Tippaporn

If you are full up with this thread and it has nothing left to offer you then why to you persistently come back, not just to read but to post, too? It's remarkable.

Well, I typed it. Yeah, it's all mine. Admittedly, I did copy and past the calculus formula.

Ultimately it will be known that objective reality is wholly dependent upon, and in fact a construct of, subjective reality. And that piece of information is the ultimate heretical statement in the eyes of object-based science that can ever be uttered. One day it will be thoroughly understood that consciousness creates form, and not the other way around. A random chance mixture of the correct ingredients in perfect proportion coincidentally existing in a perfectly conducive environment and finally agitated to the optimum degree by some unknown spark is not the way consciousness arose. Again, consciousness creates form, and not the other way around. I don't expect or even desire to convince a single soul of that here, though. It requires, among many things, much prerequisite knowledge to understand, no different than a calculus course requiring algebra, geometry and trigonometry as prerequisite courses. But it is a concept that anyone can learn and understand. You don't go from 1+1=2 to (z2+2zy√+y−1)2((1+y)(z+y√)−y√(z2+2zy√+y+1))21z+y√=(1−y)2−4y√(1−y)z+O(z2)((1−y)z−y√z2)2(1y√−zy+O(z2))=1−4y√1−yz+O(z2)z2(1−2y√1−yz+O(z2))1y√(1−zy√+O(z2))=1z2y√(1−zy√−2y√1−yz+O(z2))=1z2(1y√−1+yy(1−y)z+O(z2)) in a day. And that is one of the many problems with debates such as this, especially on a public general forum. A lack of specific knowledge about the subject matter. One cannot write a review of a book they've never read. Also, zero patience in filling in the gaps between the current set of knowledge an individual possesses and the knowledge that they need to gain for a full understanding. It's almost as if folks have this expectation that they can take, say, a calculus class, show up on day one and say "fark this" when they're told at the end of class that they're not ready to take the final exam the next day. Good Lord, show some patience, folks. Another obstacle encountered on any road to knowledge is one of desire. Many people do not have the degree of desire required to pursue certain knowledge. They like to only dabble in certain subject matter. There's nothing at all wrong with such a predisposition. Personal propensities and inclinations also are a determinant in the pursuit of knowledge in any field. Some folks like math while others shun it. Some enjoy endeavours involving a great deal of socialisation while others enjoy tasks requiring deep concentration in solitude. And so, truth be told, this subject matter is not for everyone.

In the chance that this is a case of crossed wires my response was in reference to faith (subjective reality) and science (objective reality). If ever there is to be a holistic understanding the two need to be combined. I'll grant that they may appear to be contradictory but they are not.

Another good quote on debating. I know it's good because I just created it. It very true, though. "You can never debate with a dishonest man." - Tippers

There is a middle ground that combines the two. I don't know, maybe that's too obvious to have to mention since, afterall, we are subjective creatures residing in a physical body whilst existing in an objective world. Sometimes, though, one can't see the forest through the trees. "A topic we never discuss." You're a wise one.

Excellent quote.

I gave it a "laugh" reaction because of the twisted logic. Please elaborate. The logic seems rick-solid to me. The logic used here relies on false assumptions and artistic license. Thor and Odin were once held as Gods. Gods who fell by the wayside, as have many Gods throughout history. Gods who have lost popularity and following become relegated to myth. I have no doubt that the God who is currently recognised as existing, along with Allah, will one day, too, become myths. The answer to the posited question also makes the logical error of falsely alluding to a consensus of belief to be synonymous with absolute truth. Sunmaster offered up a very apropos to my point Marcus Aurelius quote. “The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject.” The Dag Sørås quote is, in my opinion, done for laughs, as he is a comedian, and not to accurately portray any real truth. (I don't know . . . maybe he does believe it's true.) We're all familiar with saying something that is not necessarily accurate, or even truthful, but it's very clever and really sounds good. Seriously. Were you taken in by that? BTW, there is an old folks home for all of the out-of-vogue Gods.

Believe me, I sometimes question why I post any of what I know at all. LOL I know of an instance where a doctor was remarking about the fact that he had numbers of patients who did not appear to want to improve their health while others responded to his aid wonderfully. It was the cause of great consternation and frustration for him as no matter what he tried he was unable to get those who resisted his help to come to accept it instead. He was given advice which confirmed that ill health served certain purposes for those who did not seem intent on regaining full health. And further advice to focus on those individuals in his practice who truly were seeking an end to their maladies whilst allowing the others to go their way. I always come back to the idea that there is, ultimately, value to sharing what I share because, as it is so strikingly apparent here, there are those posters who engage because they truly do want to increase their knowledge and understanding. And, of course, there are those others who have their own entirely different reasons for engaging in this thread. I don't mean to suggest that the above example be taken as a literal analogy in the sense that those others do not equally possess a desire for knowledge and understanding. Just wanted to make mention of that point so as not to unnecessarily get anyone up in arms. I'm quite sensitive to insults.

Science attaches zero credibility to subjective reality and precisely for the reasons you give. The moment they accept subjective reality as real is the point at which they become synonymous with religion. And yet, again, there is not a one of us who can deny the existence of subjective reality. The question, and the dilemma, becomes - what do we do with it? Currently, sciences chooses to simply ignore it completely, hoping that that is the correct solution. Knowing what I know, at least, I can't help but then conclude that it's a very bad choice and a terrible solution. This really does point to the fact that, overall, we know very, very little. Yet it's been said that every generation sincerely believes that they know most of what there is to know and that there's very little left to discover. Every generation.

To me learning is synonymous with growth. Growth is never ending. I would say that there is more than a single reason for why we're here. