Comments on: Marc Oromaner’s Lost In Myth: “The Variable”—Choosing to Sacrifice For the Sake of the Island http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/ Everything Lost found here. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:58:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Lost In Myth: What the LA X in “LA X” Really Refers To | The Layman's Answers to Everything http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-54385 Lost In Myth: What the LA X in “LA X” Really Refers To | The Layman's Answers to Everything Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:23:22 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-54385 [...] will eventually be returning in a more powerful form as well. The message for us (as discussed in “Choosing to Sacrifice for the Sake of the Island”) is that by challenging ourselves we grow into stronger people, better able to handle the [...] [...] will eventually be returning in a more powerful form as well. The message for us (as discussed in “Choosing to Sacrifice for the Sake of the Island”) is that by challenging ourselves we grow into stronger people, better able to handle the [...]

]]> By: When Falls the Coliseum » Lost in myth: What the LA X in “LA X” really refers to. http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-54380 When Falls the Coliseum » Lost in myth: What the LA X in “LA X” really refers to. Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:02:32 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-54380 [...] will eventually be returning in a more powerful form as well. The message for us (as discussed in “Choosing to Sacrifice for the Sake of the Island”) is that by challenging ourselves we grow into stronger people, better able to handle the [...] [...] will eventually be returning in a more powerful form as well. The message for us (as discussed in “Choosing to Sacrifice for the Sake of the Island”) is that by challenging ourselves we grow into stronger people, better able to handle the [...]

]]> By: Marc Oromaner’s Lost In Myth: What the LA X in “LA X” Really Refers To. DocArzt’s LOST Blog http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-54347 Marc Oromaner’s Lost In Myth: What the LA X in “LA X” Really Refers To. DocArzt’s LOST Blog Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:05:30 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-54347 [...] will eventually be returning in a more powerful form as well. The message for us (as discussed in “Choosing to Sacrifice for the Sake of the Island”) is that by challenging ourselves we grow into stronger people, better able to handle the [...] [...] will eventually be returning in a more powerful form as well. The message for us (as discussed in “Choosing to Sacrifice for the Sake of the Island”) is that by challenging ourselves we grow into stronger people, better able to handle the [...]

]]> By: ufolawyer http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-46433 ufolawyer Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:17:05 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-46433 Marc, I have a business proposition for you. Can you please contact me at ufolawyer@msn.com Marc, I have a business proposition for you. Can you please contact me at ufolawyer@msn.com

]]> By: Marc Oromaner http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36866 Marc Oromaner Wed, 06 May 2009 22:39:37 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36866 Ray didn't really answer the question. Well, he answered it by saying that Second Life is becoming more and more realistic and it is entirely possible that it will get to the point that it is indistinguishable from the real world. What he didn't comment on though, was whether his own theories point towards the probability of our world not being real either. The audience laughed after I'd asked the question, so perhaps he thought I was joking or just got too caught up in his answer to comment on what I was really asking. I like to think that at the very least, I put an idea in his head that he might not really have thought of before: that his own theories seem to indicate that our world is a simulation. Ray didn’t really answer the question. Well, he answered it by saying that Second Life is becoming more and more realistic and it is entirely possible that it will get to the point that it is indistinguishable from the real world. What he didn’t comment on though, was whether his own theories point towards the probability of our world not being real either. The audience laughed after I’d asked the question, so perhaps he thought I was joking or just got too caught up in his answer to comment on what I was really asking. I like to think that at the very least, I put an idea in his head that he might not really have thought of before: that his own theories seem to indicate that our world is a simulation.

]]> By: ufolawyer http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36795 ufolawyer Wed, 06 May 2009 17:50:35 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36795 Yes - please tell us what his answer was. Yes – please tell us what his answer was.

