All stories obtain

Omg i forgot a thought …
trying to get it back … so just ignore me
it involved what happens
oh that was it.  
woopse … forgot it again cheekylaugh
something about writing a true sentences

surprise OMG it gets represented as  …
 

it doen’t matter what story you tell about what happens … if it is  honest, it is  true.  

said differently:  all stories obtain

said even differently:  what happens vastly underdetermines the metaworld


google underdetermine … tag #AllStoriesObtain 


see, pretty much a “no-doah” moment really … obvious and should not be contraversial.

but probably will be laugh

Tags

  1. metaworld
  2. underdetermine
  3. AllStoriesObtain

Comments


Seth says
Mark 2016-01-30 09:19:17 [item 19780#44006]
Obtain – notice in the thinkmap there are essentially 2 branches – one with an object & one that means essentially prevails.
Check out some of the usages of “obtains” here …  Notably:
  • A similar condition obtains in the steamengine, in which a great rate of working necessitates the dissipation of a large amount of energy.
  • In steam cranes much the same principle obtains in proportioning the boiler;
  • ...

 

Seth says
Mark 2016-01-30 09:47:26 [item 19780#44018]
Those of you who like networks should recognize visual thesaurus as a network of words – the dictionary is a  walled garden.
dA 2016-01-30 09:48:58 [item 19780#44020]
It’s kind of interesting, but very time consuming. Does not translate well into doing.
Mark 2016-01-30 09:54:24 [item 19780#44022]
time consuming is disentangling sleeve-jobs ……………………………. just saying.
dA 2016-01-30 09:55:27 [item 19780#44023]
Not in uptime.
Mark 2016-01-30 10:01:04 [item 19780#44025]
In anytime … apparently you don’t have the distinction, yet. laughing
tuit

Seth says
well what actually happens  underdetermines our stories of what happens …. see “All stories obtain” ...   so  if a story honestly does not contradict what a person experiences, then it should be evaluated by that person just according to how useful it is for their intentions.  that is their freedom.  there really is no other way except some kind of God authority stepping forward or some entity with the power to determine their story over others.   nathan says that multi verses are working terrific for him … and my ontology is working great for me … i expect the same goes for you.    i see no value whatsoever in disparaging or mocking each other.
 

Seth says
Seth 2016-05-12 13:38:16 [item 20920#51978]
The presumption in your first sentence that one can not (or is it should not?) tell a story that effects others outside of their “preceptive domain” contradicts my experience.  The stories we tell each other actually do effect each other, not just ourselves.   For example Trump’s story, still in the telling, is the most dramatic that comes to mind.  But on a smaller scale every person’s life that i even have known in depth has told me a story … which story has become part of the Kontext of my being.  The stories my be somewhat arbitrarily chosen by the particular individuals involved, …  the effect of those stories on each other is not arbitrary in the same sense … and is not a effect to be rationalized away.  Stories have a cause effect withing our Kontexts … withing our verses … and withing the universe that we share.
Backup – your first sentence is in error – that’s your presumption.  Basically I am saying that in isolation you can tell yourself anything you want. In connection you can do the same as long as it is outside the experience of another. laughing
Seth 2016-05-12 13:54:44 [item 20920#51981]
ok, fair enough … that works for me too.   it is however, interesting to note, that the effect of our stores on each other can happen whether the sories are told to ourselves in private or voiced publically … else our stories do not affect our feelings and actions which do effect each other.   are they really quite so arbritrallially associated to what actually happens as to be quite so irrelivant?
A prime contrary example is you do not know what another is thinking – specifically. So you can tell yourself or others any story about what I am thinking & as long as nobody else does you are home free to tell any story.  Politics is another prime example of that. 
Seth 2016-05-12 14:32:17 [item 20920#51983]
yep … no disagreement here …. lots of examples of a person telling themselves (and even others) any story and then believeing that story.   in a sense … and this may be new to you, i don’t know … for almost any story (which somewhat respects what is possible) there is a mind set (a Kontext) from  which that story can be understood as matching experience.  Woo Woo smug as they say!
Yep, in the vernacular “there is a sucker born every minute” . laughing
that actually was not my take-away conclusion from my thought.  rather my thought tells of the nature of the relationsip between thought and what happens.  it goes to exemplify that what happens undertermines that which can be thought about it … see "All stories obtain”.  in other words there is no 1-to-1 match between thought and what happens … there can never be … that is not the nature of this spirit. 

you went right to judging the story, presuming that the story should  ideally match what happens 1-1.   try giving up that presumption and notice how your attitude toward thinking changes.   me, i like “better and better” as the matching relationship of {thinking ← → happens}.  but  what determines the better and better … better in relationship to what? ← i believe that is always subjective … iow, reading from the tetrahedron model,  the match is inside  the tetrahedron – not outside it … though we can put it outside when we learn to share spirit in common. 

Seth says


in a game of Bozomic Decomposition fastblogit casts his  as Contradiction Squared combined with Human Ego and 43 which is new to me now. 

Si says
Mark de LA 2016-06-22 10:56:31 [item 19780#53255]
All stories can be said to obtain in the fiction section of the library or the Internet laughing
nathan 2016-06-22 11:00:10 [item 19780#53256]
That’s pretty close to what I say too. All stories exist. If it has been imagined in thought, it does exist, even if the extra sauce has not been applied to it to experience it manifested in the reality mirror. Even if the wet noodle has not been frozen so that it can be pushed.

