 | multisenserealism on Multisense Taoism |
 | Marc on Multisense Taoism |
 | ptero9 on Multisense Taoism |
 | Multisense Taoism |… on Continuum of Sense |
| Multisense Taoism |… on War of the Worldviews |
The Art of Shé D'Montford
Transform your life with Astrology
Listen to your inner self..it has all the answers..
Thoughts on life... by Donald B. Wilson
The Blog of Author Steven Colborne
Multimedia Project: Mettā Programming DNA
Astral Lucid Music - Philosophy On Life, The Universe And Everything...
Problems of today, Ideas for tomorrow
one post at a time
Academic Philosophy for a General Audience
Exploring the Origins and Nature of Awareness
BRAINSTORM- An Evolving and propitious Synergy Mode~!
Ruminations on philosophy, psychology, life
For all dangerous minds, your own, or ours, but not the tv shows'... ... ... ... ... ... ... How to hack human consciousness, How to defend against human-hackers, and anything in between... ... ... ... ... ...this may be regarded as a sort of dialogue for peace and plenty for a hungry planet, with no one left behind, ever... ... ... ... please note: It may behoove you more to try to prove to yourselves how we may really be a time-traveler, than to try to disprove it... ... ... ... ... ... ...Enjoy!
“Don’t try to be different. Just be Creative. To be creative is different enough.”
A political blog centralized on current events
Zumwalt Poems Online
postcards from the present moment
Multisense Realism 
Certainly amazing art, if not science.
Thanks Jeff!
stuff is so intriguing!
Thank you!
Seems like I can’t get away from you. I was doing some work with “Dialetheism”, and came across a forum where you commented on it. In the post you mentioned “JC Beall”. I had him for a couple of philosophy courses at Uconn, and we still occasionally exchange comments.
My recent comment to him was, “All possibilities are actualized”. : )
Haha. Hows it going? Happy New Year. I think that Dialetheism is important when it comes to consciousness, since it’s the frame of everything, we can’t expect the frame to follow the rules of the picture. It makes sense that the Totality should transcend either/or expectations that arise within some frame within it.
Why this recent pre-occupation with Energy and force?I thought their was no energy.
From the Absolute perspective, I maintain that there is no literal energy, because there is already affect and effect under sense. You’re right though, I am preoccupied lately with matching up the public side more explicitly with the private side. Even though the public side is ultimately only a recap of nested privacies, our local view gives us a realism that is made of matter and changes to matter (which we call energy). Because the way that matter changes is orderly in a way that matter is not, considering it a separate thing, figuratively, is perfectly ok, just as considering information to be a separate thing is ok too as long as we don’t take it absolutely literally. It’s all in what orientation that we start from. If we put energy on top, then matter and information are equally absorbed. If we put information on top, then matter and energy are absorbed. When it comes to the public side of sense, I put matter on top because that is what we encounter naturally and directly. Unless we are planning to dematerialize into rays of warm light or strange loops of code, I maintain that this is the more grounded and accurate view. Seeing energy as qualia reflected publicly as Δmatter, and information as Δmatter re-reflected back into qualia as quanta, it makes it easier to see the unity of all phenomena stemming from self-masking sense experience.
Sounds like your having fun. Very creative. Very good.
E = C = m
Are affect and effect emergent phenomena?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_phenomena
No, I think that they are the primordial phenomena which appearances of emergence diverge from.
In terms of your equations, matter, energy and sense are one. And, in those terms, sense is the agent that directs the transformation of matter (form) into energy, and vice versa. Thus, all possible visible or invisible particles that you recognize possess sense. Is that right?
Hence, matter and energy are sense.
Atoms and molecules are stated, although we cannot see them with the unaided eye. The smaller particles that make them up become “smaller and smaller”, finally disappearing from the examination of any kind of physical instrument, and these help bridge the gap between unmanifest sense and manifest reality. (?)
“In terms of your equations, matter, energy and sense are one. ”
Not exactly. Matter and energy are sense making itself seem remote. They are objectifications of affect-effect as form, function.
“sense is the agent that directs the transformation of matter (form) into energy, and vice versa”
Sense is all agency. We are sense. We do not transform matter into energy, we just move our selves and focus our attention. From a distance, that looks like energetic changes to matter.
“Thus, all possible visible or invisible particles that you recognize possess sense. Is that right?”
Nothing possesses sense exactly, not forms or functions anyhow. It is sense that possesses everything. What we see as particles may be the tip of the iceberg of an experience that lasts for billions of years and billionths of a second. It looks like particles to us because our experience is inside of it.
“Hence, matter and energy are sense.”
No, I think they are sensible representations of sense. Sense is energy and matter, but all of the matter and energy in the universe put together does not create even one possibility of sense.
“Atoms and molecules are stated, although we cannot see them with the unaided eye. The smaller particles that make them up become “smaller and smaller””
I think just the opposite…there may be nothing that makes up atoms which is like a particle. Instead, they are less-and-less like what we think we are measuring, and more and more like measurement itself. Measurement can be though of as the ‘square root of mass’ – the sense of planting an “effective” flag in shared affect, from which comparisons can be made. This is closer to what matter is, not particles, but circumscribed measurements.
Good questions, btw, it ties in with what I’m about to post.