Jump to content
The Corroboree
Sign in to follow this  
Avaricial

Are we capable of creation ?

Recommended Posts

I believe we do not have the capacity to 'see' or imagine anything beyond the reality we've been brought up in.

cases in point:

1) If i asked you to draw something no one has ever seen, your first response would be to combine bits and pieces of creatures you've seen. Thats not creation, thats simply regurgitation of information already present in the brain.

2) FOAF didn't know what to expect before his first lsd trip because it was a totally new experience, a dive into what was personally previously unknown.

That is the way our society has progressed through time, we learn something, we extrapolate from that new realisation and we figure out whats the next step.

Someone from the past who sees the level of technology we have achieved will believe its magic because there were too many progressive steps skipped for him to have an understanding of what he's seeing.

Discovery of new medicines, breakthroughs in quantum physics and whatnot.... they're all an analysis of the physical world we live in currently.

So, are we capable of creation?

note: I regurgitated 1/2 my post that i wrote on the brainmeta forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the universe is reflected in something as simple as a grain of sand.

In my opinion, everything we do is a completely new, creation, as before that moment in time nothing before it had existed that was the same.

I agree that most creating esp music movies and most art is a tasteful (but not always) combination of two or more previously unlinked concepts or objects.

I spose it depends on how you define creation, from what i gather, your definition is the ability to bring something into this reality that didnt previously exist in it.

So I can interpret this two ways, that every moment is new, thus the completeness of the universe is continually becoming created and our perception of it updates at a similar speed. Thus the devine creature who makes the grass green is actually you, or your consciousness.

The other way i could argue is that you are correct and it is not possible to bring anything into this reality that does not exist as whatever you brought in would already be part of the universe, as per the definition of the universe as everything.

good question!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that we are capable of creating interpretations of or different thoughts on what already "is" there. The framework for these interpretations or thoughts from a visual standpoint depend on how much you have seen. It's like dream analysis etc. and how they are made up of what you have seen but mean something else for example. You only get out what you put in.

If you start messing with your senses and states of consciousness new images are starting to form which increase your visual vocabulary and interpretations of what "is".

Nothing comes from nothing. Everything that "is" already "is". How you are interpreting or observing that thing at that given moment in time is your creation. The originality of that creation is what makes us unique. The more tribal dependent among us see things how they're government and the media want them to see it and they become "citizens", some scratch the surface deeper and become free-thinking individuals, artists, shamans, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'r only capable of munipulating what we have, not in creation as in from nothing, something!

Only god can do that :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

I'l think on the LSD question and get back to you on that... Interesting point that diffrent states of consiencous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Everything that "is" already "is".

That is the logic I use to get around belief or the need to believe something which I cannot prove for certain. What is IS, regardless of my belief or not. This kind of simple realization sure helps me from having to make a decision one way or the other on things I cannot really prove out.

i.e. does God exist or not? What is IS, regardless of my beliefs.... I don't feel a need to decide or have faith etc., what is IS....

On the subject of creation, we obviously must be capable of creation, in slow baby steps, at least. This computer I am typing on wasn't anywhere close to being something we could probably have concieved 3000 years ago. It would have been either white or black magic to most people back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm had a small revelation last night of sorts.

If in the beginning, there was nothing, and God appeared from nothing

So even if there is a God, have the atheists been right all along?

Even if there is a God, there still exists that void or 'nothing' that God emerged from.

I think i feel myself pushing the boundaries of sanity sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff amigos :) I like what Shiva said about creating different interpretations on what already IS here and largely depending on what you have seen and or expereinced leads to a certain mode of perception and interpretation. I like to think WE are the deciding factor in everything we do as individuals within our power, to come to a new mode of establishing certain levels of perceptual awareness would it be necessary to reprogram in a way of speaking the somewaht outdated configuration we have been "taught" without choice since birth... creating new pathways with which to percieve and interact with the world at large on a more intimate level of co-operative understanding based on the new modes of thinking and acting and direct communication with other involved modes of awareness be it plants, rocks, people.. etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a strange one, believing that the statements that God exists and does not exist are both correct. The way I see it, God is in the eye of the beholder, nowhere else.

The above words I just posted might sound like I am being contradictory, but I don't see it that way. The all that is, on a quantum level, is One... I see the thing called "God" as that oneness but at the same time you can just call it physics instead of God.

I don't believe in the God religions are formed around but at the same time I still believe that the physics of the universe somehow allow some kind of conscious singularity which is aware of all its parts, that thing to me is God, to a scientist it is just reality. Although science hasn't reached the point where such is in the text books the way I see it, science is becoming more and more metaphysical every year, especially in the last five years.

The more science reviels about reality the more everything appears to be made up of consciousness itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We live in such exciting times :D

I'm glad I'm sharing it with like minded people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't believe in the God religions are formed around but at the same time I still believe that the physics of the universe somehow allow some kind of conscious singularity which is aware of all its parts, that thing to me is God, to a scientist it is just reality.