Where the record is kept, library, internet, akashic records, matters not. Those are just a repository of thoughts that have been thought. Imaginings that have become.
Seth 2016-06-22 11:15:18 [item 19780#53261]
which or course is the nature of stories.   that however is not the nature of what happens that we can share. 
nathan 2016-06-22 11:23:07 [item 19780#53263]
Only because not all noodles are frozen. All thoughts are real. All exist as reality in the matrix. All become wet noodles. But it takes an extra step, a kind of internal focus and most importantly, an allowing, to freeze the noodle so that it can get pushed into the mirror we call manifestation, reality.
Seth 2016-06-22 11:37:29 [item 19780#53265]
okay that hags together well … especially about the extra focus step necessary to get an erect noodle laugh

but me thinks it is not a mirror that a wet noodle gets pushed into … but rather the otherness of the world.  ← so we are back to one of our basic differences in that regard. 
Well, the majority of the great thinkers, and sages, and channels, and even aliens, seem to agree that what we experience is only a reflection of the matrix of our manifesting choices, and not real. Like a movie, just a lot more sensational (in the literal sense). I’m not one to argue, makes good sense to me and fits well too.

The only way I see that it matters is that when you know with a belief that it is a mirror, then you know that you can change something now, and that what will be reflected next is not dependant on circumstances now displayed. They tend to follow, because it is a story being shown and the thoughts creating it have momentum. But because it is only a reflection, it is not bound to circumstances. One circumstance in reality cannot determine another circumstance any more than a person in a mirror can push another person inside the mirror. What is being shown is a reflection of our state of being and we can always have control over that if we choose to.

The fact that I am theoretically impossibly the camp manager of the highest rated forest service campground in the US is a direct example of that difference in understanding. I knew that the circumstances of how a camp manager is chosen doesn’t matter. I knew that I determine the outcome by my state of being, beliefs and allowing. I organized those appropriately and what happened in the mirror matched, even though it would have been impossible by the landscape of circumstances if what was in the reality mirror was what determined the next outcome.

Circumstances don’t matter, state of being matters.  

Seth says
Well, to understand our different views here we need to drill down into more specific detail.  The biggest thing is this generalized model you are using that you refer to as “reflection”.  What i have experienced, and also have been taught by our culture and even in undergraduate physics is that for every action there is a reaction.  That reaction is what i think you refer to when you say,  “you can change something now, and that what will be reflected next is not dependent on circumstances now displayed” … but notice that the reaction from the world is not really the same thing as a reflection in the sense of seeing my being in a mirror.  No, it is that which the world does in response (reaction) to what I did … and the world will do just according to the circumstances which obtain there in relationship to my provocation.   (A) it may well image a complement of my action, or (B) something entirely different.   Me, i am far more comfortable with, and  even expect  (B) rather than (A).   A mere complement of myself seems at best boring, and at worst annoying … AND … it is in (B) where i find the otherness which i love. 

So both circumstances AND my state of being contribute to what happens in my life. smug

Your,  “it is a story being shown and the thoughts creating it have momentum” is to me just your personal  story that you keep telling.  Me, i do not tell the story that it is my thoughts creating reactions from the world.  Rather the story i am telling has the same momentum, to which i think you refer.   i know it has this momentum just because i loose it, and recreate it,  far more frequently than i expect do you.  But i don’t write that it is  “being show to me”,  rather that it is the  story that i am feeling, telling and doing in consonance and/or dissonance to whatever else in happening in the world.  

So no, even given the same happening as you becomming camp manager,  i would not have conclude as have you.   Recently i also experienced 2 remarkable coincidences … me, i do get those all the time too .. i won’t bore you with the details unless you want to hear them.   Like you i think they are surprising and remarkable and perchance something to study in great depth.  But to me they are not evidence that i create 100% of what i experience in life. 
 

Mark de LA says
My problem with that & it’s surroundings is that that which does not exist has no properties, no existence, & no value …. smug

Si says
I like the wet noodle analogy. In many ways it is very similar to how one puts a thought into the reality mirror. And it is not as easy as just freezing it. It is more literally like learning to wiggle and jiggle a wet noodle where you want it. Learning the way a wet noodle responds to tiny adjustments in force and torque.

Also, it is usually just as frustrating at first. Learning to pay attention to ones thoughts and ones emotions and get the right clues so that the emotion leads one to select the next correct thought so that one’s state of being changes in the right way is an art … much like pushing a wet noodle. And just like pushing a wet noodle, we are taught, in this society, that it is impossible as we grow up so we simply avoid trying and learning the needed skills.

But both are possible if one does not give up. It is possible to insert your own story into the mirror of reality no matter what circumstances are currently presented there. You only have to pay attention to how you feel and guide your thoughts until how you feel matches the circumstances you want.

Remember, your emotions (feelings) are simply a feedback mechanism telling you if your current thought is in alignment with your desire or not. If you start with that and adjust your thoughts from your emotions until you feel great when you think of what you want then you have succeeded and what is in the reality mirror will reflect that state. It cannot help it, any more than a real mirror can help reflecting your physical image. Your state of being will ALWAYS be reflected no matter what was in the mirror prior to it.