]]> By: Michel http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36728 Michel Wed, 06 May 2009 04:27:50 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36728 "From the little I understand about quantum physics, I side with the multiverse or many worlds theory. So, I actually don’t believe in this non-paradoxical approach to time simply because I do not believe in one single timeline. I believe that time is an illusion. It is just one person’s experience of all the events they have experienced within the timeline they currently exist in. In other words, I believe that every possible scenario that could ever exist is happening right now, and wherever our minds go, that is the one we leap into." I don't really believe in multi-verse theory, or parallel dimensions, for that matter, for two reasons: 1. because there is absolutely no evidence to support it, and... 2. because I strongly believe that it is a simplistic answer to the (so far) unresolvable divorce between Quantum Mechanics and Newton's mechanics. Since physics came to realize that they can't apply Newton's mechanics to subatomic scenarios, then they had to come up with an scenario where matter and enery is not disappearing (because it can't disappear) but only disappearing in this dimension and appearing in another one. I think this is a preposterous and clumsy designed to attenuate the fact that we lack the theoretical and practical devices to trace that matter/energy. We simply don't know what's going on. And in our fear to the unknown, we came up with a highly simplistic scenario. Of course, all of this is my humble opinion, and I mean no personal offense to those who adhere to this theory. But I believe it has more to do with maintaining the intellectual status quo than with actually finding out true elements of reality that, so far, are being neglected or rejected by modern science. I believe it was Socrates who said that "the progress of human science is more about correcting fallacies than discovering truths". And that applies both to religion as for science... in the face of the unknown, human nature tends to assuming things and treating it as the Truth, as opposed to assuming our own ignorance and slowly working to fill the void. Like the buddists say: "the humans being suffers from ignorance". I think that's what happened to Daniel in his final days. Desperation got the best of him and he assumed to much. But even if we believe the multi-verse theory, it doesn't mean that EACH ONE of those dimensions have its own strict and immutable timeline. Time is not an illusion. Is the sequence of every change in the material world.... the succession of every event. That's time. It's not subjective. It's not illusory. Our approach to it may be, but time it's not subject to changes. It would be illogical to do so. Hence, our actions in this universe shouldn't be subject to the actions of any other universe... because they wouldn't be connected. They just exist. To pressume otherwise would be to pressume that there are some kinds of events in this world which cause can come out of nowhere.... i.e. an event cause by an action in ANOTHER universe. And that simply cannot be proven, and Occam's razor says it should be dismissed. That's why, in our everyday philosophies, we shouldn't be afraid by the existence of a rigid, unchangeable timeline. We shouldn't be discouraged by the existence of a thing called destiny. It's way much bigger than we are, and operates in a whole different level. Our actions are still what matter to us, and we must approach this actions fully exercising free will. There is no other way. Whatever is meant to happen, will happen. We humans are not the masters of time. We couldn't be. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. Put in perspective... it's actually irrelevant. “From the little I understand about quantum physics, I side with the multiverse or many worlds theory. So, I actually don’t believe in this non-paradoxical approach to time simply because I do not believe in one single timeline. I believe that time is an illusion. It is just one person’s experience of all the events they have experienced within the timeline they currently exist in. In other words, I believe that every possible scenario that could ever exist is happening right now, and wherever our minds go, that is the one we leap into.”

I don’t really believe in multi-verse theory, or parallel dimensions, for that matter, for two reasons:

1. because there is absolutely no evidence to support it, and…
2. because I strongly believe that it is a simplistic answer to the
(so far) unresolvable divorce between Quantum Mechanics and Newton’s mechanics.

Since physics came to realize that they can’t apply Newton’s mechanics to subatomic scenarios, then they had to come up with an scenario where matter and enery is not disappearing (because it can’t disappear) but only disappearing in this dimension and appearing in another one. I think this is a preposterous and clumsy designed to attenuate the fact that we lack the theoretical and practical devices to trace that matter/energy. We simply don’t know what’s going on. And in our fear to the unknown, we came up with a highly simplistic scenario.

Of course, all of this is my humble opinion, and I mean no personal offense to those who adhere to this theory. But I believe it has more to do with maintaining the intellectual status quo than with actually finding out true elements of reality that, so far, are being neglected or rejected by modern science. I believe it was Socrates who said that “the progress of human science is more about correcting fallacies than discovering truths”. And that applies both to religion as for science… in the face of the unknown, human nature tends to assuming things and treating it as the Truth, as opposed to assuming our own ignorance and slowly working to fill the void. Like the buddists say: “the humans being suffers from ignorance”. I think that’s what happened to Daniel in his final days. Desperation got the best of him and he assumed to much.

But even if we believe the multi-verse theory, it doesn’t mean that EACH ONE of those dimensions have its own strict and immutable timeline. Time is not an illusion. Is the sequence of every change in the material world…. the succession of every event. That’s time. It’s not subjective. It’s not illusory. Our approach to it may be, but time it’s not subject to changes. It would be illogical to do so. Hence, our actions in this universe shouldn’t be subject to the actions of any other universe… because they wouldn’t be connected. They just exist. To pressume otherwise would be to pressume that there are some kinds of events in this world which cause can come out of nowhere…. i.e. an event cause by an action in ANOTHER universe. And that simply cannot be proven, and Occam’s razor says it should be dismissed.

