Ixthos

I'm hoping to do a post on this at some point in the future covering my thoughts on this, but basically I think Identity is the type of connection that spans realms and causes different "things" to be considered one thing in the Cognitive Realm - so basically every atom - or axi - that make up an object in the physical realm are joined together with Identity to form the bead or misty construct in the Cognitive Realm, and going on further to form a node in the Spiritual Realm that itself then contains connections to other nodes in the Spiritual Realm. Basically if you think of the three realms stacked on top of one another then Identity is the "vertical" connection that spans across realms, and Connection is the "horizontal" connection within the Spiritual Realm that can be seen mirrored down in the Cognitive and Physical Realm. Identity says two things are one, and are the reason individual axi become a single object in the Cognitive Realm, and Connection says two things are related but not the same.

That sounds like a plausible and cool method to try to get around being consumed. I don't know if it would work and I don't know if most people would be willing to risk it to try the method, but if it could be done I would enjoy seeing this done in the books, or at least attempted. What would also be interesting would be to see if, once you are connected to Nightblood in such a way, any Investiture Nightblood consumes would also flow into you, that while Nightblood absorbs Investiture if it suffuses everything that Nightblood considers to be a part of it.

1 hour ago, Thaidakar the Ghostblood said:

probably scream at how big my pocket is.

 

what would you do if you found a Shardblade with Dalinar's initials on it in your pocket?

Depending on whether the initials are in glyphs or the Latin alphabet ... probably keep it and try to revive the deadeye spren if it is a deadeye.

What would you do if you found [REDACTED] in your pocket, with [REDACTED] [REDACTED] attached, and a [REDACTED] in your pocket?

Just now, Thaidakar the Ghostblood said:

either let it bite more or throw it somewhere random.

what would you do if you found a copy of the Silmarillion in your pocket?

Return it to Valinor.

... Does anyone know where Valinor is?

What would you do if you found a spare copy of your favourite friend or family member in your pocket?

On 6/14/2022 at 11:26 AM, EmulatonStromenkiin said:

take it apart to see how it works.

What would you do if you found the museum of Cryptics in your pocket?

I'd ask them for a tour.

What would you do if you found a radioactive spider in your pocket?

2 hours ago, EmulatonStromenkiin said:

I would bury it in a pile of nuts and see what problems would arise that would prevent it from getting said nuts.

What would you do if you found a mechanical recycler in your pocket?

I would see if I could use it.

WWYDIYF a small accordion in your pocket?

1 hour ago, Chaos said:

Feel free to PM me, if you want, when you get a chance (I don't want this to be the Chaos show). But I will say that many people have tried to make the argument, and it generally doesn't feel convincing to me. 

Will do  it probably will only be in a couple of weeks, but I will endeavour to do that. Have a good one!

1 hour ago, EmulatonStromenkiin said:

Dump it in the sink, then wash out the cup.

WWYDIYF a virtual book in your pocket?

Make sure I had something to read it with.

WWYDIYF a small sabretoothed squirrel carrying an acorn IYP?

1 minute ago, Chaos said:

Sure, that's certainly possible, but God doesn't need to exist for that.

I guess my thought is: if God created everything, then that should literally be a mathematical requirement for physics to work. It should be in all sorts of observations. It should be more than me just needing to feel God is real. It should be as obvious as inherent physics facts like gravity. If God was real, He sure likes hiding His majesty and making things with very physical properties, making Him feel unnecessary. I don't know. I want to write a book series on what I think an intelligent designed planet would be and really dig into it, because I don't think it'd look anything like what we have. 

