Lights. Camera. Action.

[Sign Related]

Part 1:

Can an action be without a beginning/start?

If you say yes, then name an action that just is (or: was) without ever having to begin/start.

If you say no, then that is as good as saying existence must have popped into existence, correct?

They say actions speak louder than words. I personally think action is the obviously brightest answer to our once commonly held mystery about existence itself.

Part 2:

Are things matter (iron, etc) and non-matter (gravity, awareness/consciousness, etc) an action?

Certain might realize that matter and non-matter started. If that is correct, then we can define them as an action, correct? All action requires is a beginning/start or end/stop. Matter and non-matter in the now are a continuing action inorder to now remain still. In other words, matter's existence involves actual stablization which makes them a factual action. Remaining is an action, is it not?

So because of action there is no "am" or "be" of any person or thing. Consider them murdered from your realizations of actualities. Only a place "be". We are just actions occupying a place that "be".

Added for the funk of it:

You know a word missing from dictionary is "actcome". "become" is in error because you cannot "be" ever if you weren't always a person that "be". So come be or be come (become) is in error. Place be, place didnt become. Hell, place lacks a will so it didnt even become us, even though we popped into it. We occupy a place, but we lack become it.

What do you want to become when you grow up? (Wrong!) It's: What do you want to actcome when you grow up?

If something 'be done', then it started and ended. So 'be done' is more like implying that a "be" was murdered from start to end in an instance of what is an act(ion).

When they say be you, they should rather say act you. Be real? No, act real. We didn't exist, no, we started existing. We live?, no, we "started to live". Dont let "to live" to a dictionary's "be" definition fool you because it makes it seem as though it's always.

When you see somebody you see an action. You're an action rather than a being. So what's up, my fellow human actions? Supreme or Higher Being? Naw, how about Supreme or Higher Action? At least we can tell a Higher Action isnt eternal to even begin to confuse us. "Supreme Being" been in error obviously to why it been leaving religion followers and atheist confused. Maybe they should teach Higher Action in school instead of God and religion and evolution.

 

[Da_Funk]

 

[Illuminattile]

Are things matter (iron, etc) and non-matter (gravity, awareness/consciousness, etc) an action?

No.

Can I close the thread now?

 

[Jokerman]

Just replace your word "action" with the word "energy," and your ideas will be clearer. All matter and non-matter is energy. When you see someone you see energy. Energy speaks louder than words. Maybe they should teach Energy in school instead of God and religion.

 

[Preach]

semantics will not help you find the solution to the universe.

 

[Sign Related]

Further expaining the principle of existence.

Principle- an accepted or professed rule of action or conduct: a person of good moral principles.

How can the start and lasting of an existence not imply it is an action in principle?

A car door that is a level of hard implies it along with it's hardness is an act(ion). Just since you aren't feeling it doesn't mean it isn't still acting hard.

I never heard of gravity sitting there present not performing. Everything now deemed existence is a performance. Performances are actions. And actions have a start.

The color blue... It is doing something. Color blue wouldnt exist if it weren't "doing" something. "Doing" implies an action. By existing it is doing something. And if doing something is an action, and actions have a start, then that says even the things that were here before our existence all have a begin/start to them such as the color blue and energy.

They think energy cant be created. But do they mean created by something else (something already existing?) or do they mean it cant pop into existence by nothing at all? They are never clear because they obviously dont know jack by assuming out their butts. Humans couldnt be first so of course no one can do anything except assume energy cant be created. Anything that "be" of course cant have a beginning start. So rather they should say energy cant "act" created. Maybe it was created (as in popped into existence) to act like it was not created (as in popped into existence or created by someone/thing already existing) since we humans werent here eternally.

Ppl are so conditioned by the word "be" or "being" that they fail to realize act, acting, action, activity, activation. "Act" has "being" murdered in truth as you witness existence right infront of your face or experience existence. It aint even a way to not understand that existence is an act, acting, action, activity, activation rolled in one (ALSO see: conduct, perform, and etc of the alike).

The activity of the color blue is and is definitely appearent by an action (call it human actings) that may witness and experience. The color blue doesnt witness or experience, but that dont mean it aint active since it has existence that is with start/begin.

