Tippaporn

You're rackin' up the red hearts now, TBL.

Which "I"?

Ah, you're deserving of a big, ol' red heart, TBL.

Sir Conan Doyle. A remarkably perceptive individual as expressed through his character Sherlock. He had a knack for eliminating the possibilities that couldn't fit and come up with the only one that could. I, too, have read them all and love them dearly.

Depends on which version of Earth you're talking about.

Man, I would have given you a <red heart> reaction, TBL, rather than a thumbs up if it weren't for your defective (purposeful use of your own adjective ) sentiment regarding the humans species.

@VincentRJ Just an afterthought, Vince. I admittedly suffer tremendously from them. Only in the belief that physical objective reality is all that exists can the subordinate belief then follow that everything in that world can therefore be proved or disproved using the scientific method. In other words, the latter belief is wholly dependent upon the former. The latter belief vanishes into thin air as soon as the former is found to be false. Only in the belief that other realities exist can the belief in a God, or god, or Gods, or gods, or higher entities, or advanced beings exist. If other realities do indeed exist, and furthermore that these other realities have effects upon or interactions with physical objective reality, then the obvious conclusion would be what? That everything cannot be proven using the scientific method since the scientific method is strictly and inexorably confined to proving only that which exists in an objective reality. A singular reality. The truth is, Vincent, that not all things can be proven as you would like or demand. You will, therefore, never be able to prove or disprove the existence of a god or what represents a god. You can, however, feel it's effects. And plenty of people do. Illogical???

You're 100% accurate with that statement, Vincent. Beliefs certainly can, and do, produce harmful effects. Very true. One side has more confidence in manifesting their desired outcome than the other side. Sports is a great example of that dynamic in play (pun intended ). And what is confidence? The belief that one's desire will be manifested, e.g. made r-e-a-l. From my point of view the nocebo effect isn't a partial reason but the whole reason. And I would expound on your example of two different religious groups and say that it applies to any conflict. Because a vast swath of the scientific world believes that the explanation for any and everything that exists in this world can be distilled to an objective explanation. Or said differently, every phenomenon in this world, including every subjective phenomenon, can be traced to objective source. Psychologically speaking, and subjectivity is considered purely psychological, that would be the physical brain. Not the mind, as the mind is nonphysical and the brain is it's physical counterpart. No, science doesn't ignore subjective reality but they certainly refuse to accept it for what it truly is. A totally different world. And science would be shocked and very unaccepting of the idea that the very source of the objective world is the subjective one. In other words, it would be impossible for the physical, objective world to exist if the subjective world did not exist. It would be the epitome of scientific heresy to suggest their precious one-reality objective-reality is dependent upon subjective reality. Say it's true, Vincent. I know it is. What is a belief and what are a belief's effects? Give answering that question a shot, Vincent. It's a vital question as it leads to some very critical understanding of the nature of our world. Presently you have no idea where the question will take you. You might be surprised. I ask that you don't ignore answering it. By the way, what is your definition of subjectivity? That would be interesting. And that basic characteristic would be? Hint: beliefs. We certainly have a set of senses for which to interpret this reality. They are in fact specifically tailored for that task. Now I could add that there are many more senses available to us but I would then be going off on a tangent. To be clear, our thoughts, though, are not one of our senses. Our senses work just as any scientific device which can detect and interpret phenomenon which our five senses are unable to detect. A sonar device, for instance. Sonar is a technique that uses sound propagation to navigate, measure distances, communicate with or detect objects on or under the surface of the water, such as other vessels. It is specifically tailored, or rather designed, to detect and interpret physical phenomenon. Hey!! I just had an idea. Boy, I hate to toss this at you, Vincent, but what if our five senses were specifically . . . designed? Now that's a comical notion if ever there was one. I'll let that one slide for now. Too much to delve into and it would lead to a tangential discussion. Your examples are still confined strictly to the examination of the material world. There are physical aspects to this reality which are not apparent to our usual five senses. It is fallacious logic to assume that because there are physical aspects not apparent to our five senses that these aspects are therefore non-material. By the way, I actually have a distaste for the term 'spiritual'. Too much baggage that is attached to the word. Too many interpretations. Though I do use the term myself at times. For the sake of maintaining accuracy I'd swap out 'mind' with 'brain'. Radiology Info - Functional MRI (fMRI) Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) measures the small changes in blood flow that occur with brain activity. Mayo Clinic - EEG (electroencephalogram) An electroencephalogram (EEG) is a test that measures electrical activity in the brain using small, metal discs (electrodes) attached to the scalp. Brain cells communicate via electrical impulses and are active all the time, even during asleep. This activity shows up as wavy lines on an EEG recording. Still strictly dealing only with the objective world. The effects of the brain on the body and it's effects on human psychology. Not investigating the mind itself. Or the subjective reality which produces the mind itself. You guys are still ignoring the beating heart.

Geezus!! 9:06 in the morning and I've the first post of 2024? Well, I'll take that as solid evidence that everyone had a great New Year's experience. Sunmaster, any rocks under the spot you passed out on? Hope you had a comfortable sleep.

