text:
- Farrukh Yakubov
- West Lafayette Bra, IN
- United States
Student, Purdue University
This conversation is closed.
Where do you think consciousness comes from?
Science can give answers to many things, but consciousness seems to be an unsolved mystery. Why do you think people have consciousness? Where does it come from? Do you think it can be created artificially? How?
You may answer based on anything you know, it does not have to be a proven fact. Thank you.
Jul 8 2011: You're going to get answers on both sides of the spectrum here. Ask a neuroscientist and he'll most likely tell you its a function of your brain. Ask a theologist and he'll say it's our little piece of God.
I have a question for you. Of what use is consciousness if the only being we can be sure is actually conscious is ourselves? see: Plato's Allegory of the Cave.
Going further. How do we even know that we are actually conscious? (Ever had a dream that seemed so real you couldn't tell the difference?) People used to believe the earth was flat until proven otherwise. So as nice as it is to believe we are all conscious beings, it's equally possible that we may not be. For all we know, this could all be a part of the vivid dream a potato in another dimension is having.
Farrukh Yakubov
Jul 8 2011: It is true that being conscious does not allow us to know wether someone else is actually conscious or not. But, If we didn't have consciousness, we wouldn't even know ourselves. As long as we know ourselves we can say that we are conscious. It does not have to be in reality as we call it. The thing with reality is no matter what it is we only feel and know it in our brain. Therefore, there is no difference between reality and a dream while they are in our brain. In other words, we know the reality only in a way our brain allows us to know; there might be things that are beyond conscious capacity of ourselves. Moreover, you a right about this all could be something's dream that exist somewhere. Entire life could be a dream, even dream within a dream. We can't tell the difference because there is no difference for us, we can't go beyond what our brain tells us.
- +11
Jul 8 2011: Hi Farrukh,
To be honest, I was actually playing the devils advocate a little. I think there is proof enough for consciousness based on a combination of a need to survive and free-will. If we didn't have something to save, there would be no need for the preservation of self instinct.Jul 11 2011: I like your explanations. You seem to be very brilliant! I agree when you said our entire life could be a dream, even dream within a dream. Our world is in our minds. Our mind is the world or universe. Consciousness comes from the mind through our physical and mind senses. But I think you wanted an answer more than that like, Who gave us consciousness, like a God that created it, is not what you're looking for as one would ask then who created God? It's a chicken and egg analogy.
Could consciousness come from desire in our mind? I agree with you that consciousness is a kind of energy, a kind of cosmic energy in the universe or outside of our universe or physical world. Where is the source of this energy? I'm extremely interested to know too. :)
Jul 11 2011: I believe that we know very little about capabilities of our mind. Everything I know about consciousness is just what my own consciousness lets me to know, so I would really like to find answers to these questions too. For now we are logically trapped in a 'universal puzzle'. But one day we will learn to use our minds to reveal the pages of undiscovered chapter of science, and find the answers that we were looking for a long time.Jul 12 2011: Farrukh,
You say..."we know the reality only in a way our brain allows us to know". You also state..."we can't go beyond what our brain tells us". Does the brain program us as individuals? Or do we program the brain? My perception is that we program the brain. So the brain doesn't really "allow" us, but rather, it is the "hard drive" of our computer:>) We program it! It is said that we use only about 10% of our brain capacity. What do you think happens when we open the mind to the possibility of channeling more information/energy through the brain? I don't feel "trapped".:>)
Jul 12 2011: I think that even we learn to take 100% advantage of our brain, and find answers to all unanswered questions, there will be new questions emerging that we struggle to find answers.Jul 14 2011: I think we start with the data already on our hard drives-DNA- that was passed down from our parents,and update it as we go- much the same as previous custodians of this data base have done since the beginning of this form of existance.Jul 15 2011: If the brain is indeed a quantum processor, then it is the environment that programs or shapes our brain. Our survival instinct picks up and then adapts the brain to the environment that is is subjected to. We are evolutionary survival beings after all and have adapted all the way through the ice ages to be here today.
The little gift of consciousness that we have only allows us to change a small portion of mainly mammalian brain. It allows us to exercise but a small portion of our largely uncontrollable brain. The rest is unconscious on a level that we are only beginning to understand. Within the unconscious (or what i like to call our animal/reptilian brain) we get the different impulses from our environment.
Being social animals we also herd at a very deep and unconscious level. I have been studying this pattern and it is global and fractal like in nature. Even when we manage to grasp and learn to understand this phenomenon, it is still out of our control.
We somehow believe that we are logical beings yet emotion usually wins out over ration for the most of us so how much conscious control do we actually exert over ourselves?
I have studied and understand a little bit about the mind yet i am nowhere near being able to figure out what consciousness actually is for? It takes a lot of conscious effort to try and reprogram the unconscious, especially as we get older. Sure enough we may figure it out, but it may be a long long way away.Jul 16 2011: Stavros, these are my thoughts let me know what you think.
Agree that our subconscious is an underlying influence in everything - but it isn't absolute. The conscious mind reasons and puts new info into the Subconscious. Sub sends direct requests and sometimes our conscious mind has to intervene with discipline - it has to weigh up oher priorities in our subconscious - e.g. a person on a diet is told to eat a burger - they can stop, and say 'hey, I am on a diet' and then 2 different subconscious drivers are in conflict and this + outside information will be weighed up and we have change/adaption.
Conscious mind is also a conduit for new info. One silly example is things like changing a password on your computer - my job forces me to do this every 8 weeks - for the first week after changing it, my subconscious automatically types in my old password, because it is still firm in my subconscious. Then I have to delete it and (consciously) put in the new one. Then by the second week the new password has replaced the old one in my subconscious.
I feel the conscious mind allows us to make optimal decisions, and form new habits (good or bad - the subcon doesn't discriminate, once it's in, it's in) - However the conscious mind does discriminate, and sometimes if we have a bad habit in our subconscious, our conscious mind will notice, and it will look for other info in our subconscious related to that bad thing, and sometimes some info in our subconscious will be in conflict with other info, and we now have a decision point - We will think about it, and we will look for outside info to help make the decision (e.g research google).
I feel what I'm saying is that the subconscious is a store full of ingredients, and the conscious mind is the chef who will put all the ingredients together and try to make something nice. Some chefs are better than others, so of course some people will eat a McDonalds 5 nights per week and others will eat like Gordon Ramsay all day.Jul 18 2011: The idea that we only use 10% of our brain capacity is a "myth." We use it all.
Do we "live up to its potential?"
Probably not. But there are no untapped or latent bits that, if we brought them "online," would give us a cognitive boost.
The myth is attributable to an erroneous - quantified - reference to William James' work and was cited (I think) in the introduction to Dale Carnegie's book "How to Win Friends and Influence People."Jul 18 2011: I think we only use 10% of our hearts. ;)Jul 19 2011: QUOTE: "I think we only use 10% of our hearts. ;)"
True enough ... but then 10% of an infinite quantity is ... carry the one ... um ... a lot.Jul 19 2011: Hi Thomas,
The 10% of our hearts line is from the movie Wedding Crashers. ...if you haven't seen it, I reccomend giving it a shot. Good entertainment.Jul 21 2011: I hate to sound disrespectful, but I feel strongly about the misconception that we only "use" 10% of our brains... Do an MRI, and you will see that this is untrue. There is definitely unused parts, but it's definitely not as large a number as most people think...
I think it stems from the fact that we can only recall a small amount of what we know, or that our capability for intelligence (organization of data, recall of data, speed of recall) is much higher than our actual intelligence...
No offense again, I just get ridiculously, pointlessly over-upset about the "we only use 2 of our brain cells!" idea.Jul 21 2011: QUOTE: The 10% of our hearts line is from the movie Wedding Crashers. ...if you haven't seen it, I reccomend giving it a shot. Good entertainment.
I did see the movie and enjoyed it but don't recall the line ... it sounds like a line Vince Vaughn's character would use.
[And you've gotten three thumbs up for it ... not bad!]Jul 12 2011: Thanks Lindsay:>)
I agree Farrukh that there may always be unanswered questions as long as we are on this earth school. If we had all the answers, we wouldn't need to participate in the human exploration. We don't need to "struggle" when we are open to possibilities and willing to say/think/feel... "I don't know for sure". I believe that as we expand our exploration, the capacity of the brain expands with a higher energy vibration, to facilitate more information.Jul 14 2011: The difference between reality and dreaming is clear. Reality is continuous, whereas dreams are not. Today will continue from where yesterday left off. Granted we can only distinguish reality from dream in hindsight, but still the distinction is clear.Jul 14 2011: Shawki,
I agree that we start with some data/programming in the brain when we come to this earth school... maybe from past lives or universal information. Then we update it, or maybe reprogram some things based on information we get from the life experience...parents, society, various individuals, groups, study, research, etc. Thanks for clarifying my incomplete statement:>)
I believe that by living mindfully, we can consciously reprogram the brain, and/or we can repeat the same patterns of the old programming. Just as there are various levels of programming with computers, there are various levels of data and programming with the brain. What do you think?
Jul 15 2011: Thanks Colleen
I totally agree.
Our scientist believe that the gene portion of our DNA-That we got from our parents,who got it from their parents, who got it....contain the blueprint for building every tissue in the body, these genes also describe how to operate and maintain the whole organism,control it's development and stably operates the activities of the brain.
We, however get to put our body through its paces, much the same as an R&D engineer puts an improved computer or airplane through its paces.
Consciousness then, is not a thing , but the process of monitoring or experiencing the interaction between our body and the universe as we put it through various configurations relative to other bodies.Jul 16 2011: Farrukh: continue with your research...I am somewhat "jealous" pertaining to your intellect...Jul 17 2011: Shawki,
I've heard about the DNA theory, and agree that we recieve data/information from that source. I also agree that we "update" the data as we live our lives. I also think there is more on another level. How do we explain, for example, the fact that children born of the same parents are often very different?
They would obviously have the same DNA and similar life experiences as children? I believed that children born of the the same parents would be similar...until I had 2 children who are very different! Then I started evaluating myself and 7 brothers and sisters! There are obviously similarities, and many differences. Do you think/feel that the differences are reflected in us as individuals with different choices as to how we "put our body through its paces"? I agree that consciousness is partly the process of monitoring/experiencing.
I agree with you that the environment, survival instinct and adaptation contribute to information that is in the brain. If these were the only factors shaping or programming the brain, wouldn't we all be thinking the same way?
I also agree that we are "social animals" and can, at times be "herded", as when we accept the "mob mentality" for example. I do not agree that the brain is "largely uncontrolable"...mine isn't anyway!!! LOL !!! I think, as individuals, we are the ONLY entity that has control of our brain. We can make choices to open the mind to information, and we have the choice as to how we will use the information
Jul 17 2011: ditto all acoss the board on this post Colleen
..I think what we see first see in infants is that true self", before the brain strats to build other guidance and information from interaction with others..parents, family, child minders and just the content of environment around them..including the "mood" of people around them.
Lucky those who get to emanante and unflod from this "true self"..who never lose contact with that self and who listen to it and takes its guidance all their lives And I agree with your sense that we add to that "true self" over the course of or lives..for better or for worse.
..I love this quote of Antonio t. de Nicolas, which underacores and beautifully expand that we always have the freedom to shape our own thoughts and create our own lives
."A person's life consists not so much in what happens to him or her but of the means he or she uses to gather that life, and the particular inner faculties to which those memories, images and facts are surrendered so that they not only make their lives through those acts, but make them knowingly."St. John of the Cross Alchemist of the Soul P.16 "Jul 20 2011: You're right when you say that the outside reality is only as real as we are. So the only solution is to think in terms of the individual.
I know that I exist, regardless of what mental or cognitive activities I do. I am not defined by my relations to external objects, but by my awareness of myself through various activities and states. So I am the only reality. Because in dreams my relations are with a different set of objects than during waking. How are we to judge which of the two states is real? Therefore, relations to "worlds" is not real.
Now, beyond myself, I can check with you to see if you have similar notions about what is reality. The commonality of experience suggests that the reality of me is the same as the reality of you. That does not mean that we both are simultaneously real, because for me, you are part of the world that is not real. I am part of the world that is not real for you. But each of us is an independent reality. That very fact gives us both commonality. It eliminates the possibility of more than one reality or "consciousness" because if there are two ultimate realities then the process of comparison of our experiences would be impossible.
Vera Nova
Jul 9 2011: Great points, Corey. I appreciate your sharp comment " Ask a neuroscientist and he'll most likely tell you its a function of your brain. Ask a theologist and he'll say it's our little piece of God."
- +1
Unfortunately many researchers are possessed by brains while looking for some philosophical answers regarding our existence.... Fancy tools! but This kind of mentality goes back to the era of René Descartes. No butcher, surgeon or researcher discovered any image or thought in brains.
I do understand that Consciousness is impossible without its Observer, which is a playful mind itself, who observes its own spectacles.
Thank you for vivid thinking! A rare treat.
Jul 10 2011: Hi Simone,
Thank you for the kudos. I'm definitely not saying one answer is better than another but, I think there is a definite distinction between individual and social consciousness. I also think that our brains are far from a perfect recording device so, we can never really be sure about anything we believe to be real. (including consciousness.)
At best, we can make an educated guess. I liken it to looking at a tree through a dirty window. We can make out the general shape and say, "that's a tree." But, we can't really see the leaves in detail.
Consciousness could just be a small part of a bigger picture and in my opinion it probably is.
Anyway, thanks again :)
Jul 14 2011: Hi Corey. "a bigger picture" I believe, is our subconscious minds.
And you've said "I think there is a definite distinction between individual and social consciousness."
I have been thinking about this for years, especially when people barely understand each other but say that they believe in some "universal consciousness".... I trust that there is no way that any universal consciousness can ever exist. It can be only imagined in one's mind as a hope.
My explanation? Nature does not allow any minds to exchange their images, sensations or thoughts Directly. "Things in themselves" as great I.Kant said.
Even telepathy is not really an open door into someone's mind, but just a special massage.
Consciousness is a unique "production" of one's mind, it is a privately owned domain, where each mind brews its own identity.
I have my theory that perceptions play a tremendous role in our existence. As an artist I've discovered (for myself) that our perceptions are governed by the same classical artist rules as those we follow while painting in traditional style.
Each mind must constantly Compare (sensations, images, sounds...), create a Composition from whatever it randomly selects. It has to Focus on something that seems more noticeable, and Frame its Composition for its observations, separating it from the rest "of the world". Corey, as you have already noticed - our minds have difficulties in "recording", "reprinting" anything perfectly. How true. It happens because any mental process
is based on constant change - change is the only universal law that we can prove within our minds (and do not need any labs). Instability, imperfectness, imbalance and uniqueness - are characteristics of this mighty change responsible for our existence.
I see our minds as primordial art, sound recording and animation studios.Jul 14 2011: Corey and Simone,
I agree that several levels of consciousness are all parts of the big picture.
You believe that consciousness is a "production" of one's mind...the brain? I agree that we may "brew" our own identity, based on information we get from many levels of consciousness, so I don't agree that it is all simply a production of the mind/brain.
I agree with your theory that perceptions play a role in our life experience, and LOVE your comparison to art. I also had the wonderful experience as a performing artist to create my "scene" with sensations, images, sound, light, actions and reactions...all the different "colors" of life:>)Jul 14 2011: QUOTE: "For all we know, this could all be a part of the vivid dream a potato in another dimension is having."
In which case, the potato might profit from asking (and answering) the question.
These kinds of discussions can become a bit self referential - we talk "about" something; and then we talk about "talking about" something, and so on. [I am doing it now.]
When we talk about consciousness (and where it comes from) more often than not, we are actually talking about "the idea of consciousness."
And when we are talking about the idea (of anything) - well, anything goes because we can say anything we want about an idea.
Jul 15 2011: It definitely makes for good conversation but, the same could be said for quantum physics or religious dogmas. When you can't prove something, all you have to go on are theories. What you have to decide on is which theory works for you.
Jul 15 2011: QUOTE: "It definitely makes for good conversation but, the same could be said for quantum physics or religious dogmas."
Yes, it is a good topic for conversation. One question we might ask is: "Is consciousness a "hard topic" like physics or a "soft topic" like religious dogma and philosophy?
Not that being dogmatic is a soft topic - it can be studied and the appropriate neurophysiological processes mapped, measured and described. But what we are dogmatic about ... well, that's another story.
I think we humans are prone to making assumptions. One of them is: If we know a word that describes something, we assume we know what the something is.
We have a word "consciousness" - it is fair to think we assume we know what that word means - we "invented it" after all.
I don't think we do.
Conversations about things we actually know are, usually, very short.
Conversations about things we think we know, are endless.
I think knowing what consciousness is would be a good first step in streamlining any conversations we might want to have "about" it.
There are some lovely simple tales that illustrate my point quite well - a well know one is about a group of people who had read about mangoes and they were discussing what they might taste like. The debate went around and around ... until a fruit seller overheard them and offered them a mango to taste. The discussion ended.
How many of us can say, "I know what consciousness is?"
I have found that those of us who (we might assume) could say such a thing (and I have met a few) are extremely unlikely to make such a comment. Those of us who (we might assume) could not make such an assertion are much more likely to talk about it with comments ranging from, "It does not exist," to "It is the foundation of all that there is," and so on.
Know consciousness.
Know thyself.Jul 16 2011: QUOTE: "One question we might ask is: "Is consciousness a "hard topic" like physics or a "soft topic" like religious dogma and philosophy?"
Can you please clarify? I want to make sure I understand you correctly.
Also, the Mango parable is great!
Jul 16 2011: QUOTE: "... is: "Is consciousness a "hard topic" like physics or a "soft topic" like religious dogma and philosophy?"
Can you please clarify?"
Sure. Is consciousness "real" ... that is, would it exist, could it exist, does it exist, independently of the mind of human beings (or some such entity?)
Or is consciousness a pure abstraction with which we can only play "word games?"
Examples of hard topics might include: chemistry, physics (to a point), marketing, carpentry, emotions, etc.
Examples of soft topics might include: God (but not religion), Truth (but not truth), philosophy, some theoretical physics (but not for lack of trying to become "hard") and so on.
Of course, you can see the problem with the question (and the topic) - unless one has tasted the mango, one cannot know what it tastes like; and even if one has tasted the mango (if it were possible,) one cannot tell anyone else what it tastes like. That is the nature of experience.
Let us assume there is consciousness and that it is real and independent (not, for example, an emergent property of the human brain.)
Let us assume that human beings can experience it (not simply think about it) ... what would someone who had had such an experience say to someone who hadn't?
What would someone who had not had such an experience talk about?
It's an interesting dilemma, isn't it?
If consciousness exists, and it is possible for a human being to experience it, then, if one wishes to talk about it authoritatively, one would want to pursue such an experience (by what ever means necessary;) and if consciousness does not exist - except as a hypothetical - there is not much point talking about it.
Unless, of course, we like talking about hypotheticals.
And apparently we do because we do it a lot.Jul 18 2011: Thank you for the clarification. I agree. There comes a point when the discussion becomes silly and like you said, it's fun to talk about.Jul 17 2011: I havnt actually read the whole conversation but I do want to add this. If beng dead can be defined as not being concious (which it is...when you are dead, you have no conciousness) then we are "dead" for most of our sleep (sleep cycle 1, 2, 3, etc) and even when we are unconcious, we can be thought of as being dead. However, when dreaming lucidly, we are concious of our existence.
"When you're in bed, you're dead."
Tuesdays with Morrie
As for the question in particular, I believe in a more holistic view of conciousness in that it is rooted from a field of sorts as many have described here. However, this is not a scientific view, only philospohical and pseudoscientific at that for I have not done any scientific studies nor do I know enough of nueroscience to actually make a conclusive theory about this question.
However, I do know of the Global Conciousness Project and how it is allowing for the study of conciousness at a grander scale to help elucidate the effects of our conciousness. This study measures the deviations of random number generator machines used for the lottery and such when large "conciousness events" occur like the Presidential election (2008) and the terrorist attacks of September 11th. This scientific study spanning more than 30 years is using Scientific and Statistical analysis to actually map how our global conciousness behaves. It is very interesting and if we want to actually talk about this topic in a scientific light we should refer to this project as a reference frame.
Jul 17 2011: QUOTE: "As for the question in particular, I believe in a more holistic view of conciousness...However, this is not a scientific view, only philospohical and pseudoscientific at that for I have not done any scientific studies nor do I know enough of nueroscience to actually make a conclusive theory about this question.
Hi Raj,
Well the guys who know a LOT about neuroscience - V. S. Ramachandran, Gerald Edelman, Edward de Bono et al - can't provide a more definitive (scientific) answer than the one you have.
Personally, I think we often confuse "awareness" for "consciousness." They are NOT the same thing.
Jul 18 2011: Thomas,
WOW...did Webster's get it wrong?
Definition of consciousness: "The quality or state of being aware esp. of something within oneself".Jul 18 2011: I love the way you think, Thomas. Unlike the rest of the deeply intuitive living world around us, we learn to communicate through our man-made language. None of our human words/terms can make sense on their own, unless we are explained and agreed upon what they "mean". Otherwise, we would not need any Webster, or even any grammar.... just like other living forms. I'd like to make some workable sense of "consciousness" for the obvious reason that we commonly use this word in different ways. Consciousness is presumably a state of Human mind, where we so desperately want to put things that we experience in our own man-made order. It's possible that our brains are growing into a such large development just because of lots of extra thinking activities. No other living creature even nearly needs this type of mental activity - it uses its instant intuition, and therefore it needs neither a compass, nor an Internet.
What strange playhouses our minds are!
As I understand, we are not born with a "consciousness" state of mind. We are born with blessed Awareness - super sensitivity and fantastic alertness. These abilities are getting suppressed as we age by our "consciousness", developed based on our human conventional thinking.
The universe of subconsciousness is magnificent and ultimately intuitive. I'd call it Awareness. Well, my Out-of-body experience has proved it 100%.
thumbJul 18 2011: QUOTE: "... WOW...did Webster's get it wrong?
Definition of consciousness: "The quality or state of being aware esp. of something within oneself".
Hi Colleen,
Did Webster's get it wrong?
It depends on whether we are getting "technical" or "colloquial."
My guess is that with Webster's ... they got it right as far as the "common parlance" is concerned.
But we are not "common" ... are we?
Our bodies are, at this moment regulating our heart rate, metabolism, temperature, and so on.
Do you think "consciousness" has anything to do with that?
Are we "aware" of it happening?
Assuming consciousness is playing some role in the maintenance of homeostasis (and it is a debatable point) - do you think - if consciousness took a little break - we could take over using our awareness?
Jul 18 2011: Yes...consciousness has something to do with that, and yes, I am aware of it happening.Consciousness and awareness are intertwined according to me and Webster's:>)
Perhaps that is not true for you, but it is for many of us. To make a broad statement like that is not accurate for some of us:>)Jul 18 2011: QUOTE: "Consciousness and awareness are intertwined according to me and Webster's:>)
Perhaps that is not true for you, but it is for many of us. To make a broad statement like that is not accurate for some of us:>)
Well, colloquially, it is true for me too but now we are getting into two different topics: semantics and "authority" for lack a of a better word. (Can someone think of a better word than "authority" for the concept I am conveying?)
