If We Were Not ~ ID 1757 ~ Dec 22, 2010 ~ Oh-1 Digital Press
Naturally after there is Entitic Science established and all the considerations of what we collectively really are, there comes the deliberation on what would it be like to consider us not existing. Modern Science, bless their little realistic hearts, does not even touch on this subject. Non-Existence to the Western Scientific mind is a whole bunch of expanding rocks, planets and stars, or perhaps the compressing of these same objects into an indescribable point, all existing in empty space that is also indescribable and without edge and the big non-existence part is the fact that we aren’t there. Any close examination of this type of existence or non-existence could not actually be described, as has been mentioned many times before, for two very simple reasons. First of all the creation of material without someone to observe it is like having a creation without a creator and the big problem with this is describing rationally how something (namely matter) is created out of nothing. The second problem is describing the space in which this exists when there is no way to communicate the lack of an edge to the whole idea of space. No modern theory has any validity at all because none of these theories can be written down without using unknowns such as infinity signs whereas Figmentalism and The laws of Reality are very simple to express.
NES Law has a peculiar problem in that we are trying to envision laws that appears to apply to a condition that could not be. It just makes perfect sense that one who ponders life would naturally be brought to the thought of non-life and it’s that obvious default that created the need for Non-real entitic science. These are not like Entitic Science or the laws, they are more like verbal tricks in which the mind struggles to understand their teachings. The shear simplicity of Figmentalism makes it necessary to contemplate all the things that can be found because there is precious little. Any direction at all that can be developed must be considered part of the new science and is entitled to that designation (Science) because it replaces the old nonsense theories such as Big Bang, DNA and all Theologies. All this leads to the fact that we could eventually develop into the those able to travel great distances at speeds well beyond that of light, discover new civilizations and create new dimensions. NES Law has little to do with that but may contrive to prove that we must exist and do not have the ability to cease.
Below you will find NES law and the expanded explanations of each law.
~~~~~ Unreality or Nonreality ~~~~~Fourth Draft~ June 10, 2008.
Unreality is the lack of existence of the lack of existence.
Even the recognition of nonreality would cause existence.
If anything is possible, everything would result.
The impossibility factor of nonreality would have to be absolute, not so with reality. Therefore the possibility is in favor of reality.
Nonreality could not exist. The state of non-existence could not be practiced within the non-void of non-reality.
The conditions required for reality would always exist, therefore no beginning nor end.
Reality cannot exist materially and externally because it cannot be contained and no thought process allows infinite expansion.
"Unreality is the lack of existence of the lack of existence." is the first ’NES Law’ which refers to the concept or non-concept that with nothing there would be no thought of nothing or qualification of nothing and only within existence can this be proposed. To some this could be considered nothing more than a cute expression but it is designed to convey the impossible idea that without existence there would not even be a place where nothing existed. People and scientists alike tend to think of non-reality or non-existence as empty space and fail to mentally or verbally find a way of removing even that. These expressions attempt to overcome this problem by conveying the impossible thought.
"Even the recognition of nonreality would cause existence." is the second law and may be noted that many of these are very similar. This one is along the same vein as the third but is unique in that is expresses that recognition of any sort would result in reality as we know it, perhaps not as humans but then that is an entirely different subject. Cognition is the key to existence. For nonreality not to be there must be no place as well. If there were a place with nothing existing it also could not be without the recognition of it and that would mean that everything would be caused. (if it were recognized) You may have noticed that there is a major problem with semantic negatives and therefore these could not be considered as irrefutable or absolute, they are rather colloquial and point out things that are a weakness of the non-existance theory. It’s odd that existence requires a balance with something that only existence could recognize, namely non-existence.
"If anything is possible, everything would result." is the third law and means that the universe and human kind is the result of absolutely anything at all. You may find that difficult but realize that for anything at all to exist it must first be recognized by an intelligence or thinking process and any single thought would result in the entirety of real existence for this very reason. Again this does not refer to a condition or event that has occurred or would occur but is merely a mental exercise on the nonreal designed to teach and explain.