God hiding Himself yet also making Himself manifest is a point repeatedly mentioned in scripture, and actually ties into one of the (as I see it) design goals in creation, and is a topic I would like to get into (seriously, the list of topics I want to cover is growing enormously). Still, I'm afraid I don't see how the universe is now differs from one that was created - I mean, I could listen to a piece of music and say it was clearly designed, but someone else listening could say it is just natural sounds, the rhythm and beat not requiring an agent, etc. And indeed there are lots of things I could point to which I could argue to be signs of design, and which others could say are not, but I don't want to get too far ahead of this right now - I need to focus on getting the Seven Days of Creation post complete before I go too far down any other rabbit hole. Suffice it to say I believe I can make an argument for evidence for God's existence from observed phenomena as well as purely philosophical reasons tied to the logic of origins, but for now I'm going to try to get that first post done first; I'm letting myself get too distracted right now, though I'm glad this sort of discussion is happening  

@Nameless okay, I said I am going to cover this in the general religious discussion thread, but two things:

• Day 1 can't have been 24 hours by the pure logic of it - light was created as the start of that act of creation and the LIGHT was called day; day can't mean 24 hour period. It, and its pair with day 4, are all about the creation of time and means of measuring time, but day is used in the first instance of the word in the scriptures to refer to light, and therefore if taken literally it means the 12 hour period;
• If it is poetic then allusions to day and morning and evening are elements of its poetic structure; much like talking about one's love being a rose and referring to her thorns doesn't mean you really are talking about a rose and not a human

If you object to it being poetry - and I am going to make a strong case for it being poetry - why do you do so? It being poetic means evening and morning? Maybe - if this topic is going to be discussed further here - it might be best if you give our objections to the points I listed in my previous post here so I can mull them over in advance of the specific topic discussion.

Just now, Nameless said:

I've seen this perspective before, and I don't agree with it. I'll wait for your post in the other thread to discuss it.

Fair enough 

16 hours ago, EmulatonStromenkiin said:

Wish for a fish, and if that went wrong, wish that the monkey's paw had never been created.

WWYDIYF a full-sized television in your pocket?

See what channels it can pick up.

What would you do if you found a WWYDIYFIYP post in your pocket?

5 hours ago, Chaos said:

Sure, makes sense.

Well I'm happy to explain whatever. I think people don't need religion or God to be morally good (or, really, that "morally good" even needs to exist or be useful).

Humans are both incredibly special and incredibly mundane. Like, assuming there is no God--and I'd argue an omnipotent God would have obvious evidence literally everywhere, baked into the foundation of the universe, and that just doesn't seem to be the case--how amazing and special are we that the random chances that we developed in this tiny portion of the colossal universe? It's amazing! No one needs to save us; we have to do our work for ourselves, because there isn't going to be a planet B. But at the same time, eh, we are all just specks of dust compared to the grandeur of galaxies. Our sun will expand and destroy our planet eventually, and the universe's expansion will accelerate so much until no particle can ever interact with each other again. So no pressure; that's going to happen no matter what puny mortal decisions we make. What a fascinating dichotomy of awe and humbleness looking at the universe can give us.

There is a lot to unpack in that, as these points in and of themselves are worthy of detailed discussion (particularly on the nature of omnipotence, morality, and the point I fully agree on being how mundane yet awesome humans are), but if - for the moment - I could ask for elaboration on one particular point (though I would like to talk back and forth with you on the rest later and in more derail): what sort of evidence would there be if the universe was created vs if it wasn't and is undirected? A big part of analysing a design is also to ask what the intended function is and what constraints are on the design - with regards to this universe, what traits would you expect to see that aren't there if the universe was designed?

(Also, side note, but on us being mundane yet awesome, I am reminded of a few things, such as Pratchett's observation of man being where "the falling angel meeting the rising ape," and scripture's own notes on the dichotomy of man and our importance and unimportance, how we are truly liminal beings.)

2 minutes ago, Nameless said:

Well, Genesis 1:1 says "And there was evening and there was morning, the first day." I don't know why that'd be there if not to indicate that it was a literal day.

Oh boy, you're probably going to enjoy the discussion on this when I do my post in the general religious discussion thread on this, but in brief:

• The days of creation are written as a poem with a lot of poetic strucuture, and poems are usually not supposed to be taken literally - they also aren't teaching there were seven days to create but rather showing the order within creation in its poetic structure - it also matches a temple dedication ceremony (the last part being putting an image of the god in the temple - Mankind was made in God's image)
• Day seven is explicitly unending - all other days the narrative takes pains to ensure are listed as ending, whereas day seven is not - this point is continued in the Book of Hebrews
• (Side point: Only day six and day seven are "the" day, the rest are just "day")
• All the days together are explicitly referred to as one day in the very next section ("in the day God made Heaven and Earth" where Heaven is made on day 2 and Earth on day 3) showing the days are figurative
• Day is also used elsewhere as a general term for a period of time in scripture, and there are scriptures which state time to God is both shorter and longer than people perceive it - the account is also from God's perspective

That is it in brief, I'll be elaborating more on this when I get the post and diagram done

36 minutes ago, Chaos said:

@Ixthos I appreciate you writing this up, but I don't know. I certainly wouldn't say souls are a necessary way to think about consciousness and the body. I feel like there's going to be plenty of neuroscience we will eventually discover to find mundane explanations for all it all. But that's just me. And as a math person myself, though I know the math references and well know quantum mechanics and the use of imaginary numbers, I don't know if that's relevant or useful in here. Imaginary numbers were always a terrible name, that Descartes chose to basically mock them; they are just as real any other number. In any case, I think you're sort of going down your own metaphysical rabbit hole of things that may or may not be true. Lots of things could be true, of course, but how does one discern which is actually true? It's perfectly fine for you to believe this, of course, but I'm just saying that isn't a persuasive model to me. Though I don't think you intended to persuade, but merely explain how you see things.

I suppose I'd ascribe a lot of these miraculous coincidences are just random happenstance. That seems implausible, but there's tons of random events that happen all the time. Have enough of them, and crazy things are going to happen to someone in the world all the time, even if it's rare for an individual. Like how the probability of you in particular winning the lottery is basically nothing vs. someone winning the lottery (which is quite high). 

I don't mean to turn this into the "Chaos talks about atheism" hour, of course. I'm happy to answer questions of my beliefs if people are interested. If not, I'll stop talking! I feel like I've already said too much. 

No worries  as I said the point of that post wasn't to argue that they do exist, but to help explain my worldview and to hopefully make both the rest of the post - and subsequent discussions - make more sense in how relate to how I view things. These sorts of discussions are a marathon, rather than a sprint - like Paul in Athens as recorded in Acts 17, some said, "we will hear you again on this." Though I wouldn't object to us having a "Chaos talks about atheism" hour  this thread is just as much for atheists as for theists and deists, gnostics and agnostics, pagans and philosophers and pantheists.

For what its worth I believe there are good, verifiable reasons to believe in religion, and Christianity in particular (I often refer to this as the seven domains of evidence, where each domain is a different type and each is a collection of related pieces of evidence, where some are more compelling to some people while others are less, yet collectively work together to make an argument for Christianity), and there are multiple records - and testimonies online - of former atheists, particularly atheist scientists, who recount their journey to faith and what evidence convinced them. My post was mainly about presenting a framework of how, if taken to be true, the spirit world or worlds and the physical world can interact - later discussions can help add to that framework and show how it is supported.

Also, yeah, imaginary numbers are a terrible name - as though numbers in general aren't "imaginary" - though I have always liked complex numbers, as while it can sound a little offputting I like how, in the right context, they refer to a "complex" as in a combination of additional interconnected things, being real and imaginary. I suppose "real" should more accurately be called "realisable" as those numbers can "exist," but still I do agree. Of course, you can always argue that numbers are more real than matter (and there actually is a physicist who believes the universe actually is entirely made up of maths: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_universe_hypothesis) but that is an entirely different discussion  

5 minutes ago, The Wandering Wizard said:

Wonder why there's a wocket in my pocket in my pocket

What would you do if you found thing 1 in one pocket and thing 2 in your other pocket?

Call a doctor! (Seuss ...)

What would you do if you found a watch with a notch in some scotch with a blotch on a locket with a sprocket in your pocket?

39 minutes ago, The Wandering Wizard said:

Keep it and raise it.

What would you do if you found a snake egg in your pocket?

... keep it and raise it 

What would you do if you found a pocket in your pocket?

5 hours ago, Chaos said:

Time for me to jump into this, because I'm very curious about something for those of you who believe: what is a spiritual experience?

