New Video: 8 Unique & Original Proofs Of God

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I wish I knew more about formal logic so I could understand better.. but it seems to me that arguing  if premise A is this  then  B is true..if conclusion then false must be self-referential in order get the argument A..therefore B ...right? So doesn't this only show that self-referential language can lead to paradox? And isn't that obvious?   logic is only a language used to symbolize objects and  and symbols cannot  symbolize themselves (like how a map can't map itself infinitetely)? 

I explained this in my latest video.

Watch videos before you ask questions.

These are sophisticated matters that cannot be explained in a quick forum post.

Edited May 20 by Leo Gura

[kbone]

9 minutes ago, Someone here said:

What is logic in your direct experience right now ?

Yes you and those dudes believe that logic leads to truth .if this is abc then that Is 123. Etc

 logic is not absolute. Its limited and relative .like  how the liar's paradox shows that ordinary language is limited by self-reference.

I wish I knew more about formal logic so I could understand better.. but it seems to me that arguing  if premise A is this  then  B is true..if conclusion then false must be self-referential in order get the argument A..therefore B ...right? So doesn't this only show that self-referential language can lead to paradox? And isn't that obvious?   logic is only a language used to symbolize objects and  and symbols cannot  symbolize themselves (like how a map can't map itself infinitetely)? 

And what's that you say nothing happened for no reason?  Where do you find a reason for this present moment?  The reason has to be in the past but I find no past here.

Logic is born of the mind, yes. What's considered logical' is conditional: experiential, familial, conditional, etc. It appears only when the neocortex is engaged. Overall, it's purddy dang useful in convos and everyday lifing, but not always, if you know what I mean. 

[Someone here]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I explained this in my latest video.

Watch videos before you ask questions.

These are sophisticated matters that cannot be explained in a quick forum post.

OK. 

I'm not sure if I can keep on watching you anymore . I mean you are headed straight to sheer grandiose madness of sorts .sorry I'm being honest with ya .you know how dear you are to me lol.

All I want to say "everything is grounded in logic "is a false statement. Its all grounded in nothing.  Which was learned by you ironically as well.

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I'm not sure if I can keep on watching you anymore . I mean you are headed straight to sheer grandiose madness of sorts .

You are so unserious that you are incapable of watching a video. Yet you want answers to life's deepest questions.

Logic would do you some good.

The reason I create videos is to explain very deep and tricky things. Because these topics are not a joke. You guys keep underestimating the things being taught here, acting like you already got it all.

Edited May 20 by Leo Gura

[Someone here]

4 minutes ago, kbone said:

Logic is born of the mind, yes. What's considered logical' is conditional: experiential, familial, conditional, etc. It appears only when the neocortex is engaged. Overall, it's purddy dang useful in convos and everyday lifing, but not always, if you know what I mean. 

Can you do logic while drunk ? Logic is obviously contingent. Where is the logic of masturbating 16 times a day when we were 17 yo? What's the logic of why the universe doesn't just disappear for no reason  ? I mean I could come up with hilarious examples but I've been overly silly lately so I'm gonna dial it down a bit just for safe measures. 

Bottom line consciousness is more fundamental than logic .

[ExploringReality]

@Leo Gura 

Don't waste your time Leo, you know there's diamonds in the rough, and people pissing in the wind. There's only so much you can do to motivate people and get them curious at least about this work, but those have been on the journey even before stumbling upon actualized.org will recognize the real. 

[Someone here]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You are so unserious that you are incapable of watching a video. Yet you want answers to life's deepest questions.

Logic would do you some good.

The reason I create videos is to explain very deep and tricky things. Because these topics are not a joke. You guys keep underestimating the things being taught here, acting like you already got it all.

I almost watched all of your videos on the playlist"metaphysics &the nature of reality " and "epistemology how the mind works ". 

The proplem is I'm losing traction with these kind of things . I think it leads nowhere. Kinda resonating more with nonduality Buddhist rats ..the stuff that goes like there is just this moment here .rest is mental noise . 

 

@ExploringReality you ain't gonna befriend him like that lol I'm just saying .

[kbone]

33 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Logic is not a belief.

