The Matter and Semantic of Spirits.

[oldfriend56]

@ThelemicMage said

"I agree...

but "spirits" can mean almost anything. They can mean the illusory spiritual and personified qualities of our own illusion. "

Right now, I am sort of lumping all non material phenomenal intelligences as 'spirits' which includes angels, gods, etc etc just to keep it simple. I do this because all of these share something in common, and that is what I am trying to understand. I, like many here, have had experiences of 'spirits' and I, like many here, do not place any objective or subjective validity to these experiences.

"

Aliens are the same, though they come in many forms just like humans do. For instance, a human being on a planet only a hop skip and a jump away is still considered an "alien." "

here it seems that you are equating form with illusion - is there no independent substance or intelligence to spirits? This is a great philosophical question in my opinion. Are they simply apart of our psyche, our unconsciousness, that we can tap into, making them nothing more than a dynamic of human intelligence - or are they a separate order of sentience all together? I would imagine illusion comes into play either interacting with spirits or my girlfriend, so here I am seeking to make distinctions inside of the illusion. At the end of the day, any illusion is a 'real' illusion and thus references something shared and therefore objective in some sense.

"

Cherubim are angels of the Yetziratic level. All actual "angels" are of levels 4-9, only, the Yetziratic portion of the tree."

noted - I include this order of beings to share something in common with all non corporeal intelligence

"

Ishim are simply fully evolved basic Malkuth-level 10 beings. They are without the wings it takes to ascend to levels 9-4. I'll give you a secret. Cherubim and Seraphim have been identified as six-winged. All the other levels of 4-9 are also six-winged, though it is not mentioned in books to my knowledge. Yetziratic beings, when looked at fully without camoflauge or hiding a dimension of themselves, have six wings.
This pertains specifically to the six numbers of four to nine, in that there are a total of six levels, which is where the design of their "flying" ability comes from. "

what do all non corporeal intelligences share in common?

[Bereshith]

@ldfriend56 said

"
@Bereshith said
"
Malkuth - physical results, sounds, materializations
Yesod - Visions, dreams
Hod - scientific knowledge, ideas
Netzach - desires

"

this is where the tree breaks down for me, and I wish to see where my error is. You put 'ideas' in 'Hod' - yet to me, that's all the tree is is an idea of how to organize experiences and therefore, ideas are in every serphirot. "ideas about experiences' are still ideas, no?"

I'm confused. Isn't what you're looking for "an idea of how to organize experiences" of spirits? For a moment, forget the Tree of Life. How would your own map avoid the same problem you see with the Tree?

[oldfriend56]

@Bereshith said

"

I'm confused. Isn't what you're looking for "an idea of how to organize experiences" of spirits? For a moment, forget the Tree of Life. How would your own map avoid the same problem you see with the Tree?"

yes. my map makes a few assumptions.

1.)Spirits exist in some sense (as separate non corporeal intelligences with their own varying hierarchy or as dynamics of some unknown component of the human psyche, collective or individual or both)

2.)As spirits exist in some sense, so there must be a variation to their interaction in phenomenology, i.e. what 'forms' do spirits take in our experience?

3.)There is a relationship between ideas and spirits - we commonly share experiences of having ideas - and having ideas could potentially be one dynamic of experience with spirits we all share in common. the qualia of ideas is perhaps shaped by the qualia of spirit.

4.)The distinctions of qualia of spirits, ideas is what I seek to map.

5.)Since I want my map to be as objective as possible, I only wish to make boundaries by shared information and shared experience.

Thanks for helping me define this better, truly. Does this help and do you see why the tree of life is not the map I am looking for? The tree of life maps ideas about spirits and experiences based on cultural artifacts and since those artifacts are cultural, they are not universal and I found the tree to be a source of wide speculation and different interpretations amongst different schools. My map is philosophical.

[ThelemicMage]

@Old Macdonald the Poppy Farmer said

"what do all non corporeal intelligences share in common?"

Well, my fellow seeker into knowledge, it seems as though adepts like Crowley distinguish the body from the spirit in such ways for a reason:
"After attainment, the body is of no more use than the dust of the floor."

The reason is so we can look up instead of thinking down and falling into the dusk of death.

Lest we not remember that EVERY thought we have is played out in our own universe, including our collective universe. So, if you have some fear of death from your auntie dying when you were seven, then that fear will play out sometime later on in life for the original thought was there.

However, the lower bodies evolve with the higher forms as well, which is why they have Earth holding their actual form in the first place, including Cherubim up to Chasmalim, even Thrones, Wheels, and HLCreatures. We should not forget that Earth is grown through, twisted, branched its way up the tree just as water has so exquisitely and miraculously fallen from the top of the tree.

I mean, a tree in itself is mostly Earthen wood when all is said and done. All the elements are patterned out with each other all the way up and down the tree. The sephiroth are projected into the four elements and winds, and the universes even as we see them are not separate.

For Christ's sakes, the God of the element of Air actually came here, rigged up an elaborate Osiris setup two thousand years ago, made everyone think "they" had killed him, when in fact he snuck his adepts, (disciples), into the places of the "soldiers" to do the dirty work. He pretty much did it to himself. They found a "Gospel of Judas" that had been in the area somewhere and has been tested and found to be written right after the time that both Yeshuah and Judas died, though with the stars and the zodiac even appearing in the wrong places, (our man Crowley used Tropical oh so successfully, and so do I,) it just might truly date right on time, and explains how Yeshuah himself asked dear ol' Judas, (one of his closest disciples, no doubt,) to turn him into the Romans.

