.ll 72
.fo off
.co on 
.ce ((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))
.ce ADR - 126
.ce Copyright (C) Homer Wilson Smith
.ce Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes
======================================================================== 151
Resent-Date:  Thu, 06 Apr 89 22:49:36 EDT
Resent-From:  "Homer W. Smith" 
Resent-To:    adore-l@ualtavm
Date:         Fri, 10 Mar 89 14:15:07 EST
From:         "Homer w. Smith" 
Subject:      Re: Life is a Holodeck
To:           Parapsychology Discussion Forum 
In-Reply-To:  Message of Fri, 10 Mar 89 08:53:17 EST from 

Old Psi-l.

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>>     However if you really use Ocam's Razor and say that the
>>external universe does not exist at all but is just a projected
>>hologram, then one is faced with the problem of how to fit
>>all that ability (to project) into something that has no
>>space or time.
> 'Something'?  You've just said that the extrenal universe 'does not exist
>at all"!!  How could anything 'project' a nothing!!

     The something I am refering to is the inner something that must
then have all this ability to project this outward illusion of picture
space time place form and event.  this inward something would not
be a 3 dimension physical something, but would be a 0 dimensional
physical something that was real and able even though it had
no space, time matter or energy.

     Its basic abilities would be to project hallucinations
of space time matter and energy at the beck and call of any
conscious dream unit that wished to indulge.

>Unless you want to explain who 'designed' our consciousness, I would
>encourage you to get rid of the teleological language here.

     The 'purpose' of something can be what it was 'designed' for
by some intelligent being, or it can be just what the function of
the thing is assuming it was not designed at all but is eternal
and forever existing.  There is no assumption here that consciousness
was designed by someone or something to have a purpose, but consciousness
does have functions, and in a very inanimate way, those functions
are its 'purpose'.

    It is a different use of the word purpose and you should not
get stuck on it.

>>     However the second theory is very adamant about being
>>considered with some seriousness.
>Even if I buy the line about 'all evidence coming through our cs' (as
>if it could come through anything else, that is), why isn't that good
>enough?  What else could there be?  Even you yourself say that the cs
>is the important thing here.  I am making an equivocation with 'spirit'.
>Incoherent concepts confuse me.

     What are you saying here, Norm?

     You don't believe your dreams are real do you?  You see and feel and
interact with 'real people' in your dreams but is there anyone else there,
or are dreams just a hallucination of external cause?  The world is
the same way, it is all a dream in consciousness, but in this case
other bodies DO have other dreamers operating them, so this is like
a co dream.

     But those other people are not out THERE, where the dream of their
bodies is, they are right where you are, all projecting outward
a dream of others bodies out there.  That is why you can travel
anywhere instantly once out of your body, because in reality you
are not traveling at all, you are just shifting the dream around
you.  Of course this is no trivial accomplisment and takes mucho
guts.  You might endup in a grave or a cess pool or something.

     In fact it is there very wish to NOT end up in certain places
that has backed the spirit in to so many corners that finally
it can only occupy a body which can only see and hear a small
radius of distance and time.  It is ideal for those who wish
to forget and not confont the killing fields.

     However, how many corners can you back yourself into before
you become a rat?  Getting people out of their bodies is exactly and
only a process of getting them to be willing to be somewhere else.

     But most of those somewhere elses are much to icky for them
to want to be there.

     Much safer to be a body, then you don't have the option and
no one will blame you for not using your responsibility to go be and
and confront where ever there is to be and look at.

>Your reliance on the inner-outer distinction is troubling.  You've given
>no reason for me to even acknowledge that it is actual.  Keep in mind,
>that as Jim Lippard was compelled to point out to you, that the
>'problem' with appearance is not our senory apparati, but with our
>confused interpretations thereof.

     Truly the words inner and outer are incorrect as they
assume the very 3 dimensional universe I claim is merely a
hologram in our consciousness.

     I should try to come up with something better.

     But the problem is as I stated before, that consciousness seems
to be inherently geared to perceive and think in dimensional terms
of space and time, and I am using my poor consciousness to consider
a 0 dimensional ground of its being.  Could burn it out you know.

     Of course y'all would love that.

>>     And they do this with tremendous unshakable certainty based
>>on zip.

     Zip.  Just because you SEE something in your consciousness is
no evidence at all that there is a real external reality that
is referenced by your conscious picture.   Get me clearly, I am
saying the whole world is a hallucination.  The hallucination
is real, and the being doing the hallucination is real, but
all the 'out theres' are virtual projections of a hologramic nature.

     When you are walking down the street, it LOOKS and FEELS like
you are moving, but in reality you are just shifting the dream
in a convincing way.

     It works in real life just like it works when you are dreaming
in bed.  You FEEL like you are walking, but it is just a hallucination.
Most would say, sure, but the brain got this ability to hallucinate
during sleep, because it experienced it in the real world in the first place.

     I merely disagree, as I would have to claim that the brain is
just part of the dream too, and that the spirit (conscious dream unit)
can wake up out of myriad levels of dreams until it is finally
asleep in the Big Snooze of them all.  Peace forever for free.

    You see, being 'awake' means getting lost in a dream
of external things, including other dreamers who co control
images in your dream. One big CP LINK.  Really being awake means not having
any dreams or consciousness at all, and at that point you are
total cause over your future because there is nothing there
to influence you until you so decide to have it again.
 Homer W. Smith      adore-l@ualtavm      4/06/89*Life is a Holodeck