Jenna Jameson Lesbian On Black Sofa

Digital

I do not think that there are some important "philosophical" reasons why it would be impossible to build a machine endowed with intelligence, including the ability to use natural language in the same way as we use it. You may even think that the machines performing simple algorithms can have an awareness that the implementation of simple instructions may be to them a simple "survival." Yet I believe that consciousness is a natural feature of simple physical processes. Similarly, I believe that the human brain is a biological computer - an extremely complicated, capricious, unpredictable, computer, however, not a "controlled intangible spirit of the relay signals." Hindu sages say that all is Brahman. If they were right, that would mean that, and the computer is Brahman. In what would it be worse? Conscious and intelligent computer may even possess free will, if the concept is understood as a feeling of compatibility of the decision of the value system is adopted. It can be humanly capricious and unpredictable. Theoretically, "may", however, between theory and practice gap opens sometimes impassable. Technical and theoretical problems that are facing the issue of artificial intelligence and the task of verification of hypotheses related to the "artificial" consciousness is in my view, enormous. On the problems of these, but some possibilities and I want to write some comments in today's entry.

Firstly, I think it is very important to make a distinction between intelligence and consciousness (or "awake", the ability to feel, to be subject of survival). Something like a cross between these two concepts to be aware of "higher order" linked to the rich associational structure, including - but not necessarily and not only - of language, semantics, and thus the backbone to express any thoughts, as well as aesthetics, ethics, etc. .. With it connects to our artistic sensitivity, sensitivity to the beauty of nature, to poetry, the beauty of mathematical formulas, the beauty of simplicity of proofs in mathematics and logic. This phenomenon of the human mind causes much confusion and is sometimes confused both with knowledge and with intelligence, meanwhile, although there is because of our intelligence and sensitivity, thanks to the richness of the structure of the human soul, he is content to "experience" rather than an actual experience. An example of confusion about the concepts of consciousness, intelligence, and "understanding" is a discussion around the famous "experiment devised" by John Searle (see "Chinese Room" ), where - in my opinion - everyone understood the concept differently polemicists, for which he had argue.
Some confuse it with the awareness of intelligence. They believe that conscious beings can only be equipped with intelligence and intelligent information processing that is always accompanied by consciousness. That need not be so, the easiest way we shall see when we notice that in a very intense and conscious way, we can live united in no way engaging our intelligence - physical pain, sexual arousal, 'animal' fear of appearing in a time of danger. If, in turn, we consider the enormity of complex calculations, which are carried out - for example - the brain of the host to provide a football striker in the penalty opponent and believe, that his whole attention is then focused on the movements of the goalkeeper, on the movements of the advancing defenders and the same shall be receiving the ball instinctively and out of consciousness, then we understand that the processing of information and awareness, not necessarily the same thing.
For example, the player to go back even further, presenting his own, very simple, but extremely technically difficult to verify the hypothesis concerning the nature of consciousness.

But let's start from the intelligentsia. In the 40 pioneer in computer technology, a prominent English mathematician and kryptoanalityk - Alan Turing proposed test that could show whether the machine, or rather performed by that program is or is not intelligent. This test would consist in placing in two separated areas: the computer has undergone a test in one man and moves in the second test. The tester does not know whether, in the second room is a man or a computer and using klawiaturowo - monitors "conversations" have it resolved. If he fails to recognize that, in the second room has a computer, then we say that the Turing test has been passed. This "behavioral" test seems to be methodologically correct. There is probably no other way to verify someone's intelligence (in this case is meant, as a capacity for reasoning in a human manner, in a manner appropriate intelligent people), and an interview with him and to examine the reasonableness of his speech. Although I do not deny nor the capability to build intelligent machines or the fact that about someone (something) intelligence to know we can only study it from "outside", I believe, however, that to the Turing Test to be considered credible, must be fulfilled several additional conditions, most important of which is one hundred percent effective during the "exam". If anyone manages to "break" mindset algorithm, then the person will be able to betray his "way" of other testers, and since then the machine does not pass the test any longer. Meanwhile, we recognize that intelligence is a trait that we can not lose, only because of something someone told on us. We understand it as a feature of "internal". For exactly the same reasons, the description of the test algorithm should be widely available. This stipulation clearly raises the bar for all aspiring to pass the Turing Test automata. Keep in mind that the intelligence of each algorithm should be constantly treated as a hypothetical. As the algorithm will take the next test, our belief in "truth" of his intelligence would of course increase, but if someone ever manage to "catch" it to the evident "inhuman stupidity", then it turns out that he was not smart never (! ), and not only when it is discovered. Scientific hypotheses and theories, including those which deal with the intelligence of specific machines, we can only forge. We can never carry their proof - unless we describe the nature of human intelligence and prove mathematical theorems in the form - but I think this idea as crazy. Probably
intelligent machine will have to have human connotations, and it is unknown whether this can be achieved not by taking part in the human good and bad - in the suffering, humiliation, pain, weakness, ułomnościach, shame, pride, ambition, triumph, pleasure, joy, satisfaction , surprise, a variation of what life brings. Is the humor, irony, malice, or betray our humanity mistakes, slips of the tongue, errors in general are possible without a lot of wealth born of the experience?