God is a centipede moving all of it's legs simultaneously, it is not conscious of it, just acts/reacts but not consciously directing each of these movements. Each individual limb has its own free will -in a sense although directed by the rythm of the greater body, the greater self from which all information flows, it does not know it is a part of the whole, and even when the connection is there through rope bridges or what have you, the limb is still not conscious of all other thoughts. Only that the source is the same for the whole body... the way i see it, what i mean is I'm not sure of a conscious singularity thing.. whatever the hell that means, but maybe oneday.. when we bridge all these conections and create some kind of... one mind type of reality.

...that has nothing to do with creation..

well it does i guess. I mean it all depends on signals from god or out of space or what have you.. we all get em all the time.. signals, what signals and from who depends on who we are and what we do... what ever the case.. bald people have poor antennas.. so i don't trust them, long hair is what acts as an antenna for signals from the cosmos, forget about the brain, just grow long hair and be a hippy, peace and love naturally follows cuz all the cool aliens like hippies and they send the good signals.

...the above retardedness aside. I like the analogy of the brain as an antenna for mind.... if mind is a transdimensional 'field' or what have you, then you could say it is aware of all possibilities across these dimensions, being a higher than 4th dimension thing it is timeless.

Visionary states seem timelss, sacred geometry and the makings of the universe being a common signal sent to us monkies in that state. I like the idea that with entheogens came increased creativity, that they could be an amplification of the mind field, the space signals.. the aliens talked to us more more when we're high okay, cuz aliens only talk to cool people.

They talk to ya when your sober too except you think its yourself thinking...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
God is a centipede moving all of it's legs simultaneously, it is not conscious of it, just acts/reacts but not consciously directing each of these movements. Each individual limb has its own free will -in a sense although directed by the rythm of the greater body, the greater self from which all information flows, it does not know it is a part of the whole, and even when the connection is there through rope bridges or what have you, the limb is still not conscious of all other thoughts. Only that the source is the same for the whole body... the way i see it, what i mean is I'm not sure of a conscious singularity thing.. whatever the hell that means, but maybe oneday.. when we bridge all these conections and create some kind of... one mind type of reality.

Very good stuff, and that long hair antenna thing, I'm doomed! balding and short hair for what is left, does my long beard help?

...They talk to ya when your sober too except you think its yourself thinking...

I've been wondering about that possibility for awhile now. I don't hear voices, but I think things which seem to be far beyond my individual realm of experience to come up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who defines that creation has to be something new? Its always been about regurtitation, re-interpretation and re-digestion. Everything and everyone is creative. 'Life is a canvas and art is filling it in', Brett Whiteley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I don't advise a haircut, man. All hairdressers are in the employment of the government. Hairs are your aerials. They pick up signals from the cosmos, and transmit them directly into the brain. This is the reason bald-headed men are uptight."

That's the quote i sodomised then feltched and spat back into these forums with my version of it.. in a way, thought it was funny. but yeah i guess that's a good case in point here, i cannot be creative, i just regurgitate old shit... hmmm.

But really what did we start off with? um.. we were monkies and this big mysterious who the fuck knows what goes boom your creative have some tools.. did we get raped by aliens who spliced our dna? did that big monolith thing do its space flight and land here to teach us monkees as in 2001 a space oddysey (most probably). Or did we stumble upon fungi... intergalactic fungi with mutagens altering our dna.. haha i dunno.

but my point is pretty simple, no duh we're creative look at all we've created.

...Nah, now I'm very confused by your question, haha what the hell man? there are soooo many creative people and things in the world.. and yes they're all in essense a reinterpretatiojn of the same thing, everything is derivative bla bla bla but everything is unique, every1 brings their own interpretation, and at times creates something entirely novel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm, its really open for debate i guess :D

by 'creation' i actually refer to something that never existed prior to it's inception; combinations of colors, shapes, textures, taste etc doesn't really count in this respect.

As far as our technological achievements have gone, we're still in a stage of infancy.

Everything we know has been derived from natural sources or invented to fit a purpose. Each step of so called 'creation' in this world has to be progressive, step by step, else it wouldn't make sense.

... and at times creates something entirely novel.

perhaps you could give me an example of something we've done thats novel? I really can't think of anything..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interpretations or representations are novel but is their any actual creation happening or is it just recreation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

old topic but how about this...

true and valid that nothing is new, all is recombination. this fits with idea that all things are one from a certain perspective.

also true that brand new combinations of things are possible, this fits with evolution and change.

i guess that every moment is a unique recombination of stuff never to be repeated, and life force is the engine of chaos/creativity that drives this pattern permutation, whereby things whirl and change and become new things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
old topic but how about this...

true and valid that nothing is new, all is recombination. this fits with idea that all things are one from a certain perspective.

also true that brand new combinations of things are possible, this fits with evolution and change.

i guess that every moment is a unique recombination of stuff never to be repeated, and life force is the engine of chaos/creativity that drives this pattern permutation, whereby things whirl and change and become new things.

That certainly holds water, I wonder if terrence mckenna was on to something with his novelty theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That certainly holds water, I wonder if terrence mckenna was on to something with his novelty theory.

dont know much about that, but i understand it has to do with novelty being a kind of tidal force, waxing and waning over time in a regular kind of way. if theres something to it then i'd wonder, what force is driving said novelty waves, as per the moon driving the tides...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×