You are sitting at McD's near the corner to Kings Island Way (Columbia
Road) and Kings Mill Road with your large diet Coke (small mix of Cherry Coke)
and Carol with her medium half diet Coke and high test Coke. Carol is on page
228 of The Columbus Affair. This is after another morning of walking in
Pine Hill Lakes Park in Mason.
1043 hours. Strangely it is rather comforting to know where one is with
some reasonable certainty. I don't know how that is for the Dead. I assume they
have some sort of built in GPS devise that shows them where their private
quarter is.
Orndorff, you forget the heartanmind is in
the soul which takes care of the personal centeredness. - Amorella
That doesn't sound fair. The soul finds something good to nibble on and
from then on sheorhe is stuck with a heartanmind of its own. It sounds like the
soul loses. It's a wonder some old soul doesn't come along and say, "Hey,
you suckers, don't eat that stuff no matter how it tastes. You'll lose your
freedom real fast."
Freedom from what, orndorff? Freedom from
eating what tastes satisfying and really, really good? - Amorella
I don't know. The analogy is losing its flavor like old gum.
What is the difference with a person
deciding to have a purpose or meaning in herorhis life? Once the decision is
made the person loses a portion of herorhis freedom, does sheorhe not? -
Amorella
The decision or purpose is not permanent though. People have different
goals, objectives, purposes, meanings, etc. in their lives as they live through
them.
Ah, but in context with blog and books, who
is one when sheorhe confronts herorhimself when dead. What have you taken with
you? Who are you and how and why did you get where you are when you died? Isn't
the accumulation of one's meaning and purpose in living? - Amorella
I don't know.
Let's bring it home, buddy boy. I haven't
asked you this since you thought I might be an Angel of G---D (you were not
positive one way or another even now). Are you? - Amorella
No, Amorella. I am not. Hypothetically though, today, I say I am a
living being, species Homo sapiens. I am built with the same limited (built in)
physical constraints (needs/desires) of living. Otherwise, who I am is
basically who everyone else is except for my mind, heart, and soul, which are
frozen here in grammatical and word form (with a few sketches). I assume some
of this would go with me when dead as would other peoples' thoughts from
heartansoulanmind. In context with the Merlyn books and the
personal-notes-in-a-blog, what else, except for self-deceptions as they are
also a part of the species, Homo sapiens? I can stand on this and say who I am.
Who can counter it? Who will? In context, no other human being can counter it
with any sense of certainty just as I can not counter in other person's sense
of who sheorhe is, that is, who sheorhe takes from the life experience with
herorhim when dead. (1124)
Carol is discussing her reading; she thinks
it is interesting that Columbus did not bring a priest with him on his first
voyage. Why? You like to she her tackle these things because it brings out her
passion, it brings out who she is in private. All for now. -- You are home.
Post before you change your mind. - Amorella
1306
hours. Subway lunch on the deck; it is probably the first time in two years
according to Carol. It is very nice what with the woods having grown a couple
of feet this summer what with all the rain. Shoot, we even late early. I
haven't changed my mind because I forgot what I thought earlier. People don't
keep thoughts in their head; too much diversion caused by the environment,
people and otherwise. What I need to do is put all this material important to
Pouch 20 in that document so I have something to refer to along the way.
1644 hours. I had a good nap. Checking on line I saw an excellent
article on BBC about the circumstances that set me on my personal study that
eventually ends up with Amorella, at least this is the scientific point of
view.
** **
| 30 July
2013
How the
ouija board really moves
By Tom Stafford
Ouija board cups and dowsing
wands – just two examples of mystical items that seem to move of their own
accord, when they are really being moved by the people holding them. The only
mystery is not one of a connection to the spirit world, but of why we can make
movements and yet not realise that we're making them.
The phenomenon is called the ideomotor
effect and you can witness it yourself if you hang a small weight like
a button or a ring from a string (ideally more than a foot long). Hold the end
of the string with your arm out in front of you, so the weight hangs down
freely. Try to hold your arm completely still. The weight will start to swing
clockwise or anticlockwise in small circles. Do not start this motion yourself.
Instead, just ask yourself a question – any question – and say that the weight
will swing clockwise to answer "Yes" and anticlockwise for
"No". Hold this thought in mind, and soon, even though you are trying
not to make any motion, the weight will start to swing in answer to your
question.
Magic? Only the ordinary
everyday magic of consciousness. There's no supernatural force at work, just
tiny movements you are making without realising. The string allows these
movements to be exaggerated, the inertia of the weight allows them to be
conserved and built on until they form a regular swinging motion. The effect is
known as Chevreul's Pendulum, after the 19th Century French scientist who
investigated it.
