[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]

/fringe/ - Fringe

Esoteric Wizardry

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Flags
d±
Password (For file deletion.)

Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


[Rules] [Guide for Newbies to /fringe/] [Freedomboard] [/asatru/] [/occult/] [/edgy/] [/4chon/]
Read the rules before posting. Go to freedomboard if 8ch.net goes down.

File: 1425701571678.jpg (103.88 KB, 730x1019, 730:1019, 123123.jpg)

 No.25864

http://www.physixfan.com/wp-content/files/GEBen.pdf

Anyone read this book. How does it tie in with the astral? I feel like some kind of connection might be made.

excerpt

It is still of great interest to ponder whether we humans ever can jump out of ourselves-or
whether computer programs can jump out of themselves. Certainly it is possible for a
program to modify itself-but such modifiability has to be inherent in the program to start
with, so that cannot be counted as an example of "jumping out of the system". No matter
how a program twists and turns to get out of itself, it is still following the rules inherent
in itself. It is no more possible for it to escape than it is for a human being to decide
voluntarily not to obey the laws of physics. Physics is an overriding system, from which
there can be no escape. However, there is a lesser ambition which it is possible to
achieve: that is, one can certainly Jump from a subsystem of one's brain into a wider
subsystem. One can step out of ruts on occasion. This is still due to the interaction of
various subsystems of one’s brain, but it can feel very much like stepping entirely out of
oneself. Similarly, it is entirely conceivable that a partial ability to “step outside of itself”
could be embodied in a computer program.

In Zen, too, we can see this preoccupation with the concept of transcending the system.
For instance, the koan in which Tozan tells his monks that "the higher Buddhism is not
Buddha". Perhaps, self-transcendence is even the central theme of Zen. A Zen person is
always trying to understand more deeply what he is, by stepping more and more out of
what he sees himself to be, by breaking every rule and convention which he perceives
himself to be chained by-needless to say, including those of Zen itself. Somewhere along
this elusive path may come enlightenment. In any case (as I see it), the hope is that by
gradually deepening one's self-awareness, by gradually widening the scope of "the
system", one will in the end come to a feeling of being at one with the entire universe.

Perhaps the greatest contradiction in our lives, the hardest to handle, is the knowledge
"There was a time when I was not alive, and there will come a time when I am not alive."
On one level, when you "step out of yourself" and see yourself as "just another human
being", it makes complete sense. But on another level, perhaps a deeper level, personal
nonexistence makes no sense at all. All that we know is embedded inside our minds, and
for all that to be absent from the universe is not comprehensible. This is a basic
undeniable problem of life; perhaps it is the best metaphorical analogue of Gödel’s
Theorem. When you try to imagine your own nonexistence, you have to try to jump out
of yourself, by mapping yourself onto someone else. You fool yourself into believing that
you can import an outsider's view of yourself into you, much as TNT "believes" it
mirrors its own metatheory inside itself. But TNT only contains its own metatheory up to
a certain extent-not fully. And as for you, though you may imagine that you have jumped
out of yourself, you never can actually do so-no more than Escher's dragon can jump out
of its native two-dimensional plane into three dimensions. In any case, this contradiction
is so great that most of our lives we just sweep the whole mess under the rug, because
trying to deal with it just leads nowhere.
Zen minds, on the other hand, revel in this irreconcilability. Over and over again,
they face the conflict between the Eastern belief: "The world and I are one, so the notion
of my ceasing to exist is a contradiction in terms" (my verbalization is undoubtedly too
Westernized-apologies to Zenists), and the Western belief: "I am just part of the world,
and I will die, but the world will go on without me."

 No.25876

File: 1425717662415.jpg (757.01 KB, 1233x1700, 1233:1700, berkly.jpg)

>>25864

Have not read it but I've heard an Occultist raving about the "Art of Fugue" compilation by Bach.

Also I have seen a little bit on Godel via the 'Gary Geck' vids. From what I have gathered Godel was firmly in the platonic school, his mathematics got metaphysical and he make Spenglerian comment along the lines of (paraphrasing) 'this is the wrong age for the discovery of splitting the atom, that is meant for the 3rd World War', something to that effect.

Though I gathered information about Godel from academics lectures so they would be likely to brush over anything more occulty than mentioned.

As for the book itself it looks like it is written from a mundane perspective but probably still worth reading in order to gleam information.


Though I haven't read it so don't put any weight on my words.

 No.25878

>>25876
Yeah the guy who wrote it is mundane. However he is just one step away form going over the edge. Often flirting with other ideas.

However one part of the book he never tackles succinctly is the binding problem. He admits the binding problem is a contradiction using his logic, and spends a good deal of time talking about it. He admits his own mundane views are ultimately irrational and unprovable yet stands by them. Instead of taking the next step he attributes it to the universe being fundamentally irrational.



Delete Post [ ]
[]
[Return][Go to top][Catalog]
[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]