Certainly, there is a relationship between consciousness and awareness but that does not mean the words mean the same thing. Especially when we are engaging in a discussion about where "consciousness comes from." That's the semantics bit.
Computers can be "aware" of certain things - what you are looking at, for example - there's a TED talk on that - does that mean the computer is "conscious?"
The "authority" bit rests on the question I have asked a couple of times: "Does anyone know what consciousness is?"
If some of us "know" what consciousness is, we would have a distinct advantage over those of us who do not. Such people would be "authorities."
Of course, for those of us who do not know what consciousness is these "authorities" would be unrecognizable.
I haven't read all the posts ... so maybe someone has said, "Yes, I know what consciousness is."
But, if no one has, then "anything goes" consciousness MIGHT be the same as awareness; it MIGHT not exist at all; it MIGHT be an illusion resulting from a complex biological process that accidentally resulted in a differential feedback mechanism in the brain; it MIGHT be the Mind of God, and so on.
Do you know what consciousness is?
Jul 18 2011: Thomas,
You really like to complicate things and talk in circles huh?
Your statement is "we often confuse "awareness" for "consciousness". They are NOT the same thing".
The only point I'm making is that I, and many others DO NOT confuse awareness for consciousness. Consciousness is part of awareness and awareness is part of consciousness, in my humble opinion. Perhaps it might help if you read all the posts.Jul 18 2011: Hi Colleen,
You say, "many others DO NOT confuse awareness for consciousness."
Yes, perhaps I could have been more clear and said: "Some of us confuse "awareness" for "consciousness, some of the time..."
In terms of making a distinction between "awareness" and "consciousness, "I'm not sure where this falls: "Consciousness and awareness are intertwined according to me and Webster's"
Do I like to "complicate things and talk in circles?"
Not really. I prefer simplicity.
Circles I kind of like as T.S. Elliot put it: "And the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time."
So ... Do you know what consciousness is?
Jul 18 2011: Thomas,
I know what my own experience of consciousness is, which I have expressed.
As you insightfully say in another comment "know thyself".Jul 18 2011: QUOTE: "I know what my own experience of consciousness is, which I have expressed.
As you insightfully say in another comment "know thyself"."
Where did the experience come from?
Do you think that anyone who has not experienced what you have experienced could understand "where it came from?"
Jul 18 2011: Thomas,
I experienced several levels of consciousness after a near fatal head/brain injury, craniotomy, and NDE/OBE 21 years ago. That was my frist big "lesson" in consciousness/awareness. I have lived my life as an exploration, being an observer, while fully participating in every moment, so the experience was the catalyst for more exploration into religious beliefs, philosophy, psychology, shamanism, science, and many various aspects of life and death.
I do not believe we need to experience trauma to understand. I believe that in living a mindful, consciously aware life, we can learn, grow, and expand our understanding of anything:>)Jul 18 2011: To quote myself: "At a certain point. It becomes silly."Jul 19 2011: Hi Colleen,
Yes, I gathered from some of your other posts (in other threads, I think) that you have suffered a serious injury.
I find language somewhat limiting ... even though we all try to use it well.
I didn't mean what triggered your experience; I meant, "Where" did you experience consciousness?"
Where was the consciousness when you experienced it?
Where were "you?"
And, regardless of the triggering mechanism - trauma, meditation, mindfulness, revelation, ergot, peyote - do you think someone else who has not had your experience could understand what you are talking about when, for example, you use the word "consciousness?"
Jul 20 2011: Dear Thomas,
First of all, I did not "suffer" anything. To suffer, means to endure, put up with distress, loss, etc. My perception of the experience is that I learned many things I probably would not have learned in any other way, so it was/is an opportunity. Suffering, is holding onto the pain of the challenge, which I do not choose to do. I agree...language is limiting.
To ask "where did you experience consciousness", is like asking, where do you experience energy? I've said several times on this thread that I experience consciousness as energy. It is everywhere. Can you tell me where electric energy is? It is in lightening...at the generating plant...it runs through electrical lines...into homes, business, recreation areas, etc., does it not? It is 110 volts, 220 volts, and probably many "forms" in between. Electric energy is everywhere and yet you cannot specifically say "where" it is can you? That is how I percieve the energy that is consciousness. It comes into our homes (the body), into a breaker box (the brain) and then is seperated, and it also remains part of the source. When I experience consciousness, it is everywhere...in and around everything that is, and yet I cannot pinpoint it because it is everything and nothing. I am part of the whole...part of the energy of the generating station if you will, and yet I am also a tiny little shining night light, and it is all interconnected.
I don't honestly know what another person can understand. That part is up to him/her.
We can only share information and each individual will accept it...or not:>)Jul 20 2011: Some of my experience of consciousness:
When the body was being loaded into the ambulance, I'm told that I kept saying..."I don't have time for this...I have company coming for dinner, and I have to go home and cook...I don't have time.."
According to the medical records, I was unconscious, but responding on some level. I don't remember any of this, but apparently, the brain was still connecting with something it knew to be true on a human level...the fact that I was having company for dinner, and didn't want to take time for this other "activity".
The next conscious state I am aware of is observing the body from another place. I was in ICU after the surgery, and the body (according to the medical records) was hovering between life and death, kept alive with life support systems.
At that point, apparently there was a small amount of energy running through the body and keeping it barely alive. The rest of "me", or the energy that is my consciousness, was in an expanded state, which was a higher vibration than the body can hold. At that point, the consciousness was aware of a much bigger picture, and there was a sense of all knowing...an expanded sense of something like intuition, or ESP.
When the energy/consciousness came back into the body, the body stabalized (according to medical records). At that point, I was aware of being in the body, and was aware of what was going on around me to a lesser extent, and I could not communicate. Except...I'm told that I was smiling and giving my visitors a thumbs up:>)
I experienced another level of consciousness 10 days later, when I was labeled "conscious" according to the medical model, and could communicate on some level. I was in a child like state emotionally and physically at that point.
After that, there were continually changing levels of consciousness/awareness as the energy began again to function within the body/mind/heart:>)Jul 20 2011: Hi Colleen,
I was using "suffer" as an intransitive verb, in which case it means: "to be affected by or subject to [something.]"
QUOTE: To ask "where did you experience consciousness", is like asking, where do you experience energy?
I can tell you where I experience energy. And, I am sure you can tell us where you experience it too ... if you put you mind to it.
Where do you experience the taste of an apple? In the apple? On your tongue?
QUOTE: When I experience consciousness, it is everywhere...in and around everything that is, and yet I cannot pinpoint it because it is everything and nothing. I am part of the whole...part of the energy of the generating station if you will, and yet I am also a tiny little shining night light, and it is all interconnected.
So, to answer the question, "Where do you think consciousness comes from, might you answer: "Consciousness is an emergent property of consciousness-as-energy (or energy-as-consciousness) interacting with and between a sentient organism and all of creation?"
Or would you say, "Consciousness just "is" - it doesn't come from anywhere - and we simply experience it as a result of our existence within an infinite field of conscious energy?"
Or ... something else?
(As you may have guessed, I am trying to help our good friend Farrukh Yakubov with his original question: Where do you think consciousness comes from?)
QUOTE: I don't honestly know what another person can understand.
Probably anything you or I can understand - and through the same process (not circumstance.)
And I agree with you that "that part is up to him/her."
Jul 20 2011: Thomas,
If you can tell us where and how you experience energy, why don't you do that, rather than asking the same questions over and over again? Please don't tell me what I "might answer". I've answered your questions in a way that I am willing and capable of doing, and you continue to ask the same questions and try to put words in my mouth.
I experience an apple in much the same way I experience consciousness...with awareness of all that it is...with all my senses...appreciation for the whole apple...the growth...the gift it gives me on so many levels...the beauty...deliciousness...nurturing qualities...the wonder of how it is produced...etc. etc. How do YOU experience an apple?
How do you experience consciousness? Energy? Awareness?
No, I did not guess that you are trying to "help our good friend Farrukh". He did a great job with his question, and in my perception does not need help getting answers. It's good to know what you are trying to do though, because it was previously unclear to me.
You have answered your own question regarding "what another person can understand"..."probably anything you or I can understand" - and through some of the same processes or circumstances. What information a person is willing and able to assimilate is his/her choice. There have been quite a few interesting, informative perceptions put forth on this thread, so again, I don't percieve Farrukh as being in need of help moderating this discussion. He asked a question and is looking for different perspectives, and, quite frankly, I find your comments repetitive, so it would be wonderful if you would present some of your own opinions/perceptions regarding the topic, which I'm sure you are capable of doing:>)Jul 20 2011: QUOTE: "Some of my experience of consciousness..."
Thank you for sharing that.
It sounds like a beautifully transforming experience.
Jul 20 2011: You are welcome Thomas:>) It was indeed a beautiful experience, and continues to be such.
I would not say that it was "transforming"...perhaps we are facing another difference in word usage/interpretation? Transform, to me and Webster's, means to change in composition or structure; to change the outward form or appearance; change in character or condition; to cause to undergo genetic transformation...etc." I am still the same "character" with the same physical composition, structure and outward form, appearance and genetics.
The experience caused me to be more aware of the energy of consciousness on many more levels. It opened channels/programs in the heart, mind and body, that I was previously not aware of on a human conscious level, and connected other channels/programs that I was aware of, but not realizing the interconnections.Jul 20 2011: Hi Colleen,
I haven't answered the question where I experience energy because no one asked and, even if they had, it is not particularly relevant to the topic. I do not equate "energy" with "consciousness."
You raise some interesting points.
Why do I ask the same question over and over?
Because I have not received an adequate answer.
With topics like this one, it is often assumed that "opinion" is good enough. The assumption is that the topic is essentially "unknowable" so we might as well just throw around some ideas. Ideas are great. Opinions are fine. But perhaps it is possible to actually know consciousness. Not know about it. Not know what we can do with it. Know consciousness.
And if one knew consciousness, one might be able to provide Farrukh a definitive answer, or a definitive method of finding an answer for himself (rather than a collection of anecdotes and opinions - which are fine too.)
You provided an experiential basis in your response so I pursued it.
This discussion is not actually about you, you know?
It's about seeing if we can come up with an answer to where consciousness comes from.
Have you considered that I - or someone else responding - might actually know?
Have you considered that a "direct answer" might not be possible; and the only way Farrukh will find a meaningful response will be self-discovery?
I have.
I have also considered that someone might be able to provide him with an answer that I am unaware of.
Hence my questions. And I will probably continue to ask them.
This is not a "social interaction" this is an exploration.
Make sense?
EDIT: How do YOU experience an apple?
I eat it.
But that wasn't my question. My question was, "Where do you experience it?"
[There's no need to answer.]
EDIT: "Please don't tell me what I 'might answer' ... and ... put words in my mouth."
Colleen, if you read the post again and I think you will see they were questions.
Jul 20 2011: Dear Thomas,
If you "have not recieved an adequate answer", then I understand why you keep asking:>)
I'm wondering if any answer will be "adequate" in your perception.
I "know consciousness" as it impacts me, and can only explain my perception with the information that is in my own heart and mind.
I know this discussion is not about me Thomas, and it is only my thoughts, feelings, ideas, opinions and perceptions that I can share about the topic. You ask me questions about my experiences, then tell me the discussion is not actually about me?
I already told you about my perception that many people "know", and have expressed themselves very well on this thread. Are you listening? Hearing? I also expressed my belief that each and every one may have different perceptions/beliefs about the topic. Of course this is an exploration, and it makes a lot of sense to me in the many ways I have expressed:>)
I already answered your question regarding the apple to the best of my ability.
I read your post several times, while "listening" and being aware on several different levels, which is how I read and reply to all comments:>)Jul 20 2011: QUOTE: "The experience caused me to be more aware of the energy of consciousness on many more levels. It opened channels/programs in the heart, mind and body, that I was previously not aware of on a human conscious level, and connected other channels/programs that I was aware of, but not realizing the interconnections."
Sounds lovely.Jul 20 2011: Hi Colleen,
Yes, there are answers that would satisfy my very particular questions. On July 8, Ed Shulte provided a very succinct response that I find adequate.
I have not confirmed with him whether his answer is "a guess" based on applied logic or whether he "knows" his answer to be true but, as it stands, it is probably the best answer so far. It's not much use to Farruhk ... unless he can arrive at the same answer by independent means but it is a good answer.
And I agree with you there are many other wonderful responses in the thread. Most of the ones I have read would fall under the category of conjecture (and there's nothing wrong with that - the question is, "Where do YOU THINK consciousness comes from?")
I do not equate our experiences or our cognition with the self but, if you would like to have questions about your experiences and about your ideas be "about you," we can do that. In that capacity let me make a recommendation: If you have answered my question, about the apple, to the best of your ability; and if you have "listened" to my post on several different levels before you replied, then I recommend that you subtract some of the filters you apply to your "listening." They are distorting what you hear. Let me rephrase that, they are distorting what I say.
For instance, you did not answer MY question about the apple at all. You answered YOUR question about the apple. It was an excellent answer but not to my question.
This is tangential to the discussion but perhaps useful. Perhaps not.
Jul 20 2011: Thomas,
I am glad you found something "adequate" in this discussion.
You say..."It's not much use to Farruhk...unless he can arrive at the same answer by independent means...".
That does not seem consistent with one of your previous statements, which I agree with..."In the end, I come to the same conclusion we are all the same. We just describe our "sameness" differently". In my perception, we don't have to have the same answer, if/when we can find common ground, even if the wording is not the same.
I percieve several of the comments on this thread to express similar answers to the question, and I also feel that we are all much the same, and describe our experiences of "sameness" differently.
You have questioned my experiences, and I respected your questioning with honest replies. Interesting statement Thomas..."...if you would like to have questions about your experiences and about your ideas be "about you", we can do that". LOL!
Who else do you think/feel statements about MY experiences and ideas might be about?
If you don't honestly want to hear about my experiences...don't ask:>)
Re: Who did, or did not answer the question about the apple.
You say in previous statements..." We can describe our own experience and if another person's account matches our own (even remotely) assume we may have a shared foundation". "I had to learn to listen to the message "behind" the "words".
I agree with these insightful comments Thomas.
I have considered your recommendations, and percieve them as not very useful. You are the only one who can do anything about the distortions in what you say:>) I have no desire to go round in circles with words that contradict.Jul 21 2011: Hi Colleen,
I suspect on some level you are doing this intentionally but allow me to point out the application of a filter that is distorting what I am saying, what you are hearing, and, as a result, how you reply.
You open with the line, "I am glad you found something "adequate" in this discussion."
Colleen, you know that is not what I said. The subtlety is evident and the statement must serve some purpose - it could be an "idle" mistake - but you have said you are very careful in your replies, so I think not.
QUOTE: "You are the only one who can do anything about the distortions in what you say:>)"
I agree but, as you can see, I must also take responsibility for the distortions that others, including yourself, hear. That is, if it is important to me that "others" hear and understand me. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it is not.
QUOTE: "I have no desire to go round in circles with words that contradict."
Then stop doing it. The words that "contradict" are, I suggest, the editorial comments, appended by your inner narrative to my own.
You have skillfully extracted excerpts from my posts and constructed them so as to support your own conclusion [very well done, I might add.]
I share you opinion: "I have no desire to go round in circles with words that contradict." So I will not address them further. For one thing, it would not advance the topic of the thread.
Jul 21 2011: Thomas,
I repeated EXACTLY what you wrote...word for word....of your own construct:>)
I have made no conclusions, but rather reflected back to you, your own words. Thank you for saying it is well done:>)
The only way it may advance the topic of this thread is to demonstrate how consciously aware we are of the words we use and how we communicate...or not:>) My mind and heart are always open to commonalities. It feels like you do not percieve very many of other people's ideas (mine included) to be "adequate".Jul 21 2011: QUOTE: "I repeated EXACTLY what you wrote...word for word....of your own construct:>)"
Well you did use my words but you did not repeat them "EXACTLY" the way I used them. (You know this ... so why you did it might be useful to contemplate just a bit.)
QUOTE: It feels like you do not percieve very many of other people's ideas (mine included) to be "adequate"."
Thank you for using the qualifier "it feels like." That has not been my intention (and, again, I suspect you actually know this on one of your levels of consciousness.)
Allow me to clarify: What I said was I had not received adequate replies to "my question." That was not meant to imply there are no adequate replies to Farruhk's question. Or that there were no adequate replies at all.
I actually like many of your replies. You are speaking sincerely from personal experience. That's as good as it gets.Jul 21 2011: I'm actually both thiest and neurology (not a neurologist :P). I propose the idea that God made the brain. I'm actually averse to the general idea that "science is the devil." So, God made the brain, and the brain makes consciousness. Take away the brain, no consciousness... Like a veggie.
I've already replied, but I figured i'd troll. I don't think it's anything mystical, or anything to hypothesize about. It's brain capacity. Whether you're a theist or not, that's what it scientifically is. And plants are green because of chlorophyll... (dear god, I hope I'm right about that plant thing :S)
Comment deleted
Jul 8 2011: Hi Jim,
I am with you in believing science can explain to us the function and mechanisms of the brain. For example, the study of brain activity in sleep:
It shows that the brain still functions to maintain other critical activities in the body.
HOWEVER, have you considered your experience during deep sleep? In that state, your senses and your mind are not active. Which means you are not indulging in activities that contribute to, or are part of, your identity. In fact, after a really deep sleep, your space-time awareness is absent for significant duration. You might have difficulty walking, like you never walked before. You might not remember who you are, etc. for short duration. That is a continuation of the deep sleep situation. In other words, you feel "groggy", meaning that your definition of yourself is hazy to nearly-absent. After that, "YOU" somehow "return" to an awareness of yourself. And all this while the brain still shows activity.
This shows there is a complete disconnect of "YOU" from the physical body. This "YOU" is not the senses, not the mind, not the personality. It's something totally non-physical. That "YOU" is what I call "naked consciousness". It is not a product of space and time and biology.
If there were no demonstration that such a disconnection can happen, then I would completely agree that we are entirely a product of our brains and neural activity.
Comment deleted
Jul 11 2011: Where does the sense of "I" come from? You can locate functions in various organs, but you can't locate "I". "I" exist as long as "I" am alive, meaning "my" body is alive.
A brain-dead person is not pronounced clinically dead. This implies that the center of consciousness is not a single organ, but the entire body. It's an energy that activates the organs. The definition of death is still unclear. What is clear is that after death, the physical parts are all here, but "something else" is missing. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death#Problems_of_definition
You are still not considering the deeply subjective reflection and experience that consciousness means.You are still talking about the "utilitarian" mode of consciousness, which is used for physiological functions. It is the "social identity-building" mode. The "absolute" conscousness is linked to life and death, not to identity.
If you say it's all a system of electrochemical processes, then I ask the origin of the processes. You would have to agree that there is a separation between the grey matter and the electrical signals running through it. That electrical energy is a mode of the "absolute" consciousness. The DNA is matter, but the "information" it contains is a mode of consciousness.
Perhaps "consciousness" is another of those unfortunate semantic-confused words.Jul 11 2011: Moreover, have you considered the one flaw of empirical study of consciousness, that it needs objectivity. Objectivity means a total separation of the observer from the observed. Such objectivity is experiencing stress even in non-biological studies like quantum physics and cosmology (like you said in another discussion, "Model Dependent Realism"). Even more so such objectivity will be compromised in studying consciousness, because you are a mode of consciousness. Just like you cannot see your own back, but need external mirrors. Here the problem is, all of us are back-to-back, if you know what I mean. We are all facing the same way, and we are all like "electrons in an electrical field" If you ask an electron what an electrical field is, it wouldn't know, because it is simultaneously generating an electrical field and being acted upon by other electrical fields. It can never get out of an electrical field to study it.
To that extent, all of our fundamental knowledge is flawed, because we use "knowledge" to discover "knowledge". However, "we" being the "highest knowledge" in our field know better about some things, and not so better about others. As such, because we cannot get out of ourselves, our knowledge of consciousness will always be partial when objectively studied. However, when "experienced" subjectively, it still leads to insights, not knowledge. But those "in-sights" are the highest we can get to.Jul 12 2011: I agree Abhiram, that there is a "seperation between the grey matter and the electrical signals running through it. The DNA is matter, but the information it contains is a mode of consciousness". During my NDE/OBE, I experienced my "self" as a mass of energy:>)Jul 12 2011: Abhiram, you say there is a separation of the grey matter and the electrical signals running through it. Please explain what you mean with "separation" in this context.
I living organism is a very complex structure and nothing is separated from each other in this organism.
Everything contains information. Even a stone. But information is not consciousness. I think consciousness is simply a term made up by man to express what makes a human a human.
It's nothing really tangible you could point your finger at.
Hi Colleen: good to see you again !!Jul 12 2011: Hi Harald...good to see you:>)
My perception is that it is seperate materialistically...connected with energy:>)
I'm sure Abhiram will have a better explanation:>)Jul 12 2011: Hi Colleen, thanks for fortifying my viewpoint!
Hi Harald, I think the word "consciousness" is semantics-confused. What I meant by "separation" is the fact that energy exists by itself, without shape or form. When this energy interacts with matter, then we see some effects. A stone contains energy, but the stone matter modifies the energy differently than the brain matter. The brain can exist by itself as matter, but when electrochemical energy is introduced into it, it shapes the energy to output "consciousness". There is electrochemical energy in the stomach cells too, but those cells shape the energy differently. It results in a different "consciousness". Life happens when special matter soaks in special energy.
I'm not sure, but maybe this is what happened: when Colleen had the NDE/OBE, "She" was still shaped by the brain and the body. So the blob of energy was conditioned by the specific matter. Blob of energy+Specific matter=Colleen. After certain death, that blob just mixes with the "free energy". We still don't know much about dark matter & energy. Physicists know a little about dark matter, but zilch about dark energy, which they say makes up more than 75% of the observable universe. This reminds me of a hymn from the Rig Veda:
"One quarter of It is the visible universe, three quarters of It are eternal and unchanging."
Maybe dark energy is this "absolute consciousness-energy". Dark energy does none of the things that "normal" energy does. We don't even know why it exists. YET!Jul 13 2011: Dear Abhiram,
I agree with your comment..."Blob of energy + specific matter =Colleen":>)
The "blob" of material that was on the bed in ICU, was still "shaped by the brain and body", while the "free energy" that powers the material body/brain was seperate. My energy, and the energy of other beings was interconnected, and yet seperate. Like an electrical generating station, with electric lines coming from it and going in different directions. Or like an electric line coming into a house...into the breaker box and then seperated to different breakers. Like one drop of water in the ocean. Do you understand? Yes...I think/feel that you do:>)Jul 13 2011: Abrihiram wrote "Where does the sense of "I" come from?"
The sense of "I" is a conceptualization based on limited information. Buddhists describe it as an illusion. Awareness of "I" limits our effectiveness because it requires our brain to multitask whatever we are doing. We function most effectively when we are able to join with our activity in a natural flow without thinking about what we are doing.
Developing consciousness transcends the sense of "I"


