Tear my ideas apart if you must, but I'm gonna post a few

[Golden Applesauce]

With the metaphysical thing, I guess i'll just rephrase it and if i'm just making a fool of myself let me know.  We have the ability to conceptualize or experience everything(not meaning at the same time) But for everything to exist it has to be not nothing. which means nothing exists.  .......oh shit.  maybe it's just that our perception of things is dependent upon knowing what things aren't, but everything can exist independently of our perception of it.  Am I making sense right now?

Could you clarify that bolded statement for me?  Are you saying "everything" in the sense of The All, the Universe, or something similar?  Or in the sense of "any thing," as in, "For any given thing to exist, that thing must be not nothing?"

[rong]

when is a knot not a knot?  when it's snot.

[LMNO]

With the metaphysical thing, I guess i'll just rephrase it and if i'm just making a fool of myself let me know.  We have the ability to conceptualize or experience everything(not meaning at the same time) But for everything to exist it has to be not nothing. which means nothing exists.  .......oh shit.  maybe it's just that our perception of things is dependent upon knowing what things aren't, but everything can exist independently of our perception of it.  Am I making sense right now?

Could you clarify that bolded statement for me?  Are you saying "everything" in the sense of The All, the Universe, or something similar?  Or in the sense of "any thing," as in, "For any given thing to exist, that thing must be not nothing?"

"Nothing" exists as a theory.  As in, "if there is a something, there should exist an opposite." but, as you probably figured out, it can't be something we can either point to, or label; because then it becomes a "something."

Before the beginning, there was a 50% chance that nothing would exist
and a 50% chance that something would exist. In order to determine
whether something or nothing would exist, something and nothing
decided to flip a coin. However, in order for there to be a coin to
flip, something had to exist, so something had already won. Therefore,
we exist because something is a lying, cheating bastard.

i get what you guys are saying with the menu and all that jazz.  kinda liberating really.  makes me see little point in words.  made me think about how words and concepts' sole purpose is to arbitrarily set boundaries in the infinite.

Really?  Because the way I see it, words are simply the most obvious examples.

From The Black Iron Prison:

Stop for a moment, and try to notice as many possible things in your environment that you can, simultaneously. Notice that, as you start to identify more and more objects, sounds, smells, and tactile sensations, you can't keep them in your head all at once. When you notice, for example, the pressure of your shoe against the ball of your foot, that distant bird chirping seems to fade from your attention.

And let's not forget about how much stuff you weren't paying attention to when you started reading this. Let's face it: We all live our lives with blinders on. We only allow ourselves to pay attention to 1% of what we physically can perceive, which is an infinitesimally small percentage of all the stuff in the Universe.

And that fraction of a fraction of a percent is what we usually call "Reality". We call it "Real", as if it's an unshaking firmament of solid Truth, that what we see is all that's really "out there". But you're not even paying attention to the 99% of stuff that you can even sense.

And this "Reality" is what we base our judgments on how the Universe "works" and what "should" be Out There. We construct our actions and reaction to this 1% of available information, and reject everything else in the Universe. And then some Authority comes along, and tells you that they know what's really real, and that you should do as they do. Talk about the blind being led by the blind... or in this case, the blind being led by the incredibly stupid.

So, what's the answer? Would it be best to try our best to see everything, all at once? Is the solution to try and tear down all the filters, to let your brain accept, acknowledge, and perceive every bit of information that comes your way? Would that help?

Are you kidding? It would completely shut down your brain. Trying to identify, recognize, and notice every single thing happening, all at once, all the time, would completely incapacitate you. And let's not forget that, due to physiology, it's still impossible to perceive a great deal of the Universe, anyway. And because it's totally impractical to try and simultaneously perceive what little bits of the Universe our senses can pick up, in order for us to function in our lives, we are forced to shut out certain things. But who, or what, is choosing the things we do perceive at any given moment? That, my friends, is the question.

Was it your parents? Was it the years you spent in school? Was it the TV? Was it a band? Was it a book you read? Was it a preacher you heard? Was it the kid who pushed you down when you were five? All of the above. The way you see the world, my friend, is a patchwork quilt of individual experiences, shaping the way your mind works. 'Round these parts, we call these things the "bars and walls of your Black Iron Prison".

So you see, anything we can possibly perceive has the same innate problem as "words" do; all of our existence is an incomplete map.

But some Discordians think that by learning to read as many kinds of maps as possible, we may benefit.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

So you see, anything we can possibly perceive has the same innate problem as "words" do; all of our existence is an incomplete map.

But some Discordians think that by learning to read as many kinds of maps as possible, we may benefit.

I... I love you, man! 

[Triple Zero]

makes me see little point in words.  made me think about how words and concepts' sole purpose is to arbitrarily set boundaries in the infinite.

we have a saying for people that think like this, it goearbl warfgr eiok pwnvbdfarwehecomesdkcngh%%4ndhak$@!

[LMNO]

So you see, anything we can possibly perceive has the same innate problem as "words" do; all of our existence is an incomplete map.