Now we have Horus and that is a rather intense miracle of another story.

Besz, Apophis, and our dear Lucifer are certainly not forgotten, but celebrated in this elaborate setup.
"Music, Dancing, Silence and Stillness," are our sacraments even at the death of the Sun, by Apophis, Besz, and Satan-Typhon, respectively. Our universes commingle in the same way that the elements do up the tree.

This really is a rather important time to be alive, seeing as how they are to begin dancing again, the door was flung wide open not too long ago, but closed again due to the "sanity" of the mediocre, common (vomit) human being. Lysergic Acid Diethylamide is the sacrament that spans universes past universes, not just one good look like our sacred manna gives us. This was the turning point and mark of the door flying open back then. You cannot stop a flash of lightening, nor even cover your ears to protect you from the vibration of the thunder.

It would be wise of one to learn how to dance.

Try a bellyful of Nuit's sacraments repeatedly until you can walk around on them, then pull out your wand, finger, (or member,) and start dancing with one foot at a time. There's no ruby slippers to click together to get us out of this one.

93 93 93

[oldfriend56]

"Well, my fellow seeker into knowledge, it seems as though adepts like Crowley distinguish the body from the spirit in such ways for a reason:
"After attainment, the body is of no more use than the dust of the floor.""

kind of you to take me as a seeker of knowledge. I'm up to my ears in knowledge, this puppy is going for the understanding and thanks for being here with me on this journey. You seem to have quite a rich inner life

[ThelemicMage]

BTW you currently have 93 posts.

I have been noticing serious Cabalistic manifestations of this number as of late.

You should recognize this and see if it manifests in your life.

In all seriousness, 93, or
"Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law; Love is the Law, Love under Will",
should be a constant manifestation in the life of any serious student.

93
93/93

[oldfriend56]

@Mr hoot and come in said

"
In all seriousness, 93, or
"Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law; Love is the Law, Love under Will",
should be a constant manifestation in the life of any serious student.

93
93/93"

and here we find perfect agreement

[oldfriend56]

@winner, best hair cut, 1998 said

"

but "spirits" can mean almost anything. "

i suppose 'spirits' can just mean about anything and the list of what spirits can mean is part of the list I am collecting. I must say I have been intrigued by a few mentions of 'planetary intelligence' on this forum and reading how they are distinguishable from spirits, maybe you or another can oblige, thank you in advance.

[ThelemicMage]

From what I understand, planetary intelligences are on a different level than the names or spirits of the planets themselves.

For instance, Venus is the visible name of the planet itself. Her intelligence is Hagiel.
Her spirit's name is Qedemel. Her Olympic planetary spirit's name is Hagith.

It kind of like Hathor is the house and wife of Horus, and Ma'at is the adjuster of balance that steadies him into the transformation into Hrumachis, the double-wanded one. Horus himself says he holds the wand of double-power. It's not too far-fetched to see how the greatest "Nuit" and "Hadit" of our Universe are merging as one being and will encompass the next aeon.

It is my belief that the spirits, names, and all intelligences of the planets are one, in essence. The same way that the "beast" of the Earth's, (or of the Air, Water, or sacred Fire,) heads are one being, although on this level they are named differently such as Amaimon, Auriel, Phorlakh, Ghob, et cetera.

In the Lust card of the sacred Tarot of Photeth, the beast of the Earth, in the form of a Lion, with seven heads, has Phorlakh with his head turned away, with "four locks" of hair gently curving down as the hint of all hints. Crowley and Frieda were guided by much more than mere pure inspiration. What they did with the Tarot is divine in every aspect as literal pictures of the Book of the Law.

Now you won't hear the "beast" of the Air or Fire in revelations, for there is a great secret regarding the two witnesses and the crowned and conquering child -- however it is as simple as opening up Liber 777 and reading the names of their seven heads, Table II. The sun and moon conjoined with the two witnesses is the symbol of the Aeon, which is also the "mark of the beast". It hides a secret 93 and 666 in it's symbolism.

One would wish to look at these things with an open mind, always with the thought of God being one in everything, and to separate not, for thereby cometh hurt. (Book of the Law.) Things flow perfectly when this is realized.

[Bereshith]

@ViejoAmigo56 said

"
Thanks for helping me define this better, truly. Does this help and do you see why the tree of life is not the map I am looking for? The tree of life maps ideas about spirits and experiences based on cultural artifacts and since those artifacts are cultural, they are not universal and I found the tree to be a source of wide speculation and different interpretations amongst different schools. My map is philosophical.
"

Ehhh... Not really. But I don't mind giving up on it.

So, why not brainstorm?

Physical Manifestations:
(five senses)

1. Visual
2. Auditory
3. Olfactory
4. Gustatory
5. Tactile

Emotional Manifestations:
(which organization fits with your philosophical approach?)

Cognitive Manifestations:
(How are you thinking about this? You want to start with a list of "-ologies" or....?)

[oldfriend56]

@Epic Dungeon Master said

"From what I understand, planetary intelligences are on a different level than the names or spirits of the planets themselves.

