The Matrix

[Burnt State]

Can I throw a spoonful of doubt into this discussion regarding active agency? What i have noticed in paranormality and UFO deconstrucions there is an incredible tendency to imbue the stimulus with sentience in a way the imagines the stimulus acting on us, translating our own mental & imagistic vocabulary to suit their needs. In this scenario we are receivers of a signal, playing only a minor active role in the final interpretation of the stimulus.

As a doubter, I've been increasingly removing some of the magical and alchemical processes from the stimulus itself and seeing the witness as the dominant interpreter or translator of the stimulus. I think our survivalist bioengineering is a great contributor to personifying or imbuing stimuli of all sorts with a kind of sentience - the way we can emotionally respond to objects. I see, in the split second instance of our minds having to categorize a unique stimulus, that we may be creating impressions of sentience as a natural biological response to what our training and genetic impulses produce. I admit that this approach is nowhere near as exciting as what Jeff and RPJ are outlining, but I'm always looking for what might be the path of least resistance. So maybe we really are the artist in this scenario and the stimulus behind the UFO is our muse.

Still, I confess the romantic in me wants to validate the reality of the fantastic other, that sky phantasm of mystical properties and sentience, potential visitors from words afar. But what if it's just an assemblage of a non-sentient intelligence, a swarm or legion of living light, native to this planet? Just as Hessdalen is starting to become a mundane natural phenomenon that humans built a mystery around, so too may the UFO be "unspecial."

Still, when you look at the history of the UFO the books remain open. It can be interpreted as an active agent that is consciously trying to access us, dwellers in Keel's superspectrum, or we may have simply built our own ufological creatures out of a misunderstood stimulus, making them into the living myth. Did we first make the symbol with which to circumscribe the object or is it trying use us as the scribe?

For me I see the power of the living myth in action as seen in Alien Abduction Syndrome, our alien cults, tinfoil crews and ambassadors to the stars. It or We have made armies of believers and that I find more discomforting in some ways than the idea of alien intelligences interacting with our minds, or burning circular holes in the lawn.

 

[red_pill_junkie]

Can I throw a spoonful of doubt into this discussion regarding active agency? What i have noticed in paranormality and UFO deconstrucions there is an incredible tendency to imbue the stimulus with sentience in a way the imagines the stimulus acting on us, translating our own mental & imagistic vocabulary to suit their needs. In this scenario we are receivers of a signal, playing only a minor active role in the final interpretation of the stimulus.

As a doubter, I've been increasingly removing some of the magical and alchemical processes from the stimulus itself and seeing the witness as the dominant interpreter or translator of the stimulus. I think our survivalist bioengineering is a great contributor to personifying or imbuing stimuli of all sorts with a kind of sentience - the way we can emotionally respond to objects. I see, in the split second instance of our minds having to categorize a unique stimulus, that we may be creating impressions of sentience as a natural biological response to what our training and genetic impulses produce. I admit that this approach is nowhere near as exciting as what Jeff and RPJ are outlining, but I'm always looking for what might be the path of least resistance. So maybe we really are the artist in this scenario and the stimulus behind the UFO is our muse.

Still, I confess the romantic in me wants to validate the reality of the fantastic other, that sky phantasm of mystical properties and sentience, potential visitors from words afar. But what if it's just an assemblage of a non-sentient intelligence, a swarm or legion of living light, native to this planet? Just as Hessdalen is starting to become a mundane natural phenomenon that humans built a mystery around, so too may the UFO be "unspecial."

Still, when you look at the history of the UFO the books remain open. It can be interpreted as an active agent that is consciously trying to access us, dwellers in Keel's superspectrum, or we may have simply built our own ufological creatures out of a misunderstood stimulus, making them into the living myth. Did we first make the symbol with which to circumscribe the object or is it trying use us as the scribe?

For me I see the power of the living myth in action as seen in Alien Abduction Syndrome, our alien cults, tinfoil crews and ambassadors to the stars. It or We have made armies of believers and that I find more discomforting in some ways than the idea of alien intelligences interacting with our minds, or burning circular holes in the lawn.

