Impact of Free Energy Device on humanity

[Silvije]

@Prajna: It is nice what you are saying here but I don't share your opinion. This is what i know:
Besides my mind I also have one other thing. It is called conscience. That is gift from God. So I just might stop my mind but my conscience cannot be stopped. It helps me and you to choose good. That is why you think you know that you are peacefull. I am saying that we are not good or bad. What we do is good or bad. We are not much different in that matter from the knife or the fire. Both can be used to make a meal. And that is good. Both can be used to kill which is bad. Important is what you do, with yourself and with everything. When you say you are peaceful it sounds to me like you want to say you are not capable of doing anything bad (warlike). I am telling you something else. You are more than capable of doing bad things same as I am and you know it.

So what you are saying it does not sound nuts to me, just to some extent sounds wrong
Why MIB are doing bad things? Because they have poisoned their conscience. It is still there, but not loud enough
for them to choose good. Also we might add that there are people who think they are doing good but they are not really. So I allways ask:
If you say/think you are doing good, You are doing it to who? just yourself? others?  Our politicians often says: We this, we that... who are 'we' exactly I ask.

You also say that you have knowledge about yourself rather than ideas. I am not so sure about that.
Do you know the secret of life? Are you a supreme being rather than just a creation? How much can a creation know about itself and is it better than the knowledge of it's Creator? You also state that knowledge you have about yourself is empirical, from direct experience. I ask you what devices or measures have you used to scientificaly determine your peacefulness? Physics cannot accept emptying your mind for knowing something about something as a procedure of empirism or cognition. That is insane and unacceptable and very different from empirism. So you may have an idea of being peacefull, you may think it and even believe it but you cannot say you know for sure. If you can prove it. So you see you need to meditate little more on this subject.

I agree with you about the money and illusions. It is hard to live without them, because reality is harsh. Problem is that people are not aware of that. They even find their meaning of life in those things which is bad because reality strikes eventualy, illusions fall apart. Then you became really dissapointed. I've been there Now I am aware of lot of things I was not before, but I know that I know very little. Lets take small steps. First lets brake our own illusions, than lets brake illusions other people want us to live, and then help in liberating third people who are still living the illusions. This is getting really scary Do you wanna know what matrix is?

I have to add one more thing: MIB will never vanish, I know that for sure because I know something about them. They are not really just the ones which are supported with our consumerism. That is just one of their branches. And they do exist. And yes you have to fear them, or not. Truth is ordinary fellow human as you say, who do not see this is as good as one of them. Seen matrix? They are vessel for agents. I am not matrix freak btw but film is really interesting (first part any way). And they are around you, you are just not noticeing them. There is a way... Choose red or blue pilule Description of your way of living is telling me you chose the right one.

But than again I cannot agree with you about what you are saying about you wishes for destruction and promotion of anarchy which is bad.
This show us that you might not really be as peaceful as you thought. It just shows us that you might choose the wrong rather than right, bad(evil) rather than good, just like all of us. I persuade you not to make a wrong choice. And your conscience will tell you what is good.

If your target(goal) is peace, do you really think it could be achieved by another war? even against tirany which kills us all?
So people should in fact do as you said, reasses their ideas, but i dont think that they should do it with guns.

For my conclusion I ask myself: is fire warlike? is it peacefull? Hey, instead of fire I just may put the electric current. Hey I can even put myself into that question. am I warlike or peacefull? I dont know but I guess I am neither. Or lets say I am peacefull today because I havent killed anyone. What will be tomorrow? we will see.

Someone said no one can go against its nature. I say that is bull. You can do good as much as you can do bad. So if you are capable of both things how can you be just one of them? Talk about someones nature makes no sence. Prove that I am good, or bad. And I did both.

s.

[Silvije]

If someone persist in saying he/she is warlike, it maybe just mean that he is simply choosing bad more often than good. But most important thing is you can change that. It is not easy but it is possible. You may go with the flow, that is easy. But that does not determine you. You can always choose to do the right thing. Problem is that it is not as easy than to go with the flow. So if you are going in wrong direction in life, stop and turn around before your conscience gets too poisoned to a state in which you would think it is impossible to get/do good.

