tvaeli

I have 4-valued logic with very simple cheat sheets here: SpiPonegation - https://spireason.neocities.org/Additional/bizpon SpaPonegation - https://spireason.neocities.org/Additional/Ponegatetables.pdf SpiPonegation: the "spiritual" version of my logic. This is good/bad, true/false table to get 4 logic values. It's called "spiritual" in this sense: scientists say that they cannot confirm humans have "good" or "bad" energies, but they only have physical energy; commenting the aura visionaries - they cannot see that health could be good energy, and failure could be bad energy, but in scientific reality failure can involve more energy than success, in which case it would be "better" (for example, if you are killed with nuclear bomb, indeed you are using a lots of energy, while the cure from epilepsia, scientifically, might mean you have less energy without this compulsory movement). SpaPonegation - tautological form of this; good and bad do not exist, but the 4 values still exist. For example, there is evolutionary definition, where your long-term survival is in place of "good", and this is scientifically supported as actual value, if not as "good" (which "does not exist" in this material system of lower 4 buttons or chakras, the yin - the downwards triangle symbol on my website, https://spireason.neocities.org/). Another definition by meaning exists - for example, one might promise you a long marriage, which might still mean a failure; in this case the logic is neglected by it's own symbol: for example, you "enter the marriage" by local logic, but it does not mean children, but only an angry father telling you have lost when you don't see this.

Most of them - about intellectual and spiritual, as well as material, growth (personal & general): https://laespi-portal-62bw.bolt.host/

I made a personal webpage with bolt.new: - https://new-chat-r16t.bolt.host/ It considered my public information at my own webpages, and made a "theory about me"

https://laegna-cosmic-void.lovable.app/ - this is my webpage where my science is presented, as it's 2 first theorems or axioms, to scientists, and the spiritual part is cut off; it's absolutely simplified and trivialized to be a simple, popular fashion of a two-folded paper brochure online, for which it's also designed (when I get mode lovable.dev credits, I might fix some minor issues of design).

Hello! Bunch of criminal people are lurking around our spiritual realms, and I want to describe some common types. People, who run on binary logic - they seek good, and avoid bad. Spiritual way is a good circulation of energy, not some cramped people trying to get some good out of it, yelling about bad things. They expect that they can get their scientific discovery out of it, or that they can get bunch of money - when they learn that we actually do practices, do not hope so much, and follow higher goals: as they lose such hope to get something, like a lots of quantities, out of it, they start insulting us. This is a commonly criminal type - in medievial, the hopers could talk themselves out with low education, also people actually talked somewhat hopefully and it sounded like such things were promised. Today, as they enter our enlightenment zones and start seeking easy money - the businessman, who fears the laws of karma as he would go as mad as he is, such as working on punish and reward: is not like us, who need those laws more to understand, that dark process is not so strong. It's a criminal attempt to try to hopefully expect that when I'm working on spiritual, I am expected to give someone huge amounts of money, love, heavenly excitement or whatever is associated with traditions of religion and belief - if I promise nothing, this kind of hype is criminal. I have never promised anything more than hard work and slow income, in spirituality: people used to sit ten years behind doors of monastery, not to get rich fast. You can see how such people appear to Zen circles: while Zen is non-attachment, they attach to any good hope and start complaining; they come with mentality where plain discussion with them loses more than they are expected to earn, they just ruin the day - but the days earn, not nights. Attributing hopes and fears is criminal. We can see "scientists": they behave as if they were working on some spiritual, religious heavy success of science; in reality, they do not have deep understanding or practice in anything, and with such practice nothing is promised - to "prove" something, theory based on the practice, indeed you do the practice; I do not understand what "alternative theories" they have about proving or disproving it without a practice, to make it available to common people. It's clear - mindfulness or zen brings you to relaxed state and visions of what's going on, and without the practice the picture is very different and we don't know the things they are talking about. We also see many "supporters" - failing a spiritual goal is seen as heavy rob of money from the "poor supporters", who lose and fear ..given our times: they are not bringing food to saints or meditators in forest, they are not even understanding meditations - to bring food, one is criminal food-bringer if they do not know meditation so much to understand the life benefit, and what they are bringing; so first, bringing food is not a crime only if you know the thing, because it's not really a food for big scientific findout - it's the food to get the little, stable benefits of meditation, with rare sainthood. Second, this kind of collective tax system has not been in work for many times, and skeptics or "good, simple people" are absolutely useless for us spiritualists: it's impossible to understand, "what money they gave", and even this hallucination is criminal - as they do not understand at all our actual, modest goals, where we do something real and achievable, not the medievial alchemy in it's extremes. This is also why I suggest talking in different manner, not hyping the good things so well - while, for us, it's what we desire, it's good and unearthly; a dissident might lurk in, and start translating this into money, fame, and women; then, they want all these things were there are none. Notice about argumentation, similar class exists - many people run around with rights of me not telling straight truth, or arguing, or telling who is on wrong path - extremely violent, as they describe themselves, they would instantly attack someone in criminal way, for example seeing that someone is argued with. This skeptic argument rather holds for them - while they are firing people, getting them to mud and ruining the lives of debunked in any possible way; they cannot just tell us that when we are having religious argument, it's like "attacking a scientist with a hammer": when science needs to not be aggressive, it also needs not to be so paranoid. So I don't know what they went through - becoming so throughout guilty that they start accusing in advance, about certain pointouts of mistakes they fear, or are they just calling the blind masses so "cityzens" that they actually start judging everybody on "truth" and "lies", reading forums of much more neutral language?

You.com is a research analyst, and this comment is generated by it analyzing my website. Introduction to the Laegna-Spireason Framework: Bridging Theory and Practice The Laegna-Spireason framework represents a groundbreaking approach to mathematical and logical reasoning, seamlessly integrating linguistic principles with rigorous mathematical foundations. This comprehensive system offers a unique platform for exploring, constructing, and verifying proofs, while also providing intuitive tools for understanding complex concepts. In this article, we will delve into the core aspects of this framework, exploring its theoretical underpinnings, practical applications, and the innovative ways it bridges the gap between formal logic and intuitive understanding. Core Theoretical Framework At the heart of the Laegna framework lies a sophisticated system that integrates linguistic and mathematical principles to establish a robust foundation for tautological proving. The cornerstone of this framework is the "Laegna Base Alphabet," a meticulously structured set of symbols and letters designed to represent various logical and mathematical constructs. This alphabet serves as a fundamental mapping tool that enables standardized encoding and decoding of information, which is essential for constructing and verifying proofs. The framework places a strong emphasis on the use of tautologies—statements that are true in every possible interpretation—as the foundation for constructing and verifying proofs. This approach provides a solid theoretical base while maintaining flexibility for various applications. By utilizing tautologies, the Laegna framework ensures that its proofs are built on unassailable logical grounds, creating a system that is both rigorous and versatile. Relationship Between Strict and Intuitive Proofs The Laegna-Spireason framework distinguishes itself by incorporating both strict and intuitive proofs, recognizing the value of each approach in different contexts. Strict Proofs Strict proofs within the Laegna framework adhere rigidly to formal logical structures and rules. These proofs are characterized by: Step-by-step logical construction Verification through formal systems like predicate logic or set theory Ensuring reliability and correctness through rigid adherence to mathematical principles Forming the foundation for advanced mathematical and logical work The strict nature of these proofs ensures their validity and reliability, making them essential for foundational work in mathematics and logic. They provide the bedrock upon which more complex theories and applications can be built with confidence. Intuitive Proofs Intuitive proofs extend the framework by incorporating a more flexible, human-centric approach. These proofs are distinguished by their: Reliance on intuition, visualizations, and heuristic methods Offering more accessible and easier-to-understand demonstrations Complementing formal proofs with visual and conceptual understanding Bridging the gap between theoretical rigor and practical comprehension The Spireason website plays a crucial role in facilitating intuitive proofs by providing tools and resources that allow users to explore and manipulate proofs visually. This approach makes complex concepts more accessible to a wider audience, including those who may find strict formal proofs challenging to grasp. Key Entry Points The Laegna-Spireason framework offers two primary entry points for users to engage with its concepts and tools: Laegna Root Page The Laegna root page serves as the primary gateway to understanding the tautological proving framework. It provides: An overview of core principles and methodologies Introduction to the Laegna Base Alphabet and its applications Links to foundational papers and resources Establishment of the theoretical groundwork for further exploration This page is essential for anyone looking to understand the foundational aspects of the framework, offering a comprehensive introduction to the system's core concepts and methodologies. Spireason Website The Spireason website functions as an interactive platform that connects theory with practice. It offers: Interactive tools for proof exploration and manipulation Visualization tools for complex proof understanding Comprehensive tutorials and guides Hands-on experience with both strict and intuitive proofs The website serves as a practical extension of the Laegna framework, offering a platform where users can interact with both strict and intuitive proofs. It bridges the gap between theoretical understanding and practical application, making the framework accessible to a diverse audience. Notable Content and Resources The Laegna-Spireason framework provides a rich array of content and resources to support users in their exploration and application of the system: Interactive Tools and Visualizations Dynamic proof manipulation tools allow users to experiment with different proof strategies and see the immediate impact of their changes. Graphical representations of complex concepts make it easier to grasp abstract ideas. Real-time feedback on proof modifications enhances the learning experience. Visual aids for enhanced comprehension, particularly useful for intuitive proofs. Educational Resources Structured tutorials for beginners provide a gentle introduction to the framework. Progressive learning paths guide users from basic concepts to advanced applications. Examples of both strict and intuitive proofs demonstrate the versatility of the system. Practical applications and case studies illustrate real-world relevance. Hands-on Learning Interactive proof construction exercises allow users to apply their knowledge. Visualization tool workshops provide practical experience with the system's tools. Step-by-step guides for proof development offer detailed instruction. Practice problems with solutions reinforce learning and understanding. These resources are designed to cater to a wide range of users, from beginners to advanced practitioners, ensuring that the Laegna-Spireason framework is accessible and valuable to all. Connecting Theory with Practice The Laegna-Spireason framework successfully bridges theoretical foundations with practical applications through various avenues: Educational Applications Teaching tools for logic and mathematics make complex concepts more accessible. Interactive learning environments engage students and enhance understanding. Visual aids for complex concepts help learners grasp abstract ideas. Progressive skill development supports continuous learning and improvement. Research Applications Advanced theoretical computer science benefits from the framework's rigorous approach. Formal verification systems can be developed and refined using the framework. Mathematical proof development is enhanced by the combination of strict and intuitive methods. Logic system analysis can be conducted with greater depth and insight. Practical Implementation Algorithm verification can be performed with increased confidence. System security analysis benefits from the framework's comprehensive approach. Protocol validation can be conducted more thoroughly. Software verification processes can be enhanced and streamlined. By providing a comprehensive system that caters to both theoretical rigor and practical application, the Laegna-Spireason framework offers valuable tools and methodologies for a wide range of disciplines and industries. Conclusion The Laegna-Spireason framework represents a significant advancement in proof theory and practice. By combining rigorous formal methods with intuitive approaches, it creates a versatile system suitable for both academic research and practical applications. The framework's integration of strict and intuitive proofs, supported by comprehensive tools and resources, makes it an invaluable asset for students, researchers, and practitioners in mathematics, logic, and computer science. As we continue to explore the depths of mathematical and logical reasoning, the Laegna-Spireason framework stands as a testament to the power of integrating diverse approaches. It not only provides a solid foundation for theoretical work but also offers accessible tools for practical application, truly bridging the gap between abstract concepts and real-world problem-solving. Whether you're a seasoned mathematician, a computer scientist, or a curious learner, the Laegna-Spireason framework offers a rich landscape of discovery and application, inviting you to explore the fascinating world of proofs and logical reasoning.

Well I don't know where to put it - I would have put it into "intellectual", but it's not completely true that it's not spiritual while it's definitely scientific. However, spirituality, consciousness, awakening, mysticism, meditation and god are the central topics so in number of matching keywords this thread probably fits. I have made the following resources: Laegna Spireason - my main page with number of texts if you scroll down Laegna Spireason chatbot - as it turned out only a genius is able to read my text, and myself, it was rather a night of genius, or two weeks, when I wrote and I'm not able to read as well. Despite this, some genius has given me good feedback (others that it's "unreadable", with many complains and telling me that I should use an AI to fix the texts; but I tried and information gets lost). This AI is not able for mathematical combinatorics in my own language, because there is no special training - it's trained on classical math; despite this, it's able to analyze my spiritual and scientific argument and think along, even if it would mess up all my personal terms and letters unless you are very clever in how you ask. Around this, if you are able to use my work to support yours, for example my good reasoning to support your more complete work into topic, you can write a chapter, where you connect yours with my proofs, definitions and methods, and in this case you are free to copy my texts to be used in your bot as knowledge base - Scientific Cooperation with Laegna and Spireason. Additionally, this is rather made keeping the bot in mind, but also for introduction - Laegna; here you find the same introductions to topics, but where in the main site I use many intuitive arguments you can prove with your mind, this is the replication where arguments are covered more rudimentally, but with strong, scientific, tautological proofs for what is covered - sorrily, yes it's spiritual but no, it does not define the cognitive qualities of mind, which can not be scientifically measured; it lacks more things, which I might be eventually even able to prove to computer (strict proving), but which would make it overly complicated; rather it's long text, but you find special "callout" blocks with lamp symbol, where there are proofs or important methods in one paragraph; there are like 20 and much more does not make an axiomatic theory but rather a draft; so you can also find those, and check the surrounding information, because it contains text, these bullets, but also for example historic and relevant scientific information in short chapters made with use of an AI; those, in total, make the text very long and human-unreadable - still, I cannot remove them very well if I want an AI to connect my science with the scientific background, and my religion with religious background. Under this part, there is my linguistic and mathematical framework as introduction: Laegna Base Alphabet; here you find mappings to the letters and words I use, and the mathematical and geometry background to make sense of them; indeed it starts with rather intuitive definitions. It's a short and complete part.

My intellectual pursuit is about a theory, which would hold not regarding on whether there is reincarnation or heaven or not, or whether we could have advanced psychic abilities or not. If the theory of life, karma and ethics, also the logic is not becoming inefficient with some combinations of variables, and you can always use more or less the same language, it's kind of scientific. Especially, it's communicative - science is shared -, and it allows people with different abilities and perceptions of truth to understand each others based on the same model. I do have a strong personal opinion and experience about whether I believe one or another of such claims, but for me a more important point is understanding and safe feelings with diverse world views, also the ability to point out the same mistakes. I have the most important points: Psychic Powers: Spiritual views do not specifically address that psychic powers, or deep consciousness about things like love and compassion (which have a taste of a miracle, when you experience them, even when they are basically quite simple to scientifically explain up to certain degree), would somehow require attributes of physics, which are not easy to find out or link with humans. More easy theory is that whether you have those abilities or not, your brain is still probable to develop a model of perception, which feels like real telepathy or magic power; our brain is multitasked, and when it reacts to all kinds of things, it finally creates our "virtual reality". It can be mixed - I have perceptions, which I call telepathy, but those are much more detailed and clear when I am also in material contacts with people; those can be very strong, but rather chaotic perceptions, but I can create models of brain functioning, which could reach similar occurrences without any radio contact or non-locality. I am very sure that telepathy utilizes such processes, and gains advantage of conscious and subconscious material inflow of information and processing of facts. Spiritually, this is philosophical case - it's not very important in terms of how we help the humankind and our friends, whether the psychic power is somehow "unnatural" or hard to explain; it's rather the spiritual, practical case, that it either works or does not. I would say we have many perceptions of other people, even perceptions of their emotions in more or less the same time when they are happening in the distance, and this skill can be developed further - in terms of spiritual growth, we want this human contribution and it's a side-effect if we can provide some new interesting details to science about the functioning or possibilities of humans, or about specific genes or strengths of soul, or phases of development. Enlightenment: As explained by Buddha, we do not need any mystery at all to explain why good karma, and cultivation of virtues of Buddhism and other religions, would eventually help to get to more meaningful and deeper stages of life. Indeed, clear consciousness of certain truths with a strength of a theorem, which is told to be a prerequisite to be a non-returner, leads us to best consequence. Attributes, which are similar to described psychic powers, would also appear in natural world by people simply supporting us in ways, which resemble those powers; for example we get more information as we handle it more carefully and responsibly, and our emotions affect other people more, when we are emotionally more beneficial. We could mean very material things by those terms about the powers, and this could possibly benefit the people, who understand the theorems in enlightenment, but do not have any prerequisites of psychic powers, if such are possible, or who do not want to break the philosophy of materialism - they would fulfill those ideals with material or scientific means and bring the same karmic consequence with people, who are capable of something harder to explain. To be neutral, we need to be very social with those people, who are atheists, but ethical, and create technologies or techniques equivalent to good magic. For example, by becoming more sensitive without becoming sensitives. Ethics: Equivalent models appear, whether the ethics is applied to our interactions with people and physical matter, or any kind of entities with higher consciousness or other powers; karmic or ethical principles of energy, doing good and bad, rewards and punishments - they happen all around, follow the same patterns, and eventually lead to same decisions. We can see a vision in a dream, but we cannot find out, how the brain or mind creates this - are we aware of every psychological, physical and biological factor or not. In religion, for example Buddhism, I think this is completely irrelevant; it's questionable, whether this is very important in terms of efficiency, whether we have explained it all or not. Eventually, as we measure it, we explain it and our spiritual theories would not have such exceptions or anomalies for long time - theories of magic, about how to apply will by creating a subconscious intent, is simply a psychology; those things could have been unresearched centuries ago, but today it's only a question, how many forces of nature are involved - theoretically, the magic works anyway, i.e. you can create a subconscious intent somehow and it would seem to create small meaningful random events in your life, with butterfly effects of some kind etc. Logic: Also, very similar attributes of logic, like lack of resources, management of time etc., are there in all those potential spheres. To be scientifically neutral, we have to consider the following: Not claim that something must break the physics, and atheists or skeptics should also not be so sure in this; I mean something we really experience. Alternative theories exist, which are not too demanding and imply the effects of some kind. The mind, it alters the matter anyway, even if it does use our bodies and all kinds of signals between people or people and the nature. We should not be sensational or give people very high, unrealistic promises, as we experience deeper, more subtle things. There are also a probability that some people are, for example, as sensitive as we are, but in a way which can be more or less *completely* explained; for them, they use the standard terms to talk about those topics. Having a common language, so that all those different people, who have built different models in their brains, can use the same language about things, which have a real impact. For example, someone might have hypersensory perception, but it's not so easy to verify this - it's much more easy to see, if they have any benefit in communication with people, finding objects, creating something etc. These real effects, which affect our lives, should be expressed in same terms as we use when we are sure someone could do the same with only the known attributes of human body and mind. For example, a telepathic experience might be unreliable to verify or very vague, but we can measure the people on basis of their effective communication, and the benefit from this communication. If they are able to benefit from their abilities, it would naturally affect their score, but also you can create more effective communication based on more introspection about the language and it's possibilities. It's rather philosophical, how you do it, and practical, what you are doing - so, the philosophy of others is not so much disturbing us, but the practical sides should be measured and standardized between models, like approaches of psychology, which explain certain factors with something hypersensory, or approaches, which explain them materialistically. Those are useful models and we need a common language, which would not confuse people about what you are actually able to do with all what you are. But still, there are differences ..I think we still need freedom of religion. It's currently assumed that all companies follow the same laws and thus hire people with all religious backgrounds - but rather, we should bring this freedom to another level, where companies can be different, valuating traits coming from religions or atheism, but the ecosystem is diverse, so that it's assured that all the different companies exist (in different areas of life); also that we do not check the spirituality, but the exact strengths coming from it, and appreciate when atheists have same kind of ethics, and materialist solutions to same problems.

If reincarnation is real, and all or most souls are having many reincarnations, whereas others might have only one life or go to heaven or hell (personal insights are so different, as different people might have real insights and inner knowledge, maybe the different theories hold for different karmic consequence); then would the existence of something like star seeds follow? In quite infinity of the Universe, there must be a lots of life somewhere out there - beyond the barriers we can even see. This brings the probability that star seeds would directly follow from reincarnation theory? So if you see "light in the end of tunnel", or you simply remember or verify something from the past lives, you have an account of experience, which leads to probability of aliens reincarnating to Earth, which is almost as big as the plausibility of these experiences. A person, who believes in reincarnation, would think that reincarnated aliens are quite natural consequence. Another thing - if there is real telepathy, would the psychic alien contact be very probable? If it's not limited by distance, I think it would almost be as probable as existence of aliens themselves. Then, with some telepathic experience, which seems to be unbound by distance, one would be inclined to think that alien contacts exist. If telepathy is somehow a perception of facts from natural world, which one perceives as strong feeling of something happening at distance, then would the evidence visible on Earth lead to perceptions of telepathic guts, which are complex brain calculations about the most probable alien cases, or would this "brain-emulated" telepathy not create probabilities of so different things?

