Deep Philosophy

[Rock Chalk]

Hey everyone. This is a conversation by me and Josh a while back (I hope he doesn't get mad).

Anyway, we had a really fascinating conversation that kinda jumped around but touched on some interesting topics and I figured if I posted them, we could get some of the intellectuals (yep, we have TONS of those right? ) on the board to throw in their two cents.

Please, refrain from name calling and smack and going off topic (not that there is a specific topic here). This thread is designed to promote thought, beliefs, and general scientific theory. It doesn't have to be right, it doesn't even have to be someone else's theory. Here, you can take a theory, add to it, dissect it, and expand on it. Again, please call no one stupid or a moron or an idiot because you may not agree with the theory or opinion, just explain why you disagree and present your own (if you have one).

Anyway, here goes....

[Rock Chalk]

Hey ames, I thought I would throw some things your way. Some of superstring stuff may be over simplified (if what I typed could in anyway be construed as "simplified") or a little inaccurate. As I say I am a layman on the subject and could barely understand the physics and theory without reading over and over again.

(First some thoughts from me)
[You know when you get Deja vu? That could be just glimpses of another experience from another time. A reality in which the universe begins and ends and begins again and ends again, always repeating, never ending, never changing.

This could be both bad and good. The bad is that we cannot change our ultimate demise and doom, the good is that we are essentially immortal, living our lives over and over and over and over for eternity. ]

(now the cool stuff)
The superstring theory is really quite a fascinating take on reality (universe I do not feel completely covers all of reality). I think it might be a bit drug induced, as someone had to have been smoking something to come up with it, but it is interesting nonetheless. Im a layman on the matter but from what I understand, a single atom or sub atomic particle moves through time forwards, reaching the end of time, then reverses direction, sometimes bumping into itself in time and "fusing" to create another atom or molecule. The single atom continually moves back and forth through time and all the things that exist are just combinations of that single atom as it interacted with itself while moving endlessly back and forth through time. (a side effect of this is multiple universes as the change of that first atom affecting itself will change the timeline of that first atom while it was in its initial stage of travel (now, no longer just a single atom, but a fused atom travelling now in reverse in time, the same as the other atom in the other universe, but never having made it to the end and each one as it interacts with itself through its course creates a new time line and hence a new universe, each one slightly different than the other, oh it hurts the head to think about.)

So then, is God that single first atom? That all powerful Creator of all the universes? Indeed, if this theory were to be proven, then one could surmise that our Creator was but a mere atom and that we are indeed made in its image. That everything that exists is part of the Creator and cannot be separated from the Creator. In a way, the Creator is omnipotent and omniscient because the Creator is everything, matter, energy, dark matter, the void in space, EVERYTHING. That is true omnipotence and true omniscience.

Lets look at not the beginning, but the end. If, at the end, gravity no longer can hold the matter together in the universe and each atom is separated from one another by distances so large that the small amount of gravity they do exert does not influence the closest of its neighbors, then what happens? There is lots of postulation that the Universe will implode at that moment and everything that exists will fall at incredible speeds (on the power of the Speed of light to the speed of light's power(186,000 mps to the 186,000 mps power, that's a big number). At the moment of implosion at that speeds and the energy it would produce would be enough to cause the "Big Bang" all over again, and perhaps the end is really the beginning of a new universe. If it is the beginning of a new universe, how many have ever existed? How many exist right now? Is time not linear but circular in nature? Perhaps we merely travel in a great circle in time, at some point we start moving backwards. Think about that because it makes much sense. Everything we see is a circle. Electrons whiz around a nucleus in a circular orbit. Planets revolve around the sun in a circular orbit while spinning on an axis in a circular manner. The Circle of life itself is another good example. Things seem to come full circle and it has manifested itself in our culture and our thoughts. History repeats itself, as individuals we will continue to make the same mistakes over and over again and sometimes we learn but many times we do not.

