love this topic and any one who brings this level of precision insight and poetry. i 100% agree that simulation theory and application have been co-opted by mechanistic and reductive frameworks, and to all the down-vibe ends you have identified
that said, apart from that co-opting, i think 'the simulation' is a spiritual technology and, as such, a radically liberationist construct. one that offers non-locals "a fleshy system to grant us material continuity" (citing @elodivedha)
i also have come to believe that spacetime, which is the dynamic stage that the simulation 'happens on' has coded within it mechanisms that generate narratives for its players as immersive systems for accelerating processes of... soul integration. if that can be considered then simulation theory is not a denial of objective reality but rather a intricate narrative game engine designed (and yes i know that word is problematic) to provide the conditions for growth, awakening, and, ultimately, transcendence
again, if that model is considered, then perhaps the 'simulation' is not antithetical to the mystical tradition; it is a repurposing of it. one that alchemizes the spiritual and the material
but materialistic empires are going to try to rope people into any deterministic system they can. so that we generate the prison our selves. but that is all quantum magick, imo. what if we 'see' the simulation as a medium, not for control, but for transformation?
I wonder, though, if you are speaking of creation, rather than simulation? It might seem like a small distinction, yet the separation of creation through phases and cycles is I think the experience, while simulation is the manipulation.
How dare I make such a statement, you might ask.
Well, it has to do with my observation of the development of history. There has been a development, in the tension between belonging and becoming, and I refer to this as the God of the Mechanical. I discuss him, and his influence here:
Thus the rise of the machine is evidenced by a deepening and solidifying of incarnation. This drop into the physical is met by the need to be in a world of things, yet it still must participate somewhat with the higher, thus the distinction.
Simulation therefore is attempting to make sense of hard matter that is ignorant of, yet must participate in the higher reality.
Questions that require far more than a comment section to address!
A new cycle is being born, yes, you can sense it through everything, it isn't just a standard change of season.
I like the way you put that...trying to materialize the spiritual. It shows very clearly where you are coming from, and that statement itself is extremely interesting.
I really can't imagine, how it could be that the direction of consciousness that has brought us here is more than vaguely, tangentially aware of the spiritual. The entire point of modern thought is to liberate itself from all spiritual responsibility.
So god mechanical, the joy that all your thinking is just physical neurology, is the birth of a material ascendency from matter itself. In this heavily incarnate space, the spiritual actually projects from the material, and this is the Blue Mind Field. Here, the physical success stories of society are ascending to take up new positions with their mechanical godhead.
Maya figures strongly in your understanding, but she has quite a different cast to the machine god's prophets, related purely to scientific control, A.I., and transhumanism.
A.I. is, in the image thus presented, a distillation of the Noosphere. In such a system, there is no room restraint, the purpose of A.I. is to first augment man, and then replace mankind completely.
When you understand this direction, you will understand the prophets in an entirely different light.
With all due respect, I don't follow that what you're referring to is simulation. In my understanding you are describing a guided reality, in which the circumstances are arranged by higher power.
This is a classic relationship of the incarnate individual with the Daemon or Daimon, Elder Brother.
It is important to grasp that this tradition is pre-christian, and thus does not partake of abrahamic or scientific thought. It is very difficult for us to grasp the essential tenets because of our indoctrination. Imagine if you will that everything that Is exists completely, but that you, and everybody can only perceive the smallest and quickest flash of it. To the mind it might appear that there is a hidden reality, because it is only possible for us to experience a small piece of it, and yet those like yourself cannot dismiss this greater reality.
In this life then we can be aware of this greater scope, and the intelligences that populate it.
Such is not simulation, it is the cosmos.
Simulation is the notion that this reality is a false construct. The plasticity in reality that you refer to is inherent without the need for a spurious division in experience. It is instead a construct of abrahamic thought, where the model of reality cannot support all the recognized functions, so therefore a different model must be invented.
oh i agree with you on the terminology. the word 'simulation' does not express what this 'thing' is. we are talking about spacetime, and right now that entire concept it up for grabs. and terms like simulation (which really comes from Bostrom's musing on whether advanced civilizations who were facing extinction trajectories might create ancestor simulations to game outcomes) are actually helpful in terms of breaking down the mechanics of spacetime.
using 'simulation' as a descriptor suggests an immersive experiential construct which is being generated from a non-local source.
that it has 'source code' (which can be hacked and altered, hence my reference to this way of seeing as liberationist)
for a species who are now rapidly advancing their framework for understanding how 'worlds' are created from the quantum perspective - even if just digital game versions - i think terms like 'simulation' are really helpful. and i guess i disagree that the term frames reality as a false construct. false relative to what? i am typing with fingers that are actually made of atomic constellations being generated from a quantum field that processes the non-material into material. on a computer that is, at its fundamental 'level,' more empty space than hard matter. i think it's pointing more to the idea that what we think about reality is false... as false as the idea that the earth is the center of the galaxy/universe. its less a factual correction than a system upgrade.
but we're really just doing semantics here and again i agree that the term for many people would only be confusing if not completely misleading.
one other tangential point i wanted to comment on:
- when we consider how events are unfolding today - and the degree to which they may be 'led' by apocalyptic eschatology of the Abrahamic religions - i think the term simulation may actually be extremely on-point. there is a good argument to be made that in the quantum construct we are generating the consensus reality that has been coded into 'holy' books for centuries. simulating that reality and its inevitable terminus.if that is the case, however imperfect as terminology, 'simulation' may help us see these apocalyptic trajectories not as inevitabilities, but as deeply coded storylines—ones we might yet rewrite at the level they are being generated from
However, when one is discussing reality what they actually are defining is experience. The abrahamics have not altered reality, or created it, but they have changed the interpretation of the perception/experience.
One can commune with the Daemon, and achieve some pretty remarkable communications, despite the fact that abrahamism defines and teaches such as 'demons', and worthless. So, the abrahamics did not negate the old ways, they only paved over them.