A fair counter-argument. I think it was Mac Tonnies the first researcher I'd found who was proposing that aliens might be entities endowed with intelligence but devoid of sentience. At first the idea didn't make any sense to me, other than from an A.I. POV, but later as the years went by the concept didn't seem so far fetched. And then when I head Bruce Duensing on Radio Misterioso, he more-or-less expressed those same ideas when he referred to the anecdote of explaining the UFO phenomenon from the POV of an Amazonian shaman --how these are more or less 'parasitic' agencies which are fueled of life and intelligence by our own consciousness (I'm murdering the concept with this paraphrasing so I urge you all to seek that episode in the RM archive)

Of course, we could also spin the whole sentience/consciousness problem on its head, and speculate about consciousness in higher levels, instead of lower. What I mean is we humans always use ourselves as the parameter to which we measure the whole of reality. We perceive ourselves as conscious, and for many centuries animals were nothing but automatons in the eyes of philosophers and scientists. Then we started to gradually change our POV and we're now entertaining the possibility that animals are also endowed with intelligence and consciousness. These ideas always tend to focus on the realms below us --if dolphins and apes are conscious, what about mice? or cockroaches? or flatworms?-- but what about the higher realms? What if planets and stars are conscious too?

You see the striking similarities between the neural network forming our brains, and the way galaxies and nebula clump together in the Cosmos, and it makes you wonder whether we're just a minuscule particle inside a conscious, living super-organism.

 

[Burnt State]

A fair counter-argument. I think it was Mac Tonnies the first researcher I'd found who was proposing that aliens might be entities endowed with intelligence but devoid of sentience. At first the idea didn't make any sense to me, other than from an A.I. POV, but later as the years went by the concept didn't seem so far fetched. And then when I head Bruce Duensing on Radio Misterioso, he more-or-less expressed those same ideas when he referred to the anecdote of explaining the UFO phenomenon from the POV of an Amazonian shaman --how these are more or less 'parasitic' agencies which are fueled of life and intelligence by our own consciousness (I'm murdering the concept with this paraphrasing so I urge you all to seek that episode in the RM archive)

Of course, we could also spin the whole sentience/consciousness problem on its head, and speculate about consciousness in higher levels, instead of lower. What I mean is we humans always use ourselves as the parameter to which we measure the whole of reality. We perceive ourselves as conscious, and for many centuries animals were nothing but automatons in the eyes of philosophers and scientists. Then we started to gradually change our POV and we're now entertaining the possibility that animals are also endowed with intelligence and consciousness. These ideas always tend to focus on the realms below us --if dolphins and apes are conscious, what about mice? or cockroaches? or flatworms?-- but what about the higher realms? What if planets and stars are conscious too?

You see the striking similarities between the neural network forming our brains, and the way galaxies and nebula clump together in the Cosmos, and it makes you wonder whether we're just a minuscule particle inside a conscious, living super-organism.

A good reclamation of the creative thinking strand as well, and it plays directly into Jeff's cerebral mahinations so I'm going to wait to see who is going to deal out the next cards in the Tarot deck of ufological discourse and see who reinterprets the spread.

I always apreciate your ability to change the size, scale and perspective of the lens. Too bad there's no UFO-Idea art gallery outside of this white digital canvas to hang such artistic notions. Why is there no RPJ site/show yet?

That Duensing episode really pulled things together for me. Can't recomend it enough along with the RPJ episodes. Listen to Radio Misterioso people. It's good for your karma, will release your inner bodhisattva and will help to keep that third eye wide open.

 

[red_pill_junkie]

A good reclamation of the creative thinking strand as well, and it plays directly into Jeff's cerebral mahinations so I'm going to wait to see who is going to deal out the next cards in the Tarot deck of ufological discourse and see who reinterprets the spread.

I always apreciate your ability to change the size, scale and perspective of the lens. Too bad there's no UFO-Idea art gallery outside of this white digital canvas to hang such artistic notions. Why is there no RPJ site/show yet?

That Duensing episode really pulled things together for me. Can't recomend it enough along with the RPJ episodes. Listen to Radio Misterioso people. It's good for your karma, will release your inner bodhisattva and will help to keep that third eye wide open.