That’s why, in our everyday philosophies, we shouldn’t be afraid by the existence of a rigid, unchangeable timeline. We shouldn’t be discouraged by the existence of a thing called destiny. It’s way much bigger than we are, and operates in a whole different level. Our actions are still what matter to us, and we must approach this actions fully exercising free will. There is no other way. Whatever is meant to happen, will happen. We humans are not the masters of time. We couldn’t be. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Put in perspective… it’s actually irrelevant.

]]> By: Lesmanaste http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36632 Lesmanaste Tue, 05 May 2009 16:51:19 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36632 Ha, perfect, that's right up Jim's alley! :) BTW, what did Ray reply to your questions? (Feel free to let me know @ FaceBook if you feel it's getting too off-topic for here) Lesmanaste, Rob Ha, perfect, that’s right up Jim’s alley! :)

BTW, what did Ray reply to your questions? (Feel free to let me know @ FaceBook if you feel it’s getting too off-topic for here)

Lesmanaste,
Rob

]]> By: Marc Oromaner http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36573 Marc Oromaner Tue, 05 May 2009 04:33:22 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36573 So serendipitous that you should say that b/c I've specifically mentioned MYST in reply to people who ask me what I think is going on with the whole Egyptian stuff on LOST since it isn't really necessary for my theory. Where did you hear that--do you remember? Was it from the creators themselves or just fans taking guesses about the show? Also, I only played it once. Was there a reason MYST was capitalized like LOST? So serendipitous that you should say that b/c I’ve specifically mentioned MYST in reply to people who ask me what I think is going on with the whole Egyptian stuff on LOST since it isn’t really necessary for my theory. Where did you hear that–do you remember? Was it from the creators themselves or just fans taking guesses about the show? Also, I only played it once. Was there a reason MYST was capitalized like LOST?

]]> By: Marc Oromaner http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36572 Marc Oromaner Tue, 05 May 2009 04:26:37 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36572 Awesome man--thanks! I just posted this in an email to Jim: "I live in NYC and recently went to see “Transcendent Man” at the Tribeca Film Festival. It’s a documentary about Ray Kurzweil and he was there taking questions after the film. One of his points was that because we use technology to make the next level of technology, technological advancements go exponentially faster. He spoke of alternate reality games like Second Life in the film and it got me thinking. I’m sure you’ve seen movies like “The 13th Floor” and “eXistenZ.” I asked Ray this: since technology advances exponentially, then very soon alternate reality games like “Second Life” should become so realistic, it will be difficult to decipher them from the real thing. At that point, we will also likely create alternate reality games within those games. This being the case, isn’t it very unlikely that we live in the very first reality? Isn’t it much more probable that we too live in an alternate reality and that The Matrix got it right? Perhaps all this afterlife stuff we believe in is just mythology to help us interpret what’s really going on? In the documentary, he’s obsessed with living long enough to have technology help him live forever. My point was that there is no need. Once you die, you just take a step back into the previous simulated world and can come back as a different avatar and try again—our “reincarnation” mythology comes from this. I now believe that the likelihood of us living in the very first reality is as possible as us living on the only world with life on it in the entire universe. Not too likely. Awesome man–thanks! I just posted this in an email to Jim:

“I live in NYC and recently went to see “Transcendent Man” at the Tribeca Film Festival. It’s a documentary about Ray Kurzweil and he was there taking questions after the film. One of his points was that because we use technology to make the next level of technology, technological advancements go exponentially faster. He spoke of alternate reality games like Second Life in the film and it got me thinking. I’m sure you’ve seen movies like “The 13th Floor” and “eXistenZ.” I asked Ray this: since technology advances exponentially, then very soon alternate reality games like “Second Life” should become so realistic, it will be difficult to decipher them from the real thing. At that point, we will also likely create alternate reality games within those games. This being the case, isn’t it very unlikely that we live in the very first reality? Isn’t it much more probable that we too live in an alternate reality and that The Matrix got it right? Perhaps all this afterlife stuff we believe in is just mythology to help us interpret what’s really going on? In the documentary, he’s obsessed with living long enough to have technology help him live forever. My point was that there is no need. Once you die, you just take a step back into the previous simulated world and can come back as a different avatar and try again—our “reincarnation” mythology comes from this. I now believe that the likelihood of us living in the very first reality is as possible as us living on the only world with life on it in the entire universe. Not too likely.