Any thought regarding the inventing of a new perspective on the ancestors is, in my own experience an idea that derives from having no relationship with them. It does take time and dedication to build this bridge, but the experience of the ancestors has its own direction, and this is what can and should be discovered, or we are back on the slippery slope of the 'Noble Lie.'
I'm afraid we disagree on the concept of simulation. I absolutely find that any such thing, supposing it exists, is a result, not generative. Therefore, it is up to the level and strength of connection between the person and the sim to breathe any life into it, yet anyone who spends time in nature is quite aware they are living with other expressions of life which definitely are generative.
Simulation by definition is reducing reality to a false face value aspect, and the condition or basis upon which it is layered is thus imagined as the truth. Its laid out quite nicely in Mr. Hoffman's Ted talk, which is included in this piece above.
You seem to be making a case for immersion, or intensity to be driving simulation theory, but again, the intensity can only be lent by the participant, especially if we are describing simulation as a mathematic description.
I don't see any form of this cosmos as a simulation. I have yet to find any example in nature where simulation rings true. The notion seems to derive solely from a specific form of thought that has arisen since de Chardin and the Huxleys first proposed transhumanism, and began the worship of deus est machina, the machine god.
In the end, reality is far deeper and greater than the experience of one life form, yet that reality is encompassing, not divisive.
this is a fascinating conversation for me / thank you for penetrating its multi-dimensions. we are in total agreement about the generative nature of reality and the qualia of Nature itself. most of my work in developing my own gnostic perspective happens in nature, where i have experienced ‘contact’ with cthonics that moved into non-natural settings (but always use the alchemy of cosmic light sources - sun, stars, moon, planets) and terrestrial frames or objects (trees, windows, spider webs etc) to communicate very precise messages. i’ll take it a level further and say i live in service to an Authority which can only be described in terms that our pre-abrahmic ancestors would use
so all that to say - im with you in that. as a person who works in the field of generative design (we write code that processes information into complex dynamic signaling objects - the same way a cloud which materializes from atmospheric inputs can then be ‘read’ by meteorologists to deconstruct those generating inputs)… as a person who works in that field and specifically building objects that bio- and cosmo-mimic - again our worldviews are completely aligned. Hoffman is one of my polestars as well and im not sure his desktop theory, which posits spacetime as ‘an interface’ is a repudiation of simulation hypothesis as you assert
i guess what im saying is that Nature (using Emerson’s coinage) is not necessarily embodied fully in spacetime. that, to cite Hoffman, what we experience here is merely a construct we have materialized for our own purposes/needs. and thus ‘true reality’ may still be out there/in there and waiting for our next evolutionary thrust to unveil itself
Its been my experience that the conscious mind is a limited feature. Consciously, we can accept that there is a greater scope to life, experience and being than what we can be directly aware of.
Where I differ from Mr. Hoffman is with the assertion that this limited awareness denotes, suggests, or defines something that is essentially not true.
I can and do honour antecedent states to this one, however that honouring does not negate life or experience here, it embraces it.
The issue as I see it with simulation is that this theory is coupled with a hyper aggressive lust for manipulation and control. It is especially easy to act without heed or regard if one is doing so in an artificial construct. Simulation will simply cheapen life and reduce all deep processes to fair game through violent exploitation. I would think by now this would be evident, but the collective is more than willing to go there.
My question to Mr. H, which I doubt I will ever get to ask is what is his view of the purpose and direction of cognitive science and his own work?
I just see more disaster in the making, more alienation from the inner knowing of what it means to be to human, more dalliance into failed ways, and a doubling down on life which is gonna break things.
The mind loves to make models, and models are wonderful tools as long as we don't lose sight on the fact that its a model.
There simply are in my experience, deeper levels of reality, the powers and principalities truly live. If we take a step back from manipulation for one moment, perhaps then it will become evident how much we have been missing. Simulation simply empowers that emptiness of the missing.
i think we’ve cooked this goose (apologies to the vegans!). my last thought - and by no means trying to have the last word here Mike Kay - is that in simulation hypothesis and desktop theory i only see the liberation from manipulation and control and the berth of a new system cognition that has the potential to float ALL boats and give people who are under the thumb of this techno-feudal paradigm which is doing just fine in the status quo consensus version of spacetime. in that ‘reality’ there is only a quickening loss of agency and autonomy. and theyve got it locked down from our microbiome to the Van Allen Belt.
Then Kandinsky had synesthesia - he saw tones in colours , colours were musical tones . There are many fake artists now who are trapped in simulation - who have no regard for Colour, tone , other dimensions … but it should be that the artist the poet the philosopher comment on and observe the simulation but they largely do not … they are part of its blandness … as we saw with the number of artists and celebrities who so unbelievably rallied the public health officials on to administer their poisons … thank you 🙏 so interesting and thought provoking as always
I love the kind of participation required to understand Kandinsky.
In terms of fake artists, they are very well paid to hit audiences over the head with banalities. And of course they promote the poisoning, after all, they know better than to bite the hand that feeds them.
the thing about simulation that gets me, and i am fresh from reading the comments here and feeling a little under-qualified with my feeble grasp of what simulation is meant to actually be, is that it has popped up as this great Theory only after we have developed computers. when i first heard about it my instant thought was so what, are we all like on a hard drive somewhere? like, god's computer? someone or something has to be running this simulation, its completely hegemonic and maybe that is the point.
it seems to be a theory born out of complete and utter immersion in the latest fad in human life, not a deep contemplation of or better still immersion in nature.
I'm not intellectual, I'm not up on people with letters after their names' latest anything's and I'm not particularly well-read, human world speaking, maybe that is why i think simulation is one of the emptiest most vapid explanations of reality i have ever come across.
its most likely an oppressive meme designed to divorce us further from the actual mystery of what this all is, and the sense of wonder, and being content and exhilarated by that wonder, because wonder doesn't sell fucking iphones. as for number, i think it is a symptom of the universe (thanks ozzy), not the stuff of the universe.
just as a religious fixation on the afterlife seems to have devalued the web of life we actually have here and now, i see simulation as a further, even more flippant, disregard for the real and, in that we cannot explain them and need theories to even try, magical complexities of life, death and everything we know fuck all about.
i believe trees are more intelligent life forms than us, i measure intelligence not by how technological a species becomes but by how adaptive to the prevalent conditions in order to support and strengthen biodiversity the species becomes... is simulation just peak homogeny i wonder?