text:
For Immediate Release: October 25, 2010
The Jones Point Park Project was advertised for construction by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) on July 27, 2010. Two responses were received from potential contractors at the September 22, 2010 deadline. VDOT is reviewing the responses, and it is anticipated that a recommendation will be forwarded early November 2010.
In addition, it is anticipated that the selected contractor will be given notice to proceed in November 2010 and be provided with a completion date of June 25, 2012. Prior to commencement of work in the Park, the contractor is obligated to participate in an open meeting to inform the public of intended work schedule(s).
The public will be notified when a time and date for the meeting becomes available.
To receive information about the Jones Point Park Reconstruction Project, update your subscription or subscribe to eNews by visiting alexandriava.gov/eNews. Subscribe to Jones Point Park Reconstruction Updates in the Department of Recreation, Parks and Cultural Activities notification group.
For additional information, visit alexandriava.gov/recreation.
Find neighborhood parks?
Start a small business?
Learn about new development?
Pay my taxes or parking citation?
Report fraud, waste and abuse?
Speak at a City Council meeting?
Apply for a marriage license?
Find information for retired City employees?
Get information about permits?
Search property and sales data?
Find visitor information?
Find volunteer opportunities?
Obtain and review public documents and records?
Find information about parking?
Learn more about Verizon FiOS?
1108 Jefferson St.
Alexandria, VA 22314703.746.4343Fax: 703.838.6344Email: Information
Office Hours
8 am - 5 pm
James B. Spengler

