Pay for Article

November 24, 2007

Disassociation Of Mind And Body

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Jasmine Staff @ 11:10 pm

Disassociation of mind and body, the spiritual and the physical: is it impossible? They are two totally different things, held together simply by the fact that they exist mutually within a single entity. To be human one has to be both in the world and in the spiritual realm. I, and all beings, am a spirit. I have been placed, by who knows what, in a certain human form, on a certain place on this earth, to fill a particular niche. Perhaps randomly. Perhaps not. It is sad, and strange, how bogged down our spirits are by the world, the physicality of our beings, all that is obvious and impossible to miss. Our physicality is everything that is tangible, and does not have to be guessed at, pondered upon, or assumed. It is everything that we touch, taste, feel, see, hear, smell.

It is how we move around and find our way in this corporeal world. This which we are so overly concerned with pervades our thinking, so much so that we often pay no mind to, in fact even fail to notice or appreciate, the existence of what is beyond that; what is farther than the flesh. I guess that tends to happen when two totally separate worlds (body and spirit) are forced to collide into one being that is both. It is bizarre how we rely so heavily and so totally on that one half (the physical) which is actually the weaker half. It is the half that is restricted immensely - by gravity, size, mass, the laws of nature, entropy, and the space-time continuum. Yet our other half, for all we know, is limitless. It stretches beyond what we know and is virtually impervious to destruction. Why do we continue to deny the part of us that is so limitless and so free.

Jasmine Staff is a student at the University of Rochester studying Psychology and Animal Behavior. She is an artist, an authour, a published poet, and a pilot. She works with underprivlidged preschool children in Rochester, NY. Originally from Australia, she has great plans to travel the world and use what she has learned to help people and animals. When not living in Rochester, she is at home with her wonderful family and many pets in Geneva, NY.

October 27, 2007

Dreaming ? How Real Are Our Dreams?

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Greg Gourdian @ 4:17 am

We wake up in a cold sweat from a nightmarish dream of our demise and wonder whether we have just been warned. Or we linger in a dream that is gratifying a primal but unfulfilled desire in our life for happiness or success until we can remain within the dream no longer and we must awaken. Do our dreams have any real significance and if so how can we know?

Many people claim not to remember their dreams upon awakening, or even deny that they have any dreams at all. But dreams appear to be a fundamental function of our minds as necessary as sleeping or breathing; many people sincerely believe that their dreams have great significance or add immense value to their lives.

Whatever significance may be found in our dreams is ultimately up to us to discover. There is no way to empirically know what value our dreams may have, but subjectively we may assign them whatever value seems appropriate to ourselves. A dream which may appear to be a warning may serve to avert us from some future disaster. If such a dream fulfills its purpose it is possible we may never encounter the circumstances which we were warned about and may never then empirically know if it really had been a precognitive dream. If in fact it was a truly precognitive dream which helped to steer us clear of some disaster in our life then that dream certainly had a great deal of value. And, if we are lucky enough to arrive upon the scene of our dream and emerge from the event unscathed, in part due to our forewarning, then we are very lucky indeed because we know in our hearts the dream was given to us to help us. However, there still remains no empirical proof regarding the validity or nature of our dream experience.

So with dreams it often boils down to a matter of faith in the value of our dreams and our skill in understanding what our dreams may mean. The fact that we dream is of course very real, even if the content of our dreams may appear to be unreal. Dreams speak to us on many levels. They may have meaning in context to many different things in our lives. When we study our dreams we should look beyond our first efforts to interpret them and dig deeper to look for as many meanings as we may be able to find.

Dreams have often been thought to derive from a single source, but in fact many dreams are blatantly derived from multiple sources with many different interpretations all of which may be valid from different points of view or contexts. When we attempt to unravel the meanings of our dreams we should be as open-minded as possible to the many motivations we have for assembling our dreams in the manner in which we experience them, we will often want to consider that sources external to ourselves are also involved in the processes by which our dreams are delivered to us. We may be receiving messages from the future, from god, from a soul that has passed away or from a living person whom we may or may not even know.