Near as I can discern, the origin of simulation theory began, or at least really picked up steam with the invention of the hologram: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography
Interestingly the hologram arrived at the same time the Gnostic Nag Hammadhi Library was discovered.
The real voice behind simulation picked up on both to promote this theory in his books, Phillip K. Dick, and he used to attend conferences to promote his ideas.
The essential point, like Hoffman explains in the TED talk I posted with this piece, is that the world we interact in isn't real, and is in fact a distillation of deeper forces.
Simulation theory in regards to spirituality goes back quite a bit earlier, to the idea that the world is an illusion.
Currently these two streams, the scientific and the spiritual have dovetailed.
A big reason why I wrote this piece is to illustrate that spirituality is not given over to simulation. In fact, it is quite the opposite.
Genuine spirituality promotes a different view of intelligence than that of modern society. Here, intelligence is not in handling difficult concepts, it is found through ingenious adaptations and alterations, so on that we certainly agree.
I don't have a phone, corvus. Thats why at this time I can't start up a paid service. Nearest bank is over an hour round trip, and while I could deal with a money order or check, this entire intellectual hustle just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
This society loves to kill trees. It loves to steamroll life and other people that get in their way. It is a vicious genocidal abrahamic parasite and its time is finally coming to an end.
thankyou for explaining, Mike. i just deleted a sizable response as i haven't watched the material you embedded in the op and i need to get my head around the concept before i add anything. what did come to mind is the old story of the disciple claiming all is illusion to the teacher, and the teacher hitting them on the head with their staff, and asking "what hurts?"
i can also theorise without grasping the concept fully, that our disconnection from the web of life and the ways of being of our distant ancestors may be the thing that allows the concept to take root...
is simulation theory just another offworld value system locking us further into the technocult with no solutions to offer for what feels like existential suicide for the entire systemic interrelatedness that sustains the brains that devised the theory in the first place?
I don't really think simulation is related to any kind extraterrestrial phenomenon, but I do think its heavily linked to materialism, which is the dominant world view of modern science.
Simulation actually subtracts from human agency. Its purpose is to destroy perception as fundamental. Yet this becomes an absurdity, because there is no other venue to exploring an objective reality.
So simulation winds up being destructive to any system of understanding, including its own.
In terms of spirituality, the notion of illusion seems to be a poorly chosen translation and a kind of fundamental error. I am writing about this in my next piece, which is still a distance away.
Speaking personally, I find there is a level of awareness before perception, preceding ever so subtlely. Science has no means to measure this, so they insist it doesn't exist, but they are wrong because all consciousness develops from a complement of perception and awareness, which arise not fully formed, but through unfolding.
Awareness can be developed, and so can perception.
In short, simulation is there to get the guilty off the hook, and to remove agency from those that might threaten the halls of power.
Mike, the math priests, who I am not aligned with, may have a point. In that, music 🎶 notes, sound, follows a pattern and the notes 🎶 are related to the periodic table. Vibration is key. And intensity of vibration can be measured in numbers?! So is color related. We humans sometimes experience synesthesia that mixes color, temperature and numbers, etc.
One problem - a huge one - is language . We are trapped by its symbols . Wittgenstein was intersting in this … how can we escape perception - words imprison us . But then look east … study Zen Buddhism .. no name no form .. the Heart Sutra . Beautiful
Interesting idea, but from what I understand of Buddhism perception is fundamental to identifying different states, be it clear light, or even diamond mind. Perception is crucial in working with the panopoly of spirits, and perception is deeply involved in Tantra.
There is no possibility I have ever found that is open to an experience without perception, even if that perception is limited to purely internal states.
We can imagine a pure awareness perhaps, yet even in the Theurgists' vision of ultimate origin, which is beyond any mentalist ability to comprehend, there the notion of perception in 'Ouseia.'
Language as we currently use it is debased. Other than with poetry there are not multiple levels of meaning to modern language. Modern thinking demands words to operate as crudely as possible, and to throw out anything deemed extraneous.
But what is extraneous?
Who decides?
The result is that modern language is a hybridized descendent of completely different modes of thinking, and even in this, education is succeeding in ruining learning, and destroying the last vestiges of precise language.
If you look at pieces that were written in Cant, you will find this greater depth to language now forsaken.
But English is the most boring utilitarian language of the colonisers . Irish language is so rich - provides portals to other dimensions . Russian , Tibetan , Urdu … countless rich languages that have so much more depth and signify other much winder perceptions ,.. I dint like English but I’m trapped in it jut have learned many other languages which make me feel entirely different .., Sanskrit .. there are words that can’t be translated - they greatest translation flaw has made Śunyata into ‘emptiness ‘. Rubbish nihilistic useless word that throws most western Buddhists off course . I’m not a Buddhist anymore but was for twenty years … the philosophy is fascinating but it’s not taught in a way to help you live those truths . Like every religion you get crumbs
I'm not trying to make you upset here, but the issue with multilevel speech is that someone actually has to understand it.
You make some very good and strong points, in fact your point on translation from Sankrit into English being wrong, and in fact misleading is exactly the point I'm making with the math priests, number, and simulation, when I was answering commentary from Nature, so thank you.
I think when you speak of genuine language, such as Irish, you also have a record of the Irish experience in that language, and this is just me, but I also can't help but feel that there is a unique path of thought, thought being higher than feeling. The whole thing is beautiful and humbling.
I will try to explain...I always, since I was in single digits, if you can believe it, loved to read Edgar Allen Poe. I actually read his work with no recollection of having any issue reading it. The chance came up when I found a rendition of one of his pieces online, and I was immediately struck by the richness and complexity of his language.