now come to consciousness. I believe, or at least close to this I am to believe that consciousness is accompanied by all the physical processes taking place in the universe, that it is somehow a fundamental property of existence. And that is why we speak of artificial consciousness is the same misconception as to talk about "artificial electron." It may seem that he deny what I wrote a few paragraphs above about piłkarzu "unconsciously," the host application. Contradiction however, disappears when we notice that in order consciousness could "demonstrate" that could "testify about myself," must be accompanied by memorizing survival. Experience, which has not been saved anywhere immediately "dies" and verify that it occurred that it was "conscious", it becomes impossible. When our football, even as he learned to master the avatar given away the ball, these exercises focus on all of his attention. Then, each receiving the ball had been aware of. Once this technique has been assimilated, the player did not have longer focus on the parties. He did not need them anymore, "remember" and so they started to disappear from his consciousness. Notice that the word "his" there is no sense only in the context of a specific human memory. That memory is the only glue "I", the only factor that separates the self from the rest of existence. "I", this (or that), who remembers my experiences, and who (or what) can remember them.
My hypothesis assumes that any algorithm capable of storing any simple event, and also for reference to what is remembered is at the time of such a process in a simple way conscious. This hypothesis seems difficult to challenge on the grounds of logic alone, and perhaps sometime in the distant future, we will be able to falsify it, or made more credible by some experiment. Verifying this hypothesis, however, will connect more with carrying out experiments on humans, not machines, because people just are beyond doubt aware. If ever our knowledge about the brain and technology have gone far enough that we can "protein" survival memorize in silicon and silicon experience to remember in the "protein", perhaps uprawdopodobnimy hypothesis that the silicon is capable of "inner experience" and that the content of consciousness may be something very simple, separate from the context of human experience.

Some fear that the emergence of intelligent and conscious machines will entail enormous, difficult to predict ethical problems. I do not agree with that. Even if the machine will create a truly and humanly intelligent, conscious, which has even some digital feelings her "personality" will almost certainly very different kind than ours. Easier for me to imagine that we will in some way "more than" than it would be "human" without participation in experiences such as humiliation after losing a fight, the joy of winning the match and the smell of their sweat, as awareness of the coming of old age and fear of death . While we can succeed in understanding it, will never feel the same way as we do. Creation of "standing in the server" machine with a higher intelligence than our own will almost certainly be technically easier than building an android which we give to human fate. With this machine, it will not unite us no biological relationship: it will be the "other species" and a million times more "different" than any other animal species living on Earth.

Although it is "theoretically possible", is "artificial man" ever actually built?
In the seventies, after a decade of success in the conquest of space around the Earth, after a few landings on the moon man, it seemed that the era of tackling more areas of the universe, flight to the stars, or at least mass manned spaceflight vessels for further planets of the Solar System will inevitably come - if not in the twentieth century, at least in the early twenty-first century. We already know that this was not true. Not true, not only because it became too difficult technically, but also because it turned out to be simply unaffordable. Instead of flights to Mars but we have satellite television, personal computers in almost every home, internet, mobile phones. Technology development went in the direction of providing what is perhaps less glamorous, but more useful and easier to achieve. Why should we seek to force the bestowal of computers, human intelligence, since their "inhuman" data processing speed can be useful to us much more if we use it in another way? Today celebrated successes of artificial intelligence in any way, do not take the machine to imitate the way human reasoning. And the path goes rather further development of information technology, and project sponsors picking itself the goal of full "humanization" of the machine will find smarter ways to invest money.

Birthday Invitation Cool

Nju David Gerard cz. 3 - A few advantages

Despite all his dislike of the New Age Movement, the two components his ideology I consider valuable and worth commended. I am pleased that AT using its popularizing potential, contributes to their spread. My point here about antydualistyczny aspect of monistic philosophy and affirmative, respectful relationship and fascination with the myths.

Monism NA is the philosophy by which everything that exists is an emanation of one of the basic existence: God, the Absolute, the matter (it can be treated differently.) Spirit and matter are just different ways of manifestation of existence, are its "properties". Monism is so fundamentally antithetical dualism (and therefore my definition to exclude from the phenomenon of all varieties of Gnosticism). Matter, as an emanation (manifestation) of God is good. Nature is good, is "holy".
An important consequence of that interpretation is precisely the rejection of monism and dualism, and so the idea that horrible (in my opinion) weighed on the whole European tradition of philosophical and theological. View, the obvious consequence was desacralization nature, acceptance of the concept of nature-machine, and consequently contribute to the birth of the concept of man-machine and atheistic materialism. It is easy to trace the development of European thought, which led from the dualistic theology of Descartes and Newton to Pierre-Simon Laplace and La Mettriemu, and then also by Darwin to Dawkinsowi.