I dunno, sorry I rambled on there, most people I know are too stupid to understand anything like this so I try to take advantage of any time I get a chance to have a philosophical/scientifc discussion.

Alec

[Rock Chalk]

Alec,

on your thoughts per deja vu - this is interesting in that i've not met anyone that really wanted to or presented this angle of deja vu. I've not thought about it much on that in the sense we couldn't change our path etc, like a groundhog day type of deal. would we be living our lives over and over again on different 'planes' of existence, where sometimes (as you state possible glimpses from another expierence or time) it bleeds through and causes deja vu (i think we are sort of on the same page with that concept).

I think deja vu is more like a bleeding over from different times and expierences of 'us' - but I don't think it's repetative as a whole. Let me further try to explain:

I'll give you an example: Two of my best friends not that long ago were in a situation where it involved a girl, and she went from friend a to friend b - well as it turned out i was the integral part of keeping them friends, isntead of the situation exploding, it more or less just kinda cooled down. They still remain friends. Now from a deja vu/past life deal - did they keep having this same type of issue until the cycle was broken? And if so, in future instances of 'them' would they not interact with each other anymore since this situation/lesson is learned? I don't feel that (my opinion) that situations will be like reruns in that the exact same thing happens (i could be wrong, afterall i'm not god ) maybe situations in a kharma sense is what i'm more after.... (We can discuss that further)

Interesting on god being the first atom that moved through space fusing with itself to and from beginning/end of time - it's interesting how (at least my feeble mind) interprets the creation/change in new universes - almost like dimensions (similiar but different) -

God as the first atom - and we are made in its image:

Alec - i have been studying divine theulergy (i am pretty sure i spelled that wrong for you, there's some words that i'm forever stuck on spelling wrong) - anyway one of the lessons is 'as above so below' and how it correlates to our relationship to the creator. On how above and below us are reflections of what we are, but the level of perception we are in doesn't allow us to see the full picture. One reason that it correlates to how man and the cosmos is more in common in relation than not. (and the atom actually kinda fills in some gaps for me) - also interesting how atom sounds like adam (just connecting things, even if they are wrong, don't be scared inside of my head ) - since in my teachings they talk of an adam (i forget the 'lastname' they assign to him) as being the heavenly man -

true omnipotence and omniscience from the creator being 1 atom and we are all made up of it, truley brings another angle and though into my studies as well - that i've not htought about, and makes actually some christian dogma more sensible to me on gnostic levels of such power. I had always fallen into the trap in looking for the big picture of god, instead of the building block of life - the atom - and this theory certainly reminds me of discussing with friends what if we are just an atom in something else -

The circular theory of time is also interesting - for i've not thought of time in a circle - i've used more of... the double helix/dna model of time (which kinda explains deja vu, in that when the helix's cross maybe that's how deja vu comes through) - and the 'endgame' of the universe imploding with the 'timeline' moving in a circle is very much as possible as anything i've read (including the holographic universe) - which ties in the whole theory you outlined pretty well....


I studied with a hindu for a while, and i remember she told me: Sometimes there are those people who learn very slowly and will take many lifetimes to understand their challenges.

I know i'm a bit scattered, but i had a little bit to try to do this in at work... i can elaborate if needed...

~josh

[Rock Chalk]

amesj523 wrote on 04-02-2003 11:29 AM:
Alec,

on your thoughts per deja vu - this is interesting in that i've not met anyone that really wanted to or presented this angle of deja vu. I've not thought about it much on that in the sense we couldn't change our path etc, like a groundhog day type of deal. would we be living our lives over and over again on different 'planes' of existence, where sometimes (as you state possible glimpses from another expierence or time) it bleeds through and causes deja vu (i think we are sort of on the same page with that concept).



