body

Experimental proof of “immortality” of a human being’s Personality and its Consciousness as the basis for changing the vector of development of modern humankind in the future

Posted on by Mykola Krasnostup

Modern scientists claim that they have already determined the directions that will enable humanity to make a breakthrough into its radiant future: nanomaterials, smart houses, travelling to other planets, cloning various creatures, storing information in DNA-like media, artificial intelligence, robots and biorobots, studying ocean depths and the depths of Space…

I dare say that most of the state-of-the-art technologies created today are so significant that their creators may erroneously believe that it is the development of these technologies that will allow their owners to “rule ‘Our’ World” in the nearest future.

 But, from my point of view (and, unfortunately, not only mine), modern mankind currently has no future. All new technologies will only lead the modern mankind to collapse. The more revolutionary the new technology is, the faster it leads the modern humanity to the end.

It is not because these technologies are harmful, but solely because people use the fruits of any technological revolution primarily for such purposes as arms race, seizures of power, turning people into ‘zombies’, etc.

Invention of a wheel and a knife proved to be a much less dangerous technology for humans than creation of new viruses and bacteria, climate and chemical weapons over the past 100 years. And most importantly, the inventors (creators) of these technologies are not able to prevent such use in any way.

Many modern researchers realize the current situation and consider it to be hopeless so far, since up to the present there have not been found any acceptable solutions for mankind’s exit from its “nosedive” to death…

While investigating prospects for development of the mankind, I carried out many imaginary experiments, and as a result I “saw” the following main causes of this problem:

  • Cause #1: Most people consider themselves “the center of the Earth”, kind of “ kings of Nature” and don’t realize their true place in the hierarchy of the Universe. These earthlings honestly believe that they are at the top of the “food chain” and they can do whatever they want with complete impunity throughout their short life on the planet Earth.

  • Cause #2: People haven’t yet realized that a human being actually is a kind of an essence of field nature, which is “dressed” in a material body. This body is only a part of a human being, and it’s far from being the most essential one.  

The result obtained in this experiment clearly showed thatno technological improvements of human bodies and the environment of these bodies are able to change the people’s attitude towards the Nature (the Universe) and to all its inhabitants, including their own species…

That is why, it is not the body of a person that should be “altered” – it is, first of all, people’s worldview, way of thinking, meaning of their lives. Change of the outlook will automatically lead to replacement of current dominant values ​​(money, power, fame…) with new ones, such as harmonious relations with the objects of the Universe and with all its inhabitants. These new values will determine behavior of people and their social relations in the long run. On this basis, the direction of the modern mankind’s development will change automatically.

“You are looking into the interlocutor’s eyes and realize that a bag of meat and bones cannot radiate an intelligent look. You see the flesh, but you communicate with an invisible spiritual essence.”  Yuri Larichev, writer and philosopher

Obtaining a strictly scientific proof of immortality of a human Personality and its consciousness and disclosing it to the general public (by means of demonstrating so-called ‘miracles’) should become the cornerstone of this crucial task.

At present, due to the conservatism of the official science, even studies in these areas are considered absurd, and any publications on such topics in scientific journals are kind of a taboo and are considered “undesirable”…

“The consciousness, which is already transforming and organizing a hefty chunk of “our” solar system, is denied objective existence only because traditional science doesn’t know how to approach it, didn’t create an appropriate conceptual apparatus and scientific tools for its study, and it is in no hurry to correct these mistakes and to overcome the arising difficulties.”  George Somov, “Matter of Consciousness & Consciousness of Matter (Материя Сознания и Сознание Материи)“

This situation has led to the fact that even ‘crazy investors’ “do not see the advisability” of investments in this field. Investing in human development has become completely unprofitable, as the payback period can reach 30-60 years. Investors don’t realize that they themselves are blocking the most promising areas of investment in the history of “modern mankind”.

“If there is no immortality, then neither is the remorality: all is permitted.”  Vladimir Bekhterev,  “Immortality From the Scientific Point of View”

 “It sounded an excellent plan, no doubt, and very neatly and simply arranged; the only difficulty was, that she had not the smallest idea how to set about it…” Lewis Carroll, “Alice in Wonderland”

 I do have an idea how to.

