Im mad (allegedly)
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-09-2011, 05:22 AM (This post was last modified: 08-09-2011 05:25 AM by bemore.)
Im mad (allegedly)
When I tell people how I try to operate my brain and thinking, people call me mad. Although the people who I have told, I dont think are actually prone to thinking "outside the box" and are quite close minded.........ill share it with you guys and see what you think.

My life experience has shown me that my beliefs can be solid one moment......then in a wink of an eye something can come along and shatter that belief.......something previously unknown and not considered.

I try to take all the experiences that life throws at me and I try to take some sort of "logical" lesson from it.

The fact that my beliefs can change at the drop of a hat..........has taught me that absoloutly nothing is certain........given this thought for the last few years I have changed my approach on how I look at things.

I will give you a prime example...........

Mr David Icke (conspiracist) believes that we are all the result of an ancient alien race (the anunaki) that came to earth and genetically changed our DNA. He believes that they "rule" the world in certain traceable bloodlines........he also believes that the Moon is an articial construct and that we are actually all controlled (our conciousness) by it.

NOW!!!!!!!!!!!! A lot of you will read this and think it is a crock of shit (excuse my french).........HOWEVER!!!!!!!! I view it as neither true nor false.........If I attribute certain beliefs to this then I am closing myself off to other beliefs.

I do this with EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!! I believe that the only way to the perception called "truth" is to consider both sides.....the positive and the negative......the yin and the come to the whole.

If I can simultaneously work out both sides of a story then am I not in a position to come to more neutral, logical conclusions???

If I consider every aspect.........avenue.........possibility......then this leads me to a very enlightened and neutral viewpoint........where I wont feel "silly" if I am proven wrong..........(because I have nothing to prove) If I can look down upon everything for what it is, potential information, considering everything and not letting myself linger on certain beliefs then logically I am in a better position???

People say that I am too "open minded"..........that in fact my brain will fall out it is that open minded lol.

I wanna see what you guys think Huh

EDIT: I try to operate CONSCIOUSLY at this level..........I know that Sub-Consciously I am making thousands of decisions based on stimulus my brain recieves.

I feel so much, and yet I feel nothing.
I am a rock, I am the sky, the birds and the trees and everything beyond.
I am the wind, in the fields in which I roar. I am the water, in which I drown.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
08-09-2011, 05:56 AM
RE: Im mad (allegedly)
(08-09-2011 05:22 AM)bemore Wrote:  People say that I am too "open minded"..........that in fact my brain will fall out it is that open minded

In the book I am writing, I say the following. I think you find it related to your question, bemore.

Limits of Science

I read a really cool sci-fi story once. A mining town was destroyed by an explosion in the night, yet the next morning people woke up as usual, went to work as usual and lived their lives as usual. They noticed one change: commercials and billboards and all forms of advertising became so ubiquitous that there was no escape from it. At the end of the story they discover that they are nothing but replicas of themselves. A big PR company had bought all the DNA of the dead people, cloned them in miniature form, put them into a miniature replica of their town on a laboratory bench to use as a testing ground for advertising techniques. Imagine their shock when they made it to the edge of the table and looked down!

I can’t help thinking of that story whenever I hear someone being so sure about what the world is and isn’t like.

We humans like to hold simplistic views. When people think about science, they often hold one of the following two extreme views:

1./ Science is omnipotent, can explain everything (if not yet, soon) and everything outside the domain of science (ESP, etc) is pure superstition, to be dismissed out of hand.

2./ Science is overrated, a useful tool in the material domain and totally clueless when applied to important spiritual, emotional, social questions.

I don’t subscribe to either of these extremes. I love and respect science and recognize its greatest contribution to human thought in the discipline and methods it gave us in examining any kind of phenomena, be it material or social.

On the other hand, I am aware of many human qualities besides reason that are important sources of knowledge: intuition, imagination, ethical sense, spiritual insight all play an important role.

Reason alone can only give us some probability of being right, as opposed to absolute certainty. It is a very important point, often ignored in debates. Doubt is a useful device (See John Ralston Saul's "The Doubter's Companion") that keeps us alert at all times, making us examine and re-examine our basic assumptions and the methods we use in pursuing ‘truth’.

I find myself in a somewhat ‘delicate’ situation. This book is primarily about Physics, how wonderful it is, what great achievements our geniuses made, all implying how great reason is. Then I start writing about the ‘limits of reason’ and the ‘abuse of reason’, as if I were contradicting the very theme of this book.

I almost feel like a father, loving his children very much, yet willing to admit that the children are not grown up yet, they need protection, parental control and correction. It would be irresponsible to let them run wild, do whatever they wish, because they would end up hurting themselves and others.

As John Ralston Saul wrote in “On Equilibrium”, talking about reason:

"…For every positive claim, someone can match it with a negative….a century of unprecedented physical progress and unprecedented violence. Even progress is a conundrum. It has been used willy-nilly to save lives and to take them, to process information efficiently and to limit citizens’ freedom, to run hospitals and to run death camps”.

Reason is a marvelous tool, if used right, in its own place, within its own limits. Luckily, when reason can’t help us, we have other qualities to fall back on.

Our understanding in science is, inevitably, incomplete and sooner or later we are stopped by the boundary of our current scientific experience.
Quote this message in a reply
08-09-2011, 09:01 PM
RE: Im mad (allegedly)
Bemore, it sounds to me as if you may be living in hummingbird mode - if so, you'll use up your billion heartbeats too soon.

It's okay to look at things from every possible angle, as long as you choose carefully which things you want to look at that way. Choose one phenomenon or question or theory to investigate at one time, and when you're done with that, file it away and pick the next project. You can't do it 16 hours a day, and you can't do it with everything you encounter, or you will go mad.