For instance, Venus is the visible name of the planet itself. Her intelligence is Hagiel.
"

I'm really hoping someone here can show some clear understanding on the distinction between an intelligence and a spirit. To me it sounds like an intelligence is a POV, where as spirits serve the POV , based on what I am reading here on this forum. In this light, what would 'intelligence' be? Defining intelligence itself is one of the biggest hurdles in many a field of science.

[oldfriend56]

@hombre said

"

Ehhh... Not really. But I don't mind giving up on it.

So, why not brainstorm? "

what a wonderful idea - this can be a collective work, no doubt.

But since my map is ultimately a map of ontology, and I want my map to reach for completeness, elegance, and be holistic, we have to be very careful about our language.

for example

"

Physical Manifestations:
(five senses)

1. Visual
2. Auditory
3. Olfactory
4. Gustatory
5. Tactile

"

What is physical about the experience of the senses? To me the experience of light, sound, smells, touch, taste are just as abstract and illusory, non material as the experience of spirits. The only distinction is that we have physical sense organs, which are manifestations. These physical organs just give us 'content' to experience. the experience itself? this I imagine is where you would put malkuth, no? Experience arrived via the content and media of the five senses.

So to me, the foundation is experience, consciousness, being. That to me is a state beyond language, even 'every day' being. We just use language to reference it, make sense so far?

So experience and the content and medium of experience must be distinguished. The experience of the physical may not be physical at all (this is the 'hard problem' of consciousness in philosophy and neurobiology)

Anything experienced has existence in some sense. This existence may be physical, imaginary, metaphysical, etc. Unicorns may exist as creative thought forms, but they have existence none the less.

The qualities of experience are then distinguished by being and ideas about being. then environment. we experience being and have ideas about being in two distinguishable environments, a share objective environment we all participate in equally (i.e. the physical universe) and a subjective environment which is our individual state of being, which also includes emotions naturally.

this is my foundation so far....make sense?

"

Emotional Manifestations:
(which organization fits with your philosophical approach?) "

Emotions manifesting as..experiences or behaviors? Emotions to be are a component of 'feeling' and our subjective environment, they are personal and the list is just a set of ideas about being and feeling and should not be confused as those experiences - if that makes any sense

There is a relationship, no doubt, to various states of being, environment, and the ideas that surround them, as you are about to breach below...

"
Cognitive Manifestations:
(How are you thinking about this? You want to start with a list of "-ologies" or....?)"

Ahhh! 'Thinking' and conceptualizing' - this cannot be listed without it's counterpart 'intuition' or inner knowingness, inspiration in my opinion. To me this is just 'thinking and feeling' manifesting as arts and sciences. This experience we attribute to our subjective environment but is only possible inside of interaction with our shared environment (culture)

which leads as next I guess to spirits and how they appear to us.

Are spirits just ideas or are ideas just spirits? in my map above, you see how they easily and neatly occupy the same environment....just the distinction needs to be made between them.

[Frater 639]

Oldfriend56 -- you are truly an entity after my own heart. Keep going!

Polite and positive. And on topic with semantics!

But, as you know, all arguments are circular when dealing with the topic, correct? That is the nature of consciousness, is it not? What is it that you're driving at, though? It remains unclear to me. Please explain if you have the desire or wish to forsake the economics of energy.

Memes and spirits? Do you see it as aspects of the same thing, only from the perspective of different planes? Doesn't this always lead to confusion?

[oldfriend56]

@Frater 639 said

"Oldfriend56 -- you are truly an entity after my own heart. Keep going! "

thank you for your support good frater!

"

Polite and positive. And on topic with semantics! "

thank you! nice to see someone around here has an eye for talent

"

But, as you know, all arguments are circular when dealing with the topic, correct? "

The topic being 'consciousness' specifically? if so, I would say I always find enjoyment in seeing how 'discussions' on the topic produce contradictions, and if that is what you mean, then yes. But I am not sure if this is a 'law' of the landscape, however, that discussions must produce contradictions and become circular. I want my map to be consistant and contain no contradictions but allow for a 'transcendent' to be distinguished and, most importantly, objective.

"That is the nature of consciousness, is it not? "

Personally I believe consciousness is the transcendent to the physical and because of this, likely to produce contradictions in arguments and discussions, quite a 'hard' problem indeed. I enjoy the sport of the discussion around it.

"

What is it that you're driving at, though? It remains unclear to me."

My apologies if this is not clear, I attribute it to my own limits in explaining this landscape. I am creating a 'map' of spirits and ideas which fits into a larger map of consciousness and the physical universe. This map is really just a metaphor for understanding and hopefully, wisdom.

"

Please explain if you have the desire or wish to forsake the economics of energy. "

not sure what this means?

"

Memes and spirits? Do you see it as aspects of the same thing, only from the perspective of different planes? "

Currently, yes I am seeing as an shared aspect of one phenomenon. Like many here on this forum, I have a life of experiences between exalted states of being mixed with interactions of 'ah-ha!'s' (inspirational ideas, creative concepts, etc) and more direct encounters with subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) 'intelligences' of a non corporeal reality.