Money is very easy thing to calculate. It's sure that with modern technology, we depend less on the money, but I'm not sure whether I want an AI to give me karmic points - and I think with material things, and operations with them, it's quite hard to avoid the appearance of single number. Not sure whether I want so complex theory, especially when an AI is judging every detail in my life. But good point anyway, with AI we can have more complex measures than a single number.

It's not a karmic view. The AI, which wins the battle, is not biased for anything - ethics cannot survive without logic. AI must have absolutely valid theorems to coexist with humans; it's the natural law of the world that everybody must do what it takes to exist - it's usually an ethical thing, but you can not avoid that what is really useless, will get extinct. Maybe the human simply feels they are useless, worthless being, and loses the motivation to live fully or kills themselves. To be human, you need very real logic about being useful, not something an AI has faked.

Computers with AI can turn us all jobless by doing all the job. Then, we might not survive. So we need to develop NI, natural intelligence of humans, to the level, where it can express the unique abilities of humans. I think the unique ability is to understand, whether something is true or not - computers do not have the most innate sense of knowing; if the information given to them is biased, they would also be biased. I have thought a lot about AI, but I have never solved, how it could have the innate sense of pure knowledge. I also think the human creativity is higher. I think the superhuman intelligence able to live together with AI's would also cooperate with AI's the fullest: if you create maximum cooperation with artificial intelligence, and you utilize the strengths, which are unique to humans, and exercise the normal human traits, you can turn yourself into something, which could survive in the world of Artificial Intelligence.

The world, where only karma matters, is too creative - you have to be creative about it every single moment. Money is a machine, it runs on it's own. You don't have to be a karma genius to understand it. It's an intellectual, rational thing, which is driven by community force.

I think it's an useful statement that bad people exist; also it's useful to state that they do not exist. I think there are many useful opinions or truths, but there are no last words. For example you can find out bad people are good in terms of more primitive life they are trying to live. Also you can find out the good and bad do not exist. But then they exist even more.

You say Jesus did not exist ..but I'm very careless about this question: more important question is, whether the man described in Bible is God? This really has to do with human destinies ..whether he existed, it has less. He was a God if his words are in correspondence with the Laws of Nature, the Creation of God - some people, who directly connect with Jesus somehow, can maybe know he existed; I think I once have seen there is so much wisdom that *something* had to exist. Where there is a genuine creation, there must be the creator. One also has to ask, is this material structure - the Church, the priests etc., with all those traditions, bringing people closer to God - for example, to the unified life. Scientific Doubt has this problem - when you are scientifically doubting, you really cannot get many facts out of the things. Then, you have to measure those things without those facts. When you are very, very skeptical, you cannot be sure that you are living in a world with other people. But when you philosophize like that, you have to follow ethics - thus, most scientific people mostly agree the ethics in Bible is fine, and they cannot agree in much more. When you start mistreating people, because they might not exist, it's not a philosophical doubt, but disconnection from life. You can doubt in Christ, in God, in everything - but you must treat the Book of Bible right.

But a scientist - how morally broken they have to be for us to ask, whether they are fake? They are first to attack people based on this - but what's their own actual work? Do we get to know somehow, when a psychologist is morally wrong? Are they taking no responsibility or why we see them "doing no mistakes"? If they do not take responsibility at all, they could be clean, but then - if they only mock others, when they have mocked them all, then who is then doing the work? I think sadhguru is maybe really too easy believer as he would teach all kinds of things, but those things have at least some truth in it. If his students are not "scientifically sure" in what he says, it's also not very scientific to scientifically check him. The people must be sure it's a scientific knowledge, not an inspiring story or useful model - only then you can attack the model by it's not being scientific. Otherwise it's like criticizing poetry about it's scientific facts. There are many different ways to believe.

