- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
If he comes to Conn. I will give him a copy of my book and he might begin to think of creation, the creator and the teachings in a more conscious quantum way...(that's his only stumbling block for those that want to make it up on their own).
That's exactly what's been going on for several decades!
And it's the Electorate's Fault for buying into and supporting that Process!
[hugs, though...]
.
Rubio C did the same thing but escaped the bite on the ass.
If you want dirty tricks and lies look to trump...he's an ignorant loose cannon
Isn't A==A?
:)
We need the G to adhere to the constitution and we need a person with strict constitutional principles...we let the FG get away with too much crap.
I understand the anger but it's not the American way to do it.
When Trump first tossed his hat in, I concluded that his 'strange' style would be VERY appealing to what I thought was a vast majority of voters fed up with what Politicians have done to the country for scores of years.
I think I was right back then and still am.
Yes, Trump could be a Very Scary President in his own ways... I strongly disagree with some of his views on trade, economics, and religion, but I also believe that the higher risk to the US is to continue down the socialist death-spiral with Bernie OR Hillary.
Problem for me still is: I'm an Atheist, and I don't see ANY of the (R) candidates being anything less than bible-thumpers at heart. I want a Critical Thinker in the WH, not someone who turns to their preacher, minister, pastor or bible for "The Answers."
In other words...I don't think trump is that smart...outside of business ideas, he is compartmentalized and cannot engage his mind.
otherwise he would of studied the constitution and had been talking more about making government smaller.
He has been part of the system we need to abolish.
That's my take, my observation over the years regarding trump.
Principled, disciplined, accountable and appreciative bible readers are the best people to trust...even if it was a pagan bicameral fear of consequences that drives them to be good and fair.
That is not the case with Ted...I have followed his career for years now.
My displeasure with "religion" is much like yours...except I always knew there was some value there but was confounded with mysticism.
That's why, as a small part of my work and perhaps the most important, is to unconfound it, demystify it and get at the quantum physical conscious truth of it.
Keep in mind that even the OT, T and the NT are still all expressed in pre-conscious (bicameral) language. That's what I learned from the work of Julian Jaynes: The breakdown of the bicameral mind.
Then I look at the alternatives.
I just haven't encountered many, if any, "Principled, disciplined, accountable and appreciative bible readers" in my life.
I think too many people claim or assume that bible-reading automatically implies or enables the rest of the list to be characteristic(s) of the 'readers.'
I've encountered only two or three 'bible readers' who I actually felt were "holy persons" with those other characteristics, but my belief is that those were their characteristics long before they connected with any bible.
imnsho... :)
Those that teach/organize are bicamerally compartmentalized also even though they might be consciously integrated otherwise.
..............GO straight to Gitmo
As far as the middle east is concerned, no matter whom gets in, we're gona be kickin butt there for a long time.
Maybe we should enlist the prescription drug addict companies to make a pill for pagan barbarianism.
Later my son said friends of his were voted for Cruz.
Guess they knew what I knew but felt but just had to make a statement about sticking to grounded conservative principles.
Trump of course beat Cruz with whatever principles he may have floating in the air.
David Duke? Who is David Duke? Let's talk about how bad the KKK is after they help me beat Rubio and Cruz.
Hildebeast and Sanders really want to increase taxes and take away freedoms though. They are specifically evil. Of the group, Trump is our best shot in my opinion. I dont think he would do things tht hurt our economy like the others. And I doubt he is into religious zealotry.
When asked, Trump said he liked the idea of using Executive Actions like Obama has. I would prefer someone who wasn't quite so willing to go it alone when he didn't get his way.
"Hildebeast and Sanders really want to increase taxes and take away freedoms though."
Yes, they do - especially Hillary. She'd like nothing more than to become Queen.
"I dont think he would do things tht hurt our economy like the others."
I'd sure love to see more specific policy statements from him on those matters. So far, there's not much to go on and that's scary. And he will have to do more than just "not hurt" the economy, he's actually got to encourage positive change. We're on a collision course with bankruptcy and collapse that is going to take a real leader and serious change to avoid. I don't see him advocating for a change in course on economic policy, and no specifics about how he's going to "make American great again." I want those specifics.
I'm not the common, uninformed voter who relies on endorsements and heady platitudes. I want substance. I look at history. I look at the current field and see a doddering, delusional old man, the devil incarnate in a pantsuit, an outsider, a bloviating narcissist, and an establishment shill, aside from a well-meaning but out-of-his-league passivist and an unknown aspirant.
Buying from china and sending them paper dollars has helped our economy by avoiding a lot of government red tape. I know how to make most of the items my small company buys from china, but dealing with US employees and laws is such an expensive proposition we just couldnt stay alive that way.
COMPLETELY AGREE. But in order to allow the economy to work, government has to actively remove the chains already in place. Ignoring the chains, restrictions, and bureaucracy isn't going to do anything.
"All Trump would have to do is reduce enforcement of the current laws actually."
