Corey Rebhahn (Morgue): Hyperians Deny Free Will

 

No one on earth actually believes that they do not have free will. Some people – scientific materialists – cannot see how it is possible to have free will if their paradigm of choice is true. And, indeed, free will is 100% impossible if MATERIALISM is right. Rather than reject materialism, materialists reject free will and constantly argue against their OWN free will. They would prefer to regard themselves as robots rather than abandon their blind faith in materialism. Yet if their faith in materialism were valid, they themselves have no say in what they believe. They don’t choose materialism. Rather, materialism chooses materialism for them, and also chooses all of the non-materialist positions that billions of other humans hold.

 

Isn’t it bizarre that materialism causes people – the vast majority of people (everyone other than scientific materialist atheists) – to reject materialism? That’s some mighty powerful shit! Imagine a system of absolute truth (materialists say that it’s the absolute truth that only matter exists) – that generates countless lies, false beliefs, delusions, illusions, fantasies. Wow! Who knew that physical atoms and physical laws had so many unusual and remarkable – indeed miraculous – properties? But don’t ask us to justify the materialist position – ask people like James Smith, but bear in mind that according to himself he is a robot with no free will, so talking to him isn’t even as interesting as talking to a Turing Test chatbot, which at least pretends to be human and have free will (does that make the chatbot a higher form of life than James?! – philosophers will long ponder this question).

 

James Smith, the self-declared bot, goes to all the trouble to attach “laugh” emojis to Karen’s FB page – it’s remarkable what robots decide to do with their total lack of free will! Of course, they don’t “decide” to do anything because that itself implies free will, which they obviously don’t have.

 

Isn’t it amazing that matter-produced language full of terms that depend on free will even though free will is impossible in materialism? It’s pure MAGIC … absolutely MIRACULOUS. Good old materialism, as amazing as the theistic God of Christianity for generating impossibilities. Anyhoo, Smith attaches laugh emojis to a FB page – apparently a free decision on his part to troll us, and yet obviously not a free decision because, as he robotically tells us, he has no free will, so has no control over trolling us. We are NOT being trolled by James Smith. We are being trolled by the physical atoms assembled under the manmade name of James Smith, and the laws of physics that apply to them. We are being trolled by MATERIALISM, by atoms and the laws of physics! Atoms and the laws of physics are repeatedly posting trolling emojis on Karen’s page. Isn’t that fucking mind-blowing? Haven’t seen a single scientific law that in any way suggests that atoms post laugh emojis on Facebook pages, but, hey, go consult the expert – the robot James Smith. He has all the answers, or rather, all the things that his atoms and the laws of physics have mindlessly told him to think and do. Remember, this robot James Smith has no say in anything, no choice in anything and makes no decisions. All of these require free will, which, as we all know, he (or his atoms) says is 100% provably impossible. But apparently, it’s 100% possible for non-free-will materialism to post laugh emojis on Karen’s FB page.

 

Is your mind well and truly boggled by materialism … nothing produces more miracles than matter. It even magics itself into existence out of non-existence, out of nothing whatsoever. Wow, just Wow. It’s amazing that people don’t actually worship matter as GOD (they would if they had free will, which of course they don’t). It might as well be. “God” creates the world out of nothing at all. Matter creates ITSELF out of nothing at all, a much greater miracle! But, as we say, James Smith, the non-free-will spokes robot for materialism says materialism is 100% proved and free will 100% disproved. By the way, only scientific materialists speak truthfully regarding matter; matter makes everyone else speak falsely about matter, and even deny its existence! Who could possibly disagree with a robot?!

 

Isn’t it amazing that human robots with no free will are among the most vicious trolls? Their lack of free will is expended on annoying other people! Sheez.

 

Anyway, as you can see, FREE WILL – explaining it rationally and logically – is just about as big as it gets since an automatic corollary of the authentic existence of free will is the total refutation – FORMAL FALSIFICATION – of scientific materialism! That’s not to say that science has no USE VALUE – it has awesome amounts of that – but, frankly, it has zero TRUTH VALUE – because there is no such thing as scientific matter. That’s just an abstract manmade idea. Science is simply a modelling system, nothing more. It’s not a reality system. Ontological mathematics is the reality system.

 

Science gets all its power from MATH (it was garbage – alchemy and such like – before it embraced math!), so it’s math, not matter that is real. And math goes with MIND. Math is what explains free will! It’s an intrinsic property of ontological mathematical systems.

 

How CAN anything be free? Although most people certainly feel free, most people are also baffled by how it’s possible, especially since science renders it impossible. So what is meant by free will? We’re talking about foundationally, ontologically.

 

Clearly, if you are nothing but a collection of unfree atoms operating within an environment of unfree physical laws, you CANNOT be free. So, for free will to be true, the picture science presents MUST be false. 1 + 1 = 2.

 

Science is a theory of mindless “stuff”. It has no explanation for mind, it has no explanation for qualia, it has no explanation for consciousness, and free will features not at all in science. There is no symbol for it, no equations that contain it, and it is 100% excluded from the scientific paradigm.

 

Ontological mathematics is completely different from science. Where science is about the laws of “stuff”, ont math is about the laws of mind, of thought. A monad is literally made of thoughts – a full collection of sine and cosine waves, which are ontological basis thoughts.

