Reality in the macro sense is either

1.deterministic, physically determined
2.consensual, God(s), psychically determined
3.acausal/random, no cause
4.irrational
5.variable
6.some combination of these

and saying that the acausal causes the causal, falsifies the premises of
macro acausality, so acausal cannot coexist any causal model of
determinism

Can
we have a child without a parent, a specific without a general?

Can there
be just little acausality? Let us see what set theory has to say.

If
acausality and causality are always disjoint sets, then the acausal can
never intersect and interact and beget the causal, or have any effect on
it. If they are continously joined then, and mutually exclusive, this is
the logic

A = acausality, let C = causality, A is not C, A = ~C and C = ~A
if C exists, A cannot,

if there is any causality, there can be no
acausality, there is causality, so there is no acausality, in a rational
reality, and if we are talking about an irrational reality, then
acausality is beget by irrationality and is no random or acausal at all,
and a variable reality with rationality, is an irrational reality, SO,
there are no true acausalities, or randomness, only characterizations of
such, only things that appear to be such

--
Comrade
see my friend Average Joe's site
http://www.mysolution.ws
the aristocracy was the problem in 1776
the aristocracy is the problem today
http://www.aclu.org/dissentreport
we must close the door by which aristocracy arises

"Does God want goodness? or the choice of goodness?
Is the man who chooses bad, somehow better,
than the man who has the good forced upon him?"
a quote from the movie, A Clockwork Orange, Kubrick

Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage.
Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his understanding
without direction from another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when
its cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution
and courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere aude!
"Have courage to use your own reason!" - that is the motto
of enlightenment.
Kant -- What Is Enlightenment? 1784

Ayn Rand just professed laissez faire, another Jewish mysticist
of Zionist status quo social order, and aspiring to such, she
never challenged "the establishment" she was a radical crony,
not a radical individual, the very anti-thesis of individualism

Comrade (Average Asshole) wrote:


bull**** which was snipped...

go **** yourself asshole.

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:55:47 +0000, Moonshadao wrote:

go **** yourself asshole.

you are such an angry young man when people have a discussion of value


--
Comrade
see my friend Average Joe's site
http://www.mysolution.ws
the aristocracy was the problem in 1776
the aristocracy is the problem today
http://www.aclu.org/dissentreport
we must close the door by which aristocracy arises

"Does God want goodness? or the choice of goodness?
Is the man who chooses bad, somehow better,
than the man who has the good forced upon him?"
a quote from the movie, A Clockwork Orange, Kubrick

Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage.
Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his understanding
without direction from another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when
its cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution
and courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere aude!
"Have courage to use your own reason!" - that is the motto
of enlightenment.
Kant -- What Is Enlightenment? 1784

Ayn Rand just professed laissez faire, another Jewish mysticist
of Zionist status quo social order, and aspiring to such, she
never challenged "the establishment" she was a radical crony,
not a radical individual, the very anti-thesis of individualism

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:55:47 +0000 (UTC), Moonshadao wrote:

Comrade (Average Asshole) wrote:


bull**** which was snipped...

go **** yourself asshole.

STOP responding to him. He will NOT stop posting this **** as long as
people keep responding!

"Comrade" wrote in message ...
Reality in the macro sense is either

1.deterministic, physically determined
2.consensual, God(s), psychically determined
3.acausal/random, no cause
4.irrational
5.variable
6.some combination of these


None of these concepts can in any way describe the actuality of
reality. If you think any of these words mean anything that can
describe the true nature of the universe, you are looking for you
awnsers in the wrong places. If words could do a good job of it, I
think you would find more people who agree with you. Again my main
question for you is, why does this issue even matter to you, and how
will you use this understanding to improve the quality of your life?


and saying that the acausal causes the causal, falsifies the premises of
macro acausality, so acausal cannot coexist any causal model of
determinism


Cause and Effect are just lables we use for our observation of the
"external" world through our "internal senses" the do not exisist
outside the realm of our immaginations. You are not capible of
describing reality because you are not capable of perciving reality
outside the confines of your senses. My advice is to stop trying to
"figure" "everyting" out and concentrate more on enjoying life.