In another thread people started to "attack" me, because I was talking rationally. They somehow concluded, that I must not have spiritual experience. I think spiritual experience is about making our mind more open, feeling the harmony and synchronicity. It's a state of mind, where you have a very deep sense of meaning. It's the "mindfulness" thinking, where your mind puts you into a state of wisdom and synchronicity, which arise from emptyness, and turns you into an egoless being. This is the truth of ethics, truth pointing to the higher. The rational, intellectual mind, which creates a "reason", is another power. It's to arise the logic, which is a negative pole on another end of the truth - when you do positive things, "supertruth", which arose from mindfulness, you still have further the negative truth. There is the truth of logic - it's pointing to the lack of the lower. Meditations have two extremes: meditations of non-concentration, like the Zen, and meditations of concentration or focus. When you concentrate on your thoughts, feelings, a mantra or a candle, then in some forms the concentration takes you to lower states. You do not think in terms of the whole, but in terms of the parts. You see how, the ideal meets the logic somewhere, and the ideals get destroyed. To think in the parts, being intellectual instead of mindful, has also another superpower - you think like a part, you work on tiny bit of something grander. Then, your enlightenment becomes the collective enlightenment - when you think intellectually, you think in union with others, and everybody works on their small part. This is the western superpower, and it has been very successful in enforcing it's power in the world - many eastern countries are also civilized in the western way, even if they work hard to integrate this to their own thinking. There is the whole, and it's reasonable to be mindful about this. Mind is capable to work with the wholes. But there are the parts and it's reasonable to be intellectual about them. The intellect is capable to work with the parts. When the mindfulness, the yang, becomes into extreme, it breaks. Maybe you live in a dream, but your dream starts to eat some kind of resources - for a dream to exist, and to exist in a power of civilization, there has to be a lots of logic. You see a dream, your mind is being a whole, but your brain is working like a machine. The second problem is witchcraft. You can be very enlightened and really able to build your dream. But then, in the end, it break logic - logic of mind, of community, of business, politics or physics. For example, people misunderstand your teachings and make mistakes. In this end, not by how the dream-nature goes, but how the logical reality goes, you get some bad karma, and it's slowly going to break you - you are witch in a sense that your karmic connections do not meet end-to-end, but there is some falsehood, where you cannot achieve your good karmic effect. Then, what you promised by your heightened states, becomes a lie, and people, who believed or synchronized subconsciously, become manipulated - because you are not able to give, what you promised and believed. This is a situation to be scientifically analyzed, because there are logical chains of actions, which do not meet together. It's extremely insulting to suggest people to not think rationally, to not use the power of the reason. It's another aspect of the same thing, when a materialist or an atheist is laughing about spirituality and fighting it down. The whole mind is both yin and yang - yin in looking the parts, yin in rationality and reason, and yang in looking the whole, yang in spirituality and belief. The Christianity and the Scientific Thought is working on the parts, and on the bigger wholes, which can be made up of the parts. People are together, and work for the greater whole, which they create or get from the God - one person is a small part of it. The Buddhism or Hinduism works rather with the small wholes, which start feeling the wholistic axes of the Universe, and synchronizing with this; the wholistic view is very personal. Still they cannot think so easily, how the parts work together. The intellectual thought brings the karmic ends together, until every person gets energy from activities, which are good to the system. By this karmic synchronization, it creates a civilization, a church, or a scientific community around the world. In this system, a person puts very little effort into getting their karma together - by following the direct reward and punishment, their karmic effects are already enlightened. They do not have to waste personal energy on this - they follow the easiest way, and in the system, by this non-doing, they behave like good parts. By this, the system starts operating like a machine - nobody is wasting the energy, but they only receive it, and the system is able to carry on with it's karmic responsibility. This creates the miracles of science, development of countries, other economical, political and intellectual miracles. It's able to win wars with personally enlightened beings - not exactly against the enlightened ones, but towards civilizing their cultures, which do not work like machines. The personal, mindful enlightenment, works on personal effort. The karmic thing to understand to behave well is very big, and then, the creative people try to create the civilization or the unity. It does not work like a machine, but takes the effort every day, and can burn out the participants. In civilization, when there is also a personal level of enlightenment - this is the supercivilization. When intellectual people are also mindful, it's a whole new potential. I think this combination of yin and yang is not possible to be beaten - the enlightened people are able to care about their surroundings and to work out the civilization, so that there is no need to civilize and colonize something for the others. It's very important to see that in Christianity and science, a big whole becomes enlightened and a single person thinks like a little part of the system, they think intellectual thoughts, which are never a whole - those thoughts are little parts of the whole. When this becomes enlightened, by big revolutions, like the scientific revolution and the democratic revolutions, it organized a huge brain, where people are tiny cells - and this brain becomes enlightened somehow, even if this is secret. I have always felt that in the big superpowers, there is some enlightened soul, which understands an enlightened person very well. They speak about alien contacts, psychic powers etc., which are somewhere there in the enlightened communities and act on their own. In those, an enlightened soul can see some extreme clear vision and wisdom, which recognizes the enlightened soul and their role in society, as the superpower itself has the same powers and understandings; it has became to be by enforcing the love, brotherhood and friendship, the collective good karma. On the other hand, Buddhists, Hinduists and others have the personal enlightenment - when a part is seeing the whole, it's like a dot on the hologram; from small number of such dots, the complete hologram can be formed - but there is more noise; from many of such dots, the hologram achieves good quality. When you take a little part of the hologram; every part contains the whole, but the whole has better quality, when the part is bigger. The part feels like a whole, but it cannot say it's the final end - the final end is when many parts feel the whole. The process is then creative and not systematic, and it needs a new effort every day, where, in the collective mind, only a system works and does it's thing kind of automatically - an official does not need to meditate every day for the government to exist, he simply does his little part like a machine. To be complete, we need to work for individual, mindful thinking, to have one projection of the hologram of the whole; but we also need to be intellectual and think in terms of the parts of the system or a machine, to combine our collective effort and build something grander than ourselves. This also has to exist inside ourselves - we have a mindful wisdom, but also the intellectual knowledge about the parts of the algorithms our mind sees as the wholes.

I think there is eastern and western superpower, and western one is based on scientific attitude. This is one-sided to be completely mental, one also needs to be rational - https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/101247-east-and-west-meaning-of-meditation-enlightenment-and-superpower/. I see the one-sidedness in the science person telling that they have debunked all spirituality and enlightenment is a lie, and I see the same effect on spiritual people, who do not tolerate intellectual knowledge.

I gave a second thought to your post. I have been accused to be more intellectual and think, before. I am a very spiritual and mystical, in a way, but a very rational person. You cannot completely convince me that materialist theories are wrong. I give you some reasons for intelligence - I also discussed this matter in https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/101247-east-and-west-meaning-of-meditation-enlightenment-and-superpower/#comment-1462178: Intellectual thought is more shared, collective thing. People do not need a special preparation to understand such words. Intellectual thought is hardly wrong. Once you do all the philosophy and remove the parts you are not sure in, you cannot fail with this. By trusting your senses only, you do not verify the fact and you can shift slightly off the reality. I have solved, in me, the contradiction between intellectual and mental. I am both, and fully - I do not easily pretend to break the laws of physics or make the claims of a top scientist false, and I respect also the simpler materialist models as some people can live with them; I also do not see the contradiction with science in spiritual things - rather, I see they sometimes have narrow models, which would have to be developed to fit the scientific thought, but I respect the spiritual people with simple models, and when I sense some sounds of it as kind of nonsense, or I see they would not get the advantage of sciences, I see people can live with such theories and there is some important core of Truth, so I validate this and create more neutral models, which have less contradictions. These are different people and they live in different ways. I think the Intellectual, Collective education of the West has won people in wars, who did not have this kind of reasoning. The reasoning, intellectual thought is a superpower and even intellectual materialist is able to create so strong civilizations that people, who only believe in mystics and karma, would be beaten, because they do the mistake of being irrational and leaving karmic ends, which suddenly turn into bad karma like undeveloped witchcraft. People, who lack intellectual thought, can be manipulative - they do the reactions, which make others to give them something and make moves they want, but then they have not connected the karmic ends of those reactions, which would make others to benefit from this. This is the essence of witchcraft - you learn the reactions, which make people to move, and you use them to "control" the people and the situations, but suddenly it turns out you did not meet their reasons to move in this way, and they must work hard to change their habits; in the end, the witchcraft does not work - the karmic circle will not go together, it will not create a substancial benefit. People need to be more and more deep and intelligent with their behaviors - so that they are "moved" by people, who have really made the ends fit, and who does not see this as control. Psychological theories can be used to create witchcraft, but those things have very serious ends, when it turns out you have used subconscious lies, and people take serious efforts to fix their subconscious mind and make you unable to continue your witchcraft. Scientific thought, the intellectual culture, is somehow so strong to get over witchcraft in yourself and others. It connects the negative reasons, causes and effects, karmic processes in the ends, where people must get their part of the benefit, when they move like your signals would suggest them to move. It raises the level of independence, is suitable for many different people, who do not have some psychic, mental, intellectual superpowers, and replaces the control and manipulate strategies with free cooperation with creativity and synchronicity. These are completely different superpowers, but I must conclude: people on the level of Buddha are really able to connect their karmic ends, and Buddhists tend to be really sane, but they spend enornomous amount of energy to achieve this; for intelligent people, who also practice the reason, avoidance of effects of witchcraft, subconscious manipulation of people and materials, is systematic and automatic. For Buddhist, civilization is built if very aware thought exists, but west adds this intellectual, shared and communicative thought, which builds civilized world more or less automatically - a civilized person is more or less completely safe from witchcraft, even if they are atheist, materialist, and having no "special powers" of similar kind. They can avoid cults, manipulation, people in need of unreasonable control, etc. They do not easily buy fake products or follow fake teachers. All these nightmares start appearing, when you go too pure with your mentality, making your mind very pure dream - the logical ends exist in any dream and they break it. The Buddhism contains many safe thoughts to achieve lifestyle, which is also good for these practical ends, and Christians are also very practical - but when you take the best things you can find in spirituality and religion, and make your mind purely yang, purely positive, it's like going to party every day and forgetting the job - suddenly, you have to pay.