Notice that even your questions and criticisms of anything I say cannot work without logic. You need logic to criticize.

Yes there is. There must be. For a thing to just be it cannot not-be.

Notice that nothing in the world happens for no reason. There is always some reason for how things are. This reason is not necessarily of the human sort.

Logic is a tool.

Perhaps too much thinking. Thinking is born of the mind. Logic is born of thinking. Thinking is not pre-requisite for simply being. 

So maybe you're tinkering with the 'thinking/reason born of the Mind of God' dealio, but then you'd be saying that God can't simply Be, which would be counter to Infinite Potential. Otherwise, it would be mixing contexts.

Typically what transpires is that something happens, and only later does mind ascribe a reason for how/why it happened based on its limited view of events, conditioning at the moment of perception, and beliefs of unperceived events (aka, logical jumps). Quite often, that reason/logic shifts over time. This is conditional to one's faculties for reasoning/logic and memory, which change.

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, Someone here said:

The proplem is I'm losing traction with these kind of things . I think it leads nowhere.

Imagine if you were in 3rd grade and you said, I think this leads nowhere.

Theory is a deep investment. It takes time to pay off. You don't go to school for a payoff next month. You go to school for a payoff next decade.

This is just a school. An advanced school. The stuff they should have schooled you but didn't.

Edited May 20 by Leo Gura

[kbone]

20 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Can you do logic while drunk ? Logic is obviously contingent. Where is the logic of masturbating 16 times a day when we were 17 yo? What's the logic of why the universe doesn't just disappear for no reason  ? I mean I could come up with hilarious examples but I've been overly silly lately so I'm gonna dial it down a bit just for safe measures. 

Bottom line consciousness is more fundamental than logic .

Most of those examples are about quality of logic, hehe.

The question of why/why not the universe doesn't just disappear for no reason could be an interesting one. What do you mean by it?

Sure, consciousness is more fundamental than logic in how I would express it. It doesn't happen until the intellect is engaged. I can simply look and perceive without thinking or logic. Often, that's when there's more mental space, which is indicative of greater potential and awareness of peripheral movement, whether it be mental or environmental.

[kbone]

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@ExploringReality you ain't gonna befriend him like that lol I'm just saying .

He does seem to do a lot of cheerleading, don'tee 

[ExploringReality]

Wasn’t trying to befriend anyone, just speaking truthfully. Some topics require serious contemplation, not quick answers. If someone can’t see that then they’re not ready for the depth being pointed to. It's about quality of inquiry not personal dynamics.

[Someone here]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Imagine if you were in 3rd grade and you said, I think this leads nowhere.

Theory is a deep investment. It takes time to pay off. You don't go to school for a payoff next month. You go to school for a payoff next decade.

This is just a school. An advanced school. The stuff they should have schooled you but didn't.

You know what Leo..I'm gonna download your last three episodes about god and watch them in one sit  and see what you have to say .

Thanks for your hard work .keep rocking .much love brother 🙏 

[ExploringReality]

@kbone what's up? 

Edited May 20 by ExploringReality

[Someone here]

8 minutes ago, kbone said:

The question of why/why not the universe doesn't just disappear for no reason could be an interesting one. What do you mean by it?

You know exactly what I mean .I wrote it in plain English.  Why  does the universe not disappear completely from existing right now ?

Nevermind I do know the answer which is that the universe is infinite so it has no where to go. Seems like we are stuck forever. you can suicide yourself a million times but this is not super Mario this is infinite Mario. 

The question about masturbation is more confusing 😂. 

[kbone]

12 minutes ago, ExploringReality said:

@kbone what's up? 

What's up? Ya mean literally? Figuratively? Please clarify the question! 

[Leo Gura]

22 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I'm gonna download your last three episodes about god and watch them in one sit

Why these extremes??

[kbone]

27 minutes ago, Someone here said:

You know exactly what I mean .I wrote it in plain English.  Why  does the universe not disappear completely from existing right now ?

Nevermind I do know the answer which is that the universe is infinite so it has no where to go. Seems like we are stuck forever. you can suicide yourself a million times but this is not super Mario this is infinite Mario. 