Can we have a child without a parent, a specific without a general?

No, but that only mean that our thinking and words are at least
somewhat limited by duality. This should be an indication that words
can not describe infinty, at least it should be if you have taken
psychedelic drugs.

Can there
be just little acausality? Let us see what set theory has to say.


Which theory, quantum theory allows for quantum randomness and allows
for cause and effect to describe other phenomina.

If
acausality and causality are always disjoint sets, then the acausal can
never intersect and interact and beget the causal, or have any effect on
it. If they are continously joined then, and mutually exclusive, this is
the logic

A = acausality, let C = causality, A is not C, A = ~C and C = ~A
if C exists, A cannot,

if there is any causality, there can be no
acausality, there is causality, so there is no acausality, in a rational
reality, and if we are talking about an irrational reality, then
acausality is beget by irrationality and is no random or acausal at all,
and a variable reality with rationality, is an irrational reality, SO,
there are no true acausalities, or randomness, only characterizations of
such, only things that appear to be such

So who is causing everything to happen then, and again why does it
really matter.

-Have you considered writing a book?
-Bryan

Moonshadao wrote in message ...
Average Asshole wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:55:47 +0000, Moonshadao wrote:

go **** yourself asshole.

you are such an angry young man when people have a discussion of value

I'm 52 years old

Bull****

and emotion has to be present for anger.

Anger is an emotion *stare*

Simple ASCII text characters convay no emotion.

Oh, so words don't cary emotion? Gee I guess everyone who cries when
they read "Romeo and Juliet" must be delusional. Besides even if words
carry no emotion, why chose to use ones that make you look like an
ignorant, ranting, high school adolecent.

Why not face the truth, you have nothing to say.

I am sure he feels what he has to say is important, as he posts it.

There is no discussion value in any of your bull****.

Then why do you and others discuss said "bull****"

You are a ****ing moron that is desparate need of a life.

Very compassionate

Did your mother ever have any kids that lived?

Wow, such hostitity

I'm sure if you took an IQ test the results would be negative.

Wow Mr. 52, that sure sounds like an insult that took a lifetime worth
of expericance to come up with.

-However you feel about the content of his posts, you should deal with
the excessive emotions in yours.
-Bryan

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:58:51 +0000, Magnus_Grey wrote:

So who is causing everything to happen then,

I think God and the Devil are one, see http://www.mysolution.ws/tao.htm

and again why does it
really matter.

you need to find a rationality in life, you cannot deduce things without
knowing the general, and when you induce, what you find is the general

--
Comrade
see my friend Average Joe's site
http://www.mysolution.ws
the aristocracy was the problem in 1776
the aristocracy is the problem today
http://www.aclu.org/dissentreport
we must close the door by which aristocracy arises

"Does God want goodness? or the choice of goodness?
Is the man who chooses bad, somehow better,
than the man who has the good forced upon him?"
a quote from the movie, A Clockwork Orange, Kubrick

Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage.
Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his understanding
without direction from another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when
its cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution
and courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere aude!
"Have courage to use your own reason!" - that is the motto
of enlightenment.
Kant -- What Is Enlightenment? 1784

Ayn Rand just professed laissez faire, another Jewish mysticist
of Zionist status quo social order, and aspiring to such, she
never challenged "the establishment" she was a radical crony,
not a radical individual, the very anti-thesis of individualism

"Comrade" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:55:47 +0000, Moonshadao wrote:

go **** yourself asshole.

you are such an angry young man when people have a discussion of value

you do use up quite a bit of bandwidth :-)

care to conduct separate conversations with each group
(so the groups can generally stick to their preferred focii)
and post a bit more sedately?
(so more quiet folks' threads don't get lost)

we're not going to run away while you do something else,
but it's a hit much to ask folks with little time for usenet
to trudge through even one of your treatises, let alone several
in one day

-k

bottom line: (not intended as an insult) you're NOT being civil
with regard to how you post