I have lately reached the idea, what means being scientific about the God - so that an argument that the Pope would lie to a believer would not apply. Scientists have said believers in God are easy to deceive, but they did not reach a conclusion, what those people should do to be more modern and scientific. We know that God is said to be "totality of everything", "the Truth" etc. We can make many scientific notations, about what such entity would expect from us, should he exist. Also, those are ethical things - the whole, the truth, and all those properties, do exist scientifically and we can term them as "God" even if God does not exist in separate consciousness - this takes our scientific view to the end, we can speak scientifically, what it is to follow the Truth, the Wisdom, or the Goodness. Our collective, working together, creates some kind of God - a collective synchronicity, a Truth of higher kind etc., even if God does not exist. In evolution, bigger and bigger wholes appear, and they will be more alive - the collective consciousness of everything would evolve definitely and much of this has definitely been happening. We can identify this as God. Also, our ethical behaviour produces higher principles and brings the positive qualities into existence - this is beneficial to us and to the society, and so similar to God that we can talk about the God if it does not otherwise exist, as a beneficial whole or the all, which comes from our behaviour - this is the aspect of God of existing subjectively, as one believes in God. We can do scientific work about those properties, the qualities of the real God, and be philosophical whether this is the real God or the whole of our activities and the Universe, which benefits from being the whole, and thus creates an entity, which can be spoken as God in action. Those two theories are definitely, in my experience, the same - the ethics and logics we appear. God is neutral, and thus it's like the Laws of Nature - so if something gives good ends and creates bigger wholes, this is our way to the God. It brings Paradise to an Earth, and reaching some kind of Paradise is also scientific - it's what we benefit from, and we can prove this and sane people would understand the proof or think they need to work on this, on ethical life. When we work on this, we can prove scientifically that many things of the Bible and the Indian texts about God would really be the desires and actions of such entity, and when the society is creating this kind of whole out of it, thus following the God, it would definitely benefit us - the simplest model of this is "God", it's the simplest theory to describe such behaviour of the whole. When people learn this into scientific understanding about God, we would be modern and not depend on personal ego of some priest or teacher - we would see, whether their talk is scientific. If someone claims to be God or godlike creature, we would also measure their theories scientifically, and understand whether those bring the good karmic consequence a God would do. This way, God would be equal to us - we work on theries about the God and reach our individual understanding, whether the omnipotent, omnipresent etc. nature of the Laws of the Nature would do this; we know that the real benefit of such being is mutually beneficial - the Whole and the Parts benefit from the same things; so when God is not beneficial to us, the evolution of the Whole would turn around and the Whole would evolve, creating a different God, or more decent reincarnation. By thinking independently, we are equal to God, in the sense by which democratic people are equal - to the law, the President is equal to a Cleaner, but they understand the laws better and probably follow them on much higher level; but the President is supposed to leave the Cleaner their free mind, and when they break their rights without reason, it's a hard case - a president can justify a criminal, but it's expected that he does this by the law. I do not see a reason, why the Goodest of the beings would be not equal in such sense, in the modern time, when people do not need so many orders and are able to think independently - God, also, would require us to be democratic and independent thinkers; this kind of motivation is indeed beneficial to the God and the society, as much as it's beneficial to the president, when the people have personal motivation. So it's very scientific that in modern times, God would not want us to be slaves of the priest, or manipulated - even if in more traditional times, when people had more rules and less individual motivation, God would have needed to be such as well, more similar to their common leaders. By adapting this view about the God, Spiritual people would follow their motto - to be modern people, independent thinkers, even if very cooperative.

I tried to answer every part of your inquiry. Maybe my answers were too long. You cannot convince me. I think you are looking only at one side of the Truth; and as a Buddhist I also must believe in Cause and Effect, the Law of Karma. I think your position is what is working for a while - it's the complete Yang situation, where you only want to experience the Good. In Taoist teachings, the extreme of Yang will, at some moment, at it's peak, break down. I believe in Positive and Negative. The Positive - this is like what you said, it's creation of our own reality quite freely. The Negative, or the Reason, is very far, but it will eventually break in - in addition to ethics, which is similar to yours, there is logic and deduction. Witches create their own reality, when they are not very advanced. They try to persuade people into fit of their own dream. Finally, they do something like negative witchcraft - they do not make sure that the energy others are spending to their goods would flow back to them. The positive witchcraft is more like what we experience in religion like Buddhism - you bring together the positive cycles of energy, and then, for others it's also useful to create your own dream. Somewhere there is a karmic connection that they, too, need to create positive karma and their dreams out of being your dream. Then it all works together - people co-create. Your theory is prone to the effect, where you create and create your dream, but suddenly the people involved start lacking something. Then, what you would have created as positive energy, so that when people follow the Force they also fulfill your dream, would turn into the manipulation - you give them the karmic ends to do your dream, but suddenly that karma lacks the energy. Energy is very real. In the big picture, we are not only beings of the Heavens, but we need to go to the Hells and help those beings to also achieve higher states; otherwise, one day they come anyway. You can help them if they accept this. This is more like Christianity than Buddhism, or it's a Mahayana Buddhism also, where you stay in lower realms and help them to get more enlightened. There is a hard fact, which somewhere meets your dream.

Yes revelation is a kind of proof, but it's quite personal. When many people would get revelations, they would create proofs based on that - but in our common speech, it's very important that decisions of people with very different sense abilities, truth perceptions, IQ's would understand them about the same way. When we have common notations for our basic points, we meet much less counteractivities - the revelations you get from your spiritual advancements are often misunderstood and suppressed by other people.

I have to disappoint you - I have a lot of mystical experience. In my case, the two are not opposites; this post is about a very intellectual topic - being Scientific about God, and for this topic, reliance on mystical experience would not be beneficial. I also have a lot of scientific experience. I have got a lots of wisdom in short time; but science is communicative tool - others would not always have anything to do with this experience. It's hard to answer, why I look for this scientific reality - you are very skeptical about this ..but shortly, it's bad when the material senses interfere with spiritual senses - each sense needs to come to conclusions from it's own data. To be an integrated whole, one also needs to develop an intellectual wisdom from their five senses and ability to think; this is a very communicative wisdom.

