Captain Gabriel and the Great Planetary Odyssey

Hmm… the alpha and the omega… the story begins and ends in the same way… a transition into and a transition out of (a dream), and it is done seamlessly so that the reader doesn’t quite know when he has left the crib and when he as entered the cosmos (or visa-versa). ← Maybe this seamless transition is the topology, a way of mapping the one world to the other. I mean, if Gabriel started his adventures saying: “Okay, here’s how the story starts…” then it would be abrupt and we wouldn’t be able to trace elements in this reality with elements in the other. But a fluid transition is a topology.

Well, Pilgrim, you read into it what you may. Hopefully it will inspire you and others.

Magj, in spite of the boozing repute I have developed, I’m quite harmlessly in control. And no, I wasn’t reserving it(the reply)for its rarity, nor its complexity, only to avoid inyerjections
of the kind I’m making now.

And I’m making no other excuses.

Gib, talking about intersections, or what the beat writers used to call the ’ cut up method, I felt the seams of the later sections appeared to counter them.

The different contextual areas, seemed as if different stories were beginning, and matured as they unraveled.

Pilgrim, isn’t SCAP and topography mutually descriptive in a sense?

Gib … you have such a way with words … a tribute to the depth and breadth of your intellect … or … the caliber of your AI algorithms … either way the result’s the same. :slight_smile:

Some people travel regularly and without effort between worlds … others work very hard at it … eg serious meditation practitioners, aesthetics and so on.

All art is subject to the interpretation of those whose gaze fixes upon it. While I only tasted a mouthful I find your writing may be interpreted on multiple levels … yet … at the same time such interpretations remain invisible to the blind.

Obviously my interpretation(s) is framed within the context of my life experiences … individuals without such experiences are the ‘blind’ I refer to … not at all an affront.

[b]

[/b]

Meno … I look forward to your posts … written while sober or drunk … or anywhere in between. :slight_smile:

The word I would use for SCAP is ‘bridge’ … connecting our material world with the ‘other’ … despite the fact there exists no space or time between the two worlds.

While the Evolution of Being marches forward … SCAP seems to have ossified. The turbulence from the left is a consequence of this ossification. I’m sure we’ll land on our feet at some point along the way.

Or, we are at a junction or interjumction between the views that either we do land on our feet or we miss. The interjection is almost unpredictably and unprecieveably subtle, and the mechanics of the knowledge will have to become equivocal to the knowledge of it’s mechanics to map the correct choice.

Some even believe that only our higher powers can direct that route to be taken

Not just can but do.

I’m with Gib … though … begs the question:

[b]

[/b]

Some suggestions:

  1. Some drugs appear to work … some of the time.

  2. Sufficient volumes of alcohol appear to work … some of the time.

  3. Sober and immersed in the crowd … not so much.

  4. Sober and separated/isolated from the crowd … worked for me … and others?

Meno … you shared some personal info with those ILP members who read your posts. Your life has been a continuous stream of increasingly difficult and increasingly painful “hard Knocks” … graduation may be just around the corner.

Graduation as in:

[b]

[/b]

[/b][/quote.

Those lyrics are hard to live up to. Thank you , the sentiments returned, most of these effects are certainly due to Gabriel, in the present context.

[b]

[/b]

Perhaps there’s a mathematical relationship between level of hard(ness) and level of merit.

Reaching for the summit.jpg

Reminds me of the quip … the philosopher and scientist finally achieved the summit … after a very long and arduous effort … only to be met by the spiritualist who asked them "What took you so long?

[b]

[/b]

and by extension to Gabriel’s creator … Gibran Shah

When I think of our higher power, I think of the higher self, the self that chooses everything we do in life and knows why it chooses. The higher self orchestrates the entire show as far as I’m concerned.

Nice meta statement Gib … the cornerstone of the second book of your trilogy? :slight_smile:

Let me paraphrase is my own words and you can let me know if we’re on the same page.

Our (sub)conscious mind takes us places we don’t want to go. At some point along the way our conscious mind becomes aware of the odyssey and starts to enjoy the ride.

I would make it even simpler: our subconscious mind takes us places.

Your book supports this perspective.

What about encounters along the way?

And in addition what sort of compass does our sub-conscious mind take us, where , if the compass goes wrong, the route it directs to may not coincide with our higher powers?

