Session 23 March 2019

barbarossa

The Force is Strong With This One
Perhaps, ultimately, that is the point? The ultimate free will choice?

What these conversations are starting to show to me is that I need to better understand the question of what 'lessons', 'learning', 'free choice' are. So once again my gratitude to all for the time offered. I'm working towards deeper understanding of these concepts and not just brushing the surface. This community seems like minded which is why I'm expressing some of this thoughts without intending to, but coming out as difficult.
Thank you.
 

barbarossa

The Force is Strong With This One
barbarossa,

I think you are wise to not accept any information and just "believe". The Cs really are saying that in this session I think. Our trust in any information should be "informed" trust. After we do our own testing of that information (as best we can) we can develop a trust and have more "faith" in the source.

Sorry, if I was over-the-top in my first response. I will try to make more "meaningful" comments.

I probably can't give a satisfactory answer to "why so limited in choices" but for now I would say it is because if we are overwhelmed with too many options at once we are even more confused.

As you said "change in awareness the truth that they're exposed or lead to changes with them". I think after we begin to "change" we see more options. For example maybe you have noticed that you have used a certain software program for a very long time and then one day you accidentally hit a button that gives you more options and say geewhiz I didn't see those options before.

If you hadn't started using the software first you would not have found the other options.
Once again, i appreciate the response and the opportunity to discuss as well as clarify for myself and understand. Thank you for your time and responses.
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
I probably can't give a satisfactory answer to "why so limited in choices" but for now I would say it is because if we are overwhelmed with too many options at once we are even more confused.

I think you're right here. I would add that on the most basic level, you cannot have free will without limitation. Making choices implies some uncertainty. We constantly need to make educated guesses, value judgments, follow hunches, or sometimes just throw a Hail Mary in the face of extremely limited knowledge. That's just how life works. Think about the alternatives. We can either know nothing and not have the capacity to learn anything, in which case life would be impossible and the universe would be purely mechanistic (if there could even be a universe in the first place!). Or we could all have omniscience, knowing everything, having perfectly 'free' will, knowing the right choice to make in every situation with absolute certainty - in which case life would be easy, there would be no sense of discovery, there would be no real learning, no struggle, because we already know everything anyways. We would be equivalent to 'God', all-knowing and all-powerful.

But like you said, even that might not be the full picture. Because the way we are, we are limited beings. Just think of how small you are compared to the totality of the universe, think of all the things you are NOT. The portion of the universe that is "not you" is astronomically bigger than you. Now imagine you had perfect freedom in those conditions. Like you said, you would be completely overwhelmed - information overload. We NEED to be limited in order to learn the individual choices appropriate for our level of being.

So compare those two broad options (no freedom, full freedom) with what we have: limited freedom. The way the cosmos seems to be structured is as a scale of free will and "knowledge" that is laid out in a grand hierarchy from those beings with the least amount of knowledge and free will (atoms, molecules), up through the tree of life to us, and whatever beings are above us, with the mind of the cosmos as that which knows all, provides the ground of all being, and the push for novelty, direction, and the overall evolution of consciousness. Yes, there are limitations on our free will. It couldn't be any other way. But the nature of the universe is such that learning is possible, free will can be expanded, new things can be discovered, and we can learn to throw off the shackles of many of the things that have held us back until now.

Perhaps. There's a lot of obstacles to overcome and a designed obfuscation that I do not agree with. Can I do a lot with it? Mine to determine. That's my free choice to make. And that does not sit well with me. Not a complain, not a 'woe is me'. Just does not feel right.

I think there's an important lesson here to be learned, because you're right: the universe isn't fair. Is it fair that animals have even fewer choices than humans? Or is it fair that the free will of some humans can be so totally subverted? This is the problem of evil. But again, it couldn't be any other way. If there is freedom, that means that there is freedom to be evil, freedom to enslave, torture, manipulate, exploit, coerce. The upside is that we ALSO have freedom to learn how to navigate evil, and to create a better world. And that's the adventure, and the responsibility of free will. WE have to create it. Because there's no one else that's going to do it for us.