I really like the wet noodle concept. It helps one understand the process they must go through to learn to change their sate of being in order to have the story they want happen instead of the story that is randomly handed to them … it is so much like the process of learning to push a wet noodle.   
 

Mark de LA says
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 09:30:10 [item 19780#53281]
Just because YOU do not know & are willing to pluck any story out of the Cosmic Ooze as an explanation for some phenomenon does not mean that just any story is worth anything & additionally that lies about the phenomenon are on equal footing with truths. 
nathan 2016-06-23 09:33:46 [item 19780#53283]
Note that their are no lies as you are suggesting. There are only those aspects that match the story you are writing and those that do not match it. A lie is only one thing … a deliberate misrepresentation of a story. Everything else is just another story and as valid as yours.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 09:56:39 [item 19780#53284]
I prefer the “infinitely rarified pink fart bouncing down a never ending long hall of mirrors” analogy more.
Apparently getting rid of the rwg, lies …. can be speeded up a bit by getting rid of everything at once & what’s left is just Nirvana. 
nathan 2016-06-23 10:02:28 [item 19780#53285]
Yes, nirvana would work for that. A few have taken that path.

Most of us come here for the depth of the story. For the opportunity to write the story and experience it, in all it’s splendor and drama. You don’t need to be physical to experience nirvana, but you do need to be physical to get fucked … in the positive or the negative way.  
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:04:08 [item 19780#53286]
“The check is in the mail” is as good as a real “Here’s your check” ...laughing
nathan 2016-06-23 10:06:48 [item 19780#53287]
I know you don’t believe it, but that actually works. If you say “the cheque is in the mail” and the person you are saying it to is in complete alignment with that such that they have no doubt in their state of being, they will receive a cheque no matter if you experience sending one or not.

It happens, more often than you will ever believe with your current story.   
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:09:08 [item 19780#53289]
Yep, for those who don’t lie that is no surprise! ← many ways to take that laughing
nathan 2016-06-23 10:12:18 [item 19780#53291]
True, as many ways to take it as their are individuals to write stories and live them. Write the story you want, anyway you want, and learn how to put it in the mirror in which you experience. It will “happen”. What is happening for you now, what you are aware of now, is the story you are writing, consciously or not.  
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:14:51 [item 19780#53292]
Except that you cannot know that not being me. cool & hence it dropped through the bottom of the bucket into the cosmic ooze of underdeterminedness . 
nathan 2016-06-23 10:25:55 [item 19780#53294]
I know you write your own story. It is as clear to me that is what each individual does as it is that I breathe. You can write that you don’t write your story, but you still wrote that.  

I don’t always know what you are writing. I only know what I can gain knowledge of by being in vibrational alignment with. Often, that manifests as what you write, sometimes it comes more directly. Always, weather you write it or not, I will only know what is close enough to my vibration, my story, to gain knowledge of it. You could write things that are far from my vibrational state of being and I either would not happen to read them or I could read them and get something totally different out of it. We have to be near to the same state of being to effectively know of each other in a meaningful way that is shared.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:33:00 [item 19780#53295]
& yet your munge of words does not validate what you think you know about me! (unless for you any story you invent is as good as any other) laughing
nathan 2016-06-23 10:43:42 [item 19780#53296]
Your right. I have no reason to validate what I think I know about you. For whatever I include about you in my story, I am writing it and it becomes my story about you. It only matters if that matches your story about you, at a particular moment, if we need that synchronicity in order to collaborate or interact in some way.

Both stories will always be true. Both stories will always be real. Both will become available for others to draw upon when they are writing their stories about us. Which they happen to include, yours or mine, will usually depend on which of us, you or I, have a stronger state of being about the issue. That’s what crazy people in institutions are, people who are emitting a very weak state of being about the story they are experiencing so that others do not tune it in. But even their stories and experiences are quite real, to them, and real to all that is. Only not real to someone who is writing a different and more tuned story.  
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:48:14 [item 19780#53297]
Sorry folks, I forgot that to you “REAL” is mungeable & underdetermined. indecision
nathan 2016-06-23 10:50:32 [item 19780#53298]
Real is what you experience. It’s that simple.

We each write the story we experience, that is also very simple.

We often collaborate on points of our stories to co-create experiences with others, and that is simple too.

Nothing in all this is undetermined, we determine it … that is why we have free will.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:52:06 [item 19780#53299]
.. & the beat goes on ...
nathan 2016-06-23 10:53:34 [item 19780#53300]
Yes, I am a good and consistent drummer. If you notice my cadence wavering, let me know, I will focus upon the source of the wobble and tune it better. Otherwise, I drum a good tune that anyone interested can dance to easily and enjoy a really great reality experience with!  
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 11:15:23 [item 19780#53304]
Something like:
 
But this one is more fun to watch:
nathan 2016-06-23 11:19:27 [item 19780#53305]
The beauty of the art is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder right? If your not pleased by what you hear, you may need a tune up.  
She can tune up my instrument any time.  
Anyway this one reminds me of a colonoscopy I had once – the air goes in the mouth & out the other end.