Continue reading →

Vegans and vegetarians. What are all sufferings for?

Posted on by Mykola Krasnostup

I remember the words of my mother ever since I was little. She was a doctor and said if a seriously ill patient asks for a meat, then the illness comes to an end and the patient is going to do well. The desire of a seriously ill patient to eat a meat always was a signal that unequivocally claimed — the patient’s body is making progress, i.e. it is coming through an illness …

But in recent years the majority have become engrossed in vegetarianism, veganism, raw foodism, inedia, etc. Many people refuse a meat … Some people have already gnawed stools, lightbulbs, razor blades …

What is it? Fashion? The way to extinction of the humankind? What are the reasons to suffer? Many people explain their actions by a wide variety of motives: ethical, medical, religious, economic ones, etc.

I’ll try to answer these questions, because I haven’t found an acceptable answer on the Web yet.

The modern humankind, in its essence, is very heterogeneous and nutrition of people living in different parts of the planet, i.e. in different climatic conditions greatly differs from one another and if these groups of people exchange places of their living, they couldn’t even survive …

Look at people living on the shores of the Arctic Ocean, they eat raw fish and drink seal oil. Look at people who live in northern Africa, they eat acute food with a lot of camel and lamb oil (in Europe, human stomach stops functioning properly in a day or two). This list can be endless …

Of course, people have the right to experiment on their material bodies and eat whatever they want.

The representatives of the modern humankind are constantly trying something new: now they’re drinking only water, now trying to eat only plant food, then using only solar energy, then start eating insects only, etc. … The material bodies of people — like self-organizing objects — begin to adapt to all new forms of food. But in order to complete the process of adjusting the body to new types of nutrition, our material bodies need to evolve, and many future generations will be involved in this process. In the meantime, the experimentalists and their children will get sick and suffer … from indigestion and improper functioning of many elements (proteins, fats, carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals and micro elements) in their bodies that are necessary to support the vital functions of the material bodies.

BUT …

Mother Nature (the functioning algorithms of material bodies, the environment, the Universe, God) is interested in the widest food variety for people whose material bodies are able to take anything. But it’s impossible to create a perfect digestive system for swallowing metal and plastic, plants, meat, etc. It isn’t possible yet. But food diversity can greatly impact on the survival of all humankind in the future (the fall of meteorites and asteroids, volcanic eruptions, changes in the magnetic field of the planet …).

In the near future, people will be able to create the human material bodies with ability to digest anything. They’ll also create new genetically modified material bodies on the basis of genetic engineering … But the real situation looks a bit different until such creations aren’t available for a daily use.

The modern humankind should experiment with nutrition to survive in the future. So, the essential functioning algorithms of our material bodies are initially programmed to maintain similar experiments on food diversity as much as possible in principle … and they will contribute to such experiments in the future …

Maybe the earth “meaning of life” of all experimentalists — vegans, vegetarians, rawatarians, etc. — consists in creation of the material bodies with ability to digest something unique.

Everyone decides by himself whether it makes sense to take part in such experiments that lead at the first stage to sufferings and diseases of the material bodies …

That’s life …

P.S.

My tricky questions for vegans and vegetarians:

  • What do you feed your pets (dogs and cats) with?
  • Do you eat plants that consume the flesh of insects, birds or animals?
  • How do you differentiate carnivorous plants from all the rest?
  • Do such plants like wheat and rye refer to meat eating ones?
  • Do you know why there is a sticky liquid on the leaves of many plants? Are you ready to drink tea of a lime color?
  • 🙂

Continue reading →

Perception vs Receptivity vs Manifestation

Posted on by Mykola Krasnostup

COGNITION is a complex of processes, procedures and methods of acquisition of knowledge about phenomena and regularities of the objective World. A lot of special disciplines such as cognitive psychology, scientific methodology, history of science, Scientology, sociology of knowledge, etc. investigate cognition. However, most of these sciences study cognition, considering only certain aspects of it. On the whole, knowledge remains a special subject of philosophy study.