What is intriguing to me more than spirits and their nature is the nature of ideas themselves. Ideas are shared amongst all of us, regardless of philosophical, religious, or secular leanings. We all share ideas in common and ideas are just as, if not more, mysterious in nature than spirits. Unless of course they are the same thing. Which at this point I am leaning towards they are. This may not bring any more light to ideas and spirits, but approaching them as the same phenomenon from two distinct points of view creates a larger mystery and set of questions regarding humanity and our role in the universe - which is also a very strong aspect of my 'map'

"
Doesn't this always lead to confusion?"

I certainly hope not I think the confusion lay not so much in confusing the 'planes' but confusing the 'environments'; meaning - we confuse ideas about our shared environment (physical universe) with ideas about our subjective environment (consciousness, being and ideas about spirits, gods, etc) and there is where the confusion lay.

[Frater 639]

@ldfriend56 said

"thank you! nice to see someone around here has an eye for talent "

Very talented and very polite. There is enjoyment when seeing the universal aspects of relating to others.

@ldfriend56 said

"The topic being 'consciousness' specifically? if so, I would say I always find enjoyment in seeing how 'discussions' on the topic produce contradictions, and if that is what you mean, then yes. But I am not sure if this is a 'law' of the landscape, however, that discussions must produce contradictions and become circular. I want my map to be consistant and contain no contradictions but allow for a 'transcendent' to be distinguished and, most importantly, objective."

No, when dealing with the intellect, all arguments can be circular and reduced to "not that" -- therefore, your truth AND my truth is relative. I understand the aim for objectivity; however, when dealing with YOUR map, I find it difficult to get past Berkeley -- you mentioned the five senses yourself. And these senses always will be subjective, do you agree? Unless you can shed identity? THEN WHAT? We can agree on an objective reality, but it will always only be collective subjectivity. And this is a meme.

After that, if you'll forgive the linear time landscape, do you still "see" a perceived and the perceiver, when recollecting or projecting? Is this subjective to you? Is this your map?

@ldfriend56 said

"Personally I believe consciousness is the transcendent to the physical and because of this, likely to produce contradictions in arguments and discussions, quite a 'hard' problem indeed. I enjoy the sport of the discussion around it."

What makes you believe this? Is this an objective view? Consciousness has physical and transcendent to the physical aspects -- do you think it to be a dichotomy?

@ldfriend56 said

"What is intriguing to me more than spirits and their nature is the nature of ideas themselves. Ideas are shared amongst all of us, regardless of philosophical, religious, or secular leanings. We all share ideas in common and ideas are just as, if not more, mysterious in nature than spirits. Unless of course they are the same thing. Which at this point I am leaning towards they are. This may not bring any more light to ideas and spirits, but approaching them as the same phenomenon from two distinct points of view creates a larger mystery and set of questions regarding humanity and our role in the universe - which is also a very strong aspect of my 'map'"

Why lean toward anything? Why not simply adopt your POV to be in right relation? Do you think there to be one true answer, or is the truth dynamic and relative to any given POV?

@ldfriend56 said

"This may not bring any more light to ideas and spirits, but approaching them as the same phenomenon from two distinct points of view creates a larger mystery and set of questions regarding humanity and our role in the universe - which is also a very strong aspect of my 'map'"

It seems here that you are not leaning toward anything. I think not reducing everything into false dichotomies is very important.

@ldfriend56 said

"I think the confusion lay not so much in confusing the 'planes' but confusing the 'environments'; meaning - we confuse ideas about our shared environment (physical universe) with ideas about our subjective environment (consciousness, being and ideas about spirits, gods, etc) and there is where the confusion lay."

In this context, I see "planes" and "environments" to be the same thing. I agree wholeheartedly.

So, these "ideas, spirits, etc.", if they are in different "environments", you state about sharing them -- does this happen materially? Yes, it does -- in a strict neurobiological sense. It also happens in the "world of ideas" -- relative to the perceiver and perceived. So, here again, we have an example of the duality (and, in a broader sense, unity) of the subject/object. It is not a matter of either/or -- it is a matter of SCALE and IDENTIFICATION. What do you think?

[oldfriend56]

@Frater 639 said

" There is enjoyment when seeing the universal aspects of relating to others. "

indeed! let's get right into it, this is going to be fun!

"No, when dealing with the intellect, all arguments can be circular and reduced to "not that" "

Not sure exactly what you mean by 'intellect' - however I understand the flaw you bring up. I relate to bivalent, dualistic, or Aristotelian logical reasoning. But your also addressing the 'conflict of idea' - that very nature of conceptual reality, that all ideas are in conflict with one another and every concept as an opposite which seeks to obliterate it. (truly 'wars which are in heaven', no?)

"-- therefore, your truth AND my truth is relative."

there is your truth and my truth, sure, but then there is also OUR truth, which is our objective and shared environment. that's a very distinct truth value. For example, our truth exists in this very sentence and I predict with 100% accuracy that you will agree with me that the word at the end of this sentence is the word pickle.

"I understand the aim for objectivity; however, when dealing with YOUR map, I find it difficult to get past Berkeley -- you mentioned the five senses yourself. And these senses always will be subjective, do you agree? "

the senses will always provide BOTH objective and subjective information at ONCE! It is only our thinking minds that have to sift through the mysterious information and place it in it's proper sphere of relevance. Our five senses just help us navigate the mystery inside and outside. We only know what is true, even the fact that we exist, because of the exchange of information between POV's. All POV's will contain some objective information, some relative or false information, and some mysterious information where the distinction cannot be made objectively.

