The title of this article... WTF PEOPLE!! That DOES NOT sound desireable! No likey!
https://www.gadgetsay.com/2016/12/scientists-developed-method-upload-knowledge-brain/But then as you read it, instead it seems to turn to simple neuroplasticity rather than some vile machine attempting to "feed" you.
It's an odd article.
Neuroplasticity is one thing and a very beneficial thing that I've even user myself but it is an odd article nonetheless.
Comments
But who is creating these diseases and why do the "cures" have the potential to turn people into robots?
Note to self: you have been warned.
Thanks for the heads up.
http://www.crystal-life.com/blog/feng-shui-faceted-crystals/
Rene Guenon got fooled. He's talkin' about "this duality betweeen the
Purusa and Prakrti on the hindu tradition or, just to use another expressin'
, that between the "essence" and "substance". These two are about to be
'nderstood as the two poles of any manifestation..."
"Bad idea jeans !" : Prakrti is "matter in its aspect "Mula-Prakrti",
which 's got its mythologykal correpondent in "Mu-Deva", wrongly considered
as "inphernal Shakti".
Prakrti and Purusha are, in fact, con-substantial and indivisible, and
maybe Guenon ment in his statement Maha-Purusha and Mula-Prakrti which are
trully 2 poles (as in Sahasrara and Muladhara).
More : " This way, there' s "essence" and "substance", whether for a
world, meanin' a state of existence determined by certain special conditions
(?!?- dha ... what ?!? - my note), whether for a bein' considered as
particular or even for every each and one of this bein' states, meanin' any
manifestation of this bein' onto the levels of the existence.."
Wrong again (I love this game !) : it' s an absurd definition of "the
world" ("F*ck the entire world !...." - Eminem, I just don' t give a f*ck) -
the only state of existence of a ( ! ) world is given by that particular
world' s state of counsciousness (there' s no such thing as strictly
energetyk or materyal world).
"Understood like this relative way and especially in comparison with the
particular beings, the essence and the substance are basically the same
thing with what the scolastyk philopsophers named as "form" and "matter". "
No, it ain't like that.
1.Matter = Mula - Prakriti and 2. Form = Rupa ; 1 + 2 = the visible
reality, strictly traditional fact.
"(...) we'll add that all that's named "actin'" and "potential", in
aristotelicyanway,alsocorresponds to the essence and the substance ; these two
terms are liable to a more extensyve aplication than that of "form" and
"matter" ; but, basically, tosaytere' s in any bein' a mixture of act and
potential means the same thin, 'cause the act is in itself what participate
to the essence, and the potential what participate to the substance (...)"
No. The act = potential, essence = substance.
It' s like this : an atom of hydrogen remains the same, no matter how
many atoms of hydrogen make a hidrogenate substance.
An atom of anythin' is identykal with any other 5 atoms of anythin',
'cause it is the ESSENCE OF THEIR SUBSTANCE.
This is "The law of much more" !