Dr. Jacques Vallee ~ The Control System

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear

Also, various other creatures do affect the environment
such as beavers who damn up rivers... various creatures
like goats who strip away all vegetation until topsoil
is lost,etc. But yes, your point that humans are the
best killers and destroyers the planet may have ever
seen is certainly valid. Again -- I'm not proud of this
tendency, but in fact ashamed of it.

This shows exactly how humans and animals are different - humans are capable (though granted not likely) of 'choosing' to live on this planet without destroying it...For example: We now have the technology to farm without harming the ecosystem at all...

Not only could we prevent further destruction of the planet, but there are many people working to 're'construct it - sadly the efforts are too little too late, but regardless how 'self-aware' some animals are, are any of them capable of understanding such concepts as reforesting?

As for free will: I believe we are born with it, but that part of the 'control system' (whatever it may be) agenda has been the systematic elimination of humankind's 'power' to make choices that would aid in promoting the well-being of humans and the world we live in...

Thankfully they haven't completely succeeded yet - case in point:

My husband and I both drive Prius's...Two yrs ago we re-mortgaged our house to have solar power installed - when I asked how long it would be until we would recoup the cost, my husband said, "We're not doing it to save money; we're doing it to save the world." (boy was I chagrined)..

And not speaking to anyone in particular here (just saying), I believe that all this stuff about - 'no such thing as freewill', 'we're no different than any other animal', 'good and evil don't truly exist', is just yet more obfuscation on the part of the control system 'entities' to convince us that ultimately, we have no power...

I just want to make a point here:

Just because the course the world has taken can be attributed to a vast majority of humankind, does not mean that every human is representative of that 'kind' of human...

When we talk about the violence of 'humans', the destructiveness, the horrendous (child rape, etc.) acts, the war mongering...it has to be remembered that this does not speak to the truth of all humans...

I would wager that there's not a single person who has posted on this thread who could be lumped in with 'humans' by the above description - and I for one, get tired of being lumped in with them...

I also get tired of the 'ant' analogy (siiighhhhh...You know, the stuff about how 'superior races' would see humans as nothing more than ants, so would never even really 'see' us or consider us worth taking a 'look' at)

While I agree that superior races may not give a hoot what humans are doing, so long as it's confined to our own planet, the fact about the ant analogy is that it simply doesn't hold water....

Here's the thing - as humans, we are certainly as 'superior' to ants as any ET (for argument's sake) would be to us, right?
Well, our scientists have studied the heck out of ants, we totally understand them - specifically, we know how and why they communicate and if we had reason to, we could easily devise a type of 'communication' that ants would recognize...So...

....Doesn't it follow that any race superior to humans would be capable of finding a way of communicating with us? Think of the way adults communicate with toddlers. We talk 'down' to their level of understanding...

My point is: I think (not saying I 'know') that humans 'are' special, and it is because of our 'capability' to evolve as individuals who, as similar as they may yet be to other humans, still can be so utterly different, so outside the 'standards' of the majority as to almost seem to be a different species of human...

You know (aside from sex), every Fire ant is representative of every other Fire ant (and same goes for all ant species), every species of sheep is representative of every other sheep of that species, every tiger (in the wild) representative of every other tiger, every other ape (barring minor 'ape-like' behavior variations) is representative of every other 'like-species' ape -

But the same simply cannot be said of humans - Every human is not representative of every other human...No matter how much alike the majority (and I feel that this 'alikeness' has been thoroughly manipulated - the 'sheeple' are brainwashed), there have been and continue to be humans who are not truly 'representative' of mankind...

You have only to look at those humans who have contributed so much of beauty and meaning to our world - Could Beethoven, or Van Gogh, or Wordsworth, or William Blake be considered representative of the majority of humans (as a whole & particularly of these times?)

I believe that whatever 'force' (Control System, etc.) has been 'driving' civilization toward self-destruction, is responsible for the 'dumbing down/brainwashing' of mankind...I think that the 'humanity' of mankind is being purposely stripped away (which is why humans are becoming more and more 'inhumane')

And I wonder whether this thread can make any progress figuring 'anything' out, unless we acknowledge that we are singular individuals who are utterly unique even if merely by virtue of having culled 'ourselves' from the 'herd'...