dualism, however, exhausted. Destroyed it the same currents of thought which, to some extent, were the least consequence. The development of science and physicalism subsequent forced us to look at psychic phenomena (or spiritual), as a natural (though unexplained, and perhaps even niewyjaśnialnych) features of matter, with which we are weaving. Forced to recognize that every physical phenomenon has its source in another physical phenomenon, removing the non-existence is the supernatural. Illuminated physicalism duality, opposing matter spirit, or even the information was simply a logical error. It became clear that the only way there are information states of physical objects. The only means of reading or writing - the physical processes. Finally, the only way the existence of psychic phenomena is their background material (the brain, or - perhaps - another material object.) In addition, the laws of nature, no matter which do not hold any meaning, simply can not exist. Because if there is no Coulomb's law, at least two loads? For the spirit - beyond matter - I just ran out of space. Semantic Change that followed, she was something quite natural: instead of God - the laws of nature, instead of the soul - the psyche, because neither the deterministic mechanism of the universe, or of woven material, gelatinous machine hidden under the cover of a human skull no longer deserved - as it was - any lofty terms. Pogardzaliśmy matter (the belief that we are equipped with an independent element of it) and we got exactly what we deserved - we began to despise each other.

However, as the nineteenth century dualism eventually buried and allowed Nietzsche to announce the death of God, so the twentieth century, mainly due to discoveries of quantum physics, buried in a definitive way mechanism. It turned out that nature does not, however, is a "big clock", filmed by the "blind watchmaker," but rather "the organism" in the traditional sense of the term. Nature proved to be capricious, and returned it to the capriciousness of the mystery and majesty. And so the death of mechanism has created a chance for the "resurrection of God": the resurrection of nature. Also, the brain, as subject to unpredictable laws of nature, ceased to be a chemical razor. Subjective experience of our own fickleness was consistent with the description of the operation world and ourselves. Back to the naming of brain function the soul became fully justified. These possibilities
njuejdżowcy saw (do not they indeed the first) and praise them for it. Today, in fact, after the death of dualism, and conceptual revolution which took place under the influence of science, "Spirit of the Earth download, embedding it in the matter, and respirytualizacja resakralizacja nature, are probably the only chance to rebuild any credible conception of God. Concept matching at least the language, which we use today. It also noted the considerable group of Catholic thinkers (Even before the war de Chardin, Raimon Panikkar and then, a priest in Poland Gruss with his concept of Christian materialism, and many others), but - unfortunately - these views are not always met with acclaim. Treating nature as a "body" of God wipes out because of pantheism, and that (for reasons not entirely clear to me) always treated as a dangerous heresy. But "substantive" God does not necessarily have to be an impersonal "cosmic energy" njuejdżu, the God of the philosophers, Jaspersowską "transcendence." It may also be a personal God that interferes in the history of the world, taking care man and loving it. Only now, however, so we can see him, because God is beyond the remainder of the world could only "do not exist."

seems to me, moreover, that already in the nineteenth century there was a chance for "the breath of spirit in nature", mechanistic chance to overcome the consequences of mechanism. This missed opportunity has been known at least since the Middle Ages the idea of \u200b\u200binfinity of the universe. The idea that each element - remaining after the interaction with "the rest of the infinite" - has done an unpredictable (and so capricious). Emphasize that a person and regain the majesty of nature, not by free will, not by raising up, and with fickleness (volatility), which is a condition of secrecy. This mystery of the world produces the distance between any - even mechanistic - his model, and its images with reality. Thanks to the mystery of consciousness, confusion of the world with his idealized image becomes more difficult. And that is what the world, not ideas, it is true.


Another valuable feature in my opinion, ideology, NA is an affirmation of myths, and therefore the recognition of psychological and spiritual wisdom inherent in the mythologies and legends of cultures, both advanced as well as those known as "primitive." It is associated primarily with the names of the two "precursor of New Age" (as fans call them supporters of the Movement): Carl Gustav Jung, Swiss psychiatrist, student and friend of Sigmund Freud, who tried to build his own philosophy, or maybe even a religion, and so important for me, Joseph Campbell - an excellent popularizer of knowledge about the myths, the author of several best-selling books, also known by the wonderful series of television programs ("The Power of Myth"), available online today in many places in the network, which subsequently appeared in book form (translated into Polish and published by "Mark").
I Campell (and perhaps also Eliade) helped me understand the role of myths in our lives. He showed how myths reveal the hidden truths about ourselves, how to talk about our passions, ułomnościach, subconscious mechanisms for guiding our behavior, how to show us how to escape from life's pitfalls, how to shape the whole of human culture, as - in unconscious ways - shape the mentality of even those who say that none of the myths do not believe how much we lose if we reject the myths, as a "fabrication" and how inevitably - we do not know about it - then replace them with quasi-myths and superstitions, however, no longer carrying any substantial content . I am also persuaded by their depth, which never quite recognize, because it leads to "ultimate transcendent reality."
In this context, the natural question becomes, what should be for the Christian Scriptures? "Seer of God" textbook history, astronomy, biology? Or, rather, a story that using the language of myth tells an important truth about our soul, the meaning of our existence, a right relationship with God and our neighbors? In the first sense it is nothing really important, much less credible. Sublimity and importance for us can recover only as a myth - which of course does not necessarily imply the rejection of belief in the historical authenticity of some or all of the events described in it. I recognize the Bible as a myth can force us to accept it humbly and holistically. Any attempt to "historical" or "scientific" explanation of his message, all "demitologizacje" For example, rejection of the ascension, and the adoption of the crucifixion, are simply absurd, because there is historicity really are important. Humility and is also a consensus that the ultimate truth, which is to be given to us as described hiding, we will never be able to understand his mind, because the myth than what is reasonable. It is also recognized for any misunderstanding of theology, but also a chance for a more peaceful, tolerant religion.
emphasizes that this philosophy is the most effective, you can imagine, a shield against these attacks on Christianity, which as a method Action adopted rozmijania showing the description contained in the Bible to historical truth (or more generally with science.) Its adoption is needed, however, rehabilitation of the notion of myth, and this is not possible without the simultaneous recognition of the size of pagan myths.

Van Gogh Das Gelbe Haus

Nju David Gerard cz. 2 - criticism criticism Criticism and David Gerard

I am a strong conservative (let it be that postkonserwatystą), Catholic (perhaps heretical, but Catholic) and the rationalist (though conscious that reason will never give us answers to all the relevant questions). Therefore, the movement, which on its banners is bordered with relativism openness, which undermine the existence of representatives of the duties of man to any community, a movement that rejects Christ, who rejects the idea of \u200b\u200ba personal God, a movement that is based on which the denial of common sense belief in progress and the imminent arrival of a new great era, a movement that in one way or in any way connected with the spread in the world's most peculiar superstitions, cherish dislike, or at least wary distance. My biggest dislike
raise two of the "pillars" njuejdżu, which I wrote a week ago and so the "openness" and belief in the imminent advent of a new better era.
It is true that "openness" NAM, as a moderate, is the recognition that in any spiritual or philosophical tradition is part of the hidden truth about the world, about God, about the meaning of existence. This view - true or false, is certainly natural, and I'm even willing to admit he was right. Its prevalence is even some practical advantages - for example, can facilitate community building in multicultural political organisms. The more radical version - and probably more widespread - "openness" adopted by the followers of the Age of Aquarius, it is recognition of all virtue, views systems as equally true and this attitude associated with relativism, often moral. A man who decides what is right and wrong, there is no obligation to anyone. Such beliefs are obviously destructive to any community, and their only advantage that I see, is that they are equally destructive to the movement of NA, completely preventing him from permanent root in any society. Historical
optimism NA, is a belief in the imminent arrival of a new better era in the history of humanity (or the belief that this era there was already) When any historical conflict in definitively disappear, and the world embrace universal love, tolerance and brotherhood, and when science is finally reconciled with religion. This belief is clearly naive, and shows that the followers of the Aquarian Age can not accept the wisdom sometimes even their "gurus" such as Aldous Huxley, who warned that the upcoming Brave New World is more likely to be technocratic nightmare, and not the epoch "deeper spirituality."

NA, as a Western phenomenon, is often criticized the Christian position. Criticism of the items atheist mainly associated with the Movement of irrational elements, such as the occult, and faith in a variety of superstitions, and in fact overlaps with the criticism of Christianity. The drop-criticism by the Christian environment, but the arguments with which I agree, but there are elements, in my opinion, totally irrelevant.

First, it is true that the U.S. is a conspiracy aimed at destroying Christianity. RNE was born and became popular in environments far removed from Christianity, indifferent to him, and not hostile. Cases that It attracts a practicing Christian, if at all, they are certainly very rare. There is therefore no compelling reason to doubt that arose as a reaction to the spiritual void postchrześcijańskiej fact, the long dominant in Europe and among American intelligence atheism, agnosticism, materialism.

Secondly, it is not the occult, which is hidden "behind the facade of harmless topics." NAM is a multi-threaded. Besides its main pillars, which I tried to extract the previous entry, consisting of the phenomenon are independent of each other: the occult is not necessarily linked - and often do not mix - the ecology, feminist critique of dualism, or praise tolerance.

Thirdly, it is not true widespread assertion that the New Age, it's just an old, known for centuries a competitor of Christianity - the gnosis, which is sold at most in new packaging. NA, in its basic assumptions is monistic and is opposed to the most important of the Gnostic tenets - dualism. There is no division in the NA on the wrong material and good spirit, because spirit and matter are like two sides of the same coin. For njuejdżowców matter is good, which indeed implies the characteristic of the ecological sensitivity of the Movement. Both the specific "openness" and an affirmation of the myths and religions of primitive peoples, the ancient Gnostics were foreign, and even hard to say that they were close to the ideas of "ezoterykom" late nineteenth and early twentieth century, which, moreover, to classical Gnosticism was very far away, and who alleged "hidden tradition" only able to discern in the great religious systems of Europe and Asia. Of New Age, so it is largely indeed "new", though it often tries to strengthen their impact, through reliance on selected elements of the old traditions or very old.

underscores that the treatment of monism and the related opposition to dualism, as the main determinant of NAM is entirely justified. The vast majority of the leaders of the Movement has just laid down the order. Most indicated they were precursors ON monistami or critics of the dualistic way of explaining spiritual phenomena. The most prominent Polish expert on the topic - Bartholomew Dobroczynski stresses that the treatment of self, of individuality, as an illusion, is one of the most important foundations of the New Age philosophy. Similarly, most researchers claim phenomenon, the texts read. Gnostics among those identified (it is not known whether rightly) of the New Age Movement are a small minority.
This approach may, however, raise some doubt. Yet consistent recognition of monism, as an indicator of NA, kazałoby off from it all who believe in reincarnation. Those who believe that the soul is independent from the body form of being, which in the physical body can be "embodied." Such faith is of course a classic dualistic and it can not be reconciled with any monism. At the same time Yet, just the belief in reincarnation is very common among those admitting to NA. I think that reincarnation is to be regarded as a myth and showing me the truth close to that "other people are also us" that there is "only one man in the billions of lives" that the individual self is an illusion. Literally understood reincarnation is so that "monism for the little ones, something analogous to medieval notions of the European populace that story about hell and pitch forks, or celestial palaces treated literally in the clouds. The belief in reincarnation belongs to the realm of New Age Movement low.

