Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Keep out of reach of children.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                           

Grand Objective Distinguishability

A religion
  (+2, -4)
(+2, -4)
  [vote for,
against]

I just got done reading two crazy books: 'A View from Nowhere' and 'Infinity and the Mind'. Nagel attempts to cover the bases of Objectivity. Rucker tries to prove that mathematical infinities prove the existence of infinity in the Mindscape. Theirs are valiant efforts, and very complete. I think these ideas can go further, however. I think Objectivity and Infinity can be the basis for a very positive movement amongst people. It is essentially very easy to understand these two things, but ultimately, their usefulness may lend to a fully capable spiritual human being (i.e. mass produced enlightenment (i.e. enlightenment need only be achieved through a thorough dedication to conceptualizing the infinitude of objective states)).

This is an idea to form a unified religion based on the understanding that all consciousness is basically equal, and this understanding is uniquely arrived at through the powers of human objectivity. It is a scientific religion, because objective states can be measured in the laboratory.

Infinite Objectivity is the new Meditation for the Buddhists.
Prayer for the Christians. Laying and Praying for the Muslims. Temple for the Jews.

The idea is that, through the power of the human mind to objectively comprehend the universe, and to objectively realize a true consistency of consciousnesses (that is, all consciousnesses are basically the same), we can experience a fully realized identity with every conscious entity and thrive spiritually from said identity. It is an identity that can be arrived at solely through the powers of objective thought and our ability to repeatedly, if not infinitly, stand back from our surroundings and put them in a single set.

What happens when you stand back from your surroundings an infinite number of times over? You achieve the only rarely achieved goal of this religion: to free the mind entirely from the prison of subjective thought and arrive at Grand Objective Distinguishablilty.

daseva, May 14 2010

[link]






       <pedant> Sp: mathematical   

       Sp: Theirs (about the only posessive word not posessed of an apostrophe.) </pedant>
csea, May 15 2010
  

       Wow, I think this is a very well written idea (who am I to judge, I am dutch) and a very beautifull concept. I find so many flaws in it that I think it is better that I go and sleep on it and get back to you later. I do know enough to give you my bun though.
zeno, May 15 2010
  

       Consider Ayn Rand' work as being involved in a process of building subjectivity. It is nothing but a joke.   

       To be a purely objective creature one must live the life of a social isolate from birth, perhaps raised by wolves, where the relationship between one's body and the world is not mediated by the mind, but by the hand to the mouth.   

       The possession of mind, which is imparted to the individual by society, imprisons us in a subjective existence.
rcarty, May 15 2010
  

       //based on the understanding that all consciousness is basically equal// but consciousness is an illusion.
pocmloc, May 15 2010
  

       Sounds rather like systematic theololgy, itself which is an oxymoron. The work of Alvin Plantinga might interest you.
RayfordSteele, May 15 2010
  

       Beats my Sack Religion idea all to Hell. [+] Books sound interesting. If I ever get done with Halfbakery, I may read them.
Mustardface, May 16 2010
  

       //The idea is that, through the power of the human mind to objectively comprehend the universe, and to objectively realize a true consistency of consciousnesses (that is, all consciousnesses are basically the same), we can experience a fully realized identity with every conscious entity and thrive spiritually from said identity. It is an identity that can be arrived at solely through the powers of objective thought and our ability to repeatedly, if not infinitly, stand back from our surroundings and put them in a single set.//   

       I'm OK up to the first comma, and a few words beyond that.   

       I'm fairly happy with "objectively comprehend the universe" (though some would quibble).   

       Then there's this bit: //objectively realize a true consistency of consciousnesses (that is, all consciousnesses are basically the same)// I'm not sure that all consciousnesses are basically the same, because 'basically the same' means nothing and everything. The same in what way? Nor I am happy with "objectively" used in this context (without further clarification).   

       Then there's // fully realized identity with every conscious entity and thrive spiritually from said identity// Does this mean that we appreciate that all consciousnesses are 'basically the same'? If so, see above. I don't know either what 'thrive spiritually' means, unless it's equivalent to 'be happy', and I'm not sure that a realization of a common consciousness will necessarily make all people happy.   

       As for: // It is an identity that can be arrived at solely through the powers of objective thought// Again, this is really just a restatement of what has been hypothesized in the foregoing sentences, and I'm not at all sure about it.   

       And then: // our ability to repeatedly, if not infinitly, stand back from our surroundings and put them in a single set//. How can we stand back from our surroundings even once? And what does it mean to put them in a single set?   

       Sorry, but I really don't get along with this kind of stuff. None of the wording is precise and none of the assumptions are solid, and I don't think it says anything.   