I cannot speak to this but take it on faith. But note how it speaks about our own being limiting choices for ourselfs. Why would we set ourselfs up like that and then make it difficult to find? Why has this been set up like this?

One possible answer: because nothing of value comes easily.

Again, not enough data to answer this. I can make a hypothesis at best. But, any beings that ascend, according to what I have read, view time differently, have a different understanding of reality as well as information available to them. Do ascended beings have a better selection or choices or few because of that?

I'd say they probably have even more choices, and thus even more potential ways of screwing up and acting malevolently. Just think about the wishful thinking and contractile selfishness of 4D STS.

And as a counter argument let me ask you this: If you could perceive time and reality differently, would the same lessons still apply?

Maybe the lessons have something in common, but I'd say on the whole there would be new lessons.

I'm again questioning the mechanism of knowledge transmission as it's currently understood. An immortal part of me has information that it has specifically decided upon for me to pursue. But, the physical vessel will be easy to tamper with and may even hide this from me as I go through the circumstances that are generated part by choice part by happenstance. At the end I either get it or don't, but it's ok, because time is irrelevant. That does not seem like an OK answer to me. I'm again, missing something.

I agree about the basics. But to keep hiding them or putting them in a format that needs to be understood over and over again, is why I think the game is rigged.

Maybe think of it like this. There are some beings that actively tamper and try to hinder and hide information from you. That is an obstacle to be overcome with hard work. But that's not the higher part of yourself. The higher part doesn't 'hide' things from you. It is constantly providing you with the circumstances to learn what you need to learn. Sometimes that will take a long time. But in the long run that is irrelevant. What is important is that you really discover it. It's like cheat codes in video games or on tests. By using those crutches, you never really learn anything. But through the struggle and sacrifice of learning, you gain something infinitely more valuable: actual knowledge and skill. And with that, you can bring something truly new and valuable into the universe.
 
Last edited:
Just does not feel right.

Well, to that I would say: keep learning until you understand it all better. Speaking from my own experience, this really does get better as you progress.

Why has this been set up like this?

I cannot answer why the system has been set up the way it is, but I can say that while I had the same questions in the past, thanks to all the knowledge I've gained over the years, I don't have any problem with the system. It makes sense to me. And I'm sure with even more knowledge, we'll understand why it is the way it is.

Do ascended beings have a better selection or choices or few because of that?

Not entirely sure what "ascended beings" means, but if it's 4D, then I don't think "better selection" is the right way to think about it. They live in a different environment, with different rules, and with different consciousness. Obviously their choices and lessons are different. I think "better" is a subjective judgement that has little relevance here.

And as a counter argument let me ask you this: If you could perceive time and reality differently, would the same lessons still apply?

Different perception, I think, necessitates different lessons. But as all there is is lessons, any lesson has value, provides opportunity to learn and experience to gain, and it doesn't matter so much what the lesson happens to be as what you're able to get from it.

It sounds like you'd like to pick lessons you want. I've learned to accept things I cannot change and deal with things I can change. I just let the universe throw at me whatever it wants, and I deal with it with a warrior's mindset.

But, the physical vessel will be easy to tamper with and may even hide this from me as I go through the circumstances that are generated part by choice part by happenstance. At the end I either get it or don't, but it's ok, because time is irrelevant. That does not seem like an OK answer to me. I'm again, missing something.

Tampering with any part of you by others is a reflection of the free will of others. You can't have freedom without some serious consequences. If everything was "good" for everyone, there could be no freedom. If you want to prevent being tampered with, gain knowledge on how to defend yourself. That's the game we're in. Some manipulation we can overcome by learning, some maybe we just have to grind our teeth through and suffer a bit, but that's a lesson too. Every single experience has value, no matter how much you may not like it. Approaching Infinity already explained this nicely above.

I agree about the basics. But to keep hiding them or putting them in a format that needs to be understood over and over again, is why I think the game is rigged.

It has a reason, but it takes time to really get it. I'll get to it more in the last reply.

