I couldn't find a shred of objective evidence to support the claims of Holophany

Written by Guest

Thanks for the warning! I visited your site, but I couldn't find in it the citing of a shred of objective (empirical) evidence to support the claims of Holophany, nor even a clear statement of just what theory or explanation of creation is offered by Holophany. And so, for the moment at least, I'll stick with the scientific theories of a Big Bang followed by physical, chemical and biological evolution (random events and nonrandom processes in nature - chance and necessity) which are currently favored by the scientific community (and supported by a veritable mountain of diverse empirical evidence which grows exponentially year by year). A supernatural creator God may (or may not) actually exist, but if one does, as far as I can tell He/She/It is either incompetent or else has not paid a lick of attention to what's going on in the cosmos (and particularly among humans here on Earth). The "widening of man's perceptions" requires empirical evidence which can stand up to critical examination; when that is available, post it on your website and then I'll be happy to revisit and reconsider.

Basically, the theory of "Creation" that I bring forth is not stating that there was a Big Bang or that there was no Big Bang. The Big Bang does not explain creation of something from nothing, nor our "perception" without which we could not have asked the question. Empirical data do not answer Heidegger's question, "Why should there be something rather than nothing?" Also, science is unable to explain "consciousness", or free will. As you have remarked, science can only deal with either causal or random processes whereas free will is neither. Does that mean then that free will is a figment of our imagination? If so, you can't punish crime because according to this view, the criminal cannot be held responsible for his deeds: he was either forced to do what he did by causal processes, or was the victim of random events. So obviously, the world of phenomena is much richer than what scientific formulation can measure.

You seem to ascribe objective existence and attributes to phenomena, independent of measurement. I hold that the parameters of the measurement are the parameters that define what this or that phenomenon is; if the same event was measured through different parameters (if it was defined differently), it would appear to be a different event. According to this view, for instance, an electron IS its quantum numbers, or in other words, everything IS its "definition". This is the reason that I do not question the true nature of phenomena, but rather my quest was to discover the lawfulness of how phenomena are perceived irrespective of who or what perceives (measures), or what is being perceived (defined). What I found was an isomorphic logical structure (with universal realizations). This logical structure - the loop logic - implies that existence is a necessity, which answers Heidegger's question. So "God", the Creator must be this logical structure, which also answers why "He/She/It is either incompetent or else has not paid a lick of attention to what's going on in the cosmos (and particularly among humans here on Earth)," as you put it.

 

Please don't claim exclusivity on the Truth

Written by Guest

What I disagree with you is your claim that Holophany "is a journey where no man has gone before." This is a very sweeping claim. What you have expounded in the website is no different from Indian philosophy or even the core of the teachings of Jesus Christ (without the theology added later by the Church). Saints and sages of every age have discovered the same Truth again and again. It is no doubt a great achievement to arrive at the Truth. It is the very source and goal of life. What you should realize is that you are not alone. There are hundreds of people in all ages that have arrived at the same Truth as you have explained. Your site will surely be useful to people who seek it and I am sure they will be greatly benefited by it. But please don't claim exclusivity. The knowledge of the Truth is open to all. You are one of the droplets of water in the ocean of Truth.

Holophany is unique not because of the truth (or truths) that it has arrived to, which is indeed the achievement of many, but because of the logic through which this truth, as you call it, has been achieved. I do not proclaim to be the messenger of "Truth", I do not "preach" what is right or wrong, I do not tell what to think. My efforts are aimed at analyzing and understanding how we think (no matter what we think). That's neither truth, nor lie, but a lawfulness, a process - or to be more accurate - the process of definition that defines reality to be what it is to us. I do not deal with what has been perceived; my focus is on the process of "perception", and the laws thereof, which endow one with the ability to create reality. Holophany is not a religion but a philosophy mainly dealing with logic. Please read my article Holophany and Truth which clearly states that I am neither searching for THE TRUTH, nor preaching it, but instead, analyzing the structure of thinking, the structure of existence. And yes, I maintain that Holophany brings one to terra incognita, to where no man has gone before.

Shet sounds like a demon

Written by Guest

SHET sounds like a demon that you have encountered. A real person, a spiritual being, who tells you lies to destroy you. The Bible you quote is so clear; there is a personal God who has expressed himself clearly in the scriptures. Yet SHET tells you a mild reworking of pantheism. SHET tells you God is not personal - this is a lie. What else is SHET lying about?

You were probably raised with the belief of an external God, external to you, who is there as a good father to take care of you and the pious, and who punishes sins and rewards the righteous. However beautiful that is, look around you and ask, where was this God that is almighty and can do miracles to save the innocent during 9/11? Where was this God during the Holocaust? All those children dying from hunger, murdered during ethnic cleansing, entire species of animals (God's creatures) annihilated - were these sinners that deserved it? If God would be a good and just father sitting up on a cloud able to save millions of his suffering children, and he does not do that, then there are two possibilities: God is either impotent or doesn't give a damn, in which case he is neither good nor just. Another possibility is that God is the lawfulness itself, the process of becoming, existence, which means, the very essence of being - any being - in which case, we would be wise to learn this lawfulness, so we can become creators in "his image". What do you think was meant in the Bible by man having been created in God's image? That God has hands and a face? Or that we are similar in function, which would mean, that we can be creators of our own lives and happiness. That is what "SHET" teaches. He does not teach truths, but tools whereby we can undo our reliance upon external help instead of staying victims. By learning the universal lawfulness of how anything (things, situations, and etc.) becomes, which is the process of creation, we can replace the necessity of an external God with the knowledge that unites the transcendent with the immanent within. Perhaps, reading What is the Purpose of Creation? will make things clearer.

Something that claims to be everything is usually nothing

Written by Guest

You are dealing with subjects like philosophy, logic, psychology, physics, religion, and what not. Something that claims to be everything is usually nothing; at best, such claims are superficial slogans, demagogy.

This argument would be true, unless there was a unifying element. There is. Holophany is special precisely because such a unifying element, an isomorphous lawfulness is the essence of the theory. This isomorphous lawfulness is a logical process wherein "existence" is inferred by the process. Or in other words, "being" (of anything that is) is a logical necessity. To see what I mean, read How is there Something from Nothing? and The Loop Logic. The full theory with its implications in psychology, science, etc. is given in my book, Holophany, the Loop of Creation.

What kind of sexist religion is this?

Written by Guest

What kind of sexist religion is this? Only 'man' learns, not women? What kind of religion is that? Retarded?

1) "Man" is the generic use for the human race that includes men, women, and everything else that is Homo sapiens.
2) Holophany is NOT a religion. It is a philosophy.