Whatever the sources of our dreams may be, whether a non-conscious internal process or a divine message from an angelic being, our dreams have many potential meanings to explore and may deliver inspiration, warning, affection, perspective, and much more to us. The value we place in context to our dreams is personal, but those dreams we value highly often have a profound influence on our lives and therefore profound meaning in our lives.

Wherever we find influence and meaning we find something real and valuable to ourselves so our dreams have the potential to be very real indeed, and they may even transcend the everyday reality we are accustomed to believing in and may radically change our beliefs or change how we experience our world.

When we focus our attention on our dreams we may make them stronger and more potent templates for events that will subsequently manifest in our lives, making our dreams appear to be very real indeed. Through prayer, meditation, writing, painting, music and many other activities we may turn our dreams into something we may use to transform our lives and we may even extend that transformation of our own lives to transform the lives of other people.

Our minds are very powerful assets which we may use to deliberately change our world to make ourselves happier and healthier. Our personal beliefs and expectations play very powerful roles in how we manifest the events we will experience in our lives. Our dreams are some of our most potent tools for change in this regard because our dreams do something our conscious minds have great difficulty doing, our dreams synthesize various parts of our lives and experiences bringing them together in new and unexpected ways which may transcend our personal limitations or transcend internal or external conflicts that our conscious minds can scarcely perceive let alone reconcile or use to our advantage.

In this invaluable synthetic process our dreams may bring us new potentials for growth and may help us to heal and to become happier human beings. Through our self improvement and our shared joy and delight with the world which our dreams can help us to achieve we may be empowered to be more compassionate and loving, nurturing people toward those around us with whom we share our lives

This makes our dreams very real indeed because the influence of our dreams can manifest in our lives profoundly in so many different ways to make our world a better place to live.

BIO: Fledgling author Greg Gourdian has worked with the general public as a psychic reader for a little over four years from 1981 to 1986. Much of his written work is channeled, although he will admit that he has no idea who many of the sources for his channeled work may be. He has many strange tales to tell regarding his spiritual journey and he attempts to tell his tales in a humorous or entertaining manner. While not an accredited teacher, Greg has taught classes in psychology, sociology, metaphysics and parapsychology.

Visit Greg’s blog at http://tangledintime.blogspot.com/

May 28, 2007

Doing the Impossible: Balancing Good and Evil

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Kenneth Wallace @ 7:51 pm

Early in my youth I became fascinated by the prospect of actually doing what science said was impossible to do. I learned from both the empirical and theoretical versions of mathematics that there are an infinite number of points between any point A and any point B no matter how long or short the actual distance between the two. A proof of this is the hypothetical experiment that if I stand any distance from a wall and go only half the distance to it with each step, I should never actually get to the wall. Mathematically, this experiment is possible to conduct; physically, it cannot be done. However, we are all in the habit of ?touching walls? without any thought about how to do it or expending any effort in accomplishing this familiar feat.

I can actually touch the wall at any time I choose no matter what distance I am from it when I begin my approach toward it. The math says I cannot traverse infinity because infinity has no beginning or ending. However, the distance I cover between myself (A) and the wall (B), comprising an infinite number of points, indicates that what is finite can include what is infinite and that the infinite can be experienced within the finite. In other words, the two concepts, as commonly assumed, are not mutually exclusive. Each exists only in relationship to and as an integral part of the other.

Life is a Balancing Act

The human being, just as a coin, can only exist at the nexus of opposites. Heads and tails comprise the coin and not merely one or the other. The one cannot exist without the other. Everything physical as well as metaphysical is manifested and experienced as a combination in equal degree of opposing forces. On the cellular level, for example, atoms are composed of a central nucleus surrounded by electrons and positrons, which are elementary particles that have the same mass but opposite electrical charges. These particles counterbalance each other and identify the atom as a specific entity distinct from all other matter. Gravity, no matter how scientifically explained, is nothing more than the unseen force that pulls against that which pulls against it. The magnetic force is simply the equilibrium between positive and negative poles that are aligned exactly opposite each other.

?Who Knows What Evil Lurks in the Hearts of Men??

The primary set of opposites that forms the human soul is good and evil. This dialectic describes the essence of human existence. Evil without the counterbalancing good causes the soul to be ill formed resulting in narcissism and destructive behavior toward one?s self and others.

You cannot live in reverse, which is exactly what evil is ? a drive toward death that seeks to reverse the natural impetus toward life. Interestingly enough, the English language just happens to provide what I think is an ideal illustration of the true definition of evil: ?evil? is ?live? spelled backward. And perhaps the ultimate description of ?devil? is that he once ?lived? but now exists devoid of any life.

This is the definition of evil I find most meaningful when dealing with human nature. Evil arises from the universal human propensity toward selfishness. It is the cause of all war and disharmony throughout human history. It focuses on self-preservation at the expense of others. When your internal balance tilts toward evil, you begin to set yourself up as a god with dominion over everything in your universe. The lives of other creatures, especially other human beings, become insignificant and meaningless except as they play a role in serving to preserve your life and add to your personal increase. The resulting attitude and behavior toward creation sets the stage for conflict, struggle and revolt.

It is one of the mysterious ironies of humanity that when you focus exclusively on the preservation of your own life you actually wind up behaving in ways that gradually and imperceptibly destroy what you think you?re protecting. Evil seeks to distract and eventually defeat the drive toward increasing life for all living things now and in the future by posing as intense interest in the defense of a single life.

Evil is manifested as much in a malevolent attitude toward life as it is in any wicked transgression or overt malfeasance. For example, do you know people who complain often about the circumstances and events in their lives, who feel constantly put upon by hardships, both real and imagined? They see their lives being manipulated by nefarious forces determined to make them miserable by thwarting their every dream and effort to improve their lives. Mark Twain?s comment, ?I?ve experienced a great many calamities in my life; most of them never happened,? applies to these people in that they make their lives unduly difficult because that?s what they expect life to be. It is something to be trudged through, struggled against and tediously endured with stoic resignation. When these people die, they?re glad it?s all over. This attitude is a manifestation of evil because it is antithetical to life. Evil only sees dearth and not abundance. It seeks death, not life.

Several years ago, I had the opportunity to get to know and love a young man who taught me much about life. Scott had inherited a terrible gene from his parents that caused his father and two brothers to die from a painful form of cancer before they had reached the age of 30. He was given a bit more time ? he died at 32. You would be justified in calling this fate a manifestation of evil.

Although he would have been a wonderful father and wanted desperately to have a child he and his wife decided not to have children because they didn?t want to take the chance of passing on his death gene to yet another generation. It was a courageous act of self-denial. I never heard Scott complain about the pain or the apparent injustice of his situation. In fact, he would frequently say with a big grin, ?I’m a happy camper!? Scott loved life and he wanted more than he knew he was to have. Nevertheless, he lived in joy and gratefulness and balanced the evil of his circumstances with the goodness of his attitude. I believe this attitude toward life prepared him to receive more of it after he died.

The Good Isn?t Any Better

Conversely, good without the tempering of its opposite results in a soul that Abraham Lincoln whimsically described: ?It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.? Of course, vices and virtues are relative terms and I don?t think Lincoln was speaking of anything other than human idiosyncrasies and certainly not of unmitigated evil. However, without a definitive respect for the evil that comprises part of one?s self, life becomes insipid, dull, disheartened, despairing, passionless and stunted in its significance. There?s a healthy tension between good and evil that creates and sustains the human soul that, if pulled out of the nexus even slightly in either direction, causes deformation of character, distorted thinking and aberrant behavior.

You might think that it would be best for humanity and the world if the good within us were to completely overcome the evil within us. Ironically, when evil is omitted from the human equation life can actually manifest the evil it seeks to overcome or deny. Those who are horrified by the darkness they sense within them often will take great pains to exclude it from their consciousness thereby hoping to eradicate its existence altogether. Seeking to deal with evil by simply pretending that it doesn?t exist actually creates the very circumstances out of which the dark side can better and more easily emerge into the world through our own actions.

Doug Hall, in his intriguing book, ?The Reality of the Gospel and the Unreality of the Church,? identifies the circumstances that could give rise to further evil in the world. He sees that human societies subconsciously seek to repress ?the other side of the coin? of human existence. By means of their entertainment, social structures, media and often their religions they create alternate worlds in which there is only good, right, purity, brightness and nobility. He cites an advertisement found in the New York Times several decades ago inviting people to the ?unreal? world of Disney World in Orlando, Florida. It is written as if a father were writing to a relative or friends back home in the ?real? world.