This implies a linear mode of learning. I have yet to experience learning as linear. So the concept of learning and lessons maybe in need of a better definition. It maybe that the concept of lessons is limiting. Maybe need to find a better way to understand what is meant by lessons.

Literally everything is lessons.

A better understanding of what it is that I use this concept of 'free choice' on.

But that is the point! That's sort of your first lesson once you've "awakened": to figure out the rules of the game.

I think this last reply of yours drives home for me what the issue really is for you. The sense of playing a game the rules of which you don't really understand, if I'm getting it right. I get that feeling. I had it too, 20+ years ago.

But this understanding is something you have to fight for. It's a long and often painful process, full of mistakes and wrong turns and traps. There's really no way around the suffering, but in the end you'll understand why it was necessary that way.

The thing is, if you gain something easily, you don't really understand the value of that thing. You don't learn much. It's like how people rich from birth are disconnected from the reality of most people. They got their wealth easily, so they don't really have a clue what it's like to fight every day to get even the basic things. So if the lessons are hard and things are hidden from you, the process is slow, but the lessons really have value and the knowledge sinks in.

You can't get answers to your questions easily. Even if I could give you all the answers you seek, it wouldn't be worth much, because you'd have to test them all through your own experience, both to verify them and to really understand them.

The things you say you're missing will become clearer in the future. I can say this with quite some confidence based on my own experience, but there are no shortcuts, no free lunch. You're doing some good thinking, though, and asking good questions, so you're on the right track.

What I feel like you'd benefit from more than any particular knowledge right now is a more practical attitude. I got this from Castaneda's books. First, they taught me about the self-defeating nature of self-importance and all its forms. Some of the greatest obstacles to my progress were my self-pity, anger, feeling of injustice (which I had all my childhood, not just about myself, but the whole world), sadness about things I couldn't change, complaints, and so on. Understanding that neither I nor anything else is more important than any other thing freed me from this victim mentality and provided me with a much clearer view.

I acquired the sense that complaining about injustice won't get me anything other than a miserable feeling, and I decided that whatever I have to deal with, I'll deal with as best I can. I stopped being afraid of anything. (Of course this transformation took years.) I understood that to overcome any obstacle and get answers to my questions, I needed knowledge. Later I realised that asking "but what knowledge?", like it's hiding in any specific place, is the wrong approach. You have to search and sort through a lot to find bits of the right answers here and there.

But ultimately, a clearer picture starts to emerge, you get moments when suddenly some things click together and you realise something pretty amazing, and you start to see how things actually make sense once you get the proper insights.

But of course it's a lifelong struggle. I still don't know infinitely more than I do know, but I feel like I understand the basics and the rules of the game, and that gives me some peace of mind and enough confidence to take on anything.

So to sum it up - the things you're looking for, I'm sure you'll find, piece by piece. It will take time, it won't be easy, and it won't be for free. But that's the way it has to be for you to really get it. Belief in yourself and your ability to find the answers you're looking for.
 

Tuatha de Danaan

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Well, to that I would say: keep learning until you understand it all better. Speaking from my own experience, this really does get better as you progress.



I cannot answer why the system has been set up the way it is, but I can say that while I had the same questions in the past, thanks to all the knowledge I've gained over the years, I don't have any problem with the system. It makes sense to me. And I'm sure with even more knowledge, we'll understand why it is the way it is.



Not entirely sure what "ascended beings" means, but if it's 4D, then I don't think "better selection" is the right way to think about it. They live in a different environment, with different rules, and with different consciousness. Obviously their choices and lessons are different. I think "better" is a subjective judgement that has little relevance here.



Different perception, I think, necessitates different lessons. But as all there is is lessons, any lesson has value, provides opportunity to learn and experience to gain, and it doesn't matter so much what the lesson happens to be as what you're able to get from it.

It sounds like you'd like to pick lessons you want. I've learned to accept things I cannot change and deal with things I can change. I just let the universe throw at me whatever it wants, and I deal with it with a warrior's mindset.



