A journey out of the matrix and into a world of love (part 3)
Disclaimer: the term 'most people' refers to the average person in mainstream society, not you, the people in this group
'I think therefore I am' - famous words of Descartes. If true, then most people are not. Because the definition of 'think' is to synthesise new original ideas and concepts based on a multitude of inputs and stimuli combined with memory. Locally unique, not necessarily universal, just new to you. Mainstream people today simply parrot what they see and experience; sport, weather, politics, celebrities and TV in general. Echo chambers. They have forgotten how to think. A dozen years in the government camps tried to beat it out of them, and those who did not succumb are bombarded with mainstream garbage and job descriptions that make them robots. The survivors are here.
We are nearly ready. Armed with a Value system, willing and able to question trust, facts and truths, and able to think, we will venture into the wilds.
Disclaimer #2 everyone has their own journey, everyone is an amazing hueman; I am writing these posts as an aid to those who get stuck, or are dragged down by the mainstream world in which we live
Our journey here will take us backwards and forwards in time, we will ponder the basic aspects of life and consciousness, challenge the limits of possibility and hopefully embark on the next leg of the journey with a new vision and understanding.
I love illustrations and examples of things I am learning as well as raw words, so I will use real world examples to assist.
Story time. There is a lady called Eileen McKusick who heals people with a tuning fork. She can also read memories in their biofield. Its called biofield tuning. She can do this in person or even remotely. In a video she made maybe a year ago, I noticed a person made some comments calling her a fraud. So I engaged this person in a small debate, which went more or less like this: I claimed to him that modern mainstream science can not explain what a magnetic field is. After a few back & forth he agreed there is no explanation (plenty of formulae and descriptions, but no explanation). So my next reply was to ask him what makes better, finer machinery - man or nature? His original claim of fraud was that no machine can detect what she can detect. Again after a few back & forth he agreed nature makes finer machinery - it makes life! So we had established that man can not explain electromagnetism (e-m), but makes e-m machines to measure e-m and that nature makes finer machinery than man. But he steadfastly stood by his claim of fraud. He was polite the whole time, so I believe he was genuine, not someone on a mission to destroy her. But cognitive dissonance prevented him from expanding his sphere of knowledge. Don't be that guy.
More to come...