Reality

Albert Fils-Aime Nick, try saying that again to someone who is trying to understand the CTMU, and I'll report you. Mr. Davis, I only postulated a four-aspect substance by paying attention to the fact that the components of the HCS are extensions of each other and could therefore be formulated differently. I believed that a four-aspect line of extensions could be the most general, and therefore the default. But then I went on with thinking of how the QPS is emotional in comparison to the LMS, and found that this is similar to applying a subfield of mathematics like number theory to the entire spectrum of physical law. So I believe it is more like a two-aspect substance where the duality of the ETS and QPS components contain the duality of the LMS and STOS components. The technicalities of self-containment relations lies my problem with understanding the CTMU mathematically, though I understand it in general. As far as I've read, the three metalogical principles combine to form supertautology, so please explain your assertion that the three are each supertautologies. And if I were to give my word to Chris Langan, I'd say he should put forth a simplification of his theory that pays high attention to the deepest of technicalities and uses a simpler style of expression for his principles. Anyway, thanks for your thoughts.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Human Cognitive Syntax

From CTMU Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

In the CTMU, the Human Cognitive Syntax (HCS) (or Human Cognitive-Perceptual Syntax) is the set of structural and functional rules obeyed by the human mind. The HCS can be partitioned or stratified according to the nature of the elements incorporated in the rules. In particular, Langan names four classes or "subsyntaxes" of the HCS:

• space-time-object syntax (STOS), rules governing the fundamental trio space, time, and object (see also triality).
• logico-mathematical syntax (LMS), the laws of logic and mathematics. Langan also denotes these laws by S1 and denotes the laws of physics by S2. S1=LMS forms a syntactic covering for S2.
• qualio-perceptual syntax (QPS), the perceptual qualia in terms of which we define and extract experience.
• emo-telic syntax (ETS), feelings and emotions integral to the determination of utility.

Since humans are real, human cognition is embedded in the generalized cognition of reality. At the same time, for us to be able to cognitively refer to reality, it must conform to our cognitive categories (i.e., to the HCS). Hence there is an isomorphism between human cognition and generalized cognition, and this implies that they are mutually consistent aspects of a single global form of cognition, namely SCSPL self-processing.

http://ctmucommunity.org/wiki/Human_Cognitive_Syntax

HERE WE SEE THAT THE SCSPL IS CERTAINLY NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE TO THE UNIVERSE.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The HCS obeys the same rules as generalized cognition.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In the CTMU, syntactic and mathematical rules are obeyed by the universe and everything real. Reality is mathematical and physical. It also appears to acknowledge itself through the SCSPL.

 

I guess God is like alcoholism.

 

He is more like love.

 

So what made you disbelieve? And what made you believe again?

 

Excellent question! Thank you for asking. After watching Matthew Mcconaunhey's "Life is a Dream" speech from True Detective I decided to become an atheist to the extreme and believed myself to be strictly a body where my emotions were the illusory part of myself. So I decided to rebel against the idea of God by reading the Devil's website (Actual Slavery) and I could feel the injury to my neck affecting my body's system in a deadly way and then I suddenly believed in God and shut off the Actual Slavery screen that I was reading and felt the injury returning back to normal and I suddenly praised God and thanked Him for returning my body to normal otherwise I may have suffered a tormenting long-term injury to my physical body. I believed it was the wave-function of my body that adjusted the damage that my disbelief caused followed by my belief (to the point of confidence and assurance that God exists), not to mention I could hear and feel things that my eyes could not see happening around me. Such as the Devil bleeding from the ceiling. The pain was exchanged for my belief between me and the Devil, and I could feel something drip from the ceiling onto my arm but I could not see. Though I was confident it was the Devil's blood instead of mine.

 

Every bit of this sounds crazy.

 

I think that now, at last, we have been given solid evidence of Spellbound's deranged mental condition. I'm sure a lot of us suspected, but now it is fairly plain to see.

 

YOU ARE IN NO POSITION TO CALL ME DERANGED AS YOU HAVE NO ACCESS TO MY INTERNAL ORGANS AND BONES. NOT EVEN AN X-RAY CAN DETERMINE THE REALITY OF MY INJURY.

 

Spellbound .......get a grip on yourself guy.

 

IT IS POSSIBLE THAT MY INJURY AND HEALING MAY HAVE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH GOD. HOWEVER I AM NOT GOING TO RULE IT OUT.

My neck is feeling better though.

THE REASON... My neck is currently in the process of healing because I genuinely believed I was possessed by the Devil so I tried my best to twist it backwards. I do not regret it.

As my neck is feeling much better I currently doubt the existence of God.

 

Get a grip guy.

 

Sorry, I tend to get angry at people who jump to conclusions about me quickly.

 

Just focus on your thinking , thats all that matters in the end.

Thats all I want anyway.

river

 

We're not jumping to conclusions about you quickly.

You have a whole posting history on here to draw a conclusion from.

 

No jumping required. A tiny shuffle will do.

 

This dude rings some Internet warning bell in me... I almost remember who it may be, but not yet...

Watchele este bobo, de veras!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Spellbound, you didn't become an atheist, even for a short time, from the sound of it.
In your own words, you "decided to rebel against the idea of God". That is not lacking belief in God. It sounds as you still believed but merely tried to act as though you didn't. Yet your actions were not of someone lacking belief in God but of someone deliberately trying to go against what they actually did believe in.

And please don't take this as an offence, but the rest of your post suggests you may need some professional help, as it sounds as though you are/were suffering hallucinations and possibly delusions as well, i.e. possibly hearing and feeling things that aren't there.