Does the subconscious mind have any connection with our higher powers?

Both,

I think of the higher self as like the actor playing the character–always in control and has the character’s life entirely pre-planned–the character thinks he’s in control (usually completely unaware that the actor even exists)–but unbeknownst to him, the actor is always calling the shots.

Encounters along the way? I’m not sure. Plot elements in the story I guess. I don’t want to say there is no room for improvisation or that plot twists can’t unexpectedly enter into the picture, but I think the higher self jumps into the roll having one’s entire life planned out.

They are one and the same. We tend to think of the subconscious as a closed off compartment of our minds. The image usually brought in to represent this is the egg model (where the top portion of the egg is colored white, representing the conscious mind, and the bottom portion is colored black, representing the unconscious). The image I prefer, however, is the Jungian image: the conscious mind is like a room that you’re centered in. The unconscious is the dark side of the room. You see walls on all sides of you except in the darkness. The darkness just fades to black the deeper into it you peer, and beyond a certain depth, you can’t see the wall behind it… which is to say you can’t even see whether there is a wall or not.

Because the Jungian perspective models the unconscious from the first-person subjective point of view, we lose the right to claim that the unconscious is compartmentalized (closed off). For all we know, what lies in the darkness is unbounded. It may not end at a wall, but rather be an opening the the vastness of infinite space. If this is the case, we ought not to think of the unconscious as a personal component of one’s mind, but rather a passage that leads from the individual’s mind to the rest of the universe. The higher self becomes a bridge between the ego and the universe, more closely connected with all the higher powers that determine our lives than the personal ego.

It’s time for me to go to bed … thank goodness … as Poirot would say … sleep gives my little gray cells the opportunity to do their work. :slight_smile:

Here’s something to munch on with your morning coffee …

The underlying purpose of AI is to preserve our material reality.

Could our higher powers appear to led us wrong, where the wrong may be out not understanding it?

It depends. I could be an actor playing the part of Oedipus. When Oedipus finds out that the woman he slept with is his mother, he may blame the “higher powers” for steering him wrong, when in fact, the higher power responsible for this (me, the actor) did it on purpose and strictly according to the script. Then there’s mistakes at the level of the actor–he screws up his lines, the director gives him shit–or at the level of the director: he puts on a bad play, the audience hisses and boos. But I think we’d be making a mistake by imagining all these “higher” levels as literally separable into “levels” (or individual selves–some lower, some higher). I think the ego is the only “level” that is individuated (and even there, I think this is an illusion); it’s all rather seamless. At the top of the hierarchy, I suppose we could say the universe itself is an “individual” (who goes by the name of “God”), but here I believe everything is planned and there are no mistakes, no leading us astray (the indeterminism of quantum mechanics notwithstanding).

Good morning … my little grey cells did their job … here’s the output.

  1. Being within form.

  2. Being created form with a specific purpose.

  3. The shelf life expiry date of form is rapidly approaching.

  4. Form has grown to like itself and feels threatened by the retreat of being.

  5. Thus the mad rush to preserve form without being … ergo … AI

Brilliant! … n’est-ce pas? :laughing:

Very nice. Can A1 accomplish it ? Its like the mathematical analysis of topical and internal mathematical analysis of limits as boundaries.

Can A1 accomplish that , which it has taken mankind’s whole. existence to come to this point? If A1 can, then perhaps the ontologocal warning of Occam’s Razor can coincide with those current opinions regarding the unworthiness of reliance upon the trust vested on modern technology.

Or is the early preoccupation of linking identity via Leibnitz’s two spheres will tend to show more convergence then divergence , reducing motive behind intentionality and looking at the morphology of the Great Social Experiment more likely furthered furtheredby a kind Rouseau-en than Hobbs-Ian social contract?

Now I know how You hate fancy language Pilgrim so ignore this last philosophical comment, for this is a literary genre here, but I needed to establish links , to which I can layer on refer to . Sorry to say, one of may marked disabilities disabilities has to do with short term memory loss, indigenous, but definitely related to drink going back to my teen years.

And since we’re not too much off tangent here behind the Planetary Odyssey, I wonder if the Great Homeric Odyssey can somehow be touched upon? In fact the mere mention of it , brings to mind its temporal influence.

Gib: dis You use ‘Odeasey’ in its temporal l sense , or more alongside its colloquial rendition?