Re: Choices & Free Will
Quite the flair for drama, eh TTA? While I have attempted to refrain from my usual sarcasm (yes, I may have slipped once or twice), I see your Modus Operandi emerging right on schedule:
And at best, the example you put forth was a generalization of the TTA’s arguments in comparison to the Amish’s stance on technology. Which was also shown to be false.
Problem is you really don't know the details of the comparison I was making, because you immediately avoided engaging me on that comparision. And instead you issued your OWN generalization about the Amish... something about not using the technology "period". I then gave you references to counter YOUR generalization and show you that you really don't know the Amish as well as you may think. And now we come full-circle with TTA's tactics in that the TTA is accusing ME of throwing generalizations! Classical TTA if ever I have seen it.
As for the unknown quantified impact, and how we could not go further in answering the debate in logical terms; if you knew this before hand and understood it’s limits to answer more questions then there would be, why was a debate even considered with the TTA vs. just a discussion?
Did I ever disclose to you ALL of my INTENTIONS for this debate? I did share some, but you never asked me to share all.
So this debate was a waste of time RMT.
Why do you think this? I certainly do not think it was a waste of time at all. In fact, one of my own personal philosophies in life is that there is really no such thing as wasted time. Just because this debate has not measured up to YOUR intentions, I would ask that you not presume it did not meet mine.
The factor we both could agree on was on the “good†& “bad†uses of the technology. I believe the scenario was specific but limited to only this.
And the thing we can't seem to agree on (or at least the one you will not address) is the fact that we cannot begin to assess ethics with respect to an
alleged technology until all the DATA and FACTS are laid on the table for anyone to see and test.
I merely wanted to continue on the spiritual advancement aspect of the premise and look at this comprehensively.
I fail to see how examining something based SOLELY on your interpretation of some subjective experience you have had is looking at this "comprehensively". How can a discussion be "comprehensive" if it all must be based on what YOU alone have experienced, and for which there is no available scientific data (including expert analysis) to support?
Yes, but this place is only an Institute by name, not an actual university or place to have a formal debate.
Are you then insinuating that this is a good enough reason to not follow a scientific method? Just because we are not at a "real" institute? Sorry, but the RainmanTime does not suspend his scientific mind when he leaves work/school. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
And as I have stated to you, that the TTA is not a scientifically based individual.
Similar to the above, are you insinuating that I should not hold the "facts" that the TTA cites here up to scientific scrutiny? Do you think you should just be given a "free pass" because you don't know science, or the acceptable practice thereof?
Not everything needs a formal format for discussion.
If one is trying to discover (or agree upon) something we call TRUTH, then such a formal format often helps avoid discussions which can have no basis for verifying said truth.
I believe some people reading over the posts of the TTI right now, may have ideas of their own that they wish to express, but may be intimidate if the forum is full of sharks, who are waiting for fresh meat to tear apart.
I ask that you please not paint me with such a broad brush, TTA. Yes, I admit to being quite the "shark" when it comes to HOAXERS who insist on giving me the GLOOM AND DOOM version of our potential future. You bet that this sharkey is going to go for that kind of fresh meat! HOWEVER... you will also note that I do NOT "tear people to shreds" who are here to NOT try and pull a hoax, but rather discuss thoughts. Now if these people insist that they have got TT "wired" and yet their theories have fundamental flaws that do not align with science, then I will point this out. And if they continue to insist they are right, in spite of what science tells us, and they get nasty.... then I use my freedom to be just as nasty back to them. But yes...hoaxers with negative views of the future... I'm all for "sharking" them. They make good sport (and they set themselves up for this, so THEY are just as much to blame for the outcome!)
What comes out of this belief if they do come over to play pool with you? Possibly nothing? However, experiences with actual real manifestation that can be seen and tested, if some are willing to investigate and examine them is another.
So you are trying to enlist other people to do your science for you? Tell you what... you find the $ to pay my salary for 1-2 years and I will do just that. You can bring all the subjects you want for testing, and I will match them with "control group" subjects. What a ball we could have.