I'm an atheist, but was raised technically Christian. I say "technically" because my dad never opened his Bible and never took us to church. It was easy for me to fall away from religion, and it was unnecessary to my worldview. But I can truly say that I don't think I have ever had a spiritual experience in my life. I am married to the most incredible woman, I've seen gorgeous views in nature, all sorts of amazing things, but I couldn't say I ever felt anything spiritual in any of this, or anything.

I am genuinely fascinated with religion because I don't really understand it. I get it intellectually for a variety of reasons, but I feel like I completely lack the ability to comprehend what it's like. I think in my own fantasy works, I end up writing about religious characters because I like exploring this, even though I don't really get it myself.

I can't speak for everyone, and I am in many ways still learning and still gaining more understanding on this topic, as I believe everyone continues to learn as they grow, but I will try to answer. I apologise in advance if this gets a little long and rambly - a large part of this is trying to establish a common frame of reference.

Thinking about this question, I think there are three possible ways to approach it: is the question 1) what is the spirit world / how does it relate to our world, 2) why do you believe in spiritual things, or 3) what spiritual experiences have you had? Reading your question again, I think each is a valid way of interpreting the question, but the first one likely touches on the spirit of your question - and that phrase itself, "spirit of the question," is, I think, a great place to start.

I have a tendency to get bogged down in the weeds in discussions, and to go on semi-relevant tangents, especially on very open ended conversations - a boon or bane of the ADHD mind, I'm afraid - but I think a brief examination of the colloquially understood term for spirit - rather than the more mystically baggaged notions underlying that word that bring to mind ghosts, angels, and the explicitly supernatural - can help us get to a common root and reference frame to answer this question - and reference frame is again a useful term to use in this. Also, again, please bear in mind that I'm by no means an expert or professional theologian, and my understanding on this topic may or may not match what others in my faith and in other faiths would say on this topic, but I believe my view is still a robust one. It also will reference mathematics (so manifolds and complex numbers), phasor diagrams (via complex numbers), simulations, and a brief breakdown on the tripartite breakdown of humanity and the universe.

(Also please note that for the sake of brevity I'm not going to try to justify why the things I describe here are the case, as that would take too long. Rather if there is anything you would like me to elaborate on or justify afterwards I will be happy to do so.)

Spirit, like the word faithful, has a colloquial meaning that in many minds seems to be separated from its more esoteric meaning and root, but nevertheless still ties into it - faith in a Biblical sense is to be trustworthy and to trust in another's trustworthiness (hence faith in the Bible is not blind, but each "hero of the faith" is someone who had very good reasons to believe) which is why we get the term faithful; being faithful is to keep faith, to not betray a trust. Similarly with spirit - it is in essence the "breath," the wind, the essence of something - the spirit of a law is the essence of the law, what the law means. So spiritual fundamentally means looking at the foundation or root, something more essential than what is physical even if it, ironically, seems less substantial. Spirit is, fundamentally, the fundamentals, and what underlies more mundane things, yet can also manifest over it.

On the Body, Soul, and Spirit

Now this all may seem a little tangential to the topic, but it is important to understand for the explanation later what these things are and how they relate so as to better understand the main point later - namely that everything has a spiritual component, though some things are more spiritual without a physical medium, and others are physical and only partially touching the spiritual.