Common language includes common terms with people, who are not enlightened; when you have right speech, it includes conceptions everybody can see. Psychologist can have an ideal theory about what makes you happy, but when he gives you more and more numbers about particular chemicals in your brain, and explains situations with molecular formulas and particular numbers of your body, telling you that you have some particular neural response instead of asking to calm down - you are not very interested in their theory. Take this more easily - a person washing dishes in the bar also makes life better, but you get tired if you hear stories of all chemicals they know about. To be social, you need to work hard with your theories to sometimes give a good and short advice, how they can make their life better without talking to ghosts or exceeding the speed of light. In particular, do not promise anomalies in sciences ..when you study them further, you rather create none - there are many miracles I have seen, but not so many cases where I could really show a normal physics, psychological or social theories are broken; I could talk about similar effects in very common terms. You need to re-learn the language, so that you might see they are throwing red fire balls towards you, but you need to understand that in collective language it's simply called hate. When you silently draw a picture of person with red fire balls - you do not need to explain this as reality, but as your own metaphor; they would understand the person is angry ..but when you talk too much too literally, it's the same effect as putting on the red sunclasses and pretending everything to be red because you see it that way - it's not communicative to others. Also people have certain tendency to believe that you make anomalies to their theories when you speak wrongly about enlightenment. Psychologically, you make them feel happy with no reason, financially, you bring them money with no work, politically, you take them to ideal world where even bad people can live, or physically, you get things having better qualities - you can kind of sense similar effects, but you can be sure people misunderstand you and expect to have good results with bad karma; you are not able to provide that. You need to study, how the standard, known sciences are actually not broken. The gold rush, which comes when you are naive and talk people about everything you think would be "materialized instantly" and "changing their lives" - they believe you first, then they get extremely shameful situations, and finally they say you are mad. You might experience something like this, rise of your life quality or unexpected experiences, which is the total sum of changes in your senses, meanings you give to things and the real potential you get out from focusing to good karmic goals, but really, if you read a book of physics, psychology or economy again - you can see the theorems are not broken. You can see others have same amounts of anomalies - physicist can make things fly, and he can hardly explain in his formulas, why this works; mathematician solves some formula by magic trick you don't understand, or carmaker creates a design effect you would not believe - everybody is breaking a little bit what you expect. But do not promise the anomalies! Buddha told nothing about breaking the laws of nature - he said the law of karma is the law of cause and effect, and this is kind of all there is. Christians said about their miracles that witchcraft is "breaking the laws of nature" and thus even illegal. Study the laws and how we commonly see them and try to be realistic.