"Unless you can shed identity? THEN WHAT? We can agree on an objective reality, but it will always only be collective subjectivity. And this is a meme. "

I think this is part of the solution, and not the problem. I believe that our internal environment, the 'experience' of the 5 senses and beyond, is a unique truth value and our shared environment another unique truth value. One provides a subjective or relative truth that can function as an objective true, but may be delusion, or illusion, or insight, or any number of potential POV's - however the information that the collection of 'experiences' share back and forth with each other is the juicy 'true' and only what I mean by objective or objective environment. Objective reality and environment is just the reality we all can agree on - and all human beings are in a state of 93% perfect agreement all the time because of it

So you say 'then what?' - well if optimized properly, we can have cool things like global problem solving and resolution, advancements in the arts and sciences, extended life, health, happiness, etc etc.

"After that, if you'll forgive the linear time landscape, do you still "see" a perceived and the perceiver, when recollecting or projecting? Is this subjective to you? Is this your map?"

I definitely see a collection of us - yes, sharing both relative and objective information through the conflict of idea which potentially can lead to our liberation, or destruction, depending on how we play it. 'perceived and perceiver' is useful in some environments and not useful in others. The one truth with a capitol T that I can say is true for the most absolute certainty is that I, ....and you, exist! If both you and I exist, then certain other things must come to follow because of it, and one of those things is an objective and shared reality that we project our relative reality onto.

I said: Personally I believe consciousness is the transcendent to the physical and because of this, likely to produce contradictions in arguments and discussions, quite a 'hard' problem indeed. I enjoy the sport of the discussion around it.

"

What makes you believe this? Is this an objective view? Consciousness has physical and transcendent to the physical aspects -- do you think it to be a dichotomy? "

I believe this to be a mystery more than a truth, to clarify - but I believe that consciousness is likely to be a transcendent of the physical because that is how we experience it to be and there just is a very simple and clear distinction between the experience of information and the information itself that cannot be ignored or denied and that this remains true in both western philosophy and eastern philosophy and that this is an objective distinction. Is it a dichotomy or the union of a dichotomy? That's very mysterious territory! I dont have an answer there - but I believe it is very objective and rational to say "hey this is very mysterious here and we should be careful not to project our own delusion and sense of reason onto this mystery" - but we cannot deny the distinction either, we have to address it, experience it, understand it, use it, etc etc.

"

Why lean toward anything? Why not simply adopt your POV to be in right relation? Do you think there to be one true answer, or is the truth dynamic and relative to any given POV?"

I believe it is a combination of both! I lean in the direction of my intuition always

I seek my map to be objective and I believe it is my true will to make such an objective map.

Remember, objective to me just means the reality we all can agree on - and that to me signals the mystery more so than just our own individual projections and courses. We are all sharing in a journey together, relating to one another - expanding into infinite space together, this cannot be discounted.....this is the body of Nuit, no?

"

I think not reducing everything into false dichotomies is very important. "

My own personal work is uniting the opposites which I am sure you can relate to. I believe on/off aristolian logical reason is faulty, however I can be very rational in explaining how I come to that conclusion! And I also don't discard it, it has it's relevance - and computers are one of them.

"

@ldfriend56 said

"I think the confusion lay not so much in confusing the 'planes' but confusing the 'environments'; meaning - we confuse ideas about our shared environment (physical universe) with ideas about our subjective environment (consciousness, being and ideas about spirits, gods, etc) and there is where the confusion lay."

In this context, I see "planes" and "environments" to be the same thing. I agree wholeheartedly. "

coolness

"

So, these "ideas, spirits, etc.", if they are in different "environments", you state about sharing them -- does this happen materially? Yes, it does -- in a strict neurobiological sense. It also happens in the "world of ideas" -- relative to the perceiver and perceived. So, here again, we have an example of the duality (and, in a broader sense, unity) of the subject/object. It is not a matter of either/or -- it is a matter of SCALE and IDENTIFICATION. What do you think?"

me likey!

going to let that settle in a bit too!

[oldfriend56]

sorry about the double post!

[Frater 639]

@ldfriend56 said

"indeed! let's get right into it, this is going to be fun!"

This is fun! I'm digging your takes on these different ideas.

@ldfriend56 said

"Not sure exactly what you mean by 'intellect' "

The realm of Swords -- Ruach, active consciousness, analysis, rational thought, etc. Like Henri Bergson's use, used in opposition to intuition. This is a very broad term though, in this context -- not very precise.

@ldfriend56 said

"there is your truth and my truth, sure, but then there is also OUR truth, which is our objective and shared environment. that's a very distinct truth value. For example, our truth exists in this very sentence and I predict with 100% accuracy that you will agree with me that the word at the end of this sentence is the word pickle. "

This is what I call a "shared subjectivity". Reason for this is because there was an "objective truth" that the earth was round, when most people agreed that the earth was flat. Did this make the earth flat or round? Now, that's a good question!

Somewhere, somehow the earth became round in everyone's shared environment. Did it always exist that way? Sure it did -- but only according to our shared reality now. What do you think? And what does this say about the importance and power of memes and egregore?

