In article <36cf7c25.791438 at news.demon.co.uk>, malcolm at pigsty.demon.co.uk (Malcolm McMahon) wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Feb 1999 03:03:46 GMT, Bloxy's at hotmail.com (Bloxy's) wrote:
>>>>Indeed. But what makes you think that's a result of intelligence?
>>>>Ok, fine argument.
>>What do YOU think it is a result of?
>>Rat race of survival?
>>"Its a jungle out there", you know.
>>>>So you think this world is not an utter, unending
>>and unlimited intelligence?
>>>>What is it then?
>>And where did you get that idea?
>>I think inteligence is merely one of the things we're aware of. Think of
>it as a series of concentric layers of increasing simplicity.
>The external world
>>Each layer interacting only with the ones to either side.
Well, this is as good of a model, as any other.
Except, even there you made a few fundamental mistakes.
First of all, your very structure is an ancient structure,
dated back at least 5000 years ago, just to put things
And the way it goes is like this:
1. The body
[the matter, the "external" world, and all of it,
and that is your first mistake, distinguishing the body
from external world, as it is the same thing - a physical
2. The mind [that, which can perceive the body]
You see, this is a very consistent and appropriate
model, with insight, levels of magnitude more in deapth,
than your monkey logic.
Now, in order to have 2. here what is the most fundamental
Well, the most fundamental requirement is that it has
to be different from one, and in YOUR definition,
there is no even mentioning of intellect to be distinguishible
from the "external world", as you simply did not provide neither
basis, no reasons why they are different.
Again, THE MIND can PERCEIVE the body.
[therefore, it is not the body]
The hell will freeze over before you can disprove it.
3. Consciousness [that, which can perceive the mind]
Again, the same rule applies.
If you can DETECT the mind, no matter via what means,
that implies that you are using the mechanism,
external to the mind.
That is consciousness.
4. Turia [that, which is beyond ALL description]
Nothing can be said about it.
And it does not imply that it does not exist.
Else, it would not even be in definition.
Yes, there IS something beyond the mind and
consciousness. Plenty of even scientific evidence
for it at this junction.
And lastly, your assertion of
"Each layer interacting only with the ones to either side",
is pure mental masturbation, as you will not be able to
It is one dimensional view of reality,
or ALL THERE IS.
Existance is multi-dimensional and simultaneous.
You concepts of time are simply obscene.
There is no restrictions of ANYTHING interacting
with ANYTHING. It only exists in your mind, forever
struggling to concur your own complex of inferiority.
That is all.