Your describing something that can easily be misconstrued over a large distance during vs. what I am suggesting is actual face-to-face examination.
What you are suggesting has NOT been physically quantified AT ALL. Thus whether it is at a distance or face to face does not matter. You cannot compare apples to blood oranges.
In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just because we collect data does not mean your conclusion as to what is going on will be proven. We need a scientific/mathematical theory that we can use to quantify the data AND possibly test predictions. Not only would we need a quantified theory/model for how YOU think TT manifests in order to correlate the data, but we would also have to permit other, valid theories/models which also have a chance to explain what the data is telling us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, let’s do this.
What's with the "let's"? Let us? Part of the reason I started the debate was because I thought you had some kind of CONVINCING evidence to support your claims. Yet now you are trying to enlist my help to look for such evidence, when really I was just hoping to evaluate it. If you can afford me, then perhaps I might be willing to take on the job. It might be fun, but the RainmanTime is not into charity work that he does not believe is for a worthy cause.
Then it’s not a simple experiment after all. You can always upgrade to anything you wish, if given the choice. But if your only option is a small soft drink, will you still demand to have large?
Science (good science) is not just about choosing what is on the shelf. You accuse me of using a bad analogy above, and yet this one is quite a bit worse. If the premise which is trying to be scientifically verified REQUIRES a large soft drink, then guess what? The experiment cannot be executed (nor data collected) until all the REQUIREMENTS are satisfied. To do anything less would invalidate the experimental data.
As for specifics, confirming the double-digit numbers, psychic visions & voices is a sign to this manifestation, so it kind of goes without saying.
No, really it cannot go without saying. And your "specifics" are hardly specific. What PRECISELY do you mean by "confirming the double-digit numbers"? Could you put this into a recipe-like format (step a, step b...) and perhaps even define specific measurable quantities that would be part of these "specifics"?
Well according to the consensus, there are only a few who believe in this connection.
And how did you account for the people who may have an opinion, may be lurkers, but did not vote? And how do you know this vote is not "tainted" by any number of cloaked IPs?
I can easily drive over to any one’s home within a 50 mile radius and prove that I cannot be Titor. What then? What do you say about that RMT?
Before you go through the trouble, why not tell me, hypothetically, how you are going to prove it? What "evidence" do you plan to show me? Or is that some big secret?
But again, I never said it was only me who believed this and is expriencing these manifestations. Others are also experiencing this, and know in their heart what is going on, they don't need me to tell them how this has impacted their lives.
And all of them are "certain" that it is the abuse of TT technology that is causing it?
They can plainly tell you that they are not part of Group Titor again and again, and you can keep on insisting in a harassing "scientific" manner that they are.
I am merely bringing up coincidences to add to the coincidences shared by Cipher. And if you recall, I insinuated to you how I HAD to vote in your last poll, given the way you worded it. And if I am so "harassing" why do you continue?
RMT, I was trying to be courteous and end the debate on that and on some friendly terms between us. But you continuously want to rub it in my face that I have not been able to prove my original statements.
I am sorry that you have interpreted this in this manner, and I apologize if that did offend you. However, history has shown the TTA to be quite a sly character (all RPGs have at least one)... always using well-chosen words to try to "slip by" in a discussion or debate. Can you blame me for wanting to continually set this record straight, knowing the TTA's record as I do? For another example, I have also continually tried to get you to admit that we cannot rightfully assess the ethics of TT until we know (scientifically and quantifiably) how it works. You have not yet conceded this, and so I will continue to state this until you do. Now you could call that "rubbing it in your face", but I call it keeping you honest.
In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd suggest you start familiarizing yourself with science and scientific method, as you will need it to define an airtight experimental design if you ever hope to show this... and I think it is questionable that you could show this (my opinion).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ouch. Though, I’m still being nice to you RMT, I will not be for long if you continue this subtle disrespect of the TTA.