Really, I think this is more of a modification on some very old ideas. The Matrix, which, Im not sure if you were aware or not, is almost a direct modern equivalent to Plato's "The Republic" specifically the Analogy of the Cave. The "deja vu" scene in that movie got me thinking about some of the other theories on physical realities and it just kind of hit me one day, particularly after re-reading up on the superstring theories.
quote:


I think deja vu is more like a bleeding over from different times and expierences of 'us' - but I don't think it's repetative as a whole. Let me further try to explain:


This is very much the same as my belief.
quote:


I'll give you an example: Two of my best friends not that long ago were in a situation where it involved a girl, and she went from friend a to friend b - well as it turned out i was the integral part of keeping them friends, isntead of the situation exploding, it more or less just kinda cooled down. They still remain friends. Now from a deja vu/past life deal - did they keep having this same type of issue until the cycle was broken? And if so, in future instances of 'them' would they not interact with each other anymore since this situation/lesson is learned? I don't feel that (my opinion) that situations will be like reruns in that the exact same thing happens (i could be wrong, afterall i'm not god ) maybe situations in a kharma sense is what i'm more after.... (We can discuss that further)


Perhaps, if they are not equally repetetive, then they are somewhat different, some minor detail where in one timeline the atom goes this way and in another it goes that way, thus the changing of the the physical realms very nature. If in one world you have green eyes, in another you may have blue, or the differences could indeed be far more severe. It is possible that some of us only exist in a minor, small fraction of the total universes because atoms that needed to be moved in a certain way were not. More on this later.
quote:


Interesting on god being the first atom that moved through space fusing with itself to and from beginning/end of time - it's interesting how (at least my feeble mind) interprets the creation/change in new universes - almost like dimensions (similiar but different) -

God as the first atom - and we are made in its image:


That was more of a metaphorical position. Many scientists are conflicted with their traditional beliefs in God and the scientific method to which they have dedicated their lives. In a sense, the Creator is God.
quote:


Alec - i have been studying divine theulergy (i am pretty sure i spelled that wrong for you, there's some words that i'm forever stuck on spelling wrong) - anyway one of the lessons is 'as above so below' and how it correlates to our relationship to the creator. On how above and below us are reflections of what we are, but the level of perception we are in doesn't allow us to see the full picture. One reason that it correlates to how man and the cosmos is more in common in relation than not. (and the atom actually kinda fills in some gaps for me) - also interesting how atom sounds like adam (just connecting things, even if they are wrong, don't be scared inside of my head ) - since in my teachings they talk of an adam (i forget the 'lastname' they assign to him) as being the heavenly man -


"One reason that it correlates to how man and the cosmos is more in common in relation than not." This particlar sentences strikes much intrigue Ames, because you can see this very debate in other forums besides the philosophical. It has usurped its head into the "man made" vs "natural" ideologies. Technically, everything "man made" is natural. We are unable to create new matter, we may only manipulate matter and change its form. We do it in our bodies from Oxygen to Carbon Dioxide, we do it with advanced composites, steel. Yet the debate rages and we are not considered "culturally" to be part of the "natural world". How can we be separate from the natural world if we are indeed all and one the same. "The Correspondence Point" reflects this. That's the idea that all things exist in one point in one dimension in one place. One wonders how this can be, but when time is taken into consideration (which may be infinite, or infitinately rotating), then all things can exist in one point in reality, just on different timelines. (Very wierd stuff that)
quote:


true omnipotence and omniscience from the creator being 1 atom and we are all made up of it, truley brings another angle and though into my studies as well - that i've not htought about, and makes actually some christian dogma more sensible to me on gnostic levels of such power. I had always fallen into the trap in looking for the big picture of god, instead of the building block of life - the atom - and this theory certainly reminds me of discussing with friends what if we are just an atom in something else -

The circular theory of time is also interesting - for i've not thought of time in a circle - i've used more of... the double helix/dna model of time (which kinda explains deja vu, in that when the helix's cross maybe that's how deja vu comes through) - and the 'endgame' of the universe imploding with the 'timeline' moving in a circle is very much as possible as anything i've read (including the holographic universe) - which ties in the whole theory you outlined pretty well....


