something we know almost nothing about.
I always thought for existence to be a pretty narrow pathway, philosophically, since I never saw much room for discussion.
It's usually: God - yay or nay?
and Afterlife - yay or nay?
also Reason behind this - yay or nay?
A very anthropological way of seeing things
My take is: "Does it even matter what I or any other humans think?"
If an ant cannot comprehend my existence, how could I comprehend something that is so big that we don't even have numbers for how big it is, ergo, the universe?

I never said there was empirical data (well there is empirical data suggesting what I said to be true, since energy always changes from one energy to another form of energy, example: kinetic into heat, but nothing in the form of "Grandpa is now our kitchen lamp", no.)
I'm not entirely sure, but I think that a deity or even multiple deities would fit into such a concept of "rebirth", for lack of a better word, "immortality" might be the better fit. I'm not one to believe in such, since in my culture it is rather normal to be raised oldschool pagan: Cherish the sun, for it grants you life. Cherish the earth, the air you breathe, the plants that give you all you need. The animals that die for you, and the sky that rains down on you.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

I'm Autistic, hence my trouble understanding you fully.

I understand trust me, it’s a large obstacle to make it past day to day obstacles, it affects me as well. I am sorry you too understand it.

It's usually: God - yay or nay?
and Afterlife - yay or nay?
also Reason behind this - yay or nay?

I think the reason a lot discuss, and debate the topic isn’t due to the outcome alone. Even Advaita Vedanta has a sort of “Almighty,” which is Brahman. The ultimate, the many faced god of nothing, and from nothing is everything.
They debate it to more so discuss how it is to be reached, why some can’t, why some can, why it is/isn’t possible.
They discuss it to figure out to reach their goal.

energy always changes from one energy to another form of energy, example: kinetic into heat, but nothing in the form of "Grandpa is now our kitchen lamp", no.)

The Nondualist would argue that though, their argument would be exactly this too: “How do you know what he is or isn’t; when you are by yourself & he is alone. Without hearing him, or seeing him, what do you know of his status? Without something to perceive him, what does he become? An object must be perceived to be an objective, without it it becomes subjective. (I’m not making this point to argue by the way, just to shed light how they’d reply.)

Cherish the sun, for it grants you life. Cherish the earth, the air you breathe, the plants that give you all you need. The animals that die for you, and the sky that rains down on you.

I think my ultimate goal is probably just to learn, to become as knowledgeable on as many subjects as I can before I pass away and rot in the ground. Maybe I’ll become enlightened, and surpass the Cycle, maybe I’ll go another round. I won’t know, and I won’t remember if I do.

 

[AutoTripper]

Within Advaita Vedanta that wouldn’t really hold to their belief, they believe that everything is an illusion reflected from Brahman. The one Reality, one Soul, one Existence, that once you perceive/reach Brahman.
You cease to be separate, you are now one with Reality again,
> but from my PoV you’re right. Without pain, we would undoubtedly harm ourselves direly fast.

I don’t rule out the simulation theory. It would be ignorant of me I think to assume that not everything we experience and feel is “imaginable”.

I’m suddenly looking at that concept from some different angles.

The concept itself ties in strongly with the simulation concept. Like, a dream, real as day, basically. Pain, chocolate chip ice cream (if you’re Biden lol), and all.

But I’m not bought into it, or anything. I don’t rule out the Bible being genuine to the word, but I don’t scaffold any solid view system from it.

I mean, I really don’t know I’ll be totally honest. I hope we find out and it’s a very pleasant finding out.

I’ll simply be happy with that. I keep things simple otherwise, living for today. I’ll be glad if I see 42, if I see 80, I will not grumble.

I’ve no fear of death. But I still don’t want to wake up in 5 seconds, memory blank, in a Penguin’s womb.

I’m actually being totally serious, theologically, not piss taking or making light, but at the same time being naturally humorous, so that it’s not even deliberate.

That’s exactly how humour should be too, and what I’ve always called true humour. The true even serves as a pun, because the real humour has truth at its base.

Imagination is good too, in the right place and time. Humour is timing they long have said.

 

[December Flower]

I understand trust me, it’s a large obstacle to make it past day to day obstacles, it affects me as well. I am sorry you too understand it.

I think the reason a lot discuss, and debate the topic isn’t due to the outcome alone. Even Advaita Vedanta has a sort of “Almighty,” which is Brahman. The ultimate, the many faced god of nothing, and from nothing is everything.
They debate it to more so discuss how it is to be reached, why some can’t, why some can, why it is/isn’t possible.
They discuss it to figure out to reach their goal.

The Nondualist would argue that though, their argument would be exactly this too: “How do you know what he is or isn’t; when you are by yourself & he is alone. Without hearing him, or seeing him, what do you know of his status? Without something to perceive him, what does he become? An object must be perceived to be an objective, without it it becomes subjective. (I’m not making this point to argue by the way, just to shed light how they’d reply.)

I think my ultimate goal is probably just to learn, to become as knowledgeable on as many subjects as I can before I pass away and rot in the ground. Maybe I’ll become enlightened, and surpass the Cycle, maybe I’ll go another round. I won’t know, and I won’t remember if I do.

