if you think about his name, it all makes sense. I have to admit coming here to play with the electric monk is kinda fun. like messing with an ant hill to see what you can get the ants to do.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2013 10:15PM by sparkyguru.

and if you read gods debris, did you deliver the package or did it deliver you?

I'm glad you are having fun. I've never enjoyed messing with with human beings, but I know some people find it entertaining. I do very much enjoy toying with ideas more.

did you read gods debris? there are ideas in there that I am sure you will like

Thanks. I found a free online copy of God Debris. It looks interesting. I'll get back to you on your question about the package.

Thanks for the tip. I found a link to God's Debri for free. I'm about 75% finished reading it and came across this quote:

"If you spend your time arguing about the faultiness of other people’s opinions, you waste your time and theirs. The only thing that can be useful is examining the differences in your assumptions and adding to each other’s information. Sometimes
that is enough to make viewpoints converge over time.” (P. 110)

That is what I think the evolution and creation scientists should do, which I tried to explain here, but didn't seem to make much progress in the discussion. He says it much better than I did.

Instead being flexible with assumptions, scientific dogmatism prevails. Scientists debate the conclusions more than examine the assumptions. Each side is unwilling to be flexible in what the assumptions "could" be. The dogmatism is a waste of human energy and time.

There are other very interesting ideas in the book, a few I have already considered, but many I have not considered. Thanks.

Here's the link:

http://nowscape.com/godsdebris.pdf

Stay tuned. More later.

the sequel 'the religion war' is pretty good too!

religion war is free to read online on scribd, formatting kinda sucks tho

Now that I have finished God's Debris, I can answer your question: "Did you deliver the package, or did the package deliver you?"

The postman delivers the package. The package delivers the address.

The book was quite interesting, especially as it got to the end and offered more practical ideas than theoretical jargon, especially about dealing with women. (skip to the end)

In terms of the coin toss, it occurs 50% on heads because of the design of the coin, in which, a man designed by choice. If it were a dice, it would be different odds to land on one of six sides. Again, whether a dice or coin, the % of probability decision is made by man, not the coin or laws of chance.

In terms of the illustration of the coin being controlled by probability and his covering all kinds of principles from free will to chance, the author misses the main point. The coin is flipped by a man. That makes man compared to God in the analogy, who made the coin, and not by the probability laws as he argues about.

Although I understand his points of argument, which were quite interesting to follow, he starts with limited assumptions, deliberately of course, which allows him to control the conclusions.

Which takes us right back to my argument with the evolutionary scientists, who control the assumptions, and therefore, control the scientific argument and the conclusions.

Thus, evolution is designed to never be wrong or proven false by the methods and processes employed. It's rigged with the conclusions, just as the God's Debris Avatar, based on chosen assumptions as explained above. Evolution, therefore, will never be proven to be false based on that principle. Logic depends on assumptions, and whatever the assumptions, so will the conclusions be directed toward.

Food for thought.

That said, I liked the book. I'll probably buy it.

the author is pretty famous, he made the 'dilbert' cartoon

so what level are you in perception? are you aware of your own delusions or that you can be deluded?

read the religion war it has an actual plot, not so much of a thought experiment as a conclusion to the concepts in the first book

I'm aware of the author.

Some great, good, and weak points.

I'm at level 7...

Arrived at the delusion awareness way back when I left Mormonism.

Looked for Religion War online for free, but couldn't find it.

there are only 5 levels.... and how do you know you are not deluded about moses?

I get the feeling that you find hope by moving orthogonally to whatever there is out there...

here is the religion war, I haven't found this as a download, but I will probably buy it

http://www.scribd.com/doc/7215048/Scott-Adams-The-Religion-War

Every experience we go through and the actions or deeds we perform, molds are minds and beings into who we are. The actions cause the final beliefs and perspectives, and then, we continue choosing life as it comes to us, based on the beliefs that life itself has formed in us.

We are a sum total of all of our experiences in life.

Moving orthogonally is an illusion, one of the things Avatar speaks about, delusions that are useful, but not true. Everything is interconnected as one.

The sixth level is undertanding that actions mold the mind, not the mind the actions. Thus, what job you pick to do all day long will automatically mold the mind into habits that can't be broken, unless you change the job. This is learned in service in level 5, where Avatar was at, but did not "get it", yet. So he did not move to level 6.

Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

At level 7, one comes to understand the real meaning of the cosmic war between God and the devil, answering the age-old questions of the motivations between the two superpowers, and what the fight is all about. One becomes aware of existing in the middle of a cosmic showdown, much like is written in the book of Job, having very limited powers as a human being in comparison.

This idea of a cosmic war is not new, of course. But what becomes new is the logical reason for the devil's rebelling and what he is doing to survive. He still believes he is going to win.

The LDS view is wrong because Jesus and the devil are not brothers, and the fight is not over free will. The fight is about truth and error.

Seventh Day Adventists are not right, because pride is a silly foundation to fight about. There is not enough enduring power to continue the cosmic war for so long.

