the turn is always ours

Does maya (our dreaming) exist as a 4D screen in the
brain which is able to produce or note the environment via its senses and can respond and calculate? Yet
reality is
always just
around the corner?
What does a corner look like?
How do we see corners? From the inside or outside?

Is maya where we see and hear and feel and smell and taste while the good and bad happen but does not cause the good and bad times but is a witness, a record?

Does the dreaming brain make good and bad possible? So how do we find reality? Is the only way to become it?

Maya is virtual reality, so is maya enough? For most?

Reality just doesn’t care if
it’s discovered or not.
So the turn is
always
ours.
We are
always at bat.

Am I
the one who
makes comments
to and about the maya? Or
am I maya through and through? Or am I both?
An identity and commentator created
by nature and fitting
perfectly
into
the
dream
world where
things  are only partially here and partially true.

Where would we be without dreaming?
Would we be beings of about
five million years
ago?

Bernie’s got my vote!

Aren’t
many of the best
solutions usually simple?

The Scandinavian countries use the power
of capitalism to generate wealth
and then use the wealth
to make sure

everyone in
their country is
taken care of. Making
sure everyone is cared for is
called socialism. So, it seems the
remedy is not capitalism or socialism…

but their combination is.

The solution yielding the quickest
and the best changes for
the betterment of
everyone
could
turn out to be…
taking the money out of politics.

Everyone is being cared for
and getting as much
education
as can
be
held, and
opportunity is still
present because capitalism is still present.

The only difference is the rich are still rich but not filthy rich. Everyone has a shot at having it all, health and happiness and the vicissitudes which go with them.

Idealistic but doable. We have the model so why not be wise and follow it. It’s proven to work. Maybe the greatest part of our history is yet to be written.

Bernie’s got my vote!

comfort and hope

What are the classical religions? Are they very old and compelling traditions based on beliefs and promises passed on by the living to the next generation? Memes.

What is religion’s purpose? Is it to capture (save) large numbers of humans by giving them comfort and hope based on the promise of having a wonderful and never ending existence after death? Who can’t see the opportunity in that?

Organized religion is one of the greatest tools for herding humans. Nothing is wrong with this unless the power is abused by leaders. History is full of horrific examples of organized religion being used to abuse human beings.

Religion is the territory of belief and faith which makes for an interesting game of comfort and hope. But…

The odds are very high there is no afterlife, and if true, evildoers will not get their promised eternity of suffering, and the odds are exactly the same for believers to not receive their eternal rewards.

Is living not being able to know for sure what’s going to happen in the future the best way to live? Is it because the odds of an omnipotent, warlike, and vengeful god calling all the shots are so small, the god might as well be nonexistent.

Did the idea of a god existing come about to explain good and bad events as many have suggested and then did leaders pounce on the power of belief?

wasting time

Does time have a cost?

Does time cost a lot because the normal use of time takes time away from more important things?

What are these more important things? Are they opportunities? And opportunities usually have a time limit.

Is wasting time a luxury most of us think we can’t afford, but we do it anyway? Why? Don’t we need to be able to waste time or have some sort of downtime?

Does it turn out that “wasting time” is good for us because quality insights are more likely to come about when others might say we were wasting time? It’s common during a period of relaxation when we aren’t straining to come up with our breakthrough idea for “the idea” to show up.

Having some type of recording equipment close by is a good idea. “You never know what the tide will bring in.” (A quote from what movie?)

We never know what

may pop out of

a prepared

brain.

Spinoza (taken from Wikipedia)

The remaining twenty-one years of his life established Spinoza as the most dangerous man in Europe, read secretly everywhere in spite of the official prohibition of his few texts.

The most explosive of those published in his lifetime was the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus of 1670, a tract which portrayed God as the immanent cause of the natural world, and nothing more.

Employing his training as a Hebraist, Spinoza pointed out the startling coincidence between biblical authors and the ideas about God and law that they put forth.

Undertaking an extensive investigation of the motivations of each author, he showed that what generations had taken to be the deep truths of Scripture were really just the result of various authorial perspectives, and often ignorant ones at that.

Not understanding nature, and desiring the universe to be shaped according to their own personal natures, these authors called ordinary events miraculous and ventured absurd and self-serving notions of how God worked in the universe.

Pressing the point further, in the notorious Chapter VI, Spinoza argued against the reality of miracles, stating that they were either ordinary events viewed by people unschooled in the workings of nature or fits of imagination bleeding over into reality.