But some Discordians think that by learning to read as many kinds of maps as possible, we may benefit.

I... I love you, man! 

So you see, anything we can possibly perceive has the same innate problem as "words" do; all of our existence is an incomplete map.

Translation
"And so, we can never escape the Black Iron Prison."

[Cramulus]

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

So you see, anything we can possibly perceive has the same innate problem as "words" do; all of our existence is an incomplete map.

But some Discordians think that by learning to read as many kinds of maps as possible, we may benefit.

I... I love you, man! 

So you see, anything we can possibly perceive has the same innate problem as "words" do; all of our existence is an incomplete map.

Translation
"And so, we can never escape the Black Iron Prison."

Escape? No...

Make it something other than a Black Iron Prison (like say Yellow Submarine of Exploration, Silver Spaceship of Possibility, Muddy Humvee of Experiences)... Hell Yes!

[Golden Applesauce]

 

[LMNO]

SEMANTICIST!
            \

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

SEMANTICIST!
            \

That's General Semanticist to you bitch!

[fomenter]

SEMANTICIST!
            \

what are you some kind of ANTISEMANTICIST!  you nazi

[Telarus]

Do I really have to trot out the rant about how words are mask wearing anime-tentacle-rape-demons and the space between semantics is where the fnords live (from the 'do you believe in the soul? thread)?

Thanks Rat for bringing up the Chi thread. Prana/Qi/Chi.. all the terms lead back to signifiers for 'breath/movement/that which makes a living thing live'.

This whole thread is a clusterfuck of semantic tentacle-demon anime porn concepts trading labels like masks to confuse you all.

'Energy' in science (~science: a (meta)language that deals in observer-observed repeatable phenomena) means the ability to do work, to change the environment/subjects of the environment.

But in every day parlance, words can signify into two 'NameSpaces', the objectified-external non-simultaneously-apprehended Universe, and the subjective internally-projected mental-emotional I-space.

~ A ball of mass m is placed at a distance h above the end of a vertical spring. The ball is then released and compresses the spring. The elastic constant of the spring is k. What is the maximum spring deformation? Show the Kinetic Energy, the Gravitational Potential Energy, and the Elastic Potential Energy at the beginning and end of the experiment. Assume no friction.




~"She's got so much pep and energy", her co-worker exclaimed.
~"Hey Bob, you look terrible. Run out of energy?" asked Fred.

Are either two characters talking about how far a steam-engine can push a 25lb weight? No, they are discussing some-one's internal mental state as expressed through the body.

Words can signify into two 'NameSpaces', the objectified-external non-simultaneously-apprehended Universe, and the subjective internally-projected mental-emotional I-space. And here you are tossing the word 'Semantics' out like it's a fortune-cookie, merely something to ad a cheap joke to for a laugh.

SEMANTICS are the basis of all communication. Pay attention to your semantics, for the spaces between semantics are where the Fnords live. The best way we've found to model Information uses terms like Negative Entropy, and Coherence.

Which leads us to this gem:

Author=False Profit

So first off, yes, I do believe in a soul.  Now for the brain hurty part of the post.

Most religions and beliefs share that a human/talking monkey holds some sort of cosmic energy that exist through out the universe and have called it a soul.  Here is we know from various speculations out there.  Mass and Energy are one and the same only in different states.  The body requires energy to function.  When a body dies that energy is gone.  As that energy has mass, it can be concluded that when a body dies its mass decreases due to the energy becoming non-existent.  Where that energy goes? Who knows, but we know it must go somewhere as if it didn't the body would just keep moving about on its own.  Maybe that is how zombies come into existence, dead bodies that fail to discharge properly.

Or I could be lying.

What he's really asking is about the body's Coherence, it's Coordination, it's Will, it's Chi. The ability for it to coordinate enough muscles to suddenly hoist up the jury rigged scaffolding of bones and sinew and run the fuck away from me as I swing my blade at it. Whatever Coherence it has usually leaves after the body gets stabbed a few times and loses Coordination of breath and circulation.

WHERE DOES THE SIGNAL GO! he means to scream.

But no, he mistakenly grabs the term 'Energy' from the societal narrative and then runs to the Model that has claimed that term, Energy. The proponents of the Model point and laugh at him.

Strife allows a smile to flutter on her lips. Semantics.

Oh, and my new favorite word is Intersubjective.

[matthewsquires]

It's like no matter what I think, I am reading into things.  Like to say there is no objective truth is flawed because that would assert that there is an objective truth, that being there is no objective truth.  it seems like there's an infinite amount of truths and even to think that is one of them.  like you just can't avoid it but you can at least be kind of aware of it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

It's like no matter what I think, I am reading into things.  Like to say there is no objective truth is flawed because that would assert that there is an objective truth, that being there is no objective truth.  it seems like there's an infinite amount of truths and even to think that is one of them.  like you just can't avoid it but you can at least be kind of aware of it.

Sophistic poster is sophistic.