I then went to various sites just to read what is considered English today, and its like some retarded chicken scratch from planet of the apes.
What passes for discourse is pathetic with monosyllabic slang, acronyms, incomplete thoughts, and a radical reduction in vocabulary.
It is literally impossible to convey THOUGHT with this primeval grunting.
Now, it can be entertaining on a crudely shallow emotional level, but it will never be capable of stimulating any higher faculties.
That is English today.
It once was capable, but now its a truncheon used in truly stupid displays.
Yes, some of us buck the trend, resist the collapse, but we are few, not many.
Simulation appeals to this environment of simple concepts and monolevel meaning.
It was Socrates who questioned the entire notion of number, and his argument was quite brilliant, that number itself had no real existence, it was all based on assumption, not reality, with the only possible exception being the number One.
If we look at different systems of number, we find the current base 10 system to be just one of many. For example, Chaldea, with some of the most precise astronomical measurements of any ancient society used a base 60.
This is a fancy way of saying that whatever system is used, number performs the same function, an abstract means of measure.
My point is that as long as one is measuring an actual phenomenon, there is a degree of reference to number, to mathematics, and an actual event, yet that number can never be The Actual Event. In cases like evolution the math is not even measuring an actual event., it truly is just off to never never land.
So the math, the number, is its own extrapolation.
Which means number cannot be what is measured.
Therefore whatever phenomenon exists, does so independent of number, even as number is fundamental to the understanding of those who use it.
Can you follow this thought to recognize how math and number lend themselves directly to simulation?
In short, science is using an artificial construct to claim that actual phenomena can best be described as something besides phenomena.
I'm sorry Nature, but this strikes me as utterly ridiculous.
Please note, I am Not saying that resonance, waves, currents, layers and such aren't real, the simulators are saying that.
I am saying that vermilion has very real properties and that you as a living being have access to these direct;y, just because you are living and perceiving.
I am saying that what you perceive is very much a feature of reality, and in fact you have no other honest measure of what is real.
Simulation proves nothing besides the evident fact that science worships the machine god. Worse, it thieves from everyone the only connection available to understand their own humanity.
You could look at it that way, 4 sure, but then you really have a problem defining fear.
Its not that AI has any power outside the human sphere, because it doesn't. The zenocrats want to get it there, but they can't, they won't, but that won't stop them with messing with everything.
When it comes to this life, tho Saxx, there is a baseline reality, and it is defined by certain conditions that life here can't control, alter, or arrange. Life can only adapt.
Beyond this world there are many others, beyond standard knowing, thus do I believe that no one has seen them all.
I liked UG for years. He was hard to understand at first. UG feels the body decomposes in to other forms and is thus eternal. But our thoughts 💭 end when we die. He must not have ever gone out of body, as I have., where thought continued. I like that he says there is no thing to do to be ‘saved’. No meditation or yoga 🧘♂️ , etc.
We call movement in the ocean waves or currents, motion in the sky wind, motion in our bodies the pulse, motion in our thoughts inattention. Ousea in the ancient Greek is usually described as essence, but it truly means motion without motion, a movement of turning , a self perceiving that is the root of it all.
I did not know about the Ousea which makes sense and is inline with the Indian beliefs. Of which I am sure all of Europe was influenced by in the Silk Route.
Amrita the Sanskrit word of the Seiks refers to the god who churns the oceans. The gods (Devas) and demons (Asuras) worked together to churn the ocean of milk (Kshirasagara) using Mount Mandara as the churning rod and Vasuki, a serpent king, as the rope. This cooperative effort was necessary to produce Amrita, as individual efforts were insufficient.
Amrita represents eternal life, vitality, and rejuvenation. Its possession would grant the consumer immortality, making it a coveted prize for both the gods and demons.
So in this churning we have in the essence of the movement as you say.
I can't speak for Krish or Mr. Relativity, any more than I can speak for Bo, the three big personalities introduced already to this comment section. I am not a big personality, yet I refuse to be buried by the winners of interpretation according to society, mostly because they say little that has significance in my experience.
This is not to say that I'm denying them, or those who find them worthy, no I am not doing that, but I am addressing life according to my own perspective in this piece, and all the others.
I wrote this in response to a current I see in society, and that is the simulation. Experts say, that much of their inspiration derives from taking a chainsaw to the Western Mystical Tradition. I wrote this to show that it wasn't ancient spirituality that gave them their machine mind directive, and the insanity of society, and the new relativity of everything didn't come from the old masters.
I need to make this distinction because the lumberjacks are coming for the last standing timber, the last vestiges of spirituality, with their fucking chemtrails and orchestrated fires.
Their power play, to turn the spiritual into a hideous mockery has no impact upon the higher planes, its just a loosing game, and its not the spiritual that fuels them.
love this topic and any one who brings this level of precision insight and poetry. i 100% agree that simulation theory and application have been co-opted by mechanistic and reductive frameworks, and to all the down-vibe ends you have identified
that said, apart from that co-opting, i think 'the simulation' is a spiritual technology and, as such, a radically liberationist construct. one that offers non-locals "a fleshy system to grant us material continuity" (citing @elodivedha)
i also have come to believe that spacetime, which is the dynamic stage that the simulation 'happens on' has coded within it mechanisms that generate narratives for its players as immersive systems for accelerating processes of... soul integration. if that can be considered then simulation theory is not a denial of objective reality but rather a intricate narrative game engine designed (and yes i know that word is problematic) to provide the conditions for growth, awakening, and, ultimately, transcendence
again, if that model is considered, then perhaps the 'simulation' is not antithetical to the mystical tradition; it is a repurposing of it. one that alchemizes the spiritual and the material
but materialistic empires are going to try to rope people into any deterministic system they can. so that we generate the prison our selves. but that is all quantum magick, imo. what if we 'see' the simulation as a medium, not for control, but for transformation?
there can be no quarrel with that 🛫
I wonder, though, if you are speaking of creation, rather than simulation? It might seem like a small distinction, yet the separation of creation through phases and cycles is I think the experience, while simulation is the manipulation.
