Jump to content

A Place for Sharing Books etc


Guest

Recommended Posts

Started on a Wiki page about Dark Crystal (found in DIF "random thread") and not too long to wait and look around until I end up on this page on quite a different subject.....

 

MY PRE-AMBLE featuring some of my own thoughts which try to balance this whole Observer Arguement (as best I know it to comprehend currently) which is always harder when you try to put into damn words anyway, so bear with me here....

 

So what we have here is:- "Biocentrism" (a novel for some part, until proven anything in it to the contrary, which I am sure the authors also are aware of,  link below as per the book asking these types of questions in a story style I think), so anyway Biocentrism~ the concept or idea which portends the universe only comes into existence when there is an observer present (I guess therefore meriting OR otherwise substantiating, the existence of another person or thing)..... although for me, about this concept naturally has to be approached with some caution.... Take me for example, I have progressively thought well hang on, this maybe true in some cases and to some extent, but I am not sure it can claim "no existence" of anything for either being or not being or "capable of being dismissed out of sight entirely?" verses "regarded as being palpable to the mind?" as in real generally (sts) unless APPARENTLY?? following the law of the Observer as it would appear, therefore the idea that a thing does not roundedly exist without first being subject to the observer or observers as if it were an approval system, or based on somebody's voyeuristic say so?? ~ occasionally chipping in to say== "hey relax I know you exist, I just happen to be a spectator in this world, don't mind me??"... LOL....

 

Atm, I will only go so far as to say (*without having read the novel I only found today on Wiki*) when anything interacts in the universe, be it creature or substance of bio-universal-creativity in general, well then obviously the interaction of so many elements and chances for creation and creativity to become in a super-convening-&-super-charged atmosphere almost inevitably (like any vitals for life) would promote super inventive state of flow, and so would be *and surely IS* what makes reality either more exciting or interesting from that general perspective, at least when we don't mind being at the centre of a hive of activity and life overflowing, by which when you have so many participants/ peoples and other elements, clearly things will get busy and be witnessed by lots of witnesses creating A SORT OF MULTI REALITY in among anyone witness to it and present by what's happening around them in the NOW (the main & most common way to believe this is where we might say~ as long as corresponding knowledge can reach out to it, whatever is desirable to bring into context), but at the same time it is (or could be seen as) only an amalgamation of peoples combined perceptions when at the same time bringing the aforementioned new thresholds and scope for how diverse reality can reveal to us of itself through our interactions with it and each other, (people or maybe in some instances even benign objects) via the spirit of interplay and mutual recognition of whatever we think it is we are experiencing or perceiving in moulding a basic for structure in an otherwise seemingly meaningless universe... I personally don't believe it is utterly meaningless though, there are an abundance of ways we can make life both interesting and more meaningful to us by simply enhancing creativity and participation.... No one has to proove a damn thing necessarily to make life become reality, and so come alive within that space, which is whatever & however reality opens up & appears to (us/I/them/we) an individual based on their willingness to imagine and participate and solicit a system of conduits or something withing nature or indeed within the world that the human has created for better or for worse [material worlds I mostly DO NOT like]... (also more obviously as for a collective bunch of people all in it together, but even in a group of brainstorming minds each person still has a unique personality or contribution ultimately in the quantum field of play or whatever sustainable by this).

 

But in essence, going back to the book how it may portend (and I really don't know to quote) but my guess going by a quick read of the Wiki page and of how I have heard fleetingly of this concept before, I now want to say aside from my arguably also not so resolved opinion above on the questionable reality, then else in essence if what the Biocentrism as characterized by this novel is in the sense of the Observer Idea and IF that is THE over-riding thing to allegedly go by when given to be believed as reality, then even though I haven't pondered too deeply on that narrative by any particular angle, let alone the specificities of purely observing (that singled out is what I find problematic IF that is the standard arguement PERHAPS made by author Robert Lanza and the like) and so anyway by this Observer idea that if correct grants or brings something OF REALITY ;; TO REALITY as it were, and thus into existence in one way or another....???


That SEEMS to be the going idea as just mentioned in the latter, then if that's what being touted, I myself at first base for myself have to intuit and make a guess around that standard speculation of Observership~ (without necessarily being the best theologian for this myself, although I am not talentless either), it strikes me that to say as would be supposed in the book below such a narrative... (and btw, apparently a work of Semi-Fiction for some part based on I don't know what, but a thesis that is trying to put it's point across)_>_>_> that to say by witnessing reality (allegedly) only makes true (or only comes into being) somehow if there is an observer present or charging up the atmosphere in I don't know somekind of symbiotic arrangement between organisms that when aligned become something more etc???...

Yet to exercise a little caution here from another base for thought and so of thought may come reality, I suggest a too defining and restrictive reality seems implausible, MAYBE , where I might say of my guess "is there not something missing of this admonishment of reality re-juxtaposed etc"....At least if proposed in concept is just as would be mused any other one-legged [sts] standpoint potentially too without the full spectrum of possibilities to keep open about, because take this as an example--from my POV--}}  what do we say about people who live alone a lot and experience life that way, they have few observers of their activity don't they....Likewise does a distance star not exist because we can barely see it? (ok bad example as a star can have died but from where we are on Earth, we can still see its' emitted light from the bygone time that star was alive yet we still perceive as real and alive in our version of 'now' reality!!)....

 

So as far as I can suggest, and to make  a relatively rounded assessment, I portend to say each thing has existence partly of its' own merit to my mind, regardless of realized by other lifeforms it exists.... and for more remote survival mechanisms of certain species not so all pervasive in their quest, can still to my mind be said to exist, be that with a strategy to withstand and survive and probably that thing doesn't get too existentialist about it on the basis of ego, if a plant for example, and so still remains rooted in reality IMO and has a hold or stakehold in the reality somehow is my opinion whether observed or recognized as existing or not, by any nearby eyes and ears, etc.... I mean we all have unique thoughts, but do they too not exist(??) because they are thoughts we maybe never share with others......Think about that, even if it is only to yourself, by yourself if you must!...

 

In any case I imagine strongly this could be an interesting read...."OBSERVER" -}} by 2 authors, Robert Lanza & Nancy Kress.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_(novel)

Quote

Observer is a 2023 science fiction novel by American medical doctor and scientist, Robert Lanza, and science fiction author, Nancy Kress. It is Lanza's first novel and Kress's first novel written in collaboration with another author.

Observer is based on the concept of biocentrism, a theory proposed by Lanza in 2007, which states that the universe only comes into existence when there is consciousness to observe it.

 

Edited by Certified Green of Heart
Eta:- added title of book alongside link indicating the same
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New Holistic Herbal

By

David Hoffman

Element Books 1990 &

1996 (illustrated version)

 

First good herbal I read (  and earlier '87  version)

Got me thinking of synergistic  plant medicine more clearly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Talorgan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

The Lost Continent Of Mu by James Churchward (Author)

https://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/James Churchward - The Lost Continent of Mu (1974).pdf

 

Is it possible that Mu is actually Moo as in cow. Instead of Queen Mu -> Moo?

If so, this link in with the Egyptian goddess Isis, goddess with cow head. This has been going on well before the illuminati came on the scene which is fairly recent.

Edited by DaleP
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...