Others have sought to explain it, but when the real reasons are understood, the cosmic battle all comes into view, and the logical reasons speak for themselves.

This level includes evidence from Supernatural powers that remove any doubts of Intelligent Design, though none of the details are in place about when or how.

Building on level 5 is a good foundation, but it lacks personal evidence. It is also limited in its assumptions (man flips the coin) as explained in another post. Level 5 is nonthreatening, based on pure reason and logic, and no evidence. One needs to abandon certain delusions about thoughts at level 5 to move forward, which is a big step to make. One who continues the "thought experiment" will learn the fallacies about "thought" and move on to level 6 as needed. Indeed, as one progresses, the ability of the mind to create delusions becomes far more intense. It becomes quite clear how the devil creates his own delusions and believes them. It's just what the mind does. Level 6 stabilizes the mind through actions and more experience.

Level 7 shifts the paradigm from faith to personal tangible evidence, which cannot be disputed in the mind. The question is no longer whether or not there is a god, but which god to follow.

Avatar is correct. The further one goes into the 7 levels, the more difficult it is to be happy, although each level is important in its own sphere, as he explained. All have their relevance.

Thus, right now I'm intellectually homeless at level 7. I'm not sure what is in level 8, but one thing is sure, the levels just manifest on their own by life's experience, as one meets the Life's challenges one step and a time. The Universe cannot be controlled. It is what it is.

so you added two more levels to the postulate of the book. what is level 7?

ok by definition (of the book itself) level 5 is being free of self delusion.

yet you argue that there is still delusion.

you are making a "this sentence is false" circular logic mistake.

I would say the book was clear on its premise, level 5 is free of self delusion. yet you are the one who redefines it to fit your perspective. Is not redefining the statement made in and of its self creating a delusion?

It's a *premise*.

It's not circular logic, it's about redefining the "assumptions".

I certainly can change the assumptions and add two more levels.

I said the book's assumptions are limited.

You asked what level I am on. I said 7.

Then you asked to defined level 7. I did.

Now, what exactly am I arguing about? Can you tell me?

*You* set up the argument. You asked me to tell you what level I am on, and thus, to answer, I changed the assumptions. You turned the attention toward me and away from the book. That's ok with me. But to be unaware of what you did puts you below an Avatar level.

For me to say I'm an Avatar is a place no one exists. No one is 100% free of delusions the mind generates. That means anyone you ask the question cannot answer 5 truthfully, so they are forced to answer: level 1, 2, 3, or 4. What exactly did you expect me to answer?

Anyone who answers 5 is deluded.

So I added two more levels, pointing out the weaknesses of the book.

Goalposts moved again. At least you can acknowledge you are delusional.

Have you read the book?

Goalposts moved? He laughs at your goalposts, when he has the ball, he kicks it every which way and declares himself the winner. When the other players complain, he states "I'm playing the game at a higher level than you!"

I'm mean really? Who reads an thought experiment book, which poses a question with a scale and when asked where he fits on that scale, invents 2 levels above the scale presented, because "I really don't fit anywhere"... Then condescendingly congratulates the person who referred the book to him when he places himself correctly on the scale "I'm glad you can fit yourself into the book as a 4."

The rules simply do not apply to him. Other people must be "free of assumptions" yet, when he doesn't like them or finds them to confining he is able to modify "the assumptions a bit to fit my reality"... Thus placing himself "at level 7" when the scale, in the real world only goes to 5 so that he can feel execptional.

His arrogance is off the charts. Based on his posts, life messed him up well and good, I feel kind of bad for him because he will always be "homeless" but only because he makes himself that way.

so you are saying, if there is a definition of anything, you are free to ignore the definition and substitute your own as you see fit.

IE

we both read a book that used definitions. you are right the definition of 5th level is free of delusions per the the book we both read.

I asked you a question relative to that material. you could have respond with an analysis that employed the definition in the book.

A level 4 for example would indicate that you can grasp the concept that you can be deluded but are not free of all delusions,

true the avatar is the only one free of delusions and he is a fictional character in a fictional book. the whole concept is a allegory that teaches how people can bring delusion and perception to anything (even science which made me think you would like it give your statements on evolution and such)

I think that you probably read this and when asked about a level you didn't like the definition of the level, because you can't be 5 by your own admission. That would mean you would have to say at least 4 to keep in line with definitions in the book. But you can't be less than the avatar, he is the hero of the story, ergo, change the definitions, come up with some new ones so you can rank yourself higher.

I guess maybe I should have asked more clearly, Keeping with definitions of the book what level do you personally fit in?

it will be interesting to see if you can work from an agreed definition IMO, or with even still you will have to change it around to fit your needs when you answer this question.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/09/2013 11:50PM by sparkyguru.

Let's back up.

What level are you at?

4

What the hell are we talking about, gentlemen.

(Apparently that was a statement, not a question?)

Edit: all caught up, although the initial post by sparkyguru is an odd one I don't understand.