How dare I make such a statement, you might ask.
Well, it has to do with my observation of the development of history. There has been a development, in the tension between belonging and becoming, and I refer to this as the God of the Mechanical. I discuss him, and his influence here:
Thus the rise of the machine is evidenced by a deepening and solidifying of incarnation. This drop into the physical is met by the need to be in a world of things, yet it still must participate somewhat with the higher, thus the distinction.
Simulation therefore is attempting to make sense of hard matter that is ignorant of, yet must participate in the higher reality.
https://mikekay.substack.com/p/prophets-of-the-machine-god
Questions that require far more than a comment section to address!
A new cycle is being born, yes, you can sense it through everything, it isn't just a standard change of season.
I like the way you put that...trying to materialize the spiritual. It shows very clearly where you are coming from, and that statement itself is extremely interesting.
I really can't imagine, how it could be that the direction of consciousness that has brought us here is more than vaguely, tangentially aware of the spiritual. The entire point of modern thought is to liberate itself from all spiritual responsibility.
So god mechanical, the joy that all your thinking is just physical neurology, is the birth of a material ascendency from matter itself. In this heavily incarnate space, the spiritual actually projects from the material, and this is the Blue Mind Field. Here, the physical success stories of society are ascending to take up new positions with their mechanical godhead.
Maya figures strongly in your understanding, but she has quite a different cast to the machine god's prophets, related purely to scientific control, A.I., and transhumanism.
A.I. is, in the image thus presented, a distillation of the Noosphere. In such a system, there is no room restraint, the purpose of A.I. is to first augment man, and then replace mankind completely.
When you understand this direction, you will understand the prophets in an entirely different light.
With all due respect, I don't follow that what you're referring to is simulation. In my understanding you are describing a guided reality, in which the circumstances are arranged by higher power.
This is a classic relationship of the incarnate individual with the Daemon or Daimon, Elder Brother.
It is important to grasp that this tradition is pre-christian, and thus does not partake of abrahamic or scientific thought. It is very difficult for us to grasp the essential tenets because of our indoctrination. Imagine if you will that everything that Is exists completely, but that you, and everybody can only perceive the smallest and quickest flash of it. To the mind it might appear that there is a hidden reality, because it is only possible for us to experience a small piece of it, and yet those like yourself cannot dismiss this greater reality.
In this life then we can be aware of this greater scope, and the intelligences that populate it.
Such is not simulation, it is the cosmos.
Simulation is the notion that this reality is a false construct. The plasticity in reality that you refer to is inherent without the need for a spurious division in experience. It is instead a construct of abrahamic thought, where the model of reality cannot support all the recognized functions, so therefore a different model must be invented.
oh i agree with you on the terminology. the word 'simulation' does not express what this 'thing' is. we are talking about spacetime, and right now that entire concept it up for grabs. and terms like simulation (which really comes from Bostrom's musing on whether advanced civilizations who were facing extinction trajectories might create ancestor simulations to game outcomes) are actually helpful in terms of breaking down the mechanics of spacetime.
using 'simulation' as a descriptor suggests an immersive experiential construct which is being generated from a non-local source.
that it has 'source code' (which can be hacked and altered, hence my reference to this way of seeing as liberationist)
for a species who are now rapidly advancing their framework for understanding how 'worlds' are created from the quantum perspective - even if just digital game versions - i think terms like 'simulation' are really helpful. and i guess i disagree that the term frames reality as a false construct. false relative to what? i am typing with fingers that are actually made of atomic constellations being generated from a quantum field that processes the non-material into material. on a computer that is, at its fundamental 'level,' more empty space than hard matter. i think it's pointing more to the idea that what we think about reality is false... as false as the idea that the earth is the center of the galaxy/universe. its less a factual correction than a system upgrade.
but we're really just doing semantics here and again i agree that the term for many people would only be confusing if not completely misleading.
one other tangential point i wanted to comment on:
- when we consider how events are unfolding today - and the degree to which they may be 'led' by apocalyptic eschatology of the Abrahamic religions - i think the term simulation may actually be extremely on-point. there is a good argument to be made that in the quantum construct we are generating the consensus reality that has been coded into 'holy' books for centuries. simulating that reality and its inevitable terminus.if that is the case, however imperfect as terminology, 'simulation' may help us see these apocalyptic trajectories not as inevitabilities, but as deeply coded storylines—ones we might yet rewrite at the level they are being generated from
However, when one is discussing reality what they actually are defining is experience. The abrahamics have not altered reality, or created it, but they have changed the interpretation of the perception/experience.
One can commune with the Daemon, and achieve some pretty remarkable communications, despite the fact that abrahamism defines and teaches such as 'demons', and worthless. So, the abrahamics did not negate the old ways, they only paved over them.
Any thought regarding the inventing of a new perspective on the ancestors is, in my own experience an idea that derives from having no relationship with them. It does take time and dedication to build this bridge, but the experience of the ancestors has its own direction, and this is what can and should be discovered, or we are back on the slippery slope of the 'Noble Lie.'
I'm afraid we disagree on the concept of simulation. I absolutely find that any such thing, supposing it exists, is a result, not generative. Therefore, it is up to the level and strength of connection between the person and the sim to breathe any life into it, yet anyone who spends time in nature is quite aware they are living with other expressions of life which definitely are generative.
Simulation by definition is reducing reality to a false face value aspect, and the condition or basis upon which it is layered is thus imagined as the truth. Its laid out quite nicely in Mr. Hoffman's Ted talk, which is included in this piece above.
You seem to be making a case for immersion, or intensity to be driving simulation theory, but again, the intensity can only be lent by the participant, especially if we are describing simulation as a mathematic description.
I don't see any form of this cosmos as a simulation. I have yet to find any example in nature where simulation rings true. The notion seems to derive solely from a specific form of thought that has arisen since de Chardin and the Huxleys first proposed transhumanism, and began the worship of deus est machina, the machine god.