@ldfriend56 said

"I think this is part of the solution, and not the problem. I believe that our internal environment, the 'experience' of the 5 senses and beyond, is a unique truth value and our shared environment another unique truth value. One provides a subjective or relative truth that can function as an objective true, but may be delusion, or illusion, or insight, or any number of potential POV's - however the information that the collection of 'experiences' share back and forth with each other is the juicy 'true' and only what I mean by objective or objective environment."

Solutions and problems are two ways of looking at the same phenomena, would you agree? Truth is a matter of convenience. All can be illusion and shared reality. All can be true yet completely individual. Usefulness and Value is what remains for the aim of unity with any given POV. And scale and identification of the POV are the intensity factors.

@ldfriend56 said

"All POV's will contain some objective information, some relative or false information, and some mysterious information where the distinction cannot be made objectively."

When separated by analysis and static, yes...I agree. However, POVs are seldom static and the nature of analysis changes the POV completely. We have the action and then the analysis, like you mentioned earlier. I agree with you, being tied to the measuring equipment (sensorium) is problem numbero uno.

@ldfriend56 said

"So you say 'then what?' - well if optimized properly, we can have cool things like global problem solving and resolution, advancements in the arts and sciences, extended life, health, happiness, etc etc."

Ok, ok. I see this and you're tugging at the heart strings now. I agree -- the world will be fine, though. With or without man thinking itself to be the reason for existence. It is interesting what we put prioirty on...you're starting to sound like a Leo!

Appeals to emotion always get me. But, I agree that your benevolent motives are always important and worth working toward. Are these things just means to "unity with the not-self" or maybe the collective sharing of resources?

Like you say here:

@ldfriend56 said

"Remember, objective to me just means the reality we all can agree on - and that to me signals the mystery more so than just our own individual projections and courses. We are all sharing in a journey together, relating to one another - expanding into infinite space together, this cannot be discounted.....this is the body of Nuit, no?"

But this is confusing:

@ldfriend56 said

"I believe it is a combination of both! I lean in the direction of my intuition always "

I think you lean in the direction of your intellect more? Intuition can be muddled with all sorts of weird stuff...

@ldfriend56 said

"
My own personal work is uniting the opposites which I am sure you can relate to."

I understand what this means to me. What does it mean to you? And why seek to do this?

For me, like taking your benevolent ideas above -- everyone sharing and growing together -- I find it to be very important to think about how we evolve, regardless of if we control it or not, whether we consider it worse or better from this particular POV of "humanity in the present time". But, even this is skewed and biased -- priorities change and the idea of humanity moving in the same "postiive" direction will change too. Construction and destruction cannot exist without each other. They are in "Lust" with each other. But, above all this, is really just Love and Unity. Uniting to my greatest fear and repression is an aspect of this -- so, the aim is to bind nothing, for there is none that is not very Isis.

But then, discarding all of this thinking when it is not useful and moving away from obsessing thoughts. It can take away from living every moment to the fullest. The trap of Indolence is a very dry one -- no flow -- this is what I meant before when it comes to economizing energy...how useful are these conversations? Besides showcasing skill of ideas in ontology, teleology, and other big words that turn the majority of humanity off...

I share your aim to create a map that is more objective, though. It is funny -- the more I follow my Path, the more I wish to be united to others in goal, aim, and direction. But, not always with the most benevolent or chaste aspects of those relations in mind...

What are your moral opinions, if I may ask, when it comes to global solutions, etc.? Why do you find these things worth fighting for? Do you subscribe to a categorical imperative? If so, do you feel that it benefits you in some way?

Very nice exchanging ideas with you btw! We could probably just take this conversation offline...

93 93/93

[oldfriend56]

@Frater 639 said

"

The realm of Swords -- Ruach, active consciousness, analysis, rational thought, etc. Like Henri Bergson's use, used in opposition to intuition. This is a very broad term though, in this context -- not very precise."

ok - i just call that the realm of thinking and include in that list is 'honesty'. I believe it comes into fruition when balanced with intuition.

"

This is what I call a "shared subjectivity". Reason for this is because there was an "objective truth" that the earth was round, when most people agreed that the earth was flat. Did this make the earth flat or round? "

well it more than likely played little role what so ever in the formation of our earth as a sphere. In hind site, we can say it was the objective environment even though people had a false idea believed to be true about this environment (happens all the time) - and it would be quite objective for us to say so. When we believed the earth was a flat plane, we were not being very objective! we were projecting our own false ideas onto the mystery and believing them to be true.

I understand there is this philosophical aversion to using the word 'objective' and 'objectivity' - but shared environment, the physical universe does not change for me if you exit or enter it - and it's exact nature might be mystery, with much truth to be discovered, but it still exists independent of a point of view.

And using the word objective is always in relationship to it's opposite, subjective - so it's a complete relationship so I like it

"
And what does this say about the importance and power of memes and egregore?"

Well it lines up quite nicely with my model so far. All memes make copies and spread themselves around and ideas and memes that appear to create the most accurate map to the most points of view, objective memes if you will, make take a long time to spread around but when they take hold they take hold firmly in culture. We are quite unlikely to go back to the meme 'flat earth' as true.