The question about masturbation is more confusing 😂. 

Well ooookkkkaaaaaay then, mental masturbation it is!! 🤣

So, imagine if you're Infinite/Source/God/whatevs, and the entire appearing EVERYTHING is your body. When you close your Infinite Eyeball, plug up your Infinite Ears etc etc, what happens to EVERYTHING?

Pretty easy so far, and no one and no thing is stuck anywhere.

 

Then, bring it back to human thinking capacity in one's present state, right here, right now. Do the same thing.

Now, if one says the body is still there even though there's no perception of it, one is using thinking/logic to draw the highly probable conclusion, yes? If one says the body is not perceived, that would be honest also, yes?

 

So, what is the construct of self, and who is stuck in the perceived universe? Or, is it the universe/self that is perceived within/as Consciousness, that you've stated as fundamental? If the latter, then whatthewho is stuck, like anywhere?

This is not a question asking for a mind-based answer; it's a curiosity about what in blazes is going on prior to what the mind does with all of its memory, assumptions and logic.... the realization.

Edited May 20 by kbone

[gengar]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Sub-infinities are as real as Absolute Infinity, as parts of a fractal are as real as the whole fractal.

It's all one thing, with various levels of zoom, so to speak.

This is incorrect. We're talking about what is actually real and fully actualized. A part of a fractal doesn't exist - where do you pinpoint where one part begins and ends? You're missing the subtlety of what's being said here.

The experience of "zooming in" is an illusion. you've never left the exploration of the full fractal. it's like going into a forest, and having the forest experience which is of course very different than the desert experience or the experience on the moon. yet all those things are only conceptually different, different to biased creatures, but not in actuality.

So how can something conceptual (the subinfinity) be just as real as something that is actual? (the entire infinity)

The arm of the fractal exists only as an idea, while the entire fractal itself does not exist as an idea, but in full actuality.

God has never counted up the natural numbers till infinity. because if he would, he would still be doing it right now and not created this experience right here.

The logic of Infinity demands there to be only one Infinity, and all others to be illusions, and the consequence of this is that a "subinfinity" can never exist. God is infinitely "choosing" aspects of Absolute Infinity, and that unending process is whats happening right now. Any zooming in on one part, like the set of all cheeses, is purely an illusion; it may seem that God is exploring the set of all cheeses but he is not, since the set does not exist at all. Were the set of cheeses be real, and the function of infinitely exploring it (actualizing the subinfinity) also real, then God would never get back to the exploration of Absolute Infinity.

In computer science terms, Gods search algorithm is neither depth-first nor breadth first, but random (unbiased). because both a bias for breadth-first (choosing different sets), and a bias for depth-first (cycling through members of a set) would give an infinite bias to either a particular set or only the first member of each set. Gods search algorithm must therefore be completely unbiased which means all subcategories are absolutely conceptual and arbitrary.

In a sense, Cantor's critics were correct in saying infinities are mere conceptualisations, except about one thing: Absolute Infinity. (nothing against Cantor he was genius but we're talking about what is ultimately real here)

 

Edited May 20 by gengar

[gengar]

2 hours ago, kbone said:

@gengar

That's purddy complicated, so I'll read it later with a fresher mind. My point wasn't about what idealism says or doesn't say; it was about how words/ideas are conceptualized in one mind versus another in a convo about Truth (knowing it cannot be conveyed from one mind to another via the conceptualization). My original post in this thread was in reply to @Bjorn K Holmstrom and it was with respect to how nuanced the concept of idealism can be and the apparent skepticism that might arise from a convo about it and its pertinence to potentially realizing Truth.

That's true, but my argument was also talking from that level. How can you point a philosophical, rationalist person towards the Truth? by saying Idealism is true. Because from the philosophical standpoint it is, because all Idealism says is that THIS is true, and no conceptualisations are like materialism.

Idealism is the turning philosophy in on itself by "escaping" the conceptualisation, if you get what I mean.

If you want to get a person lost in concepts out of their game you have to defeat them at their own game, so therefore, argue for Idealism.

Which is always possible because God is infinitely real and thus all logical reasoning leads to it.