Homeless is basically not playing by the rules and this upsets sparky. Nothing more to see here :)

Edit: by the way, Homeless, I sent you an e-mail. Hope you received it.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2013 01:13AM by greekgod.

greekgod,

I'll try to get my emails in the next couple of days. Thanks for writing me.



sparkyguru,

I'm glad you can fit yourself into the book as a 4.

For me, when I went to answer your question about the level, I really don't fit anywhere because I don't agree with his limited assumptions, so I modified the assumptions a bit to fit my reality, and placed myself at level 7.

The book itself says it's not true, so, the only way I can fit into it is to be a fictitious character in the book, which means I can choose whatever character I want to, and pick from level 1 to 4.

It appears you want to play a game. What level would you like me to play? 1,2,3,4?

"It appears you want to play a game."

That sounds like projection.

It's not a projection. It's based on what he wrote in the first post:

"I have to admit coming here to *play* with the electric monk is kinda fun. like messing with an ant hill to see what you can get the ants to do."

So, I decided to play along and try to learn somthing new in the process. God Debris was quite interesting. I'm glad he shared it.

Is this similar to how a wannabe cult leader/advanced being/savior/channeler/whatever get their following?

That is how it hits me
Dazzle them with footwork
Insist he acts on a different plane
Slightly mysterious
He really believes he has the answers
Far more advanced, special knowledge

Or am I off?

I hope you don't mind if I correct you.

I don't want a following. Or I wouldn't be homeless.

I have thrown out all other Biblical models because I wasn't satisfied with their answers. None of them adequately answer the antheist's arguments. They have the best arguments. They should not be ignored.

Therefore, I use my own model, unlike any other.

My view is extremely simple, easy to understand, and flexible enough to leave God in his own dominion without worry, argument, or compulsion.

The rest of life is man's dominion.

Although I believe the devil exists, it is best to attribute our "demons" to the subconsious mind, since that is where 99.9% of the trouble with man exists, which is in our own mind that creates delusions. Biblical doctrinal delusions are the worst. Jesus did not die "in our place" on the cross. It's insanity.

For me to try and get a following, as you suggest as a cult leader, would contradict my own beliefs. Family is the basic structure to operate within, not "religion".

If I present my views correctly, however, anyone who agrees will simply relax and go live life. "Oh, I see. God has his back turned to earth for a good reason, Israel asked for it, and so, I'll just go live life and find happiness with my family and friends using the laws of the Universe that He established, which includes the Ten Commandments, until Israel/He changes their minds. God created us, and that's why we live. Thus, we will continue to live in the afterlife without doing anything. The more we think about the afterlife or argue about it the dumber it is. Today is what matters most."

In practicality, it's pretty much a Deist belief, but with an added explanation of why God doesn't do miracles "in public" today anymore like He used to. His miracles are very selective. He actually wants some people to be atheists to provide them a better reward in the afterlife.

There you have my views in a nutshull. It requires no creed, no pastor, no popes, no rabbis, no prayers, no rituals, no anything. It only requires respecting Him and His Creation, especially people. If you want to pray, that's good. If not, that's fine too.

My view only requires one to respect the Ten Commandments, recognizing that premarital sex or plural sexual arrangements are not sins, but only cheating is a sin--breaking a sexual promise or expectation with someone. The sex thing we are to figure out on our own. It also requires one to understand we actually can lie when appropriate to protect ourselves, but we must not "bear false witness" against our neighbors.

In short, all of the Ten Commandments boil down to not stealing anything from our neighbor and not seeking to steal God's glory from Him. (How can an atheist steal God's glory when he/she honestly doesn't believe in Him? The more the honest scientist understands the laws of the Universe, the more God is unknowingly glorified, even if he/she doesn't believe in him.)

The Ten Commandments are a good set of rules for society to live in harmony with each other. When they are corrupted by religion, then they become bad rules.

Thus, we only need one chapter from the Bible to follow. Exodus Chapter 20. We can throw everthing else out, if we find it annoying or stupid. One chapter explains it all. Israel asked God to withdraw the evidence of His existence, and He did, so we die.

who is this "we" you talk of?

I wrote: "If I present my views correctly, however, anyone who agrees will simply relax and go live life."

What is your point?

done with you
you remind me too much of Charlie Manson with the family and twisting things
scarey to me, I withdraw from your darkness and intolerance

Charlie Manson? Wow! Where did that come from? My post is strictly referring to "religion", not society, for your information.

Families are part of the society they live in. It is in the context that *I* don't want to start a religion, and my family is enough for me, that I made the comment. You should know that I'm currently looking for a fortune 500 job, which contracts your image of "Charlie Manson". I'm intellectually homeless, not physically homeless.

Your comment is exactly the point of God Debris. An idea was created from nowhere and totally missed the ball. Strike 1 that I'm a cult leader. Strike 2 that I believe like Charles Manson.

It's comments like yours that create witch hunts. But it's good. It's a great example of what the mind can create when challenged.

You asked if you were off, so I responded to your question. Now I'm Charles Manson. Amazing.