?One of the biggest, events of the day was about to happen. A parade. Leading the procession were Mickey and Minnie Mouse, followed by several marching bands and dozens of other famous Disney characters . . .

?Our children sat in amazement as President Lincoln got out of his chair. There before us was President Lincoln, as big as Life, speaking of the things that make countries great.
As he sat down again, the star-filled sky behind him began to turn red. White clouds gathered and stretched across in bands, leaving a patch of blue at the upper left portion of the sky . . .

?After the Hall of Presidents, the children wanted to see Fort Wilderness where we got another glimpse of our great heritage. We met and talked with a man there whose name was Del Rosengrant. A real blacksmith . . .

?We left civilization for a while after that and traveled on four famous rivers of the world. The captain of our jungle boat safely guided us past hungry hippos, trumpeting elephants and spear-clutching headhunters. The kids really got a kick out of it and laughed aloud as my wife and I ducked from one of the elephants that threatened to squirt water at us.

?Everyone who worked at Walt Disney World always seemed to be having as much fun as the visitors. And of course the grown-ups were all having as much fun as the children.
Walt Disney World was the kind of vacation our family will never forget. There was so much to see and experience. Together.

?And then comes the punch line, printed in bold capital letters so it won?t be missed by all the anxious people:

?HOW YOUR CHILDREN SEE THE WORLD DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU SHOW THEM.??

Hall offers his interpretation of the contrast between the sanitized ?clean? world of Disney and the polluted ?dirty? world of real life filled with fear and filth and, at the same time, with gallant self-sacrifice and inspiring morality. He understands well that the means to deal effectively with the dichotomy at the heart of life are learned or not learned in childhood.

?I remembered that I had shown my children Buchenwald. I also remembered that as we sat outside the Ploetzensee Memorial in Berlin, while I told my young son about the courageous people who had been hanged there for resisting the Nazis, he began to cry and accused me: ?Daddy, you tell me the most terrible things!?

?There are terrible things, and there will be. And when a people determines to protect itself and its children from them, it is quite probable that that people will become the cause of terrible things.?

We are fooling ourselves when we believe we are doing good by sanitizing or ignoring altogether the evil within us. It is as difficult to do as minting a coin with only one side or imagining a stick with only one end.

This is What We?re Made Of

So this is what we?re made of: good and evil, however they are defined. In order to be fully human and alive, our task is not to run away from the dark side or to help our good overcome our evil. Rather, we are to keep them in balance, just as each atom exists only by the perfect pairing of the negative and positive particles that surround it. The well-lived and effective life of significance is the one that maintains and appreciates the natural balance between good and evil without allowing one to gain prominence over the other for very long.

There are events, initiated by others or ourselves, that will cause us to be so repulsed by evil that we seek to destroy any vestiges of it we sense within ourselves and others. There are also events that seem to compel us, as the once good boy Darth Vader of the Star Wars film sagas would say, to ?turn to the dark side,? giving in to the path of least resistance by giving up our self-discipline to maintain personal balance. The call to each soul is to persevere and persistently attempt to restore the balance between good and evil whenever it is skewed by the events in our lives or the poor choices we make.

?Do Not Give Up?

I was walking beside a beautiful stream recently in Independence, Missouri when I spotted these words that had been spray painted on a bridge abutment: ?Do Not Give Up.? I thought it interested that such sentiment would be written in a place usually crammed with juvenile expressions of love and lament and the menacing phrases and characters from gangs of anti-social youths. I?m sure it was meant to encourage walkers and runners along the path to continue in their efforts to improve their health and endurance. But it also reminded me that this motto is exactly what we all need to live by every day in all our activities and undertakings. Do not give up when it appears that it would be easier to do so. Do not give up when it seems that everything and everybody around you is strongly suggesting or even threatening you to do so. Do not give up in the face of seemingly insurmountable or ?impossible? obstacles. Do not give up trying to balance your life even when something happens that lures you into thinking you?ve banished completely the evil within you or that moves you to want to simply give in to it.

What Does A Balanced Soul Look Like?

We?ve seen the disruptions and distortions that can occur in life when the balance is disturbed ? in either direction. What happens when your soul is in balance? You experience what psychologists call ?flow,? where everything falls into the proper place, both mentally and physically. You experience creative energy and clarity of thought and direction that results in innovation and joy. Anything ?new? stemming from human initiative arises out of remaining faithful to and faithfully in the tension between good and evil. This tension is truly the crucible of creativity.

I am not saying that you can only experience ?flow? and creativity when you are in balance. I am saying that ?flow? and innovation more often results whenever you have brought your good and evil into balance. You?ve no doubt heard that there is a strong connection between madness and artistry. I?m sure this can be true for external, visible art forms and expressions. However, the inner artistry of the soul, out of which a flowing peacefulness, newness and joy are experienced, originates in the quiet balance between its opposite components.

Take Nothing For Granted

How do you create and sustain the balance? You take nothing for granted. You ask yourself every time you make a decision, ?what will be the consequences for my internal balance and the lives of others who will be affected by this decision?? Every choice you make has consequences for everyone involved. Will the choices you make result in you and others becoming self-righteous, bitter, angry, fearful, arrogant, unapproachable, resentful, condescending, lethargic or vengeful? Will they help you and others become enthusiastic, confident, courageous, bold, accepting, forgiving, self-giving, loving? Examining both the intended and unintended consequences of our choices ? both before and after making them ? is the perpetual task of self-balancing.

Lest you think that this is all too much of a chore to do consistently and successfully please know that we do this all the time anyway without being aware of it. In order for this subconscious activity to be of any value as a tool to help us maintain our personal balance, we need to raise it to conscious awareness so that we can begin to take more control of its effects in our lives and in the lives of others.

We create the quality and legacy of our lives by the choices we make every day. These choices are shaped by what we consider to be possible and impossible. Can good and evil in your life ever be balanced in the ?impossible? way I?ve described or must they forever war against each other? Is it impossible to live a full, joyful, peaceful and productive life within the tension between good and evil? If you think it is impossible, then the only possible alternative is to be caught up in the battle between the two such that you experience life as a chaotic cycle of ups and downs, highs and lows, with only sporadic spells of serenity.

I call your attention to a statement that Jesus of Nazareth made when talking about how to treat those who do you evil. After saying that it is easy for anybody to love his/her neighbor, he proclaims that you should actually ?love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.? (Matthew 5:43-45). This is tantamount to saying that you should do what you thought was impossible. If you think something is impossible, you won?t try to do it.

Jesus was challenging his hearers to rethink what was possible for them to do. He knew that people experience good and evil on a personal and not an abstract level. His challenge was not that we should be exactly as God is, but rather to look at the good within us as originating from God and as the only proper response to evil. When this occurs, evil is counterbalanced with good and the resulting reality is one of peace, harmony and ?flow.?

Abraham Lincoln summed it up well when he asked, ?am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?? Impossible? It depends on what you think. As Henry Ford said, ?if you think you can or you can?t, you?re right!?

Ken Wallace, M. Div., CSL has been in the organizational development field since 1973. He is a seasoned consultant, speaker and executive coach with extensive business experience in multiple industries who provides practical organizational direction and support for business leaders. A professional member of the National Speakers Association since 1989, he is also a member of the International Federation for Professional Speaking and holds the Certified Seminar Leader (CSL) professional designation awarded by the American Seminar Leaders Association.

Ken is one of only eight certified Business Systems Coaches worldwide for General Motors.

His topics include ethics, leadership, change, communication & his unique Optimal Process Design? program.

Tel:(800)235-5690 Claim your free Leadership Self-Evaluation Checklist by visiting the Better Than Your Best website.

May 10, 2007

God is Smarter than the Human Mind?s Comprehension?

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Lance Winslow @ 4:16 am

One thing I find very interesting is that most Christians say that God is so much smarter than humans that the human mind cannot comprehend all that God knows or understands. Personally I believe these Christians should speak for themselves. Secondly, I believe that there is nothing that is beyond comprehension if it is simply explained.