Interesting. So what part of my quote above did you interpret as being "not nice"? Quite honestly, I could have really pulled out some "Classic RMT" that would have been much less nice. However, the first statement above is my SUGGESTION to you, and it is an earnest one especially given the TTA's admission to not being a very scientific individual. The second statement is just my opinion, based on the "data" I have seen so far. You want to interpret this as "not being nice" then it is YOU, the interpreter, who has the problem, for I had no ill INTENTION when I used those words. It would seem the TTA has fiarly thin skin if he is offended by the above comments.
I believe you mean, question(s) the pleural. There’s more then one.
1. No.
2. Yes.
Personally, I only offered 1 example. Showing that regardless of my “freewill†and lack of restraints that I had, I was able to come to multiple connections in the future.
I do not understand the last sentence. Could you be more specific, please?
Also, I hope you offer exit course surveys to your students. Might be a good measure for self improvement.
Just as you did above, I could interpret this to be "subtle disrespect of RainmanTime." Should I? But FYI, I am actually required by the university to have them fill out anonymous exit surveys. You might be interested to know that I regularly receive the highest marks of all the department instructors. You would be in error to believe that I teach using the same metholodology as my character, RainmanTime. But some of the underlying INTENTIONS are, indeed, the same: Challenging people to think scientifically, and verify/validate their work.
So you agree or disagree that New Agisms don’t offer math? I acknowledged Chaos Math for example, and stated that I own the movie PI, didn’t I?
Again you try to pencil me into what amounts to a yes/no statement (and obfuscate the original point at the same time). For the third time now, I am pointing out your duplicity: You have derided certain New Age philosophies because they don't show alignment with science/math, and at the same time you offer subjective "evidence" of your experience which does not align with science/math. And I will again ask you: Which way do you want it, because you can't have it both ways?
As for stating disparaging remarks about New Agisms, I believe you stated you knew the types I was referring to.
Perhaps I did, and perhaps I was wrong. We will never know because (a) I never explicity named any types of New Agisms that I thought you were referring to, but more importantly, (b) You have also not laid-out specifics for what you call "New Age". If you were to clear-up point (b), then I would not have to speculate about what you mean.
My claims are not following any New Agisms, but opposed to them for this very purpose for freewill subjugation.
Free will subjugation which you still cannot verify/validate as being real and actually being utilized. I am sorry that you think I am "rubbing your face in it" but I have to come back to this point every time you try to slide by with the implication that this stuff is real, it is going on, and it is due to abuse of TT. It is not rubbing your face in it, it is reminding you that you cannot assume this is true and use it as part of your argument.
My agenda has always been about humanity and allowing them to see the possible pit falls and where we could go wrong by these means of unification that they preach. This will not justify their actions in the past. That’s all I’m saying!
Yes, I know... it is all about other people, and the TTA is the tireless workhorse for ethical use of TT. If you were to find a cross, drag it around a bit, and work out how you can have yourself nailed to it somewhere conspicuous you could really play that card to the hilt. (Classical RMT coming out here, I am afraid.)
Well LRH tech can be good in small quantities, but some of it’s policies and practices, not always good. Wouldn’t you agree?
I noticed that (so far) you have made the choice to NOT answer a question about where LRH tech came from in another thread. Why don't we "discuss" that a bit before we evaluate the LRH version of the tech? Who knows, we might be able to trash LRH tech altogether and appeal to its ORIGINAL source (which is much older than LRH)?
And their attempts to subjugate mankind to follow in place to find their patterns of truth to spiritual discovery, is not by our choice, but by their time table.
Evidence please?
And you said earlier you have already identified the perpetrator. Could you kindly specify their name or organization? Or do you just wish to keep the vague "New Ageisms" umbrella for this?
With that said, I agree and believe this concludes the debate.
Fine by me.
Your poll, as with other polls you have crafted, is another piece of sly work. THREE varying choices for how people can vote to allow you to stay, and only one cut-throat way for them to vote you off the island. Why not just two choice: (A)Should he stay? or (B)Should he go?
Simplicity avoids people always having suspicions about intentions. BTW, I haven't voted as yet, but I will inform you when I do (if you wish).
RMT
