what do you think of ?


I believe that the idea below (provided in bold) can be proven to be true.

We cannot behave like man (and will forever remain animals) as long as we seek money.

ADD is the disorder which goes away when we have a fair society without inequality driven by money.

'what man is to ape, so superman is to man'
Nietzsche

Ape desires dollar
Man makes the transition from (dollar) physical to mental stimulation
Superman (ADDer) does not require ca$h - and the disorder disappears when ca$h disappears.



(for more of an explanation see next post (#2))

*However* neither posts 2 nor 3 in this thread need be read if you do not want to -
all that I need is that you read and respond to the 4 points above.



------------
references :
------------

ADDF :: Nova (thread - 'we create our own reality'
ADDF :: Stabile (idea - speciation of man completes as we descend into the internal milieu)
ADDF :: Nietzsche

(for more of an explanation see next post (#2))

Argument

ADD is a tendency towards a true moral state of mind.

Money cannot exist in a moral society - because it delivers inequality in society.

Inequality in society is immoral.

As we develop our mind - our disorder can mentally cripple us into suicidal tendency because a strong morality cannot escape the knowledge that the individual is engaging in strong immorality.
--- illustration helping to convey this point ---
This represents the pain of knowingly holding one's hand in a flame - where the development of mind leads to the flame growing larger and more intense.
--- illustration helping to convey this point ---



(only if you would like more of an explanation of these ideas - please see the next post in this thread (#3)
- which contains a brief explanation of the terms in this post which are highlighted in this colour)

only if you would like more of an explanation of these ideas - please see the next post in this thread (#3)Entire post

I'd really be grateful if someone can explain to me why the following argument isn't true (using the rationale below)


Argument


ADD is a tendency towards a true moral state of mind.

Money cannot exist in a moral society - because it delivers inequality in society.

Inequality in society is immoral.

As we develop our mind - our disorder can mentally cripple us into suicidal tendency because a strong morality cannot escape the knowledge that the individual is engaging in strong immorality.

--- illustration helping to convey this point ---
This represents the pain of knowingly holding one's hand in a flame - where the development of mind leads to the flame growing larger and more intense.
--- illustration helping to convey this point ---


Explanatory Notes (if necessary) - on the above paragraph


(i) Money cannot exist in a moral society
the immorality of money is defined here as the pursuit of money for its own sake

(ii) inequality in society is used in the standard sense - I'm not describing the generation of 5 billion human clones on our planet

(iii) moral state of mind
[morality] is a function of [[mind]] - just like [cold] is a function of [] and [hot] is a function of [[flame]].

(iv) moral/immoral
we are either moral or not moral -
- just like ice is cold and not hot like steam

(v) develop our mind
this represents learning of information which we can play with in our own minds (not cramming for examinations)

(vi) cannot escape the knowledge
If we wanted to walk to London - we could take many routes.
ADD is the equivalent of defining the fastest route and thereafter not being able to use other routes (as a consequence).


Rationale


(I) There isn't any real doubt that we evolved from apes resulting in Homo sapiens where sapiens means 'wisdom'

(II) Without thinking about the actual mechanism - an evolutionary event must have occurred to permit the first 'ape' to have a mind (become man) and this event must have had an effect (resulted in a slightly different organism)

(III) The wise cannot be [I]wise without a mind

(IV) The mind occurs on the inside of our brain and so the inside of the brain is very important to us.

(V) The ape lives in the external environment (like us), and has a brain (like us) - but cannot think like us - because the ape cannot imagine.

(VI) The ape lives in the external environment (is stimulated by external things like food, other animals, nice trees) where the evolution of man represents the gradual transition from monkey gaining stimulation from external things - to man gaining stimulation from internal things (things in the mind - which of course are ideas)

Imagination represents a collection of ideas.
We can imagine 'things' in our mind which do not exist in the external environment.


(VII) Line of Logic


(a) Money exists in the external world

(b) Money is not the currency of the internal world

(c) The transition of ape to man represents the transition of living in the external world to living in the internal world
Living means gaining stimulation from
(where external world stimulation == nervous stimulation from food, nervous stimulation from the excitement of swinging through trees and
where internal world stimulation == the nervous stimulation from imagining elves fighting against orcs)

Why did we evolve to being a people with minds ?

Because we thereafter create our own reality (ADDF::Nova)
We're no longer dependent on neural stimulation from external world objects for neural stimulation
external world objects - are beyond our control - unlike internal world objects.

The evolution of neurone culminating in (man with mind) has placed the sole stipulation on the organism within which the neural structure is housed (our body)
- that it will give life to its organism (co-ordinate behaviour)
- only -
though if the organism supplies the nerve with stimulation (controlled electrical activity).

The desire for stimulation in the nerve is not negotiable.
Life is synonymous with the demand for neural stimulation; as we get better (evolutionarily)('better' meaning more complex) - so our threshold for stimulation rises.

Pain and pleasure are both forms of neural stimulation - which is why pain steps in when more productive thoughts are notable for their absence -
the famous saying that 'you have nothing to fear but fear itself'

and so - see post #1

We cannot behave like man (and will forever remain animals) as long as we seek money.

ADD is the disorder which goes away when we have a fair society without inequality driven by money.

'what man is to ape, so superman is to man'
Nietzsche

Ape desires dollar
Man makes the transition from (dollar) physical to mental stimulation
Superman (ADDer) does not require ca$h - and the disorder disappears when ca$h disappears.

Summary

intelligence arises with evolutionary advancement (development of the mind)

we gain stimulation from abstract thought processes and not the animal desires of the physical world (feeding,clothing,possesions,sexual activity)

by our $ociety driving us to desire thing$ which no longer satisfy - so do we suffer to the point of suicidal tendency -
though not meant in a scary aggressive way - merely in the sense that the desire dissipates and quite extraordinarily - there is no will to live.

Not a kinda' anxiety driven desire to show the world how bad the world is - by killing oneself - more the sensation of Hamlet at his end
'oh! good grief'

and then just dying.

One's own death is completely devoid of emotional content from one's own perspective - it's simply the logical choice.
It's actually a deeply pleasurable thought.

The comedy also is that this form of desire is so logically underpinned that no other could argue one against the act -
instead - and this is a delightful irony -
an explanation of the basis of one's decision to another would lead to the other really wanting to join in -
and commit suicide also -

once again though -
not wanting in the sense of frenzy,angst and desperation -

- instead in the same way that people feel happy :-) when they come home from a day at work to see their kids.

I've never heard suicide characterized in this way - a burning desire to die with the most delightful gentle attraction (a kinda' lovely warm feeling inside at the thought) ?

wow !

can only think that that's not good for a species.

--------
~note~
--------

- by the way -
not a single word was used ambiguously or in jest -
please take each {word,idea,sentiment} at face value
exactly as presented.

more information here (if you'd like)
->-
~s (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=565465&postcount=398)~

... ... ... excerpt from above ... ... ...
Would you be happier or sadder in a world where we all have the same phy$ical wealth?
My answer
Happier.

de$ire confounds humanity

enforces

profound mental torture (ADD)

(off the scale inescapable)

~*~

life is what we make of it -

- never really thought much about religion until recently

though

now realise that the collective great religions do something which all other disciplines combined have failed to deliver -

a 'point' to living

~s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Answer_to_Life,_the_Universe,_and_Everything)~

When asked to produce The Ultimate Question, the computer says that it can't, but can help design an even more powerful computer (the Earth) which can.

The Ultimate Question is lost completely when the Earth is destroyed by the Vogons.

Vogons == nonADDers

Earth take II
need be inhabited by ADDer.

the collective great religions were begun by a buncha' chaps which ->-
the powerful computer (the Earth) provided as 'output' - to the question

'... ... ... and what was the point again ?'

The theory underlying Emergent events (in nature) will help to clarify this idea.

eg

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:nCNDW3BrQ_Dt4M:http://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/images/mengaris.jpg

... a majestic emergent tree of the ...

eg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brood_X)

Brood X (brood 10) is one of 15 broods of periodical cicadas that appear regularly throughout the eastern United States. It has the greatest range and concentration of any of the 17-year cicadas.

..................http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:IbKdhUuYpwxRoM:http://fusionanomaly.net/magnoliafrogfromabove.jpg

.................................................. ......................blasts of cold air
.................................................. ................snow predicted for later


...........sigur ros, agaetis byrjun,
............viorar vel til loftarasa



.......................................http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/images/outlook/snow_storm.jpg



.................................................p eriodic cicada broods
.......................................may be differentiated by their song



.....http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/ukweather/images/reviews/ukwx_review_gr_11nov1.jpg

Just curious about your argument.

Why can't money exist in a moral society?

It delivers inequality however it is a stabilizer.

a stable society is a moral society?

but then again... a stable society is not a moral society

a diverse society = a moral society



Nevermind.... that's thinking too hard

Tiptoeing back down the hall now...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWiJWLiSKro&feature=related

Mechanistic explanation of Down's syndrome
(mental retardation)
and suggested cure


(from my wife)

the evolution of man involved the evolution of an electrical circuit

---first---
1-worm (coil) this (http://www.addforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=50653) picture on wikiP/Dermatome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dermatomic_area)

---second---
2-legs (gross motor)

---third---
3-arms (fine motor)

So - our evolution involved an increase in current flow around our internal electrical circuit -
- resulting in an elevated charge being built on our
central nervous battery (capacitor)
->- the substantia nigra (neuromelanin)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromelanin
->- is a ->-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polypyrrole

Polypyrrole is a
In a series of papers in 1963, DE Weiss and coworkers reported [1] high-conductivity (up to 1 S/cm) in iodine-doped oxidized polypyrrole. While too early and thus eventually "lost", this anticipated by many years the Nobel-prize-winning discovery of high-conductivity in similarly iodine-doped and oxidized polyacetylene, as well as John McGinness' et als report of a high-conductivity "ON" state in the putative first organic electronic device [2]iodine as in thyroid hormone (covered previously on ADDF).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndrome
->-
... ... excessive space between large toe and second toe, a single flexion furrow of the fifth finger, and a higher number of ulnar loop dermatoglyphs.Svefn-g-englar
Sigur RosThe peripheral electrical circuit delivers current to the brain in a sequential manner

---first---
---second---
---third---
and charge builds on our central capacitor -
- which at about three - begins to turn and lead to development of the mind.