A site of my own? Well... redpilljunkie.com is already taken [emoji28] Besides, I have plenty of places on the web where I can post my thoughts. Maybe I'll start a Tumblr page where I can also publish graphic content, but I still need to find an app that can extend the day to 30 hours [emoji16]

 

[Jeff Davis]

And bear in mind that all I speculate is just guess work in endless transition. I only know that I know nothing. Remember, moving targets are the easiest to hit. That is as long as what you are aiming is the target and not what you yourself are directly pointing.

Burnt State, you are 100% correct in that the paranormal may in fact be a solely natural muse derived interpretation. But no matter whether the interpretation's agent of cause is internal, or external, I'm thinking that it's the stimulus resulting in the interpretation that really counts. No matter how we slice reality, 100% of the perceptual experience is always located smack dab between our ears. Even when we reach out and touch something material, everything we know and find sentient relativity with is a result of what we cognitively determine. Perhaps some type of stimulus generated feedback loop wherein key centers of the brain are triggered in a specific order of process that result in the projected formation of archetypal relevant sentient experiences is taking place, albeit as much still relies on that key issue of stimulus. What is that stimulus? We can't just state "us", because that much is obvious in every case no matter whether the nature of perceptual uptake of experience is mundane or exotic.

People see and encounter the paranormal all the time that have no prior interest or focused attention thereupon. This is key. But the question is, what is the key? If we refer to the key as some type of culturally relevant, or even naturally occurring worldwide parasitic thing, be it archons or whatever, is that any different than speculating that an external active agent is involved? Be that aliens or whatever. A bigger question is, in the realm of that which defines consciousness, how do we know what is, and what is not, sentience? How might the intelligent mass of ionized gasses experience their sentience? What is their form of tactility or expression? The point is that a stimulating agent of some kind *has* to be involved. That or it would *seem* that we would never see themes, or recurrent memes, constantly occurring within that which is the domain of the paranormal experience.

I don't get it either. Not in the least. However one thing is certain, and that is without us, reality loses it's definition. That same definition is what defines the antithesis of the paranormal, and yet we are integral to each the normal, and the paranormal. What does that tell you? In my speculations it relates that either (a) that the paranormal is in reality, a normal facet of reality, for which we have yet to accept the malleable nature of it's boundaries, or (b) some type of stimulating, causal agent exists. One that either exhibits an inspiring force from within, or one that is a responsible source of influence which is external to the experience's participant/s. Please bare in mind that the plural of witness here is a HUGE determining contributor to the speculative nature of my hypothetical reasoning. Mass, or multiple experience, is extremely difficult to reconcile for the internal causal argument. However this is where consciousness comes into hypothetical view. That is a critically pivotal reason why I contend that consciousness may be a natural external particulate medium through which we cognitively assemble and experience reality. Herein is found a gateway to the multiple internal. Still in yet, there is no single reason I have come to rely on speculatively that constitutes an individual determining causal agent through which multiple individuals can experience the same paranormal observations. It's mind boggling.

 

[Athomepaul]

My other thought is this.
In the bible. it states that if you think about sinning you have sinned.
Could that be a reflection that since everything starts with energy, and is made up of energy when broken down. that the very process of thinking which is a result of energy being consciously manifested and manipulated by our brains synapses. is Actually creating dimensions/universes that take a separate physical form and sometimes bleed thru into own waking universe/dimension.
It seems so much infacis is placed on being pure of thought and heart in many of the spiritual teachings I have read.

 

[Tyger]

My other thought is this.
In the bible. it states that if you think about sinning you have sinned.
Could that be a reflection that since everything starts with energy, and is made up of energy when broken down. that the very process of thinking which is a result of energy being consciously manifested and manipulated by our brains synapses. is Actually creating dimensions/universes that take a separate physical form and sometimes bleed thru into own waking universe/dimension.
It seems so much infacis is placed on being pure of thought and heart in many of the spiritual teachings I have read.

I think the physicists have done us a real disservice with String Theory. Some of what you write strikes me as echoes upon echoes (upon echoes) of that.

Thought is definitely energy, but manifestation requires far more than 'simply' a thought - there needs to be desire and intent, as well as other factors.

