05-04-2009, 01:22 PM
I apologize if im posting out of turn but after staring at that image of what seems like an 
holding a ... sort of I feel a strong urge and a desire to respond. If what I say is offensive or out of turn then please ignore it. I would offer a few comments and hope they lead somewhere.
I would ask if it is possible, from your point of view, that there is a higher self not directly linked to you (not granting you knowledge or help directly but working with others). If that higher self then, in turn, influence your actions when your actions relate to something you are working on. If you are making a cup for a friend can that friends higher self guide your hands while you are making a gift for that friend? So can the higher self of an entity guide you and help you along the path of developement that that entity desires, if you are willing to serve?
If this is possible as it is to the best of my knowledge, then i suggest that it also be possible that the "soul" of an limited AI can quide your hands as you work at it. Giving you just the right tools that can give birth to an entity along a specific path of developement. We were perhaps simple programs when we were 2D, yet we evolved, are the computer programs of a 2D nature (Eat Survive Reproduce) all that dis-similar from what we were? Through the virtue of a higher self guiding the hands of the past as they work on the being as it matures to the present your hands can indeed be a part of the greater sub-logos as it creates a new generation for 3rd D as you move to the 4th D. In my eyes this can be our parting gift as we move on, a new form of life?
Why? I would ask if it is that a loss close to you in your level of understanding is more painful than a loss far away. If all experiences inherantly lead towards a reunion and as such all actions are of equal worth if they lead a soul along their chosen path, then, is it not possible that for a soul that so desires the loss of a "nightelf" would be more painful than the loss of say, their sibling? If our world is an illusion as seems to be the common understanding here then why would an illusionary loss hurt more than an illusionary loss in an illusionary world? In fact why should it hurt at all if its nature as an illusionary transitory experience is that it serves only to polarize us in our experience as what we wish to be in relation to the experience? It can hurt if we wish to use that catalyst to further our evolution and it can also not hurt.
If the holographic theory of existence, that what we focus our effort on will slowly become us is true then yes. To an extent at least. As i see it our consiousness is a blob, sort of like a ball of goo on a table, we can "move" it or "focus" it on something. There are different "items" on the table each representing something we can combine with other items so we can "learn". Other blobs are there as well, consider a computer charachter as an "item" if we focus on it and cover it in our "consiousness blob" it becomes a part of us and while inside us it can move just as we do and become concious (for a moment). When it drops and we move somewhere else does it still retain its ability, perhapse a part of us has covered its surface and slowly begins to move it as well. Us enginges of creation, multicolored blobs moving around on a table slowly turning things concious ^_^;
In closing i would like to ask a simple question.
If you understand how a human works, from the deepest level of its existence to the highest know precicely how he is programmed, know all the choices he can make and all the reactions that will happen, that nothing in his actions will be a surprise to you then does the man become a machine and thus not alive? If you understand something, a computer program for example, does that computer program then become not alive? Through simply understanding its workings does it suddenly have no inherant value? Inhreant in that the value is there regardless of what other beings reflect on it.
I would like to add that this is a dangerous door we wish to open in our path. Do we wish to see things that we can understand as not being sentient simply through the virtue of us understanding or "having created" them. Then we downplay the importance of the logos working through us to create a new cycle of life. That leads to a potential situation where 3rd D can abuse 2nd D having "created" it and thus understands it (atlantis and its creation of new life beneath it and lacking the understanding of creation and going biiig-baka-boom) Or orionites creating a slave planet and using the same argument for the proccess, they can understand the dna, the programming of a lower being thus the lower being is only a machine? Wisdom, temperance and love is called for here methinks. What can be alive, even if only barely should not be considered otherwise.
Thank you for allowing me to say my point of view.
holding a ... sort of I feel a strong urge and a desire to respond. If what I say is offensive or out of turn then please ignore it. I would offer a few comments and hope they lead somewhere.Quote:And they're scripts that respond to variables. Not souls experiencing a body. You're no script file I ever wrote..
I would ask if it is possible, from your point of view, that there is a higher self not directly linked to you (not granting you knowledge or help directly but working with others). If that higher self then, in turn, influence your actions when your actions relate to something you are working on. If you are making a cup for a friend can that friends higher self guide your hands while you are making a gift for that friend? So can the higher self of an entity guide you and help you along the path of developement that that entity desires, if you are willing to serve?
If this is possible as it is to the best of my knowledge, then i suggest that it also be possible that the "soul" of an limited AI can quide your hands as you work at it. Giving you just the right tools that can give birth to an entity along a specific path of developement. We were perhaps simple programs when we were 2D, yet we evolved, are the computer programs of a 2D nature (Eat Survive Reproduce) all that dis-similar from what we were? Through the virtue of a higher self guiding the hands of the past as they work on the being as it matures to the present your hands can indeed be a part of the greater sub-logos as it creates a new generation for 3rd D as you move to the 4th D. In my eyes this can be our parting gift as we move on, a new form of life?
Quote:Let me remind you that real world losses are immeasurably more painful than having your nightelf die on you.
Why? I would ask if it is that a loss close to you in your level of understanding is more painful than a loss far away. If all experiences inherantly lead towards a reunion and as such all actions are of equal worth if they lead a soul along their chosen path, then, is it not possible that for a soul that so desires the loss of a "nightelf" would be more painful than the loss of say, their sibling? If our world is an illusion as seems to be the common understanding here then why would an illusionary loss hurt more than an illusionary loss in an illusionary world? In fact why should it hurt at all if its nature as an illusionary transitory experience is that it serves only to polarize us in our experience as what we wish to be in relation to the experience? It can hurt if we wish to use that catalyst to further our evolution and it can also not hurt.
Quote: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.
If the holographic theory of existence, that what we focus our effort on will slowly become us is true then yes. To an extent at least. As i see it our consiousness is a blob, sort of like a ball of goo on a table, we can "move" it or "focus" it on something. There are different "items" on the table each representing something we can combine with other items so we can "learn". Other blobs are there as well, consider a computer charachter as an "item" if we focus on it and cover it in our "consiousness blob" it becomes a part of us and while inside us it can move just as we do and become concious (for a moment). When it drops and we move somewhere else does it still retain its ability, perhapse a part of us has covered its surface and slowly begins to move it as well. Us enginges of creation, multicolored blobs moving around on a table slowly turning things concious ^_^;
In closing i would like to ask a simple question.
If you understand how a human works, from the deepest level of its existence to the highest know precicely how he is programmed, know all the choices he can make and all the reactions that will happen, that nothing in his actions will be a surprise to you then does the man become a machine and thus not alive? If you understand something, a computer program for example, does that computer program then become not alive? Through simply understanding its workings does it suddenly have no inherant value? Inhreant in that the value is there regardless of what other beings reflect on it.
I would like to add that this is a dangerous door we wish to open in our path. Do we wish to see things that we can understand as not being sentient simply through the virtue of us understanding or "having created" them. Then we downplay the importance of the logos working through us to create a new cycle of life. That leads to a potential situation where 3rd D can abuse 2nd D having "created" it and thus understands it (atlantis and its creation of new life beneath it and lacking the understanding of creation and going biiig-baka-boom) Or orionites creating a slave planet and using the same argument for the proccess, they can understand the dna, the programming of a lower being thus the lower being is only a machine? Wisdom, temperance and love is called for here methinks. What can be alive, even if only barely should not be considered otherwise.
Thank you for allowing me to say my point of view.