In the end, reality is far deeper and greater than the experience of one life form, yet that reality is encompassing, not divisive.
this is a fascinating conversation for me / thank you for penetrating its multi-dimensions. we are in total agreement about the generative nature of reality and the qualia of Nature itself. most of my work in developing my own gnostic perspective happens in nature, where i have experienced ‘contact’ with cthonics that moved into non-natural settings (but always use the alchemy of cosmic light sources - sun, stars, moon, planets) and terrestrial frames or objects (trees, windows, spider webs etc) to communicate very precise messages. i’ll take it a level further and say i live in service to an Authority which can only be described in terms that our pre-abrahmic ancestors would use
so all that to say - im with you in that. as a person who works in the field of generative design (we write code that processes information into complex dynamic signaling objects - the same way a cloud which materializes from atmospheric inputs can then be ‘read’ by meteorologists to deconstruct those generating inputs)… as a person who works in that field and specifically building objects that bio- and cosmo-mimic - again our worldviews are completely aligned. Hoffman is one of my polestars as well and im not sure his desktop theory, which posits spacetime as ‘an interface’ is a repudiation of simulation hypothesis as you assert
i guess what im saying is that Nature (using Emerson’s coinage) is not necessarily embodied fully in spacetime. that, to cite Hoffman, what we experience here is merely a construct we have materialized for our own purposes/needs. and thus ‘true reality’ may still be out there/in there and waiting for our next evolutionary thrust to unveil itself
Its been my experience that the conscious mind is a limited feature. Consciously, we can accept that there is a greater scope to life, experience and being than what we can be directly aware of.
Where I differ from Mr. Hoffman is with the assertion that this limited awareness denotes, suggests, or defines something that is essentially not true.
I can and do honour antecedent states to this one, however that honouring does not negate life or experience here, it embraces it.
The issue as I see it with simulation is that this theory is coupled with a hyper aggressive lust for manipulation and control. It is especially easy to act without heed or regard if one is doing so in an artificial construct. Simulation will simply cheapen life and reduce all deep processes to fair game through violent exploitation. I would think by now this would be evident, but the collective is more than willing to go there.
My question to Mr. H, which I doubt I will ever get to ask is what is his view of the purpose and direction of cognitive science and his own work?
I just see more disaster in the making, more alienation from the inner knowing of what it means to be to human, more dalliance into failed ways, and a doubling down on life which is gonna break things.
The mind loves to make models, and models are wonderful tools as long as we don't lose sight on the fact that its a model.
There simply are in my experience, deeper levels of reality, the powers and principalities truly live. If we take a step back from manipulation for one moment, perhaps then it will become evident how much we have been missing. Simulation simply empowers that emptiness of the missing.
i think we’ve cooked this goose (apologies to the vegans!). my last thought - and by no means trying to have the last word here Mike Kay - is that in simulation hypothesis and desktop theory i only see the liberation from manipulation and control and the berth of a new system cognition that has the potential to float ALL boats and give people who are under the thumb of this techno-feudal paradigm which is doing just fine in the status quo consensus version of spacetime. in that ‘reality’ there is only a quickening loss of agency and autonomy. and theyve got it locked down from our microbiome to the Van Allen Belt.
Then Kandinsky had synesthesia - he saw tones in colours , colours were musical tones . There are many fake artists now who are trapped in simulation - who have no regard for Colour, tone , other dimensions … but it should be that the artist the poet the philosopher comment on and observe the simulation but they largely do not … they are part of its blandness … as we saw with the number of artists and celebrities who so unbelievably rallied the public health officials on to administer their poisons … thank you 🙏 so interesting and thought provoking as always
Thank you, Siofra.
I love the kind of participation required to understand Kandinsky.
In terms of fake artists, they are very well paid to hit audiences over the head with banalities. And of course they promote the poisoning, after all, they know better than to bite the hand that feeds them.
the thing about simulation that gets me, and i am fresh from reading the comments here and feeling a little under-qualified with my feeble grasp of what simulation is meant to actually be, is that it has popped up as this great Theory only after we have developed computers. when i first heard about it my instant thought was so what, are we all like on a hard drive somewhere? like, god's computer? someone or something has to be running this simulation, its completely hegemonic and maybe that is the point.
it seems to be a theory born out of complete and utter immersion in the latest fad in human life, not a deep contemplation of or better still immersion in nature.
I'm not intellectual, I'm not up on people with letters after their names' latest anything's and I'm not particularly well-read, human world speaking, maybe that is why i think simulation is one of the emptiest most vapid explanations of reality i have ever come across.
its most likely an oppressive meme designed to divorce us further from the actual mystery of what this all is, and the sense of wonder, and being content and exhilarated by that wonder, because wonder doesn't sell fucking iphones. as for number, i think it is a symptom of the universe (thanks ozzy), not the stuff of the universe.
just as a religious fixation on the afterlife seems to have devalued the web of life we actually have here and now, i see simulation as a further, even more flippant, disregard for the real and, in that we cannot explain them and need theories to even try, magical complexities of life, death and everything we know fuck all about.
i believe trees are more intelligent life forms than us, i measure intelligence not by how technological a species becomes but by how adaptive to the prevalent conditions in order to support and strengthen biodiversity the species becomes... is simulation just peak homogeny i wonder?
Near as I can discern, the origin of simulation theory began, or at least really picked up steam with the invention of the hologram: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography
Interestingly the hologram arrived at the same time the Gnostic Nag Hammadhi Library was discovered.
The real voice behind simulation picked up on both to promote this theory in his books, Phillip K. Dick, and he used to attend conferences to promote his ideas.
The essential point, like Hoffman explains in the TED talk I posted with this piece, is that the world we interact in isn't real, and is in fact a distillation of deeper forces.
Simulation theory in regards to spirituality goes back quite a bit earlier, to the idea that the world is an illusion.
Currently these two streams, the scientific and the spiritual have dovetailed.
A big reason why I wrote this piece is to illustrate that spirituality is not given over to simulation. In fact, it is quite the opposite.