The peripheral electrical circuit is broken in mental retardation -
as defined by the

... ... excessive space between large toe and second toe, a single flexion furrow of the fifth finger, and a higher number of ulnar loop dermatoglyphs.dermatoglyphic map -
as evidence of what lies beneath.

Maybe this is enough to cure mental retardation -
exogenous administration of ADD meds -
- like dexedrine -
to help build the mind in the absence of an unimpeded circuit.

-----
Note:
-----
shorter stature, roundish faces and almond eyes with epicanthic folds (taken from the Down Syndrome page on wikiP) will be explained from an anthropological perspective later on
ADDF :: science forum.

Summary of idea

(1) In Down's Syndrome there is no starter motor

(2) Jump start the car

(3) Therafter the car's alternator will take over the task of charging the car battery

disease (mental retardation) cured (I think) ?

"(V) The ape lives in the external environment (like us), and has a brain (like us) - but cannot think like us - because the ape cannot imagine."

You think this, SB? I disagree. I think they and other animals, most other animals, actually, but especially those that live in social groups, have vivid imaginations and mind/body connections that we have stupidly foregone in favor of language. I think man is not an improvement on apes, necessarily; we just proved more powerful.

Just my two cents. I look at the life my horse leads all day, out with her herd/family, standing next to her best buddy in her pasture, kinda bored maybe, but they spice things up now and then with play fights over the waterer and sudden bursts of running around for no good reason other than that they heard a bunny rustling in the weeds (and on another day they'd have recognized, "Ah, it's that bunny again," and gone on munching as many of the weeds as they could reach through the fence, but today, they're imagining that it's a gigantic HORSE eating bunny, about to get them...). Why do they do this? Because it's fun. It's spring, their winter coats are shedding. Because why not? Is that not a life inside the mind?

Sandy

:-)

first I'd look for a list of organisms with neuromelanin -
- and then I'd look for a method of defining creativity in other organisms.

I guess that creativity alongside imagination needs to be some form of thought on something which has no physical world counterpart -
as opposed to putting known physical world elements together

for instance - no matter where the animal is -
- the sound of splish-splosh means that water is close by.

Hmmm... ....
my doggy hits REM sleep often.

Need to qualify that statement above -

so what's the difference between man and other higher organisms ?

I think that the answer is that man is the only organism with the mind with capacity to obtain all necessary neural stimulation (after education) -
without any need for external world stimuli.

I think maybe that we're the only organism which might be able (after appropriate education) - to exist in an environment of complete sensory deprivation (and still) - quite happily obtaining all of our required quota of neural stimulation from property of mind.

I'm tempted to suggest that properly balanced mind whilst meditating (awake) - can derive all necessary stimulation by internal thought processes driving internal dopaminergic circuit to resonate off the planet

8 Hz dopaminergic circuit firing
8 Hz theta EEG - meditation and the doors into surfin' creativity
8 Hz - principle mode of Schumann

pretty sure that no other animal can do the ADD thing
(my favourite hobby)
of sitting in one place from dawn till dusk -
pullin' a

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:kecLs9_kzoeKNM:http://www.megsplace.com/TimeWarp/mrman.jpg

probably should also mention that a neural train (the self in the real world) -
can generate a partner
(self in the internal world) -

- its dual.

The product of the dual - using (3->4->13d)n would generate a construct - a child process or differential model to man in real and man in virtual environments -
and the model would represent a merger of real world and imaginary world behaviours

(imaginary world behaviour being an eversion of the real world -
the turned inside out perspective -
which will make sense (although need not represent real entities) -
because it's a variant form of the 'real structure'.

So - the idea that this imaginary world is constrained by the real world -
- but without any stipulation on representing structures with valid form in the real world.

->-

I guess that creativity alongside imagination needs to be some form of thought on something which has no physical world counterpart -
as opposed to putting known physical world elements together.


OK - so the mindspace within our head -
is a kinda' composite of two perspectives on reality -
- and balance represents the act of duality completing between the real and its opposite - since ideally - they'll represent perfect opposites.

When they are in perfect opposition - then there is a duality formed -
because the 2 duals balance.
So - we need not have 'imaginary' and 'real' duals -
since the capacity to generate one (in its entirety) -
from the other -
renders one of the two redundant.

This structure (balanced) - can be used as a child process -
where the child process does not need to balance 'real' and 'imaginary' - because it has already been done.
The structure is complete -

and so we observe

4+4 [->13->1->3d]
the swoosh of evolution

4+4 ->->->->- [->13 ... ... ... ...
represents the time it takes to educate the two internal circuits into convergence.

Explanation (not good though)
take half of a supposedly stmmetrical shape -
generate an image of what the other half should look like
perform repeat comparisons until the structure of one half predicts the exact same structure of the other half

OK - so -

This structure (balanced) ... ...


An internally logically consistent mind on dopamine level II - takes us up to dopamine level III
(details omitted)
whereby

on level III

humans may resonate off one another at 8 Hz and off the planet -
Maya and Gaia holding hands

where

I think that the answer is that man is the only organism with the mind with capacity to obtain all necessary neural stimulation (after education) -
without any need for external world stimuli.


8 Hz dopaminergic circuit firing
8 Hz theta EEG - meditation and the doors into surfin' creativity
8 Hz - principle mode of Schumann


initially from

References

ADDF :: E boy
-> 8 Hz dopaminergic circuit firing

ADDF :: High Functioning
-> 8 Hz theta EEG - meditation and the doors into surfin' creativity

ADDF :: Queen's University Girl
-> 8 Hz - principle mode of Schumann

Mmmmmmmm, I don't buy this one AT ALL:

"I think maybe that we're the only organism which might be able (after appropriate education) - to exist in an environment of complete sensory deprivation (and still) - quite happily obtaining all of our required quota of neural stimulation from property of mind."

Not only do I not buy it, I don't buy that just any "neural stimulation" will do. We are social animals. We need interaction with creatures like us, the same way that your doggie strains at the leash every time he sees another dog. After all, SB, why are you HERE, eh? This isn't a totally internal world. You're not imagining ME, for example.

I'll tell you another reason that I disagree with that; it can be demonstrated in any supermax prison you enter, or the segregation unit in the prison in which I used to work. The men were on 23 hour lockdown. The one hour allowed for limited social interaction, but also had to be used for showering, etc. A few days in there was tolerable, but you spend weeks or, God forbid, months in that and the lack of social interaction made people mad. Mad, as in, hallucinating, hearing voices, etc.

I think the only thing that distinguishes man is our use of spoken and written language, and even then, other social animals (and even some non-social ones, like cats) still "speak" a language a little bit, and still have a little bit of a "written" language. My dog used to read her pee mail. My cat scratches the couch to let every other cat that might happen to wander by know that the couch is his. But ours is perhaps uniquely well-developed, and every culture of man has it, which tells us something about our evolution, it seems to me.

I need to finish up some work, here, SB, but when I'm done, I want to ask you a question about something you said in another post (won't take the time to find it right now). I'll be back with it, but perhaps not today. When I find it, I'll put it in your visitor messages. Feel free to delete it once you've read it, though. If you had pm, I'd probably send it to you that way instead.

Just my two cents above. I'll keep thinking about where or how ADD fits into the communication hypothesis.

Sandy.

BTW,

Is this the same thing ADDAWAY means by "pffffffrt?"

pretty sure that no other animal can do the ADD thing
(my favourite hobby)
of sitting in one place from dawn till dusk -
pullin' a

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:kecLs9_kzoeKNM:http://www.megsplace.com/TimeWarp/mrman.jpg

'Cause if it is, it sounds like you two have more in common than you knew... Hehehehehehehee.:D

Bye for now,

Sandy.

Saw this on one of your other threads and thought that it related well to this discussion here:

"Pictures are more satisfying than words -
though they take me forever.

I'm thinking that communication of ideas (definitely by linear language - but even maybe by the nonlinearity of written poetic expression)
are just too slow.

The problem - communication is two way -
- if even nonlinear poetry is barely effective in *two* - way communication

how could we develop an effective mechanism for conveying more information, quicker and without fear of information loss in transit?"

I think that many animals, particularly social ones, think in pictures, and communicate with body language. And if they're properly socialized (i.e., not starved of communication with their own kind, etc.) there's no risk for them of their communications losing information in transit.

Here's an example: If I am walking behind my horse in an arena, and I step to the left of her behind a little, she will turn to the right. She knows that I mean for her to turn to the right. She may not want to turn to the right. She may throw her head at me, or "disobey" me by speeding up to the left instead, but if I then also speed up and move even more to the left, she'll whirl and turn to the right. And then if that makes her mad, she may throw her head at me, or speed up and run away. But when I stop, look down (not at her), and cock one knee, like she would do when she is resting, she'll come to me and bump me with her nose. Much was communicated. No information was lost.

I think that one of the reasons that we lose information in communication is because so much of it is this, in writing, no visual cues, no auditory cues. We need those cues because we need that social interaction to understand one another. And we do want to be understood. You too, SB. That's why you're here, is it not?

Ok, one thought occurred to me about where ADD fits into my communication hypothesis. This is from my shrink. He says that ADDers have an "uncanny knack for unmasking hypocrisy." He said that this happens because the part of one's brain that is responsible for hypocrisy doesn't work very well in ADDers.

Hmmmmmmmmm... this is supposedly related to our alleged lack of social skills. I say "alleged" because, frankly, I've never felt that I had a problem with a lack of social skills. In fact, I've always used my social skills to help smooth relations with people who are bothered by other aspects of me that (I now know) are caused by my ADD.

But his explanation made me think, because what he was getting at was something that I would not call a "social skill." He was saying (this was tied to a specific event) that I'd not played the game very well by essentially calling out (through my reaction) a more powerful person when that person was an *****hole to me. The shrink was saying that I should have been more gracious. And when the powerful guy "apologized," I should have "accepted" the apology. I put quotes around that because I recognized that what the guy did was an "apology," even though he never said anything like that, and I did essentially tell him to go screw himself, even though I was very cheerful and acted like I was merely an idiot when I did it. (He offered me something I shouldn't have turned down, and I very cheerfully told him no thanks, I was going to do something with someone else who, BTW, was far less important than him).