Tampering with any part of you by others is a reflection of the free will of others. You can't have freedom without some serious consequences. If everything was "good" for everyone, there could be no freedom. If you want to prevent being tampered with, gain knowledge on how to defend yourself. That's the game we're in. Some manipulation we can overcome by learning, some maybe we just have to grind our teeth through and suffer a bit, but that's a lesson too. Every single experience has value, no matter how much you may not like it. Approaching Infinity already explained this nicely above.



It has a reason, but it takes time to really get it. I'll get to it more in the last reply.



Literally everything is lessons.



But that is the point! That's sort of your first lesson once you've "awakened": to figure out the rules of the game.

I think this last reply of yours drives home for me what the issue really is for you. The sense of playing a game the rules of which you don't really understand, if I'm getting it right. I get that feeling. I had it too, 20+ years ago.

But this understanding is something you have to fight for. It's a long and often painful process, full of mistakes and wrong turns and traps. There's really no way around the suffering, but in the end you'll understand why it was necessary that way.

The thing is, if you gain something easily, you don't really understand the value of that thing. You don't learn much. It's like how people rich from birth are disconnected from the reality of most people. They got their wealth easily, so they don't really have a clue what it's like to fight every day to get even the basic things. So if the lessons are hard and things are hidden from you, the process is slow, but the lessons really have value and the knowledge sinks in.

You can't get answers to your questions easily. Even if I could give you all the answers you seek, it wouldn't be worth much, because you'd have to test them all through your own experience, both to verify them and to really understand them.

The things you say you're missing will become clearer in the future. I can say this with quite some confidence based on my own experience, but there are no shortcuts, no free lunch. You're doing some good thinking, though, and asking good questions, so you're on the right track.

What I feel like you'd benefit from more than any particular knowledge right now is a more practical attitude. I got this from Castaneda's books. First, they taught me about the self-defeating nature of self-importance and all its forms. Some of the greatest obstacles to my progress were my self-pity, anger, feeling of injustice (which I had all my childhood, not just about myself, but the whole world), sadness about things I couldn't change, complaints, and so on. Understanding that neither I nor anything else is more important than any other thing freed me from this victim mentality and provided me with a much clearer view.

I acquired the sense that complaining about injustice won't get me anything other than a miserable feeling, and I decided that whatever I have to deal with, I'll deal with as best I can. I stopped being afraid of anything. (Of course this transformation took years.) I understood that to overcome any obstacle and get answers to my questions, I needed knowledge. Later I realised that asking "but what knowledge?", like it's hiding in any specific place, is the wrong approach. You have to search and sort through a lot to find bits of the right answers here and there.

But ultimately, a clearer picture starts to emerge, you get moments when suddenly some things click together and you realise something pretty amazing, and you start to see how things actually make sense once you get the proper insights.

But of course it's a lifelong struggle. I still don't know infinitely more than I do know, but I feel like I understand the basics and the rules of the game, and that gives me some peace of mind and enough confidence to take on anything.

So to sum it up - the things you're looking for, I'm sure you'll find, piece by piece. It will take time, it won't be easy, and it won't be for free. But that's the way it has to be for you to really get it. Belief in yourself and your ability to find the answers you're looking for.


Thank you Mandatory Intellectomy. I realize your answers were for Barbarossa, but for me, they ironed out a few
creases here and there.!
 

Wandering Star

Dagobah Resident
I think you're right here. I would add that on the most basic level, you cannot have free will without limitation. Making choices implies some uncertainty. We constantly need to make educated guesses, value judgments, follow hunches, or sometimes just throw a Hail Mary in the face of extremely limited knowledge. That's just how life works. Think about the alternatives. We can either know nothing and not have the capacity to learn anything, in which case life would be impossible and the universe would be purely mechanistic (if there could even be a universe in the first place!). Or we could all have omniscience, knowing everything, having perfectly 'free' will, knowing the right choice to make in every situation with absolute certainty - in which case life would be easy, there would be no sense of discovery, there would be no real learning, no struggle, because we already know everything anyways. We would be equivalent to 'God', all-knowing and all-powerful.

