I know you claim a middle ground, but it seems that you are really quite a staunch advocate for the ACME.
No, I'm really not at all. ACME and OMM are both incomplete models. If you are coming from OMM though, impartiality or being in the middle will seem that I'm too far ACME.
Impressive acronyming by the way. You should work in advertising.
Either you were joking, unaware or you have been somewhat sly and disingenuous...
Nope. I found myself suddenly awake at 4:00am and couldn't get back to sleep. I was sort of mulling over what people were telling me on the previous thread and what bubbled up as the core principle that I object to in what people were saying was that 'only matter matters'. So cool, I thought what would the counterpart be on the other side and what came up was 'anything can mean anything'.
Perhaps noticing the mm and the aa I thought, hm, if I change the second 'anything' to 'everything' then I would get ACME - which, culturally, in the US, for people my age means only one thing:
I wasn't sure how ACME ties in to that worldview and when I compared it to OMM, I began to see there was a bit of a switch - ACME would be a name associated with corporate, mercantile, industrial ubiquity while OMM would be a mantra sound and (interestingly almost a mirror of Woo). The idea of using a word from cartoons interested me though because the ACME cosmos is a cartoon cosmos - disembodied images.
Then I thought about it and realized that the intuitive matching makes an interesting point. Since these are the extremes of the continuum, they represent 'pushing it too far' until they become, in many ways, a mirror image of what they seek to be rid of. It works. I can see that OMM is like a sticking-fingers-in-one's-ears trance - but of course OMM disciples won't see it that way at all...they see themselves as ACME. The peak. Achieving great things. Selling technology. (I'm not unaware of the dictionary definition of acme, but I promise, I was as surprised as you were that that was the acronym that made sense.
OMM vs ACME named itself. Through me of course.
Which leads me to the meat, the heart,
the hard core of your intent, which I in turn am going to subtitle "woo as a useful life tool" and of course a second subtitle "taking the pith".
I would say "it's important to understand woo from the inside, so that you can learn how not to project it onto the material world too much.' - the same is true for OMM, important to understand it empirically, and important to keep it on the outside and not project it in'.
As I and others have repeatedly asked you in other threads Immed, have you even one practical suggestion of how to use woo in one's life, let alone in science?
I honestly have no recollection of anyone asking me for anything which I did not deliver rapidly upon the next response. Except Omen, who decided that demanding I produce definitions for dozens of common words. Sorry, I don't do definitions spats.
To answer your question, first of all imposes OMM right away. The OMM takes for granted that life exists for strictly practical reasons, which, particularly for the hard problem of consciousness, is far from established. Practical suggestion of what? What do you want? 'Excercise more. Avoid refined carbs.' It's not about 'using woo in one's life', it's just about adding a layer of intuitive awareness so that you make fewer mistakes and cause fewer problems. It's about patience, and honesty, and not having to turn time into money every second of your life --- because it's ruining civilization.
Have you one instance to show that your impassioned wishful thinking, and emotional investment can be justified with just one practical use for woo of any sort (aside from panacea).
Practical Use is all OMM. Human consciousness has no practical use for the universe. Woo awareness, properly integrated in healthy proportion, provides layers of meaning which cross reference between time, yourself, friends. The other day I had a friend of mine I hadn't seen in 20 years call me to read her teenage son's chart (who I never met) and so I did and I modeled the conflicts she and he have for her in astrological and plain English. She asked me for advice on how to deal with their fights and I told her about the difference between people with charts like hers and charts like his. A couple weeks later she thanked me effusively for that reading and said that her and her son were really back on the same page again.
So let's see, an hour free friendly telephone call and a free chart from a free program vs perscription drugs, surveillance, dysfunctional family environment, negative life altering consequences for mom and teen alike. Yeah, that Woo stuff is awful.
I am very uninterested in pursuing any defence of the legitimacy of rational thought and science as tools, you are more than aware of these, and I will take it as given that you are not denying that legitimacy and worth/value.
What I will state is that woo = GUESS.
Gnostic's universal evidential search solution.
It's not the gnostic who searches for solutions in evidence...it's OMM.
I know that it seems to you that I'm dodging something, but to me, every time you ask that it just fulfills my description of OMM. If you are locked in a closet of materialism, all I can do is play you music or talk to you through the door. You are the only one that can open the door and take a look at the rest of the psyche - the part that doesn't just to make money, spread the genome, or disprove that there's anything outside the closet.