Well, science now knows for certain that time is not linear (as has been proven over and over again through even minute variations in which the rate of time flows) and it has to do with speed. If, then, it is not linear and follows no straight path, then it is conceivable that it will finish where it started, if not in a circle, then some meandering shape that is closed off with no beginning and no end. It's very peculiar for me to think of time in such a way, I look at my watch and I see the second hand go by and I realize that time is passing. I cannot imagine it moving faster or slower (though I may perceive it to be so with varying situations-slow work day-time flies when your having fun-time seemed to stop before I had the accident, etc. I think is just perception of time, not time actually changing). If, time travels in reverse at times as it meanders along its course, could then this be why we suffer from deja vu? Suddenly feeling as if we had done this very thing (as time reversed itself we might not quite be aware of its reversal, only the forward progress of time). Wierd stuff man.
quote:



I studied with a hindu for a while, and i remember she told me: Sometimes there are those people who learn very slowly and will take many lifetimes to understand their challenges.

I know i'm a bit scattered, but i had a little bit to try to do this in at work... i can elaborate if needed...

~josh

[Rock Chalk]

Interesting that you should mention Hindu. That, and Buddhism philosophies (ideologies, religions whatever) fit well with these theories in that there is that whole circle of life and death and rebirth theme throughout each one. An ultimate "Nirvana" as is the case in Buddhism might be equivalent to the utopian time line of our single atom racing back and forth through time, perhaps even the very goal of the atom's journey in the first place. And what happens if the atom stops its journey through time? Does time stop? If so, is time merely an abstract creation as a result of the atom's existence?

You know Josh, i never thought I would philosophize about this kind of thing when I was younger. Thought it was a waste of time. Probably still is a waste of time, but its fun as hell to speculate without having to do any real difficult research (other than looking up some stuff in books or on the net).

[Rock Chalk]

I've always been interested in such matters at an early age. Not so much as deep as it's gotten the more i learn and expierence - but i have an 'authority' problem more with just absolute authority

I'll respond further to your statements then -

I'd like to move on to something we touched on: "One reason that it correlates to how man and the cosmos is more in common in relation than not."

__

According to the Zohar, the Heavenly Man constituted the first Sephiroth, or divine emanations. Before creation God was without form, above and beyond all attributes. But when He had created the Heavenly Man He used him as a Chariot in which to descend. This is what i've learned more in with my studies (divine thuergy is more or less kabbalistic magic, heavy in old jewish mysticism) - in adam ketoth or something ( i will look it up) is the heavenly man, who knows - maybe back in the day - when a divine being stepped down and told man of some secrets of the universe, when they said atom, maybe the writers wrote 'adam' - also interesting how when 'adam split there was eve' - just throwing some bones out there....

but i've never felt inspiration of thought of who we are, where we came from and where we are going to be a waste of time, to me a man who doesn't ponder such issues and merley is a cog in a machine is wasting a valuable expierence that we will not have again.

Not too long ago adam ( i keep wanting to type alec) - i had a 'breakthrough' in my life, i was negative and pissed off and wondered why such a being as god made my life miserable, and that's when i realized perception is reality. My perception was focused on the negative, not the positive -

Since then i've had things happen, such as: Instincts/intuition are better, don't seem to have as many problems - etc - not to mention i just seem to get things at the right time, example: I plan on moving to seattle, but i was unemployed, next thing i know i get a contract for a few months, enough to get me to seattle - other things as well -

Again, i can and do plan on replaying to most of your responses, but i felt lazy and digressed today...

~josh

[Rock Chalk]

OK ames, one thing I wanted to mention about the "Adam" "atom" similarity. Different languages.

Atom is a ancient Greek word coined by either Socrates or Plato which I believe literally translates into "smallest part". (I could be a little inaccurate on that though).