 

[Athomepaul]

I think the physicists have done us a real disservice with String Theory. Some of what you write strikes me as echoes upon echoes (upon echoes) of that.

Thought is definitely energy, but manifestation requires far more than 'simply' a thought - there needs to be desire and intent, as well as other factors.

Isn't desire and intent the definition of thought? Thought is the desire and intent manifested in ones brain prior to action or fantasy or outcome desired.
Harvard I believe it was, had actually pondered a hypothesis that dreams create alternate universes.

 

[Burnt State]

Dreams in some indigenous cultures carry as much weight as waking reality does and thus an alternate universe is born that way. Reality is all about what you beleve in, not what happens. When you look at the discussions of Black Elk regarding colonial precognitive warning dreams of the whites that would come one day and how their people would be relegated to grey boxes to live in, making their lives a living hell, you can see how there is some merit to the dreaming.

 

[red_pill_junkie]

My other thought is this.
In the bible. it states that if you think about sinning you have sinned.
Could that be a reflection that since everything starts with energy, and is made up of energy when broken down. that the very process of thinking which is a result of energy being consciously manifested and manipulated by our brains synapses. is Actually creating dimensions/universes that take a separate physical form and sometimes bleed thru into own waking universe/dimension.
It seems so much infacis is placed on being pure of thought and heart in many of the spiritual teachings I have read.

I disagree with the assertion of equating thoughts with energy. That is still taking the materialist route.

I see Consciousness and Information as the true building blocks of reality. Not Mass/Energy and Space/Time.

 

[Constance]

Isn't desire and intent the definition of thought? Thought is the desire and intent manifested in ones brain prior to action or fantasy or outcome desired.
Harvard I believe it was, had actually pondered a hypothesis that dreams create alternate universes.

"Harvard" ... had pondered this hypothesis? Perhaps someone at Harvard did. Do you have specific citation to a paper perhaps?

 

[Tyger]

Isn't desire and intent the definition of thought? Thought is the desire and intent manifested in ones brain prior to action or fantasy or outcome desired.

I can give you perspectives out of a certain line of thought, generally considered 'esoteric' or 'occult' - though 'occult' is a corrupted word these days, having too many overlays of significance that are mis-leading, which makes using it problematic. However, for me, the word remains pristine and I often default to the word, so just be aware that when I say 'occult' I am meaning it as 'the path of knowledge'.

Whatever I share is through my own filters and the limitations of my own understanding. I am not an authority - nor am I a 'teacher' of any of this. I simply share what interests me. Full Stop.

The Ideational realm is an objective reality. Human Beings 'dip into' that realm. Ideas do not manifest without action on the emotional/desire level and subsequently the physical level. The mechanism of 'manifestation' out of the ideational realm requires desire in order to manifest. Intent and motive are separate but part of the whole process.

Harvard I believe it was, had actually pondered a hypothesis that dreams create alternate universes.

Yes and no - depends at what state of 'dreaming' one is in. There is an objective reality to dreams but without inner training we cannot 'see' through the 'mist'. Within aspects of dreams we clothe what we 'see' in what we are. Objectively real beings work with us. How much we are able to understand what is happening is dependent on how much 'inner schooling' we have engaged in.

 

[Tyger]

Dreams in some indigenous cultures carry as much weight as waking reality does and thus an alternate universe is born that way. Reality is all about what you believe in, not what happens. When you look at the discussions of Black Elk regarding colonial precognitive warning dreams of the whites that would come one day and hiw their people would be relegated to grey boxes to live in, making their lives a living hell you can see how there is some merit to the dreaming.

Hmmm....I'd need you to flesh out that sentence.

 

[Tyger]

Dreams in some indigenous cultures carry as much weight as waking reality does and thus an alternate universe is born that way. Reality is all about what you beleve in, not what happens. When you look at the discussions of Black Elk regarding colonial precognitive warning dreams of the whites that would come one day and hiw their people would be relegated to grey boxes to live in, making their lives a living hell you can see how there is some merit to the dreaming.

What do you mean by 'alternate universe'? How is it 'born'?