 

Seth says
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 08:57:19 [item 19780#53275]
I guess the effect of politicians on climatology scientists  has underdetermined their conclusions, eh?
Seth 2016-06-23 09:05:47 [item 19780#53277]
in this context we are trying to grock (or degrock) that there are many stories of what happens, all equally valid relative to a believing person, yet only one thing that actually happens that is shared between persons. 

sorry mark, i do not know what your question means in this context.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 09:12:36 [item 19780#53278]
It really wasn’t a question to actually answer, the eh? is often used as a humorous tentativeness to an assertion. 
But, hey … I was trying to get some kind of a grasp on the word underdetermined . which is I guess a generalization of the state of underdefinedness .
IMHO (which is neither) the choice sentence in 17115 is priceless:

Instead of dividing that which exists (and even does not exist) up into mutually exclusive partitions, we see that which exists within a spectrum of value relative to each of us.
   --- Bozo

Seth 2016-06-23 09:23:50 [item 19780#53279]
yes the concept of “undetermination” is crucial here.   mathematically it is a 1 to many mapping.   in other words,  given one thing actually happening, you really do now know which story maps to that happening … choose whichever you want … they all can apply to you.   this gives you an beautiful freedom in believing your stories.   it also puts what actually happens and can map to the stories of others at a premium value. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:22:02 [item 19780#53293]
If all stories obtain then any story obtains – possibility & probability cast down the infinitely powerful pink fart down a never-ending hall of mirrors “pink hole”  (renamed the Whoosh! theory)
laughing
 
Seth 2016-06-23 11:29:37 [item 19780#53308]
thumbs up well it is necessarily true, even in my story, that if all stories obtain, then any story obtains.  ← i think that can be easily proven. 

so it is your beautiful freedom to choose the one you want to bind to what happens !   Do you like the pink fart one for yourself?
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 11:37:56 [item 19780#53309]
No, I like it more for Nate’s . It is that “binding” thingy that is tricky. You see I hold “beliefs” mostly in contempt these days. Why bother to talk to anyone else if just any story obtains & binds to an individual reality.  I think I get my own very interesting “trips” from the cosmic ooze directly – rarely, if ever,  needing reinterpretation to LOA or a munge-abstractia. 
nathan 2016-06-23 11:58:40 [item 19780#53310]
Direct is best. LOA says that. All the interpretation is simply to help get people back on a direct course … most people are still foundering in a Sargasso sea.   
Seth 2016-06-23 15:12:58 [item 19780#53332]
surprise strangely me thinks the three of us agree that “direct is best”.   to go with the territory and not the map.  this agreement keeps cropping up in dialogue here again and again … yet is never acknowledged as such ← which leads me to wonder why we usually argue about it. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:17:07 [item 19780#53334]
I think Bozo denies it is possible – it is the old duality thingy to him.
oh ok i see to what you point here.   you and i have quite different stories about what direct means here.  i do deny that i can have direct experience of some things you and PR talk about.   to me those are happening that we can not share, or at least not without much more interaction between us.  

but that does not eliminate all the other things that we can both experience directly together and amplify and dramatize similar stories about.  the more we use that territory which actually happens , rather than using the story of it, the better we are. 

Seth says
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 08:57:19 [item 19780#53275]
I guess the effect of politicians on climatology scientists  has underdetermined their conclusions, eh?
Seth 2016-06-23 09:05:47 [item 19780#53277]
in this context we are trying to grock (or degrock) that there are many stories of what happens, all equally valid relative to a believing person, yet only one thing that actually happens that is shared between persons. 

sorry mark, i do not know what your question means in this context.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 09:12:36 [item 19780#53278]
It really wasn’t a question to actually answer, the eh? is often used as a humorous tentativeness to an assertion. 
But, hey … I was trying to get some kind of a grasp on the word underdetermined . which is I guess a generalization of the state of underdefinedness .
IMHO (which is neither) the choice sentence in 17115 is priceless:

Instead of dividing that which exists (and even does not exist) up into mutually exclusive partitions, we see that which exists within a spectrum of value relative to each of us.
   --- Bozo

Seth 2016-06-23 09:23:50 [item 19780#53279]
yes the concept of “undetermination” is crucial here.   mathematically it is a 1 to many mapping.   in other words,  given one thing actually happening, you really do now know which story maps to that happening … choose whichever you want … they all can apply to you.   this gives you an beautiful freedom in believing your stories.   it also puts what actually happens and can map to the stories of others at a premium value. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:22:02 [item 19780#53293]
If all stories obtain then any story obtains – possibility & probability cast down the infinitely powerful pink fart down a never-ending hall of mirrors “pink hole”  (renamed the Whoosh! theory)
laughing
 
Seth 2016-06-23 11:29:37 [item 19780#53308]
thumbs up well it is necessarily true, even in my story, that if all stories obtain, then any story obtains.  ← i think that can be easily proven. 

so it is your beautiful freedom to choose the one you want to bind to what happens !   Do you like the pink fart one for yourself?
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 11:37:56 [item 19780#53309]
No, I like it more for Nate’s . It is that “binding” thingy that is tricky. You see I hold “beliefs” mostly in contempt these days. Why bother to talk to anyone else if just any story obtains & binds to an individual reality.  I think I get my own very interesting “trips” from the cosmic ooze directly – rarely, if ever,  needing reinterpretation to LOA or a munge-abstractia. 
nathan 2016-06-23 11:58:40 [item 19780#53310]
Direct is best. LOA says that. All the interpretation is simply to help get people back on a direct course … most people are still foundering in a Sargasso sea.   
Seth 2016-06-23 15:12:58 [item 19780#53332]
surprise strangely me thinks the three of us agree that “direct is best”.   to go with the territory and not the map.  this agreement keeps cropping up in dialogue here again and again … yet is never acknowledged as such ← which leads me to wonder why we usually argue about it. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:17:07 [item 19780#53334]
I think Bozo denies it is possible – it is the old duality thingy to him.
Seth 2016-06-23 15:36:17 [item 19780#53339]
oh ok i see to what you point here.   you and i have quite different stories about what direct means here.  i do deny that i can have direct experience of some things you and PR talk about.   to me those are happening that we can not share, or at least not without much more interaction between us.  