So, ok, what can we deduce from that? I understood the powerful guy's language fully. I understood the slight, understood the apology, etc. But I didn't speak his language back to him, if that makes sense. It wasn't that I was true to myself or nobel, necessarily. It's that I had no interest in participating in the conversation.

Now, if that's what's meant by a "lack of social skills" then I guess I have it. But for me it's been phenomenally successful socially. I've never lacked for friends. I can only think of one election that I've ever failed to win (ok, that's snotty, but whatever... it's still true), and only one job interview that I've had where I failed to get the job. People often tell me that they appreciate my candor. And I do compliment people a lot, including powerful people (but no more so than, say, the people who clean the office at night, for example), but I only ever say things that I mean. That's the trick, it seems to me. Only ever say things that you mean, and avoid saying negative things unless you must.

So what if we ADDers are not socially inept, but especially socially ept? What if we're better communicators, ultimately, because we're not cluttering up our communications with unnecessary information, like "I'm more important than you, btw, so you should accept my apology"?

(Here's where Mr. Powerful Guy would lean back in his chair, put his feet up on his desk, and clasp his hands behind his head, elbows out. I know what that means, too, don't you? :) But I don't think Mr. Powerful Guy knows what it means. 'Cause if he did, why would he do it, you know? Isn't the whole gesture so transparent that it undercuts its own hypothesis?)

This same sensitivity to the other person's real thoughts perhaps also works in our favor in the other way, too (i.e., we hear criticism when it's meant, even if it is not said, and we hear a compliment when it's meant, even when it comes across in a way that might not be obvious to others). I remember once when a very dear friend of mine (a tall, slim, attractive woman) was complaining to me that her male friend had a new girlfriend that she (my friend) didn't like. She said, "Yeah, and everyone thinks she's SOOOO pretty. I just don't get that. I mean, you're prettier than she is..." HA! I heard it, momentarily considered bursting out laughing, realized that she would be horrified to learn that she'd said it and would feel very badly if she thought that she had hurt my feelings, and said nothing. We just finished the conversation. Why didn't it bother me? Because: 1) I don't give a rip whether people think that I'm pretty anymore; but more importantly, 2) I knew what she MEANT, which had nothing to do with me. Other women (non-ADDers, perhaps) would have been horribly offended. I was not. Is that because I understood her real meaning better than someone else might have?

Ok, I'll shut up now.

You comin' back, SB?

I was reading some of your posts in the <15 thread, particularly the one about Boehm (sp?).

It reminded me a bit of the idea of Quaker decisionmaking by consensus. Everyone agrees that no one will do anything until everyone agrees regarding the sense of the meeting?

It's interesting how beautiful that concept is, and how it can also break down completely (seen it at my alma mater) when people feel the need to throw their "credentials" around. So I see your point even more clearly now.

Ok, gotta run again. "Talk" with you soon, I hope.

Some people are sensitive to tone. . . writing tone is audible

Luckily challenging tones do not really bother me – especially if I am bored

Basically I am looking for a different type of discussion – besides the ADD is bad – ADD is not bad – meds are bad – meds are not bad . . . {the usual} This looks promising

Not only do I not buy it, I don't buy that just any "neural stimulation" will do. We are social animals. We need interaction with creatures like us, the same way that your doggie strains at the leash every time he sees another dog. After all, SB, why are you HERE, eh? This isn't a totally internal world. You're not imagining ME, for example.


Yes but is he perceiving you in the same manner in which you perceive yourself as being projected – if he never turns his computer on and if he never reads this response does it exist to him?



This would make your existence to SB dependent upon weather or not you are perceived by him – just as his existence is merely a perception within your own mind – before you had any neural stimulation that occurred under a tag that said SB_UK he did not exist to you.




I'll tell you another reason that I disagree with that; it can be demonstrated in any supermax prison you enter, or the segregation unit in the prison in which I used to work. The men were on 23 hour lockdown. The one hour allowed for limited social interaction, but also had to be used for showering, etc. A few days in there was tolerable, but you spend weeks or, God forbid, months in that and the lack of social interaction made people mad. Mad, as in, hallucinating, hearing voices, etc.


The fact that these men required such isolation to protect others from them would in itself indicate interaction with their own kind did nothing to help them either – more than likely it was interaction with their own kind that caused them to be dangerous individuals to begin with.



My dog used to read her pee mail. My cat scratches the couch to let every other cat that might happen to wander by know that the couch is his.

This is communication ones presence by actual smell – reading these words which explains my version of reality isn’t the same as smelling my chair to discover I have been sitting in it. These words are not my thoughts only representations there of – where as my scent in a chair represents my actual presence – there is nothing abstract about it.





But when I stop, look down (not at her), and cock one knee, like she would do when she is resting, she'll come to me and bump me with her nose. Much was communicated. No information was lost.

The horse was trained to know what you wanted – you may have picked up body language by watching horse your self but you are communicating emotions with a creature that is present in the same environment you are in

when you communicate with me or we communicate with SB the only thing we may have in common is some rudimentary understanding of these squiggly lines – what get lost isn’t really lost but misinterpreted because we are not from the same environments we are not even from the same cultures – it isn’t a matter of loosing any thing it is a matter of understanding another perception even if you yourself do not share it – I must do this in order to respond back to you – I do not share your understanding of this subject yet we can still converse about it – how we interpretation the difference in understanding will determine weather or not we have a discussion or an argument - there is an extra few steps in there that is directly connected with our individual perception of reality -




I think that one of the reasons that we lose information in communication is because so much of it is this, in writing, no visual cues, no auditory cues. We need those cues because we need that social interaction to understand one another.

Actually the lack of clues increases the chances of misunderstandings – all you have is a tone created by my choice of words - it is logical to assume there is more room for misinterpretation because you can not see my face or hear my voice which would tell you weather or not your perception of my words is accurate or not - an amazingly little amount of external information is required for two people to interact if they share much the same reality – using you and your horse as an example – you were sharing the same environment to communicate with the hoarse it is possible for you to share your reality by a simply body movement – your act of putting your head down and lifting up a leg meant some thing to the hoarse - now let say two people are watching this scenario unfold – that transpires will mean more to another hoarse owner than it would to a mathematician – the meaning vary not because your external environment is different my example places the two other people in the exact same external environment as you and your hoarse – the difference in meaning is based upon perception – the fellow hoarse owner is gong to have a perception that is closer to your than the mathematician – the only differences would be internal realities of the two other individuals




This same sensitivity to the other person's real thoughts perhaps also works in our favor in the other way, too (i.e., we hear criticism when it's meant, even if it is not said, and we hear a compliment when it's meant, even when it comes across in a way that might not be obvious to others)


But these things do come in degrees – what is a degree of stimulation for you and I may be seen as a degree of overwhelm again this would be internally dependent - you and I may share a temperament where debating is some thing we enjoy where others actually have a fear of it - again internal perceptions {realities}


Btw – money I is a primitive form of measuring success and hierarchy is a flat lander’s way of understanding others

----------------------------------------------------------------------
POST-posting EDIT

sorry - I posted this message before seeing Tammy's second post
(this post took ages to write -
reading and rereading to ensure that you could not get the wrong
impression)
- though I've failed and there are multiple sections (at least which
I think you'll object to)

: Attempted explanation :

you've mentioned that you're calloused -
- but there will be sensitivity somewhere -
perhaps callouses lead to hypersensitivities elsewhere ?

if sensitivity -> neural stimulation and
callouses are the equivalent of desensitization
~if~
neural stimulation is necessary
and desensitization leads to a loss of neural stimulation in some domain

then hypersensitivity must ensure ?
(I think)

- though I can argue against myself if you want -
(I usually play fairly against myself)

which isn't a statement that you're not playing fairly -
difficult isn't it -
- honest and effective
communication ?

competition needs to give way to collaboration
adversarial is between logic of arguments - not vocabulary of person.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Some people are sensitive to tone. . . writing tone is audible

I'm sorry -
but Tammy's correct - it's quite hard to explain if it needs to be explained.

Your tone suggests you want to win something -
there's nothing (physical) to win though - my viewpoint is that winning can only be characterized from the viewpoint of the physical world - as losing -
- because the whole 'physical world' aspirations towards being seen as special and not the same as others -
are lost.

Just waiting to regain balance (I've tried to describe this idea to you 5 or so times previously); perhaps it would help if you can imagine what it's like to be bullied - where bully means being told something which you know isn't true - as if it's true.

Here's an example:

This (these're my words) is entirely consistent with what I'm describing -
~ADDF::post (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=564137&postcount=15)~
sensory deprivation in children == your prisoners in 'solitary confinement'
the rest of ADDF::mijahe's thread (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50445) is useful also

it's also identical to your statement which you've described as being contradictory (your choice of language suggests strength of certainty) - to what I'm saying.
And I don't want to argue with someone who has never been beaten (apart from once (in an election)) -
- because I don't really want to argue to win (in the classical adversarial manner).

All of that silly gladiatorial stuff is man replacing the notion of knowledge as an abstract informational structure with a shape with little human faces in between.

You see - I now know too much about you in the wrong sense
- lawyer
- no kids
- rarely beaten
- own a horse
- superstring specialist
- your legal sub-specialities

and actually nothing about your personal views on any subject.

Does this make you angry ?
~ADDF::post (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44887&page=10)~ mentioning or referencing law and its associated establishment
'precedent-loving establishment pushing behemoths'

is a direct reference to the legal system (just in case I don't explicitly state it in the post)

Have you abused the rules of communication ?
Have I redefined the rules of communication to meet my needs?

You've given me too much of the wrong information -now- about yourself for me to be able to convince you that I'm not being rude to you as a person.
I've pointed you to a thread with another previously
'zen thread'
ADDF::K Gostanek
in which I could avoid this problem -
because he'd only stated that he'd
'applied his mathematical training to economics'.