How many actions does a chair have? It has a soft or hard action, it has a color action, it has a shape/form action, it has a stationary action (it doesnt just get up and walk away on its own. It doesnt just turn into a monster to hold you in place), it has an endure action, and etc.

 

[Sign Related]

What I now discovered by concluding by the principle concerning existence:

The first basic two actions or dual actions concerning person and thing:

Start (begin) and last (hold, remain, endure).

^^Those actions together mean someone/thing may/can start everlasting.

If you are a first, then that means you both began and last.

The start is the Supreme Action and the last is the Higher Action. Yep, when you come to find out.

It isnt Highest Action with an est since action which start in general continues lacking a final action that can act concluded. You can never conclude you lived everlasting. You start everlasting you must continue for ever. It's as a void that can never be fulfilled. So there is nothing to conclude as a Highest Action if an action lacks completion in any way, shape, or form.

For those who read the bible:

In the bible Jesus didnt say I am the Zero. For if Jesus said I am the Zero, then it would mean Jesus is an eternal being without start or stop. Jesus said I am Alpha...etc...the first...etc. This concludes that existence isnt eternal, and was with start. Non-existence (such as place which exists) is eternal with or without person or thing occupying it, except it is not eternal with person or thing in position, since person or thing popped into existing causes postion come where there is then 'the here' and 'the there' having beginning and ending though still with place. So place being eternal in all ways? No. So place being the Highest Be(ing)? No.

One of the specific actions is end (stop, expire, erase, delete, release, cease, vanish) of a person and thing. You have your taste bubs which release (drop) what it previously tasted. End would act the opposite of Higher Action. So you should call it the Lower Action. It would act the same as Supreme Action only if it can cause something or someone not of the same source to end (stop, expire, erase, delete, cease, release, vanish).

The Lower Action comes in handy because you wouldnt want to make a mistake and have to live with something or someone henceforth for ever. You wouldnt want to get trapped in a horrible way in any perspective and not be able to end (stop, erase, etc) what has you trapped or yourself, even, in a most horrible extreme case scenario.

For you who do read the bible to where you mistakenly think existence is a state of be(ing):

In the antonym translation of the bible (which is named the official anti-Christ guide) the word "be" (and "am") turns to "act". The word "behold" turns to "act released". "because" turns to "actcause". "being" turns to "acting". Dont knock the antonym bible's truth till you've read it when that synonym bible is only one of the books opened as mentioned in introduction inside the synonym bible.

You who are in a religion that reads the bible cant argue that there arent other books beside "the book of life" and "the synonym bible (called different translations)" when the bible says otherwise.

 

[Preach]

Listen man, it's not like we're idiots. the notion of abstract thinking did not pass us all by in our teenage development, and many of us are very familiar with the concept. We understand that most people think of matter and action as two separate phenomenons of the universe, whose metaphysics in no way overlap. You didn't break any barriers by suggesting that maybe the two are the same. In fact, such abstract thinking goes back such a long way that I remember a stand-up from a famous 90s comedian where he ended his show saying something about how everything in the world, when studied at the very core, can be cropped down to a single vibration in nothingness. Men In Black also proposed similar thoughts about the metaphysics of the universe, although in a humorous fashion. Every two weeks you make a thread like this. If I go back and look at all the threads you've made, it seems like you change your whole belief system frequently. The last idea didn't work out so it's on to the next one. Maybe that's just cause I'm a selfish asshole who let myself get annoyed by the fact that you never respond to posts in your threads as if you have an inability to discuss the ideas you propose. I'm biased when talking to/about you.

Anyway, my point is, this is something I thought about on a tuesday afternoon three years ago. I left it there. If you're so desperate to change something out there in the world, start with yourself lol. "Existance" is a word that is made up of several consequent noises. The noises themselves have little to do with the emotion the sequence of noises is supposed to evoke. The word "existance" is an invention so that I can explain my thoughts that relate to the fact that I have a conscience. I think it to be nothing more or less. Your role in the life of the universe is as big as the role of one single hydrogen atom in your personal life. You can never define it.