As for the group mind and all the different 'words' used, I have a lot of hope that collective intelligence is the future savior of our species - but it would have some limits as well. Are we to assume that planet earth did not exist until we occupied it? It does not seem reasonable to think that way. Can collective psyche create collective manifestations? I personally believe this is possible but am not prepared to make any sort of commentary here yet - although I do believe events like 911 are the result of our collective mind conspiring to move us forward, or backward, depending on the intentions.

"Solutions and problems are two ways of looking at the same phenomena, would you agree? "

yes

"

Truth is a matter of convenience."

Truth may be a matter of convenience but objectively speaking, truth is a matter of existence. Truth is existence. The existence of something or anything is in relation to how 'true' it is. Existence itself may be a very uncomfortable problem for the mind, especially the 'rauch' as you frame it to confront - I believe our relationship to truth is our journey with existence and this to me is an objective way to look at and understand 'truth'

" All can be illusion and shared reality. "

the fact that there can be an illusion that fools all of us tells me that this must be a very real illusion and therefore objective occurring.

"

All can be true yet completely individual. "

it is a continuum of shared/individual - or objective/subjective - or, nuit/hadit....same relationships really.

True comes in basically three forms. There is the truth of the mystery, i.e. it is true that there is unknown. There is the truth we all can agree on - our shared environment. And then there is your or my point of view about that environment. My POV may take a different location in time and space, as well as become colored with my feelings and subjectivity, but I am still going to be sharing a set of information with you that will be identical up to a certain point.

"
However, POVs are seldom static and the nature of analysis changes the POV completely. We have the action and then the analysis, like you mentioned earlier. I agree with you, being tied to the measuring equipment (sensorium) is problem numbero uno. "

even dynamically this must be true and i can even say it must be true for all sentient beings who could ever potentially exist in any potential universe. True, False, and Mystery are our eternally shared sets of distinctions and information and the entire play of 'us' can only take place in such an environment.

"

Ok, ok. I see this and you're tugging at the heart strings now. I agree -- the world will be fine, though. With or without man thinking itself to be the reason for existence. It is interesting what we put prioirty on...you're starting to sound like a Leo! "

Double Libra with a Pisces Moon

"

Are these things just means to "unity with the not-self" or maybe the collective sharing of resources?"

Like I mentioned above, I believe that collective intelligence is the savior of our species - and we are living in a time where, historically speaking, collective intelligence can finally take conscious shape and form via technology - so yes I am hopeful that collective organizing of resources is a result of this process.

"

I think you lean in the direction of your intellect more? Intuition can be muddled with all sorts of weird stuff..."

I use both to balance each other. I let my intuition let me wonder and poke at my curiosity - and then invite my rational mind to observe my reactions. Ultimately i believe we need both thinking and feeling (i just use these two words to explain our internal environments because they are the most shared and basic words and we all relate to thinking and feeling)

We just want to think with our objective minds and feel with our feelings and not think with the feelings and feel with the mind! yikes! talk about confusion

"

@ldfriend56 said

"
My own personal work is uniting the opposites which I am sure you can relate to."

I understand what this means to me. What does it mean to you? And why seek to do this? "

That is quite a question! Might I write a book real quick on the subject?

I believe this is how consciousness works and our consciousness does not really start working until we do this.

"
For me, like taking your benevolent ideas above -- everyone sharing and growing together -- I find it to be very important to think about how we evolve, regardless of if we control it or not, whether we consider it worse or better from this particular POV of "humanity in the present time". But, even this is skewed and biased -- priorities change and the idea of humanity moving in the same "postiive" direction will change too. "

I think progress towards a 'win win' is something that is not going to change, I believe we have competing win win and win lose strategies for our shared survival and pleasure and we are seeing a trend towards more and more 'win win' as we progress.

"

Construction and destruction cannot exist without each other. They are in "Lust" with each other. But, above all this, is really just Love and Unity. Uniting to my greatest fear and repression is an aspect of this -- so, the aim is to bind nothing, for there is none that is not very Isis."

Well we can construct ideas and we can destruct ideas, but we dont have to destruct people to destruct ideas...I believe all of this things have a place, especially when the opposites are harmonized.

"

But then, discarding all of this thinking when it is not useful and moving away from obsessing thoughts. It can take away from living every moment to the fullest. The trap of Indolence is a very dry one -- no flow -- this is what I meant before when it comes to economizing energy...how useful are these conversations? "

Speaking for myself, I need to work out my thoughts with others it helps me integrate and understand at a deeper level. It also helps me NOT obsess on them, it helps me work them out so it is very useful to me personally.

"

Besides showcasing skill of ideas in ontology, teleology, and other big words that turn the majority of humanity off... "

meh, it's just a niche skill set, I assume it bores many to tears but it seems to excite just the right people

"

What are your moral opinions, if I may ask, when it comes to global solutions, etc.? "

My morals are summarized quite simply as 'win win' on all levels and planes and environments at all times

"

Why do you find these things worth fighting for? "

my true will I suppose.....I dont know i dont ask that question much to myself, i just dig it

"

Do you subscribe to a categorical imperative? If so, do you feel that it benefits you in some way?"

Yes, as mentioned above, my 'categorial imperative' is 'all problems are solved effectively and for certain when all sides win', which is a high brow way of saying 'unity'

"

Very nice exchanging ideas with you btw! We could probably just take this conversation offline...