I think people should be aware of this if it is right and I think it is. Before free energy device is introduced to public. Because it is like weapon, and if you think you are bad, angry, warlike and egor to crush something ... it is scary because it gives you the excuse to use this device for the worse, and you would not be guilty because it is just who you are... I repeat: It is not who you ARE. You will be guilty for doing wrong and there is no excuse.

Maybe one day will not be bad idea to introduce some education to people regarding free energy and such devices. You need education and licence for a gun, dont you?

s.

[ring_theory]

The whole point about "warlike" was to express that mankind is capable of everything good and bad. The technology no matter how peaceful ie, power generation, can and will be used for war. Without evil we cannot see just how good, good is. If we cannot see that we are warlike than we cannot revel in how peaceful, peaceful is.     

Low profit per unit. What is wrong with that? A guy has to make some money.

[prajna]

Silvije, it is very difficult to explain this stuff in exactly the same way it is difficult to explain happiness. You know when you are happy, it is unmistakeable, but to explain that feeling, or even to describe it in detail, is near impossible. You don't say of yourself "I think I'm happy" or "I think I'm angry," you are or you aren't. But these emotions, happiness and sadness, are fleeting things; they are subject to change. Your nature, on the other hand, is not subject to change; it is the one sole part of you that is the same as it has ever been and always will be. If you had a way to experience your nature rather than the state of your emotions or the ideas you have about yourself then you would know yourself. If you are sad then the real you is not the sadness, rather you are the container of the sadness; in the same way as a television set is not the programs that are playing across its screen. The ?you? that you really are, your 'being', is the container of your thoughts, emotions, memories, sensations, ... This is the part of you that great teachers insist you should discover and recognise as your true self.

My nature, my true being, (and yours, for that matter) is perfectly capable of containing both peacefulness and belligerence, but the container itself has a peaceful nature.  You will just have to take my word on this until you are able to confirm it from your own experience. When you do discover your true nature it is just as obvious and unmistakeable as knowing whether you are happy or sad.

I have a completely free choice to act peacefully or in a greedy, dominating manner; just as you or any other being has. But if I am in tune with my nature, rather than my conditioning, I will always choose to behave in a peaceful, loving way. It would make no sense for me to behave in any other way since in order to justify such behaviour to myself I would have to ignore my nature and subject myself to the limitations, vagaries and conflicts that are involved in mind-based, as opposed to being-based, reasoning.

The problem is that we identify ourselves as our mind, or rather, mind identifies itself as our self. This is an illusion which is the source of all of the illusions that we are so easily caught up in. It is only through meditation (so far as I am aware) that we can directly experience that part of us which is neither mind nor body but which contains both. It is made up not of conscience (a nasty socio-religious invention) but of consciousness. There is no danger of your consciousness being poisoned in the way that your imaginary 'conscience' seems susceptible to; it is incorruptible.  The MIBs don't have a poisoned conscience but rather they lack complete consciousness. Becoming conscious I recognise the harm I do when I do harm; I 'feel' it; I 'know' it in the same way I know when I am happy or sad. How could one do harm whilst feeling that harm at the same time? Conscience, on the other hand, is merely an indoctrinated form of guilt and it is hoped that people will prefer not to feel guilty. But people do things that make them feel guilty all the time; it doesn't seem to discourage them overmuch from doing those same things again. Where does 'conscience' exist? Examine deeply enough and you will discover that it only exists in your mind. If you are driven by your conscience then you are not the free being that you declare yourself to be.

You need not fear losing your conscience so long as you replace it with consciousness. I am pretty sure that you would not choose to carry out an action if you were aware of the harm that action would create. Even ring_theory, who is so indoctrinated as to think his nature is warlike, would not choose to do harm merely for the sake of it; he would have to justify his actions in terms of a greater good or, at the very least, in terms of some personal weakness or perversion. I may be wrong regarding human nature and it may be that there are some small number of human beings who, at their core, get happiness from doing harm but really I doubt that there are any fully conscious human beings who are able to do that.

Oh, and another illusion I wish to shatter for you: reality is not harsh but society certainly is. Reality just 'is'; neither harsh nor forgiving, in the same sense as when you insist we are neither good nor bad. Speaking for myself, I have discovered that reality is considerably less harsh than it used to be when I was caught up in all of the illusions called society, culture and tradition. Once I discovered that these things, which most people call "the real world" or 'reality', are not reality at all but merely ideas that people impose on each other, life became considerably easier and 'reality' became a significantly more pleasant place to be.