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Instantly see all available homes for sale in the Bay Area – and get immediate access to the most complete real estate data, including multiple photos, interactive maps, neighborhood statistics, nearby schools and public transportation, a Walk Score©, and so much more (we'd be here all day if we listed out every awesome thing). Why wait? Start Searching.
Whether you're interested in buying a classic San Francisco Victorian, a single family home in San Jose or a townhouse in Oakland (or anything in between), you'll have the opportunity to work with a licensed real estate agent who knows the realty process inside and out, and can help you stay a step ahead of any potential snags along the way.
Renowned for its picturesque landscapes, rich culture and a diverse population, the San Francisco Bay Area has something for everyone. The metropolis is anchored by three major cities — San Francisco, San Jose in the South Bay and Oakland in the East Bay — each with a distinctive flavor and feel.
San Francisco is recognized as the cultural and financial center, and home buyers will find that real estate prices are typically higher in this iconic city. San Jose is part of the high-tech Silicon Valley and offers a more suburban lifestyle, while Oakland is the central hub for the East Bay, a major industrial center that provides a more urban atmosphere and lower home prices. To the south is the popular beach town of Santa Cruz and to the north is the famous Wine Country of Napa Valley.
|Antioch, CA
|Livermore, CA
|San Jose - Central, CA
|Berkeley, CA
|Los Gatos/Monte Sereno, CA
|San Mateo, CA
|Brentwood, CA
|Mill Valley, CA
|San Rafael, CA
|Concord, CA
|Morgan Hill, CA
|Santa Cruz - Other, CA
|Danville, CA
|Napa, CA
|Santa Rosa, CA
|Fairfield, CA
|Novato, CA
|Saratoga, CA
|Fremont, CA
|Oakland, CA
|Sonoma, CA
|Gilroy, CA
|Petaluma, CA
|St. Helena, CA
|Hayward, CA
|Pleasanton, CA
|Vacaville, CA
|Healdsburg, CA
|Redwood City, CA
|Vallejo, CA
|Hollister, CA
|Richmond, CA
Copyright 1999-2015 and Patent Pending, ZipRealty. All rights reserved.