I look at systems within which people work -
I'm not interested in the individual - in the context of systems (people come later
- not at this point) -
- that previous sentence is nothing more than a statement of the current academic switch away from molecular and into systems disciplines
(systems biology, systems analysis, systems philosophy, systems theory, systems anthropology, general systems analysis)

- if we can work our way up the systems -
we become progressively more divorced from the individual - and so can work our way all the way up the logical informational systems hierarchy -
- only then to come back down the then logically consistent and hence efficient structure
again -
though and very very very importantly (because this is the point)
- correcting all local {anomalies,abnormalities,nonsense} on the return leg.
The return leg leads straight to
and ends with what really matters - the individual within collective.

up the structure
and then back down again
(like virtual soldiers)
This is the reason why we call ADD - a disorder of 'big picture thinking'
(I'll find the supporting threads if you like -
alternatively - just search on site for
'big picture'
- one particularly useful thread was entitled something like 'suggestion of name change of ADD'
I remember posting 'dada'
and the winner was
'inability to look at details without having the big picture syndrome'

and also -
a great another useful thread was called
'metamind' (just the start)
owned by
ADDF::Carla Berg
ADDF::Stabile

where the statement was made that ADDers think bottom up, up down, side to side -
and the inference is that we suffer when we constrained to examining reality linearly

It's no more of an idea than multiple local minima being replaced by a single global minimum - which redefines a series of hierarchically lower level local minima -
which are only seen as local minima because of the nature of hierarchy -
but which should actually be seen -
given metalevel insight as different perspectives in on a single global minimum.

Explanation of that idea using an image
Imagine a man walking up the stairs backward.
He'll see all of the stairs below him as he walks up backwards -
- but cannot see that the local minima -
the steps
- are part of a single global minimum -
until looking down from the level above the highest stair.
Explanation of that idea using an image ends

MMMmmmmm, I'll give it thought. It's hard to turn off the tone thing when you teach yourself to speak in declarations. Again, how could I respond to that without referencing the details that you find disruptive.

SB, I know what it is like to be bullied. How could I not? I am female, and I live in a world made of men, structured by men, with maleness as the paradigm. What days would I not be told things that I know aren't true, but they're said as though they are? I am also an ADDer. Again, how could I not know what you mean?

There is one thing that MEADD823 says that is absolutely incorrect. I did not train the horse. The horse trained me.

That's a piece of my point, here, though I can't say that I know where it fits into the full puzzle.

Gotta go. I'll think on this.

Sandy
AKA the behemoth, apparently

trying to think of the simplest answer
- and the simplest answer comes in the way of the true scientific method.

We have a set of problems (call this any question which any mind has ever asked?)
I am suggesting that there is one model which answers every question which any mind has ever asked.

That means that
we can use one model
in a series which is defined on that model

(model)n

to explain every question which a mind has ever had.

Why is this statement important ?

Because the only method for defeating this argument - is to provide a simpler explanation of everything

eg

(simpler model)n

I don't think that that's possible in this case - but what I think isn't important -

the model need be accepted until it is rejected -
- and so the model need be cranked through to generate predictions.

However - this is the standard scientific method -
which is actually a formalization (in text books) of how the mind works.

And so - instead of worrying too much about getting the model and its cranked out solutions down on paper -
perhaps its best to get the model into mind

- a balanced mind.

Why?

Because the predictions are delivered by thinking about the question and then delivering a solution.

Sure - delusion needs to be eliminated from the question by checking the 'workings' -
however -
if the conclusions are found to be right

based upon the model which has been accepted as correct -
- then we subsequently arrive at irrefutable solutions - which cannot be defeated until the model is replaced by a better model (and cranked through).

None of this argument - not nuttin' is anything to do with me -
I'm only testing it
- which is why I think I'm immune to any criticism of it (in the stndard sense) -

I want it to be the best it can be
- which means exposing it to useful challenge
and deflecting pointless attack

(ps I'm talking about protecting a logical or geometric more here)

however -
:-)
my potential delusion aside
the model appears to be suggesting that the notion of 'belonging to' 'ownership to the exclusion of others' is flawed

if I know E = mc^2
and you do too
then both of our lives are enriched by knowledge which anyone and everyone can have

- and have their lives enriched by.

My problem is that cash is not like E = mc^2
cash cannot exist (economic systems) - if we all haven the same amount.

But then why will anybody get out of bed in the morning ?

Because we're not gorillas - though in more detail -
and this is all important -

in the example above - Einstein gave us an idea
which many of us have thought about since -

so think about it in terms of

idea delivered by a guy after 10000 action potentials in his mind
->
1,000,000,000 action potentials in 1000 peoples' heads

Money only serves to do the opposite -
reduce the stimulation to many -
increase the stimulation of the few with money - though by decreasing the stimulation of the many.

Here's another example -

a musician fires off 1000 action potentials to produce a piece of music
->
10,000,000,000 action potentials are fired off in 1,000,000 people whilst listening to the music.

In all cases - the guys who deal in the virtual world of mind are the real leaders of this planet -
- unfortunately - they're being strangled by the apes of the physical world -
by the apes forcing the virtual guys to give them money -

it's difficult
- because the more virtual that one becomes -
the less 'into' the physical world one desires to be -
- ceases to enjoy any $-based item which can be bought
becomes less motivated to earn $
because $ cannot buy anything which the virtual guy wants

and thereafter grotesque disorder -
as the guys who're being fully stimulated in the internal world of thought -
are forced to suffer pain to perform some menial task in the physical world to keep -

this isn't meant to be an attack on you
but is meant to demonstrate why I'd really have preferred if you hadn't exposed this information on yourself

are forced to suffer pain to perform some menial task in the physical world to keep -

- the gorillas of establishment in position of power

- the

lawyers
bankers
politicians
bureaucrats
corporate executives
corporate klingons (management consultants,advertising execs)

must realise that they're the problem which causes our species to be in such a tragic state.

I'm suggesting a change from what we have now - a world of country fighting against other country for physical gains
(oil is the most notable example here)

->- to ->-

(a) a one world state
(b) reorientation to a world of systems which maximize neural stimulation (synonymous with fun - :-)
funnily enough)
with a minimum (tending towards no) physical belongings attributed to the any individual.

if it isn't fun for all - then it has no place on our planet -

- where fun for all is hinted at by the examples of
Einstein's equation and music
above -
- and where everything bad and dirty arises from the of the physical world -
namely

the lawyers, bankers, politicians, bureaucrats, corporate executives, corporate klingons (management consultants,advertising execs)
(to name just the first few which pop to mind)

there are plenty more
- I generally attack all systems -
only concentrating on those which lie at the hub of the problem -
at the next level up - problems are similarly rife -

- the sole problem though that correction requires the problem being corrected at the root -
- and so it's probably not the time to launch into my usual attack on medical doctors, scientists, dentists
oh my god !
in a popularity contest - I'd be in serious trouble
:-)

ho well [I]!

-*-

I'm pretty sure that this argument is right (in essence) -
- which is a problem -
because global minima (less local minima) have a way of sweeping aside local minima in time

references (the first three which find their way to my fingertips):

The American war of Independence
Indian Independence from Britain
The French revolution

OK - so the suggestion is

(model)n -> (conclusion)n

the (conclusion)n=x offered (in this thread)

is that money is bad (simplifying)

The argument can only be beaten - I think by
(i) simpler model
or
(ii) model -> conclusion transition


...............model of evolution
(Trinity (of dualities) becoming whole)

has equality of emergent property as an essential component of the geometric progression prior to continued evolutionary advancement being mandated.

The model is described (extensively) over and over and over on ADDF (as I was :-) taught it)

~eg~

google site:www.addforums.com (http://www.addforums.com) _UK 3-> 4 13
Results (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=Az5&q=+site%3Awww.addforums.com+SB_UK+3-%3E+4+13&btnG=Search&meta=) 1 - 10 of about 911 eeek! :-) from www.addforums.com (http://www.addforums.com) for SB_UK 3-> 4 13

or maybe

google:site:www.addforums.com (http://www.addforums.com) _UK EEE
Results (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=cz5&q=+site%3Awww.addforums.com+SB_UK+EEE&btnG=Search&meta=) 1 - 10 of about 71 from www.addforums.com (http://www.addforums.com) for SB_UK EEE. (0.29 seconds)

Here's the question again

mental disorder (the contextual disorder of ADD) is caused by the love and desire for money for one (and not quality for all).

The desire for money is an evolutionary psychological construct which the evolution to man rendered obsolete - and which man has had to learn to turn his back on
- a 5 year
to 5,000 year
to 50,000 year
to 500 million year
to 3 billion year
to 5 billion
to 20 billion year long story -

- dependent on perspective

- whereby man can only be (fully) human (and not animal in the sense of complete self-control over his own behaviour)
- when this is realised -

and whereby deep understanding of this argument delivers the automatic reaction within an individual of no longer desiring money.

The model above is the most fundamental, most powerful, most infectious meme -
it infects at the speed of thought -
- all that is required is the desire to understand the meaning of

and bam!

life

- you have been assimilated to the moral :-) side

where there's nothing good or bad (in the nonADD sense of 'I'm better than you - and therefore I'm good') about morality -

morality is a physical property of fully-evolved man

like diamonds are a harder allotrope of carbon (than graphite)

~ nothing more ~

(still tremendously important)

but ~ nothing more ~ nevertheless

Mmmmmmm, I'm not actually offended, SB. I'm rather hard to offend, actually. My "AKA, the Behemoth, apparently" was said tongue-in-cheek.

I'm just struggling with two things, at the moment, well, three really:

First, I don't know if I could possibly agree with this statement (and apologies, but I haven't mastered the art of quoting in those little blue boxes):

"In all cases - the guys who deal in the virtual world of mind are the real gods of this planet -
unfortunately - they're being strangled by the apes of the physical world -
by the apes forcing the virtual guys to give them money"

It seems to me that we need to go in the opposite direction to achieve a more universal good. Less virtual world of mind, more physical "ape" world of mind/body/spirit/heart/love etc. I should be working to grow food, or cooking it. Those who are good at tending to children (not me) should be doing that, etc.

The second thing is that I'm not sure what the difference is between me "speaking in terms you don't understand" as you put it in either the <15 or "famous" thread, I can't remember where, and you referencing prior threads, etc. here? In both cases one of us might be momentarily disadvantaged in the discussion, and might have to do our homework to proceed. But you're no less adept at looking up discussions about quarks (and understanding them) than I am at reading old posts and threads (ditto, particularly if the posts are yours). If my references to those things are bullying, how are yours different? Am I not being put in my place, here in the virtual world? After all, I know that you have children (three, perhaps?) at least one dog, a wife, that you're an ex-smoker, and that you had to teach yourself (or re-teach yourself) Javascript. These are different from what you know of me, how?