Let’s try to consider the COGNITION from another point of view – the point of view of the author of this article.

PERCEPTION (from Latin ‘perceptio’) is the simplest kind of cognition during which realizes ‘sensation’ of the World (in the broadest sense of this word). The discovery and differentiation processes take place in receptors of the body (flesh) and usually fall into perception. Theoretically, perception is the prerogative of any objects having a body (flesh).

RECEPTIVITY is more complicated kind of cognition during which one reflects earlier received perceptions (sensations) as objects, processes, phenomena. In a such way one formulates his own subjective understanding of the World. The identification and recognition (categorization) processes usually fall into receptivity. Theoretically, receptivity is the prerogative only of conscious objects.

 MANIFESTATION is the most pervasive kind of cognition during which one organizes perceptions one has received earlier into interdependent strings. These strings help someone to “see” cause-and-effect relations of the earlier perceived processes and phenomena of ‘our’ Universe. The thinking (speculation, using one’s brain help someone to use systematized information in his/her activity) usually fall into manifestation. Theoretically, manifestation is the prerogative of conscious Beings and Entities (they use consciousness in their activity, i.e. information they have systematized during cognition).

 

 Mental experiment №1. A fisherman at the pond.

The fishing rod with its line, buoy and hook can be considered as a peculiar device, “special equipment for the elongation of a fisherman hand” or “elongate arm prosthesis” with the help of which he can fish more successfully. This fisherman baited and tested the waters. Firstly, the fish (the observer in our case) senses a jig (perception), its brain reflected this jig on the hood as its favorite food (receptivity). But fish, as a rule, cannot think about what can be beyond this jig. It cannot realize that there is a fisherman, on whose rod this jig is fixed. Exactly this realization is a pervasive manifestation.

 

Mental experiment №2: A human being cognizes the World.

It is impossible to precisely identify a human being if basing only on his/her body parameters. A mere plastic operation and you will not recognize a human being you knew before. That’s why to solve this case a complex of BODY and PERSONALITY parameters are used, thanks to which every human being become an INDIVIDUUM. Individuum is the conventional name of a human being who possesses individuality, i.e. unique BODY and unique PERSONALITY.

When people assert that they know this “human” (to be more precise, a human being) it means that they identify this human being according to two interrelated components:

  • They know how the BODY of a human being in which the ENTITY of a human being incarnated looks like;
  • They know the PERSONALITY of this human being, which they associate with this body as a complex of his/her stable traits.

If only one of the mentioned above items will be changed, people will not recognize this human being (“human”).

It can happen if:

  • the BODY is changed (plastic operation, body injury, etc.);
  • the PERSONALITY of a human being is changed, by any reason the stable traits of the PERSONALITY change (a human being acquires new knowledge and aptitudes) or a human being have wasted his/her knowledge and aptitudes (which he/she had before).

Based on the mentioned above material, one can assert that people identify each other according to two interrelated components that are BODY and PERSONALITY of a human being.

But if the BODY is already formed during the birth, i.e. during child-bearing, then the moment when the PERSONALITY formation is unknown to many people.

The moment of the human being PERSONALITY formation is the moment of the “Self” (the ENTITY of a human being) incarnation into the BODY of a human being. This process is called CREATION (co-creation), because parents or partners participate in the creation of a human being. The completely different object under the conventional “SELF” or the ENTITY of a human being name deals with the creation of the PERSONALITY of a human being.

Here is the most interesting thing. People, as a rule, cannot “see” the ENTITY of a human being or their “Selves”, that’s why they resemble a fish the author described in the mentioned above mental experiment. But human beings differ from fishes by their ability to perform a pervasive king of cognition that is manifestation. With the help of thinking (speculation, using one’s brain) some PERSONALITIES of human beings recognize not only “themselves”, but also their place in the Universe…

 

© 2017, Helen Zhoglo, translation into English

 

Philosophy of Consciousness

Posted on by Mykola Krasnostup

In this article, the author gives definitions of such notions as consciousness, sub-consciousness, being and entity for any biological or non-biological objects. He also considers these notions in relation to computer systems. Different approaches to objective estimation of various objects’ consciousnesses are also suggested. Besides, the writer offers the way to determine the exact point when a conscious object turns into a being or an entity.