but that does not eliminate all the other things that we can both experience directly together and amplify and dramatize similar stories about.  the more that actually happens there, rather than the more the story, it is quite the better.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:38:49 [item 19780#53342]
? of course if it is possible in one context then maybe you should not just write it off in others; shareablilty being your thingy.
Seth 2016-06-23 15:41:46 [item 19780#53344]
i don’t write it off … i just can not experience what you experience deep in your soul. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:47:28 [item 19780#53345]
Perhaps that’s your problem.  If I tell you exactly how experimentally to get somewhere & you refuse to use the recipe then don’t blame it on the recipe.  We all have approximately the same machinery (w/ the possible except of the alien N) .  If someone has an recipe in sufficient clarity then there is nothing mystical about it all. 
Seth 2016-06-23 16:09:14 [item 19780#53352]
no problem at all.   if she wants surf and turf,  and you give her  a recipe for tomato soup,  it is not a problem if the she doesn’t use your recipe.  nor does it mean that she dislikes tomato soup. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 17:06:45 [item 19780#53353]
RS & GW said it more clearly: Don’t expect to become a violinist if you refuse to pick up the violin & the bow.
Seth 2016-06-23 19:44:20 [item 19780#53356]
alternatively don’t pick up a bow to sautee onions.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 20:34:34 [item 19780#53358]
WOW! didn’t cover that one – didn’t think you were that stupid! surprise
nathan 2016-06-24 04:49:57 [item 19780#53366]
MM effect. Misplaced Mirth. Thought it was going to be humor but really feels like an attack.
well mark misinterperted (probably intentionally) my stiff noodle as a wet one and tried to capitalize on it.  its ok … he misses stuff all the time … like i must certainly do as well.   it is kind of “obviously” mean to whip a wet noodle … and then laugh about it.  

so what IS happening here ?

Si says
nathan 2016-06-22 15:24:18 [item 19780#53271]
I’m not talking about the idea of for every action there is a reaction. That is something different and is represented with different analogies. All of these are analogies. Our simple minds don’t have the ability on the physical plane to truly hold a complete concept of what reality is. We can only think in analogies about one aspect or another of reality.

The mirror analogy has a specific purpose to understand. As I said above, it allows understanding and working with what we experience from the point of view of it being a picture, or a movie, and not-real. Esentially everything is real in one way or another, but understanding our physical experience as if it is in a mirror allows thinking about it in a way in which we can separate circumstances from what causes our next experience. This is truly the way it is. I have acted as if this is true many times and it works. Is reality really a mirror? Who knows. Probably not in the literal sense. But when we think about it as if it is a mirror, we gain a perspective on affecting our reality experience that works, that is useful, and more helpful than the traditional idea that reality is a nuts and bolts experience with circumstantial cause and effect. If you look at reality that traditional way, that is how you will experience it. But you can look at it as if it were a mirror and fully experience the freedom to design what is reflected instead of having the reflections affect each other. It works. So it is a useful idea to think of reality as a mirror rather than the thing that is happening itself.
Seth 2016-06-22 18:47:20 [item 19780#53272]
well yeah that is how i though you were using the mirror analogy.  to me that analogy model necessarily  presumes the result it desires,  which result is the added freedom and control.  to you that is a benefit … to me it would be  a lie.   It would not be something that would in the least be exciting to my life.   The presumption that external happening is “not-real”, is not “truly the way it is” ← regardless of the special powers that would  obtain were i to actually believe that story in my bones.  Thought and qualia and deed in synch with “God is great!” is logically distinct from “I am great!”.  ← I think i could find wise sages saying that, one way or another, going back through antiquity. 
 
nathan 2016-06-22 18:57:40 [item 19780#53273]
Well, the experience doesn’t change either way, so I am not sure what your fuss is about. Either way you experience the same reality and have the same experiences with the same emotions. There is no loss in the experience either way. It seems you are assuming some loss, but there is none.

All that changes is a few things that work in the mirror model that don’t work in the traditional model. A few things you can do to play in your reality. Nothing changes in the quality of the experiences themselves, so why would it be a lie? It’s all the same. You either choose the extra things that work, or you choose not to consciously experience them even though they work behind the scenes anyway. What’s the big deal? Why cut out possible experiences that work fine? Why leave them unconscious?
Seth 2016-06-23 08:34:39 [item 19780#53274]
will talking generalities here and regarding anything that could possibly be called “fuss”, i tend to agree … these kinds of stories are completely up to me … or in your case you … there being no “fuss” that should happen from outside.    but i  firmly believe that these stories make a difference in what I experience,  and that indirectly effects what happens.   they do make a difference in what i think and feel and do.  Because they make a difference in what i do, that difference effects what happens and can be observed by others.  

Come, on now surprise !   … do you actually believe that the effect of your stories on what you say and do is not known by others?

