Skyblooms

Although we color and form who we perceive ourselves to be, throughout life, there is still that part of the self that is the manager of all thoughts, that processes all incoming data from the time we are born. It is our "thought manager" and our true self.

That part of us forms innately it seems. But is not the same as "self-identity", as it has no personality. And yet we feel that it belongs to us alone, my I is only mine. We are given so many personal belongings in our human body...the "I" is the most mysterious and unexplainable, to me.

The floating nature of our roaming mind seems ungrounded and non-physical. A materialist might explain that this etherical quality is an illusion of the mind. If brains are necessary for conscious awareness, then the same would apply… vice versa….that we only know OF our brains, because we are conscious of them. If consciousness is an illusion, then the brain known only by that awareness, would be illusion too. To say another way: what is known through illusion, has no grounding for it's reality.

If one insists that that the brain is real, then this would indicate that a discombobulated consciousness (soul) is real. Do you agree?

This was a woman and I'm not sure of her post, it may have not been a very significant post in the government. The incident happened within the past year, I think, and it seems as though it had to do with a bad interpretation of history. The comment seems as if it revolved around blaming the victims of the Holocaust for what happened. I've been googling and can't find anything at all about it. I'm not sure if I have the details correct but I do know the person was a woman in some type of office, in Germany.

Anyone have a clue what I'm remembering?

Do you feel the human mind can make adjustments naturally when it finds itself perceiving space that isn't physical? Would this new space continuum cause a backfiring within the brain, such as sleep problems or other inabilities to think or cope? Can the mind alternate between perceiving real physical space in comparison to a virtual space that has no home, but only exists within the mind?

....why doesn't our mind manipulate our memories in order to help us?

We have only memories that lets us know that the past in our life occurred--any past events--significant or not. Why doesn't the mind automatically imagine the best scenario happened in order to lead to the best present result?

Yes, the past decisions and actions effect the present and many times it can't be changed. But many times we could change the outcomes if we simply forgot it or changed it by tricking our memory.

Even the past is based in our mind, somewhat.

My elderly father very suddenly developed severe debilitating arthritis in his hip and knee, in July. Soon after my 21 year old niece discovered that she had mono. They shared eating utensils and glasses within the incubation period leading up to the full blown mono.

My father was in extremely good physical shape before this sudden case of arthritis, which he continues to suffer from. At the same time, he has become very tired and lost his appetite (although he contributed that to the pain medication he was given). He lost 20 pounds in 3 weeks this summer.

Today my niece's 30 year old brother discovered he has mono although they don't even live in the same house and it's been 2 months since my niece had the symptoms.

Is it possible that the virus that causes mono can show up in an elderly person, as a different disease/ different form?

Note: My father had x-rays done after his problems started, that show osteoarthritis of the cartilage of his hip, but his arthritis was so completely sudden that it is hard to believe that his joint pain could be due to the osteoarthritis. My mother who is 77 is in a wheelchair due to osteoarthritis, and so I know how it usually develops gradually.

Thanks for any info anyone can provide.

We could, in theory, have been born with a consciousness that distances itself from our neurological, biological self. We could have brains and body that react to stimuli, feel emotions and reactions, reason, contemplate (cognitively) yet not also possess the part of consciousness that feels unattached to the body.

But instead we all have a consciousness that believes itself to belong to who we are. The "I" consciousness happens. We could be observers, only, of ourselves, like we are of every other person and thing, but instead we are attached to that remote part of our consciousness. In fact life would be easier much of the time, if we felt separate from our emotions and physical parts of our body, so why then, doesn't it happen that way?

What do we truly own? We didn't create our selves. Every part of us--physical or otherwise--was given to us when we came into being Although we have the tools to work with, when we create anything, an innovated idea or a object of our creative minds, this still isn't completely original, since we have been influenced by our environment or upbringing and genetics to be the person we are as well as we bring the thoughts into being with tools that aren't handcrafted by us.

What can we claim rights of ownership to? Maybe you would consider an original idea your own, even though you had nothing to do with the tools that brought you to the place where you became capable to invent it. I read in another answer earlier today, the statement, "We don't own happiness". I interpreted this to mean that emotions aren't our creation, no matter how hard we try to have good ones. And, always, I've marveled at how did I get to be part of the world, a person with a heart and brain and skin, etc, because when you consider this as yours, you realize that you don't belong to you. But then go a step further and start imagining who owns the rights to even mental attributes or emotions, and you start realizing that you have nothing to do with any thing. Or do you?

Within the last 3 weeks my refrigerator has puddles of water suddenly coming out a couple times a day. It's a Whirlpool Side by Side (Model ED2KHAXVQ) with external ice maker/water dispenser. It's pretty new with only a few months since purchasing it.