"
"

Likewise! let's keep it continuing here, so much has come to light having this discussion in the open and believe it or not, it all relates to spirits somehow!

[Frater 639]

@ldfriend56 said

"ok - i just call that the realm of thinking and include in that list is 'honesty'. I believe it comes into fruition when balanced with intuition."

I agree. A balance of both is key.

@ldfriend56 said

"well it more than likely played little role what so ever in the formation of our earth as a sphere. In hind site, we can say it was the objective environment even though people had a false idea believed to be true about this environment (happens all the time) - and it would be quite objective for us to say so. When we believed the earth was a flat plane, we were not being very objective! we were projecting our own false ideas onto the mystery and believing them to be true.

I understand there is this philosophical aversion to using the word 'objective' and 'objectivity' - but shared environment, the physical universe does not change for me if you exit or enter it - and it's exact nature might be mystery, with much truth to be discovered, but it still exists independent of a point of view.

And using the word objective is always in relationship to it's opposite, subjective - so it's a complete relationship so I like it "

The reason why I used that is an example is because you defined objectivity as shared reality. Those people that believed something in error shared reality. Only in hindsight do we consider it false. Did that make it any less true for those people? Their belief was truth to them.

No aversion to "objectivity". But, the idea of an objective truth is usually just a model based on the most convenient way of stating a belief. And if we keep saying objective truth includes everything, then it is not really saying anything at all.

Also, using the opposites logic - truth also implies falsehood. So can existence also include falsehood?

@ldfriend56 said

"Well it lines up quite nicely with my model so far. All memes make copies and spread themselves around and ideas and memes that appear to create the most accurate map to the most points of view, objective memes if you will, make take a long time to spread around but when they take hold they take hold firmly in culture. We are quite unlikely to go back to the meme 'flat earth' as true."

Agreed. So, by this logic, it seems that "truth" can be created by belief? A useful model if used as a tool.

@ldfriend56 said

"Truth may be a matter of convenience but objectively speaking, truth is a matter of existence. Truth is existence. The existence of something or anything is in relation to how 'true' it is. Existence itself may be a very uncomfortable problem for the mind, especially the 'rauch' as you frame it to confront - I believe our relationship to truth is our journey with existence and this to me is an objective way to look at and understand 'truth'"

Existence is a very blanket term (and also futile ) -- it seems you may mean perception of that which exists? Our relationship to truth is perception? If we include multiple perceptions, then truth is relative. If we only include one perception, then it is subjective truth. Truth can also include something which does not exist until it is illuminated. Do you mean truth is the experience of existence? Does this involve perception?

@ldfriend56 said

"the fact that there can be an illusion that fools all of us tells me that this must be a very real illusion and therefore objective occurring."

"A very real illusion" is a direct contradiction by the standard definition -- but I know what you're saying I think.

@ldfriend56 said

"True comes in basically three forms. There is the truth of the mystery, i.e. it is true that there is unknown. There is the truth we all can agree on - our shared environment. And then there is your or my point of view about that environment. My POV may take a different location in time and space, as well as become colored with my feelings and subjectivity, but I am still going to be sharing a set of information with you that will be identical up to a certain point."

This is relatively true. And it is also a useful model. But, I have to keep saying that truth is POV and not an absolute. As a person that I admire once said "only Siths deal in absolutes." Or something like that.

@ldfriend56 said

"Double Libra with a Pisces Moon"

Sidereal or Tropical?

@ldfriend56 said

"Like I mentioned above, I believe that collective intelligence is the savior of our species - and we are living in a time where, historically speaking, collective intelligence can finally take conscious shape and form via technology - so yes I am hopeful that collective organizing of resources is a result of this process."

I think DNA and procreation is the savior of our species. Let's hope that we get organized collectively though -- I do share that sentiment -- and technology has not always made our collective lives easier.

@ldfriend56 said

"Well we can construct ideas and we can destruct ideas, but we dont have to destruct people to destruct ideas...I believe all of this things have a place, especially when the opposites are harmonized."

Does destroying people have a place? Technology has definitely made that easier.

@ldfriend56 said

"I use both to balance each other. I let my intuition let me wonder and poke at my curiosity - and then invite my rational mind to observe my reactions. Ultimately i believe we need both thinking and feeling (i just use these two words to explain our internal environments because they are the most shared and basic words and we all relate to thinking and feeling)

We just want to think with our objective minds and feel with our feelings and not think with the feelings and feel with the mind! yikes! talk about confusion"

I like your model of balance. As far as the "win win"...I see what you're trying to say; although, it will never always be win win because of the diversity of perspective. Until we are all seeing in the same direction, I don't see this as a possiblity. Admirable to strive toward...but it creates a problem in the free will department. There are also hints of determinism in those statements.

And, as far as the dialectic, you say it helps to hammer things out for you, but I don't see the point in talking overmuch. In fact, I find over-analysis to be interference and, ultimately, there are better ways to spend my time. Asserting belief as truth makes things, even just by talking about them, and, in my direct experience and ideas of truth, it can set up issues in the long run.

Silence to me is the greatest aspect of collective truth, because it doesn't qualify one POV over the other -- and ultimately, it is the Supreme method of magick and mysticism, and the aim of my Path.

And with that, I invoke my buddy Harpocrates. Best of luck on your Path. I enjoyed the conversation.