Adam is ancient Hebrew and translates as "Man of the Earth". Now while one might be able to argue that when it was translated into Greek from the original Hebrew that the confusion exists EXCEPT that the Greeks were phenomenal linguists and had extensive knowledge on all the languages of the Mediterranean coastlines (which included Egyptian, Latin and Hebrew as well as some of the Macedonian dialects of northern Greece and the Etruscan dialects of the Italian peninsula (which as far as I can tell is the mother language of the Latin family, predating Latin itself)).

As such, the Greeks are not likely to have made this grievous error. Their skill with language can be seen on the Rosetta stone and the original ancient Greek translations of the Hebrew Old Testament (which, you will find, are remarkably close to Hebrew, more so than English translations).

Now the thought of God being formless until the dawn of man is very intriguing and I do look forward to what you have to say about it. I will have to ponder that a while.

[Rock Chalk]

oh i do know that adam/atom are different - but how i write i like to play with words... such as rain/reign, etc -

i feel if our discussion has turned into a scholarly discussion with true needs for thought before response (nothing at all wrong with that BTW) -

God being formless until the dawn of man:

I have one perspective right now, and i'll follow up with a more 'gnostic' type one at the end:

You ever think at times, that enough people believed in something it would come true, like a mass consicnous (sorry for the spelling) pooling type of thing - where maybe god didn't have form until enough people 'believed' in him...

In the Kabbalah, the Primordial Man is spoken of as Adam Kadmon (that name i been tellin' ya about), and, in the Lurianic Kabbalah this symbol becomes a pivotal notion linking god, man, and the world. adam kadmon, as the first being to emerge from the infinite Godhead, Ein-sof (nothing, limitless), is essentially indistinguishable from the deity, yet at the same time his body is said to both emanate and constitute the world. Man, having been created in Gods image, is said by the Kabbalists to be comprised of the very same cosmic elements (superstring theory possibly ties in?), the sefirot (position on tree of life), which comprise the "body" of Adam Kadmon. The symbol of Adam Kadmon expresses the idea that the cosmos itself has both a soul and body very much like that of man, and that the world too is garbed in the interest, value and Eros which is normally thought to be the exclusive province of humankind.

~josh

[Rock Chalk]

Ok, I understood the play on words, I thought you were trying to make the connection between the words and a possible mistranslation

You said something of peculiar interest to me because of my own thoughts upon this matter.

You asked if I ever believed at times that if enough people believed in something it becomes true: Yes.

Here's why. You can go bog this down with scientific methodology and explain the things you are doing, but the fact is, we couldn't go to the moon until JFK had us believing we could get there. We couldn't create the nuclear bomb until Hitler's attempts at doing so proved to us that we HAD to before him. We could not fly, and indeed no one believed we could fly (powered flight) until the Wright Brothers lifted off from Kitty Hawk.

Now, you can argue that we have been able to do these things because of science, but I can also argue that if no one puts any faith (because thats what it is, faith) into science, then science is no more useful to us than religion is to a scientist. We don't fly if people refuse to get on an airplane. We don't go to the moon if no one believes it is possible (and thus no one tries).

What is possible is only limited by the imaginations of the human mind. We make up our reality by our thoughts. This ties into some very strange quantum theories: The dual locality for example: You have a box, inside that box there is a cat. The box is closed. Without opening that box you know that the cat is either dead or alive, it has to be one or the other...or does it? What if the cat is both dead and alive within that box and its single state can only be revealed by opening the box to either a dead or a live cat, whichever the person opening the box chooses to perceive. Now, before we open that box, the cat exists in two states, both dead and alive, but when we open that box, we define the reality that the cat is EITHER dead or alive, but not both. In this sense, we define our very realities.

I know what you are thinking "How can a cat be both dead and alive?" Well, the same way light is both a particle and a wave. We can perceive it either way and we are right both ways and yet we cannot perceive it BOTH ways at the SAME time. Even though, quantumly it IS both particle and wave at the SAME time, we cannot (as far as I know) illustrate this. We can do one experiment showing it is a particle and another showing it is a wave but we cannot show that it is both particle and wave at the same time. Likewise for the cat, once we open the box, we perceive the cat in an either or state, but we cannot perceive it both ways at the same time (even though it really does exist both ways at the same time).