I'm actually shocked that you would advocate for an Executive that doesn't enforce the laws. That's what we've had with Obama: selective enforcement. It's gotten us nowhere good. We need an Executive that will work with Congress and advocate to the People the necessity of repealing many of the existing laws currently hampering business. We need an Executive who will rescind the Executive Orders which just keep adding to that $2 TRILLION of annual regulatory burden. I'd really like to hear Trump come out and say that these are the actions he would take. It would do a lot for my confidence in him. Instead, he comes out saying that he'd rather increase taxes, or that he just likes a different version of government-run healthcare.
Either way, they should get a taste of their own doing...
It is a war, and we do need to take sides. Socialism is really bad. At least Sanders tells us straight up where he is at. Hillary is the same, but hides it
How about the anti same sex marriage , and anti gay proclamations in most of the religions today?
But the concept, proven by quantum science that something created the cosmos and everything in it- directly or by consequence is not barbaric.
Your beef is not with the concept but with brain only humanoid's.
We don't know what it is...but us and everything we see didn't start itself...it's waaay too specific.
It's simply "the creator or creation...simple stupid.
Myself, in a rational scientific investigation see the consequences of creation more of a proxy of a direct connection than a direct one like the bicameral speak thinks...either way, it's obvious that life is favored and conscious life might very well be chosen...so to speak.
Just look up a quantum event...it's been observed and measured.
It's not mystical, it's quantum physical.
good/evil is order/disorder
Dennis at Prager University has some really good video explanations of these things.
Sadly...most do not teach this stuff.
Religious good/facts of reality...just like Ayn's discussion of ethics?...same with Aristotle...like I said and have learned...it's not mystical, it's quantum physical. It's also...in one's rational self interest, to be good. That's what is being talked about...only in a nonconscious bicameral way.
.
But, since none of those running are "good" from an Objectivist prspective, at least Trump is shaking up the establishment and he likes to make a deal. The others only want naked power. The Libertarian Convention has not yet been held, and perhaps many of those who are Cruzistas will see the value in the LP as the alternative.
https://youtu.be/eE6ica0t95Q really is a Good Clip!
I've been taken behind the woodshed here many times by 'believers.'
Your mileage may vary. Closed course; professional thinkers only!
:D
Evolution of thoughts and concepts takes too much time and inhibits our mind.
I think that the evolution of consciousness has evolved much slower than Julian Jaynes might of imagined.
If we go back to the eye at the tip of the pyramid, we begin to understand that with a mind we can view ourselves being aware of that awareness.
You might find it amusing that I consider the ether: The ethernet for the mind. where true knowledge and wisdom comes from. Our brains, however amazing, is relegated to compartmentalized survival information.
We might find the "brain only" creatures in our culture and government a pain in the Butt, but on some level we might marvel at their ability to monkey see, monkey do a sometimes convincing imitation of consciousness.
However...I don't think we should be flattered.
Course Summary
The subject of consciousness is among the most vexing in both philosophy and science, and no less tractable in psychology, where the conceptual problems are often neglected. As a “state,” consciousness seems resistant to translation into physical terms and measurements, though its dependence on a healthy nervous system appears to be as close to a “cause-effect” relationship as any in the natural sciences.
The aim and scope of these 12 lectures must be modest, for the subject is as vast as that of human and animal awareness. What I hope to convey may be distilled into four main points: First, that consciousness and mental life are sui generis; they are not “like” anything else. They are not like anything that is material or physical and seem to require for their fuller understanding a science not yet available, if ever available.
Second, what distinguishes consciousness (and the term presupposes consciousness of something) from all else is its phenomenology—there is something it is like to be “conscious” that is different from all other facts of nature.
Third, conscious awareness is a power possessed by the normal percipient, including non-human percipients. This power is such that much that impinges on the sense organs is filtered out and sometimes only the weakest but the most “meaningful” of occurrences gains entrance.
Fourth, such powers vary over the course of a lifetime, are subject to disease and defect, and thus, lead to questions of profound ethical consequence.
Here, then, is a topic in which science, philosophy, medicine, and ethics are merged, the result being issues at once intriguing and unsettling.
All of which means, I doubt we can settle the issue here.
Thanks.
Your correct, it's not settled but there are some that think I've moved the bar a little, to better understanding.
The course was correct to point out that it's not physical and as I now know...it's not even in your head.
To try and convey this idea is a little saying that we learned in English class: Me, Myself and I;
Me is the brain in the body of myself made whole and conscious by the I.
This "I", this sense of "Iness" is a conscious identity. some would say it's immortal in a quantum energy sense. But its a different sense of self than say Fraud's "Ego" which is a false but needed identity.
A quantum sense of identity, versus an Ego of the brain is still the major division in our world and it's not just prevalent in the animal kingdom, it exists in human life also. To have a quantum conscious gives one conscience but if your only a body with a brain...there is no conscience.
If you observe closely...it is self evident.
Yes, sometimes the workings of it can be hindered by disease, genetics or psychosis but in the end, it comes down to whether one has the potential or desire to be.
PS...what did you learn about the psy. of our best friends?