|
|
1 May 2004 @ 04:42, by ov. Communication
The last couple of weeks I've been encountering the dialogue word in a number of unrelated places. It isn't like this is a new term for me and that once I had learned it then I started to notice that it was around. This was like it was in my face and demanding this was a concept that needed attention. More >
|
|
|
|
 24 Apr 2004 @ 13:33, by ming. Communication
George Por says: Could collective intelligence be the foundation for the next social and spiritual revolution?
Craig did it! Craig Hamilton, one of the four editors of the "What Is Enlightenment?" magazine pulled together an amazing issue on collective intelligence. Their website says:In our May 2004 issue, Craig Hamilton's groundbreaking feature, Come Together: The Mystery of Collective Intelligence introduces you to pioneers who are discovering that wholes are far more than the sum of their parts. When individuals unite in a shared intention, something mysterious comes into being - with capacities and intelligences that far transcend those of the individuals involved." Not much of it online. But there are some audio interviews. And the people working together on the subject of Collective Intelligence seem to experience it themselves: I'm noticing a new way of working together, where our interest in what is possible - from the most creative to the most practical - comes deeply alive and our flow of ideas is like a dance, where we are each paying attention to one another, taking in the thinking and research that each individual has done prior to the meeting, and responding in such a way that we really come together. It is so far from any meeting I've ever had in any other work setting - and I don't know how it is happening - but we're able somehow to bring forward the ideas we have without being attached to them, and without our identity being wrapped up in them. It is as if this creative mind just sweeps down on us, and the more we pay attention to each other and keep open the space between us, something else happens.
Laura Hartzell, Lenox, MA And, yes, I think that collective intelligence is possibly the most important thing we can figure out. If groups of us routinely can be smarter than us as individuals, we might actually be getting somewhere. As opposed to groups of people becoming dumber and more unscrupulous together than they individually are. The understanding of collective intelligence is key. It happens sometimes, and it can be magical. And other times, despite being very needed, it doesn't. We have to understand how to do it. More >
|
|
|
|
 21 Apr 2004 @ 15:27, by spells. Communication
Being Dislike and/or Being Misunderstood
Someone once said to me..”I would rather be disliked, than misunderstood”. I see the truth of these words, but it appears that both can also be the situation. Now please don’t misunderstand this post (no pun intended). I am NOT looking for compliments, ego boosting, words of encouragement, advice or anything of the sort. I only want to clear the air and be real.
What prompted me to write this little post is a private message I recently received . I was told off in so many words and then blocked from responding. OK, that is his/her prerogative. But in all honesty, I see it as cowardly, defensive, immature and sneaky.
I am not here for image. I am here to share the truth with other souls on their journey. Sometimes this truth is harsh and to the point. But enough sugar coating is done without my help. This may come off as “unloving, unspiritual, harsh, negative, judgmental ...to point out some of the “labels” I have been called. When I am told this I always ask the same question…what could be more loving than telling the truth so that others can see it and progress from there?
Repeating messages was another accusation thrown at me in this little private message. Yes, I do repeat myself, but only to make a point. When a post or comment is answered within paragraphs of the original post, this is done to be clear and thorough. So many points are missed when discussion gets going and my hope is to directly answer key topics in the hopes of inspiring deep discussion. When the points are not addressed, it is my habit to bring them up again. That way I may be disliked but not misunderstood. The same is true of questions that are not answered or not answered directly or honestly.
Contrary to popular belief, and I did have to do a lot of digging to see this clearly, I am not by nature a negative person. As I have said countless times before….don’t shoot the messenger. I don’t fool around though and I look at the bottom line in all situations. If it is not the cause of the problem that is being addressed, then the problem will not go away. Pure and simple. That is NOT my rule, it just is.
Now getting back to the message sent the other night. It wasn’t so much the words that struck me, as it was the psychic attack that I strongly felt. I (as many here) am very sensitive and when an illness, pain, discomfort or other symptom strikes me, I question where it comes from. I woke up yesterday morning with a migraine. My head hurt so much I wanted to just scream. I meditated and looked for the source and guess who popped in my head?..…the author of that message. I didn’t know yet that I had received the message, but after long meditation I knew who was attacking me. Of course, this was confirmed as soon as I logged onto NCN and saw what was written.
I am telling you this, not to attack anyone, but to ask you to please be aware! Psychic vibe and attack are not often talked about among members of a group, (or in our society) because we want to believe everyone is coming from good intent. But watch out for those that care more for image and their own self gratification then true spiritual ministry. They are very good at deception and convincing you that they are right and caring. They are very good at minimizing key points, pointing fingers of accusation and/or changing the subject.