text:
Photo by Sara Tashker
For 7th and 8th Grade Boys and Girls
September 2014 - May 2015
Sunday, September 21, 2014
Green Gulch Farm
Wheelwright Center
9:30 am - noon
We request that both parents attend the Opening Day, if possible, at which time we will ask you to participate in a special ritual to acknowledge this remarkable time in the lives of both you and your child.
After the opening ritual, the parents will have time to meet together, introduce themselves to each other and discuss how to use the time we have together during the year. Lunch following the meeting, for COA youth, is included with the program. Additional family members may join them at a suggested $10 per person.
Just as Siddhartha left the innocence and protection of his childhood palace to seek his own path and to discover what he had to bring into the world, so must all young people leave the total dependence of childhood behind and embark on the important and complex journey towards adulthood.
The Zen Center Coming of Age Program aims to offer guidance and support that facilitates youth in their journey towards forging new connections to themselves, their community and the environment. It is also a formal celebration of that journey. We hope you will join us! Both new and returning students are welcome.
ScheduleAll meetings begin at 9:30 am on the deck between the library and the Wheelwright Center. Meetings end at the same place at noon. Please pick your child up at the end of the meeting. You are invited to stay for lunch. Lunch for the youth is included in the program tuition and the cost for other family members is a $10 donation.
Parents who would like to participate can also meet on the deck between the library and Wheelwright Center, and then move to an available meeting location (usually the small dining room) for "tea and a chat" with Program Director, Abiding Abbess Fu Schroeder.
Twice each year, once in the fall and once in the spring, we can have a longer meeting if the parents would like to do so, from 9:30 - 11 am. We can discuss this option once the program begins.
2014-2015 Schedule (subject to change)
September 21 (Opening Day Ceremony)
October 11 (Girls' sleepover weekend)
October 25 (Boys' sleepover weekend)
November 23
December 28
January 11
February 8
March 14 (Girls' sleepover weekend)
March 21 (Boys' sleepover weekend)
April 12
May 10 (Completion Ceremony)
The completion ceremony begins at 9:30 am for the youth. Families and their guests should arrive by 11:15 for the ceremony in the zendo. We encourage families and guests to attend the morning lecture, which will be relevant to the Ceremony. After the ceremony there will be a reception on the pool deck. Families will be encouraged to bring a pot luck and desserts for our celebration.
$800; $720 SFZC members, $640 low income.
Green Gulch Farm
Coming of Age Program Registration
1601 Shoreline Hwy
Sausalito, CA 94965
Parents of participants must also provide (to remain confidential):
Medical Information [PDF]
Medical Release Form [PDF]