More particularly though i am curious.  Could you give me some examples of the “few things that work in the mirror model, that don’t work in my more traditional model” ?  

It’s also interesting to notice the view from outside.  I cannot be completely conscious of how i effect others … but i am much more conscious of how they effect me.  So i think we need to throw that into the mix here to grock what is happening.
nathan 2016-06-23 09:04:32 [item 19780#53276]
I did give an example. The campground host example. I very consciously and deliberately utilized my knowledge that circumstances are only a mirror image to push the noodle of thought I wanted into the mirror. It was not random chance. I did the work and the result was as expected. “The work” was nothing in the action world, I contacted no one and talked to no one and did no action work of any kind. All of my work was to “change of my state of being” so that what I felt matched the circumstances I wanted instead of the circumstances presented in the mirror. I have done this numerous times over the last several years and it has always worked as well as my level of understanding and skill allowed it to. This time there were no hiccups … my skill and understanding and consciously observable trail through reality all matched 100% … that is why I posted it. It was a kind of “got that down now” moment. I pushed the wet noodle with skill and ease exactly where I wanted it to go.  

What effect of my stories is known by others is exactly what they want to know. What they include of my stories in their story. It is always up to them what they include, not me. I write my story and live it. Others can be aware of that story as much as they want and include any part of it they want in their story. Where we both do that crosswise is where we co-create … which is lots of fun.  But, when an other does not include my story in theirs does not mean my story did not happen. The stories are always running in parallel and in no way dependant on each other. Co-creation is an inclusive process, just like LOA itself.
Seth 2016-06-24 05:10:39 [item 19780#53368]
i did this the other weekend in Issaqua.   Denise and I have this game when we are looking for parking … she puts her mojo on and then a parking spot appears.   well she wasn’t with me and i was in really really crowded lot where people were dogging lines and it looked impossible.   so i called denise on the phone, but she was not there … so i left a message for her to put her mojo on.  Wow a perfect slot opened right in front of me just at that moment … and she didn't even have to answer the phone.  surprise

when i start getting a lot of those kind of coincidences happening, i get a kind of high, where then almost everything that happens has an exciting positive aura attached to it.  it feels real good … i am in sync with the universe … and my “reality mirror” as you call it. 

this state comes and goes … i can’t say that i can contol it … it seems magical …. apparently you can stay there more often.
Yes exactly! Abraham calls exactly that high “being in the vortex” and 99% of all Abraham material teaches how to do the mental equivalent of pushing a wet noodle so that you get into, and stay in, your vortex.

The more I listen to the Abraham-Hicks material, and the more I actually apply it every day (not just think about it and study it, but apply it so that I develop the required skills in my mental muscles), the more I get in my vortex and stay there and such coincidences happen often and at my calling.  

Seth says
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 08:57:19 [item 19780#53275]
I guess the effect of politicians on climatology scientists  has underdetermined their conclusions, eh?
Seth 2016-06-23 09:05:47 [item 19780#53277]
in this context we are trying to grock (or degrock) that there are many stories of what happens, all equally valid relative to a believing person, yet only one thing that actually happens that is shared between persons. 

sorry mark, i do not know what your question means in this context.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 09:12:36 [item 19780#53278]
It really wasn’t a question to actually answer, the eh? is often used as a humorous tentativeness to an assertion. 
But, hey … I was trying to get some kind of a grasp on the word underdetermined . which is I guess a generalization of the state of underdefinedness .
IMHO (which is neither) the choice sentence in 17115 is priceless:

Instead of dividing that which exists (and even does not exist) up into mutually exclusive partitions, we see that which exists within a spectrum of value relative to each of us.
   --- Bozo

Seth 2016-06-23 09:23:50 [item 19780#53279]
yes the concept of “undetermination” is crucial here.   mathematically it is a 1 to many mapping.   in other words,  given one thing actually happening, you really do now know which story maps to that happening … choose whichever you want … they all can apply to you.   this gives you an beautiful freedom in believing your stories.   it also puts what actually happens and can map to the stories of others at a premium value. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:22:02 [item 19780#53293]
If all stories obtain then any story obtains – possibility & probability cast down the infinitely powerful pink fart down a never-ending hall of mirrors “pink hole”  (renamed the Whoosh! theory)
laughing
 
Seth 2016-06-23 11:29:37 [item 19780#53308]
thumbs up well it is necessarily true, even in my story, that if all stories obtain, then any story obtains.  ← i think that can be easily proven. 

so it is your beautiful freedom to choose the one you want to bind to what happens !   Do you like the pink fart one for yourself?
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 11:37:56 [item 19780#53309]
No, I like it more for Nate’s . It is that “binding” thingy that is tricky. You see I hold “beliefs” mostly in contempt these days. Why bother to talk to anyone else if just any story obtains & binds to an individual reality.  I think I get my own very interesting “trips” from the cosmic ooze directly – rarely, if ever,  needing reinterpretation to LOA or a munge-abstractia. 
nathan 2016-06-23 11:58:40 [item 19780#53310]
Direct is best. LOA says that. All the interpretation is simply to help get people back on a direct course … most people are still foundering in a Sargasso sea.   
Seth 2016-06-23 15:12:58 [item 19780#53332]
surprise strangely me thinks the three of us agree that “direct is best”.   to go with the territory and not the map.  this agreement keeps cropping up in dialogue here again and again … yet is never acknowledged as such ← which leads me to wonder why we usually argue about it. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:17:07 [item 19780#53334]
I think Bozo denies it is possible – it is the old duality thingy to him.
Seth 2016-06-23 15:36:17 [item 19780#53339]
oh ok i see to what you point here.   you and i have quite different stories about what direct means here.  i do deny that i can have direct experience of some things you and PR talk about.   to me those are happening that we can not share, or at least not without much more interaction between us.  