Please always go within and seek the answer, don’t take another’s word for it. Also use meditation, logic and reasoning. And please also remember…it is said that the truth hurts, but this matters not for it is still the truth, no matter how you may feel.
Peace, love and clarity,
Spells More >
|
|
|
|
 7 Mar 2004 @ 22:13, by ashanti. Communication
Thanks to Ming, I recently became aware of a new weblog called FutureHi. It explores a whole range of thought that is quite new to me, and one which is fascinating, cutting edge, and thought provoking. Specifically, I am intrigued by the Singularity, and Uploading. I immediately wondered how on earth this could be relevant for Africa, and the rest of the developing world. In one future scenario, Africa is written off as sinking into total chaos and destruction, which disturbed me greatly. If the most vital, innovative and creative scientific minds see Africa in this way, then it looks like a major polarization is going to increase.
My grasp of the overall concepts are now sufficient to put together some preliminary thoughts on these concepts in relation to Africa.
The first thing I did was simplify and de-jargonise the ideas for fellow African colleagues, and bounce the ideas off them. Those working within organized religion found the idea to be an abomination. Those working within social services were interested to the extent of what solutions these concepts could provide for poverty, hunger and illness. Certainly, removal of consciousness from the organic body would eliminate all the organic pre-occupations that currently dominate Africa. Hunger and illness would no longer be an issue. However, the social workers found the idea of life in a non-organic environment to be a nightmare of hellish proportions. Those working in political office immediately asked how one could control individual consciousness units if they were in a virtual environment. Could programmes be devised to keep the individuals in line? (That one amused me greatly, it seems that working in government breeds the idea of the need to control people. This need to control was also reflected in the recent World Summit on the Information Society where alarmingly, most of the Third World countries wanted to control the Internet, and restrict or deny access for their citizens.).
My preliminary and informal survey concluded, I then pondered these reactions and realised that in Africa, there is an overall mind-set, which appears to be incompatible with exploring concepts like the Singularity and Uploading. While Africa is ravaged because of First World exploitation of their resources, there is no doubt that African governments are largely complicit in the plunder, for their own benefit, and at the expense of their people. My further thoughts on this thus eliminate governments as participants in these possibilities, and I look only at what benefit could be derived for the People.
To me, the nature of consciousness is essential in these future scenarios. If a mind is damaged because of the environment it evolved in, and carries notions of fear, violence and anger as reactive responses to everything, then what would happen if a mind like this was Uploaded? The meme of violence as a survival mechanism would be brought into the Virtual World, and it is a meme that spreads, just like a virus. Which heads us towards that dangerous territory. Who decides when a mind is “fit” to be Uploaded? Who has that right? And by what authority?
Then, there is the other possibility. A mind can only evolve in relation to the stimulus it is exposed to. In Africa, the environment is dominated mostly by poverty, hunger, illness, violence, cruelty, lack of access to basic facilities, and pollution. African governments do very well for themselves, and their politicians have the advantage of exposure to other environments where the mind-set is different, and there are better living conditions for ordinary people. By and large, people born in poverty do not have access to other benchmarks, and it seems that governments want to keep it that way (as manifested by their desire to limit access to the Internet for their people). This is where technology could help indeed. Without Uploading fully, ordinary people could have test-drives of other possible environments, and experience the stimuli that accompanies a virtual experience. By broadening their vision into the range of life experiences possible, this could result in the mind-shift which seems to be a necessary precursor to full Uploading. The greatest problem in Africa is not the range of symptomatic problems I have listed, which manifest in the physical world, but the mind-set which is conditioned to a very limited life experience and expectation. It is a self-limitation which is inherited from the colonization of Africa, and is perpetuated by governments which essentially are parasites on their People, keeping them down, keeping them limited. The violence in Africa is a natural expression of rage at the limitation, the lack of choices, the lack of ability to live a life of full expression and self-actualisation.
In summary, what I would really like to see is the creation of Virtual Reality environments where everyone has a chance to “test” and experience a whole range of life possibilities, thus expanding their ability to make informed choices. The unexplored danger is that governments will find some way to control the Virtual Environments to keep people under control. Governments mostly are in Fear of the idea of a society of free, educated, adult and ethical people who can make their own choices and decisions based on the greatest good for the greatest number of life-forms. Perhaps those in government who are so afraid of their people being free could experience virtual simulations of a society of free and informed people, and then realise there is nothing to fear. Then, we could get them on board, too.
These are preliminary thoughts, I still need to ponder more fully, and research more, the notion of the Singularity, and full Uploading. These future scenario events have possibilities which make them definitely worth exploring, but the possible implications need to be fully fleshed out and considered. For a variety of reasons, I cannot see them happening suddenly, all at once. I think implementation will occur in stages. Like the Internet. Probably tested out within a small group of scientists, and then exported out further, after which they will gain momentum. I can see that Africa and other developing countries could be left out altogether, and this is of concern. Hence my layperson’s exploration into this new territory.
