> You said: "Belief is for losers" and "we condemn belief", yet you
> believe in Super Powers and anything supposedly (and unproved!) going
> with it!?

      Those that confuse evidence with proof are unworthy of further

      You assume that super powers are unevidenced to me.

      My official public position, is that it is a good bet that the world
is a dream, and thus the existence of super powers is probably self

      No belief, just rational bets based on a life time of experience
and evidences of all kinds, some merely hearsay, some not so hearsay.
Even if it were ALL hearsay, *MY* bet stands at 51/49 for super powers.
Back in the days when I was a mortal meatball, the bet was 0/100
against.  But the proof changed all that and the bet came up to 50/50.
Its been a hard battle against pain, sorrow, and incredulity to bring it
up to a fragile 51/49 for super powers the basic one of course being
personal responsibility for choosing to be here.

      If you wish to consider that a bet is a belief in a fair chosen
probability, then fine, yes they are beliefs, but the definition of
belief being referred to by Adore in the quote above, is more sinister,
more like the blind faith that some people have in various things.

      That is hope turned into conviction.

      Personally I can see the argument that a bet is a belief is a bet
is a belief.

      So yeah we all have our bets, and thus we all have our beliefs.

      But Adore's point, as unrealistic as it is, is that a good
scientist doesn't confuse his bets with his perfect certainties, and
thus one always needs to seek the perfect certainty in any quest for
true knowledge.

      Even if someone were to move the marble for you, you still wouldn't
have a perfect certainty that the event even happened, let alone that it
happened by the methods claimed, let alone that YOU could have such
power, let alone that they were safe for anyone to have.

      Over time you would start wondering about the reality or existence

      Those that can not present a finely tuned prime directive on the
matter of the existence and use of super powers won't even be allowed
into the conclaves of research going on.

      So write up your version of a workable prime directive with full
explanations of why and wherefore, and hand it in as a resume, and they
might invite you in.  Such a resume would involve a detailed discussion
of what evidence you have for and against such powers, and what you
would do with them if you had them, and what the consequences of those
actions would be.

      Really its not that hard, if you demonstrate more than the
intelligence of a pig, they will probably let you in.

      True certainty of eternality comes from direct perception of
eternality.  Others can always wonder and doubt, but just as you can be
certain that you exist, you can also be certain that space and time are
illusions and that you CHOSE to enter.

      Perfect certainty of choice is problematic and a big deal, not to
be belittled.

      But anyhow most people haven't had that experience, many still
wonder if they exist themselves, for these it will be a while before the
facility of perfect certainty gets put to use.

      "I wonder if I am, therefore I am, for a nothing could not wonder
whether it was a nothing or a something." -

       Philosophocles, ca. 0 BT (before time).


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com    In the Line of Duty    http://www.lightlink.com
Fri Nov  5 14:28:27 EDT 2010

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jan  9 12:06:01 EST 2016
WEB:  http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP:  ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore813.memo
Send mail to archive@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.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

Sat Jan  9 15:34:34 EST 2016