Does Person Have Cervical Mucus Before Periods

Nju part. 1 - Definition

In three entries - today, to be an introduction and two more, I decided to share his thoughts on a few misunderstandings related nujuejdżem, which I continue to call the NA, the New Age Movement, Movement, New Age English Movement (NAM) and sometimes the Aquarian Age Movement.
Without introduction, in which I explain how I understand the same phenomenon of what I write could be misunderstood. And it comes to really important matters.

subject which I wish to write definition causes problems. In fact, quite reasonably could conclude that such a thing as New Age Movement is simply not there. There is no, at least partially coherent religious movement, intellectual, social or spiritual, which would include all the phenomena known as such by its critics as well as by supporters. Between the preachers of various monistic philosophy, between the scientists and philosophers trying to describe such phenomena as consciousness, self and free will, which differs from the traditional interpretation of the Christian churches and supporters various superstitions, "alternative" forms of medicine, astrology and other divination techniques, yet there is often no "point of contact." If - as it wants to Robert Tekieli - will attach to all lovers of the eastern U.S. schools fight karate, judo, aikido, or yogis, vegetarians, water diviners, the rise of horribly blurred picture.
To complicate matters, that we the supporters and leaders of the Movement, as its precursor show a person in the views which - even with the best will - it is really hard to find any spiritual or intellectual "common denominator". What is to combines Carl Gustav Jung and Joseph Campbell with David Bohm, Werner Heisenberg, or Alfred Whitehead? What these last lines of Madame Blavatsky and Rudolf Steiner, or? What about DH Lawrence, Aldous Huxley, or William Blake?
need a more precise definition of the movement than the one that says, for example, it covers everything that you do not like Robert Tekieli. It is also not satisfactory - though certainly a bit more precise - a definition that the U.S. recognizes what she liked Ms. Ferguson or what do you like Capra. However, neither the leaders nor the opponents of the New Age Movement is unwilling or unable to help you determine What really is ON.

For the purposes of this post so I did as the broad definition of NAM, knowing that it will exclude many of which are sometimes as njuejdżowców sets.
njuejdżem So I called the set of phenomena on the borderline of spirituality, religion, philosophy and culture (especially popular culture), the basic - the representative of the vast majority of leaders and followers - are determinants:
• monism • affirmation of the myths

• openness
• naive historical optimism.
In further entries accurately explain how to understand these concepts.

course, one might add, and other determinants of the Movement, such as general fascination with the Orient, environmentalism, feminism (but peculiar, njuejdżowy feminism), emphasizing the need to man's spiritual self-improvement (and sometimes touching on faith in the possibility of some form of "self-salvation"), obsessed with point diet (kosher or as if new, even for non-Jews), but they will be even more distinguishing features simplistic definition, and using less specific and probably not very interesting.
important and worth mentioning is that the NA is a Western phenomenon (occurring in America and Europe).
Within NA, there are two levels: high and low - esoteric and exoteric - the competent intellectuals and competent masses. The first is the variety of concepts (or maybe ideas) philosophy (or the borderline of philosophy and other fields of physics, anthropology, religious studies, psychology), characteristic of the NA. For this second level are all practices of divination, astrology, occultism or, like the belief in amulets, homeopathy and other forms of "alternative medicine" or the belief in reincarnation. The next two entries I want to focus more on this "high" level of the second, only mention.
NA is a syncretic - combines elements of various (often contradictory) systems. The conflict of tradition, of which only selected elements, moreover, need not necessarily lead to a contradiction of their synthesis, therefore, I would not do this syncretism objection to the NAM.
important and which is the strength of the New Age Movement is that it is commercial traffic, and thus self-financing. This definition

NAM seems very good - covers the vast majority of both phenomena associated with the Movement and those who could be regarded as its representatives or leaders, left outside the margin of those who are confident and so could not really identify with him. There also creates an internal conflict that could become a basis to challenge any court of the phenomenon. It is precise enough to be a starting point for further discussion.
Its adoption means the recognition that the yogis, karate, judokas, dowsers, or followers of astrology, numerology, divination from the flight of birds, coffee or tea leaves from tea leaves from tea, supporters of homeopathy, Chinese medicine, Thai, Columbian, space, or any other, can be regarded as only njuejdżowców when they identify with the philosophy of monism, or at least to some myth illustrating this philosophy, if you curious about their pagan beliefs, myths and legends, and proclaim their wisdom, if you often repeat the word "Tolerance" (uppercase!) and stress that every way of life Each belief is somehow excusable if finally proclaim belief that the world is entering a new era of greater depth of spirituality. However, if either of these criteria do not comply, then the Yogis are plain, judokami, kabalistami, astrologers, or philo-homeopaths.