]]> By: Lesmanaste http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36550 Lesmanaste Tue, 05 May 2009 00:47:43 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36550 Marc, all: Recommendations for those fascinated with time travel / timelines / programmed reality: "Parallel Universes of Self" (Frederick Dodson) "The Universe - Solved!" / TheUniverseSolved.com (Jim Elvidge) Lesmanaste, Rob Marc, all:

Recommendations for those fascinated with time travel / timelines / programmed reality:

“Parallel Universes of Self” (Frederick Dodson)
“The Universe – Solved!” / TheUniverseSolved.com (Jim Elvidge)

Lesmanaste,
Rob

]]> By: Tara http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36511 Tara Mon, 04 May 2009 18:55:34 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36511 One last point - so it has also been said that the original conception of LOST was the video game MYST. The character that you play in MYST has to make choices and their 'ending' was dependent upon those choices. If you 'replay' the game (travel back in time) and make difference choices, you get a different result. Just something to chew on. One last point – so it has also been said that the original conception of LOST was the video game MYST. The character that you play in MYST has to make choices and their ‘ending’ was dependent upon those choices.

If you ‘replay’ the game (travel back in time) and make difference choices, you get a different result.

Just something to chew on.

]]> By: Marc Oromaner http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36382 Marc Oromaner Sun, 03 May 2009 21:58:31 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36382 Thanks to everyone for contributing to the discussion. I like to think we are all learning from each other. Namaste. Thanks to everyone for contributing to the discussion. I like to think we are all learning from each other. Namaste.

]]> By: Marc Oromaner http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36381 Marc Oromaner Sun, 03 May 2009 21:56:03 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36381 I do believe that there can be both fate and freedom of choice. I wrote a bit about my perspective on that here: http://www.docarzt.com/lost/marc-oromaners-lost-in-myth-lost-on-fate-versus-freedom-of-choice/ I also get what you are saying about how they can both exist within the non-paradoxical approach to time travel: because we don't know what's supposed to happen, we are choosing the events that ultimately will happen. I spoke about this perspective as well in that column. Ultimately however, I think the main mythological interpretation of this non-paradoxical, "whatever happened, happened," approach, is favoring fate much more over freedom. The theme is that something has to happen, and you are going to either cause it, or be unable to prevent it. From the little I understand about quantum physics, I side with the multiverse or many worlds theory. So, I actually don't believe in this non-paradoxical approach to time simply because I do not believe in one single timeline. I believe that time is an illusion. It is just one person's experience of all the events they have experienced within the timeline they currently exist in. In other words, I believe that every possible scenario that could ever exist is happening right now, and wherever our minds go, that is the one we leap into. It's kind of like a video game. A character can have an adventure in that game, and choose to make certain moves, but because everything has already been programmed and exists in one moment, he cannot choose to do something not within that program. We all have a destiny which we can succeed at or not, and the details are malleable. This is the way I believe there is fate and freedom of choice. We have a number of choices available to us which lead to a certain number of places. The way we get to those places is up to us. This is freedom of choice and fate. As far as time travel, I believe it is possible to go back and change things, but once you do, you can never return to what you knew as your present. That's because what we consider to be our present time, is just a series of events we have experienced--a series of memories. If I go back and change something, this will have a butterfly effect which will change the timeline I'm now in. There will still be key things within this new timeline that will direct the world in a similar path or fate it's meant to go (perhaps instead of the economic recession starting from the mortgage crisis it would start from a disease epidemic), but the details wouldn't match up as I remembered. For that reason, it would be unlikely that I would predict much. The bigger the change I cause in the past, the less I would recognize the future. From this perspective, there are no paradoxes. If someone goes back in time and kills their own grandfather, someone else will become their grandfather in this new timeline. I believe we are sort of time traveling every time we make a decision about something. And we are traveling with everyone we find in this new dimension. It's like 6 billion people all playing the same video game, but making different decisions. Within each of those games, all the characters are going along for the ride of that one character's choices. So even if I were to know how the game were meant to end and knew the character's destiny, I could still have freedom of choice to explore the path however I wanted. I don't see Lost's mythology as aligning with this perspective if non-paradoxical time indeed turns out to be set in stone. There could still be freedom of choice, but it's based only on ignorance of our path, not the consciousness of it. Perhaps ignorance is bliss, but consciousness is enlightening. I do believe that there can be both fate and freedom of choice. I wrote a bit about my perspective on that here: http://www.docarzt.com/lost/marc-oromaners-lost-in-myth-lost-on-fate-versus-freedom-of-choice/