You realize that when you say, "Tammy is right. It's quite hard to explain if it needs to be explained?" you've communicated several things to me all at once:

1) MEAD823 is Tammy. I don't know that, but you do, ergo you get one point in the competition that you think that I am having with you.

2) You and Tammy each know what the other is saying, but perhaps I don't. Again. Point to you, if this was a competition (I don't see it that way, but I'm engaging here).

3) If I don't know what you and Tammy know, I must be really dense, which is why it will be really hard to explain... (That's a stretch, I'll grant, but one could read it that way).

Add to that that you and MEAD823 tag teamed me.. (2 points there) and I think you're sitting on your desk with your feet up and your hands clasped behind your head. ;)

The third thing that I'm struggling with is why the heck am I bothering with this when I could be visiting with my horse?

Heh heh. Again, this is tongue-in-cheek, but perhaps this time either the tongue or the cheek has a stud in it...

I'll keep thinking on the theory, anyway. I don't think we're more highly evolved. I think we're throwbacks, but good throwbacks.

Toodaloo.

Sandy.

I did not train the horse. The horse trained me.

with kids -
the parent 'trains' their kids -
however the parent modifies his/her behaviour in reaction to the kid's behaviour.

Communication is bilateral - but nevertheless - the parent is doing more of the communication because - ideally

parent (large data structure of mind)
kid (small data structure of mind)

Nurture

is

kid (small data structure of mind) uploading his parent's (just one example) (large data structure of mind)

so with time we observe the transition

parent ->->->- <- younger kid
imbalanced (though still bilateral communication)

parent ->->- -<-<- older kid
balanced bilaterality of communication

still - though the scientific method would suggest that the only method to break this argument is to challenge the model -
- and then to challenge the conclusions (cranking the handle of the method) (if the model holds)

- otherwise we're in trouble -

because -
imagine a series of 1000 sequential binary choices -
- if there's a right and a wrong at each fork -
then it's going to be painful to traverse all of the false routes -

it'll take too long - there are too many possibilities -

- instead -
accept a model
and then crank through that model.

This way around there's one path to check -
as opposed to the hideous numbers of paths which're defined if we check through each of the routes which are defined by following all of the false choices -
which thereafter yield further choices -
of true or false
in their local 'false' space

- however all of which (beyond the original false fork) - are not worthy of consideration.

my kid is having a tantrum - have to go -
- can't draw a pokeball apparently

I haven't fully understood your answer to my question in post # 1.

Honestly - you only need to read those 3 or 4 lines
- all I want is a 'Yes' or a 'No' and a one line justification -
and then if it's ok and you disagree

please can I ask you a question or two so that I can learn from you.

I have a slight problem -
- in that I am being eaten alive by my own arguments - and I don't want them particularly -

imagine if you could see the solution to all of the world's problems - and instead of being able to separate oneself away from this knowledge - one could see each and every step which leads to exacerpating the situation -

it's not particularly nice --

and so from a personal perspective - I'm going to state that you are better than me in any way that you would like to be -
that's fine -
however from my own perspective - before I lose my own mind - I'd like to hear an intelligent argument which can beat mine by its own logical strength.

You've already won everything which matters -
as a personal favour -
please agree or disagree and then if you disagree -
please explain why.

I'm really not seeking to lie to you here -
I don't particularly want my argument -
it's particularly painful.

Sadly - by your constant barrage of questions - you're not actually offering any alternative opinion -
and so I can't supplant the arguments in my mind.

OK - so you are not being attacked in this post.

I am asking you if you disagree with the first post in this thread and if so -
please can you offer a consistent line of thought which wraps in the idea of physics, chemistry, biology, psychology and sociology -

just a single line of thought which generalizes any which way I choose to take your view -
so that I can adopt it.

OK - I'm going to repeat what I've just written.

I want to have your opinion -
to be a mental clone of you -

please explain to me your model -
where your model needs to generalize in any direction -

because that's what models do.

You are very clever and have a degree in physics.
You are a very successful lawyer and so understand morality and money -

please explain to me how the ideas presented in #1 are wrong based on your own arguments.

It's real simple - you're cross-examining -

that's unilateral -

bilaterality rejects unilaterality -

actually the ADDF::Stabile model proves this to be true also.

To repeat - the unilateral approach to communication
'just answer the question'
is replaced by bilaterality

It's described as the

-><
to
-><-

transition previously

where -><- is thereafter (as balanced) represented below in polymeric form

-><--><--><- -><--><--><-

-*-

What's your answer?

Please stop asking question after question - provide an answer instead.

My partial problem with your posts is that it takes me so long to dissect them.
And then you move off before completing the line of thought which you've commenced - I've followed through -
- and then you've lost interest in.

It took me a while to follow up your inmates in prison argument -
but it's gone now -
a thread within a thread which you've lost interest in

we're not going to get anywhere unless you offer

(model)n -> (conclusion)n

otherwise - there are too many possible spaces for you to inhabit - unconstrained logical space is vast
- it's also the reason why men rape

and some understanding of the issue can put many of the most heinous crimes of man against other man -
to sleep
for good
by fatal injection.

otherwise - there are too many possible spaces for you to inhabit - unconstrained logical space is vast.

(Incidentally :-) that's nonADD)

If you want to beat me -
then I concede

well done - you deserve it
- that is
- you deserve the world which arises as a result of lack in logical constraint.

MEAD823 tag teamed me

what do you want to win?

the question is really simple

desire for money -> mental disorder (contextual disorder of ADD)

all I want is an explanation if 'no'

Of course I don't mind if you have a great life of plenty of money - but it might get in the way of a discussion of

desire for money -> mental disorder (contextual disorder of ADD)

trying to learn javascript is unlikely to have any bearing on anything -
- it's not a statement that

I am something

it's not a statement that 'I am good at javascript' - which (admittedly) - would be more problematic -
because normal people are a bit scared of people who're good at programming

actually normal people are scared of people who know more than them -
- it's a problem -

- maybe a problem which is best cured by knowing how the normal man on the street works - and behaving accordingly.

I've just checked - and my wife is scared of lawyers - because she thinks that they are better at using people than most
- this is just to illustrate a point -

in that light -
if she was ever on a forum and began a discussion with a lawyer -
she'd feel intimidated.

I'm trying to explain that her feelings of fear are more through her expecting to be attacked by the lawyer -
- that's her gut reaction -

clever, fast-talking, rich people with nice suits

what's my point ?

Well - if that's the reaction - then we should at least be aware of it -
I learnt my lesson early on in forum life -
people react to others in certain ways -

know others well enough to know how best to approach others.

As I've mentioned - all of the smartest people I know - I've met on the forum - bizarrely though - the smartest by far - have been the ones who've been able to shelter all aspects of their 'real life.'

I actually marvel at it -
it makes me feel quite happy that humility is alive and well on the planet -

- though of course the ADDF::Stabile model predicts an association between intelligence (needs to be defined if you don't know my usage of the term) and humility.

Anyhow - if you can't answer the question and provide a logical justification to your answer which crosses all domains of knowledge of man -
a model-based justification to your stance

then you have no stance

this is not an attack on you -
it's simply the scientific method

"Tammy is right. It's quite hard to explain if it needs to be explained?"

OK - I understand how that could be taken badly.

Here's another attempt.

The method which you have used to communicate - has been the method which you have used to communicate.

I can understand Tammy's point - though if you did understand Tammy's point - you wouldn't have used that method.

So - to communicate the need to remove a 'callous' - so that sensitivity is returned in that area which has become desensitized is
the problem here.

I can easily communicate the name of my dog to you.

How do I communicate an area of your own self which you have had to switch off in order to be successful in your chosen field.

Here it is from another perspective -
it's often said that surgeons are quite 'hard' people - most likely this has arisen because of the need to protect themselves from the knowledge that they could kill people at work -
a kinda' military like detachment to life and death -
to permit success in the workplace

ptsd in essence

How do I communicate the need for some aspect of behaviour -
which need be lost in order for the individual to support his or her own existence


darn -
still more problems

cutting post short

Now can you see that you're turning an argument with no malintent intended into something quite offensive.

Honestly -
have to go now -

but I'm not trying to beat you

in a sense - I don't believe that any of us actually exist -

imagine life of multiple selves feeding into one ever changing structure -
which itself evolves

that's how I see people -
- as a system.

I think that my stance is not consistent with yours -
- anyway thanks for trying :-)

I'm pretty sure that you'll not be able to challenge the model -
at least if you mean what you're writing

though of course you don't -

do you ?

ps

you need to meet
ADDF::Barbyma
and
ADDF::crazy~feet

here

SB!!!!

Oof! I'd love to engage. I really would. As I've said many times, I love your posts for a whole host of reasons, even if you might be criticizing my method of communication (I don't cross-examine, btw; it's not my kind of law). I'd like to puzzle through them, enjoy them visually, enjoy the alliteration, the style to them, in addition to muddling through the ideas that you espouse. I'd love to pose an opposing theory, go down the road of the theory testing, etc. (though it seems to me that scientific method doesn't necessarily need an opposing theory to engage in that process...). But I have one problem: all of that takes time. A lot of time. More than I have at the moment, unfortunately. Like it or not, I have to make money, yes, today, on Easter Sunday. (Happy Easter, btw, if you celebrate it; I do not b/c my father died on Easter and it sort of put a damper on the whole bunny thing, which is the only sense in which we celebrated it before.)

And I know that you have all the same pressures multiplied by A LOT because you have kiddies, etc. It just happens that TODAY, right NOW, these last few hours, you've had time and I have not. But that's all my silence is. I need to work RIGHT NOW. I can't engage right now.

(Actually, though, I really have to thank you, because I've been procrastinating like crazy with the forum and you've managed to make my danged brief LESS work (and therefore MORE attractive) than the forum!!!! :D).

I'll be back. Please take care. And if you haven't had that job interview yet, I reiterate that I hope that it goes well, and that it's something that you love.

(And, btw, I don't believe for a second that you're not VERY good at Javascript... I know nothing of Javascript, nor many other things about which you obviously know many things.)

And lastly, not sure, but I suspect the last post re: people I need to meet is a dig.... Did you mean for me to get it? Or did you put it there for someone else? Just curious. I don't know those people.