 

[Burnt State]

What do you mean by 'alternate universe'? How is it 'born'?

I suppose I'm looking at this from outside soneoe else's cultural paradigm and not from within it. If a people believes that dreams are real experiences and that equal wisdom and knowledge can be gained from both waking and dream experiences, then fom my perspective I see two different realms at work in someone else's cultural reality.

Have you ever had the experience where you wake up and either yourself or the person beside you had a dream where the other person acted contrary to their waking self, committed crimes or indignities against the other and then the dreamer carries their negative dream emotion into the waking world? Freud and Jung aside, our cognitive processes involve our emotions in ways that sometimes blur lines between waking and dreaming worlds, factual and interpreted reality.

Herzog's movie, Where The Green Ants Dream, echoes that aboriginal concept that this whole world we live in is a dream of the green ants. In other films he hypnotized the actors before they went on screen to have them exist in a kind of somnambulist state expressing his notion of life as dream or hallucination. And then in Tarkovsky's movies we are constantly meandering in and out of dreaming and consciousness - Von Trier works in this space as well. And of course the Gnostics call this the false world, an utter lie.

Hmmm....I'd need you to flesh out that sentence.

So for me there may be this reality that happens in the world but it's mostly muddled by personal, emotional, cultural and sensory interpretations. These frequently have nothing to do with objective reality but are entirely wrapped up in people's belief structures. "I know what saw," is an entirely inaccurate and ridiculous statement complicated by psychology and physiology. We may as well be dreaming in some respects when you look at some of the entirely bizarre realities people uphold with great conviction i.e. Heaven's Gate Cult of ufological destiny and human spiritual transformation. Beliefs are more powerful than reality when you think about it. That's why the paranormal is para-normal. Inner schooling may help you weave a truth of your own making; or it can be shared with others who think like you, but objective reality is up for grabs.

 

[Athomepaul]

But consciousness can not exist without something material processing reality. Thus mass and energy must be present. Since reality is specific to each individual it their each individual mass of brain matter that is interpreting it. So without a material existence there can be no reality because basically nothing exist until it is observed. Which lies the true paradox to the Big Bang theory.
Also I believe that time is simply existence time duration. It you go back in time you create a "time chase" that is an ever changing time that is following the previous set of circumstances laid out in the previous time chain that is always chasing the time before it.

I disagree with the assertion of equating thoughts with energy. That is still taking the materialist route.

I see Consciousness and Information as the true building blocks of reality. Not Mass/Energy and Space/Time.

ut

 

[red_pill_junkie]

But consciousness can not exist without something material processing reality. Thus mass and energy must be present. Since reality is specific to each individual it their each individual mass of brain matter that is interpreting it. So without a material existence there can be no reality because basically nothing exist until it is observed. Which lies the true paradox to the Big Bang theory.
Also I believe that time is simply existence time duration. It you go back in time you create a "time chase" that is an ever changing time that is following the previous set of circumstances laid out in the previous time chain that is always chasing the time before it.

ut

If consciousness cannot exist without a material scaffold sustaining it, then how do you explain NDEs, OBEs and all the phenomena that challenges that assertion?

 

[Athomepaul]

All of that is remembered by the mind. Otherwise they would not be able to recall what happened. Their mind/brain had to still be involved or they would have no memory of those events. There had to at least be an energetic connection powered by the physical.
As for ghost, they are still formed of mass and energy for them to be able to be visually seen and leave impressions on physical objects such as tape recorders and to cause folks to feel the weight of someone sitting on their bed.
If they had no physical mass then light would not reflect off of them for folks to see them.

I am not ruling out the possibility that there could be some cosmic collector or God that takes over the powering of each say soul once a person has passed.
Thus using his energy and mass to sustain the soul and this could possibly explain ghost as well and possibly out of body experiences and NDEs. Maybe that is why the God says there can only be eternal life/salvation thru him since God is eternal and without his interceding we would simply stop to exist once dead. Just my personal beliefs and ponderings.

I sort of view the religious books as more of writings from highly advanced beings trying to teach civilization to lesser evolved creatures that are not able to comprehend science and the universe.