When testing with the ice maker turned off, water still leaks. The ice maker seems to be working fine. Thanks for any help!

Our mind is so sensitive to thoughts we can't stand or that depress us. Do you find you are always controlling the thoughts going through your mind in order to live life more comfortably? Is the stress of never letting your mind be present in the moment, more trouble than it's worth?

I've actually gotten 40 minutes into it and I am so bewildered. I'm planning on starting it over as soon as I grasp it better because it bothers me when I don't get the total statement of what I'm watching. Anyone have tips for making sense out of what they're doing? I know it's about shared dream scaping, but I am still lost. And they are using it as some type of business espionage??? Why can't it just be enjoyable without so much confusion?

...a moon halo specifically.

How would you set the camera settings for best contrast against the sky? I would be taking the photos with a basic digital camera Canon PowerShot A630 8.0MP.

When our consciousness became aware, soon after birth...it separated and created the external (or the observation of the external) as separate from mind, rather than focused completely on internal awareness? We innately set up a boundary of "me", and everything outside, is not of "me".

We immediately create dimensional space that is apart from our mind. Even those who are born blind, or children with autism are aware of the external world much in the same way.

Why does consciousness follow these rules with such uniform regularity?

I've read how they're formed by ice crystals high in the atmosphere that are refracting moonlight. The ice crystals are usually hexagonal shaped which are reflecting the light at a 22 degree angle, which forms the very large ring.....almost always the same distance from the moon....but still, I don't understand it. I've looked at the diagrams and can't grasp it. Please explain better.

I've read how they're formed by ice crystals high in the atmosphere that are refracting moonlight. The ice crystals are usually hexagonal shaped which are reflecting the light at a 22 degree angle, which forms the very large ring.....almost always the same distance from the moon....but still, I don't understand it. I've looked at the diagrams and can't grasp it. Can anyone explain this in their own words?

I haven't read the book, only seen the movie. I'm confused as to why the younger Henry (20ish), when he meets Clare, in the library, at the start of the film...doesn't know about their life together. Yes he was in his late 30's during all the meetings he'd have with her, while she was growing up, so that may explain why he wasn't aware in his 20's, that he came to know her later on. Yet when she get's pregnant with the younger Henry, after getting in a fight with the older Henry because he had a vasectomy.... at this time, the younger Henry DOES know her. Yes, the younger Henry has now known her throughout a decade or so, since they met in the library and married, but since he travels time, why wouldn't the younger Henry have known her right off the bat in the library? Throughout the movie, the younger 20ish Henry continually visits her and spends time with her? Time would have no meaning because he exists in all time periods, wherever he happens to appear, and so if the younger Henry knows her later on, why wouldn't he know her at the start of the film? I know how confusing this question is.

I'd like your personal suggestions of what you've made and liked.

The obvious answer, of course, would be yes. I ask this, though, because Nietzche believed that power is needed in order to exist at all....or a will to live. I've been thinking about this "power thing", and applying it to my life. Power was so important in Nietzche's writings...although, for him, many times it was more about conflict and force, rather than the simple power to live.

I feel a loss of power in my life...even within in my own mind. I'd like your opinions on the positivity of power, especially, if you have knowledge of Nietzche's writings on power (my own knowledge of his writings isn't that expansive).

I saw Dr Zhivago for the first time, over the past few days....(so long that it took 4 days to watch the entire movie)...and I have some questions and observations:

First of all, not to nit pick..but since this is considered a cinematic great, I was somewhat disappointed with how slow it moved and with how unimpressed I was with it.

The film seemed comical at times...how it's style translates in comparison to modern films. Not all great old films are unable to stand up to time, like this film seems unable to. There were repeated cinematic ploys that went over the top. Over and over, there were close ups of Omar Shariff and Julie Christie, somehow both with inhumanly large eyes.......and their eyes would be just brimming, as if a bucket of water had been poured in their eyes...with tears, the camera remaining for long seconds on the humongous wet eyes. I'd roll my eyes each time they did this, it was becoming pathetic.

Also, this film was very subtle in it's explanation of events ....my knowledge of the Russian revolution is not that expanse and I was very confused at times. I didn't know if it was due to my falling asleep while watching, or if the film was as unclear and undetailed as it seemed.

The theme song, Lara's Theme, although beautiful, and I'm well aware how popular it was at the time and how remains a classic, still, I couldn't believe how it is played almost continuosly throughout the film. These days, when a theme song becomes such an anthem, such as in Titantic, they use it much more sparingly which adds to it's magic.

I don't mean to offend anyone who loves the film and I did appreciate the Russian winter scenery where it was set. The extreme terrible cold was such a large part of the film and you could feel the reality of those who went through the events of that time in Russia.

Would love any comments, especially if you've watched the film in more recent years.