Matrixism - A religion based on The Matrix

Geo said:
Well, I've already stated that while the Universe is Math...
Click to expand...
You mean Maths is the construct – the matrix (?) – by which we explain phenomena, as much as we can?

Geo said:
Just came to tell what the Wachowskis already realized, and presented to the world through their art.
Click to expand...
But the idea of humanity as part of the machine was there long before the Wachowskis.

Personally, I thought 2001 A Space Odyssey and Bladerunner, dealt with the ideas with a greater subtlety, but that's me.

Have you read Philip K Dick, he predates the Ws by twenty years?
 
Reflecting on your exegesis, have you read Middle Platonism? The Enneads?

It is ever a fine line. There is a world of difference between 'Christian esotericism' and 'esoteric Christianity' – the discussion seems not quite so fashionable these days, we blazed away on it here, some time ago.

I identify as a Christian Platonist, and if I may, I would take you to be a Platonic Christian.

For me, the distinction turns on St Maximus' gentle and insightful corrections of Origen, or rather, 'the errors of Origenism' which might be more to do with his followers than the man himself.

Again, we have rehearsed the Platonic v Christian view of Genesis more than once, but I'd be happy to do so again.
 
Just came across this involving Thermodynamics theory...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/2-futures-can-explain-time-s-mysterious-past/

"Tentative new work from Julian Barbour of the University of Oxford, Tim Koslowski of the University of New Brunswick and Flavio Mercati of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics suggests that perhaps the arrow of time doesn’t really require a fine-tuned, low-entropy initial state at all but is instead the inevitable product of the fundamental laws of physics. Barbour and his colleagues argue that it is gravity, rather than thermodynamics, that draws the bowstring to let time’s arrow fly. Their findings were published in October in Physical Review Letters."
 
Geo said:
..
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/2-futures-can-explain-time-s-mysterious-past/
Barbour and his colleagues argue that it is gravity, rather than thermodynamics, that draws the bowstring to let time’s arrow fly. Their findings were published in October in Physical Review Letters."
Click to expand...
Thanks for the post. It's an interesting subject. It moves with increasing knowledge and information. It's not cut and dried, imo.

There'll be others who come along just as convincingly to question these conclusions, that time is a product of gravity.
 
wil said:
Lol...

Well then no need for discussion eh? Where do I enroll in the cult?
Click to expand...

Well? Become familiar with this if your not already.
"Simulacra and Simulation" by Jean Baudrillard,
"Out of Control" by Kevin Kelly, and "Introducting Evolutionary Psychology" by Dylan Evans
But of course as I stated, "The End of Time" is hugely interesting, and should be included primarily.
 
Geo said:
Well? Become familiar with this if your not already.
"Simulacra and Simulation" by Jean Baudrillard,
"Out of Control" by Kevin Kelly, and "Introducting Evolutionary Psychology" by Dylan Evans
But of course as I stated, "The End of Time" is hugely interesting, and should be included primarily.
Click to expand...
I just want to ask: you require I should devote hours of my time to reading the books you suggest which support your own hypothesis, but did you take 10min to to watch the video by Sabine Hossenfelder I posted earlier, where at the end she discussed Max Tegmar's physics?


Another member here referred to 'link hurling and book stacking.' A poster has to provide good reason for others to take time to read the books and check the links. Unfortunately the hypothesis that life in the world corresponds to ... Oh well, never mind ...
 
Last edited:
Cino Wil, and Corbet...
You've read this of course.

"Matrixists believe in four core tenets: Belief in the prophecy of The One.

Recognition of the semi-subjective multi-layered nature of reality.
Adherence to the principles of one or more of the world's religions until such time as The One returns.
 
Geo said:
"Matrixists believe in four core tenets:

Belief in the prophecy of The One.

Recognition of the semi-subjective multi-layered nature of reality.

Adherence to the principles of one or more of the world's religions until such time as The One returns.
Click to expand...
That's three you've cut and pasted: waiting for the fourth shoe to drop ...
 
Last edited:
Geo said:
mean to come across as, "high and mighty" here
Click to expand...
I am sorry to report brother you have failed.

Your postings have not lead me to have any interest in reading your suggestions. Damn shame as I see it. Your excitement and commitment is obvious...but it feels more like mlm, or the side show barker at the circus....
 
wil said:
I am sorry to report brother you have failed.