It seems that the Bible does not explain things properly and is purposely ambiguous because it does not have the answer and it knows it does not have the answer. Why do I say this? Because obviously the Bible was written by men who wish to control other men by way of religion and they indoctrinated all the people starting at a very young age to believe this line of malarkey.

If God is so much smarter then why not explain to mankind all this information. The Christians want us to believe that there is no sense in doing this because they would never understand. Oh really, well why not try them. Why not explain it to omit see if they understand rather than hiding it in secrecy. The reason is there is no God or secret and the only secret is there is no secret.

The notion that the reason they do not explain all this information is because no one would understand is a bunch of baloney. And if Christians believe they could not understand it they need to speak for themselves and not the rest of us. Besides if you believe you cannot understand something then you are right.

Many religious followers say that the reason God does not always answer our prayers is because he knows what’s best for us, each one of us. But if this is true then the individual has no freedom and that is not the type of world I care to live in. Freedom is more important than God or the concept of God.

If God is so smart and has made us in his image then obviously mankind is not a very good copy and got screwed up. Such a mistake would not indicate that God is so intelligent after all. When people say that God and the concepts are beyond human intelligence, I say speak for your selves.

I challenge this authority to bring out the proof that such knowledge actually exists that I cannot understand. Until then the debate about God being smarter than human comprehension is a totally bogus argument. Besides there is no proof of said God or any rendition there of anyway. Consider this in 2006.

‘Lance Winslow’ - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington

May 8, 2007

Government Decisions and the Emotional Factor of the Public

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Lance Winslow @ 10:04 pm

All too often we see the government making decisions based on opinion polls rather than what is best for the nation. So, let us talk about Government Decisions and the Emotional Factor of the Public. For those who say we cannot do something, which is vital for the forward progression of our nation or for the safety of the American People because of the emotional factor, well I say to you that;

Indeed, you make an interesting reality check and argument for your position, however consider that in this characterization of my position;

I do not discount the human ‘emotional factor’ I just find it irrelevant to the necessity of the forward progression of the species and this nation. Humans fear change, which is the only constant. Remember; It is the unreasonable man that propels mankind, for he is the only one who can.

Indeed, I score high on the ‘Emotional IQ’ scale, but realize that humans do not think, they mimic, mirror and accept what they hear into their belief system, thru the mass media hysteria and TV that they have surrendered their minds too. Remember; Humans can be lead to believe just about anything.

Practicalness is often favored and yet, chemicals spinning in the mind cause action and nothing happens without action. Indeed anyone who is practical is on the minority side of things. Remember; Common Sense is not all that Common.

You see at the end of the day we have either done what is right or we have failed the American People by succumbing to political opposition party rhetoric and mass media hysteria and are therefore running our nation like a Wind Surfer rather than our future. So please consider all this in 2006.

‘Lance Winslow’ - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington

May 6, 2007

You Always Have Something to Contemplate

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Lance Winslow @ 2:00 am

Is your mind fully engaged at all times or do you turn it off and just vegitate. Most people do have times when they just sit and allow their mind to regroup and they do nothing. Pretty soon they’re mind kicks back into gear and that they are off and running again. Sometimes people use alcohol and other drugs to get their mind in a state where it is doing nothing and yet it is doing something, it is just doing it in a different way.

Some people find pleasure in this and it seems to be very common, but even people who have altered their state of mind through an external substance generally will have something to talk about if they are still coherent. That is to say they are contemplating something. Recently I was told by a friend; You Always Have Something to Contemplate. This is true, actually I do and it did not matter if I was half asleep when they made that observation.

Do you always have something to contemplate or do you turn your mind completely off and vegitate? Too many people these days turn their mind off completely and really this makes no sense because you should be using your mind, as that is what it is for. Please consider this in 2006.

‘Lance Winslow’ - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington

May 5, 2007

Superconmath - The Superconceptual (Superultramodern) Mathematics

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Kedar Joshi @ 9:28 am

1.Superconmathical Definition of Mathematics:

a.Superconmathical definition of pure mathematics ? Pure mathematics is a system of 100% precise and 99.99?% necessary propositions. (The term precise means that every term in a proposition is absolutely clarified, and every non-axiomatic proposition is supported on the basis of axiomatic one/s, leaving no doubt, except the 0.00?1% superhyperbolic doubt, the principle that ?anything may be possible?.)
b.Superconmathical definition of applied mathematics ? Applied mathematics is a system of propositions constructed by applying some or up to all of the pure mathematical propositions to explain and/or predict unnecessary phenomena. In other words, applied mathematics is a system of 100% precise and 99.99?% unnecessary propositions.