Africain Skirt Called

"Tsar orphans' Summa

In early July, in the intervals between parties it, the tournaments rozgrywanymi LSG read another novel Volkov - "Tsar orphans." Of course, previously read: excellent "Assembly", "Guest pope" and "Conspiracy" (the latter perhaps a little weaker than the previous ones), I liked it. "Tsar orphans' came out, however, the decisive lead among the books off the shelf "Recommended by the Fronde, and Christendom." Well, I decided to talk about "why."

But after the turn. Two parallel threads on the pages of the book are set in eras are just a few generations. The first modern, in late December 1991 when the Soviet Union officially ceased to exist and the Bolshevik flag on the building of the embassy in Paris were replaced by Russian. The second (main) in the years that immediately preceded the Bolshevik Revolution and beyond, reaching the spring of 1918.

In the "historical" Tsar orphans "is the story about the crime, but not about the crimes of communists made in the tsarist family (as suggested by the text of the closing book of Peter Semki, which is likely the story at most przekartkował Volkova, accidentally hitting on the one page in a book that talked about the last moments of Nicholas II and his family) and above all, a crime which he did on the car the Russian nation by announcing in March 1917 his abdication. Crimes, which pulled the most devastating disaster in Russia in its history - genocidal, killing souls, truly diabolical communism.
find prosecution is also the last czar and other disastrous political mistakes: about pulling a poor, inner turmoil engulfed Russia in the First World War, by failing to withdraw from this war, even in the face of growing unrest, popular movements and revolutionary, and finally the indulgence for conspiring revolutionaries whose structure has yet figured out exactly Ochrana.
these errors, except umiałby Volkov Tsar forgive. Abdication, however, a felony with a completely different dimension. This breach of the elusive, extremely subtle (metaphysical?) Order, which destroy Nicholas II had no right (riots, the will of the Duma, there could be no excuse after all), so one of the heroines of the book, on hearing of her announcement she exclaimed to her friends: "How could he! After all, in its own way a good man, intelligent. He was anointed! Authority can be waived, but not the anointing. Otherwise, the anointing, it's just a farce. How he redeems this betrayal? God will not forgive it to him. Predict his terrible suffering, he and his family, because a person is unable to atone for such perfidy. "
And so the "Tsar orphans", is primarily a story about the consequences of the abdication of Nicholas II. About the terrible suffering that has come to the best, most faithful sons of Russia, brutally murdered and tortured by the Cheka and the Krasno-guards. About suffering, which was the harbinger of suffering all over the Russian nation and neighboring nations. A novel about the horrific consequences of cowardice, a ruler who did not want to carry on his shoulders rests the burden. Przeczuwanych consequences, even by the enemies of revolution, such as one of the main characters of the novel, Volodya Psara leftist Democrat, who heard about the abdication of Tsar "although his views have not changed iota, he saw suddenly jumped back as one of the great bolts of the world: Russia completed the holy life and have no way confronts Antichrist. The twentieth century is the century the Red Beast ".

thread in the contemporary novel is a project aimed Volkov today to make (as postulated by Solzhenitsyn's spirit of forgiveness), the great Russian national reconciliation. Reconciliation, which is possible due to some grasp of the blood community, a community of a thousand history and language, and also by ordinary human love (the love between people of the same family or between woman and man, as the KGB-sta Sergo, a great-granddaughter of a Russian emigrant Uirko).

are most important, however, these conversations, speeches heroes novels (easily recognize them), whose historical reference is just an illustration of what the same. There are more thoughtfulness about the nature of power, over its religious dimension, on its severity, or on the border between the cruelty and brutality necessary. The consequences of abandonment of violence (against which the well-known aphorism Junger warns that "the vegetarians come cannibals"). We find a clear allusion to the contemporary, dying on the "disease of human rights" in Europe. We will find the philosophical discourse and ideas, which "have consequences." Volkov using well-known literary trick, he puts in the mouth of arguing with each character's views, which means, with which even the match, despite their mutual contradiction. He has the luxury of being a writer, not a philosopher. So maybe to show reality in its many aspects, fully and truthfully, but not to impossible to achieve with accuracy. It puts more questions than it answers. And put them here more than in all his other novels that I read, combined.

also found in the "imperial orphans" something very "my". When Uirko and Sergo return to Paris with the cemetery located on the outskirts of the meeting between the conversation:

" - When I look at the street jam - Uirko said - you'd better understand that individual's life is only a pretense. In fact, since there is always only one man. The man embodied in the billions of people, but always the same. I guess I talk about this in the myths of Adam and Jesus. Adam was the only man led us to collapse, he was the only man saved us. So you need to interpret the mystery of Holy Communion. We join with the body and blood of one man and become him. [...]

- You said 'the myth of Adam'. Do you believe in this story?
- I believe. As in the myth. [...]