 

[Sign Related]

^^Nice to hear others suggested it. But what I did is make it not a suggestion. Suggestion leave things open to any ol interpretations.

I hope to seal things so that there shall lack suggestiveness period with this:

Beginning-
1. an act or circumstance of entering upon an action or state: the beginning of hostilities.
7. first; opening: the beginning chapters of a book.

^^So in the bible Jesus reffered his self as the first which means I stand correct that existence is not eternal. And since beginning an act(ion) it means any and every thing or one with a start is an act(ion).

Start-
1. to begin or set out, as on a journey or activity.
2. to appear or come suddenly into action, life, view, etc.; rise or issue suddenly forth.

^^If existence popped into existing, and no human could witness its to appear, then they have themselves as experiencers of the very "to appear" which is an action which then also says that persons are each an action.

 

[Preach]

You have to realize that the bible, and the language it was written in, were both invented millions of years after the events they supposedly describe actually took place. Science proves this to us, anyway. The fact that Jesus said some ol' shit in the bible doesn't mean it's a good foundation upon which to base fundamental ideas about life and society. It is if people agree with it, and I can't quote statistics on this one, but my guess would be that one in five people in the western world actually believe in God. On world scale, that number may be higher, but we also know development countries have lacking resources for education, which in turn has a tendency to lead to higher belief rates. Simply stating the truth.

Besides that point, you take a presumably random part of the bible, a quote from Jesus that may not directly be a part of the overall messages and rules the bible preaches. If you're like me and believe the bible is part fairy tale, anything coming from Jesus mouth would be a matter of making the sentence ring out nice. Either way, you are taking facts and information from branches of both science and religion and merging them to support your opinions. Not to us but to yourself. Religion and science are two very different notions, and suggesting something Jesus might have said is reflected in modern science research is flawed. Flawed enough that you should reconsider your idea and look for a lot more, and far better things to base your idea upon.

If existence popped into existing, and no human could witness its to appear, then they have themselves as experiencers of the very "to appear" which is an action which then also says that persons are each an action.

This part of your post makes no sense. No human could witness it to appear because the evolution of species is sub-consequent to the creation of the metaphysics of the universe, which was a fundamental event that was necessary to take place for any of the rules of physics and science to exist. I suggested earlier that your importance in the universe, and your ability to understand it, is comparable to a single hydrogen atom's importance in your life, and its ability to understand your life. If in fact the universe came to exist from nothing, released in a big bang, your inability to witness and experience the metaphysics of the universe also inable your mind to fully understand the event known as the Big Bang. I'll further clarify what I mean by throwing in some "abstract" thinking that in no way reflects what I hold as my beliefs. If the universe came from nothingness, we must assume this nothingness has some definable properties. We are able to see, hear, smell and feel things around us, but beyond that we are unable to look through time and space in ways that would enable us to see through the universe and look at what's outside it. The end of the universe is the end of existance and everything we can ever know or study. We can't even go there. Our own solar system is the end of our physical reach. If there are parallell universes or a greater space out there, it is beyond our capability to understand.

The words "start", "end", "action" are merely words. As species evolved to be intelligent, and humans developed a means of oral communication, it's only natural that we appoint words to phenomenons we witness around us. Human life is based on cycles, reflected in the way you are born and then die, or how you get up every morning and go to bed every night, only to repeat it the next day. In the context of what I just said about appointing words to things around us, it's also only natural that we appointed words to define the very concept that defines our lives - cycles. They start and they end, thus we have the words that define those things. Other words define other phenomenons around us. What you are saying is that we change what the words actually mean. Instead of changing the principles we live by, you are suggesting (you're saying you're not suggesting it but making it so, but I don't understand how you figure, you haven't changed anyone's beliefs yet) that we change the emotion that a sequence of words evokes, and practice on making it evoke a different emotion. How does this change or better anything in our world? How does anyone benefit from converting to your way of thinking?

(If anyone's wondering why I bothered, I'm high ehehehe)

 

[Lil KaMiKaZe]

i think you should get out a lil bit,it's sunny out here