LOL! Can you please narrow it down a bit for us!
Elizabeth Warren predicts financial crisis within the decade if banking reform bill passes https://t.co/YzbFhRDNSp pic.twitter.com/rr7ngGULnX
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) March 8, 2018
Friday, March 9, 2018
Warren predicts financial crisis within decade if banking reform bill passes
LOL! Can you please narrow it down a bit for us!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I predict a banking crisis within the next decade whether they pass the reform bill or not.
I also predict that the Earth will continue to orbit the sun, a military alliance between Russia and China, the iPhone 11, and more school shootings.
Noah do you think that the iPhone 11 is going to evolve from the apes from the iPhone 10 by random chance mutation?
The iPhone 11 is going to "evolve" from the iPhone 10 the way that group selection takes place at the conscious level based on feedback and learning. The industry is constantly evolving based on intense competition and the urge to survive and thrive. And Apple now has increasingly serious competition, especially in Asia, which is now the make-or-break environment.
Well I’m still waiting for that 3rd eyeball to pop out of the back of my head Tom...
I’d really like to see I’d someone is sneaking up behind me...
According to the wise, a physical eyeball is not needed for this. It's a matter of unfolding the inherent potential of consciousness.
The teaching is that this doesn't involve any addition to what's already available, but rather just removing obstacles.
See Patanjali's Yoga Sutras, in particular 1.31, 1.36 and 3. 25. There are many translations online, but it is nigh impossible to understand the inner teaching just by reading unless one already has the basis of the knowledge. One has to learn from one who has it.
This is an issue with perennial wisdom. It is either misunderstood, or regarded as meaningless by those that don't have access to the inner meaning themselves, or else access to someone who does that is willing to teach impart it.
In addition, the conceptual models used by sages are highly symbolic, putting them beyond the ability of most to discern the full meaning of without assistance.
Meher Baba sets forth the inner side of evolution in God Speaks. Development of individual consciousness has already reached its maximum in the human being through the process of physical evolution. The task that remains is to resolve the extraneous material accumulated in the process on the way to unfolding inherent potential. The task of humans is to remove the veils.
The mystical literature of the world bears ample testimony to this development.
This is also the basis of the "sixth sense," which is the beginning of this development. Biochemist eRupert Sheldrake is working on investigating this scientifically, in spite of the guffaws.
I agree with probably 99% of that Tom...
But all of this Darwin is resulting in a systemic bias towards stochasticism where if we are ever going to get here: "unfolding inherent potential"; that process has to be accomplished via determinism... which is not in view as everyone thinks they owe their entire existence to a stochastic process... its really bad shit... and it doesnt even matter as how we got here is all rear view mirror stuff anyway...
You can see this bias operating in 99.999% of people (at least I can)...
You dont drive in the rear view mirror... ie we DONT HAVE an eye in the back of our heads....
The scientific way to proceed is to use deterministic functions where possible and practical, stochastic functions where not, and ansi admit that there is a also some radical uncertainty in human knowledge we have no way of dealing with with any satisfactory degree of precision, yet anyway.
We don't always use deterministic solutions where possible because it is not practical, just like we don't use enumeration in all cases of aggregation even when we could. Counting is too time-consuming and expensive in many cases, so estimation is deemed sufficient, even though it may not be precise.
Even using deterministic functions, it's necessary to decide on the optimal degree of precision for the design problem.
Paul to Titus: "stand aloof from stupid questioning and genealogies"
There is no benefit in trying to look backwards trying to figure this out empirically... a rote teaching (appropriately abbreviated) is provided in the Genesis account in the Hebrew Scriptures for those interested...
If youre believing Darwin you might as well join the alt-right and start to look at racial genetics and shit like that... get a haircut with the short sides and longer on top and the whole thing.... use a lot of hair mousse...
Its some bad shit... nothing good is ever going to come out of it.... and its creating a systemic diversionary bias towards stochasticism...
The symbolic meaning of Genesis can be read as being about evolution.
For example, there are seven days of creation rather than simultaneous.
In God Speaks, Meher Baba's conceptual model of "evolution" is also based on seven stages of development: stone, metal, vegetable, "worm," fish, fowl, and animal, culminating in human.
Here's Jalaluddin Rumi on this, also symbolically.
I died to the inorganic state and became endowed with growth,
and (then) I died to (vegetable) growth and attainted to the animal.
I died from animality and became Adam (man),
why then I should fear, when have I become less by dying?
At next remove I shall die to man,
that I may soar and lift up my head amongst the angels;
And I must escape even from (the state of) the angels:
“Everything is perishingexcept His face.”
Once more I shall be sacrificed and died to angel:
I shall become that which enter not to imagination.
Then I shall become non-existence:
non-existent saith to me, (in tone loud) as an organ:
“Verily unto Him shall we return.”
Rumi’s Theory of Evolution-Mulyadhi Kartanegara
iirc the Genesis says something like "God created man from the soil of the ground..." (sometimes mistranslated "dust of the earth") so you see "I died to the inorganic state and became endowed with growth,
and (then) I died to (vegetable) growth and attainted to the animal.
I died from animality and became Adam (man)"
Most of the soil is composed of dead organic matter some of which is animal waste... so he is prophesying the path the components of our flesh bodies took/take ... our flesh is all made from soil so he is getting that right 1000 years ago before we even understood the biochemistry... (pretty impressive btw...)
But lets get past the bio-chemistry of our flesh and look at the process and see if it is determininstic process rather than a stochastic process...