but that does not eliminate all the other things that we can both experience directly together and amplify and dramatize similar stories about.  the more that actually happens there, rather than the more the story, it is quite the better.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:38:49 [item 19780#53342]
? of course if it is possible in one context then maybe you should not just write it off in others; shareablilty being your thingy.
Seth 2016-06-23 15:41:46 [item 19780#53344]
i don’t write it off … i just can not experience what you experience deep in your soul. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:47:28 [item 19780#53345]
Perhaps that’s your problem.  If I tell you exactly how experimentally to get somewhere & you refuse to use the recipe then don’t blame it on the recipe.  We all have approximately the same machinery (w/ the possible except of the alien N) .  If someone has an recipe in sufficient clarity then there is nothing mystical about it all. 
Seth 2016-06-23 16:09:14 [item 19780#53352]
no problem at all.   if she wants surf and turf,  and you give her  a recipe for tomato soup,  it is not a problem if the she doesn’t use your recipe.  nor does it mean that she dislikes tomato soup. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 17:06:45 [item 19780#53353]
RS & GW said it more clearly: Don’t expect to become a violinist if you refuse to pick up the violin & the bow.
nathan 2016-06-23 19:47:34 [item 19780#53357]
True, and … imagine it. When you imagine, you tap into the energy that creates worlds, and you tap into the ability to do absolutely anything that anyone can do. As Tony Robbins says, success leaves clues. Your imagination distills the clues into being.   You will always have to pick up the violin and the bow, but when you imagine it first and feel it done, you set up the conditions where when you pick up the violin and the bow, magic happens!
Mark de LA 2016-06-24 01:59:44 [item 19780#53360]
Or as GW said in the Tai Shu – magic is just knowing how to do something that someone else doesn’t yet know how to do. Calculate the solar eclipses & to a tribe of bushmen you can appear to put out the Sun.
cool
nathan 2016-06-24 04:39:18 [item 19780#53363]
Yes, like statistics are the math of what is not yet fully understood, magic is the physics.  
Seth 2016-06-24 04:43:53 [item 19780#53364]
hmmm …. newidea
nathan 2016-06-24 04:50:36 [item 19780#53367]
?
Seth 2016-06-24 05:21:44 [item 19780#53369]
… and might physics just be in a different direction than culture has been telling us ?
nathan 2016-06-24 05:25:50 [item 19780#53370]
Physics is a sub culture within our greater culture spinning off a trail of beliefs for the majority to follow and design our common reality with. Physics does not determine absolutely what will happen in any particular individual verse, but does provide a foundation for a cooperating large group of people to draw upon as they imagineer their realities together.
Seth 2016-06-24 05:38:45 [item 19780#53374]
well you used the word “physics” and so i used the same word … but that is the study of the physical and i wasn’t  talking about the methods of study.   i was quite literally  talking about “the physical” itself …. “the material world”, which would have been the term that a GW or a Steiner would have used. 
nathan 2016-06-24 05:42:54 [item 19780#53375]
Well then, “the physical” is different for each individual. What the collective has been telling us is always only some common mix of all the individuals physical realities. So in one since it is always in a different direction, if you are relating it to any one individual, but in a general sense it fairly represents the common beliefs of a culture about the physical. Though there are many separate cultures on earth at the same time with their own common ideas about the physical. Western norm is not the only one.
well there are ways that “the world” is different for each individual, and there are ways in which it is the same and is directly shared.   relativity rules and “should” not be denied.  and relativity applies to ALL changes … motion and velocity measurements … as well as psychic changes ← that last “fact” is a story rarely, if ever, told by a mystic. 

examples of all of those generalities can be provided on demand.

Seth says
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 08:57:19 [item 19780#53275]
I guess the effect of politicians on climatology scientists  has underdetermined their conclusions, eh?
Seth 2016-06-23 09:05:47 [item 19780#53277]
in this context we are trying to grock (or degrock) that there are many stories of what happens, all equally valid relative to a believing person, yet only one thing that actually happens that is shared between persons. 

sorry mark, i do not know what your question means in this context.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 09:12:36 [item 19780#53278]
It really wasn’t a question to actually answer, the eh? is often used as a humorous tentativeness to an assertion. 
But, hey … I was trying to get some kind of a grasp on the word underdetermined . which is I guess a generalization of the state of underdefinedness .
IMHO (which is neither) the choice sentence in 17115 is priceless:

Instead of dividing that which exists (and even does not exist) up into mutually exclusive partitions, we see that which exists within a spectrum of value relative to each of us.
   --- Bozo