There must be a stable core - a class of items, events, places, actions and people that you're sure of, that don't change or wander off or let you down. From that stable anchorage, you can roam in any mental direction for a limited time - be back for tea, all right?

Also, have you been reading Celine? His f......g dots.... drove me half crazy..... and then i adopted them myself. Now, i impose a strict limit: no more that two sets of dots per post. It's not easy - but dashes help.

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-09-2011, 09:51 PM
RE: Im mad (allegedly)
Hey bemore! Smile

I'm pretty much going to say what Peterkin said. I think it's good to be open minded about things. Some situations absolutely require this. I think one has to be careful about what things they open their minds up to, though. I mean honestly, there are some really wack-a-doo ideas out there, and seriously, things that no RATIONAL person would even consider possible or true. (, anyone? Wink )

Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is what was said before. There are some things that are absolutely true. Just because someone has a different idea on it doesn't mean you have to consider it. There should be times when you can say, "what a crock", and be able to move on to something else.

I don't think you're mad, but I think you might be struggling with too many things at once.

My reason for being is to serve as a cat cushion. That is good enough for me. Wink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2011, 12:14 AM
RE: Im mad (allegedly)
Thanks for the replies peeps.

I appreciate where your coming from......reading it back to myself again I suppose it does sound like I am taking a lot on, when in reality it isnt like that......its a lot simpler.

Trillium you say there comes a point when you have to draw the line and say "what a crock".........which I have to disagree with. Once you decide to draw the line and make it a then immediatly close yourself off to other belief systems.

(like religion vs science)

This to me is highly illogical.

Its like if we lived in the year 1673 and were discussing what caused people to become sick......and I had the theory that it could be passed on through the air......because this would go against all of your set beliefs, and I had no proof you would say "look Chris, you will have to drop this ridiculous notion"........then we both welcome our newest neighbour who has just moved in......Anton Van Leeuwenhoek Blush

Do you see where im coming from???

I take information for what it is.........information.........I try my best to consciously not attach a belief to it either way. If I can appreciate both sides of an arguement at once over a given subject......I am in a much more informed position to make a decision because I can consider everything.

Because something cannot be proved.......does not mean that it does not exist???

Peterkin...........the dots that plaque my writing.........I copied it from a friend and its stuck with me. I suppose its my way of attacking the written language as we dont get on ha ha...........I find it very hard to use words as a meaningfull way of getting my thoughts across. My writing has NEVER done justice to the amount of detail,depth and scope my thoughts have........which is rather upsetting as I feel I cant express myself properly. If we were to converse in person then you would see what I mean.

I feel so much, and yet I feel nothing.
I am a rock, I am the sky, the birds and the trees and everything beyond.
I am the wind, in the fields in which I roar. I am the water, in which I drown.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2011, 04:10 AM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2011 04:15 AM by Filox.)
RE: Im mad (allegedly)
Hey, you stole my thinking!! That is almost exactly how my brain functions, except I already have some experience and I will not be so extremely open-minded like you, I quickly discard loonies like Mr David Icke because I know a thing or two about the universe and it does not ad up with his crazy theories. So I am open minded, but I compare new ideas to my old knowledge and if does not compute, if it does not fit into my logical unit with little to no errors, the idea is labeled as false. I have a good logical unit, so I calculate those things in seconds, it either ads up, or it doesn't.



You are not mad, all other around you are mad, you are probably more intelligent than those who say you are mad. Go test yourself when MENSA is somewhere near you.

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2011, 03:21 PM
RE: Im mad (allegedly)
being openminded, to me, is about not discarding ideas without at least balancing then against what you already know and what's possible. Then making a decision about where you stand. I don't think you need to 'make decisions' about where you stand on all topics, how can we know everything? Many things, like alien life, are unknowns. During my teenage years I read everything I could get hold of on alien's visiting us, starting life here etc, to be it was much more plausible than the existence of god (and it annoyed the nuns at the catholic school i went to ).
I don't adhere to that idea any more (that aliens visited us, not that they exist) , as I find it illogical as the idea of god (but open to the possibility).

I want for myself what I want for every women, absolute equality. Agnes Macphail
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2011, 05:15 PM
RE: Im mad (allegedly)
Hello Belmore.
I don't think you are mad at all, in fact you seem quite as sane as I am.
It is when we become totally obsessed with a strange notion and can see no other path that madness may become an issue.

You may like these quotes:-
"Playing the game of reality with no real cards in our hands" R.D. Laing.

"Madness is divine" Plato.

"Hell is other people" John Paul Sartre.

"Who then remains unconquerable, he whom the inevitable cannot overcome"

And that not all!!
Herewith a poem I wrote a few years ago.

Call me a luddite, call me a fool
The I/n is not my tool
Rock spiders there enticing kids
Blogs designed young lives to rid
Call me old fashioned, even odd
Pity my lack of the latest I/pod
But look at our word, the churl
That ever scary downward hurl
Scientism is our new Master
A high tech god "smarter" faster
Working in unison with the old
The tele-evangelist comes on bold
That equals an ooo: perfect too!
Sitting alone there he ponders
Gee, have I got it right down yonder?
Science and god, god, what a pair
A duo designed to reach despair?
We'll save you all those isms say
Just follow us to abrand new day
Lets bomb the bastards into oblivion
Gods on your side he's forgiven yah
Neitzsche, Sartre, Albert Camus
Rand, De Beavoir, Carl Popper too
Philosophers faking taking up space
Alone Camus' question had some base
Life or suicide questioned his mind--
Randy Beauvoir chose menage a trois
Of sensual leanings some say she was bad
Unlike poor old Neitzsche she did'nt go mad
Now Dawkins becomes the grand pooh bah
The question-scientism how far, how far.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mr Woof's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: