| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/6/2008 11:15:04 PM | jesus did it. ha.. ha.. just a joke..
You know Hans Jennings, proved that emotions and thoughts basically, affect how you perceive life and will it in to being so to speak. So it's not that it isn't possible, it's that to you it will never be, because you don't believe in it. And to be fair, how do you know what death is? have you been to the other side? It could just be (like) waking up in a strange place, meaning you're not dead. You may not exist among others that you once knew, but you're certainly not dead if that's the case. Just because you leave your physical body, doesn't mean you as a being are.
well said. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 12:28:55 AM | jesus did it. ha.. ha.. just a joke..
I began to wonder if Jesus did it as a scientific experiment, and it was proven on the pentecost to satisfaction of thousands that the afterlife exists.
how do you know what death is? have you been to the other side? It could just be (like) waking up in a strange place, meaning you're not dead.
A family member recently passed, and the first thing he did to me was preach the virgin Mary, and I gave him my thoughts. Later he asked me, "Am I....." I told him "No, but it was a great funeral. You should have heard the eulogy that your son-in-law gave you. It was beautiful. By the way, your grandaughter is getting married." | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 6:37:49 AM |
The only way they can rationalizse their own miserable and fragile lives is by striking out at what they fear....the unknown quantity.
First, my life is in no way "miserable". It is certainly better than being a loser who believes in every trendy piece of bullshit that comes along. Second, serious magazines like Scientific American have infinitely more authority than your inane psychobabble (after all, they actually bother to make sure their statements are TRUE before publishing them, in contrast to you and the Weevil.)
Finally, the use of the word "fear" in this context is freakin' hilarious! I have about as much fear of your empty, meaningless nonsense as an elephant has of a BB gun. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 6:46:39 AM | Here's how Scientific American Lies for the Establishment:
Scientific American's Dishonest Attack
On 911Research
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/sciam/
Scientific American" Lies and Manipulates!
http://p2o2.blogspot.com/2008/06/scientific-american-lies-and.html
A Call to Truth: 15 Ways Scientific American Lies to You
http://www.creationapologetics.org/refuting/acall.html | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 9:11:23 AM | I was not going to respond to you again, but you have forced my hand.
The writers and editors of Scientific American (and Discover and Smithsonian, for that matter) are much smarter, much better informed, and much more truthful than you will ever be. You spew utter and complete garbage. They publish , if not absolute truth, then certainly the truth to the best of our current knowledge.
Reality has three parts:
1) That which is known to science.
2) That which is not currently known to science, but will be eventually.
3) That which cannot be known, by science or by any other means.
Anything that does not fall into one of these categories is false. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 9:18:33 AM |
Reality has three parts:
1) That which is known to science.
2) That which is not currently known to science, but will be eventually.
3) That which cannot be known, by science or by any other means.
Okaaaay... | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 10:05:20 AM |
Reality has three parts:
1) That which is known to science.
2) That which is not currently known to science, but will be eventually.
3) That which cannot be known, by science or by any other means.
Meet the entity which I call God. You call it reality, and some call it truth. Some call it "the light of the world." | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 10:15:18 AM | Reality has three parts:
1) That which is known to science.
2) That which is not currently known to science, but will be eventually.
3) That which cannot be known, by science or by any other means.
Meet the entity which I call God. You call it reality, and some call it truth. Some call it "the light of the world
"WOW", couldn't have said it better myself! I would add to that 4) That which one can have a personal relationship with and know him/her so well you can call that person or entity (although he would't want to be referred to as an 'entity') in a reverential yet familiar way, and he loves you. | |
|
| |
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 10:21:31 AM |  Only through direct knowledge can one find the Truth. Can't blame them for not believing, though. If I hadn't had direct experience I wouldn't believe either. | |
|
| |
| |
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 11:17:21 AM |
I do know the truth. I spelled it out in post 105.
Of course you do, but do you know love? | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 12:02:02 PM |
Of course you do, but do you know love?
Certainly. Love is the purpose of POF. It is the reason for dating. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 12:44:38 PM |
Love is the purpose of POF. It is the reason for dating.
It is the reason for making families, friends, communities and nations. It is the reason people become scientists, workers, artists, and soldiers. It is the reason people grow trees and raise animals. It is reason people take walks, Sunday drives, ocean cruises, and airline flights. It is the reason for reason when no other reason will suffice. It is the reason I teach. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 5:06:29 PM | part of a previous post:
"The writers and editors of Scientific American (and Discover and Smithsonian, for that matter) are much smarter, much better informed, and much more truthful than you will ever be. You spew utter and complete garbage. They publish , if not absolute truth, then certainly the truth to the best of our current knowledge."
Not that I want to get involved in any personal debate, but I find the above contribution and a few others somewhat inflammatory and not quite in keeping with the most admirable spirit of these forums; which should be to offer differing opinions but please, not to harm.
I find Webweevil's postings very thoughtful and reflect an acute intelligence which has surely experienced events of a sublime nature. It would be a shame to have her become discouraged and withdraw from providing her points of view which have value for many of us who see mankind as much more than we have been led to believe we are by a long ago established and overbearing hierarchy. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/7/2008 5:36:17 PM |
Reality has three parts:
1) That which is known to science.
2) That which is not currently known to science, but will be eventually.
3) That which cannot be known, by science or by any other means.
I'm afraid, intoart, that I'm going to have to dispute point three. Logically speaking, it is antithesis to the concept of "reality." If it is real, it can be known, either by science now or science in the future.
There is also an element of "human truth." Specifically, it's the "touchy-feely" parts of human existence that, quite frankly, I think is as valid as any scientific experiment that yields a positive result.
Without humans to thinking, intelligent beings to interact with it, the nature of reality would be a moot discussion. However, as long as human beings exist and interact with one another, there are things drawn from experience that are applicable to the person's experience with the world. There are also elements of the social contract we have as individuals within a society that are applicable only there. Sociological truths, if you will. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 5:48:46 AM |
I find Webweevil's postings very thoughtful and reflect an acute intelligence which has surely experienced events of a sublime nature.
I find her postings to be the ravings of a lunatic. The "sublime experiences" she describes do not correspond to reality, so they must be hallucinations. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 5:54:44 AM |
I'm afraid, intoart, that I'm going to have to dispute point three. Logically speaking, it is antithesis to the concept of "reality." If it is real, it can be known, either by science now or science in the future.
Perhaps my wording was a bit off. My point was that if something cannot eventually be known by means of science, then it cannot be known at all. "Knowledge" from such sources as channeling or religious texts is not actually knowledge at all, since it does not describe anything real. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 7:38:45 AM |
I'm afraid, intoart, that I'm going to have to dispute point three. Logically speaking, it is antithesis to the concept of "reality." If it is real, it can be known, either by science now or science in the future.
If it was real at one point, and is no longer real, then how would you scientifically determine it? Is not the past a part of reality? Is the evolution of man, or if Iwould be so bold as to suggest creation, and the exact nature of the reality of either knowable? Forensic sciences can give us a good picture, but can they give us reality? | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 7:44:51 AM | I find Webweevil's postings very thoughtful and reflect an acute intelligence which has surely experienced events of a sublime nature. I find her postings to be the ravings of a lunatic. The "sublime experiences" she describes do not correspond to reality, so they must be hallucinations.
You think me a lunatic and a liar because you don't recognize spiritual experiences as being "real," since you haven't had any and they are unquantifiable and proven through an objective means. I am very disappointed that you cannot see above your own limitations to respect and tolerate others who aren't cut from your cloth. You are clearly threatened by the possibility that some things may not be explained and quantified by science. I can understand and even support the suspension of belief, but the hostility you show is indicative of something much deeper. I think you have built your foundation (actually your ego's foundation) on a seemingly solid "rock." Unfortunately, that rock is not as unassailable as you would like to have it. It doesn't really serve you and you don't need to cling to it so dearly. The world won't end if you let go and swim around a little. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 8:09:23 AM |
you don't recognize spiritual experiences as being "real," since you haven't had any
Actually, I have had some very intense "spiritual experiences". What they all had in common was being a direct result of powerful psychactive drugs. This is how I know that such experiences are nothing but abnormal brain chemistry. In the many years since I became a teetotaller, I have remained in touch with reality instead of having bogus "spiritual experiences". (My dreams, of course, are very vivid. Fortunately, I understand the fact that they are not real.)
(By the way, I only just noticed that you live in Sedona. That explains a LOT about you! ) | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 8:29:15 AM | Actually, I have had some very intense "spiritual experiences". What they all had in common was being a direct result of powerful psychactive drugs...
And THAT explains a lot.....maybe it is you who should be on meds | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 8:38:40 AM | | I have had some intense spiritual experiences, without psychoactive drugs. Maybe that is why I am able to place the experience as seperate from reality, and state that the spirits lied to me. Maybe they actually did, or maybe they told the truth about speaking for god and attempting to shame me for my sins, and I am so much in denial that I won't have any of it. I will still believe in the God of my choosing, and wait for those liars try to prove something. They lied about things that could happen in real life and didn't, so I reject their god. | |
|
| Invitation to a new Philosophy
Posted: 10/8/2008 8:42:55 AM |
maybe it is you who should be on meds
I am never touching ANY form of psychoactive drug again, "meds" included.
(One positive effect of those experiences, however, was that I learned to distinguish between reality and bullshit such as "spirituality".) | |
|
Home
login 
