The existential moment is not hard to find as it must be one because I heard a sound; it makes noise therefore it is. The non-existential moment is impossible to find because it doesn't make any sound so (shrug) therefore it isn't.
Where humans get all flipped and wind up in a tavern drinking themselves blind is in thinking of a spectral interstitial moment in between the moments during which time both reveal themselves at once. We need an ultra physicist well-versed in multiple dimensions, Higg's bosons, and all that bother to even consider where such a spectral moment could exist, if it exists, when it exists.
There's not much else in religion which matters to people all that much and most it usually culminates in killing or hurting people, at least to most modern evidence although the Inquisition was a grand party as well. Conservatives, we may note, brought that one as well. We don't know if they disguised themselves as Democrats that time or maybe that was a modern invention.
People will get up in a lather over this spectral interstitial moment as 'I saw the light, I saw the light.'
Well, no, Godfrey, that wasn't the non-existential moment because it doesn't make light, it doesn't make anything, and you are clearly existential at that moment or you wouldn't see anything anyway.
Elizabeth Kübler-Ross had more twists on this than an English garden maze and she expanded her five steps of death and dying into a series akin to the "Dune" novels which may not ever end since Frank Herbert's son continues to write them. For more sci-fi / fantasy fun, try reading all of Anne McAffrey's books on the Dragonriders of Pern.
Regardless of what you think may occupy the non-existential moment, the consideration of anything taking place between the existential moment and the non-existential moment is what grabs people the most. Can I see one view from the other.
We love the ghostie / horror stories or at least you may, they scare the bejeebers out of me. In all of those stories the non-existential become spectral so we get to wonder, well, where were they when they weren't at least spectral. That must be the non-existential place so it's there. Eureka.
We like that even when the specters are usually vicious with over-size teeth and are prone to biting off our faces. This does not give us a good feeling about what else may or may not be hiding in the hypothetical non-existential moment. Nevertheless, it's encouraging to some this evidence exists, intangible as it may be.
The part still biting people hard is I want to see one from the other and the fundamental in this one is it's logically impossible since it's a necessarily binary distinction: one is and one isn't. The End.
(Ed: or your contention is complete crap!)
The regulars know by now, Heckling Student, everything I write is potentially complete crap or what's the point in writing it. If it were definitive then I might as well be giving an authoritative lecture series on pre-Columbian art ... but I ain't.
Maybe you start thinking, well, Steve Jobs said, wow, so that must mean something, right?
Well, it means whatever you like even when you know it's logically impossible to have seen anything except his current existential moment and maybe the 'wow' was because he couldn't feel his feet ... which many of you know even ganja has a high propensity for doing.
There's no argument with whatever may 'be' in the existential moment and the non-existential moment. Maybe the latter has Heaven, maybe it has Luna Park, maybe it's nothing and how should I know. We know we're in the current existential moment because I think therefore I am. We can't prove anything else exists but we're fairly sure we're real. We're not quite sure where we're real since we feel ourselves in our heads but there's another me who looks at me doing what I'm doing and I know you can play this little game as well.
You can chase that weasel for where's the real me all night long but you'll only end up snorting cocaine from the top of a toilet tank like Freud or Mayor Berry or someone.
Perhaps you like chasing weasels or you wouldn't have waded this far into the article. There won't be anything conclusive from this one on it because there can't be. For anything I may say you have a perfect right to call 'bullshit' and it will be fair ... well, assuming it's not in TeleGrunt: b cuz i sed so.
Where humans get all flipped and wind up in a tavern drinking themselves blind is in thinking of a spectral interstitial moment in between the moments during which time both reveal themselves at once. We need an ultra physicist well-versed in multiple dimensions, Higg's bosons, and all that bother to even consider where such a spectral moment could exist, if it exists, when it exists.
There's not much else in religion which matters to people all that much and most it usually culminates in killing or hurting people, at least to most modern evidence although the Inquisition was a grand party as well. Conservatives, we may note, brought that one as well. We don't know if they disguised themselves as Democrats that time or maybe that was a modern invention.
People will get up in a lather over this spectral interstitial moment as 'I saw the light, I saw the light.'
Well, no, Godfrey, that wasn't the non-existential moment because it doesn't make light, it doesn't make anything, and you are clearly existential at that moment or you wouldn't see anything anyway.
Elizabeth Kübler-Ross had more twists on this than an English garden maze and she expanded her five steps of death and dying into a series akin to the "Dune" novels which may not ever end since Frank Herbert's son continues to write them. For more sci-fi / fantasy fun, try reading all of Anne McAffrey's books on the Dragonriders of Pern.
Regardless of what you think may occupy the non-existential moment, the consideration of anything taking place between the existential moment and the non-existential moment is what grabs people the most. Can I see one view from the other.
We love the ghostie / horror stories or at least you may, they scare the bejeebers out of me. In all of those stories the non-existential become spectral so we get to wonder, well, where were they when they weren't at least spectral. That must be the non-existential place so it's there. Eureka.
We like that even when the specters are usually vicious with over-size teeth and are prone to biting off our faces. This does not give us a good feeling about what else may or may not be hiding in the hypothetical non-existential moment. Nevertheless, it's encouraging to some this evidence exists, intangible as it may be.
The part still biting people hard is I want to see one from the other and the fundamental in this one is it's logically impossible since it's a necessarily binary distinction: one is and one isn't. The End.
(Ed: or your contention is complete crap!)
The regulars know by now, Heckling Student, everything I write is potentially complete crap or what's the point in writing it. If it were definitive then I might as well be giving an authoritative lecture series on pre-Columbian art ... but I ain't.
Maybe you start thinking, well, Steve Jobs said, wow, so that must mean something, right?
Well, it means whatever you like even when you know it's logically impossible to have seen anything except his current existential moment and maybe the 'wow' was because he couldn't feel his feet ... which many of you know even ganja has a high propensity for doing.
There's no argument with whatever may 'be' in the existential moment and the non-existential moment. Maybe the latter has Heaven, maybe it has Luna Park, maybe it's nothing and how should I know. We know we're in the current existential moment because I think therefore I am. We can't prove anything else exists but we're fairly sure we're real. We're not quite sure where we're real since we feel ourselves in our heads but there's another me who looks at me doing what I'm doing and I know you can play this little game as well.
You can chase that weasel for where's the real me all night long but you'll only end up snorting cocaine from the top of a toilet tank like Freud or Mayor Berry or someone.
Perhaps you like chasing weasels or you wouldn't have waded this far into the article. There won't be anything conclusive from this one on it because there can't be. For anything I may say you have a perfect right to call 'bullshit' and it will be fair ... well, assuming it's not in TeleGrunt: b cuz i sed so.
No comments:
Post a Comment