Because as long as we see ourselves as part of the herd, we can't really look at the question of 'who' is doing the 'herding' and why...

a reply to: lostgirl

I know that's how you feel..

It IS possible to gain genuine free will.. but it's not easy.
Most go for inertia.

It probably IS possible to do some 'good' or 'evil'.. I think
in fact I've done a little of both over the years...never
willingly evil though.. I'm a huge boy scout.... have always
been..

but again, so many people walk around in a fog.. you know
it's true..

The mere desire to have good and evil and free will, does not
necessarily mean one's wishes are true.. like anything else,
anything worth having takes hard work.

I know this is a psychological pain point for you.. this conversation...
as quite obviously I know you better than many people..

This whole good/evil/free will conversation is really pointless from
my point of view. Neither you or I or anyone else currently alive,
will ever know, while we yet live, if we had free will or were just
robots --- this stuff is shrouded in deep, deep mystery.

But I fully agree that we should strive to make a difference.. to live
a quality life.. I've done that every single day.. and sometimes I appear
to be successful.. and some days not so much.

Kev

And I wanted to make a small point that's germane to the good/evil conversation as well as the Control Loop Entity(ies) dialogue... and thus has been mentioned before in this very thread, buut...

Relativism can be used to grey some of the areas of perceived good and evil. As in killing one baby that would grow into Hitler... when the killer had more info (a 'future viewer' or something) than the folks making the good/evil judgement who only see a dead baby and some evil s.o.b. standing over it covered in blood.

Perhaps these seemingly dastardly social engineering moves by the CLE is really for our own long term good (as evolving souls who's real nature isn't physical, for instance)... in a no pain, no gain sense... or something far more long range and convoluted.

Or it could be the CLE manipulating me to cut it some slack... heh... how do you find the true nature of something when you can't seem to see the whole thing at once... or get outside of the system to understand the operations?

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

If the will is not "free", than it is "unfree".
But considering that the concept of being devoid of freedom, is dependent upon the concept of freedom, it logically follows that sometimes the will is going to be free and sometimes unfree.

originally posted by: john666
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

If the will is not "free", than it is "unfree".
But considering that the concept of being devoid of freedom, is dependent upon the concept of freedom, it logically follows that sometimes the will is going to be free and sometimes unfree.

Now eliminating all spiritual philosophy.. about souls and spirits and critters
and influences.. just the human brain is composed of warring modules
all fighting each other for control of outcomes... it's just basic science.

So 'free will' is rather problematic... in truth, we are all closer to 'colony creatures'..
(due to our modular brains and the effect of human culture and the internet as just
a few rational examples)...

Yes.. there is 'free will' ... but 'who' are 'we'.. where do you draw the circle?

Do you understand my perspective now?

BTW, liked your last post.

Kev

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear

originally posted by: john666
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

If the will is not "free", than it is "unfree".
But considering that the concept of being devoid of freedom, is dependent upon the concept of freedom, it logically follows that sometimes the will is going to be free and sometimes unfree.

Now eliminating all spiritual philosophy.. about souls and spirits and critters
and influences.. just the human brain is composed of warring modules
all fighting each other for control of outcomes... it's just basic science.

So 'free will' is rather problematic... in truth, we are all closer to 'colony creatures'..
(due to our modular brains and the effect of human culture and the internet as just
a few rational examples)...

Yes.. there is 'free will' ... but 'who' are 'we'.. where do you draw the circle?

Do you understand my perspective now?

BTW, liked your last post.

Kev

Near death experiences, which happen when there is no measurable electromagnetic activity, seem to disprove the idea that the brain is the source of our consciousness.
I think that the brain has the task of connecting our consciousness - which is immaterial - with the physical world.

originally posted by: john666

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear

originally posted by: john666
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

If the will is not "free", than it is "unfree".
But considering that the concept of being devoid of freedom, is dependent upon the concept of freedom, it logically follows that sometimes the will is going to be free and sometimes unfree.

Now eliminating all spiritual philosophy.. about souls and spirits and critters
and influences.. just the human brain is composed of warring modules
all fighting each other for control of outcomes... it's just basic science.

So 'free will' is rather problematic... in truth, we are all closer to 'colony creatures'..
(due to our modular brains and the effect of human culture and the internet as just
a few rational examples)...