In the Genesis account the context is Deterministic.. the account has someone (God) determining the outcome...
this contrasts with Darwin where some random lightning bolt or something hit some random organic goo and then thru some sort of random process that eventually led to humans and here we are... the process is stochastic not deterministic...
I am not surprised that 99.999% of people dont think we can determine economic outcomes ourselves thru determinstic public policies...
iow if we dont want unemployment, then we can simply determine that via a JG, etc...
But then the stochastic people will say that that is "interfering with the natural rate of unemployment" etc.... which is straight out of textbook Darwin 101... its "tampering"...
Here's Rush Limbaugh (big Darwinist) this week on MMT sarcastically: "The national debt thus will mean nothing. The annual budget deficit will mean nothing, because all money is Washington’s. And what you have is what government decides to let you have, not what you’re earning. "
This is textbook Darwin... I dont see how you guys can be the big Darwin people and allegedly support MMT's deterministic approach to policy at the same time...
A lottery draw system deterministically produces a random/stochastic outcome, very close to a real stochastic process. Is it better to study the deterministic system or the stochastic system to understand the lottery? Yes.
Statistics and probability don't really conflict with designing, learning and running deterministic systems. Most quality control systems use statistics and probability to understand and predict deterministic processes and when/why/how they work and fail. We quantify how many variables need to be known before a deterministic process can be controlled, relationships between parameters and other bits of information and calibration that can not be readily calculated in other ways!
Something to think about.
OUPBlog
Ascending to the god’s-eye view of reality — Beyond the Dynamical Universe: Unifying Block Universe Physics and Time as Experienced
W. M. STUCKEY
Tom this is Romans 8:
"For those who are in accord with flesh are disposed to that which is of the flesh, yet those who are in accord with spirit to that which is of the spirit.
6 For the disposition of the flesh is death, yet the disposition of the spirit is life and peace,
7 because the disposition of the flesh is enmity to God, for it is not subject to the law of God, for neither is it able.
8 Now those who are in flesh are not able to please God.
9 Yet you are not in flesh, but in spirit, if so be that God's spirit is making its home in you."
Let's not forget flesh and spirit are TWO different things...
Rumi was prophesying about the flesh pre modern biochemistry... yes its there and we have to deal with it but lets try to keep it in perspective...
and lets not all get confused by some rationalized alleged biological stochastic process...
Ryan the lottery is not creating anything...
and yes the road to determinism is often thru stochastics...
But stochastics is a tip off that we dont understand something....
so if by Darwin you guys are saying "we dont understand how man came about" then I would agree with you...
Just dont try to pass Darwin off as evidence of an understanding...
We dont know what happened empirically.... and imo it doesnt really matter...
What matters is what we determine...
Let's not forget flesh and spirit are TWO different things..
Not in the emanationist (vs creationist) view. IN this view they are two sides of the same coin seen from different vantages.
In the emanationist view, the unmanifest is eternal, that is, beyond time. The unmanifest manifests in time as the tree worlds, which are nested like the layers of an onion. The most refined is the mental/causal, whose nature is intelligence. The middle is the subtle, whose nature is life energy. The gross is characterized by physicality. "Reality" appears differently in each, but they are not inherently different as aspects of the same undivided unity at the level of the unmanifest.
Knowledge is structured in consciousness. To those in gross consciousness, reality appears gross. To those in subtle consciousness, the world appears subtle. To those in mental consciousness the world appears causal. To those in unified consciousness, reality appear as it is in all its aspects in the now.
Symbolic models have usually been anthropomorphic to conform to the limitations of the audience. When these symbolic models are interpreted literally from the POV of the gross, confusion results.
so if by Darwin you guys are saying "we dont understand how man came about" then I would agree with you...
Science is not about achieving truth once and for all, but rather about arriving at the best available explanation until the next one comes along.
Explanation is always tentative.
What will explanation look like 100 years from now, 1000 years, 10,000 years, 100,000 years.
Look back at explanation a 100 years ago, 500 years ago, 1000 years ago, …..
There were three major turning points, mythological explanation, intellectual explanation and scientific explanation (math + observation using instrumentation).
What's the next major turning point?
I wouldnt discourage those studying evolutionary biology I just take issue with them trying to pass that off as some great understanding... its a stochastic study so ie they dont have a true understanding... they are BS vendors in the Taleb parlance..
iow if asked "how did mankind come about?"
They should properly say "we dont really know empirically but we are studying it via a stochastic approach for now..."
" mythological explanation,"
All that myth stuff (Campbell) is BS ...
Our ancestors deified their (deterministic) human ancestors... the mythology people would have you believe our ancestors believed fairy tales were real.. its absurd...
iow the first woman who exemplified superior management of household finances was diefied into the goddess Juno-Moneta in the Roman pantheon which is where we get the figure of speech "money"... iow they didnt know the genetic record of who (exactly) it was but they knew there had to be a first woman to excel at financial management so they would construct a female idol image and a temple and offer divine service to the memory/image of that dead human ancestor...
iow these gods were not "myths" or made up.. they were real and significant people who determined our course thru history...
All that myth stuff (Campbell) is BS
Shooting from the hip.
It's pretty well agreed that there were various origins of myth.
See, for example, Henri Bergson, The Two Sources Of Morality And Religion
One source was imaginative. Another was symbolic representation provided by sages, putatively on the basis of experience, using language that could be understood by the people of the time and place. Subsequent sages confirmed this in some cases.
Post a Comment