Would you read it? - Page 2

On April 28 2013 04:16 Minsk wrote: Heres first few pages of a very rough draft of a book ive been meaning to write Codex of Life Introduction – Hello, this book was written for the population. This content serves the purpose of moving your being closer to GTO/God/Equilibrium/Infinity/Truth, which benefits me. This book was written for myself, to enhance my existence through the process of “energetic gravity.” [described later] Its very important to understand before reading that this book does not refute any beliefs, ideologies, patterns, perceptions of the reader. At the same time anyone reading this with a mind that isn’t empty will not be able to grasp whatever is contained within, as they are separate realities. What is Reality? We all live in same universe, there is only one truth. When asked to define that we run into infinite subjective interpretations, each being subjective realities. Meaning that while we are all living in the same external universe, we are all actually living in separate internal realities and separate universes. This paradox occurs because our internal self, the self-image, is constantly in the process of making and refining itself. This process begins with emptieness, continues into growth, solidifies into the self, and continues into death. Death is the consequence for a solidified internal reality; meaning that as we fill ourselves internally, eventually we become full our internal energy solidifies, the external reality continues flowing, time passes and eventually the internal reality becomes distant enough from the external truth. This becomes the point of dying. Illustrated in the spiral image below.

You are 100% spot on. You could certainly write a book about this. There are many books that talk about the truth of reality in similar terms among the ancient catalogs as well. Buddhism's holy book the Dhammapada says exactly what you're saying. I've read portions of Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments which reflect this. Hindu beliefs reflect this. Elie Ayache's The Blank Swan concerns itself principally with certain parts of the paradox you describe of the self and the future being, "constantly in the process of making and refining itself." He calls this the act of writing and builds a theory of nature starting from the essential components of "1" and "0"; termed contingency.

There are many good perspectives on the reality of this world we live in that have helped the previously ignorant, or the writers themselves, reach deeper into comprehension of the universe. Each perspective is unique and its hard to coalesce all of them into one presentation that reaches all of the habitually ignorant at once; so please write and write and present another perspective of growth for the ignorant and gift us with more opportunities to catch on to the truth from the freefall into hedonistic destruction that modern education leaves us in.


Consider the way that participants of this thread responded:
“Genius in truth means little more than the faculty of perceiving in an unhabitual way”
-Bertrand Russell


There is aways room for more of the good stuff. Write on.

On April 28 2013 17:54 Loco wrote: Is it a study in autism from the first person perspective?

Your behavior is symptomatic of a weak or ignorant man who cannot or refuses to behold the fact that the symptomalogy of autism is described as the normal course of behavior of an uneducated *Man*. Aristotle and Adam Smith are two old voices from whom such wisdom flows if you only adopt the habits of Genius in truth during your approach to their works.

The writer who has touched my perspective, as a modern human raised in a modern educational system, most deeply and helped to pick me up from my most helpless and ignorant condition was Nassim Taleb. I recommend his works to others who have the cognizance to admit that they perceive themselves to be in similar straits as I was. He presents the mathematics that allow even the nerdiest of us to break free from the deceitful illusions wrought by modern quantitative methods, and therefore release us from the grip of the academics, fake businesspeople (such as Corporate Ladder Climbers, as well as owners & leaders of inherited businesses which operate in monopolized markets), and public policy makers who refer to said deceitful illusions in decision making.

ok, maybe i was a bit harsh to Minsk, i don't wanna persecute someone that's trying to think for themselves but i couldn't understand half of what he was saying, and would like a simpler more sensical explanation if he wants me to read it.

The first sentence was extremely offputting, and basically sounded like nonsense to me. i have no idea what he means in the first sentence, all of it. If someone could explain that, it would be nice.

The paragraph on 'what is reality? seems correct though, in a broad sense.

'This paradox occurs because our internal self, the self-image, is constantly in the process of making and refining itself. This process begins with emptieness, continues into growth, solidifies into the self, and continues into death. ''

i'm assuming this paragraph is talking something along the lines with nature and nurture, and the blank slate and how our subjective minds are built with experiences, which seperate us more and more from the objective reality?. As for emptiness, i mean we aren't born with a completely blank slate, obviously. We have the built in ability to speak languages without learning it from experience.

I would ask Minsk or 2content to expand what he means in the last paragraph by 'Death is the consequence for a solidified internal reality...'? This whole paragraph doesn't seem like it's actually saying something of meaning.

Anyway, not gona take points away from you for incomprehensibility. I mean tractatus was pretty dam difficult to read =o. i would need clarification on what some of this stuff means though before i would say that it isn't bullshit.