"The impossibility factor of nonreality would have to be absolute, not so with reality. Therefore the possibility is in favor of reality." is the fourth law and somehow contrives that reality is odds on, the favorite of the two conditions; nonreality and reality. Unlike the Laws of reality and entitic science these can be discussed and debated. The explanation of this one is; nonreality must be absolutely impossible because it cannot be possible in any way, but the possibility of reality does not have to be absolutely impossible, simply because it can actually be. This is difficult to grasp and seems to be a trick of semantics which it partially is due to it’s oxymoronic quality. It simply conveys the idea that there seems to be less chance of nothing than something.
"Nonreality could not exist. The state of non-existence could not be practiced in the non-void of non-reality." is the fifth law and gets right down to the nitty gritty of the same old underlying theme here that nonreality is something that is not something, and as such cannot not be or be and therefore not exist. This again leaves only one possibility and that is existence. I think these six laws or non-laws hammer home the idea and I really don’t think they will be added to.
"The conditions required for reality would always exist, therefore no beginning nor end." is the sixth and second last of these laws. It relates to the sixth of the tablet laws "Time is a concept and can have no beginning nor end." and exposes that there is no known condition necessary for thought nor any constituent identifiable of thought or cognition. Therefore a beginning would mean some kind of change as would an end and there is just no evidence of this nor any reason to consider it necessary or possible so the default condition becomes no beginning. It also refers to the absoluteness of nothing and the absoluteness of anything thus everything.
"Reality cannot exist materially and externally because it cannot be contained and no thought process allows infinite expansion." This is the most recent and may spawn a new set or additions to ’the laws of reality’ but cannot be added at this time due to the fact that the tablets have not even been delivered to our universities, as yet, so it will remain here. This is very important and unique and may undergo a change in the wording at a later date. It shows why the theories of creation, evolution and big bang are incomplete and unreasonable because we are truly unable to think of a universe without edges. Oddly our thought process seems to allow this but that is due to obvious oversight. We must exist within the apparent orb of reality because we simply cannot fathom an external matter-bourn reality with no container. This is also referred to as the ’Container Conundrum’. When considered carefully it condemns the existence of ’matter’ from a new perspective.
This is the explanation that is carried within the Figmentalism Site: Contemplating how or why we exist or where we came from inevitably leads to the concept of nonreality or nonexistence which is utterly impossible to imagine since one would have to first remove the stars, the planets and ourselves leaving only empty space. This seems to be possible to conceive apart from the difficulty of answering the question of just how far the space reaches and trying to imagine this condition to be infinite. Our minds cannot get around such a concept because of the ’container conundrum’. Space cannot be either limited nor unlimited but when you try to imagine the very space as not existing, nor the space for the space itself, our minds go into full arrest. Yet we continue to use nonexistence as a balance for existence because it is such an obvious conceptual default. One could even argue that if nothing existed there would be no need for such a concept because that too would be gone, thus the first NES law: Unreality is the lack of existence of the lack of existence.
Largely an exercise in semantics, oxymoron’s and double negatives, the main features of NES law would be that the condition of nonexistence must be respected as a balancing factor and also an overriding factor in that we must somehow exist without doing so in a truly material sense. We must be strictly ethereal. As is the case with the "Laws of Reality" and "Entitic Science" there is much overlapping and redundancy and it is fairly obvious that these things cannot be truly communicated. They are primarily written in this point form to dismiss many of the currently held views such as a beginning to life and the universe, material or matter as our founding evolution and the belief that anything is real beyond thought.
So that’s the end of all the laws. Don’t break them!
Books and Figmentalism Fig and Literature Entrance
INTS The Institute of Non-Theoretical Science
General Interest Galleries Real Rufus
Namron Soar Mail Nsoar@tbaytel.net
Drugs and the Mind http://www.acidprogram.com