VITALISM (fwd)

Homer Wilson Smith HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Thu Mar 2 17:16:11 EST 2017


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


        6:45pm
        Stephen Smith
        Remember the dogs on state street?
        Hi Holmer, I found the following quote: As physiology came to
        be understood more and more in terms of physical mechanisms,
        vitalistic explanations for the functioning of the body were
        refuted one by one. The last holdout for vitalism was the
        kidney, but it fell into total disrepute after the elegant
        experiments of Homer Smith in the 1930s demonstrated clearly
        the filtration and secretory mechanisms of that organ.
        It came from this
        website:??http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Vitalism
        But I am thinking that these attacks on vitalism are
        misplaced, and brought to us by "meat heads." Did your father
        (quoted above) understand this conflict as well as yourself?
        The fallacy of excluded middle must be in place here, is my
        quess. My view is that the vital is supported by the physical,
        rather than being defined by the physical. The vital gave
        birth the volition, emotion, and spirit, all of which are
        self-evident and all have transcended the kidney function that
        they depend on. A trinitarian logic gets beyond the fallacy of
        excluded middle, where vitalism is discovered again.

        Vitalism: Facts, Discussion Forum, and Encyclopedia Article
        www.absoluteastronomy.com
        Today

        11:13pm
        Homer Wilson Smith
        Read the very last chapter of "Man and His Gods", it may be on
        line.
        My father's idea of God had been poisoned by Christianity and
        the other inanities of Earth to a point where he had little
        patience for it rightly so. God is not a God of BEHAVIOR, God
        is a God of CREATION.
        Occam's Razor says take the simplest theory to your bean
        counters, as the simplest theory that explains all the facts
        is the one you should spend money on. But who has all the
        facts? That vitalism, or God or Spirit, or consciousness is
        not necessary to explain the extant observable facts of the
        time, hardly proves they do not exist, and my father knew it,
        he merely found little reason to complicate things by bringing
        God or Spirit into it. Does a watch need a spirit to run it?
        Does a brain? To him they were both machines, and machines are
        mathematical mass and force in motion contraptions that have
        no need for PAIN SHAME PLEASURE LOVE etc. Notice that a car is
        a mechanical contraption also, but its DRIVER is a spirit. Now
        we know that love and pain can not of force and mass be made.
        So they missed that one. Recent results about the nature of
        consciousness rather conclusively puts to rest the idea that
        consciousness is a process in machinery, space time gizmos, of
        any complexity. This is athttp://www.lightlink.com/theproof. A
        machine can not be certain of itself, space or time because a
        machine learns by being an effect of distant causes, no matter
        how close, and the relationship between effect and cause is
        one of THEORY, not PERFECT CERTAINTY. No part of any machine
        can be perfectly certain of any other part! But consciousness
        is self aware, worse it is self aware of how it is NOW, not
        how it WAS a nano second ago, which is the best a machine can
        do about learning about its own self. And its still a theory
        about a nano ago! This is easy to prove, if there is time
        between the cause and the effect, then the cause is GONE by
        the time the effect is created, and thus the effect can never
        bea direct perception of the cause as it IS NOW, but only a
        symbolic messenger of how the cause might have been when the
        effect was generated. Thus the effect can never see the cause
        period. Time between causes blindness and only conjecture to
        remain. Consciousness however can SEE itself SEEING, and thus
        this must be an instantaneous process in the now, where the
        being is not learning about itself by looking at a later
        effect but by looking directly at the cause itself in the NOW.
        Space time gizmo physics can not wrap its wits around that one
        at all, as all physics understands is space time processes,
        but consciousness is a spaceless timeless 'process' where
        learning about cause is gleaned by directly looking at cause
        and not at some alleged effect a while in time later. The time
        between cause and effect in the PU demands that the learning
        about the cause via the effect is dated learning out of the
        gate. Anyhow one out of the body experience that is verifiable
        and all of physics gets thrown out. THERE IS NO WAY THEY WILL
        EVERY EXPLAIN AWAY CONSCIOUSNESS WITH THE 4 FUNDAMENTAL FORCES
        OF NATURE, no matter how unified they get it. That's because
        perfect certainy and love and shame can not of force and mass
        be made. They may explain the physical projection and thus
        reduce everyone to a space time gizmo, but never the
        consciousness experiencing itself with perfect certainty. The
        unified science of the all that is then is saved in this way:
        The physical universe does not exist at all, its a rendition
        in the dreaming mind of consciousness. Consciousness is co
        eternal with all other consciousness units and lives above
        space and time as the static co-dreaming the kinetic. The
        static is a MULTI BEING, and each being incarnates as it
        wishes in a dreamtime body called an avatar. It can be a quark
        or a star or a molecule or a human body. Thus the PU is a
        hallucination pure and simple, correct down to the last quark,
        but none the less a co shared virtual reality. Consciousness
        is not virtual, it is actual, as is the I-AM being that has
        that consciousness, and consciousness is not a process in a
        virtual reality! So no, my father did not have that
        understanding, that would have been like expecting a dreamer
        to know he was dreaming. He like Newton and the rest of the
        meatballs thought that space and time are actual, just as most
        dreamers don't know they are dreaming, but he mentions 'what
        is this thing we call consciousness?' in that last chapter of
        Man and His Gods, leaving it I suppose to another life which
        he didn't know for sure he would have, and frankly probably
        thought he didn't have and after 10 years with my mother,
        probably didn't want. Most meatballs have a sense that
        conscioussness is 'different' or special, but as far as I know
        they have NEVER put their finger on just what it is that makes
        consciousness special. What can consciousness do that a
        machine can't? PERFECT CERTAINTY OF ITSELF AND ITS EXPERIENCES
        IN THE NOW. Since I am the only one saying that in present
        time and have no footnotes or references to support it, I
        shall be considered a crack pot until such time a that
        changes. :)

        The Proof
        www.lightlink.com
        Learning Certainty and Causality in Consciousness

        11:14pm
        Homer Wilson Smith
        And with all that said, the angels and the aliens have been
        tinkering with the genetic strains and the kidney for a long
        time to make it evolve properly

- ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01CE7AA0.B105DAB0--
Mon Jul  8 13:06:46 EDT 2013

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Mar  2 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB:  http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP:  ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/vitalism
Send mail to archive at lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFYuFD6URT1lqxE3HERAqqhAKC1LdB0vb+649HCeUwU0DSf+VDx9wCghO8w
d5k7XZG7fP4vTYU1bIVy68o=
=q34d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L at mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l


More information about the Clear-L mailing list