Woo is the epitome of GUESS
Matryoshka dulls receding in beautifully fractaled ignorances and silly superstitions.
like a priceless heirloom? Yeah, gotta get rid of that...there's leaking oil rigs to build, populations to grow.
As much as I like your flights of fancy Immed, I am bored with your reluctance to acknowledge that woo and science I am bored with your reluctance to acknowledge that woo and science do not mix, cannot mix, and never will mix.
do I'm pretty sure that they are two opposite sides of the same thing. We are the mix.
This has been pointed out by myself and by better thinkers than I here many times to you, but you dodge, twist and make partial adjustments to supposed meanings, partial allowances to opposition's accuracies.
For example? If I'm dodging anything I'm not aware of it. I'm just putting this information out here and really have no vested interest in being 'right' about it. Unless someone is going to make a point I haven't heard 1000 times before - then I'm very interested. Otherwise, don't bother trying to make close my eyes and go OMM, I've been there and know it inside out. Nothing anyone has said here has given me anything but validation of the model I describe.
Here's the conversation I keep having to have with people, so you can't tell me about dodges and twists.
"Color does not physically exist, yet it is a subjective truth"
"No, Color is wavelengths"
(proves it isn't)...what is color?
"signals in the brain"
(proves it isn't)...what is color?
"it's just an interpretation"
"what is an interpretation? What is it made of?"
...
Patterns, forms, icons, gestalts, images...what are these things that our consciousness literally consists of and why does the OMM deny their relevance if not existence?
You don't find them in the brain. There is no miniature studio with actual color holograms of the sights and stereo audio of the sound of our life. There's nothing but neurons in the brain. We know where conscious comes from, but we don't know where it physically is enacted. Where all of those neurochemical processes unfold into, what the OMM believes is 'all of the order and beauty that has ever been in the Cosmos'.
It's ridiculous.
What makes sense to me is that color is a purely interior subjective experience which can be encoded as an analog to transmit through wavelengths of light, then stepped through another layer of encoding/switching as a biochemical-optical text, then a neuro-electric signal, then as a brain text of complex neural orchestration (none of these look like color from the outside, mind you'), then finally as a reconstituted, decoded subjective experience of color in consciousness, 'white' for example.
The implication of this is that color is being experienced 'subjectively' in other places besides in side us. It could very well be that plants are green, but just not physically green. The light frequencies they kick back remind our brain of what consciousness was when it was light itself, when green was invented. Really not much different than holding invertebrate DNA copies in every cell. The spectrum is a living memory, evidence of order in the cosmos. The fact that whiteness holds the entire spectrum within it invisible points to the nature of memory and information access in the essential world. Solid state, timeless, ordered, meaningful to us.
By extension, all of our senses feed us information from the cosmos. Order. Like color, it is transduced and decoded through physical media, but the physical media is the exception - it's the gaps from the BB. Fragments of matter and energy now have to touch each other through encoded physical processes, a few of which we can consciously detect through our optical, aural, olfactory, tactile, gustatory, vestibular probes - which are just specialized nerve endings. The content is all the same going to the brain, and it's the brain that has to recognize patterns and generate patterns which we can recognize. The brain is quite familiar with the pattern it receives from the cosmos and generates to us, so much so that when a new variation shows up, special attention is paid to it.
If woo of any sort was capable of being used by science, read by science, embraced by science, in any way, then it would not be woo.
If woo was even capable of being taught in any meaningful way, it would just not be woo.
That's like saying, Quantum Mechanics were able to be used as music, added as spice, embraced by zoologists in any way, then it would not be Quantum Mechanics.
I have watched with interest your other posts around the site Immed, you have certainly generated some interesting thoughts/perspectives.
Why would they be interesting if there's no truth to them?
Do you like reading Woo?
I am interested if you can actually deconstruct the internal mechanism that causes you to be the obsessive one trick pony when it comes to this particular subject.
Not a cause, but yes, there is a particular astrological correlation that gives me a specific map of this moment in my life. Not that I'd choose it. I'd stop if I could, this is brutal on my nervous system. Besides, I've got nothing else to do. Makes it easy.
k, gotta go. trying to take the day off at least so if you want to keep it going, please allow a couple days for reply. thanks.