I'll leave all that 'Supreme Being', Creator/creation and secret of life stuff alone; it is all religious bullshit in any case. From a purely logical point of view, if there is a Supreme Being then it is the totality of consciousness in the cosmos and as such there is no being over which it could wage its supremacy.

Physics, by the way, doesn?t exist: it is simply a collection of ideas that are grouped under a label. What do I care what physics does or does not accept? It is not aware of itself; it is not conscious; it is not a ?being? in any sense of the word.  If you mean, ?physicists do not accept,? well, the same holds true: physicist is yet another definition. If we finally chase it down to ?some humans who define themselves as physicists don?t accept? then so what, most humans do not accept most of what I say because they are caught up in the matrix, the socio-political matrix and their own mind-matrix.

You can ?know? without mind.  Indeed, I would argue that anything you really know you know on a much deeper level than mind. It is the difference between ?knowing? 1 + 1 = 2 and knowing you can feel your big toe.  One type of knowing is purely intellectual and happens only in the mind whilst the other is something ?real? that you ?know? even when there is no mind. Most of us ?live? in the mind and pay scant attention to what level we know things on; intellectual knowledge is considered to be the same as (or often more important than) things we know by being conscious of them. This distinction is another thing that becomes more obvious as you become more aware of what is created in your mind and what exists outside it.

My experience is that when illusion falls apart there is a sense of relief.  When there is a sense of disappointment it is not an illusion that has been destroyed but a hope and expectation.

What I want is the destruction of the economy and the stock exchange and the rise of anarchy, exactly as I said. I do not want destruction for its own sake, that really would make me ?bad?. But realise that ?the economy? is a construction, part of the matrix, that prevents us from freely giving of ourselves.  It is a big illusion and a lie, which any conscious person would gladly be rid of. Anarchy, on the other hand, is the quintessence of freedom.  But you have been conditioned to react in precisely the way you did: to fight for the economy (seeing it as necessary) and to oppose anarchy (seeing it as chaotic and destructive).

If someone sees himself or herself as warlike rather than peaceful it simply indicates that they are still caught in the matrix. If someone sees himself or herself as peaceful it may or may not indicate that they are somewhat more enlightened than their fellow who believes the opposite of themselves; if they simply believe it then they are still in the matrix; if they know it unquestionably then they are at least on the Nebukanezza.

I am delighted that you are thinking, Silvije. Keep at it.

@ring_theory: I am delighted that you have depreciated the idea that you are warlike by nature. Next you need to learn that it is possible to be aware of peace without reference to war, that bliss requires no opposite in order to express itself. These are the limitations of language and the mind, where things are often defined by comparison with their opposite, but such is not necessary for consciousness, which is aware of what is without reference to anything else.

[ring_theory]

prajna, define BAH! why would one listen to or take serious a person that claims to advocate for peace?

Yet still claim "What I want is the destruction of the economy and the stock exchange and the rise of anarchy, exactly as I said. I do not want destruction for its own sake, that really would make me ?bad?. But realise that ?the economy? is a construction, part of the matrix, that prevents us from freely giving of ourselves.  It is a big illusion and a lie, which any conscious person would gladly be rid of. Anarchy, on the other hand, is the quintessence of freedom.  But you have been conditioned to react in precisely the way you did: to fight for the economy (seeing it as necessary) and to oppose anarchy (seeing it as chaotic and destructive)."

Advocating the fall of the financial institution and giving rise to anarchy, is advocating the warlike nature in mankind. also would be the reason why the so called free energy device cannot be just FREE. As i said before there is no free in free-energy. low cost sure but no free! Look at it this way when you buy the tv that has one of my mechanisms in it and you need not plug it in or recharge batteries for the lifetime of the tv. consider the energy free. as the initial investment of the tv purchase covered the cost of powering it for it's lifetime.

I figure less than $5 in materials per tv, laptop, cell or portable devices etc. If i make a dollar per unit than i would be quite happy with that given the scale of it in the overall sales. I don't think that's greedy. Nor do i think that that would be oppressive to the general population.