2.Philosophy as Mathematics:

According to the superconmathical definition of mathematics, the core ideas in superultramodern science and philosophy, though appearing to be philosophical, are, in fact, mathematical. For example, the axiomatic component of the NSTP (Non - Spatial Thinking Process) theory is pure mathematical, while its hypothetical component is applied mathematical.

3.Superconmathical Foundations of Pure Mathematics:

These are in contrast with the symbolic or, in particular, set theoretic foundations of

pure mathematics (as laid out in Bertrand Russell’s Principia Mathematica). The

superconmathical foundations are conceptual (though symbolism itself is a concept)

which attempt to define number, for example, as a symbolic representation of

quantity and justify the equality a + b = b + a on the reason that in scalar addition

order is irrelevant (and, if possible, to decompose this concept or a group of concepts

further).

4.Superconmathical Reconstruction of Pure Mathematics:

It entails some flaws in modern/ultramodern pure mathematics, and presents the superultramodern reconstruction of pure mathematics, free of those flaws. One of the flaws is mentioned below.

Flaw in the concept of hyperspace ? The Joshian conjecture of three ? dimensional space [Space, whether appearance or reality, can have three and only three dimensions (The conjecture if based on two grounds: a. The NSTP theory implies falsehood of the ontology of general relativity. b. Four or higher dimensional space cannot justifiably be imagined.) ] implies that the concept of hyperspace is invalid. And the flaw in the concept of hyperspace further implies that the Poincare conjecture [if three ? dimensional sphere (the set of points in four ? dimensional space at unit distance from the origin) is simply connected] shall neither be proved nor be disproved, as it is based on the concept of four ? dimensional space.

5.Superconmathical Resolution of Modern/Ultramodern Mathematical Problems:

Superconmathical Resolution of Russell?s Paradox ?

Russell’s Paradox -

‘A paradox uncovered by Bertrand Russell in 1901 that forced a reformulation of set theory. One version of Russell’s paradox, known as the barber paradox, considers a town with a male barber who, every day, shaves every man who doesn’t shave himself, and no one else. Does the barber shave himself? The scenario as described requires that the barber shave himself if and only if he does not! Russell’s paradox, in its original form considers the set of all sets that aren’t members of themselves. Most sets, it would seem, aren’t members of themselves - for example, the set of elephants is not an elephant - and so could be said to be ‘run-of-the-mill’. However, some ’self-swallowing’ sets do contain themselves as members, such as the set of all sets, or the set of all things except Julius Caesar, and so on. Clearly, every set is either run-of-the-mill or self-swallowing, and no set can be both. But then, asked Russell, what about the set S of all sets that aren’t members of themselves? Somehow, S is neither a member of itself nor not a member of itself.’ (See David Darling: The Universal Book of Mathematics, 2004)

Superconmathical Resolution -

Superconmathically Russell’s paradox is quite easy to resolve. The superconmathical resolution could be stated in just one sentence: As there is no barber who shaves every man who doesn’t shave himself, and no one else, likewise there is no set of all sets that aren’t members of themselves.

This sentence is justified or explained below.

Suppose there is a barber who shaves every man who doesn’t shave himself, and no one else. Now the barber himself is a man and the supposition requires that the barber shave himself if and only if he does not! This contradiction straightaway implies that the supposition is false. That is, there is no barber who shaves every man who doesn’t shave himself, and no one else.

The justification of the sentence ‘there is no set of all sets that aren’t members of themselves’ goes on similar lines.

Superconmathical approach to mathematics, being more conceptual than the traditional symbolic or set theoretic approach, makes it possible to resolve such fuzzy problems or paradoxes.

Kedar Joshi - Superultramodern (SUM) Science and Philosophy

April 12, 2007

Essence of Democracy and Freedom of Speech; Disagreeing?

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Lance Winslow @ 5:23 pm

Recently a gentleman stated to me that he believed that the essence of Democracy and Freedom of Speech was disagreement, protest, debate and counter arguments to a point of contention. Well, maybe Democracy and Freedom of Speech has turned into that. But if it has then is it indeed the best method to run a Great Nation like the United States?

Is it best for all concerned for everyone to run around and complain, without a viable solution to the points of contention that they are protesting? For instance during the last election in the United States the self-proclaimed Blue Party, which really should have been reversed as Communism stands for Red and the Liberals are socialists waiting for a disaster to happen and would love to turn the greatest nation in the History of Mankind into a communist (government does everything) socialist Beehive of humanity.

As this debate and discussion continued apparently this liberal never had this pointed out to him in a meaningful way and thus he stated; So, first off, thank you. Very seriously, thank you for taking all the time you did to respond to me in such detail. As your goal was to open my eyes, you certainly did that. You and I disagree on some points, but isn’t that the essence of democracy and freedom of speech?

So, I ask YOU, the reader of this article, is disagreeing the essence of democracy? If so, Democracy should render itself short lived amongst the human race in the next millennium. If the entire population runs around disagreeing and attacking, may I please ask how any of YOU humans plan to get anything done of value or propel the human species forward? Because seriously, I am having my doubts about YOUR abilities and the forward progression of mankind. Consider all this in 2006.

‘Lance Winslow’ - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington

Debating With Imbeciles is No Fun; You Always Win and They Just Do Not Get It

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Lance Winslow @ 3:46 pm

Debate and discussion with intellectuals is fun and often you find at least one minor point of contention worthy from the other side. When I talk about intellectuals, I do not mean academics, as I do believe there are enough educated derelicts to fill the Salton Sea.

Recently I had a debate with a Liberal French Canadian who attempted to correct my speech with a more appropriate politically correct terminology. The terminology I used had nothing to do with him personally, it was over the use of the word; Ehy. And how so many Canadians use it, almost to the point of giving away their citizenship by the mere use of it ehy? This led to a debate about political correctness in general.

In the end we agreed to disagree, which made sense. He agreed that I had opened his eyes on the political correctness issues and problems with them and I agreed he was mistaken in every regard, as I was correct entirely and he was completely in error.

Of course since the conversation was intellectually based it was all good from my perspective? After all how often do you get to talk with or even debate with someone who is actually fully engaged in their ‘life experience’ or ‘turned on’ mentally enough to understand what you are even talking about these days?

You see, Debating With Imbeciles is No Fun; You Always Win and They Just Do Not Get It. Debating with smart people is fun, as you will learn from the experience and challenge yourself. Consider all this in 2006.

‘Lance Winslow’ - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington

Linear Thought of the Present Period or Lies of History for $200 Bob

Filed under: Arts-and-Entertainment, Philosophy — Lance Winslow @ 5:40 am

Have you ever thought to yourself when interacting with others in social situations; you know I have heard all this BS before. Indeed it seems that even intelligent people show up at a party and begin discussing; How about those Yankees or How about the weather?

Indeed most of us have nothing against baseball, as it is about as American as Apple Pie and Automobiles. And the 2005 Atlantic Tropical Hurricane Season, certainly changed the weather headlines for months on end, as if it would never stop.

Nevertheless are you simply tired of all the linear thought out there? If so well then it sounds like you are someone who could certainly benefit from higher level dialogue and assist us in bettering the Republic and moving linear thought from flickering cave walls to the masses.

Would you rather discuss other things? Do you ancient studies fascinating, do you ever wonder if all the history we have been taught and everything we know is wrong and we are doomed to repeat even if we study it because we are studying nothing more than re-written purported falsehood by the victors of that past period?

http://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Your-Knowledge-of-History-Correct?&id=233411

If we have all be sold a bill of goods on history then we need not discuss the past. If everyone in the present is stuck in linear thought, then why bother discussing anything but the future road ahead? Too philosophical for you; I see, well then; How about those Yankees do you think the weather will hold out for next weeks game? Think on this in 2006.

‘Lance Winslow’ - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington

Newer Posts »