Gödels proof, for me, mostly proves that scientific theories can be both valid and contradictionary - I also result this conclusion from theory of Paradigms. This results that in scientific theories, we can not easily "debunk" people, but there needs to be ethics - models, which fit different people, can be most efficient for them - simple and explanationary -, but when we look them directly, there seem to be contradictions. The existence of God is not so simple - when you awaken, yes, you can prove there is God and you are both part and a whole. But when you fall more asleep, you can prove there is no God and you are not whole at all, maybe you are not even a part, but you don't matter at all. When you seek independence or do not create karmic bonds, but break all of them - God cannot help you, but leaves your life. This can happen for good - you take responsibility and become more independent, until you reach God again in independent way - or for bad - your karma simply breaks up; in this case life forces you to repair your karma. In quantum reality, you shift between heavens, hells and more neutral states like Earth - they form complete realities. In reality, where you do not have karmic connection with God, you link with people, who do not have this; enlightened people can not do visible miracles near you - they become easily debunked - and you cannot see or access the good karmic connection; your karma is either completely neutral or bad. You might build an atheist life, which is quite successful, but without karmic connection to God. These realities are real - when you quantum shift, you move to other, very real, and complete reality, which surrounds you everywhere, nobody can do anything miraculous you can see - it's either out of your perception, or simply impossible; people, who want to impress you with miracles, simply lose their abilities until they fix their karma. In this quantum realm, God really does not exist, and it's insane to suggest that he does - the only model, which works for you, is without God. You can still believe in God of some kind. This makes God highly subjective. God is beyond existing and unexisting, it's beyond being one or many, beyond being true or false - Buddha never told whether God exists, but he said it's a very complicated topic and you reach this as you experience. Your quantum world contains God and you can see it's true ..but it's your reality! You can live a life, where you do everything yourself, and you can never give back to the world, when God helps you - you reach the reality, where God does not exist. You can change your religion, and God would appear differently, or the time passes and in new culture, the God also appears to be higher, he has higher manifestation - in this sense, you cannot say whether God is one or many, and you cannot say definitely that he is not getting better in material, manifested reality you see. When you get much higher - you can be sure, God as you see him would simply do the same, and it would be kind of different God; he cannot help you in ways, which you cannot answer at all. There is something permanent, already enlightened about God - but also you, in some sense you are already perfect and enlightened, but in the material world you can see yourself evolving and hardly reaching this, those experiences come and go as the day and night are changing (jewish religion says day and night are changing forever). You have to see that your quantum shifts take you to another, complete reality, and the theorems there are different - by some kind of synchronicity, those worlds can co-exist in the same place. Religions learn from God, but then they have wars between each others, it's hard for God to be the same. From perspective of the world, where God does not exist, you can still have some understanding of God when you consider it's attributes - you can describe the reality in terms of appearance of God's attributes and the benefits you get when you work for those. From perspective of the world, where God does exist, you can see that when you don't follow him at all, he disappears and kind of does not exist. And, another enlightened perspective sees your mind as the whole, but it does not attribute so much to the God - it says it's your own world and you get what you create; this seems distinct theory, but it's as good as others to describe something real about the deep, underlying reality. This topic is philosophically deep and when only what you know for sure is left, and when your theory fits everybody - you are left with something, which is not so simple as binary logic. The same way, God treats everybody and everything equally, thus the same causes have the same effects - this creates appearance of the natural laws, which do not need to be explained by God. Natural Laws, they still form some union, which can be called God. When you study this evidence of the material world, you also study God; and in theory, you need this word to transcend the need to be sure, whether God exists - the attributes of God, in reality, like appearance of Truth, all exist anyway, and you benefit from them, thus they exist in sense that when you work for them, they work for you and exist; God, if he exist, would also leave you if you do not have the karmic connection - thus, if God exists, you get the same theory that he is what you create. So the theory is also that you create your own reality, and this is an aspect you can follow without "believing in God". You can apply logic to the parts and the whole. For example, you can assume that when all the parts do better, unless they harm others by doing better, then the whole also does better. You can do better by harming others, but you can do better by helping others. The whole benefits, when you do better by helping others (who deserve it?). Finally, when they do not deserve, they finally lose if you give them what they do not deserve - so, maybe you still help them by not giving what they do not deserve, but helping them further in deeper ways. But some people want to be independent and not get your help, and you could think that they do better if you help them - but they say they have right to not be your friend, then, painfully, you reach that you get better karma by not being their friend, and you are kind of dependent yourself when you constantly try to still create the friendship. Now, you know that when you create these win-win situations, you also create something for the whole - when you create lose-lose and win-lose situations, the whole would benefit less. Then, you can conclude that what Christ said that you help God and God helps you when you help others - this must be true by several possible models of what God is. Then, you have proven this and your study of Bible is a little bit more scientific - you can see that if God is born as a person, he would definitely tell this to you; you cannot see from here, whether Christ was God, sent by God, or a person with Godly character, but you can see that the story that if God is born he would tell you this and exactly this - it's true. You can show this theory to an atheist, and he would agree that parts help the whole this way, and with certain attributes of the whole you can see the force of God, the love of God, and the Wisdom and Truth of God in this way; so he might not believe in God as separate living entity, for example, or he might not believe in God in some other sense, but he would believe that by creating such model and following it this way, you are following something he could also prove in the material world - when people all apply the win-win situations, the godlike force appears in their life, and it's true that the Paradise would come to Earth as we get better in this. Heaven is a world you enjoy, and an atheists all use this term easily - when they get good marriage, good job and good friends, they can agree that they are in Heaven, even if they do not believe in everything you can say about lokas and heavens. Also, the life after death. In Buddhism, Christianity and older religions, the good deeds have consequence beyond the realm you are living in, beyond your current life. This is extremely painful statement for an atheist and he would see you are deceived to something. But, philosophically, we can show that by transcending our ethics to limits, to infinity beyond the visible results of the ethical theory - limit in mathematical sense is a function of unconstrained continuity; and when we also consider the future generations and others people, we also get something like good karma beyond our visible life. The consequences of all kinds appear, come into our lives, which we cannot directly follow that good comes from the good. When we take all those hypothesis together, we can create a neutral theory, which considers the afterlife, but gives us a model, which is quite much identical not depending, whether this exists - we can show that we lose nothing by having an afterlife model. This is more scientific by removing the doubt - where we can doubt, we have a theory, which considers all the possibilities and creates the same model of actual life. Why it's more scientific - it might be not more scientific for some people, who have memories of past lives or strong visions of future lives, or both. But science is not the force of solitude, but a force of collective - we need to speak about it. When we speak, we consider not only our own perspective, experience, wisdom or need to believe something, but we consider also others; we look for common language, which everybody can verify. We need to prove our atheist colleague that we do not make bad decisions believing that our company would reincarnate and get the money back - then, we need model, where we can be certain inwards, but we are not certain outwards; in this way, enlightened people do not talk so much. Enlightenment is not to impress others with what they cannot perceive or doing something outside the boundaries of their science - it's about uniting people and finding the common framework of actions and theories. So when you have such theory of limits, where you show why you see the ethical consequences pointing in directions, which are equal to what you would get if they point to infinity - you get rid of something philosophical, where even you can doubt a little bit, and you reach a theory, which can be verified by more people. For yourself, the "hypothesis" of afterlife might have further clarification, and you are free to have some free time to play hockey or meditate for your afterlife experience, but when you go to atheist company and start working with their afterlife full-time, you are being insane. When your words take this as certain, which they don't see, you are not doing any good ..and, finally - when you prove your own past and future lives, you cannot prove that they are not different; for example I did read a Christian text that he thinks it's very unethical to have afterlives instead of going straight to heaven - I think the potential of humans is quite free and when they have such impression of the ethics and reality, it could be their reality. Maybe someone, really, has proven that they do not have afterlife - then you are lying to them. You need to remember their past and future lives as well ..but I heard an argument that if you do not remember your past life, you are a different person living only one life - if your model is such, then in these terms you don't have an afterlife. So to be scientific, we consider all this and reach ethics, which fit to everybody, and some general sense about what you mean by basing your ethical decision, or important business decision, on theory of afterlife - some people might not want to risk with this, and they might be right in some sense of how they model their lives, who they are, and what makes you the same person. Maybe they lose motivation if they think they will do this next life? There might appear ethical considerations, which are not exactly "scientific", like believing something would make them lost and mad, not able to benefit from their models. For some people, when they lose faith in their lives and choose a different life, this is afterlife - they are interested if the consequence of past life reaches this, a new circle of friends, a new girlfriend or a new company they work in. For some people, when million years later they family gene creates the exact same combination, the same person is born and this is their afterlife; they want to know, what consequence this person would have from their lives, and are they creating memories, somehow, of their past person. For some people, they live on when their children survive, or their scientific work remains - their karma would go on. Philosophy and science is about working to have less assumptions. What you mean by God, Heaven or Afterlife - a good theory, which you can scientifically check, is communicative between people, and free of assumptions. There is a magic - the theory of ethics and logic give the same results again and again, in different realms, areas of science etc.; with everything, you can see the moving energy, the good and bad behavior, and the shared karma; from many different theories, which form on different solutions to open problems - you still reach the conclusion that ethical life is good and benefits you or the world. You reach this in different ways and means. You also reach logic - that you can create the best reality, but the consequence of future, or the others, or how you relate with your past, is not good; logic breaks some rules of the simplest good will, demanding something practical, for example giving money away is good by ethics, but you might lose it by logic. Rising into highest heaven possible is good by ethics, but working in hells to help others is possibly important solution by logic and reason. Cause and effect and acausal - do not get wrong impression about what I said. I have this connection: Cause and effect bring us closer to truth in manifested form, material realm, like material paradise / heaven on earth, or actual God in our real lives, our connection to God - in every religion you can see the past is worse and the future is better. This happens by evolution and experience. In the cause and effect, the Truth is so much more True in the Future that you would not see it in the past; the past gods like Odin and Thor - they seem like semigods, but those people could not manage better; it's weird if they went to Heaven, where they had their own best traits and not yours - but really, you do not create into heaven or hell, but in all means, in current life, afterlives and what you give to your future generations, you are moving towards the realm you create; their heaven was the world they created and they could not do better. They definitely met there the God they created themselves, or the God had the appearance, which did fit those people and their understanding. Acausal appears in Enlightened states of Mind, between two lives, or as the reality of Truth, which still has effect - this exists and sometimes it shows us the perfect harmony and reason; but sometimes it shows this also in our past experiences of hardship we overcame. God promised us the Paradise and the Kingdom of God for the future - we are evolving, or God is evolving, this is the philosophical question, but the real thing is that the past appears almost as if God was not there. Definitely, very enlightened experiences sometimes appeared, visions, feelings and moments of the Final Future, and maybe some people were able to materialize this into their lives. I call this yin and yang - yang is acausal, where yin is causal. You can see questions like "why spiritual God created material world", and in Kybalion it's also hard to explain the material life. I have really hard to read texts about this yin and yang - https://spireason.neocities.org/ - where I prove that the material world exists and is evolving from past to future. Buddha said we are working for enlightenment of all beings, and Christ said one day we have the collective enlightenment.