Yes.. there is 'free will' ... but 'who' are 'we'.. where do you draw the circle?

Do you understand my perspective now?

BTW, liked your last post.

Kev

Near death experiences, which happen when there is no measurable electromagnetic activity, seem to disprove the idea that the brain is the source of our consciousness.
I think that the brain has the task of connecting our consciousness - which is immaterial - with the physical world.

I see a lot of people who are 'stuck' on one type of philosophy.
It's been said about me too of course.

I did ask you to consider that there are multiple 'factions'
both within the brain and within society, that make the
definition of 'self' rather slippery. If 'self' is slippery, then
the whole subject of 'free will' is slippery.

But it's not required that we pursue this conversation..
was just trying to broaden perspectives away from the
usual perspective. Anyone can parrot words that have
existed for hundreds or thousands of years.. but to
even ATTEMPT to create something new and worthwhile
to discuss is not easy.... for any of us.

Thanks... I'm exiting this topic for now... and we haven't
even scratched 1% of the surface of it.

KPB

a reply to: john666

Near death experiences, which happen when there is no measurable electromagnetic activity, seem to disprove the idea that the brain is the source of our consciousness.

I don't think that's accurate.

"We were surprised by the high levels of activity. In fact, at near-death, many known electrical signatures of consciousness exceeded levels found in the waking state, suggesting that the brain is capable of well-organized electrical activity during the early stage of clinical death."

www.medicalnewstoday.com...

Although I don't discount the idea that some form of consciousness continues on. I have a hard time trying to understand how that gets decoupled from the brain though. Sorry to jump in.

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: john666

Near death experiences, which happen when there is no measurable electromagnetic activity, seem to disprove the idea that the brain is the source of our consciousness.

I don't think that's accurate.

"We were surprised by the high levels of activity. In fact, at near-death, many known electrical signatures of consciousness exceeded levels found in the waking state, suggesting that the brain is capable of well-organized electrical activity during the early stage of clinical death."

www.medicalnewstoday.com...

Although I don't discount the idea that some form of consciousness continues on. I have a hard time trying to understand how that gets decoupled from the brain though. Sorry to jump in.

This discussion of Vallee's Control Loop sure wanders around a lot ;-)

We sometimes discuss moral or ethical or other attributes of the
'personality' of the Control Loop, if this type of discussion even
makes sense.. and that leads to all these off-topic discussions.

But what the hell? My own experience with near-death is quite
nuanced.. but I'm not afraid of death.. nor the 'long sleep' if you
want to put it that way.. I certainly don't cling to feeble hopes
and misinformation about the theoretical continuation of
personality... most people's personalities in my opinion, and
may well apply to mine as well -- have nothing beneficial
about them to preserve...! we are pieces of a big, big
puzzle..we live, we eat, we have sex, we delude ourselves
and we die..and the 'multiverse' repeats all possible
combinations endlessly.. including this billionth time that
"I'm here" writing this post again.

I personally can't get excited about this life and death stuff..
don't be an a-hole if possible and try to enjoy yourself..
that's about as excited as I can get about everything!

Kev

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
...Now eliminating all spiritual philosophy.. about souls and spirits and critters
and influences.. just the human brain is composed of warring modules
all fighting each other for control of outcomes... it's just basic science.

Kev

Now, now, Kevin. I think you should have a cup of coffee and grab a pen and notebook. You can thank me later. Again.

Firstly, it's a rather glaring dichotomy in your own philosophy when you fall back on "basic science" as a key piece of your argument. What I mean is: You are constantly suggesting the limits of "basic science" and suggesting not only new Physics frontiers that negate current knowledge and understanding, but even going so far as to suggest you have breakthrough insights worthy of their own books authored by yourself!

Now, please forgive me for harping on a favorite subject of my own, but "Consciousness" with a big "C"--that being the self aware kind--should give the materialist a deep and sincere pause for reflection. Really deep. It's worthy of the questions, and suggestions, it makes. I think it's rather obvious that you vacillate between materialism and mysticism in a constant effort to try and balance those dichotomous aspects of your unclear and fuzzy theorem.