Additional Key Words and Phrases: Consciousness; Subconsciousness; Superconsciousness; Knowing; Cognition; Awareness; Manifestation; Body; Organism; Being; Creature; Entity; Evolution; Human; Life; Life Cycle; AI; Artificial Intelligence; Computer; Computer Program; Operation System; Application; Software; Computer Science; Information; Information Carrier, Information Storage; Data; Alphabet; ABC; Word; Sentence; Phrase; Language; Concept; Thought; Brain; Thinking; Conceptual Thinking;

 

1. INTRODUCTION

Disputes over the interpretation of such notions as consciousness, subconsciousness and a being have been taking place throughout the history of the so-called modern humankind and provoke people’s interest up to this day. Nowadays these debates have reached their climax.

Scientists from various research centers actively develop different structures (e.g. devices, robots, mechanisms, and so on), which, as they claim, possess artificial intelligence.

So, now – like never before – there is a need to formulate unified terminology and related nomenclature, which will be used within various areas of research, such as artificial intelligence, robotics, biocybernetics, computer systems, etc. It will help modern researchers to find a common language, which, in its turn, will contribute toward development of the technologies that will benefit the whole humankind.

I think that the future of the modern humankind is tightly intertwined with answers to such questions as “What are consciousness and subconsciousness?”, “What is a Being?”

This paper is devoted to finding answers to these questions.

 

2. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION

“There is a conceptual gap between science, which stands for objective measurement and the conclusions we can draw thereby, and consciousness, which is a synonym for subjective experience. We obviously cannot simply ask an entity in question, “Are you conscious?” If we look inside its “head,” biological or otherwise, to ascertain that, then we would have to make philosophical assumptions in determining what it is that we are looking for. The question as to whether or not an entity is conscious is therefore not a scientific one. Based on this, some observers go on to question whether consciousness itself has any basis in reality.” [1] Ray Kurzweil

“Proposals have been regularly presented that purport to be scientific theories linking consciousness to some measurable physical attribute — what Searle refers to as the “mechanism for causing consciousness.” [1] Ray Kurzweil

 “As British psychologist and writer Stuart Sutherland (1927–1998) wrote in the International Dictionary of Psychology, “Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon; it is impossible to specify what it is, what it does, or why it evolved.” [1] Ray Kurzweil

  Continue reading →

Philosophy of INCARNATION. Part #5. INCARNATION procedure. A Human Being and his “Self”

Posted on by Mykola Krasnostup

Thus, we take on writing of the long-awaited article that is devoted to the analysis of the most evasive part of a human being — his “Self”. Readers may conceive the information of this article like fantastic one. Therefore, it is strongly recommended for readers to follow the offered by the author materials in a strict sequence: from Part #1 to Part #5. It is all for a better understanding of this article information. It is with this sequence the author’s thoughts will be clear for readers and they could develop the full picture of the INCARNATION procedure.

The presented in the article materials give qualified radio engineers possibility to revise the author’s hypothesis and to confirm its veracity.

All information below is personal opinion of the author, i.e. point of view of the author’s PERSONALITY…

The author wrote more simply for readers better understanding of the information presented. He used all the terms in accordance with the notions that were mentioned in “The New Cosmic Philosophy” book series.

So, let’s get started.

The author published infographics of the installation process in his “Computer system and its ‘Self’” article. Any IT specialist says for sure that everything depicted there is “functional”, i.e. the part of depicted information is already “turned into reality” or can be “turned into reality” as soon as possible. Let’s try to transform a little bit this diagram by changing some of the devices for the new ones. In this case, the general view of the infographics and the general idea of the ENCARNATION procedure remain the same. Why it is so, the reader will find out at the end of the article.

And here is what we have:

 

Continue reading →