I also get what you are saying about how they can both exist within the non-paradoxical approach to time travel: because we don’t know what’s supposed to happen, we are choosing the events that ultimately will happen. I spoke about this perspective as well in that column. Ultimately however, I think the main mythological interpretation of this non-paradoxical, “whatever happened, happened,” approach, is favoring fate much more over freedom. The theme is that something has to happen, and you are going to either cause it, or be unable to prevent it.

From the little I understand about quantum physics, I side with the multiverse or many worlds theory. So, I actually don’t believe in this non-paradoxical approach to time simply because I do not believe in one single timeline. I believe that time is an illusion. It is just one person’s experience of all the events they have experienced within the timeline they currently exist in. In other words, I believe that every possible scenario that could ever exist is happening right now, and wherever our minds go, that is the one we leap into.

It’s kind of like a video game. A character can have an adventure in that game, and choose to make certain moves, but because everything has already been programmed and exists in one moment, he cannot choose to do something not within that program. We all have a destiny which we can succeed at or not, and the details are malleable. This is the way I believe there is fate and freedom of choice. We have a number of choices available to us which lead to a certain number of places. The way we get to those places is up to us. This is freedom of choice and fate.

As far as time travel, I believe it is possible to go back and change things, but once you do, you can never return to what you knew as your present. That’s because what we consider to be our present time, is just a series of events we have experienced–a series of memories. If I go back and change something, this will have a butterfly effect which will change the timeline I’m now in. There will still be key things within this new timeline that will direct the world in a similar path or fate it’s meant to go (perhaps instead of the economic recession starting from the mortgage crisis it would start from a disease epidemic), but the details wouldn’t match up as I remembered. For that reason, it would be unlikely that I would predict much. The bigger the change I cause in the past, the less I would recognize the future.

From this perspective, there are no paradoxes. If someone goes back in time and kills their own grandfather, someone else will become their grandfather in this new timeline. I believe we are sort of time traveling every time we make a decision about something. And we are traveling with everyone we find in this new dimension. It’s like 6 billion people all playing the same video game, but making different decisions. Within each of those games, all the characters are going along for the ride of that one character’s choices. So even if I were to know how the game were meant to end and knew the character’s destiny, I could still have freedom of choice to explore the path however I wanted.

I don’t see Lost’s mythology as aligning with this perspective if non-paradoxical time indeed turns out to be set in stone. There could still be freedom of choice, but it’s based only on ignorance of our path, not the consciousness of it. Perhaps ignorance is bliss, but consciousness is enlightening.

]]> By: dbarrus http://www.docarzt.com/lost/lost-in-myth/marc-oromaner%e2%80%99s-lost-in-myth-%e2%80%9cthe-variable%e2%80%9d%e2%80%94choosing-to-sacrifice-for-the-sake-of-the-island/comment-page-1/#comment-36259 dbarrus Sat, 02 May 2009 17:19:58 +0000 http://www.docarzt.com/?p=7034#comment-36259 Very Excellent article...Enlightening (as elaine says). If all the correlation is true between the writers and Steven King. This article convinces me how/where LOST is heading. In the Stand, it's all about good vs. evil, black or white,choosing someone who will reestablish society running on time again by using terror vs. choosing freewill/learning by mistakes made but taking the longer road. Yes I would like to think that we humans do have a choice to change the course of our world, we just have to take a STAND. Katesfriend Very Excellent article…Enlightening (as elaine says).

If all the correlation is true between the writers and Steven King. This article convinces me how/where LOST is heading. In the Stand, it’s all about good vs. evil, black or white,choosing someone who will reestablish society running on time again by using terror vs. choosing freewill/learning by mistakes made but taking the longer road.

Yes I would like to think that we humans do have a choice to change the course of our world, we just have to take a STAND.

Katesfriend

]]>