I would note that consciousness is the bugaboo of "basic science." Further, I would suggest that "science" seems more a pawn of the so-called control system if anything. If it can weaponized or abused it will be. Take a look around.

As far as free will and the control system theory, I do believe we have free will. Any "control", imo, is given when we are fooled and accept these theoretical constraints. It's not forced on us, it's slid by us...

Free will is a delusion since everything is predestined by the law of science.

But hold fast and despair not…for it’s your “ignorance is bliss” unawareness of the destiny of yourself that makes the game still fun…

When you are at the crossroads of any decision only Hu knows what you will do and you aren’t hu you think you are…

Once when I was told I look at the glass as half empty by some commentator, I said to him in return:
Nay, I see not the glass as half empty neither half full, but I see it as FULLY EMPTY

In fact, my cup runneth over with emptiness!

Glad to be back. After all the politics, I had to take a shower.

a reply to: The GUT

I generally thank you Mr. Gut.

I love how you observe me so closely....if I was female I would be flattered! LOL!!

I do agree with you....you see me much as I am....

But there are certainly many things that science gets right....or almost right anyway. ...Science can fly us to the moon....and religion can't. ...

But yes I do draw from science and 'newish' concepts both.

Yes consciousness is a 'hard problem'.

You might be interested in my detatched chakra theory from our other thread in Skunkworks....I think that it has much explanatory power for consciousness research and fringe subjects both.

By all means keep me honest sir.....but I prefer 'kinder gentler Guts' !

Thanks

Kev

a reply to: The GUT

One day Maezumi Roshi was sitting on the stoop of the sangha house with a student. A disheveled and depressed looking man was passing by them on the sidewalk and the man stopped to ask Roshi:

“What's it like to be enlightened?"

“Very depressing,” Maezumi said.

Then D.T. Suzuki said this:

"Enlightenment is like everyday consciousness but two inches above the ground."

-D.T. Suzuki, Root (2001).

Those two guys were pretty advanced thinkers when it came to "consciousness" and trying to discuss it, and you can see how much sense they made of it.

So, at this point, I am trying to understand what sense you are trying to make of it.

You haul out the "consciousness" thing every time you get a whiff of something that you want to toss in your materialist-basket.

I know you are trying toi get something important across, and I'd love to know what it is.

Part 1
Human beings are very presumptuous and a bit blind. They don’t see themselves for what they truly are.

Our intellects deceives us in thinking we aren’t screwed up

All one has to do to understand why aliens are so afraid to get close is look at the depths of the human condition




Part 2

That’s it. I wonder are the aliens enlightened.
Or I wonder if there wondering...

What ails human beings?

Why do they have episodes like ISIL in the earth?

Why do they build WMD’s that can destroy the solar system?

And we are wondering why these aliens hide from us!

We do these things and want higher knowledge still

originally posted by: Bybyots
So, at this point, I am trying to understand what sense you are trying to make of it.

You haul out the "consciousness" thing every time you get a whiff of something that you want to toss in your materialist-basket.

I know you are trying toi get something important across, and I'd love to know what it is.

Mainly this--and I'm gonna have to butcher, paraphrase, and add to a quote of someone I can't recall at the moment: If scientists/materialists ever do reach the peak of our deepest and most profound mysteries, they will find the philosopher, the theologian, and the mystic waiting there for them.

a reply to: The GUT

I doubt that since before science finds this great mystery human beings will have long destroyed themselves…and ironically it will be science before they find the great “ thing” who hands us the key to self destruction...

I am even willing to make a bet on it

a reply to: The GUT

That is likely a quote from a Fred Alan Wolf book like the Tao of Physics....

I've been researching this stuff since forever too.

I understand your perspective.

But I suspect that 'both sides' are more than half wrong....

That's why weird people like us are involved with such threads!

Kev

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: The GUT

That is likely a quote from a Fred Alan Wolf book or from 'the Tao of Physics'.

I've been researching this stuff since forever too.

I understand your perspective.

But I suspect that 'both sides' are more than half wrong....

That's why weird people like us are involved with such threads!

Kev

a reply to: The GUT

If scientists/materialists ever do reach the peak of our deepest and most profound mysteries, they will find the philosopher, the theologian, and the mystic waiting

Yeah, and the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker.

Alright then..