Welcome to Gaia! :: View User's Journal | Gaia Journals

There is no right or wrong; there is no negative action; there is no positive action. The only things that are, are those things that lead to what you would prefer to happen, and those that do not.

Is that clear? Am I lucid? Let's take an example: I kill a person. When I killed that person, I ended its conscious potential for both "positive" and "negative" actions. Without an ability to evaluate whether the person would have ultimately produced a net "preferred" or a net "non-preferred" set of actions among the total consciousness of the universe, I cannot be held responsible for what it would or would not have done. However, I am simultaneously held entirely responsible for what it will have and will not have done, because I chose to kill it. Simultaneously, there is no indication of morals, because morals only exist as self-synthesized abstractions of what you or I would ultimately prefer to happen or not to happen.

You see, then, an intimate relationship between me and this person. That relationship is built on this concept: to attempt to destroy an object is to attempt to destroy oneself, but to attempt to alter the state of an object (kill, vandalize, build, etc.) is to attempt to alter the state of an object (kill, vandalize, build, etc.). If I wanted to destroy that person, I would have to track down every aspect of its life so that I could delete its influence on the universe, thus erasing it from universal memory. Every item having made conscious observation of it must have that observation reversed, most effectively by eliminating that object's ability either to recall or communicate such an observation. Thus, eventually, I would have to destroy myself, due to the vast and infinite networks of interconnectedness. So to those of you who believe you can somehow right the world by eliminating something: You cannot delete something without deleting yourself. You can only effect a change in state.

While on the subject of deletion, consider the following statements:

1) Any system is an unbounded, self-perpetuating machine of ideals that are shaped by its own permeability to contaminants.
2) The essence of humanity is in humanity. That is, the conscious-whole is a computer for the extraction of abstract essentials; only unity and reduction will yield answers, and the paradox is that that very reduction eliminates the inherent uniqueness of being.
3) Systems of interlocking "personal" Truths reveal at their intersection the Intangible - that is, God, the Pneuma of the All-Universe.

Therefore, to delete an event is likely an inexcusable action, by the laws of the unbounded system: an event of identical import must replace it, assuming that boundaries can be drawn around the deleted event in the first place. However, it is equally possible that conventional physics do not apply to this system and that deletion merely yields a sum reduction of the whole. This concept obviously evokes the opposite hypotheses: A) that any created event is contingent upon the destruction of another or B) that any creation merely yields a sum contribution to the whole.

~
I feel at this juncture it is necessary to attempt a definition of the word "event" as I have been using it. An event may be one of three things.

i) An isolated product of the summed consciousness of the universe.
-- That is, an occurrence within a vaguely decided-upon segment of time and occurring within a vaguely decided-upon segment of the universe that was or is produced by the semi-conscious actions and reactions of the whole consciousness of the universe. I reject this in favor of definition iii.
ii) An isolated product of the concerned consciousness of the universe.
-- That is, an occurrence within a vaguely decided-upon segment of time and occurring within a vaguely decided-upon segment of the universe by a strictly defined subset of consciousness within the universe, that was or is produced by the semi-conscious actions and reactions of that strictly defined subset. I reject this because the unconcerned other-consciousness, by its own lack of concern, has the potential to impose its own "rules" upon the event, and thus also acts to create it.
iii) An isolated segment of the consciousness of the universe.
-- That is (with simultaneous declaration that due to the fact that all the universe is, in fact, co-created at every instant by the sum total conscious decision or indecision, all things are merely consciousness itself), a piece of the time-space-mind whole.

For my part, I choose option iii, as it is closest to the production of the idea of singularity of all things and therefore is more likely to approximate a core, from which further answers can be extracted.
~

With the introduction of the idea that all the universe is a computer for seeking Truth (Statement 2), we have the question of what it is that is seeking Truth. Once again, there are three possibilities:

x) That a God, as of yet unable to be defined alongside the above postulates, created this computer, unable within Its own universe to find them without us. God may have turned Itself into this computer, being a part of consciousness Itself, and thus agreeing with definition iii above.
y) That a God arose from this computer as a natural occurrence, perpetuating Itself in an attempt to find the answer produced by the computer from which it molded itself.
z) That the computer continues to be God (that is, without any boundary of consciousness and no external concept of self), and that we are all God, totally seeking and producing our own Truth.

For my part, I prefer x and y over z, as established precedent for "independently" discovering Truth increases the likelihood of my own discovery from the zero-to-infinity in z to the one-to-infinity of y or the one-to-one of x. However, as God is a metaphysical postulate, this excursion into theology is moot pending completion of ontological study.

Here again, I reach the as-of-yet unattained goal: to manipulate the universe such that my dreams become reality. We have established (in theory only, as any good scientist knows, that the universe is a product of amoral, sum-total conscious actions. It therefore stands to reason that we are all responsible for every event in the universe. We are not powerless to the dictates of the sum-total consciousness that existed before us. Rather, as we are what exists in the present, we can take what they have given us and rip it apart, replacing old events with the ones we would prefer. Unfortunately, how to isolate an event is as of yet uncertain, and whether deletion of that event would yield an equal creation-event is also uncertain, due to the unknown properties of the universe and its potential total unboundedness. We will not give up, though. We call on you, members of the Universe, to band together and uplift a state in which we are not confined to the stupidity of our forebears.

Wreak change in this universe. Make it what you want it to be.