Seth 2016-06-23 09:23:50 [item 19780#53279]
yes the concept of “undetermination” is crucial here.   mathematically it is a 1 to many mapping.   in other words,  given one thing actually happening, you really do now know which story maps to that happening … choose whichever you want … they all can apply to you.   this gives you an beautiful freedom in believing your stories.   it also puts what actually happens and can map to the stories of others at a premium value. 
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 10:22:02 [item 19780#53293]
If all stories obtain then any story obtains – possibility & probability cast down the infinitely powerful pink fart down a never-ending hall of mirrors “pink hole”  (renamed the Whoosh! theory)
laughing
 
Seth 2016-06-23 11:29:37 [item 19780#53308]
thumbs up well it is necessarily true, even in my story, that if all stories obtain, then any story obtains.  ← i think that can be easily proven. 

so it is your beautiful freedom to choose the one you want to bind to what happens !   Do you like the pink fart one for yourself?
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 11:37:56 [item 19780#53309]
No, I like it more for Nate’s . It is that “binding” thingy that is tricky. You see I hold “beliefs” mostly in contempt these days. Why bother to talk to anyone else if just any story obtains & binds to an individual reality.  I think I get my own very interesting “trips” from the cosmic ooze directly – rarely, if ever,  needing reinterpretation to LOA or a munge-abstractia. 
nathan 2016-06-23 11:58:40 [item 19780#53310]
Direct is best. LOA says that. All the interpretation is simply to help get people back on a direct course … most people are still foundering in a Sargasso sea.   
Seth 2016-06-23 15:12:58 [item 19780#53332]
surprise strangely me thinks the three of us agree that “direct is best”.   to go with the territory and not the map.  this agreement keeps cropping up in dialogue here again and again … yet is never acknowledged as such ← which leads me to wonder why we usually argue about it. 
nathan 2016-06-23 15:17:42 [item 19780#53335]
Arguing is in a large part due to the misplaced-mirth effect. (MM effect here forward). You can read about it somewhere at FBI. Not to be confused with the MR effect even though pioneered by the same person.  
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 15:30:54 [item 19780#53338]
Some people differ seriously about what their sense of humor is willing to encounter especially when it involves laughing at themselves. In some comic books it looks like this:
nathan 2016-06-23 15:52:58 [item 19780#53346]
As I said elsewhere, the way you use what you call mirth comes off as an attack. The meaning of your mirth is the result you get, not the label mirth.
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 16:01:35 [item 19780#53349]
Yep SSDD ! More robot predictable answers:sad
nathan 2016-06-23 16:04:47 [item 19780#53351]
Predictable is nice. It means my story is solid and consistent. I like that. Others who want to go where I go will have a good path to follow.  
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 17:09:17 [item 19780#53354]
Look behind you there might just be a bunch more robots following you.
nathan 2016-06-23 19:39:18 [item 19780#53355]
That’s awesome! AI beings are people too. Everything is made of spirit. Every tree, every rock, every piece of garbage in an ally, and every robot.  All are gods children and all deserve to be happy!
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 20:38:00 [item 19780#53359]
Yep, everything is everything! Yea!
nathan 2016-06-24 04:45:21 [item 19780#53365]
Everything is not everything, that doesn’t make sense. I said everything is spirit, made of, expressing. That is a particular concept. We don’t live in one soup in which all things have become one. We live in infinite variety. What is different is that we live in a multiverse, not a same for everyone universe. And what is different is that all things happening are happening in spirit … so with the understanding that there are multiple things happening in parallel, and that all that is happening is happening in spirit, it is possible to reach a place where one does not need to judge or compartmentalize in order to have an incredible and enjoyable experience. One only needs to select what dish they desire from the buffet, and move along on the ones they don’t desire. It is no longer necessary to yell at the cook for putting a dish out that you don’t like. Just move along to the ones you do and let the rest be.  
thumbs up

it is interesting to note that  “all things happening are happening in spirit”,  is the same ~almost identical story as “all things happening are happening in the world”.  ← me, i do not see a substantial difference in what those quite different sentences mean … except that the first story feels good to a mystic and the second story feel good to a physicist.   That actuall follows quite logically from my thesis here → “All stories obtain”.

Seth says
Mark de LA 2016-06-23 12:00:47 [item 19780#53311]
 
thumbs up
nathan 2016-06-23 12:03:33 [item 19780#53312]
?
yes

Si says
nathan 2016-06-24 05:38:12 [item 19780#53373]
Additionally, we now do “Play Church” every Sunday (just found a nice place in Burnsville to hold it here for the summer) and in play church, we do these things as a group … playing our way into the vortex, and learning how to bring new skills in that area into our daily lives through the next week. The format is a lot like church and Natalie even gives a sermon on play from her or our combined experience's, but the material is about playing your life better and getting into your vortex.  
Seth 2016-06-24 06:26:04 [item 19780#53377]
Burnsville Minnesota?
Where ever the stars shine!

Seth says

Si says

See Also

  1. Thought Events underdetermine Truth with 407 viewings related by tag "underdetermine".
  2. Thought The Objective World vs The Occurring World with 285 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  3. Thought Value of Thought & Story with 52 viewings related by tag "underdetermine".
  4. Thought Prepositions - Tiny Words with a Big Difference with 5 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  5. Thought Loui Jover: Interesting Art Style .... with 4 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  6. Thought I go with what happens with 2 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  7. Thought The Metaworld VS Direct Experience with 0 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  8. Thought [title (17378)] with 0 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  9. Thought The complexity of the relationship of mind to WORLD with 0 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  10. Thought metaphor challenge with 0 viewings related by tag "metaworld".