Video games and the Law of One

[sylverone]

Hello everyone! This discussion has some interesting points in it, so I thought I'd make my first forum post here. I guess I'll start by giving some alternate viewpoints concerning some things that have been said. Since I don't know how to quote people yet, I'll wing it.

>by Al Quadir
>I do not consider artificial computer agents conscious.

I think they might be. The artificial agents are us. I've been thinking about this for a while: when we play a video game or use our computer, are we not incarnating into that reality? Therefore, the mouse pointer on the computer, or the game character on a console has as much consciousness as we channel through it; just like we have the consciousness that our soul channels into/through us.

Perhaps I take the analogy too far, but would this mean that our lives here are only as real to the next level up as the video game characters' are to us? We play many games, in which these characters may die again and again, so that we may learn, just as we may have many incarnations here, so that our soul may learn. I'm not sure, but it's very interesting to think about. A video game is just another illusion within our illusion, which we may enter as freely as we entered this one.

>Al Quadir
>There are no negative consequences from losing a game. But there are
>positive consequences.

This is your perception, but I don't think it is shared by all. I've seen people go into rages because they lost a game, or were having difficulties with one. We determine the nature of our own consequences, I think. The choice of how to perceive things is always there. It's just another learning experience in the long run; I just want to provide an alternate perspective.

>Sirius
>The developers intend you to kill your opponents. lets just say for
> instance your playing call of duty 4. Modern warfare.
>The developers have made the game so that if you dont kill anybody,
>you dont get anywhere in the game, besides past training anyway. The
>point of the gam ein the broad respect of the army is to protect civvies. >so in all of these respects playing that game is STO even though it is
>very close to the wars which are actually happening around the world >today.

In real life soldiers fight to protect civilians, but I'm not sure that makes wars STO (in the short-term sense), and the game is just an imitation of those wars, made for entertainment. I don't think these things are really STO in nature. The way an individual chooses to interact with these circumstances is the STS/STO determiner.

Although I do keep coming back to one thing; isn't everything STO? After all, isn't "everything" the definition of Source/God/7th density, which/who is the purest STO?

Anyway, very neat discussion so far. We should all be able to gain something from this.

With everything,
sylverone