My future ponderings will be again on the nature of consciousness to be uploaded – if we have not solved our problems at the current level, can we really leap into the next? Should we not be cautious about expecting a shift to a new life form to resolve the problems (mostly mental – intolerance, prejudice, conflict, greed, lack of ethics) that we have not solved at our current level? And again – who decides what consciousness units are to be Uploaded? Can nanotechnology cure AIDS? Questions, questions, questions. More >
|
|
|
|
 21 Feb 2004 @ 21:33, by nemue. Communication
I was reading a message from Stuart today, which made me take stock and think about how important it is to tell those we love and care for, how much we love them. To tell them how proud we are of them. Our failure to do so can leave many scarred for life. More >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 9 Jan 2004 @ 06:24, by ming. Communication
Cleve Backster is a pioneer in research demonstrating how plants, or for that matter, any live cells have some surprising abilities to respond to thoughts and feelings and communicate in ways they wouldn't traditionally be expected to."My plant read my mind!" On February 2nd, 1966 this realization forever changed the life of the FBI and CIA's then foremost polygraph researcher, and reintroduced modern science to the sentient nature of our universe. On that date the brilliant and disciplined mind of Cleve Backster conceived an irrefutable paradigm-busting scientific protocol. With straightforward electronics that a student or garage-level scientist can replicate, he proved to humans that their thoughts and emotions affect the behavior of their own and other living cells.
For millennia traditional peoples have known that all life forms-plants, animals and even single cells-are not only sentient and intelligent, but that they communicate with one another. This fact got lost a few centuries ago between the mechanistic focus of industrial science and the modern human view of reality that ascribed consciousness only to the human brain. A few 20th century scientific pioneers, like Chandra Bose in India and the Kirlians in the former Soviet Union, had earlier developed technology to demonstrate energy fields and basic emotional responses in plants and animals. Backster's experimental work took the next step and documented a heretofore unrecognized cellular level of interspecies biocommunication.
At the bottom you can find a review of Backster's new book by Paul von Ward. Now, Cleve Backster wasn't particularly the first person who experimented with this subject matter using galvanic skin response meters. For example, Ron Hubbard was playing with this in the 50s, and was generally ridiculed for it. Backster is a more respectable and mainstream character, being essentially the father of modern polygraph testing, so his message has a better chance of getting anywhere. Not that it particularly has.
Now, I know about this not just because I've listened to Clive Backster talking about it, but because I did some experiments of my own. It is very easy to do, and any skeptic ought to check it out for themselves. It is just that you need some kind of galvanic skin response meter. Like this. Which is essentially just an electronic instrument that measures resistance and that is very sensitive. A regular ohm meter isn't good enough as it isn't nearly sensitive enough. It takes something like a wheatstone's bridge, which gives large and fast readings on minute resistance changes. Or some more modern equivalent. And it needs to be attached to some suitable electrodes. For humans that would be something similar to a pair of tin cans. For a plant, the clips that otherwise would attach to the cans would do it.
So, now, for the simple and interesting experiments. You attach the clips to some plant you have standing around the house. Any plant will do, but a big leafy thing would be good. The meter will just show the needle standing rather still. If you cut off a leaf of the plant, the needle will give a sizable reaction. Not very surprising. But the surprising part is that if you take your scissor and approach the plant, intending to cut a leaf off of it, it will also react in a similar fashion, without you having touched it. It seems to react to your intention somehow. Likewise if you have several plants, maybe of the same kind. Put them in different rooms, to rule out that they can, eh, see each other. Attach the meter to one of them and have somebody watch it. Then go to the other plant and either treaten to cut one of its leaves off, or actually do so. Either way, the plant in the first room will react as if it was happening to itself.
Very simple to do. And it should certainly raise some questions in the mind of anybody who believes this would of course be impossible. And you can of course do this more scientifically and systematically, trying to exclude all sorts of other factors. And you can take it much further. And that is the kind of work that Cleve Backster has been doing.
Unfortunately, the scientific community in general has not paid much attention. As, of course, this is all impossible according to the theories that draw the most consensus, so why even bother to check it out. More >
|
|
|
|
1 Dec 2003 @ 11:53, by bkodish. Communication
Columnist Julie Burchill, bless her soul, is leaving her job at the British newspaper, the Guardian. She has gotten fed-up with the pronounced anti-Israel prejudice of that so-called 'liberal' publication.