text:
Would you like to use material from VietSALON on your website? Contact us at email@example.com for permission and instructions.
Order a back issue of VietSALON or one of our other educational products at our online store.
Comic-Con Nails: Comic Book Nail Art for Heroes and Villains73 photos
Viet Fashion Week 2015: On the Runway262 photos
Learn More
Am I losing my touch applying acrylics?
Should I have a TV in my salon?
Is perfectionism on the job a blessing or a curse?
What's the best way to recruit techs for a new salon?
What low-cost extras do you provide that clients perceive as having a high value?
Featured Products & Promotions | Advertisement
Get a free preview issue and a Free Gift
Subscribe Today!


text:
St. Edward's University Art Student Honors Fellow Veterans in "Letters of Sacrifice"
Senior Jennifer Hassin, an Art major, created a unique project entitled "Letters of Sacrifice," which honors soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country.
Hassin is a veteran of the United States Air Force and came to St. Edward's on the Post 9/11 GI Bill. She is also a member of the Ladies Auxiliary at the VFW Post 10427. She is one of 221 students currently enrolled with the Post 9/11 GI Bill at St. Edward's.
The artwork consists of rolled-up mock condolence letters that represent each member of the military that has lost his or her life since the Global War on Terror began in 2001. The representational letters are then placed in chicken wire to create a wall of letters. Hassin will present the "Letters of Sacrifice" project at the art program's senior show.
The Art Senior Exhibition will have an opening reception in the Fine Arts Gallery on Friday, April 13, from 6–8 p.m. The artwork will be featured in the exhibit until May 12. Hassin will present her project at SOURCE 2012 on April 20.
"I feel blessed to have had this opportunity, so when given the task to make a final senior show work, I could not think of anything that would say 'Thank you' back to the Service than making an artwork in honor of the military," said Hassin.
The university community pitched in and helped Hassin roll thousands of letters for the Letters of Sacrifice project. Chris Garcia from the Office of Student Financial Services, Dianey Leal from the College Assistance Migrant Program, and students Jose Garcia, Kelsey Pokorny, Kristin Moore and Lexis Fentanes donated their time to help roll letters.
After the senior show closes, the memorial will be displayed in the Texas Military Forces Museum for Memorial Day and through the summer. Hassin will continue adding rolled condolence letters while the exhibit is displayed.
"Through the Letters of Sacrifice memorial, I hope to raise awareness about military sacrifice," Hassin said.
Hollis Hammonds, art director, has served as Hassin's mentor through this process. "Her critiques and motivation kept me on schedule and helped me to make this project grow," Hassin said.
Hassin recently completed a project that was featured at the Cesar Chavez Pachanga on March 30 at St. Edward's. This particular piece of art was made with 2,541 essays that CAMP students wrote about their personal experiences with migrant work. CAMP students and other volunteers helped Hassin roll the essays. The project took 43 hours to complete. City Hall officials used the artwork at the Cesar Chavez March on March 31, which ended on the steps of City Hall where the piece was displayed.


text: I'm not here to make excuses for any wrestler, but last night was not Ryback's fault. That botch was on Tensai. For some reason or another he limped out and made Ryback try to dead lift that worthless walrus. I don't know why he did this, but if it was because he was purposely trying to make Ryback look bad, stay tuned for Tensai's future endeavors. Anybody, who in some form has worked in the industry, could see what Tensai did to fuck this up. It's a BIG industry no no.


text:
Connect with Us
Now Playing
Loading stream...
Now Playing
Loading streams...
Podcasts & RSS Feeds
|All Content
|View all podcasts & RSS feeds
Around the Nation
12:50 pm
Wed November 21, 2012
Can Detroiters Make A Better City With Soup?
By editor
Originally published on Thu November 22, 2012 11:03 am
One micro-grant project in Detroit is gaining a lot of traction. Every month, the group Detroit SOUP hosts a dinner, and for five bucks you get soup, salad, bread and a vote to give the night's proceeds to a community project. Director Amy Kaherl talks to guest host Celeste Headlee about the power of neighbors talking to neighbors.


text:
Registration Fees and Deadlines
Registration fees include
When registering, you must indicate what workshops you plan to attend. Please refer to the 2014 Workshops page for the list of this year's workshops and organizers.
Register Now
General Registration
Please Note: Before you register, please take a minute and consider nominating an ALS staff member or user whose extra effort deserves recognition with a 2014 User Meeting Award for scientific or technical achievement and/or user support.