My point is, we create the reality of the cat being either alive or dead in this instance, but we must open the box first. Before science, religion dominated, before religion, mysticism dominated (as can be seen by so many cultures), and before that who knows, but whichever predominating theory the MASS of the people on Earth shared was the way the world was perceived. Perception is reality (to steal a quote from one of the posters here), if we perceive ourselves to be mystical and magical, then we are! Indeed, walk amongst the woods and close your eyes, listen carefully and use all your senses and you will feel something hidden just under the surface, something you can't quite put your finger on, something that has been hidden from you (in the name of science!). Mysticism, religion and science are at odds with one another. Science would love to discredit mysticism (which it continually tries to do) and religion (i think science is not ready to take on religion for a battle of faith of the people), but because religion is so firmly entrenched into our hearts and minds we choose not to accept that science which might be in contradiction to our beliefs.

Now, if you are lost, dont feel bad because I get lost on quantum theories as well and I only understand this because a very smart person explained it to me in very simple terms. I tried to explain it to you the way it was explained to me (not sure if I did a good job of it though).

More later, have to do some research on some things. I gotta go check out the Kabbal (weren't they Jews from like Spain and dealt with Bible Code?) and make sure I know where you are coming from.

[Rock Chalk]

Well i'd like to take credit on the perception is reality statement- - i don't know if i can - i know i argued with glory mule on such topics many times... but that's just my ego talkin'

I've often believed that we do influence our perception. I feel i've expierenced this first hand. My pops was schizophrenic and committed suicide when i was 7. From about ages 7-21 I spent the time angry and ticked off. I wondered how so much bad luck and how much suck in life could be just for me when everyone has it so much easier.

One day i woke up, and everything was bright, was no longer tinted and tainted. I'm much more positive, but still attracted to the dark side of humanity (for my arts purposes in poetry, music, etc) but now instead of trying to convey that feeling, i'm trying to convey to people to recognize when you get stuck in such things and how they do affect you...

If you haven't seen this movie, i suggest you rent it - "In the Mouth Of Madness" - it's a move done by John Carpenter - based off of ideas by HP Lovecraft (My personal favorite author of his genre).

And i think we are both in agreement on the power of 'faith' in terms of how it affects what is happening.... sometimes it makes me nervous when so many people are willing to accept and believe in ideas that are so fearful and negative.....

on the kabbal jews - i'm not sure EXACTLY what sect they are - but the tree of life teachings are the same for my QBL teachings -

it's funny sometimes, i once learned einstien used science in conjunction with the QBL - in terms of explaing how the creator set things up - etc -

Just food for though....

~Josh

[alkemical]

:bows:

[Hogan11]

Things I Don't Believe In:

RIGHT and WRONG
"People just make up what's right and wrong to serve their needs. Needs change, and so does right and wrong--for each culture, person and moment."

GOD
"Maybe there is some old guy with a long white beard sitting on a throne. Sure I'd be surprised...but would it really make any difference?

FREEDOM
"Many people sacrifice much for freedom...But more people run from freedom in terror."

JUSTICE
"One person's justice is another person's outrage."

FAMILY
"A family is a group of people who resent each other and wouldn't even be friends if they weren't so codependent. That may be sacred to some, but not to me."

LOVE
"It comes and goes. It brings happiness and misery. You might as well believe in the gag reflex."

MY SENSES
"Anyone who has drank as much as I have knows the senses are not trustworthy. Anyone who has been fooled by a magician should know the same thing."

ORDER IN THE UNIVERSE
"Just tell me what a disordered universe would look like. I can't imagine it would be any different than this one."

This is the Way I Think the World Is:

People prefer self-delusion.

Belief in God and spirits is an expression of powerlessness.