But like you said, even that might not be the full picture. Because the way we are, we are limited beings. Just think of how small you are compared to the totality of the universe, think of all the things you are NOT. The portion of the universe that is "not you" is astronomically bigger than you. Now imagine you had perfect freedom in those conditions. Like you said, you would be completely overwhelmed - information overload. We NEED to be limited in order to learn the individual choices appropriate for our level of being.

So compare those two broad options (no freedom, full freedom) with what we have: limited freedom. The way the cosmos seems to be structured is as a scale of free will and "knowledge" that is laid out in a grand hierarchy from those beings with the least amount of knowledge and free will (atoms, molecules), up through the tree of life to us, and whatever beings are above us, with the mind of the cosmos as that which knows all, provides the ground of all being, and the push for novelty, direction, and the overall evolution of consciousness. Yes, there are limitations on our free will. It couldn't be any other way. But the nature of the universe is such that learning is possible, free will can be expanded, new things can be discovered, and we can learn to throw off the shackles of many of the things that have held us back until now.



I think there's an important lesson here to be learned, because you're right: the universe isn't fair. Is it fair that animals have even fewer choices than humans? Or is it fair that the free will of some humans can be so totally subverted? This is the problem of evil. But again, it couldn't be any other way. If there is freedom, that means that there is freedom to be evil, freedom to enslave, torture, manipulate, exploit, coerce. The upside is that we ALSO have freedom to learn how to navigate evil, and to create a better world. And that's the adventure, and the responsibility of free will. WE have to create it. Because there's no one else that's going to do it for us.



One possible answer: because nothing of value comes easily.



I'd say they probably have even more choices, and thus even more potential ways of screwing up and acting malevolently. Just think about the wishful thinking and contractile selfishness of 4D STS.



Maybe the lessons have something in common, but I'd say on the whole there would be new lessons.



Maybe think of it like this. There are some beings that actively tamper and try to hinder and hide information from you. That is an obstacle to be overcome with hard work. But that's not the higher part of yourself. The higher part doesn't 'hide' things from you. It is constantly providing you with the circumstances to learn what you need to learn. Sometimes that will take a long time. But in the long run that is irrelevant. What is important is that you really discover it. It's like cheat codes in video games or on tests. By using those crutches, you never really learn anything. But through the struggle and sacrifice of learning, you gain something infinitely more valuable: actual knowledge and skill. And with that, you can bring something truly new and valuable into the universe.

The seeker of truth has very often encountered the following:

"When the student is ready, the teacher appears!":-D
 

Aeneas

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
(Joe) You said in the forum that every single species was individually engineered out of the experimental parts that were previously engineered through billions of years of Earth's history. So, I was wondering... They said in a previous session that life here was seeded. First, primitive life was given. But to what extent was the progress of all the species on Earth directly created?

A: As Behe suggests, at the family level.

Behe tries in his book to narrow down the edge of evolution, which is the title of that book. Below is a picture from the book (p. 218) which illustrates for those who do not have access to the book, what Behe suggest as a possible edge.
Behe - Tentative edge of evolution.jpg
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Also for those who have not yet read Darwin's Black Box by Behe there many places where he emphasizes so many discoveries "yet" to be discovered. He even creates his own words for it like "as-yet-undiscovered" and "asyet-unknown"

Might there be an as-yet-undiscovered natural process that would explain biochemical complexity? No one would be foolish enough to categorically deny the possibility.
(Page 203).

The theory of intelligent design cannot explain the presence of nonfunctional pseudogenes unless it is willing to allow that the designer made serious errors, wasting millions of bases of DNA on a blueprint full of junk and scribbles. Evolution, in contrast, can easily explain them as nothing more than failed experiments in a random process of gene duplication that persist in the genome as evolutionary remnants.21 This argument is unconvincing for three reasons. First, because we have not yet discovered a use for a structure does not mean that no use exists.

The tonsils were once considered to be useless organs, but an important function in immunity has been discovered for them. A python pelvis might be doing something useful of which we are ignorant. This point also applies on the molecular scale; hemoglobin pseudogenes and other pseudogenes, although they are not used to make proteins, may be used for other things that we don't know about. A couple of potential uses that spring to mind as I sit here at my desk include bonding to active hemoglobin genes during DNA replication in order to stabilize the DNA; guiding DNA recombination events; and aligning protein factors relative to the active genes. Whether any of these are actual duties of the pseudogene for hemoglobin does not matter. The point here is that Miller's assertion rests on assumptions only.

The second reason why Miller's argument fails to persuade is that even if pseudogenes have no function, evolution has «explained» nothing about how pseudogenes arose. In order to make even a pseudo-copy of a gene, a dozen sophisticated proteins are required: to pry apart the two DNA strands, to align the copying machinery at the right place, to stitch the nucleotides together into a string, to insert the pseudocopy back into the DNA, and much more. In his article Miller has not told us how any of these functions might have arisen in a Darwinian step-by-step process, nor has he pointed to articles in the scientific literature where we can find the information. He can't do that, because the information is nowhere to be found. Folks such as Douglas Futuyma, who cite vestigial organs as evidence of evolution, have the same problem. Futuyma never explains how a real pelvis or eye developed in the first place, so as to be able to give rise to a vestigial organ later on, yet both the functioning organ and the vestigial organ require explanation. I do not purport to understand everything about design or evolution—far from it; I just cannot ignore the evidence for design. If I insert a letter into a photocopier, for instance, and it makes a dozen good copies and one copy that has a couple of large smears on it, I would be wrong to use the smeared copy as evidence that the photocopier arose by chance. Arguments based on perceived faults or vestigial genes and organs run the danger of the argument of Diogenes that the progression of seasons shows intelligent design. It is scientifically unsound to make any assumptions of the way things ought to be.

The third reason why Miller's argument misses the mark is actually quite understandable. It arises from the confusion of two separate ideas— the theory that life was intelligently designed and the theory that the earth is young. Because religious groups who strongly advocate both ideas have been in the headlines over the past several decades, much of the public thinks that the two ideas are necessarily linked. Implicit in Ken Miller's argument about pseudogenes, and absolutely required for his conclusions, is the idea that the designer had to have made life recently. That is not a part of intelligent-design theory. The conclusion that some features of life were designed can be made in the absence of knowledge about when the designing took place. A child who looks at the faces on Mt. Rushmore immediately knows that they were designed but might have no idea of their history; for all she knows, the faces might have been designed the day before she got there, or might have been there since the beginning of time. An an museum might display a statue of a bronze cat purportedly made in Egypt thousands of years ago—until the statue is examined by technologically advanced methods and shown to be a modern forgery. In either case, though, the bronze cat was certainly designed by an intelligent agent.
(Page 227).

Some future day may yet arrive when all reasonable chemical experiments run to discover a probable origin for life have failed unequivocally. Further, new geological evidence may indicate a sudden appearance of life on the earth. Finally, we may have explored the universe and found no trace of life, or process leading to life, elsewhere. In such a case, some scientists might choose to turn to religion for an answer. Others, however, myself included, would attempt to sort out the surviving less probable scientific explanations in the hope of selecting one that was still more likely than the remainder.1
(Page 234).

In the next step a second tRNA molecule, associated with a protein named elongation factor Tu (EF-Tu), comes in carrying the appropriate amino acid and binds to the ribosome. A peptide bond forms between the two amino acids held on the ribosome. The first tRNA molecule now has lost its amino acid, and the two covalently bonded amino acid residues are linked to the second tRNA. At this point the first tRNA dissociates from the ribosome, the second tRNA moves into the site on the ribosome previously occupied by the first tRNA, and the ribosome moves precisely three nucleotides down on the mRNA. This translocation process requires another protein called EF-G for some asyet-unknown function.
(Page 292).

His approach is very much in line with what the Cs have said about anticipating that which cannot be anticipated.

It is scientifically unsound to make any assumptions of the way things ought to be.
 

Tuatha de Danaan

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Also for those who have not yet read Darwin's Black Box by Behe there many places where he emphasizes so many discoveries "yet" to be discovered. He even creates his own words for it like "as-yet-undiscovered" and "asyet-unknown"



His approach is very much in line with what the Cs have said about anticipating that which cannot be anticipated.

Just reminded me of Donald Rumsfeld and his "unknown unknowns.:umm:
 

genero81

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Maybe think of it like this. There are some beings that actively tamper and try to hinder and hide information from you. That is an obstacle to be overcome with hard work. But that's not the higher part of yourself. The higher part doesn't 'hide' things from you. It is constantly providing you with the circumstances to learn what you need to learn. Sometimes that will take a long time. But in the long run that is irrelevant. What is important is that you really discover it.

Yes, very well put. I think if one is heavily invested in an assumption about life, (ie. belief), then I think the "higher part," as you say, sort of keeps to itself more or less. I think that part is there to inform. There may be inklings from time to time that things don't completely add up under one's current belief system, but by and large you are left to experience the results of those assumptions until you come to a place where you recognize the need to modify or discard them. That can take some time.

Other times that higher part can make it quite clear that something specific needs to change. But knowing it doesn't make it any easier. A great deal of struggle is still required before the lesson is fully learned and the challenge is overcome.

I speak from experience on that last one. :whistle:
 

Puma1974

Jedi Council Member
Hello

"Here is an analogy: You could use a horse drawn wagon as a chassis for an automobile" ... or how past design conditions present and future design.

A few days ago I got a message about science stories in which it is shown how the past conditions the present and I decided to use it for this post.

"NASA's space shuttles have 3 fuel tanks: the main one (disposable) and two auxiliary tanks (recoverable). The size of these two tanks, auxiliary, is not capricious. It is determined by the size of the horses' ass (?). These tanks are manufactured in Utah, to get to the launch base in Cape Canaveral (Florida) have to travel by train across the Rockies. The tunnels that cross them only allow this size. The size of the tunnels is determined by the train, specifically by the distance between rails (in the US, 1.4 meters). In turn, this track width is due to the English engineers who built the American railroad (thus they would use the machines manufactured by them).

This "English" gauge was due to the fact that it was already used by the English trams and the constructors of the trams were the same ones that used to make the wagons pulled by animals (the thing is taking shape).

The dimensions of the cars are due to the ruts of the roads. The vast majority of the main roads had their origin in the Roman roads. These roads had the exact average of the Roman cars (not the chariots).

And to close the circle, those cars had to have enough separation so as not to disturb the two horses, the wheels should not coincide with the footprints of the horses or be too far apart to be able to cross the cars.
So, it had to be taken into account,the ass of the horses to build the cars."

Now.. If there is no evolution as we think, but a process of test and trial ... then it would be like a manufacturing process? For example, 4D Engineers could apply the same questions that 3D engineers apply to develop products: What does the client need? Can we make the product? Do we make the product? Does the product work? Is it what the customer needs?

... as it is above is below ...

29697

So the possible 4D Engineer would have to take into consideration several things at each stage like:

-Competitors: "slime world creatures", "tube creatures", plants and animals.
-Legislation: Universal laws
-Growth Potential: development of intelligence
-Segment and size: beings like plants, beings like apes?
-Resources required: Natural, another EXISTING DNA, type of energy required.
-Capital Expenses: Energy
-Technical Specs: two legs? two arms? one brain?
-Prototyping: Neanderthal, Cromagnon etc.
-Trial production
-Testing: wrong? ...clean house...
-Distribution plan: Americas? Europe, Asia? Mars?
-Collateral Desing: for future developments... Successful past design conditions future design.
-Set Launch Date: Earth 2D, Earth 3D, Earth 4D

Therefore, the title of the post remains, amply demonstrated. Do not? :huh:
 
Behe tries in his book to narrow down the edge of evolution, which is the title of that book. Below is a picture from the book (p. 218) which illustrates for those who do not have access to the book, what Behe suggest as a possible edge.

In The Edge of Evolution, he pointed to Classes as the probable dividing line, but in Darwin Devolves, after 10 more years of research, he adjusted towards the Family level, which is what the Cs referred to.
 

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident
Now.. If there is no evolution as we think, but a process of test and trial ... then it would be like a manufacturing process? For example, 4D Engineers could apply the same questions that 3D engineers apply to develop products: What does the client need? Can we make the product? Do we make the product? Does the product work? Is it what the customer needs?

I agree with that, good question. Pages back, I had mentioned that maybe some parametric design is involved.

I am now studying in my career, a class dedicated to morphology. Specifically, the mofology of objects. The teachers in 3 classes have given us a methodological design tool. This is knowing the connoted and denoted aspects of an object.

To understand that and how to use it to design something, it was decided to create a kind of word cloud with the connoted and denoted aspects.

The following groups were formed:

Connotative:

BIONIC

SPORTS

TECHNOLOGICAL

MINIMALIST

SENSUAL

Denotative:

FOLD

FLOAT UP

CIRCULATION

ARTICULATE

ROLL

In this we are more within language, communication and the symbolic.

Now let's say that I want to design, or I'm in charge of designing something that can float and that is bionic or sporty. What things appear in your mind? What is the first thing you can associate? If the "client" say that we have to create a living being with those two words, the first thing that comes to my mind is a bird.

The important thing of this is that the communication in 4D is symbolic, according to the Cs.

And what else you think is manifested more immediately, unlike 3D where the design takes other stages, from the idea to the material realization. We know that a chair is really easy to make. You have the image of the chair, you take the measurements, you go to the forest, you cut a tree, you take the parts to use, you shape it, and you join them to create the chair.

For approximation between what I learned in class and how ideas are expressed in 4D, I think that the design there uses the symbolic language denoted / connoted to express to 3D the desired form or object, but that in the process marks or points are taken as parameters, and those parameters are between the connotative and the denotative since neither of the two can be completely separated. And this is because the connotative expression is parallel to a main message or base, called denotative, where the connotation does not have the literal and usual meaning of the term but gives it another meaning.

If we say "dog life", the connotative expression qualifies as suffering, painful, miserable both the life of man and the dog, a qualification that is purely subjective and in a symbolic sense. Or if we say "eagle eye", the connotation will qualify an outstanding attitude associated with the high and majestic flight of that bird.

Language is denotative when it clearly calls (when it denotes or names) things as they are, with the intention of being understood literally.

In short, what is connoted is subjective, and what is denoted is objective.

From the list of words in the denoted group, you can see that they are functional aspects of an object or that they fulfill a function. Its essence.

I remarked that word because it is very important. The essence of an object, its root is an archetype, a divine face.
 
Last edited:

thorbiorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Thank you for sharing this very beautiful session.

Regarding this question from Pierre:
Q: (L) Next question?
(Pierre) About the French Revolution: Behind it, was the main ideological force Frankish Cabalism?
A: Yes
Q: (Pierre) Oh, Jesus. Did Frankish Cabalists infiltrate Weishaupt Illuminati and some Freemason lodges?
A: Yes
there was in this session from August 22, 2011, which puts France in relation to other countries:
Q: (L) Any other questions? (Psyche) I wanted to ask about cultures and countries. Do countries have an "essence" as described by Gurdjieff?
A: Yes
Q: (Psyche) So the question is, is there something essentially wrong with French culture? [Laughter]
A: Now, yes. Since the revolution was coopted by dark forces.
Q: (Perceval) That could be since Sarko came in... (Ailen) Or farther back.
A: Longer ago than that.
Q: (Ottershrew) Since 1789? (Ailen) The French Revolution.
A: Yes
Q: (L) So it started out being a pretty good idea for a revolution, but then it got coopted. Is that it?
A: Yes
Q: (L) Is it as I think that the worst of this is manifested in the educational system?
A: Yes
[...]
Q: (Bubbles) Which country on the whole planet has the best "essence"? (Perceval) From our perspective? (Bubbles) The least bad?
A: None at present. As we have said, there is already a one world government.
Q: (L) I don't think there is a country... If you think about any one country, they're all in bed together. I guess in a certain sense, we're already in the least bad place we can possibly be.
A: Yes
Q: [Moaning and Laughter] (Perceval) People should stop thinking about their own little country, and start thinking about the world as a whole.
 
Top Bottom