text:
Former Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo is one of the most outspoken supporters of same-sex equality in all of professional sports. He used the Super Bowl as a platform for expressing his views on gay rights and anti-bullying and continues to work with the LGBT community to create a safe environment for gay players in the NFL. Last week, a report from CBSSports.com's Mike Freeman indicated that a current NFL player is "strongly considering" coming out as gay in the near future. During an interview with The Baltimore Sun on Friday, Ayanbadejo said he expects that to happen soon, but with more than one player at the same time. "I think it will happen sooner than you think," Ayanbadejo said. "We're in talks with a handful of players who are considering it. There are up to four players being talked to right now and they're trying to be organized so they can come out on the same day together. It would make a major splash and take the pressure off one guy. It would be a monumental day if a handful or a few guys come out. "Of course, there would be backlash. If they could share the backlash, it would be more positive. It's cool. It's exciting. We're in talks with a few guys who are considering it. The NFL and organizations are already being proactive and open if a player does it and if something negative happens. We'll see what happens." Comments from people like Seattle Seahawks defensive end Chris Clemons and San Francisco 49ers defensive back Chris Culliver remind us that backlash is inevitable, but a group of players coming out at the same time could help counter some of that. After the Ravens released Ayanbadejo on Thursday, the 36-year-old told Newsday that he believed the attention he has brought to the issue of same-sex equality in football contributed to the team's decision to cut him. He backtracked from those comments on Friday morning. "The Ravens have been backing me, they knew my stance for years and have been facilitating me and organizing me with LGBT and set me up with Equality Maryland," he said. "They helped me. If they didn't like what I was doing, they would have cut me a long time ago. I'm a special-teams player and you can find somebody to do what I did for less than half that value." Ayanbadejo was entering the second year of a three-year, $3.22 million contract. The Ravens insisted that the decision to release him was strictly football related, and it's not hard to believe that when you consider the type of player Ayanbadejo is. Clearly he was speaking out of frustration on Thursday. Related posts: Brendon Ayanbadejo plans to use Super Bowl as platform for his gay rights, anti-bullying messages Brendon Ayanbadejo Says the Two Best Teams Are Not in the Super Bowl, Calls Joe Flacco a 'Nobody' and More Brendon Ayanbadejo apologizes for ripping Patriots on Twitter
How can Yardbarker not censor assholes such as this, who have no business even being allowed to make comments. They're irrelevant, narcissistic jerks.
Shove it in my face again. I don't care if your gay, but you make it a crime if I don't accept your lifestyle. Carry on but keep it off my front porch.
I have a very brave announcement to make; i'm coming out of the closet and telling the whole world: I am straight a heterosexual. man, I feel so proud and relieved!!!
Me too. I have a gay brother and he doesn't flaunt it in my face because I'd slap the sh!!!t out of him and he knows it.
they don't care. I've flagged them and written correspondences to this about this butt hole, but they don't care and never do anything to ban this cheap, sel-promoting ass!!!
Where are those anti-spam folks from the Slashdot.com community when we could use them. Perhaps another spammer could use the same sort of lesson they provided to one Mr. Rawlsky, after the self proclaimed king of spam did a media interview regarding the house that spam could buy. They had his real life address, unlisted phone number, spammer's "work" email, and just about everything published. Mr. Rawlsky, in a moment of delicious irony was complaining how anti-spammers were harassing him by having signed him up for every unsolicited advert known to man, and threatened to sue. He couldn't seem to put together that a self proclaimed spammer who bragged about being able to send 1 billion unsolicited emails per day, had no leg to stand on, legally, for ending up at the receiving end of what he had done for a decade or more /rofl
Me thinks the above spammer could use a similar lesson, if someone were able to teach this spammer also...
I buy.... no one cares asshole!
tell them to keep their sexual preference to themselves.
As soon as you stop denying them their fair rights.
I'm certainly not denying anyone,anything just remember there is a reckoning day...no attorney's allowed at this court.
what rights are they being denied? just name one!!!
why do these individuals feel like they have to tell the world? just shut up,alrready,.
We do want to keep our orientation to ourselves - in the same way straight people do: Announcing their engagements, marriages, the birth of their children; by wearing wedding bands, putting a picture of their family on their desk (or in their locker). By letting some friends know when they are struggling with a separation or divorce or a death of a spouse. Yeah, we want to keep our orientation just as private as our straight counterparts do.
but, they're so damned proud to be perverts!
This is a big yawn. Why should I give a rat's @ss about a football player's sexual partners? Can you block, tackle, catch a pass, throw a pass or run off tackle? That's it. Now please STFU about it. Nobody cares, really!
Congratulations to these players! The more players that come out, the better. Let's move on in this world and let young gays, lesbians, and transgendereds that we're all human and we're all struggling to deal with life's issues. Let's deal with it by supporting each other.
Hey Doc I really don't care about the issue one way or the other,but an very instersting piont was expressed by a lawyer on the radio. What will prevent fathers from marrying sons now if we change what the definition of a marriage is? Insect laws are in place to prevent imbreeding,but in a gay marriage no breeding occurs. If fathers and sons do this then they could avoid paying inheritance tax because the son is now the fathers spouse. Just a thought.
Wow, such idiotic talk. Laws are there to stop incest, period. nothing to do with offspring. The lawyer (and the actor Jeremy Irons) were way too looney to even consider such a stupid reasoning. That same logic would allow someone to say, "hey, I am no longer fertile, so I can marry my daughter/son." It's stupid, innane, and so reaching for straws that it should require an immediate castration/neutering to any who make such a claim to prevent them from potential spreading such idiotic thinking to another generation. Of course, then that person might be able to marry their sibling or parent because they could not spawn. Hmmmm
ASDodge...funny you call it idiotic talk. Only a few years ago people would have called these discussions today idiotic. goalzilla has a point...not about reproducing, but about two consenting adults doing what makes them happy. If a parent and adult biological child desire to marry why shouldn't they be able to? This is the exact argument GLBT members have been fighting over for years. We are adults. We Love each other. We deserve to be happy. We should be able to marry who we want...So come on ASDodge what could you possibly have against two related consenting adults marrying one another if they make each other happy? I find it just as idiotic as two people of the same gender coddling each other and calling natural. It's sick! Just my opinion.
The same thing that would prevent fathers from marrying daughters? Sexual orientation wouldn't effect the matter of incest...
Sodom and Gomorrah anyone? Seems like the USA is heading toward their standards.
Or the beginning for Huxley's "Brave New World" where natural reproduction was eliminated.
the real irony here, is if the perverts parents were perv's too, they wouldn't be here talking their gay pride b.s.!!!
I agree, Skradin, we are heading toward Sodom and Gomorrah standards. Ezekie 16:49 & 50 says, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom (Ezekiel was speaking to Jerusalem): She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did destestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen."
Our world is certainly heading toward those standards. But those standards don't mention anything about their athletes coming out of the closet.
exactly. it's been this type of perversion that has destroyed many a civilization, such as the roman empire, and the greeks!
yeah, they definitely have issues: being gay, lesbos, or transgendered!!!!
I hope Brendon asked straight players if they would support their fellow players coming out. I mean really? Is it that big of a deal? Straight,gay, black,white male,female.. There are gay people out there. LEAVE THEM ALONE.. What is the big deal. We're all people.....
It should not be that big a deal, but professional American sports (America in general) is so rampantly homophobic that it chases away players or forces them into hiding because of their sexuality. GLBT's coming out is a way of saying "we are a part of every facet of life." And perhaps they will finally have equal rights completely and folks will truly NOT care what their race, gender, orientation, religion, etc are.
@barbie And keep your fear and intolerance to yourself. These men have a right to be who they are wherever they are. Just get over it and let them play football.
Really, what is so special about guys announcing they prefer wanking other guys? What's the point? I'll admit, "coming out" does give celebrities some free face time which can result in some financial gains.
why does it have to be such a big deal. If they want to be Que*r, be Que*r, I don't give a sh!t. What I care about is having to listen to crap all the time, and about how proud they are. Why do they have to brag about it and shout it from the rooftops?
Ok,brace yourself world. I'm heterosexual. How many of you wouldbe shocked or care.I'm betting no one.As I don't give a rat's back end about them "coming out". What is the big friggin deal. Some act like it is so important. It isn't. The world isn't going to stop.
It is because so many hetero's DO act like it is a big deal... or have you not caught all the ministers preaching hatred of homosexuality, or folks, perhaps yourself, getting all bent out of shape because they want to marry like all other folks. As soon as the religious nuts and ultra-cons shut up and allow all folks to live equally, the gays will stop making announcements... other than to say, just like you do, "I just got married... we just bought a house, my partner and I broke up." As soon as we hetero's stop being jerks about out, they will stop feeling the need to "out" themselves. THey will just be there.
I realize it is difficult, when one is a part of the majority group to understand what it is like being the outsider. As much as white, hetero males like me may whine about our rights being taken... the fact is, we still run the place and get really bitchy when those not like us start getting the same things we have.
absolutely do what the Sodomites did,they turned out alright.
Why not have the NFL....and, the "NgFL" (National gay Football League)? The NFL would be for heterosexual football players....and NgFL would be for "gay" football players. If for no other reason, it would be interesting to hear/see how many heterosexual players would be "accepted" (with equal rights) within the "NgFL".......AND share their orientation without criticism....just a thought.........
don't expect "fair treatment" when on a football field.
Goalzilla, you're an idiot.
Just make the showers and the locker room private.
you americans are all the SAME.people CHOOSE to be gay!!!!!!!!!DUH people
So, jeffrorules, you have struggled with same sex urges too then, huh? And decided to be straight? Good for you. For myself, I have never struggled with heterosexual urges and so never did have to decide to be gay. But, thanks for sharing.
If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. (NKJ, Leviticus 20:13)
Alright lets start with the obvious, "your" bible means nothing to me, and over 75% of the world, so lets make that perfectly clear and you hiding behind "its scripture" makes me and 75% of the world laugh. Can we put to death over half your "preachers"? According to your "scripture" we should be able to. Nah we can't do that because you can't handle when scripture is turned on you. Now be Gone Bible Thumper!
Bassinjunky, how many gay men have you, personally, put to death? I hope the answer is zero, but if it is, you are a hypocrite. And we all hope your hypocrisy in this area always remains intact. But don't preach what you don't live up to.
I'm very tired of the media trying force this issue down our throats and get the public to go along with something that clearly goes against Gods word. God is not a God of hate and He certainly hates the sin of homosexuality just as much as He hates the sin in me. God does not hate people, He hates sin. I don't feel that it's right for the media to have this agenda of getting people to go along with homosexuality as if it was a normal way of life. God clearly says it is not a normal way of life. Because the Spirit Christ dwells in me I cannot pretend like the homosexual life style doesn't offend me because it's offensive to God.
Be offended all you like. That's certainly your choice and your right. But there is nothing in the laws or the constitution that give you the right to never be presented with something you find offensive . . . nor to deny the rights you have to those with whom you may be personally offended.
My God says homosexuality is just fine with Him. So whose God wins?
But do YOU hate the sin in you as much as YOU hate the sin of homosexuality? And tired of getting the public to go along with something that is against God's word? Really? The public goes along with a TON of things that are against God's word.
This is what you Christians just don't get. EVERYBODY sins. All those "heterosexuals" in your congregation - they're all sinners too. Sexual acts for pleasure with your partner of the opposite sex ARE JUST AS MUCH OF a sin as an act between two of the same sex. The sooner you come to grips with the fact that those who commit homosexual acts are your brothers and sisters of sin under the same God, the sooner you will stop pushing others away from their faith.
Geez, I'm an atheist and I understand this crap better than you.
Perhaps, this God people speak of, doesn't want obedient little automatons that simply follows a list of do's and don'ts that have been canonized and promulgated upon the consciousness of a people and a civilization as dogma. Perhaps, just perhaps he/she/it would want "his/her/it's" children to grow up to become mature sons and daughters of he/she, that could learn to understand. If there was a desire for automatons, there would be no reason for free will, or a mind with which to think.
But then again this gets into the matter that knowledge and wisdom are not necessarily the same thing, and memorizing a bunch of doctrines and dogmas is not the same as coming to understand, becoming experienced where life (and living) is concerned, or getting some perspective in life. In the end, all must find their own path in life, whatever they do or do not believe; and perhaps just perhaps if there was this judgment some would speak of, it would be more then just a check list on whether one followed the beliefs of another human being, independent of themselves.
Perhaps, just perhaps, this higher power people would speak of, what it would want, would require that people have a certain amount of liberty to live their own life as they see fit, to live, to learn, and yes even the right to make what some might term mistakes. Perhaps, just perhaps, what people might term God would be more interested in what it is the person becomes/evolves into more, then whether they met someone elses definition of human perfection, or simply avoided someone elses idea of sin, simply because someone else believes otherwise.
Many a parent could attest, that moving into adulthood, an individual ultimately must develop into their own person, and can't simply "grow up" to become someone elses idea of who someone thinks they should be, or become...
And if one reaches a point where, life, the universe, God, whatever sees a need to bring something to their attention; life is able to provide life's lessons to people, without having some who consider themselves holier then though, sitting in the seat of judgment, and presume to impose those upon people, without any regards to the rights or liberties of individuals to lead their own life. Many have had life altering experiences, have hit rock bottom, or what have you; and trust me life itself is not incapable of getting people's attention in those cases, without some presuming to know best, for all others...
gay, gay, gay. Rasciam. Racism, raciam, raciam, Illegals, illegals, Illegals. That is all we read about. Out of the six sports headlines each day, three of the subjects are about the above. Who cares. Stop dragging people into this bullcrap every day of our lives. People keep trying to pull us together. Obama has made it worse. There is no longer sports. It is all political bull.
Why is press making such a big deal, yet avoiding printing that Peyton Manning is openly gay? I saw a newspaper article when he and his male partner announced they were breaking up after a long term relationship. There was also a picture of them with the article.
Straight, gay, lesbian, male, female, green, purple, we as Americans are suppose to have Freedom and Liberty, as long as you are not injuring anyone, find your happiness. That said, if it doesn't matter, then why is their not one comment form anybody, gay or straight, why OUR/YOUR money (taxes, tens of billions $) is being used to prop up @#$holes around the world who kill gays and lesbians. Keep your head in the sand, circuses and clowns.
Sorry. My mistake about Peyton Manning.Iread an article in the March 8,2012 Wall Street Journal about he and Jim Irsay announcing their divorce. I didn't know who JimOrsay was then and didn't realize it was a tongue-in cheek article.
Wonder if they are all centers?
comment below viewing threshold
What's the big deal about these fou?. Peyton Manning is openly gay. I don't understand why the media doesn't mention this now.
Name one former Society in the History of Mankind to have embraced and accepted Homo Sexuality that did NOT crumble and self destruct not long after.
I know I'm homophobic or some crap. Prove me wrong.
Put them all on one team and let them have an orgy in the locker room. Its uncomfortable for straight players to be looked at sexually while they're doing whatever they're doing. Thats why men and women don't share locker rooms, and why faggots and normals shouldn't either.
People can be gay if they want too......
NFL News
Delivered to your inbox
You'll also receive Yardbarker's daily Top 10, featuring the best sports stories from around the web. Customize your newsletter to get articles on your favorite sports and teams. And the best part? It's free!
Buehrle drank beer during World Series game he pitched
Redick gives Clippers 'F-minus' grade for losing Jordan
Report: PGA pulls Grand Slam event from Trump course
Three things to watch for on Hard Knocks with the Texans
Pierre-Paul could face charges for possession of fireworks
Report: Warriors trade David Lee to Celtics for Gerald Wallace
Rivers believes Gates' PED use was unintentional
Favre felt 'bothered' by Green Bay's decision to trade him
Ned Yost explains Alex Rodriguez's All-Star Game snub
Donovan McNabb arrested for DUI after rear-ending car
|Best of Yardbarker
|NFL News
|MLB News
Today's Best Stuff
For Bloggers
Join the Yardbarker Network for more promotion, traffic, and money.
Company Info
What is Yardbarker?
Yardbarker is the largest network of sports blogs and pro athlete blogs on the web. This site is the hub of the Yardbarker Network, where our editors and algorithms curate the best sports content from our network and beyond.
|© 2015 Yardbarker, Inc. All rights reserved. Use of this website (including any and all parts and components) constitutes your acceptance of these Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. (What's New?)