The God of Spinoza does not act in the world, does not have emotions, does not support one people over another, does not wish for things, and does not ask for worship. He is, rather, the substance underlying the universe, a completely indifferent source of natural law to whom prayers and sacrifice are nothing whatsoever.

This view of God, one who could not be bribed or pleased, and who offered neither punishment nor advice, was a trident in the heart of standard theology.

While theologians argued over aspects of God and definitions of good and evil, Spinoza offered the sober reality that, if even the authors of the Bible couldn’t clear away their local historical prejudices in interpreting God’s nature, a man coming thousands of years later, with an incomplete knowledge of the base languages involved and a totally different historical context, had no chance of saying anything except the pre-existing content of his own religious fancy.

Good and evil are just what we call things that are useful and appealing to us or not, but nature makes no such distinction. Tragedy is inflicted upon the innocent as often as triumph is meted out to the villainous, all following rigidly mechanical laws emanating from the structure of the universe, and there’s nothing to be done about any of it.

He would expand these ideas in his posthumous masterwork, the Ethics, which had to be smuggled out of his house in an unmarked crate lest it fall into the wrong hands and be destroyed in manuscript. It is a towering work which attempted to display Spinoza’s complete system with geometric precision, the philosophical counterpart of Euclid’s Elements. It was his final statement of belief, and if written in a more sober tone than the Tractatus, was even more radical in its content.

Since God is essentially just a nom de guerre for nature, and nature is governed entirely by mechanistic cause and effect, there can be no such thing as free will in any meaningful sense. Rather, there are just people, striving to actualize their personal natures to the fullest extent possible, and forming societies to do so.

When such people come across something that meets their needs, they have a natural tendency to think it was made specifically for them, and so they craft notions of Providence from crude matter, and when they are foiled in their ambitions, they seek an outer source to propitiate, and thus are born superstition and the power of priests.

Spinoza exhorts us to turn away from anything that demands the sacrifice of our reason, or the freedom to investigate the workings of nature. Any government or church that claims power over minds or knowledge of God’s thoughts is unworthy of its authority.

Each person must employ the full power of his or her reason to understand his nature, work against self-defeating desires, and pursue the needs of his particular self in joint purpose with his fellow human beings.

Because the universe is fully determined, along with our actions in it, there is no need to feel envy for those who happen to have done better, nor to feel superior to those who have had a rougher lot in life.

Instead, we are to approach other humans with compassion and understanding, realizing that their conception of good might not be our own, and that there is no way to judge one person’s path as objectively better than another’s.

In a Europe still finding its feet after the destruction wrought by the Thirty Years’ War, Spinoza’s call to relinquish self-satisfied superiority in favor of a broad-based sympathy was strikingly original, and formed the positive ethical core of modern humanism.

By combining scriptural critique with an uncompromising materialism, and welding both of those onto a new secular ethics of inclusivity, Spinoza produced the foundation of not only the Enlightenment, but the basic vocabulary of present humanism.

Throughout his life, Spinoza’s motto was caution. He kept the sensibilities of his Christian audience in mind, seeking to wean them of their dependence on Jesus Christ by degrees, focusing on the Old Testament and letting the implications trickle through to the New.

For all his caution, however, the consequences of his philosophy were plain to all, and Spinoza watched friend after friend turn vehemently upon him, upbraiding him for his arrogance in supposing that he, and he alone, knew better than thousands of years of religious experts.

He was called the most vile, foul, and dangerous human being in the history of religion. His friends, the Koerbagh brothers, were put on trial for espousing atheistic doctrines.

Van den Enden traveled to France to foment his beloved Normandy rebellion and was hung for his troubles. Leibniz, the greatest mind in Europe, eagerly sought him out in private, and condemned him vehemently in public.

And yet, his life went on, supported by a handful of true friends and a growing army of those attracted to his views but too afraid to be seen publicly defending him. He was never arrested, never driven from his home country, and lived, to all appearances, precisely the life he desired, a simple life of the mind.

When he died, it was suddenly, without warning, though his health had always been precarious. Within a year, his Ethics was published, along with some of the secret correspondence that had flown between his humble rented rooms and the rest of Europe.

Spinozism became synonymous with atheism, and his philosophical system proved fresh for generations of intellectual outsiders.

His comments about the consequences of linguistic degradation for religious exegesis found their way into Herder’s revolutionary linguistic theory, while his observations about humans crafting gods in their own image inspired Feuerbach’s dialectic critique of Christianity.

From being the outcast’s outcast, he has become the philosopher’s philosopher.

Thank you Wikipedia!