Gotta go be a behemoth for now. ;) If that's not good enough, I'm sorry. :(

Sandy

P.S. Added smilies to try to deal with the whole "tone" issue. They don't seem to be your speed, but it's the best that I can do at the moment.

ADDF::Barbyma
and
ADDF::crazy~feetare the two most powerful forum members I know.

c~f has posted more messages here than anyone else -

man - honestly

- I don't do 'digs' - ! -

that'd be silly - I'd also feel really bad about it.

It really is so hard to be forceful without being offensive -

why would I want to be rude?

what could it accomplish?

So - here's the argument again -
one model - applied over and over - leads to a complete understanding of everything - and whilst straightening everything into an efficient perspective on reality -
- what falls out is the outrageous pointlessness of chasing money and physical wealth.

Christ died at Christmas -
- unwinding the metaphor - one sees the connection with the rebirth which accompanied Buddha's enlightenment.

I've just been to my parents and been reminded of this
~s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman)~
Brahman as infinite Being, infinite Consciousness
and just thought that the similarity to this

in a sense - I don't believe that any of us actually exist -
imagine life of multiple selves feeding into one ever changing structure -
which itself evolves
that's how I see people -
- as a system.

need be mentioned.

Sigur Ros
Svefn-g-englar

I think that we'll be able to wrap the physics of gravity, global consciousness (Brahman consciousness), meaning of life, basis to happiness and pretty much everything of importance into such a simple argument soon -
(3-4-13d)n geometric series defining evolution will be intrinsic

- the predictions of the model which wraps every aspect of every thing into one simple idea -
defines inequality at the phy$ical level as being untenable.

The point was never $ for the self -
- it was quality for us all.

We can all be happy if we stop cha$ing our now evolutionary legacy tail.

We're better than that -
- we could be great

right now - I hope that we'll soon see that we should feel some deep sense of shame at the way in which we have behaved to our others -
- there are no others


in a sense - I don't believe that any of us actually exist -
imagine life of multiple selves feeding into one ever changing structure -
which itself evolves
that's how I see people -


- there are no others

to our.selves
to our.selves
to our.selves
to our.selves
to ourselves


that's how I see people -
- as a system.


~ one world ~ of ~ one people ~

SB, This is a lecture I think you would be pretty interested in

WARNING: Mention of psychedelic use is a central subject, amongst others, so those offended by drug use should skip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp5IlodrPj4&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp5IlodrPj4&feature=related)

Edit: Not sure if anyone else sees the double video link, but Im not sure how to fix it if you do.

brahman version I (the power within)

brahman version II (global consciousness)

---[material world]---

[B]--- metalevel

ADDF::Nova
consciousness - the universe attempting to understand itself

[B]---[.material world.]--- ->- dielectric
.
a fundamental duality
{{{ {.brahman energy (.plasma.).} {.brahman consciousness.} }}}

agaetis byrjun
from agaetis byrjun, Sigur ros
(it's really very good)

SB, This is a lecture I think you would be pretty interested in.

wow -
that's great

- at 10 minutes currently.

Terence McKenna has a huge array of truly stunning idea, just skipping through Youtube videos of his speeches is a good day to consume every ounce of your attention for half a day or so. Amazing theories at every turn.

How do I communicate the need for some aspect of behaviour -
Heya SB ;)
I'd join in (predictably) but I can't find any reference that I can run with !!

You need to include me..make me sound good, and I'll find it :)

---1---

why are there so many problems in the world ?

--->---

because a good system needs to be developed from outside the system.

---2---

Man is part of a system - and man fails to generate a good system for man to be involved in - because personal incentive creeps in.

---illiustration---

Personal incentive is either from the
individual's perspective (maybe a 'king') or from a
group perspective (maybe a set of cabinet ministers in a political party (wanting to retain power)), from an
extended group perspective - for instance the wars for supremacy in (only the first three lesser quoted examples which pop into mind)
(i) Basques of Spain
(ii) Quebecois of Canada
(iii) Walloons of Belgium

noting the idea of north/south boundaries -
which also applies to England, (us)America, France, Italy

man!
that's yet another real important bipolar pattern (exactly as predicted by
evolution3by4numbers13

---illiustration--- ends

---3---

The metalevel perspective takes away personal gain on any level from the participants in the discussion.

---4 ,1---

why are there so many problems in the world ?

--->---

because a good system needs to be developed from outside the system.

---5---

but isn't all of that obvious?

--->---

yes - from a theoretical perspective
yes - for people outside the system to use these ideas -

though no - for people within a system to take on these ideas.

---why?---

The nature of man appears to be to covet $tuff which other people have.
This $tuff is pretty much always physical -
cost$ and its worth is intertwined with the jealou$y it creates.

The problem though that the desire for $tuff is not what man is about -
and acquisition of $tuff
yes - is the nature of man -
though is actually the legacy nature of man - which we need to get over - to actually cease being animal -
and to become man
at last.

Similarly jealou$y is a part of our evolutionary past which need be lost

Sadly though
de$ire for $tuff -> <- jealou$y
fuel one another.

The dual dies when either one dies -
$ is the prime target for summary execution.

---6, 4 ,1---

why are there so many problems in the world (including contextual mental disorder) ?

--->---

Summary

Because we all know what the right thing is to do.

However we cannot do the right thing alone.

We need to change as a system (an emergent system - kinda' like birds in a flock - turning in perfect synchrony in the air above us)

The reason why the solitary individual is powerless here -
- is that although the system is way
way
way way way
better -
- it involves a leap of faith - and the capacity to turn away from the legacy ideals -
- which in a former evolutionary life - were actually our goals
(the acquisition of phys$ical wealth)

( so think Kings in the lion ' roar!!! ' king sense )

So - turning one's back on instinct - without absolute certainty that it's for the best is hard for the individual to entertain -
- which is why we need to confer absolute certainty that the shift in an individual's desire from the desire and search for phy$ical to mental (linking to spiritual) wealth -
- is for the unquestionable unequivocal and absolutely undeniable better

and that's what these next few characters confer

starting here ->

evolution3by4numbers13

<- ending here

... ... ... it's the only model we've ever needed -
we can prove using one logical argument - and can answer - using one logical argument
all of the above

Physical wealth need be equalised to make way for Mental and then Spiritual richness (happiness)
- I believe that the argument can stand up to any scientific scrutiny -

the problem which science has had
- has been the need to prove

all bets - though need be off - since the complex domain (from mathematical chaos theory) - generates real spaces into which we can't venture -

chaos theory defeats the empirical scientific method -
- we see a pattern - though don't know how the pattern will express itself

- so God exists (by virtue of the pattern) -
- and does play dice - by virtue of the pattern being absolutely expected - but in the pattern delivering a fundamentally unknowable product (or output or child process)

(I can rephrase '-so God exists'
that last paragraph again if you like -
it wasn't clear)
->- Rephrased ->-

We know that 1/6th of the time we'll role a 1 using a 6-sided dice -
- though don't know whether we'll obtain a 1 on the next specific roll.

point?
patterns are templates (the statistical probability) ->
1/6th of the time we'll role a 1 using a 6-sided dice

however we are a specific roll ->
- though don't know whether we'll obtain a 1 on the next specific roll.

~*~

Tracy - :-)
please get this album

Sigur Ros
Agaetis Byrjun

it's outstanding - particularly songs II-svef~*,IV-flug~,VII-vio~,IX-aga~)

*the YouTube to this is ~

if we're the roll of a dice (the next roll is unknown)

and where the statistical probability is known for rolling
'1' '2' '3' '4' '5' '6'

then the statistical probability is kinda' the metalevel model or generalization to us -
which we can either consider our child or our parent process.

How can that be true?

Child process
The model of parents is the child (from previously) -
- the duality of parents make one structure -
- where the rate of change of the duality of the parent is kid.
Where parent and child process are universal constructs and not just restricted to lil' 'ole life.
Kid is the differential calculus model -
- the differentiated parental unity leads to the child.

Parent process
In the dice example - the model is the class model - the template which defines a statistical probability for the child process -
gives the child process restraint within the bounds of probability -
- though cannot define the specific product which arises
(child process itself)

That sounded confusing - and so again -
parent and child are both models
parent is model of child
child is model of parent

That still sounds confusing -
do you understand -
I'll work on better pictures until your post.

---anyway---

Why is this(that) idea really important?

Because from the perspective of mind -
we can give the mind a structure -
- in which the motion either to more generality

carpenter -> artisan

or specificity

carpenter -> door-frame carpenter only

results in traversing a single structure - which is an interconnected manifold -
- perhaps if we throw in the idea of binary decision -

- we see that the shape must be composed of this kinda' subcomponent

-<

(3 sides)

and so - going back to (eg)

ADDF :: pi thread

imagine the shape as a dodecahedron - or something similar - where - if one runs in any one direction -
one can end up in the place from which one began.

Imagine - running around the equator of a sphere that's the size of a house - you'll end up at your starting location.

Why's this important ?
Everything we know is by virtue of our mind.
We now give shape to our mind - and so see what it is and what it is not capable of telling us.

Imagine if you're a scientist studying the blue nature of everything around you -
- only to find that you've been wearing these dark blue lensed sunglasses - the whole while -

- it's the act of removal of these spectacles.

Scientist has never questioned his own mind.

This is a problem -
- calibration of equipment is an absolute requirement in science.

I am camping :) remind me in a few days..
now, what is this thread about? saving money??
you'd be impressed by my skills!! I did my washing in the river yesterday :)


- ok -
:-)

click on this then (as a taster)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRVjm6mAVds

-*-

what is this thread about?