Your postings have not lead me to have any interest in reading your suggestions. Damn shame as I see it. Your excitement and commitment is obvious...but it feels more like mlm, or the side show barker at the circus....
Click to expand...
That's fine wil. My commitment, nor belief, is not dependant on another's response.
What have I supposedly failed in?
- "Have you ever stood and stared at it? Marveled at its beauty, its genius?
Billions of people just living out their lives, oblivious."
Smith

So be it.

"That's three .."
Yes, once you are convinced of the Truth wil, I don't see that the use of psychedelic drugs are a requirement.
 
Perhaps you're in the matrix and we're the guardians? Welcome to IO, lol
 
Meanwhile...
I didn't start this thread here...
The founders of the Bahai's are genuine, and have gone through inhuman persecution because of their beliefs.
Who also wrote,"The Promulgation of Peace".
The Jewish Wachowski's grew up as siblings, and discussed all of these things, and eventually presented it to the world.

So be it.
 
It's ok: every person lives by their own light -- to act from the highest and best place inside myself that I am capable -- and let God take over completely
 
Cino said:
What I was going on about is the strategy to proove (and thereby know) things about these infinite sets. In formal mathematics, you reason about the infinity of the natural numbers by considering that there is always one beyond the one you are looking at. That way, you can construct proofs that hold for all of them, by showing what happens to a given one and the next one.
Click to expand...
Thank you for indulging me.

To my way of thinking, what is being called "infinity" is not really infinite - it is a really big unknowable. It would be like asking how many grams the Sun weighs, which while certainly an enormous and likely difficult to calculate number, it is in fact a finite number. To a number such as that, adding or subtracting makes sense. But if the set of infinity includes all of the stars in the universe that are, ever were and ever will be, how can one add one more star? Philosophically and Logically, it is impossible.

All this aside, formal mathematics uses a biblical term, in its set-up of proofs: "Let there be a set with such and such properties...". Inasmuch it lets you create numbers outside your set, and remove them...
Click to expand...
I don't see any philosophical, or logical, problem with removing anything *from* infinity. I wish I still had access to the specific argument, the bulk of which was outside of my understanding, but the entire formula was predicated on adding to infinity, not subtracting.
 
juantoo3 said:
But if the set of infinity includes all of the stars in the universe that are, ever were and ever will be, how can one add one more star? Philosophically and Logically, it is impossible.
Click to expand...

"Impossible" is a term not unlike "infinite", in that it is difficult to reason about using our everyday habits. I used to have the daily training sessions that kept me fit to play with such terms... anyway, enough posturing as an old geezer by me. Yes, it is not useful to consider "infinity plus one" if one wants to construct a proof. The infinity symbol is a handy shorthand to indicate "what happens as this variable gets ever larger". A bit like thinking about the vanishing point in one's visual perspective.

But as I tried to present earlier, while it is not useful to add one to infinity, there are actually different kinds of infinite sets, which can be said to have different "sizes" ("cardinalities").

By filling the gaps between the natural numbers, it is possible to add to this infinite set, making it "bigger" (increasing its cardinality).

The ancient Greeks struggled with the concept of the irrational numbers: Pi, the square root of two, the Golden Mean, none of these can be expressed exactly as a fraction of natural numbers, although they were easy enough to construct in terms of geometry. To the ancien Greek mathematicians, these were "impossible" numbers. We have learned to deal with them since. "Impossible" philosophical concepts are not impossible forever, more often tban not.
 
Geo said:
"Billions of people just living out their lives, oblivious
Click to expand...
"They also serve who only stand and wait."
John Milton, "When I Consider How My Light is Spent"

"... Unlike the world of the Matrix, our "real" world does not have a readily apparent escape hatch. We are inescapably dependent upon the system that feeds us, dependent upon grocery stores for food, a large, powerful health care industry, phone companies for communication, government agencies for security, and have no substitutes should these fail...

... The Matrix Trilogy reveals that western technological republics are still longing for a Christ to show the way to an escape hatch leading us out of ourselves, and that our postmodern condition has made us ripe to seek the fulfilment of this longing. Baudrillard, for his part, is having none of it."
Baudrillard Studies (last para)

It would appear believers in Matrixism have opted for the Blue Pill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top