Genuine spirituality promotes a different view of intelligence than that of modern society. Here, intelligence is not in handling difficult concepts, it is found through ingenious adaptations and alterations, so on that we certainly agree.
I don't have a phone, corvus. Thats why at this time I can't start up a paid service. Nearest bank is over an hour round trip, and while I could deal with a money order or check, this entire intellectual hustle just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
This society loves to kill trees. It loves to steamroll life and other people that get in their way. It is a vicious genocidal abrahamic parasite and its time is finally coming to an end.
thankyou for explaining, Mike. i just deleted a sizable response as i haven't watched the material you embedded in the op and i need to get my head around the concept before i add anything. what did come to mind is the old story of the disciple claiming all is illusion to the teacher, and the teacher hitting them on the head with their staff, and asking "what hurts?"
i can also theorise without grasping the concept fully, that our disconnection from the web of life and the ways of being of our distant ancestors may be the thing that allows the concept to take root...
is simulation theory just another offworld value system locking us further into the technocult with no solutions to offer for what feels like existential suicide for the entire systemic interrelatedness that sustains the brains that devised the theory in the first place?
I don't really think simulation is related to any kind extraterrestrial phenomenon, but I do think its heavily linked to materialism, which is the dominant world view of modern science.
Simulation actually subtracts from human agency. Its purpose is to destroy perception as fundamental. Yet this becomes an absurdity, because there is no other venue to exploring an objective reality.
So simulation winds up being destructive to any system of understanding, including its own.
In terms of spirituality, the notion of illusion seems to be a poorly chosen translation and a kind of fundamental error. I am writing about this in my next piece, which is still a distance away.
Speaking personally, I find there is a level of awareness before perception, preceding ever so subtlely. Science has no means to measure this, so they insist it doesn't exist, but they are wrong because all consciousness develops from a complement of perception and awareness, which arise not fully formed, but through unfolding.
Awareness can be developed, and so can perception.
In short, simulation is there to get the guilty off the hook, and to remove agency from those that might threaten the halls of power.
Mike, the math priests, who I am not aligned with, may have a point. In that, music 🎶 notes, sound, follows a pattern and the notes 🎶 are related to the periodic table. Vibration is key. And intensity of vibration can be measured in numbers?! So is color related. We humans sometimes experience synesthesia that mixes color, temperature and numbers, etc.
Yes, well so far this piece has generated relatively few likes, and in this case I feel that is because few agree with my premise.
So let me ask you Nature, do you see number as something within itself, or is it a placeholder, a kind of symbol that can represent many things?
Is number generated from number, until thought can no longer hold the thread, or is number itself a higher function?
Does number then capture all phenomenon, or does number just describe them?
Its important to me because the perspectives regarding these questions have everything to do with simulation.
One problem - a huge one - is language . We are trapped by its symbols . Wittgenstein was intersting in this … how can we escape perception - words imprison us . But then look east … study Zen Buddhism .. no name no form .. the Heart Sutra . Beautiful
Interesting idea, but from what I understand of Buddhism perception is fundamental to identifying different states, be it clear light, or even diamond mind. Perception is crucial in working with the panopoly of spirits, and perception is deeply involved in Tantra.
There is no possibility I have ever found that is open to an experience without perception, even if that perception is limited to purely internal states.
We can imagine a pure awareness perhaps, yet even in the Theurgists' vision of ultimate origin, which is beyond any mentalist ability to comprehend, there the notion of perception in 'Ouseia.'
Language as we currently use it is debased. Other than with poetry there are not multiple levels of meaning to modern language. Modern thinking demands words to operate as crudely as possible, and to throw out anything deemed extraneous.
But what is extraneous?
Who decides?
The result is that modern language is a hybridized descendent of completely different modes of thinking, and even in this, education is succeeding in ruining learning, and destroying the last vestiges of precise language.
If you look at pieces that were written in Cant, you will find this greater depth to language now forsaken.
But English is the most boring utilitarian language of the colonisers . Irish language is so rich - provides portals to other dimensions . Russian , Tibetan , Urdu … countless rich languages that have so much more depth and signify other much winder perceptions ,.. I dint like English but I’m trapped in it jut have learned many other languages which make me feel entirely different .., Sanskrit .. there are words that can’t be translated - they greatest translation flaw has made Śunyata into ‘emptiness ‘. Rubbish nihilistic useless word that throws most western Buddhists off course . I’m not a Buddhist anymore but was for twenty years … the philosophy is fascinating but it’s not taught in a way to help you live those truths . Like every religion you get crumbs
Yes English is very hybrid . Descended from various original languages that were far closer to truths of nature than this languages
Siofra,
I'm not trying to make you upset here, but the issue with multilevel speech is that someone actually has to understand it.
You make some very good and strong points, in fact your point on translation from Sankrit into English being wrong, and in fact misleading is exactly the point I'm making with the math priests, number, and simulation, when I was answering commentary from Nature, so thank you.
I think when you speak of genuine language, such as Irish, you also have a record of the Irish experience in that language, and this is just me, but I also can't help but feel that there is a unique path of thought, thought being higher than feeling. The whole thing is beautiful and humbling.
I will try to explain...I always, since I was in single digits, if you can believe it, loved to read Edgar Allen Poe. I actually read his work with no recollection of having any issue reading it. The chance came up when I found a rendition of one of his pieces online, and I was immediately struck by the richness and complexity of his language.
I then went to various sites just to read what is considered English today, and its like some retarded chicken scratch from planet of the apes.
What passes for discourse is pathetic with monosyllabic slang, acronyms, incomplete thoughts, and a radical reduction in vocabulary.
It is literally impossible to convey THOUGHT with this primeval grunting.
Now, it can be entertaining on a crudely shallow emotional level, but it will never be capable of stimulating any higher faculties.
That is English today.
It once was capable, but now its a truncheon used in truly stupid displays.
Yes, some of us buck the trend, resist the collapse, but we are few, not many.
Simulation appeals to this environment of simple concepts and monolevel meaning.
Numbers are probably place holders and symbols.