- I am awed by you. I thought that Christians are bound to believe in such things. - Threw a number one - well, maybe it is easier to be a Christian than I thought.
- It is not easy. But if you think that makes us believe in bajdy, then you are mistaken ... "

After I wrote about this in his last year's entry October. Do not know if Volkov is right that such a belief is incompatible with Christianity, it is not just a simple heresy, but what made me happy that I found another person who understands what is so important to me.

Church Donation Letter Requests

nontheologic

today to clarify misunderstandings that trigger my entries on some online forums, misunderstanding, which led to my speech during the earlier and subsequent meetings with colleagues instead of the usual entry in the blog I decided to put a general synthesis of their own beliefs - creed on 4 January 2009. And so:

• Following a number of the most prominent anthropologists of the twentieth century and religioznawcami acknowledge that the myths of all systems except the religious language of poetry telling the truth deep psychological, sociological and spiritual. They teach inner harmony and harmony with the world and society, prepare to the challenges, the stages of human life brings: puberty, marriage, parenthood, old age and finally death. It is not true that they were preparing for death, suggesting the mendacious promise of eternal life - they're just in a poetic way indicate this aspect of our existence, which really is immortal (the immortality of my entry of October). Myths allow us to touch that part of reality, the language of science, nor the language of prose "never failed to describe. Their role was never a meeting (not very important for most people), or the astronomical nature of cognitive curiosity, telling about the creation of the world, animals, our species, etc.. Their role has always been social, psychological and spiritual. Cosmogony appeared in them in order to show the eternity, immutability and power depicted rights. Myths and parables of the great religious systems: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism, mazdaizmu also carry profound philosophical content.
• myth presented in Genesis is not for me or more important, or more beautiful than many other myths, however, is the most I I "tamed." Its literal reading ever - even during najżarliwszej faith - I considered the idea absurd.
• Fundamentalism harm to the truth, and that (contrary to Dostoyevsky's famous declaration) should be for us more important than any konfesyjności (Weil). I do not believe, moreover, that the true faith would be reached by closing their eyes to reality. Fundamentalism harm the religion itself, because it discourages people internally honest. Sam, I can not believe in anything, when the mind screams to me "is not true."
• Prayer and rhythm are key elements of spiritual practice - are direct contact with the reality of the myth, and thus indirectly (and perhaps direct) contact with the one reality which gives our lives any meaning. Develop character and spiritual attitude towards the world and against fate. Finally there are the gateway to transcendence, the gate (sorry for the pathos of this term) to the highest mystery of existence. [ changed June 16, 2009 ]
• religious experiences, mystical states, rapid conversion phenomena are entirely natural and not indicative of mental disorders a person who has the experience (which attempt to suggest militant atheists such as Dawkins). Some are familiar with similar conditions, moreover, even people who find to be agnostics or atheists - you are simply unaware that delight, which embraces them (and us) when in contact with the majesty of nature, the vastness of space, great simplicity and consistency of the laws of physics, or with an extraordinary personality, a religious feeling. The Japanese have the lovely term "kami" which means penetrating the sanctity of every being, which, however, with particular strength is manifested in the beauty and awe of nature, and in extraordinary people.
• I believe that the commonality of religious experience (the experience of mystics of different religions), the commonality of themes mythical in isolated cultures confirm the reality of the fact that these experiences and myths illustrate. Intersubjectivity of experience is always a fundamental test. This commonality, independence from the religious context, but it is also proof that the Catholic Church or Christianity in general, do not have a monopoly on access to the truth.
• Mircea Eliade was telling one of his essays the story of how at an international conference of religion an American anthropologist, asked the Japanese szintoickiego sage to explain the ideology and theology of their religion. The man said to him: "we do not have an ideology or theology - we're dancing." I deeply regret that a similar abandonment of Christianity were unable to ever get it. Theology is a discipline for me, very "suspicious" - do not trust her. I do not trust dogmas, because they kill the authentic religious experience - come down to the prose poetry of myth (in addition the prose, which the modern, critical mind, he can not have the most to accept.) Sometimes I dream that one day the church announced that all the previous dogmas are only a theological hypothesis that does not oblige the already faithful. I have a dream, because such an event (which of course never happen) I would facilitate a deeper identification with the only religious community that such identification would be possible in my case.
• The Old Testament is not for me a source of moral inspiration (how could he be), but I appreciate the depth of psychological observation and philosophical reflection in it. At the same time I think it loftiest Gospel Book written by man. Paper, though no doubt written by people in their significance, spiritual and moral sublimity overwhelming everything human. Hitchens remarks about the alleged immorality of the New Testament, I think it is simply hilarious.
• As a (admittedly heretical) Catholic, I recognize the Incarnation as the central event in history. Also reject the Gnostic belief about the possibility of "self-salvation," the man who by effort and meditation may achieve a "knowledge." Without the help of God we can do nothing. He alone is the giver of what is truly good. [ I added 16 June 2009 ]
• I admire the deep sense of ethics of the Catholic Church and accept fully the moral teaching, though often to its use in practice, he had trouble. I do not think the requirements were "too large" - I know many people who conduct consistent with it, harmonious life. They are just people happier than others. I agree that the Catholic Church has the right to speak on important social debates, but I do not believe whether politicians should always be subject to suggestions of the Church.