1.
It's impossible to make money morally in the current $chasing climate
2.
Money needs to be made just to exist (prevent repossession of one'e life)
3.
The only moral option in this current climate is to expose the immorality so that there's change
4.
Even if existence were possible within this $chasing environment - without money - it'd still be immoral to live in that way -
because
'I'm alright Jack'
is still an immoral stance
5.
So - there's no hiding from the truth that there's only one route that's moral in this current climate -
- and that's to explain the logic (for scrutiny) - of the argument -
though if upheld -
that change must be mandated

Summary
-1- Moral life is neither possible with nor without money in this current $-chasing environment of our lost society
-2- Moral life currently is only possible by exposing these ideas - and then maybe earning money during the transition period of change -
but only with the absolute knowledge that change is coming

I think that many just say
'wouldn't it be nice to have a nice world?'
- then make loads of money and forget the point of their success in the first place

Facts of current life (it seems)
---1---
Currently one cannot survive without money
Money is bad (look at where the money lies - or who're the best at acquiring money - and there lie the true criminal groupings of our society)
---2---
Morality and money are mutually confounding
---3---
Morality is a physical property of proper man
---4---
Money must go (it's the lower evolutionary desire - where lower is worse)
---5---
Moral man cannot earn money - cannot live in a society which earns money without money (?through charity?)
because morality is change not charity

Summary (again)

There'd be no arguments if I wrote that ice is colder than steam.

The argument here is that the desire for mental wealth in man is better than the desire for physical wealth in ape.

Currently our society is behaving like animals -
- but not because of some half-baked argument of
'it's good to be good'

In as much as ice is colder than steam
So
must man see that mental wealth man is better than physical wealth ape

these are physical properties of us and our precursor state

man must stop chasing money -
or rather
ape must stop chasing money

provably so -
I guess.

Taking the argument into science removes any notion of the cruddy 'he's better than me,
she's better than we,
what a good man he is'

these arguments offered are just *because* of geometric progression

I can give as many perspectives on this argument as you like ?

I've been trying (because the argument doesn't make me feel good) -

but honestly Tracy -
it's unassailable

do me a favour
assail the argument.

Bizarrely -
even though this argument is crushing me -

I just want to break the idea - not particularly for my own need to break the argument
- more because I really can't see any other alternative.

It's unfortunate - but we appear to have two philosophies on the planet

- the guys who deal in phy$ical wealth (with power)
and
- the guys who deal in mental wealth (without any power)

And - because the mental wealth thing is more important to man -
so do the mental wealth people become less in need of phy$ical wealth -
- and so lose out to the phy$ical wealth people who just gain more money.

The imbalance results in the phy$ical wealth people strangling the mental wealth people - and then (the phy$ical wealth people) actually eating each other (other phy$ical wealth people) -
and then them$elves (actually themselves).

Remember that conversation about fresh grads not being able to buy houses these days -?-
and the sub prime -?-
banks going bust -
- now apparently in the UK - banks don't even trust each other
- apparently they charge each other more than the government charges them for money - which make me feel as though -
- well
- why is the government bailing out the source of the problem in society -?-

- using our money to rescue the source of all of our problems - it's ludicrous

remind me -
the last time that a little person couldn't make repayments to a bank -
when was the last time that a bank didn't repossess ?

sub-prime was all about banks cheating little people without much money
(I have just read a story about Cleveland -
which apparently was (is) the sub-prime capital of the abuse)
Hey -
let 'em burn

:-)
no ???

Honestly - a world gone mad -
the model solves all of these problems

it's time to burn their hearts (the banking system) out -
- this argument supplants them with sense

Little sad -
but I know that this picture can defeat every powerful establishment without partcularly much effort -
perhaps why it looks like the 'holy grail' when drawn

actually - it's the unwound metaphor of the holy grail -
I'll take the 'change' argument -
- geometry is about to restore sense.

yay!

it's remarkable that we could voluntarily slip ourselves into chains -
lock ourselves in place and then call the prison guards to take away the key -
requesting twice daily whippings

(not cream)

my head's going to fall off
- I can think about every level of every aspect of every component of the mindscape -
- and money falls out from each and every perspective as being the problem

a stake through the heart of society -
- we're on an ADD site

- every single problem arises because of money
the mental disorder of ADD
- it's the most strikingly off-the-scale p<0.000000000{infinitynumber of zeroes}0000000001 hellyeah! significant probability that this idea is incorrect -
meaning it's correct -
with absolute certainty

man ...

... ... what a to do !

I'm gonna' have a lie down -

ok -
- that's better - except for these blessed pokeballs

:-)

-*-

OK - off to read about the Swiss banking system
- all I know about Switzerland is that

they have all of the bank$
all of the most expensive luxury good$ are produced there
no dog poop'$ allowed on the ground
no affiliation to any larger body (in voluntary i$olation)
phy$ically isolated - and so protected from attack
where tax i$ not payable

and the most god awful problem with drug abu$e

Have any famou$ artists in any field of art come out of Switzerland ?

literature, painting, sculpture, philosophy

hmmm ... ... ...

hmmm ... ... ... ... ... ...

do you see what I'm getting at ?

There is one thing that MEADD823 says that is absolutely incorrect. I did not train the horse. The horse trained me.

That's a piece of my point, here, though I can't say that I know where it fits into the full puzzle.

Below I offer my words quoted directly for clarification – please read all of them it is important – the concept is a global one


The horse was trained to know what you wanted – you may have picked up body language by watching horse your self but you are communicating emotions with a creature that is present in the same environment you are in


The point communication is between two creatures two individual beings whom are sharing the same physical environment – I represent it as such.



Again, how could I not know what you mean?

Perhaps you do not understand it as he does – presently as we do.

How do I know- you tell me

There is one thing that MEADD823 says that is absolutely incorrect

According to your internal perception in order to be correct I must be incorrect – there was no correct vs incorrect simply a difference in understanding – if you re-read what I said you will find my concept not far off the one you later reveal yet at the time of my posting you had not knowingly revealed it.



1) MEAD823 is Tammy. I don't know that, but you do, ergo you get one point in the competition that you think that I am having with you.

2) You and Tammy each know what the other is saying, but perhaps I don't. Again. Point to you, if this was a competition (I don't see it that way, but I'm engaging here).

3) If I don't know what you and Tammy know, I must be really dense, which is why it will be really hard to explain... (That's a stretch, I'll grant, but one could read it that way).

Add to that that you and MEAD823 tag teamed me.. (2 points there) and I think you're sitting on your desk with your feet up and your hands clasped behind your head.

I find it absolutely amazing that any time some one lacks a full view it must automatically mean some form of malice – like we are purposefully trying to loose you – allow me to assure you we are not – if we wanted to speak between the two of us without your presence then wouldn’t we just PM each other? – would that not be the path of least resistance {and the most logic}

I engaged in the conversation speaking my intention out right in the second sentence second post – this is an unusual discussion about a topic that isn’t typical – I am bored and not put off by your challenging tone or difference in perspective . I tried to post as clearly as possible my intentions

Communication is interactive – why bother to interact with you if I do not intend to speak in a manner I believe to be understood – again nothing was lost but due to our difference in perception much was apparently misunderstood

He used references to other post and pointed to times of previous discussions - SB and I have posted together on several occasions - what we share is a history - and through that history we understand each other. We have been accused of several things - tag teaming was among them - there are some parallels between the present and the past -

Just as I am doing now I try to serve as a bridge between two vastly different worlds because I can relate equally to both - I have been attacked for attempting to do so because it was taken negatively.




The parts that would infer indirectly toward you would be your higher than average education level, intelligence as well as your tendency to have a strong opinion to the point you can present as oppositional even when it isn't intended -

This is your nature please do realize we do not assign it as good or bad for in our world nothing of the sort exist - you are as you are there is only acknowledgment and acceptance - I tend be challenging and can present as adversarial to those who do not know me very well - this is a common trait I share with you and there fore can relate -SB knows this about me.

I hope this clarifies the comments.




You realize that when you say, "Tammy is right. It's quite hard to explain if it needs to be explained?" you've communicated several things to me all at once:

Do you not have thoughts that are difficult to put into words?

This is what was meant by the comment above.

Again malice is assigned where none was intended

Thus the hesitation to communicate to begin with – you live in a world of right vs wrong Black vs white – we do not live in that same world although we can comprehend it – thus meaning behind several of the exchanges.



The plurals above are intentional.



Okay I am up to post #25

the problem then -

freedom (Shawshank Redemption) of mind is the goal of the spirit of man.

The idea of military discipline - of overly constricting protocols and ways - of linear thinking

which are seen in linear
clean paths
with no tolerance for diversity
only one way of doing things
money money money

the fight has been of the spirit of man seeking release -

tethered by

squeaky clean roads
with squeaky clean people
with squeaky clean jobs
in squeaky clean

'cept it's all dirty

The linear order is losing out to the exquisite order -
though seeming chaos of the quasicrystal

any system which appears ordered to the untrained eye -
is disorder in the making as

it all falls.

So - squeaky squeaky - relates to the sound of people growing within a fixed size strait-jacket -
- and we are now at exactly that point at which the strait jacket breaks or we do -

'cept the strait jacket doesn't stand a chance -
because it's only a stupid system that has been in place for a few years -
- and it has now been generalized and defined as our past -

and so goodbye to it -

thankfully

alongside disappears the drug abuse problem

where drugs are abused when good people are not provided with sufficient stimulation -
- datsa' the point

it's also why we (on this site)

need to take drugs which're related to the illicit variants

stimulation

stimulation stimulation stimulation

- provably so.

reference :
the squeaky clean streets of suburbia in 'blue velvet' -
- they have become the problem -
the strait jacket
an ideal
to which there is no possibility of adherence

cut off one's arm if necessary
we're housings of nerves

look to the nerves -
is all

honestly
- it's not hard


Olsen Olsen
Sigur Ros


man - I did not know that Iceland harboured so much talent :-)

why do the NGOs like the IMF from the country of capitalism -
drive capitalism (through privatisation) ?

that makes no sense.

oh !
man ... ...

... ... I'm getting a pattern - a pattern of corruption within a country protected by physical geography

this pattern stinks real real real bad -

- won't take long (not long at all) to unwind :-)

- that's the thing about money -
as a man-made system -
which is our evolutionary legacy -

- it's mechanism of operation (of leveraging and maintaining control over people) - is never hard to deconvolute -

at least not compared to proper subjects -
investigations of nature -

the sciences, arts

politics,economics,law are not real subjects -
- they're man-made systems to enforce control -

and aren't very intelligent

(i) the sciences
->-
(natural sciences in Cambridge)

(ii) arts
->-
(expression of creations of nature
which do not involve control)

(iii) classifications of past, present and future
->-
history,geography and spirituality

(iv) mechanisms for communication
->-
languages,linguistics,technology

(i) - (iv) -
all good
all good and proper - make us feel good


{politics,economics,law} (however) are all invalidated because they're creations of man with a less abstract view on society
- as the mind evolves - any establishment ideas may need to fall -

{politics,economics,law} make me feel sick - formalization of behaviour as a barbarian ... ...