And Brahma is Vamanadeva, is Mahadeva, is Mahakali, is Krsna, ultimately.
I think ultimately that God, or whatever name we might pick, is and has been our concept of what we do not understand (yet).

I imagine an Ancient Egyptian explaining a Smartphone. It can only be magic from the Gods, maybe Ra-affiliated because of all the light emitted by it. We might think similarly about this in a thousand years, when mankind tries to understand our concept of God, while in that time(thousand years from now) maybe knowing of a living universe(something we highly highly theorize about today, and funnily enough makes a lot of sense.) that we misinterpreted.

The Judas Evangelium comes to mind as well, depicting how Jesus told only Judas his true message, which is to find what is godlike within oneself. If we're just tiny organisms of a bigger self, we would all be God, or whatever that may truly be, since we can only interpret higher power as that. If we live inside the confines of God, we are God, to a certain degree.

The Quran has an interesting theory, that all this is just a sandbox, and we're to prove, within the confines of this sandbox that we're worth progressing to the next level. So God not interacting when millions of people die, would be a test, ultimately - would this destroy your faith? Then you have not learned enough. I find this belief interesting, but solely because it's the "answer to everything" in a nutshell

If a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound? Subjective reality is dangerous, very dangerous. I work with dementia patients every day as a musical therapist, and there are many interesting aspects about alzheimers, but it doesn't make their reality my own, or make it anyone else's reality. In my understanding, this is how psychosis in whatever form is born, drifting off into another reality, where nothing happens, if I didn't see it happening. I'd close my eyes and reality would come to a stop. I had a patient who every day had to remember anew that his wife died 20 years ago. He would roam the halls searching for her, until he came to that realisation. But the truth is she wasn't alive anymore, I knew it, everyone else knew it, he just didn't for the first 3 - 4 hours of every day... and intermittently at evening the same Spiel.
Dangerous tobacco, I'd be careful with that, and try to work with what I got. Maybe that reality already existed, sure, but maybe you created it.

Yes, maybe I see a colour as yellow, and you see it as green, but we will both call it red, so we will work with the fact that the colour is red. Maybe the tree did not make a sound without anyone perceiving it, but it did fall down, that is the reality.

I hope I fulfilled what you asked for now

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

I don’t rule out the simulation theory. It would be ignorant of me I think to assume that not everything we experience and feel is “imaginable

I actually detest the Simulation Theory, but I’d have to dig up my argument against really quick brb.

 

[AutoTripper]

The ultimate, the many faced god of nothing, and from nothing is everything.

Interesting. The Game of Thrones series I have to disapprove of strongly and reject, if I’m to stick to my roots and follow my heart and listen to my mind.

Horror movie disguised as entertainment. They put a lot of budget and psychology into that one to subtly cause mental and emotional pain, imprint fear was number one psychological warfare function of the whole series.

It’s inherently Satanic, anti-humanity, anti-life. Not vibration raising, PTSD aiding, and no doubt many PTSD sufferers watched it, most people thinking they were getting a treat, while being unwitting victims.

I watched some of it, it horrified me. It’s designed to make people feel scared, weak, worthless, sick, hopeless. That’s what horrified me, how far they had gone on it, and how wide the franchise was rolled out and accepted, another Trojan Horse from said Satanic worshippers, in my strong view.

But….they talk in that series about “the God of many faces”.

I wondered where they had drawn that from.

 

[9th Euclidean Sphere]

Is reality a simulation?

I doubt it, a simulation, along with the language of that 101010 stuff doesn’t really make sense to malleability of the Human mind.
If we are living in one, you’d think that means one day we became capable enough to do this sort of thing.
If I remember right, no leading science believes we could ever do it, therefore kinda unlikely.

We couldn’t be sim-like in simulation either, we’re simply much more complex, and the sims are just. fiction. entirely, true to fake, fiction.

Last would be a brain in robot, or liquid filled box, in which case takes too much subjective/relativism style arguments to hold any actual merit. Nobody else could disagree with you, because they’re the experience of your perception. They can disagree with your ability to believe they can, but why listen? They’re not real, they’re made up, they’re a product of your dream world. You’re a brain in a jar dude, ignore em, go jump off that bridge the cop told ya not to.
Then there’s the innate issue with them all, to create a complex simulation, you need an even more complex creation/technology to do so, presumably at least.
We can’t even figure string theory out, nor do some leading figures in science believe we’ll ever have the math capable of doing so.
Imagine it’s possible though, 10D, well 4-10D Universe with a future where we created items that transcend such Universe in complexity?

Having no empirical evidence or testable implications, this argument is not science or even scientific speculation. In the language of pragmatism and logical positivism.

Unlike say String Theory, in which Science believes it’s possible if we could calculate/structure it, we just can’t
There’s absolutely zero evidence on the simulation theory, save for sophism, if we accept this who’s to say there’s not a species above the one above us, or one greater than them. Where does it stop, we have no free will, we are nothing.

But it doesn’t exist.