Of course, the above section can be seen entirely to be a physical manifestation of physical patterns - the soul is patterns in the brain, and the spirit as underlying principles to those patterns - no higher worlds are required. However it is when they display traits that go outside of physical principles and probabilities that things become more difficult to explain purely physically - these are entirely anecdotal and so obviously don't constitute the type of evidence that can be scientifically verified, but I've had and been granted insight into situations I couldn't possibly have known and which has left both myself and others stunned that I made certain observations or knew certain things, or said certain things which moved people in ways they didn't think possible (to give one example, when I was about eight I spoke to someone and they later told me that before that point they wanted to die - what I said convinced them to live). Another has been movement in my conscience to take certain actions or undo certain things I'd done before it was too later, feelings deeper in me than my emotions - which fully wanted to do those things or let them persist - that motivated me to act, and those actions turned out to be for the best, as well as a feeling of absolute serenity and calm in some situations when inside I knew what my emotions wanted to do and what would be a normal response (an anecdote from that time was when I was in high school I was slapped twice hard across the face by a fellow student because he felt insulted that I didn't want to enter a Mosque and my reasons when others kept pressing me to do so - and while I felt the slaps I didn't feel any anger towards him, nor was I upset he hit me, I only felt peace and sorry for the anger in him). And another has been answered prayers and things so incredibly unlikely, favour shown when it was not due and things working together so unexpectedly I almost didn't believe them having happened at the time, probabilities shifting and moving. These aren't powers I can call up at will, only experiences that show me - scientifically minded though I am - that there is more going on than purely physical phenomena, if only from the statistical unlikelihood of those evens, all taken together. Most of those events are deeply person experiences, and some I only dimly remember, but they stand as poles of personal experience, along with the intellectual reasoning I have for my faith, that encourage me and still leave me filled with wonder.

Those examples are the more subtle type of spiritual experience, as I feel there are at least three types (the omnipresent "background" level of spirituality that everyone experiences on a daily basis and doesn't notice, the "could just be coincidence" level mentioned above where highly unlikely but still theoretically possible events occur, and the outright miracles - i.e. the only way to explain them physically would be that everyone involved hallucinated). 

Now, I promised maths! Or at least how certain mathematical and computer science ideas relate to this topic. As this post is already getting long (and I realised I think my middle section just above here and below the first spoiler box where I recount some of my own experiences might actually have been more in line with what you asked) I'll try to truncate my response, and likewise put it in spoilers.

None of these examples are meant to prove this is the case, only to address how such things are valid ways of considering the relation between the physical and spiritual world, and without going into the moral dimension and Hume's Guillotine - I'm hoping later, after the Seven Days of Creation post is completed, to address the evidence for and logic behind the necessity for the Spirit World.

Anyhow, I hope this much longer than intended post was helpful! Please let me know if you would like me to elaborate on any point, or if I did successfully manage to answer your question 

I should be going to bed, but I remembered hearing a few years back a beautiful work of fan music that expanded on the in-setting music, "The Colour of Trust," which was also the name of the chapter is appeared in, and decided to give it a listen again. It really is a well written and clever expansion of the song as presented in Lord of Chaos. Listen here:

@Spook's biggest fan in all seriousness, why do you feel God - or any supernatural beings - would invalidate free will, or control you?

22 minutes ago, AFdooda said:

Worry if there are other tiny sentient people living about my person.

What would you do if you found a really big spider in your pocket?

I would name him - or her - Fernando, and raise it in a glass jar, or set it free.

What would you do if you found a phone number in your pocket? 

34 minutes ago, Nathrangking said:

Be shocked.

What would you do if you found Shaekspeare's first folio in you pocket?

 

First, make sure I'm not in an episode of Warehouse 13. Second, see if I can get it appraised and turned in to some museum.

What would you do if you found Syl in your pocket?

53 minutes ago, Some Random Spren said:

Probably keep it until i get proof that it isn't a metal that would just look similar. Once i knew it was lerasium, definitely eat it.

At least, that's what would happen if i recognize it from the description of lerasium. Probably would just treat it like normal metal if i didn't.

What would you do if you found a Scadrian medallion in your pocket?

Try to determine its metal first, to see what trait it corresponds to Feruchemically - otherwise try to tap it if it seems safe.

What would you do if you found nothing in your pocket?

19 minutes ago, Nathrangking said:

Probably discard it as I lack the stirmlight to use it.

What would you do if you found the one ring in your pocket?

We wants it, precccious!

... I mean ... I'd see if any eagles would be available to shorten my trip 

What would you do if you found a letter from Hogwarts in your pocket?

14 hours ago, NerdyAarakocra said:

What would you do if you found a slate with hieroglyphics on it in your pocket?

Go get it translated, or at least look up what the hieroglyphs mean

What would you do if you found a portal to the moon in your pocket?