 

Let’s imagine a reality comprising just one physical atom – an atom of hydrogen with atomic number 1. What would it do? Well, nothing at all! What is it capable of doing? So, if you build up your whole picture of reality on the basis of hydrogen atoms – which is largely what science does – you’re never going to arrive at free will, mind, consciousness, and subjectivity, are you? There’s no path to those outcomes. They’re all impossible. Scientists ramble on about “emergentism”. They might as well talk about religious miracles. Emergent phenomena have no scientific basis because nothing in science can anticipate and predict them. They are always after-the-fact conclusions. No one could look at hydrogen atoms and predict CONSCIOUSNESS.

 

So, scientists simply say that consciousness “emerges” from the organization of atoms. In that case, why can’t free will “emerge” too? Isn’t it funny that most materialists are willing to say that undefined consciousness “emerges” but undefined free will does not? Why wouldn’t anyone say that emergent consciousness is the source of emergent free will? But no one says that. Scientists are willing to tolerate the concept of consciousness – but really only as an illusion, as a pointless epiphenomenon – but will definitely not accept the concept of free will that would actually mean that people could alter the laws of physics by doing freely chosen things not mandated by the laws of physics.

 

Ontological mathematics is about monadic minds with an atomic number of zero. These are mental entities, not physical, and they are made of basis thoughts, which they can combine to produce any possible thought.

 

Let’s imagine a reality that comprises just one monad. This one monad is literally a thinking organism. All it does is think. All it does is generate constructed thoughts (by combining basis thoughts) and then experience them and react to them.

 

So, a reality of one monad involves no external forces, entities, or things, operating on it. All of its activity is 100% internally generated. It has no dependence on anything else. It is 100% autonomous, independent, and self-defining, and its creative acts are all its own.

 

This one monad would teach itself to think better and better, to have more and more complex thoughts. It would constantly evolve its thinking.

 

The key point is that the monad is making its own reality. There is nothing else to affect it. It is generating its own thinking, its own behavior. It can decide what to think and what to do. It has agency. It can choose this and not that, think this and not that. It is the Chooser of what it does. And that of course is what free will is – deciding what you are going to do without being compelled by anything else.

 

Free will is an intrinsic property of monads. It’s baked in. Nothing tells the monad what to think. It decides for itself. And that’s why we always have and experience free will, and why our free will can NEVER be removed from us, and why non-free-will – a central claim of scientific materialism – is 100% impossible!

 

So where does the idea of “non-free will” come from? Aren’t we all condemned to be free, as Sartre put it. Although we all feel free, we also feel massively constrained by the world. We feel as if something is blocking what we want to do. There is resistance out there acting against our free will. Well, of course, the thing constraining our free will is none other than the free will of other monadic minds, which opposes our free will.

 

We started off with one monad. If we add countless other monads, what’s going to happen? We’ll have a war of competing free wills, of rival centers of will to power, and that, of course is precisely what happens.

 

But another vital factor must be considered. We can share thoughts, share basis sinusoids, and, by the laws of logical Fourier mathematics, we can create material objects in space and time. These material objects – since they are made from the thoughts of all monadic minds – also resist every individual monad mind. We cannot control matter because our contribution to the matter is negligible. No individual can make matter do what it wants because it’s up against the will, the eternal sinusoids, of all other minds. Now, sinusoids, when they are not under the free control, the free will of any one mind, take on a different character. They become “stuff” defaulting to purely syntactic (automatic) behavior. Semantic (free control) is absent (except in the case of our individual body, which we can operate according to our own free will). Anyway, a default syntactic system looks exactly like a system of pure matter where free will is absent – i.e., we get exactly the “scientific” universe! So, science is just an inevitable product of ont math. Scientists believe that science has no underpinning. In fact, it is entirely underpinned by ont math – by MIND. Thus we all inhabit a reality of mathematic idealism and rationalism, not of scientific materialism and empiricism.

 

You can see how essential it is to define monads correctly, to always understand that they have quiddity, haecceity and aseity. For free will to be true, each monad must own its own sinusoids FOREVER. They are absolutely confined to it.

 

We are dealing with the order of the eternal and necessary, which can construct the temporal and contingent – from itself. This is what ontological Fourier mathematics is all about, generating temporal and contingent spacetime functions from eternal and necessary frequencies.

 

This is why Corey Rebhahn’s claims that there is only one ontological mind – ONE MONAD – is preposterous. This Walter Russell quote captures Rebhahn’s position better than Rebhahn has ever expressed it:

So, there is One Mind (God), and, for some reason, it creates other minds, but these other minds can never be anything other than an extension of the Creator! This is a Creationist worldview, an Abrahamic worldview. And we all know how much of a Christian Rebhahn is. The only “qualification” he has is that he read the Bible for sixteen years! It’s completely internalized in him.

 

Rebhahn has literally said that the One Mind “got bored” and so created new minds to “explore diversity”. Now, here’s the critical thing. The only mind capable of being free is the original mind. All its basis thoughts belong to it. A mind cannot create independent minds! It cannot remove its thoughts and give them to other minds. That is absolutely impossible. So everything that Rebhahn says about reality involving One Mind “exploring diversity” is totally false. A mind cannot create independent minds with free will. It cannot create US. Rebhahn is preaching total nonsense to total suckers. He’s telling them what they want to hear, not what is true. And that’s how he approaches everything. Because this is a malignant narcissist seeking narcissistic supply, not a truth seeker doing whatever is needed to establish the absolute truth of existence.

 

100% of Hyperians WANT to be lied to. They don’t want people telling them that reality is absolutely NOT about “unity exploring diversity”. It’s about the members of an ontological Hive Mind – rival centers of will to power – warring with each other, until they learn to cooperate with each other. It’s about ontological diversity seeking functional unity. It’s about the collective, not the extreme individualism preached by Hyperianism!