I gave you a thumbs up for the clarity with which you express your reasoning. And given your beliefs your reasoning seems quite solid. Seems. Seems because you're missing much data in the mix of your current data set upon which your reasoning is based. Also, you presume that your assumptions are correct. And in the context of this discussion your prime assumption is the idea that our dear old mother earth, the entirety of our precious physical universe, and the 'you' that you see in the mirror is all there is. All of the data that you pull from the massive data set which exists and is currently available to you you then attempt to fit to make your assumptions true. Data which does not fit is discarded. Other assumptions which would show your assumptions to be false you reject as well. Reasoning can always, always be made very sound and the logic seemingly water tight given a) a certain, finite data set and b) the assumptions made upon which the entirety of reasoning is based. Every theory is based upon at least a single assumption, and usually many more assumptions. Here's an excerpt from NASA: Assumptions, or working hypotheses, are a major part of science. In fact, it is difficult to talk for long with a scientist about science without hearing the words, “If we assume.” In order to make sense of things, we usually have to make assumptions, which help structure our thinking. Assumptions, Models, and the Scientific Method Now here's where all reasoning, yours and everyone else's about anything, has the potential to fail. a) The data set is incomplete and b) the assumptions are incorrect. So what might prevent someone from recognising that their data set is incomplete or that their assumption may be false? Let's explore . . . Now tell me if this is sound reasoning by your rational and logical standards. A person's beliefs act like blinders. I think we can agree on that, right? Isn't that the very definition of bias - to wear blinders? You see only what you want to see? And aren't beliefs the very source of bias? The fountainhead of bias? I know you understand well the concept of bias since you've acknowledged it earlier. Though I'm not so sure you understand bias' source. Perhaps you do and maybe you don't. You'd have to tell me. Now take the example of someone who believes that the only reality which exists is the one they're in. For them there's no ambiguity on this point and their conviction is rock solid. So for the fun of it let's run an experiment where we assume that our working hypothesis - that other realities exist - is true. Let's assume that our example friend is wrong in his belief that there exists only a singular reality - which is believed to be purely objective. Your task is to convince this hypothetical friend otherwise. What you will quickly learn is this: your friend's belief that there exists only a single reality will be the very thing which will blind him to the existence of other realities. Neither reasoning nor logic nor any other data to the contrary will dissuade him. Though the persuasive logic of your reasoning is sound he will refuse to accept it. And even see it as illogical. By one method or another he will reject all data which does not fit his model. You may even be able to show him how he can enter other realities himself and thereby prove to himself conclusively that other realities do indeed exist. (Again, for the sake of this experiment we'll make another assumption - that no reality is a closed system and therefore any reality is accessible - and consider it to be true.) Since this friend is firm in his belief, comfortable with it, satisfied with it, and even threatened by the prospect that his assumptions may be in error and thus invalidate his reasoning and logic - which will automatically place him in a position where he's then not sure what to think about what's true and what's not, he will refuse to investigate himself. BTW, I have a real world story, from this very site in fact, which perfectly illustrates the outright refusal of people to investigate for themselves the truth of a thing despite bringing them to the very portal of where that truth lies. All they would have to do is enter yet they steadfastly and even vehemently refuse. This example was even more interesting because it involved not just a single individual but quite a number of people. I'll relate it if you're interested as it is solid proof that people will go to great, and frankly unbelievable lengths to reject anything and everything that they believe not to be true - sight unseen in fact. Ah, behold the mighty power of belief!! And that is not hyperbole in the slightest. Moral of the story? Or the conclusions, results of the experiment? Your beliefs are the very thing which will blind you to anything else which exists outside of the framework of your beliefs. And it works the same regardless of the subject matter. Be it issues of great weight, such as science and politics, or even the most mundane of issues, such as which option in a given situation of import would work given multiple options. It's been said that all issues are the same issue. Whether it's relationships, money, health, wealth or poverty . . . you name the issue. Why? Because the process by which all natively subjective issues are manifested, or translated into personal human experience of a physical nature, is the same. Your beliefs create your experience, or your personal reality. Kudos to anyone who can understand that truth with utter clarity. Now this will be the most important part of my post. You can forget everything else I've written and focus only on this: Every belief forces one into accepting the presumptions upon which a particular belief is rooted. When exploring the great unknown (of which the known is but a teensy tiny sliver) you had better be prepared to leave all of your current presumptions at home. If you don't then you will take your presumptions with you and they will act as the figurative blinders which prevent you from seeing anything else which exists. You can take that to the bank.

Just make sure you find a comfortable place to pass out, Sunmaster. Happy New Year, mate.

Geezus, save the frogs. Who is gonna read 28 pages of that? Just the idea that I would do that has me speaking in tongues, all of which would be censored here. Much better is a tutorial on how to do it. Give it a whirl.