I am still looking to try to find some articles on the study of dreams creating universes.
Was about 12 years ago if I recall correctly.

The Paracast is definitely my favorite show of this kind! I love to read the thoughts of folks much more knowledgeable than myself. Sort of like taking my brain out for a spin to clear out the cob webs...

 

[Athomepaul]

I have

A fair counter-argument. I think it was Mac Tonnies the first researcher I'd found who was proposing that aliens might be entities endowed with intelligence but devoid of sentience. At first the idea didn't make any sense to me, other than from an A.I. POV, but later as the years went by the concept didn't seem so far fetched. And then when I head Bruce Duensing on Radio Misterioso, he more-or-less expressed those same ideas when he referred to the anecdote of explaining the UFO phenomenon from the POV of an Amazonian shaman --how these are more or less 'parasitic' agencies which are fueled of life and intelligence by our own consciousness (I'm murdering the concept with this paraphrasing so I urge you all to seek that episode in the RM archive)

Of course, we could also spin the whole sentience/consciousness problem on its head, and speculate about consciousness in higher levels, instead of lower. What I mean is we humans always use ourselves as the parameter to which we measure the whole of reality. We perceive ourselves as conscious, and for many centuries animals were nothing but automatons in the eyes of philosophers and scientists. Then we started to gradually change our POV and we're now entertaining the possibility that animals are also endowed with intelligence and consciousness. These ideas always tend to focus on the realms below us --if dolphins and apes are conscious, what about mice? or cockroaches? or flatworms?-- but what about the higher realms? What if planets and stars are conscious too?

You see the striking similarities between the neural network forming our brains, and the way galaxies and nebula clump together in the Cosmos, and it makes you wonder whether we're just a minuscule particle inside a conscious, living super-organism.

I have looked at this and often wondered if we are not just thoughts and dreams of say God and the universe is his brain that we reside in. Could this be sort of why God says that a million years is like a second to him because times in dreams is distorted. They say a dream that seams to last years in reality is only a couple of minutes.

 

[red_pill_junkie]

All of that is remembered by the mind. Otherwise they would not be able to recall what happened. Their mind/brain had to still be involved or they would have no memory of those events. There had to at least be an energetic connection powered by the physical.
As for ghost, they are still formed of mass and energy for them to be able to be visually seen and leave impressions on physical objects such as tape recorders and to cause folks to feel the weight of someone sitting on their bed.
If they had no physical mass then light would not reflect off of them for folks to see them.

I am not ruling out the possibility that there could be some cosmic collector or God that takes over the powering of each say soul once a person has passed.
Thus using his energy and mass to sustain the soul and this could possibly explain ghost as well and possibly out of body experiences and NDEs. Maybe that is why the God says there can only be eternal life/salvation thru him since God is eternal and without his interceding we would simply stop to exist once dead. Just my personal beliefs and ponderings.

I sort of view the religious books as more of writings from highly advanced beings trying to teach civilization to lesser evolved creatures that are not able to comprehend science and the universe.

I am still looking to try to find some articles on the study of dreams creating universes.
Was about 12 years ago if I recall correctly.

The Paracast is definitely my favorite show of this kind! I love to read the thoughts of folks much more knowledgeable than myself. Sort of like taking my brain out for a spin to clear out the cob webs...

NDE study doesn't necessarily have to go through the 'God' route --even though it's an almost inevitable discussion-- but before that we have to consider the following: Veridical NDEs are the most dangerous evidence against the materialist paradigm IMO, because these patients were able to accurately perceive circumstances and dettails transpiring during the time when they were pronounced clinically dead, that couldn't have possibly be known to them!

Forget about the accounts of people when they go through 'the tunnel of light', meet their deceased friends or relatives, encounter the 'being of light' and have the 'life review.' All that could be confabulation concocted by the mind after recovery. But the veridical information is much harder to dismiss by debunkers.

And furthermore, there's an even harder question to answer: How is it that NDE patients were able to 'see' all those dettails, when THEIR EYES WERE CLOSED?

For this and other reasons, is that I think we need to surpass the 'energy' dead end, and look beyond it. Look toward a reality that transcends time, space, and even energy.