@Erimitus Said
EB:
if: Earth is a creation
Then: the overall events taking place in the earth
And: the affects those events have on its subjects
…are representative of the overall moral integrity of the mastermind behind its creation.
E: If you are saying that reality is a creation and the events in this creation represent the morality of the creator then I understand. I would add that we create our own reality and that this reality is a representation of our morality. And ...and our morality is a representation of the spirit of the times. This is a circle. The creation influences the creator and the creator influence the creation. This is a sort of feed back loop. Art, for example, is a reflection of the times.
What do you think?
OK a quick story: (it could be true)
In the 19th century a Native American went to a white man's school. When he finished his studies he returned to his tribe and became the medicine man. That fall the tribe came to him and asked if the winter was going to be cold. Being educated the medicine man knew to telegraph the weather bureau to see if the winter would be a cold one. The weather bureau said yes it would be a cold winter. The medicine man told the tribe it was going to be a cold winter and to cut a lot of wood.
A few weeks later the medicine man telegraphed the weather Bureau again. The weather bureau told him it was going to be an exceptionally cold winter. So the medicine man told his tribe to cut even more wood.
A few days before the start of winter the medicine man contacted the weather bureau again. The weather bureau told him that they were expecting the coldest winter ever. The medicine man asked why and they told him that the Indians were cutting firewood like mad.
This is a feed back loop. The creation influences the creator and the creator influences the creation.
If we accept that there is no spoon. Then we are left alone in the desert of the real. That is why most of us take the blue pill. It is nice to have the company (even if it is a fabrication)...
Yeah that goes right back to folks (like myself) getting trapped in the illusion that films, stories and music makes (as you said: 'Art' ) - One man's theory become everyone elses' exponentially and with many bizarre variations.
As for us being the
exact same person - I am not too sure. It looks to me like we are borrowing from the same disembodied personality which has a personality of it's own which we then tend to express when using it to communicate.
And actually, going by the old idea of "demi-gods" or "affinities" I'm not sure they are much more than A.I. that helps us to communicate and "us" being the individuals still asking questions.
For instance - I don't know what you had for dinner this evening.
Now, taking a wild guess - If it turns out we
are sharing different affinities (at context appropriate times) - during those times we might be able to reach through to each other and learn of each others' current general thoughts ("Telepathy" ).
But from what I've experienced (and although I can not prove it) it does look like we have a genuine (and non-artificial) distinctive self which is only being aided (for whatever really strange reason) by artificial devices.
And there in goes old news footage of a monkey telekeneticaly bringing a robotic arm with a banana to it (when the footage was used again they changed the story (red herring I'm sure) that in order for the ape to 'will' the mechanic arm they had to chip his brain.).
But what if that was footage not from ten years back but several centuries back? How far could science go with remotely operating a robot using telekinesis?
Just theories but this what often times adds up for me --> When we finally die we might all wind up as baboons.