text:
Start the search for the perfect blazer at VILA. The selection is wide, so if you're looking for a classic, feminine, elegant or trendy blazer, VILA is the place. Read more
We have blazers with a perfect fit for a sophisticated look, blazers with sequins and glitter for the festive look and patterned blazers for the fashion-conscious. VILA's wide product assortment includes designs which fit every taste, whether it's an open one with buttons, one with a zip-closure, a long or a short blazer you're looking for.


text:
The melodious songs and graceful yet acrobatic leaps in the middle of the ocean are part of the male whale's courtship gestures to draw attention and impress the female, who chooses the male with the best display as part of their mating ceremony.
With a privileged location in the heart of Panama City, this new hotel opens its doors in the capital city just in time for the Panama Canal's centennial celebration.
CAMBUTAL, Los Santos. Some 35,687 sea turtles have successfully been born on the beaches of Cambutal in the province of Los Santos, according to official figures of the regional environmental group Tortu-Agro.
A new attempt to unite Panama and Colombia through a sea route is in the works for October, and its organizers say that this time the project is steaming full speed ahead.
Panama means "abundance of fish" in an Indian language, and this fame attracts anglers from around the world. The Central American country has positioned itself as one of the main destinations for sport fishing, which has generated an annual visitor spending of over €135 million in lodging, boat rentals, and complementary activities.


text:
Random First Lines:My Uncle is Merle Haggard his Job is to entertain people who enjoy country music. » Read
Home» Read
Welcome Visitor:
Members retain all rights to their work. Please see our Member Agreement for details.
About | News | Contact | Your Account | TheNextBigWriter | Self Publishing | Advertise
© 2013 TheNextBigWriter, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy.
Disable this story.
Disable all chapters
Disable Author/Content


text:
Sorry, you must be a member of Salfordonline to complain about any offensive or innapropriate content. This is to prevent misuse of the system.
Why not become a member? It is completely free and allows you full access to all the features of Salfordonline. Just hit the 'Join Now' button in the top right corner.


text:
How to Apply:
-Wash face with a mild cleanser to remove any surface oils and dirt that may be present on skin.
-Massage area gently in a circular motion with lukewarm water to soften hair.
-Apply a thin layer of the appropriate Kiehl's shaving formulation for your skin – a little goes a long way!
-Shave in the direction of hair growth and glide seamlessly across skin for the smoothest "Take-Off" imaginable.
-Rinse thoroughly and apply a small amount of Razor Bump Relief for a bump-free landing


text:
Sorry there are no shows for Laugh Till It Hurts right now.
What people are saying about Laugh Till It Hurts
This area is intended for discussion only. If you have a question about your order you can get in touch via our Customer Service Area. Comments about existing orders, or with questions will be deleted.


text:
Tired of looking for yardage markers and sprinkler heads? Do other players get impatient at you for holding up play while you try to get a good reading with your laser rangefinder (the one that you also always seem to be misplacing)? Then you need to experience the ease and accuracy of the SkyCaddie Watch for a deal that only MG Golf can offer!
The SkyCaddie Watch isn�t just another golf GPS watch! Its propietary CGT technology delivers superior performance on the golf course while also being attractive, lightweight, flexible and comfortable everyday sport watch.
Start playing better golf and having more fun with the rangefinder watch from the highest-rated and most-trusted rangefinder in golf, SkyCaddie the brand used and recommended by Hank Haney, Peter Jacobsen, and LPGA start Natalie Gulbis.
The SkyCaddie Watch can be yours not for their regular $249.90 price ($199.95 watch price plus $49.95 for 3 years of membership access to course map updates) but for only $149.95 which includes FREE LIFETIME membership access to course map updates!
No Tour pro uses yardage books derived from satellite images or flyovers. Neither should you. Other GPS rangefinders use second and third generation maps derived from aerial imagery known to contain errors.
Consider this, when PGA Tour pros compete:
You probably don't have the luxury of a personal caddie walking the course for you. But you can have the next best thing. SkyGolf (the maker of SkyCaddie products) walks every course with professional grade survey equipment to create original course maps, accurate within 1 yard. SkyGolf provides the most complete, most reliable and most precise course maps in the game. You can trust your SkyCaddie, just like Tour pros trust their caddie. SkyCaddie is the �Closest Thing to the Real Thing!�
Course maps created any other way are simply not reliable and could be wrong 50% of the time. This proprietary, high-precision, ground-corrected course mapping combined with conventional GPS, SkyCaddie calls CGT (Core Golfer Technology). It eliminates errors known to be inherent in maps provided by others. This makes SkyCaddie the brand trusted by more serious golfers than all other rangefinders combined.
To update your course maps, after a quick install of the CaddieSync Express software, you simply plug the watch into your computer using the cord provided and follow the menus. The watch battery also charges either from your computer or by using a DC 5V, 1A universal wall charger (available from SkyCaddie or other merchants). The battery charge lasts up to 8 hours in continuous GPS mode, 8 months in non-GPS mode.
SkyCaddie members get access to the most complete, most reliable course information in golf. Membership Plans support SkyGolf's ground-mapping process, and HoleVue rectification process to ensure that you have the most accurate distances in the game when you use your SkyCaddie.
Having the best accuracy and doing things the right way comes at a cost. Normally this cost is borne by you, the golfer, at the rate of $49.95 for 3 years. But through a special arrangement with SkyCaddie, MG Golf has pre-paid a LIFETIME membership for your SkyCaddie watch. That means for the life of the watch, you are saving $16.65 each and every year!
Add everything up, and you are getting a $249.90 value for only $149.95! Don't wait, supplies are limited, order now!