WOW! I think I've just suffered from a religious experience. It took me three tries before I was successfully able to post a GIF. Thinking about that no doubt brought about my epiphany . . . all good things come in threes! It's TRUE! Think about it! The Holy Trinity The Three Kings Israel has three patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (see Exodus 3:6 and Matthew 22:32) Noah has three sons (Genesis 6:10); Job has three daughters (Job 1:3; 42:14) Jonah is the whale three days (Jonah 1: 17) ;Matthew 12:!4) and it takes him three days to walk across Nineveh (Jonah 3:3) God appears to Abraham and Sarah as three persons (Genesis 18:1-15) Abraham and Isaac travel for three days on their way to Mt. Moriah (Genesis 22:4) Joseph puts his brothers in jail for three days (Genesis 42:17) Isaiah says that God is three-times Holy (Isaiah 6:3) God creates the world in three days. Well, no. I am just making sure you’re not just skimming through this. God creates the world in 6 days, which is 3+3. Mary goes to visit Elizabeth and stays three months (Luke 1:56) The wise men bring three gifts to baby Jesus: gold, frankincense and myrrh (Matthew 2:11) When Jesus is lost in the Temple, he is missing for three days (Luke 2:46) Jesus stays 40 days in the desert and tempted three times (Matthew 4:1-11) Three guys witness Jesus’ transfiguration: Peter, James and John (Matthew 17:1) Jesus prays in the Garden of Gethsemane three times (Matthew 26:36-46) Peter denies Jesus three times (Luke 22:54-62) and confesses his love to Jesus three times (John 21:15-17) St Paul on his way to Damascus, after Jesus reveals himself to him, is left without sight for three days (Acts 9:9) There are 27 books in the New Testament: That’s 3x3x3. Perfection to the third power! A genie grants three wishes. The Three Bears - Papa Bear, Mama Bear and Baby Bear Three little pigs The three musketeers The three amigos Moe, Larry and Curly The good the bad and the ugly A tryst A tricycle. WOW!!! Just WOW!!! I feel like I'm in a cloud right now!!

BTW, where's the party tonight? Whose house? I'm not as yet booked so PM me with directions. I really don't want to go to sleep at 8 PM tonight. And can I bring my wife?

"It means nothing TO ME, and I don't think it exists." There, fixed it for you. It's free this time because I feel festively generous. And a Happy New Year to y'all!! I think a good New Year's resolution for some would be to learn something in the coming New Year. Now don't throw in the towel by mid-day Jan. 1. I went with a non-religious theme so as not to upset any of those living in a strictly objective world. Wait a minute . . . it's supposed to be a goddamned GIF (excuse me Lord). Damn it. Still not working. Lemme try again . . . There we go. If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. I'm a persistent prick. Actually, I like this one the best. It's got an image of my favourite beverage! This used to be one of the quotes in my signature: “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” See, God does exist. Ben Franklin knows! And he had a scientific mind, too!

I was holding off thinking you'd have some comments to the body of Seth's quotes. I hadn't heard anything after the latest three. As to the other two replies of yours . . . There's no wading pool here. Just make sure your air line is long enough before you jump in. You're gonna need as much length as you can get. Partial response. I woke up this morning with the intention of replying to your two responses (actually three, as I count the Sam Altman post, too). But then I got interrupted by TBL. Blame him. Since then I'm just going with the flow. But a promise is a promise.

The placebo effect, the schmacebo effect. As long as it works what's the complaint? Why? Tough nut to crack in a singular objective world. Might it have anything to do with that other world? You know, that subjective one? The one that you ignore? Question: What is a belief and what are a belief's effects? Okay, I lied. Two questions. That gives you the option to cherry pick the easiest one to answer. By God (excuse the filthy term), I think you're on to something!!!

Why not just get it from your kitchen sink tap? It's cheaper.

"In the game of life the truth always wins." --Tippers, 2023 from The God Thread I admit I'm very fond of and given to using sage, astute and perceptive quotes of others. The above is my original. I fancy that some future poster on this thread, say 200 years from now, will come across that and quote me. They'll credit me with "Tippers, whoever the hell he was."

Hey, how come everyone else gets a reply but not me!! I call foul!! <--- That's me crying my eyes out. You can run but you can't hide.

One man's gold is another man's rubbish. Ain't that the truth. Your methodology would work just fine if the objective world were the only one.

My google search also revealed many religious references like the one you quoted, but I'm reluctant to propagate nonsense. My belief is in the true 'methodology of science'. This methodology, as I understand it, requires at least some degree of skepticism on all theories, so that any flaws in a theory can be investigated, using a method of enquiry and investigation which is as objective and as unbiased as possible. Unfortunately, being biased and acting in accordance with an established, politicised, agenda, is normal human behaviour. A hearty thumbs up on your last line. The rest are a thumbs down. I went with the thumbs up reaction to your post as I preferred giving you the benefit of the doubt.

I forgot to mention . . . there are three pastries but only two of us. So . . . one for you and two for me. I am gracious and charitable in sharing knowledge but I'm a greedy bastard when it comes to pastries.

Good morning, Sunmaster.

Obviously not everything in the Bible is to be taken literally. But some do anyway. But that's just a side issue to the important part of Mark Nothing's post, which deserves the focus. Which is that he found success with it.