What is happening with
Chevreul's Pendulum is that you are witnessing a movement (of the weight)
without "owning" that movement as being caused by you. The same basic
phenomenon underlies dowsing – where small movements of the hands cause the dowsing
wand to swing wildly – or the Ouija board, where multiple people hold a cup and
it seems to move of its own accord to answer questions by spelling out letters.
This effect also underlies the
sad case of "facilitated communication", a fad
whereby carers believed they could help severely disabled children communicate
by guiding their fingers around a keyboard. Research showed that the carers –
completely innocently – were typing the messages themselves, rather than
interpreting movements from their charges.
The interesting thing about the
phenomenon is what it says about the mind. That we can make movements that we
don't realise we're making suggests that we shouldn't be so confident in our
other judgements about what movements we think are ours. Sure enough, in the
right circumstances, you can get people to believe they have caused things that
actually come from a completely independent source (something which shouldn't
surprise anyone who has reflected on the madness of people who claim that it
only started raining because they forget an umbrella).
You can read what this means
for the nature of our minds in The
Illusion of Conscious Will by psychologist Daniel Wegner, who sadly died last month. Wegner argued that our
normal sense of owning an action is an illusion, or – if you will – a
construction. The mental processes which directly control our movements are not
connected to the same processes which figure out what caused what, he claimed.
The situation is not that of a
mental command-and-control structure like a disciplined army; whereby a general
issues orders to the troops, they carry out the order and the general gets back
a report saying "Sir! We did it. The right hand is moving into
action!". The situation is more akin to an organised collective, claims
Wegner: the general can issue orders, and watch what happens, but he's never
sure exactly what caused what. Instead, just like with other people, our
consciousness (the general in this metaphor) has to apply some principles to
figure out when a movement is one we've made.
One of these principles is that
cause has to be consistent with effect. If you think "I'll move my
hand" and your hand moves, you're likely to automatically get the feeling
that the movement was one you made. The principle is broken when the thought is
different from the effect, such as with Chevreul's Pendulum. If you think
"I'm not moving my hand", you are less inclined to connect any small
movements you make with such large visual effects.
This maybe explains why kids can
shout "It wasn't me!" after breaking something in plain sight. They
thought to themselves "I'll just give this a little push", and when
it falls off the table and breaks it doesn't feel like something they did.
From: http://bbc.com/future/story/20130729
** **
The
key here, from my, Amorella's, perspective has been underlined by orndorff.
** **
You can read what this means
for the nature of our minds in The
Illusion of Conscious Will by psychologist Daniel Wegner, who sadly died last month. Wegner argued that our
normal sense of owning an action is an illusion, or – if you will – a
construction. The mental processes which directly control our movements are not
connected to the same processes which figure out what caused what, he claimed.
The situation is not that of a
mental command-and-control structure like a disciplined army; whereby a general
issues orders to the troops, they carry out the order and the general gets back
a report saying "Sir! We did it. The right hand is moving into
action!". The situation is more akin to an organised collective, claims
Wegner: the general can issue orders, and watch what happens, but he's never
sure exactly what caused what. Instead, just like with other people, our
consciousness (the general in this metaphor) has to apply some principles to
figure out when a movement is one we've made.
** **
The
'automatic writing throughout this blog is an organized collective [of an
individual's consciousness]. To you this is what 'ghost writing' really is. You
have never professed that it is supernatural because you have never completely
seen it that way even in the one time mystical dance you saw yourself as
dancing and not dancing both at once. For you this connects with yesterday's
Wikipedia article on Schrödinger's
cat:
** **
Yet, when one looks in the box, one sees the
cat either alive or dead, not both alive and dead. This
poses the question of when exactly quantum superposition ends and reality
collapses into one possibility or the other.
Wikipedia - Schrödinger's cat
** **
From your perspective (and you can see the reasoning through segments of
your blog) you see this as similar to a "quantum superposition" of
being in two places at once or as with the Dancing with an Angel of G---D
(really myself) being in existence and not in existence at the same time. This
is/was a subjective feeling that allows/ed your psychological detachment from
both events at once; don't you think? - Amorella
1713 hours. I agree that imaginary or not, you can better express my
sense of things in words than I can.
Thus, here we are. Post. - Amorella
You do consider yourself real.
In context to your grand experiment in
automatic writing, I have no choice. Otherwise the reasoning would fall apart.
I provide you the "willing suspension of disbelief" as Samuel Taylor
Coleridge would say about his "Rime of the Ancient Mariner".
1719
hours. This makes sense to me. In context it makes no difference if you are
real or imaginary. - rho
That is indeed what makes this notes-blog
and Merlyn books fiction. Post. - Amorella
What can I say?
No comments:
Post a Comment