On April 28 2013 11:42 Gadget wrote: This is terrible bro. Is there any particular reason I should believe anything you are saying? Do you have a PHD in something? Why are you special, and why is what you're saying matters?

having a phd isn't a reason to believe someone lol...

I really want to clarify the first paragraph,

“Hello Readers, this book was written for the population. This content serves the purpose of moving your being closer to GTO/God/Equilibrium/Infinity/Truth, which benefits me. This book was written for myself, to enhance my existence through the process of “energetic gravity.”

This basically means that the basis for me writing this content is to bring the reader closer to balance, and the reason I personally want to bring readers closer to balance is quite simple; it allows me to optimally stay closer to balance. Meaning that the book is written to improve the conditions of my existence by allowing me to optimally remain closer to balance.

To understand this it needs to be understood that while GTO/Balance is a completely un-counterable point on this graph, there is not a single point outside of GTO & GTO -1 against which GTO is optimal.

These diagrams should explain what this means.
Its easier to explain this in the context of poker terms because poker is regarded as a strategical game, life in essence is also a strategical game of survival, but the poker terminology is easier to use





Death being caused by solidity means that as we aquire who we are through our lives our point on this graph moves slower and slower burdened by ourselves, eventually it stagnates at which time more free points move past - the box of survival shrinks, we remain the same, and eventually die.

Energetic gravity means that any time energies come in contact, they rub off on each other, moving both points closer to each other, attempting to balance each other, it is the reason opposites attract. Unfortunately I cannot emulate every opposite of every reader, that would be more ideal. The best thing I can do is emulate my current understanding of truth/god/balance/gto in a range on range sense.

This is primarily meant to be a book about strategy rather than religion, although it would be reasonable to interpret it as almsost a religion of strategy.

those above two posts just make it look like pseudo science. For starters, the words you are using like GTO, infinity, truth, and 'theoritcally perfect world' (what can this possibly mean?) mean something other than how you've used them here. Your work cannot be interpreted because the words you have used to begin with are used illogically.

What is going on in this thread?

If I may be so bold as to interject with my interpretation of what you've said so far..

Minsk This basically means that the basis for me writing this content is to bring the reader closer to balance, and the reason I personally want to bring readers closer to balance is quite simple; it allows me to optimally stay closer to balance. Meaning that the book is written to improve the conditions of my existence by allowing me to optimally remain closer to balance.

Improves you (and you improve others..and others improve others and you..etc) by social conditioning.

To understand this it needs to be understood that while GTO/Balance is a completely un-counterable point on this graph, there is not a single point outside of GTO & GTO -1 against which GTO is optimal.

Stroggoz, it isn't that he's using terms illogically. He is just expanding their dimensionality by stretching the core ideas underneath the words used therein. Communication is not always a clean-cut affair when humanity yet lacks portals directly into one another's minds.

GTO or theoretically perfect balance as used here is the same thing that the Buddhists and other cultures call Nirvana, or Enlightenment.

These diagrams should explain what this means. Its easier to explain this in the context of poker terms because poker is regarded as a strategical game, life in essence is also a strategical game of survival, but the poker terminology is easier to use

Poker has several strong analogical properties to the game of life, but the usefulness wore thin for me as I continually found myself wanting for useful terminology which is not found in poker (ie. the multi-dimensionality you discuss under "Considerations 1))

The absolutely most important thing missing from Poker metaphors for life is that the game of life uses Time, of which there is no poker equivalent (where everything happens in steps and iterations; there is no flow of time represented in static imaginations of poker ranges).

I want to venture a guess that,

Minsk In a theoretically perfect world this square would loop identically, infinitely

This here is a meditation on Time; time is an infinite loop so far as we can tell, Quantumly Speaking (re: entanglement).

Catch this: if there were no forces acting on something imbalanced, a timelapse of that object would appear to exist identically in all (infinite) frames of the timelapse. This is the way that something perfectly balanced, and remaining so, would appear despite any forces acting on it. This is ideal.

Forces in the case of this example would be the 'exploitations Point C or Point D' described on page two of the handwritten note. Forces in the poker analogy are poker ranges in a theoretical River Call spot, and further connected to reality they are the events and duties of the day-to-day; forces which are acting in your environment and which you choose to respond to in balanced or unbalanced ways.


~~~

I don't pretend to know everything that Minsk has to say or the exact applications of his understanding herein; I really don't know Minsk outside of this thread. However, what he has to say rings truly to mine ears so I offer conversation.

This is all right, im not sure about social conditioning being the right term,

The reason for using poker terms is to be able to clearly show how the points exploit each other,
Using a 3D graph of life it would be near impossible to word why these points exploit each other, where using a strategical game; it can be explained.

yeah it is time, thanks for that

Manifesto?