>>888

>>889

>>899

Texts like The Return of the Light show how dangerous Wisdom and philosophy are without critical thought and a sense of personal responsibility. Anons on this board can handle it of course, but so often people get a hold of texts like this and run with it.

We often see others pick one book, one ideology, one guru and sculpt their lives around it. For this particular text, they could use it as justification for doing bad things because the Light Beings salvaging Earth will remove the Dark at some point and "all will be forgiven." Or use it as a justification of "understanding the knowledge of duality, thus surpassing God" as Luciferians do. Dangerous!

This is just another philosophy problem. Maybe humanity could "phase shift" over to the Light side of the polarity. This way, our Dark transgressions are more misunderstandings and misdemeanors, instead of the Soul-scorching-crimes-against-humanity we have come to learn about on the Research boards.

Something to keep in mind during the Awakening period as we reach out to others. This is why the 20/80 and 40/60 disclosure was mentioned, why philosophers write impenetrable tomes, one-letter Intelligence Officers' posts are cryptic, and prophets and mystics speak in parables. Getting at the Truth should be hard work!

>>>/qresearch/580316

>Thus, FREE WILL and CHOICE was born.

>This allowed duality. Light, and darkness. You cannot have light without darkness. You cannot have positive without negative. You cannot have a 1 without a 0.

I enjoyed this post and am sympathetic what was said. My reply is here, so as not to disrupt the flow of the other /qresearch/ board.

Mainly I wanted to bring up Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem. A rudimentary way to state this theorem is that with any axiomatic or logical system, you can either anchor a system relative to other derived points, making it a consistent system, but the system will not be complete. You can derive more and more formulations inside that system, but will always have doubts that you will run into a case that contradicts the system.

Likewise, you can have a complete system considering all possibilities, but it will never be consistent with your anchoring axioms or system of logic.

Much of the esoteria I have studied here and other places is woefully incomplete and inconsistent. You have to anchor the material on points that are simply a "Leap of Faith" and allow the inconsistencies to keep digging towards completeness. One can create maddeningly relativistic structures, making connections with other inconsistent structures to keep whatever theory running. Only to find out you may never get definitive proof of where you are resting those points.

Science and other fields of study do not escape this trap either.

But let's not hinge everything on the likes of Gödel, we're studying spirituality here!

We can take those leaps of faith, anchor it all on God. Seems reasonable. Anything we cannot get at or comprehend falls under "God works in mysterious ways".

There may be another way out of the trap worth exploring. We can both accept God and begin to redefine how we use Reason and Logic.

> you can see everything in existence in BINARY.

I can see the binary, however where the ones and zeros are not well-defined. The spirituality of it is they are gradients at best, and the zeros contain one-ness, and the ones contain zero-ness. Altruistic acts have elements of self-serving intention. Math and Logic systems we create are subject to

Gödel's theorem. Control systems allow freedom(your computer). Freedom requires control(layers of protocols to make the computer work). I envision a thermodynamic system, ever striving at homeostasis, but never truly achieving uniformity. That's the beauty of It.

> The sad truth, is that MOST of the horror on planet Earth has been by the hands of humankind's own FREE WILL.

To a point. We build on faulty anchors and deal with the consequences, foreseen or not. In this gradient thought experiment, our Will is on rails. Just like the computer analogy, to use a train, we have to follow a number of layered protocols. We can change trains, but we still have to ride out the next stretch of track to the next platform.

> If you are a 1, you are adding 1's to the multiverse. You are adding to the grand creation of existence and LIFE.

Agreed, any of these choices lead to new tracks that impact which trains other passengers ride. This journey, taken as a whole, is a expression of the gradient of those choices.

Where to go from here? Beyond systems of logic and gradients, in core of the mind and seat of the Soul, we are swimming in God right Now. This Now. The Now. All we can do with certainty is to enjoy the ride.

That is a leap of faith worth taking!

>>1040

>>1121

> The past is

> holding your Now

> hostage

> for a future

> that never was

Our memories are a construct of perception and experiences, a continual making and reconstruction of events in our personal history. As we retrieve experienced information, those archetypes are patterned or copied from those structures, incorporated to our present state, coloring our experience right now. If our memory is associated with a strong emotion, the more rigid those connections are. Our peak experiences are fondly remembered, and thus provide fuel for our desires. Conversely, if we had burned our hand in the fire, we are more cautious around flames. These copies of structures serve an important function, they allow us to generalize. "Red, hot things cause pain" for example.

Think about how you experience time. Weren't you just a child? Wait, no a teenager. How old are you? Here's the kicker… without thinking about it, how old do you feel?

What you remember of the flashes and sequences of your life and events may just be a running tally of these structures.

>One can create maddeningly relativistic structures, making connections with other inconsistent structures to keep whatever theory running.

The problem is, in this process of building, retrieving and incorporating our archetypes into our present perceptions, we are now deriving information from imperfect copies from the original event, a simulacra. As the simulacrum is incorporated into our present experience, it dulls the present, the Now. We get bored, we daydream, think of ways to experience those high points again, or avoid painful experiences. The passage of time we experience is then a Becoming, we never seem to arrive at the present, the Now.

To further complicate things, we have desires and our Will that drive us to some uncertain wishful future. We then incorporate those desires to our simulacrum to further remove it from any authenticity of our then-Now. All of our anxieties and fears are nothing more than trying to resolve the conflict between our expectations and present condition. In other words, Debrowski's inner mileau and outer mileau.

Time is still time. Our memories are a veil that keep us from authentically experiencing Now.

So, where are we NOW? What if we lay all of our bias and rigidity down and truly experience the Now? In short, it solves a lot of problems. Worries, fear, bias, anxiety, desire, etc… we stop Becoming, and simply Be. Our lives would be richer and more aware, we can enjoy even the most dullsome conditions, and our structures would be more in harmony with our inner and outer mileaus.

Further Reading:

Jean Baudrillard - Simulacra and Simulation

Kazimierz Dabrowski - Personality-Shaping Through Positive Disintegration

Mihaly Csikzentmihalyi - Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience

Martin Heidegger - Being and Time

Jean-Paul Sartre - La Nausée