Belief in morality is an expression of self-hatred.

The world is random and chaotic.

Magic is only tricks. Tricks are always done in the simplest way, but the eye is misdirected because people love to be fooled.

I have no control over anything.

I am alone.

Death is nothing. Then we rot and fall apart.

I like it this way and.......

I could be wrong about any of these things.

Discuss
__________________

[Rock Chalk]

Right and Wrong are morality issues and are different very every culture, society and person. Agreed.

God exists. I cannot prove it but you cannot disprove it. Impossible for me to discuss further with you since you lack belief.

freedom is simultaneously the most coveted aspect of society and the most feared. True freedom is a terrifying thing.

I partially agree with you on justice. Yes justice for one is another's outrage but in most cases, (speaking of real justice here, not the false justice that is handed out by governments) the outrage is caused by those who have been affected by the one that has had justice served upon him/herself. Justice fits the majority, not the minority. (i am not speaking of race here, do not misconstrue that).

Family, well, I can only suspect you have none of your own. That you have never held a baby girl or baby boy that was born from your own seed. Perhaps I am mistaken, perhaps not, but I have seen too many people with similar feelings as your own changed literally over night when their family has first begun.

Love is human emotion and multi-faceted. It comes and goes for many but not all.

Senses, you Kierkegaardian you He said the same thing and in a way I believe him. Trust not the senses, for they will mislead you.

Order (Stasis), Chaos (Dynamism), Entropy (decay/birth). This is the cycle of reality. All things move in cycles, so too does reality.

People do prefer self-delusion.

belief in God and/or spirits may be an expression of powerlessness, or it is an expression of faith. Faith exists in all humans, be it in God or science. I bet you had faith that when you clicked the "Post Reply" button that your post would end up on the message board, in tact, where it belonged.

Belief in morality is essential for society to continue.

The world is fixed, destiny takes hold, there is nothing random. Chaotic yes, random no. There is meaning, even if we do not yet see it.

Magic is wonder of the unknown.

I have control over only my thoughts.

I am not alone. God walks with me.

Death is the greatest thrill of all. That's why it was saved for last.

Perception is truth and the lie. I love it this way. It keeps me on my toes.

You are wrong about everything and nothing. It is the way of things.

[alkemical]

Right vs. Wrong -

I do believe there is a right and wrong that walks common ground. However there is no defined or set definition of either of those to a point. I think that anything that harms another individual can be wrong. As in - if you mug someone for $20 - that act of violence is wrong - now if you mug someone for $20 because you need to eat - you still commit an act of violence - but - we'd have to understand the situation and circumstances and thus try to get down the basics. I've had no money before and had no inclination to mug someone for $20 - i'd rather go and be a slave and chuck beef and get my money.

God - I know there is a god, but it's not with an understanding of traditional concepts of religion. I view god as the nothing, the grand architecht that is all - But i don't view god as a male or female - god is just the 3 veils of ain - I've seen to much to not believe in a God -

Freedom - There is no such thing as freedom - freedom is only a matter of choice. Being tricked into believing you are free - is a point that all gov't try to place on you. We aren't free here, we wouldn't be free anywhere. And there's different levels to being free. You can have freedom as far as rules, or you can have freedom in your mind -

Justice is and will be served by kharmic resolutions. ALot of people will disagree with me here. And if you were 'free' you wouldn't care about justice to an extent.

Family - I have family and i'm glad i have some of them - others are just nasty and i wouldn't be nice to them if i didn't have to share the same blood line. You can develop just as tight a bond with people you aren't related with.

Love - always comes and always goes - but it is the only pure thing in the world.

My senses just trick me into believing this existence is real and not a dream of my higher self -

Order in the Universe - due to laws and cycles that have been setup, there is order - but you have to learn how it is ordered and what happens happens for a reason that has been setup. Coincidences there are not -

Magic exists - and the reason it does exist - is because it shows that this reality is just an illusion - But it's not the magic you might be thinkin