       If I can extract any meaning from it, it's something like "All folks are basically the same; maybe some non-human folks are also basically the same; so we can all be happy about that.", only it's written a bit more mystically.
MaxwellBuchanan, May 16 2010
  

       eww. and it's really boring too.
WcW, May 16 2010
  

       I think consciousnesses are massively unequal. Also, I am angry at the prospect of yet another belief system co-opting scientific terminology to hide its irrationality. [-]   

       Have you thought about making a belief system out of dividing by zero, where you achieve infinity by decreasing your consciousness to zero, then dividing?
sninctown, May 16 2010
  

       so with increasing distance and scope all problems of human existence disappear into the cosmic mysteries which when viewed at an all encompassing view are simply noise in a quantum equilibrium and the mathematics of infinities. That's got to make being decisive a serious problem. "one lump or two? hmm, I'll consult the vastness of all things known and unknown................". also it should be recognized that it fails the critical "will it get chicks to go to bed with you" so it is very unlikely to get any traction with the popular culture.
WcW, May 16 2010
  

       // a belief system out of dividing by zero, where you achieve infinity by decreasing your consciousness to zero, then dividing? //   

       Yes, we tried that one time, but it gave us a terrible headache.
8th of 7, May 17 2010
  

       If you could somehow divide consciousness by zero, you wouldn't even need it be reduced to zero itself in order to reach Infinity.   

       I suppose it would just be simpler for me to say "humans who achieve greater objective states are actually manifesting a closer approximation of infinity in their mind, and this may be a measurable way to encourage the spiritual experience, since Infinity and God are basically the same thing, right?"   

       oops.. sorry the edits took so long there, [csea]. Thankya.   

       Also, [pocmloc] //consciousness is an illusion// how so? How can it be? Who is being decieved? Deception is a conscious art requiring both victim and perpetrator. Or so I thougt. I could be wrong.   

       Lot's of stuff has been said... I'm sorry you are bored, [WcW]. I'm going to look up these recommended works at some point and [MB], your analysis is basically exact. ha! No, but seriously, you pretty much have the idea right: "thinking about the sameness of consciousness makes us happy". Or does it? Pretty sure this is the halfbakery I could be wrong.   

       It's the union of Reason and God, folks! We can stop praying and start being objective because objectivity alone leads to Infinity and subsequently God as we have ever properly conceived the deity! I know this isn't going to help my case...
daseva, May 17 2010
  

       // "humans who achieve greater objective states are actually manifesting a closer approximation of infinity in their mind, and this may be a measurable way to encourage the spiritual experience, since Infinity and God are basically the same thing, right?"//   

       No no no no. Again with the words already.   

       Can you explain, straightforwardly:
a) "greater objective states"
b) "manifesting a closer approximation of infinity"
c) what is the connection between (a) and (b)
d) what is a 'spiritual experience, and why does it need encouraging?
e) why are infinity and god (only one of which has been shown to exist) basically the same thing?
  

       The problem is that this sort of thing is just too damn easy to do. I can say, for example:   

       "The ultimate depths of introspection take one through the self, inwards toward the centre and outward to a greater level of objectivity which, in turn, allows one to understand the self in a cycle of deepening realization."   

       I think that says as much as your idea says. The problem is that I spent about 5 seconds thinking about my "deep" statement, and I have absolutely no knowledge of anything which relevant to it. Yet I can write something which is, I think, just as meaningful as yours.
MaxwellBuchanan, May 17 2010
  

       Oooh.. I like it. Out throught the indoor, good stuff, MB.
daseva, May 17 2010
  

       Or, alternatively:   

       "The myth of introspection is that it allows a greater objectivity, as though an arrow plunging to the centre of an apple continues through the other side to leave the apple open behind it. The truth is that introspection is nothing but the compounding and resonating of internal noise to the point where it appears to be, but is not, a signal from some external reality."   

       You see the idea? Any amount of this stuff can be generated by a soulless molecular biologist in two minutes with a few glasses of wine in him. At least that's what I think, objectively.
MaxwellBuchanan, May 17 2010
  

       //only one of which has been shown to exist//
I'm not sure LEJ Brouwer would agree that *either* of them has been shown to exist.
mouseposture, May 17 2010
  

       Ah, [mouseposture]'s "Exclusion Principle".   

       (That's the one where you get pushed out into the Outer Darkness, and then we slam the fire exit behind you).
8th of 7, May 17 2010
  

       This is fun.   

       //"The ultimate depths of introspection take one through the self, inwards toward the centre and outward to a greater level of objectivity which, in turn, allows one to understand the self in a cycle of deepening realization."//
Hit it right on the head. I would only insert the words 'other than' before the second 'the self' in that statement.
  

       //Oooh.. I like it. Out throught the indoor//
It's more like a Klein bottle really. : ]}
  

       In through the in door, then, but no out.
8th of 7, May 17 2010
  

       //It's more like a Klein bottle really.//
What?! I was promised the Outer Darkness, and here I am, still on the inside/outside with [8th_of_7].
mouseposture, May 18 2010
  

       Tsh.   

       We're already on the inside.
We gotta go further in to get out.
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle