My general musing on things

Hi everyone!
So I'm back again with another thread were we can discuss my views on things.
Now I'm just gonna state some things that I believe is correct and later, and if requested, give the explanations for how I came to those conclusions.

The different levels of cognition is is following  a non-linear curve, in other words, the current highest form of awareness, sapience, is to self-awareness as it is to non-sentience/basics.

There's really no defining line where one can say that a being is sapient, rather the different processes and abilitys that make up sapience can sometimes be found in lower forms of minds, no different in shape from from the more advanced minds or with less sophistication.

The Universe itself is a mind, although very different from the ones found in living beings and the action-reactions ones that arise due to living beings interaction with animate and inanimate objects and subjects. The Universe is both a independent mind and a composite mind built up by all lesser matter, energy, spacetime minds, these two universal minds are interlinked in various ways.

A thought is only dependent on one of the Universal's mind existence.

This Universe is more then matter, energy, spacetime. It also consists of things that I without any better knowledge call influx, ints and potentials.

Influx is the remains of whatever single or multiple things that existed before our current Universe. Whatever it is, it's an integral part of our universe. It  re-act former events, potential events and un-events  which takes form in various ways.

Ints is related to the nature of intelligence, and more specifically to the minds that are self-aware to a certain degree.

Potentials is ghostuniverses that play out the natures of things that are non-existant in our Universe but still a physical possibility.

The Universal mind can be contacted and will be if it is supposed to be, by any lesser mind. There's no random element or no form of choice when dealing with the Universal mind since it consists of all influx and potentials that among other things give rise to these phenomena.

Do you have any evidence for all this nonsense?  Or do you get paid by the word?

Yes, it sounds like nonsense, and much of it probably is.
I believe that it is correct because I think I've accessed  part of the Universal mind or maybe it was it that accessed me, I don't think there's a difference.

fucking crap is this?

I'm taking a shit into your thread -- huuuuuh pffarplfshhhhh farP! splash

wait, is this univrse thing god?
wasn't it you that said he didn't exist?

>>5
I'm taking a shit in your sink.

>>6
No, neither Universal mind posses the same traits that the christian God possess. Though every thought it have is also an real physical event. Thoughts exists both physically, electrical and chemical impulses or an example, and mentally, the Int of the thought, levels. When it comes to the composite Universal mind, any physical reaction, be it a star going nova or objects colliding or even smaller events such as one of our neurons firing of an impulse, will create an physical thought that might have an partner in the other Universal mind, the independent one.
So for the Universal mind(s) it could think something that would result in a physical event such as a change in my brain that would give me the knowledge of all this. Then there's the other Universal mind and it's way of transferring knowledge, though that is rather complicated to explain since none of it has any basis in our current knowledge inferred from science.

aids

Hi Nanami! How's your research and studying going?
I've had a few new ideas pop up and I was wondering if you were interested regarding the uses of religious practices and doctrines and how they may be applied practically even in this day in age to a respectful and meaningful experience.

It may seem strange that I post these ideas here, but really I'm doing it for a lot of different reasons to both perpetuate my own ideas and to also allow others to use them to their advantages or disadvantages as they see fit. That choice is up to them. But primarily, this is to better learn what it means to be alive, to live in order to learn. It is a new idea that I'm attempting to perpetuate in order so that others can learn from my experiences as I perform new tasks with the same questions and find whole new answers that I never had before.

For instance,
what I was just talking about was understanding what a Point of Origin is.
A point of origin is where you stand at the moment. A point of origin is only discovered upon experiencing a new event outside of your normal environment. To remain within a stable environment and attempt to ascertain a point of origin is incorrect and foolhardy. What is ascertained by remaining within a stable environment is the reaffirmation of doing the right thing. I am only just learning that my origins are that of inexperience of external activities and as of yet unknown activities. My experience lies in the realm of imagination and studying that reinforces that imagination because imagination itself is the mysticism any inanimate interactions via man and machine/paper/information will reinforce this mysticism. The differences between what I'm working on and them is that I'm here to understand WHY they do that, but in order to do that I must first experience what they experience. And my conclusions are that there is a certain degree of sanctuary within not knowing. A hidden degree of safety within inactivity habitual reinforcements. The only thing is that respect must be diminished to certain degrees and levels within this environment in order to MAINTAIN a level of harmony so that change is minimal and degrees of discomfort are diminished as well. With this comes increased degrees of moral flexibilities within the self, though I have personally observed that this can become confusing as a sense of self is also diminished with isolation without clearly visible degrees of differences observed by the person who is performing this mysticismal  isolation and lack of interaction and any accompanying discomforts are the effects of change(the aforementioned degrees of discomfort are a link-as I have observed-).
The link, as I have become privy to, has to do with another area I'm researching called "Grief".-this moves into another area aside from point of origin, moral flexibilities, and experience and more along the scope of habitual reinforcements, expanding moral flexibilities into realms of self-disrespectful activities and punishing respectful activities-
I have studying the research others have performed in order to better get a grasp of the details involved that correlate to this link of discomfort and change that are prohibitors or inhibitors to advances in self-discovery and exploration and thereby attempt to do the same to all external variables -inanimate and animate- I've experienced this over and over again, but the only way I was able to recognize, differentiate and define the differences was to experience the differences in unknown and unexperienced environments where my lack of experience yet experienced imagination (mysticism) prevailed. I have a faith that we all reside within working cycles and working cycles are residing within us. It is within us and outside us, yet it is the very things we are made of in order to do what it is that we do to discover what those esoteric features are. -the previous statements are still considered to be my own experienced imaginations and inexperienced unknowns. I do understand that what I say may or may not be detailed enough to seem as experience, nor should it as no true experience to the depths of involvement and multiple environmental discomforts. -returning now to the idea of grief being involved in decision making and discomforts-
Every discomfort we perceive and thereby experience the details thereof takes us away from a point of origin or a point of harmonious sanctuary, a lesser degree of grief can be observed regarding the loss of that sense of sanctuary. The idea that this lead to for me was the first sense of loss of sanctuary. That was birth. For an infant to pass from the sanctuary of the womb to the discomforts of cold, harsh, dry, and painful environments creates the first sense of loss of sanctuary and thereby the infant cries out of sense of loss of sanctuary. There is a degree of grief, but with it comes the sense to regain that once held sanctuary. -here comes the scary part- some people have gotten over the sense to regain that once held sanctuary and become accustomed to the cold, harsh, dry, and painful environments so that these become their new sanctuary and any degrees of change and slight discomforts are diminished through chemical reinforcements via sex, drugs, emotional expressions that attempt to diminish the change yet again. -please understand that this is my current understanding drawn from little experience and lots of experienced imaginations (mysticism). My idea is that everything is already combined and working together or has the potential and thereby possibility to do so. Next time I come on here, I'll bring some more experience and a lot more studied research materials to correlate my new ideas. I have a sense that imagination and experience are linked through causality and are a perpetually working cycle that no human can stop, but seem to do the best they can to deny its very existence due to "lack of perceivable evidence". Yet here we are, "living, perceivable evidence".
Perception when viewing as I have speculated may correspond to reflection. I know it sounds strange, but take a look at respect. Respect is "how you treat yourself is the way you treat others, and how you treat others is the reinforcement of that principle". Now what about light? If we look directly into the sun to see light, we go blind, am I wrong? How we perceive is actually the reflection of that light off of other objects, as I have studied external scientific research performed by others. Now what about the sense of touch? Touch is the feedback due to change or alteration from the harmonious sanctuary, and thereby is a result of reflection as opposed to a direct contact. But I have seen that the source sometimes is sought as to the understanding of the event so that we understand more of the cycle than the single event of touch or sight or respect. This is the area of my research. To put into the world all the stars of ideas that reside within me brought to you by the details of those stars from experience. You don't need to accept or deny or question. That choice is yours to make, cause it doesn't directly affect me. That the information is available to you for your POTENTIAL growth and self-discovery is the greatest feeling of accomplishment I could have ever hoped for in my life. I have this sense to tell you this only because I would like the same consideration, but I won't expect (it does me no good) what I speak to just appear or be in everything without my involvement. I can only learn of what things are as they are...to discover each individual point of origin through doing so with myself in varying environmental changes of comfort and discomfort and to better understand the habitual natures of our so-called "devil" (Ego) hidden within the darkness of our minds with only the experiences that we gain as memories and transmute to imagination...what we do with them from there...is up to us, each other, on an individualistic basis. But that too is just my opinion, the real question is, what do you believe? The answers aren't meant for me, are they? Whose answers are you really seeking? But to that, what questions can you gain from an already involved experience? What new questions come from a new experience? Now how do those new questions relate to the previous experience? Now how more fulfilling and involved is that previous experience? These questions are not mine to give you the answers as absolutes (MY BELIEF: all absolutes are absolutely relative to perceived perception), instead to give you a potential avenue for further involvement, new questions and greater involvement in already involved areas of your lives. Now how fulfilling are your lives? That too I leave to you to decide for yourself. If this information appears to be wrong and you feel that it is wrong, do you question it and seek to understand why it's wrong, or do you blindly accept it as wrong...or right? I really do wish you all the best, but do you trust in my words as true? Do you trust in your own words as true? ...the rest I leave to you. Good luck!

wat

this is ridiculous
either redcream is also A2U or redcream is also Nanami

>>12
FAIL.  RedCream is NEITHER of those retards.  Anyone can look at the poasting styles and conclude THAT.

I too don't fully comprehend what AnOnYmOuS 2U writes but if I need to know it I'll probably will some day.
Now if we were to go back to discussing this new, world view so to say, is there anything you're wondering or want clarified?

What do you think of the Higgs-boson field?

lol wut

this thread is so gay that i must fap to >>16 nao

Okay, I know how to make contact with the Universals now.
Phew, this is a lot for a mere human being like myself, I'll rest some time before I write it down.

I fuck my mother.

>>19
Mothersex claims are INVLAID without an accompanying detail which indicates which hole was penetrated.