• The main task of the Church does not see in activities for the poor or educating a moral society, struggle to change unjust laws, etc.., But in the implementation of the faithful in the world of the Great Mystery, the mysterium tremendum et Fascinans , which is the depositary - no I'm not talking about the world of theological speculation and dogma derived from them, but the reality of myths, parables, stories, rites and sacraments.
• I agree with those of my colleagues who criticize the Second Vatican Council II to be carried out changes in the liturgy. Replacement mysterious and dignified-sounding Latin swojskimi everyday language, a reversal of the priest "facing the faithful" (and so back to him, what is "outside"), made like the celebration of sacrifice, to a lecture or performance. Also regret over the devastation of sacred architecture - the symbolism of the temple was somewhere completely lost. Today's churches, like bunkers or concert halls. The medieval cathedrals of every detail of a parable.
• I am a moderate nominalist. Moderation is clear that the ideas and the universals I categories as necessary, so that we can experience reality. However, they are creations of our minds and outside the context of words and thoughts simply do not exist. Popular Richard Weaver on the right with his criticism of nominalism totally gets me and I find it almost as an intellectual of the pest.
• The word transcendence has many meanings. For example, we talk about the transcendence of the electromagnetic, gravity, and the like. When people talk about God's transcendence, however, have usually mean a complete separation of God from the world - So God has to be something the shape of Platonic ideas, inexplicably endowed with the possibility of active operation in the world. I find this approach totally wrong. The God in whom I believe God is immanent or transcendent in such a way as attributes of matter, as the law organizing the universe, not the same as universals, which defended the reality of medieval thinkers. He is the supreme principle of (set of rules?), A collection of properties of matter and the universe. Is the soul of the universe and the universe is infinite (as if) his body. Defies all categories and is unknowable, because the final rule organizes the matter is unknowable.
• The universe is constructed in a manner consistent with our mind - I think the logic of the universe's greatest mystery. It is an authentic miracle (those who do not believe in the existence of miracles recommend that took the hand of any textbook of physics or biology). It is also a confirmation of the words of Genesis, that we were created in the image and likeness of God.
• I believe that awareness, the ability to feel, is a riddle of existence, which we humans will probably never manage to solve. Close to me is neomisterianizm. But I think that the inextricable link between spirit and matter, the hypothesis suggests panpsychizmu or panprotopsychizmu (about their conceptions mentioned in the entry). I also believe that the spirit without matter can not exist.
• I believe that the human soul is a function of the brain and can not exist outside the body. Our "afterlife" is carried out in other people - all, however, not specific (as proponents believe the naive version of reincarnation). Individual self is an illusion.
• The consequence relation of spirit with matter, I find it also in the entanglement God, beyond the matter of the concept of God does not make sense (maybe that is why Genesis says that "at the beginning of the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters"?). Creatio ex nihilo is a concept completely foreign to me, unless they understand it as a metaphor that God continually sustains the universe form.
• I believe (and this faith has a rational foundation) that the universe is infinite in time and space that the Big Bang, it's just baloney United . Supporting this false theology is not science or science or theology. • I believe
(And also that faith has a rational basis) that life in the universe is eternal (my entry of December and the website Briga Klyce'a ) - has always existed and never will not stop there.
• accept the scientific fact that life on Earth has existed for nearly 4 billion years and has evolved through the mechanism of natural selection and mutation. I believe that a decisive role in these mutations (the formation of new species) has played a mechanism of horizontal transfer of genes from micro-dealers, which hit the Earth from space.
• I am absolutely sure that the forces of inertia are the gravitational influence of bodies from the distant masses in the universe. Mach's Principle is najdonioślejszym and surest law in physics that was ever made. To disregard these rules by the dominant model today is a disgrace to modern physics.
• Space is not a physical entity, a product of the human mind to facilitate our description of the relationship between material objects. All indications are that the full description of reality is enough for us, and three-dimensional Euclidean space. Why? It is an inexplicable mystery. Introduction of extra dimensions in the physical models of the universe is only a convention - indeed bad and confusing.
• Every scientific theory should be built based on experience and observation - only for building models of the Universe "at the desk" using mathematical tools is a culpable error of method. The fact that consistency of structure of the universe does not mean that there is a single formula that describes all the laws of physics.
• Any theories constructed by the natural sciences are the only path to truth, the same is true about the nature of the universe is unknowable, because (I believe) the universe is infinitely complex. It occurs in there are infinitely many types of phenomena. General Theory of Everything will never be built.
• "There are more things in heaven and earth, which never dreamed of in your philosophy."
• Christianity and Catholicism are mine - I was born and raised in a Catholic country, Catholic family, Catholic culture. So, just because so and until I see no reason to change the rite to another, a stranger, whose symbols and language will never be as clear to me what the symbols and language of Christianity and ancient paganism.
• There is a relationship between civilization and its religion. Although the full nature of this compound do not understand, none of its existence probably do not deny. Spiritual dimension of our lives is linked with the social dimension. Greatest civilization that arose in the history of world civilization is Latin. Maybe this is another reason why I consider myself a Catholic. [ I added 14 June 2009 ]
• I share his political views with a group of friends who subscribe to the manifesto post-conservative Thomas Gabisia.