Nungali

Noooo ..... you be mixed up with 'tow rope ' ; ;

< sniff sniff > ... I smell something suspect here . I did enjoy reading it but then decided to check one random statement - the claim about what Erwin Schrodinger said ; '' "The total number of minds in the universe is one. In fact, consciousness is a singularity phasing within all beings." - who said this ? AI says Schrodinger . But if you put the question the other way around and ask if Schrodinger actually did say it ? ''No, the exact quote is not from Erwin Schrödinger, although he did write similar ideas in his philosophical essays, particularly Mind and Matter. He wrote, "The total number of minds in the universe is one" and that "consciousness is never experienced in the plural, only in the singular". However, the popular version includes the phrase "In fact, consciousness is a singularity phasing within all beings," which is not a direct quote. '' ... 'cause there aint no such thing as a 'singularity phasing ' or the person who made the quote up used bad punctuation https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/47487/did-erwin-schrödinger-say-there-is-only-one-mind-in-the-universe I found the passage in his writing that relates to this, in a way ... although it does not say this - he also said ''This is religion not science . '' (he was an Advaita Hindu ) - I wont be checking the rest .... a shame the author didnt do more research (it took me 12 seconds to check ) because now his whole article is suspect .

Ahhhh ... better !

Sorry , that didnt work either , it wanted to direct me to a 'chrome webstore to extend your connection ' and agree to .... well that wasn't clear . Why dont you just tell me what the ultimate nature of reality is ?

If it can be anything ...... how can I be wrong about what it might be ?

One end .... the other end ..... and the stuff in the middle

according to your link .... the ultimate nature of reality requires a facebook registration and log in

Crowley advocated it as a remedy to 'spiritual pride' ; AI Overview Aleister Crowley wrote that laughter is a remedy against spiritual pride because the "bitter earnestness of the man amid the grim humour" of the world is mocking and that "the Powers of Good themselves seem to indulge" in it . He believed that the "irony of the whole strife" could be seen through the mockery, making it a useful tool against spiritual pride. The mockery and the irony in life are fascinating aspects of the human experience, according to Crowley. He believed that these feelings can be overwhelming and that laughter is a necessary tool to keep things in perspective, particularly when dealing with spiritual matters. He noted that a certain "grim humour" or "cacchination" (loud, boisterous laughter) exists in the world, and that even "the Powers of Good" seem to share in the mockery, which is what makes the whole strife so ironic. Crowley saw this irony as a way to combat spiritual pride, as it brings the individual back to a sense of humility and perspective Next time I am called out on my 'bad sense of humor ' I shall explain how I am only following the example of the Universe .

Thanks for sparing me ... if I remember rightly, last time it was very ........ unEgyptian . I'll leave this one for our resident Indiana Jones of Egyptology

yes, to an extent , but the reference to 'magick ' and 'Daimonic Reality ' supposes something ..... 'against common consensual reality ' , ie we make happen or watch / observe something , we dont normally do , that has 'limited consensual reality ' ... and example of that is many of us don not 'believe in UFOs (until recently ) but small groups (limited consensual reality ) affirm they have seen them and seen the same thing as each other was seeing . Which is branch of Magick Crowley touted ; 'Scientific Illuminism ' .... ' The method of science with the aim of religion ' . hence the magical diary and record where experiments , rituals, meditations, etc should be written up , pretty much like a science experiment ( Aim , Equipment , processes , record of event ( the 'working itself ' and what might have occurred during and then any results as time goes on , and over time to collate and compare the record ) . '' Let success be thy proof '' Oh ... there is ! I believe it . And there from the beginning ( most related ritual is about knowing that and having converse with it , evoking , yes but not 'evoking it into existence ' / 'creating it ' . It seems to much a part of too many different cultures , in one way or another . Yes. A lot of magick is an 'unveiling ' and it should ( according to the 'Old Boy ' ) have such elements of Buddhist and Hindu realizations about the nature of mind . By the way ... the proceeds and resultant papers of the above 'Scientific Illuminism ' approach and research ( and results ) or just papers or philosophies gleaned from the process (as well as more intellectual works ) get collated and shared in 'The Collage of Hermetic Philosopher ' - on examining a lot of the work and attempting to answer the question .... is it internal projection or external forces , the official pronouncement on that was ( back then ) ' .... we are not yet ready to say , one or the other ' Thats because ( I reckon , as in many cases ) its a bit of both .

Yes . We could focus on this part of the definition ; '' the belief that belief itself is a tool to manipulate reality and that one can shift beliefs as needed to achieve goals. ' So, I assume , the ritual system and 'paraphernalia ' of magick is geared towards cultural belief ( hence different types of magick ; from modern western, to 'Javanese' to Buddhist , etc . ) and relies on a stong 'set' in the psyche - which is why a lot of older western magick is in the 'theater ' of Christianity (or its opposite , ie, 'demon based ' or 'sourced' ) . That is , in this situation , it is firmly entrenched in the psyche and the belief system . So can ( and how can one ) change or ;shift' belief systems so as to have them so firmly entrenched in the psyche that thay have the same 'impact ' . I doubt this part . However , the issue of belief systems 'manipulating ' realty seems better explained by 'Daimonic Reality Theory' ( ex Harpur ) seems more realistic . I 'operate' sort of like that , but my belief systems only 'validly ' changed ( ie, changed to a deep enough influence that they did 'manipulate' reality , after evidence accretion - ie . if you try something and get the same result many times , then its easier for the belief to become entrenched in the psyche to be effective . Also it broaches the whole idea of inner Vs outer influence . What are your thoughts on that ?

Same here .... and I never went to see the movie either ! I have seen shorts on TV advertising it but never knew of the Chaos theory in it until this thread .

And ? This isnt about Chaos theory .... its about Chaos Magick .... a point established ( back near the start of the thread ) . No, chaos magick does not directly use chaos theory from physics, but it is named for the word "chaos" and its philosophical principles are similar, emphasizing uncertainty, adaptability, and the idea that small changes can have large effects. The name reflects the belief that belief itself is a tool to manipulate reality and that one can shift beliefs as needed to achieve goals. One is a 'philosophy' the other is a mathematical system ( non-lineal , dynamic systems theory ) . That spanner was removed from the 'works' previously but Homer keeps trying to throw it back in to subvert this thread . .

Its best to ignore that one ^ ( perception and communication 'difficulties' ) Sorry , I thought the original diversion to this subject and the posting of that paper and bringing up this idea was due to a lack of understanding about what the term in question actually meant and this was bought up as a possible alternative explanation / origin . ; '' There really are a thousand different ideas what it could mean, because no-one actually seems to know what it means. .

Indeed ! ... and thats the point ... if you 'get it ' . Correct , however I was responding to the actual words if the claim which were ; '' worshiped a Sky God '' not '' had a sky God as head of their pantheon '' . 'PIE religion and associated 'facts' are either made up or highly speculative as is 'Dyeus piter '