pjrv : Messages : 14?5-14?5 of 4038
#14?5 From: "Pame" What if the combined weight of all consciousness
> decides what happens and doesn't.
a.. xP; This would depend on what area of consciousness you were weighing.
b.. If you wanted to measure consciousness I would do it from a strong
will/ psi ability
c.. The average person which this world is approximately 80 to 90% has no
focus. Our breading culture doesn't encourage or promote our full mental
potential. But exceptions can be found when the schools have those aptitude
tests and then the kid gets put into a special class, and home advantages.
d.. Influence to another only needs to be directed to the one and only
deciding person of influence, Now how many talented mentally influential
controlling people does it take to have someone think the way you want them
e.. When you think of something where are you getting the thought from.
Especially if we prove that RV works
f.. WE have proved that there is a strong connection to receiving or
g.. How do you know what thought is yours alone and not picked up from a
> What if the individual
> consciousness of every single person decides
> what aspect of reality they experience as 'real'
> decides what happens and what doesn't.
a.. xP; again, the shape of reality is molded by parents, teachers,
church, state, and ones own peers, and the stress is put on to follow the
leader. even in thinking.
b.. This is probably why most don't understand the way I think.how I look
at things and other people?
> If time doesn't exist, so future viewing is possible,
> then how can we assume there is some (linear? )
> cause-and-effect for what happens and doesn't? How do
> we know, in fact, that in actuality all of reality
> is not created sort of 'after-the-fact' in some obscure
> way, instead of from the other side (prior to? )?
a.. xP; you cant view the future if there is no time.
b.. I see time as a lucky time to experience time. Time gives us cause and
effect that we can experience.
c.. I am not always in agreement with most results, but who is? I just had
to adjust and put it all into experience you couldn't have had otherwise.
> When is a peaceful person an aggressive
> person or an aggressive person
> Seth has some interesting comments on aggression. He says natural
> aggression is real and positive, but that we have twisted aggression
> into being correlated with violence, dominance, bullying. He points
> out that every proactive attempt to do anything is aggression.
> Whether you are cooking dinner, cleaning up your neighborhood,
> standing up to sing for your church, etc.
d.. xP; that was part in part of my aggressive question.
> My point is, that the future of the
> world is not set in stone.
> Good heavens, I hope not. It would seem rather fatalistic to believe
> it was. I have some issue with the "free will" concept -- I believe
> free will exists -- yet it sometimes seems to conflict with other
> equally interesting theories.
xP; IMO whom ever did the pushing the Free-Will idea was reinforcing
the duped into going on with a set aspect of the illusion, I think there was
a moment at that time that was going to wake up/dispell a mass of people,
and that was a threat for some reason, and then all of sudden the words FREE
WILL was spitting out all over the place. I don't believe in free will as
long as I am in a physical form ruled by laws and rules, we only have Free
Choice. Free Will is something that is capable in influencing free choice.
"HaveThoughtWillTravel" "What is perceived can be experienced Tumultuously "