They are not as significant as color or temperature IMO.
Thank you Nature..
I hope I can explain this clearly.
It was Socrates who questioned the entire notion of number, and his argument was quite brilliant, that number itself had no real existence, it was all based on assumption, not reality, with the only possible exception being the number One.
If we look at different systems of number, we find the current base 10 system to be just one of many. For example, Chaldea, with some of the most precise astronomical measurements of any ancient society used a base 60.
This is a fancy way of saying that whatever system is used, number performs the same function, an abstract means of measure.
My point is that as long as one is measuring an actual phenomenon, there is a degree of reference to number, to mathematics, and an actual event, yet that number can never be The Actual Event. In cases like evolution the math is not even measuring an actual event., it truly is just off to never never land.
So the math, the number, is its own extrapolation.
Which means number cannot be what is measured.
Therefore whatever phenomenon exists, does so independent of number, even as number is fundamental to the understanding of those who use it.
Can you follow this thought to recognize how math and number lend themselves directly to simulation?
In short, science is using an artificial construct to claim that actual phenomena can best be described as something besides phenomena.
I'm sorry Nature, but this strikes me as utterly ridiculous.
Please note, I am Not saying that resonance, waves, currents, layers and such aren't real, the simulators are saying that.
I am saying that vermilion has very real properties and that you as a living being have access to these direct;y, just because you are living and perceiving.
I am saying that what you perceive is very much a feature of reality, and in fact you have no other honest measure of what is real.
Simulation proves nothing besides the evident fact that science worships the machine god. Worse, it thieves from everyone the only connection available to understand their own humanity.
Mike, look 👀 at this post on music and let me know what you find.
https://www.organarchy.net/p/the-music-of-the-spheres?lli=1
Listen to the 2nd clip, too.
I liked the Moody Blues clip on OM! 😉
I have a friend who finds the Moody Blues really significant.
My experience of the Music of the Spheres, the Heavenly Choir certainly agrees with the general direction of the article.
There is way more to explore than what was briefly alluded to there, but as it is, I find it a good introduction.
The author ✍️ stated:
“ The Music Of The Spheres
It’s All In The Math”
And:
“ they were singing as they mathematically inclined along their way. ”
Seems music 🎶 is connected to math 🧮.
They are related patterns perhaps 🤔.
Please see this: https://montanarcc.substack.com/p/where-do-we-human-beings-come-from
Bo had his own view, and as I said previously, he was good, but he's not my Guru.
The only way to usurp god with A.i is to make it kill.
All meaning is derrived from fear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FMoiZB_ClA
You could look at it that way, 4 sure, but then you really have a problem defining fear.
Its not that AI has any power outside the human sphere, because it doesn't. The zenocrats want to get it there, but they can't, they won't, but that won't stop them with messing with everything.
before language. Or the word becoming flesh. to use the quote.
there was only action and all sounds were born out of a emission of need not want.
Now we have sigils (language) and vocal sonic hymns (speech) we think and there fore it is. Yet none of them exist or are born out of need.
Unvention of invention.
"Imagination is not real it only thinks it is."
When it comes to this life, tho Saxx, there is a baseline reality, and it is defined by certain conditions that life here can't control, alter, or arrange. Life can only adapt.
Beyond this world there are many others, beyond standard knowing, thus do I believe that no one has seen them all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZBG6hWfb9M
I liked UG for years. He was hard to understand at first. UG feels the body decomposes in to other forms and is thus eternal. But our thoughts 💭 end when we die. He must not have ever gone out of body, as I have., where thought continued. I like that he says there is no thing to do to be ‘saved’. No meditation or yoga 🧘♂️ , etc.
Yeh his quote
"I am another dog barking."
His essential message that is not a message is to enact people
to remove themselves from groupthink in my interpretation.
agreed.
born out of a want to know.
If people can imagine warmth when they are cold and feel warm, is imagination not real? Einstein said imagination is more important than knowledge.
"The only permanence in life is longing." Amg
We call movement in the ocean waves or currents, motion in the sky wind, motion in our bodies the pulse, motion in our thoughts inattention. Ousea in the ancient Greek is usually described as essence, but it truly means motion without motion, a movement of turning , a self perceiving that is the root of it all.
I did not know about the Ousea which makes sense and is inline with the Indian beliefs. Of which I am sure all of Europe was influenced by in the Silk Route.
Amrita the Sanskrit word of the Seiks refers to the god who churns the oceans. The gods (Devas) and demons (Asuras) worked together to churn the ocean of milk (Kshirasagara) using Mount Mandara as the churning rod and Vasuki, a serpent king, as the rope. This cooperative effort was necessary to produce Amrita, as individual efforts were insufficient.
Amrita represents eternal life, vitality, and rejuvenation. Its possession would grant the consumer immortality, making it a coveted prize for both the gods and demons.
So in this churning we have in the essence of the movement as you say.
I can't speak for Krish or Mr. Relativity, any more than I can speak for Bo, the three big personalities introduced already to this comment section. I am not a big personality, yet I refuse to be buried by the winners of interpretation according to society, mostly because they say little that has significance in my experience.
This is not to say that I'm denying them, or those who find them worthy, no I am not doing that, but I am addressing life according to my own perspective in this piece, and all the others.
I wrote this in response to a current I see in society, and that is the simulation. Experts say, that much of their inspiration derives from taking a chainsaw to the Western Mystical Tradition. I wrote this to show that it wasn't ancient spirituality that gave them their machine mind directive, and the insanity of society, and the new relativity of everything didn't come from the old masters.
I need to make this distinction because the lumberjacks are coming for the last standing timber, the last vestiges of spirituality, with their fucking chemtrails and orchestrated fires.
Their power play, to turn the spiritual into a hideous mockery has no impact upon the higher planes, its just a loosing game, and its not the spiritual that fuels them.
I thought sound emerged to create forms that move. Of course, sound is motion.
What was the action before sound?
https://hyperallergic.com/731339/on-kandinskys-spiritual-relationship-with-music/