As she put it in her Saturday, Nov. 29th article Good, bad and ugly : "...if there is one issue that has made me feel less loyal to my newspaper over the past year, it has been what I, as a non-Jew, perceive to be a quite striking bias against the state of Israel. Which, for all its faults, is the only country in that barren region that you or I, or any feminist, atheist, homosexual or trade unionist, could bear to live under...I don't swallow the modern liberal line that anti-Zionism is entirely different from anti-semitism; the first good, the other bad..." More >
|
|
|
|
5 May 2003 @ 14:43, by sharie. Communication
I always wanted to be able to write a great love letter...
and a great love song...
one that would express my deepest love and appreciation...
I get the feeling nobody here is really interested in love.
I'm shocked and stunned and startled by the intensity of the anger being expressed. If only people had the same intense feeling of love, if only they'd realize that nobody else is going to create their experience but themselves...
if they want to waller in anger, frustration, insults, misery, finger pointing, complaining... it's all a mystery to me, but it's certainly their right if they choose.
I suppose they're angry at the state of the world AND at what's going on in their personal lives AND they're angry at their parents - or lack thereof - AND they're angry at their children - or lack thereof - AND they're angry at their partner - or lack therof - AND they're angry at themselves... OR they're just angry at me that I would dare to say "thanks, but no thanks" ...
maybe they haven't figured out the choice is theirs.
I don't care to carry around that kind of anger, I've felt it, I don't want it... I've been through more hell than most anybody that's left livin' - except for Kay - and she's not wallerin' in anger either, so it's no mystery that it's all about choice.
Sure, we can choose to be angry, seething through our teeth, pretending we're trapped and helpless. I'm not going to pretend somebody has that kind of power over me, because it would be an absolute lie.
I know that what I experience is my own making and I have no desire to waller in misery. Been there, done that. Twelve years ago my doctor told me I was dying, I was being eaten alive by every micro-organism that passed my way, and people were stealing money from me and anything else they could get their hands on, the doctors were lying, the lawyers were lying... everybody was "pissed off". What a hellhole. I don't care to be eaten alive anymore, especially not by my own anger... and certainly not by anybody else's anger either. I say, "no" and "no thanks". It's my choice, no question.
I don't think anger gives me a power position or makes me a righteous rebel. I can see right through myself, and I wouldn't dare be that phoney.
I'm happy. The angry people are probably "pissed off" at that too.
whoop-ti-doo
|
|
|
|
 3 May 2003 @ 16:13, by ming. Communication
Some people are having a discussion about whether and how language shapes how we experience the world. Stavros the Wonder Chicken has a very long post examining different academic models, and using Korean as an example. And David Weinberger has an excellent post talking about Heidegger.
I enjoy philosophical discussions, and I particularly enjoy examining how world views are constructed. But I guess I have somewhat limited patience with academics, and I'm not overly educated in traditional philosophy. I tend to be most interested in examining other models to possibly improve on the model I already have, and I have little interest in models that are more limited than my own, even if they are maybe of historical interest.
Anyway, I find it quite obvious that people being native speakers of different languages see the world a bit different. Western languages tend to construct sentences out of subjects and objects. That creates a certain separation between things, which doesn't necessarily exist, but which makes native speakers of for example English often believe that they can say things really precisely in their language. And because the sentences fit together well, and seem to fit with each other, they often end up with the misguided belief that their language provides a complete description of physical phenomena. Which is borderline insane, in my view.
I've noticed how Chinese or Japanese speakers often will make certain consistent mistakes in English. Like mixing up singular and plural. Some people figure it out eventually, but some people never do. For an English speaker it is obvious that noodles is plural, because there are many noodles on a plate. A Chinese person is just as likely to call it "noodle", not because he can't count, but because he's seeing it differently. I suppose focusing on the substance, not on the individual pieces. A Korean person leading a Yoga class might say "Touch your left feet". I only have one left foot, but in Korean thinking it makes sense that he's talking to the group, and there obviously are a whole bunch of left feet there. The English speaker will be very focused on himself individually, whereas a Korean will think more as a group.
From what I understand here, a couple of linguistic researchers, Sapir and Whorf, are major proponents of the idea that language shapes our world. There are various degrees of that. Like whether the language absolutely and inescapably shapes our world view, or whether it just influences it greatly. And others again disagree altogether.
I think many humans, many scientific types in particular, have a great fear of admitting that they live within a certain world view, which isn't just The Way Things Are. Particularly it is difficult to admit that what you perceive around you isn't the real world at all, but only a vague approximation and interpretation of a very narrow band of what is really there. Quantum mechanics should have revealed that, but the realization hasn't yet crept into our way of thinking. In part because we still speak the same way.
I think we should learn general semantics in school. Alfred Korzybski's Science and Sanity is still one of the most important books I've read, even though it is a very difficult read. The map is not the territory. The word is not the thing. More >
|
|
<< Newer entries Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Older entries >> |
|