... ... and datsa' one thing that establishment don't do - accept its own radical change - loss of power
- at least without violent revolution

In IT - the Linux movement is a revolution against Windows -
Windows will soon be lost from the IT sphere -

politics,economics,law ->- are our true problems though

politics,economics,law
->-
political,economic,legal administrators putting pointless protocol over the point -
it has been about quality for all
not physical wealth for the few

where are all the rich people?

Hmmm... ... ...

{politics,economics,law} - formalization of behaviour as a barbarian ... ...
- because they're (these systems) were grounded -
were developed -
for a less evolved state of mind -

which maybe we then
(hundreds -> thousands of years ago)
required these systems

not now though

I give you the true problem with our society

the systems of establishment loving

politicians
economists
lawyers

- again - off the scale significant.

Yay!

pick a fight with all the people who can squash you without much effort -

wait a minute ???

that's not good ---

ooopsy !

the model though :-) gives us wings

metamorphosis (a\ la caterpillar -> butterfly) is part of the Universal geometry of evolution

3
4
13

svefn-g-englar
Sigur Ros


music gives us wings too

om g
- that's just soo good.

Without getting to political here - if you are the only one left alive then there is no one else alive to care - in the end he who has the most toys dies any way

When all the straight jackets are gone there is no one left to put us into disordered boxes - either way it is an illusion a bad one at best but a reality to too many for too long. We should be able to learn for the betterment of us all but we are expected to learn for the betterment for ourselves - if we are right then they are wrong - if we are black they must be white - white bad or is that green that is bad pretty soon all is bad - the thing we need to remember and not let be taken away

Diversity isn't the enemy fear of it is -

If any one should feel a little strange, odd or "dysfunctional" here is some thing to cheer you right up {okay maybe - then again maybe not} And These People Lable Me Dysfunctional=wtf? (http://www.addforums.com/forums/blog.php?b=155)

This is the truth and nothing but the truth so help me what was I talking about???? !

Diversity isn't the enemy fear of it is -

Tammy has it correct

my wife gave me the images below (labelled the problem) from just a few days ago

from October 2007 !

The posters taped on the walls at a political rally here capture the rawness of Switzerland’s national electoral campaign: three white sheep stand on the Swiss flag as one of them kicks a single black sheep away.


the story
(http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/08/world/europe/08swiss.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Yxd6KZJ4SsHAhM:http://loranablog.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/1.jpg

eg in their streets

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:gse6Nch6_zMOuM:http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0709/postcard_pomy_0921.jpg

from October 2007 !


please - come on -
who needs more evidence of the effect$ of disparity in phy$ical wealth being the problem -

- apparently we live in a world of sheep who're too scared to voice their opinions -

because right above me

is the evidence of primitive behaviour by ape not man

- geeze !

so unaware of how wrong that view is - that they can't even see that it shouldn't be flaunted -
- these're the sorts of views which I expect to be found in many prejudiced minds -
but never actually exposed

and all of the power of the world is kept in this fundamentally corrupt regime of $ worship
for themselves

man -
oh man !

and so the obvious question is how might an entire political party be so clueless ?

well - that'd be a country's voluntary enforced exclusion from any community

NOT for neutrality
- instead for their own benefit.

man !

- keeping everything for themselves and consequently nothing for others
- by exclusion they've tried to set themselves up as separate
'better'
than the rest of us

->- man!
this is wrong

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:h6IP5dH6mJrAJM:http://64.13.133.31/pics/up-NHPF3FJSU8JVJN89

(actually makes me really angry)

Switzerland kicks a black sheep
which returns with friends and burns Switzerland ALIVE

SOLUTION

found

--- no question ---

we have mapped the problem


ca$h money breeding corruption

just finished that article (previous post) from the New York Times

extremely well written - and that's a good newspaper and so

geeze !!!

no doubt -
no doubt at all

ape$ which have hidden away and mated amongst themselves -
which is fine -
if it wasn't for the fact that their reach extends beyond their mating territory.

No doubt
no doubt at all -

at the roots -
rip out the rotten core of the Swiss and world (predominantly economic) $ystem$ of inequality -

sorry guys - I should use a Euro symbol -
'cept the Euro is even better at hiding
and I just don't have one on my keyboard

sorry -
- systEUROms

regardless
* cash money *

post # 44

agree completely -
just adding the idea that self need be removed from proper communication

Tracy has a thread on chit-chat
RE:arguments over who has the best favourite colour

Tammy has a previous signature relating to the need for diversity

- so -
where do problems arise ?

particularly when something which doesn't matter -
- is made into a matter of contention.

How do I see things?

well ...

(i) neural stimulation is what we need (not to be bored)

(ii) when we do something - we want to contribute some product which increases neural stimulation in others
(making things more fun for others)

as opposed to taking fun away

('fun' and coherent neural stimulation are synonyms)


Contributing is carrot
Restricting for self is stick

political,legal and economic systems are sticks for a legacy species -
we're all good people -
'bad' arises from the partitions of

political -> national boundaries enforcing separation
,legal -> legal knowledge (those who can pay for legal support) versus those that cannot
and economic -> rich / poor

sorry - but true disorder is expressed by the corrupt powerful physical world loving hulking useless monoliths

and it's interesting how there's no overlap between these pointless ways

- the diseased triumvirate which the evolution of man has been about the removal of

and the replacement triumvirate

good spirituality,
good science (understanding reality)
and
good art (blue blue skies research)
->-
the new triumviracy.

viorar vel til loftarasa
Sigur RosIcemen

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:CmPPSo8fBkhNfM:http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/4706/iceman9tn.jpg

also have wings :-)

just as their looky-likeys have ironing boards.

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:VI5LF-uwV8qi4M:http://marvel.com/universe3zx/images/thumb/c/c9/Silver_surfer.jpg/595px-Silver_surfer.jpg

Tammy has it correct

again :-)

(or at least exactly the same argument as I'm using)

'correct' sounds a bit -
- you know ... ... ...
:-)

(not meant that way though)

- apparently we live in a world of sheep who're too scared to voice their opinions -


==

the following

Okay normal is paying for a club house that doesn't exist BUT lack of impulse control is asking "are you people ****ing nuts?"and is taken from the reference in

If any one should feel a little strange, odd or "dysfunctional" here is some thing to cheer you right up {okay maybe - then again maybe not} And These People Lable Me Dysfunctional=wtf? (http://www.addforums.com/forums/blog.php?b=155)

This is the truth and nothing but the truth so help me what was I talking about???? !

man !

this band

sigur ros

Icelandasgard

Placeholder for survival of the fittest on mental layer

~ briefly (though) ~

from previously on ADDF

the equivalence of the gene on the physical layer to the logical model on the mental layer -
- entails that we can use 'survival of the fittest' as an idea taken from the lower physical layer and reflected on the higher mental layer.

So

genetic level

maximize survival and continued evolution by selecting the strongest collection of genes which support the organism's continuity
importantly -
we need to compete these models in 'fair space'

we can't have a species consisting of a 'dastardly and muttl(e)y' subspecies which sneak out at night and kill all the rest -
- because 'dastardly and muttley' subspecies (as the last subspecies standing) might seem to be the strongest because they've cheated and killed off all of the rest
- they're not actually -

since the point was to optimise the genetic quota of the organism to environment for survival -
not to beat competition - which actually serves no other role other than to - in effect complete the level of a computer game by knowing the secret key press

- the point of computer games - is to have fun making one's way through the various levels - and to have learnt from one's mistakes at the end of each level -
- so the subsequent harder levels are tackled with some hope of success.

The dirty 'stick' people propagate themselves -
and unwinding all of the metaphors and explaining why the outgoing establishment triumviracy must be discarded -

- simply -

'stick' people do not contribute -
- they only police others

- in a world (vogon world) - in which there are only politicians, economists, lawyers and bureaucrats -

who do they police ?

there's nobody for these pointless people to exert control over -

so there -
- from another perspective
is the problem

the politicians, economists, lawyers are the stick wielders of prokaryotic society -
and we're eukaryotic fun gaes with love of carrots
and no need for sticks.

Post summary

EEE (emergent evolution) 3geom4etry13 defines a repeating pattern
(the Trinity or Trimurti)

which allows us to translate the behaviour on one abstraction layer onto the behaviour on another.
(evolutionary cycle - the bit in between two adjacent evolutionary emergent events)

We know much about genetics :-) and molecular biology -
oh man!
do we know much about molecular genetics

- and although everything which matters (mind-related)
- to man -
does not involve molecular biological mechanisms

the understanding of the logical model (meme)
and gene
exhibiting similar behaviour -

- permits us to translate the evolutionary process on the physical layer (DNA) -
to the mental layer (logical structure of mind).

We see that there is survival of the fittest -
and that the fittest involves a fair and open competition on a level playing field

by that I mean
- that
- from a physical level - we'd get a buncha' strains of bacteria from one species together -
and see which strain was the last strain standing within the environment within which they were competing
competition is for survival within environment
- not against one another for supremacy

however - for mind -
we expose the logical models which shelter behind geographical hiding place -

- the hiding bankers in Switzerland -

within open forum -
- and then observe whether any form of economic theory can be supported by logical argument - without the strength which comes from just having more money than anyone else - and so not needing to listen.

Economics and money -
division by separation is not supportable,

The reason why the Swiss can't even see that using three white sheep kicking a black sheep out of their country is bad -
is a sign of a particular strain of logical model set
-> mind

which has only survived because of its geographical separation

- however -

- which, when shown to be exerting influence throughout the world
*need* be shown to be logically defensible in the open market of mental model sets (of mind)

isn't logically defensible
the tendency towards allowing companies free reign

is the tendency towards the supremacy of corporate world and money
over people

IS wrong -

- and so timely
- I'd say

for that logical model set to be exposed for what it is

- that (logical mind set) which drives us to aspire towards physical world wealth

isn't logically defensibleis wrong
is immoral

will all come tumbling down

and very soon -
with the argument which we offer on these pages -

- because :-) the pen is mightier than the sword

and imagine pen which in presence of any competition
simpl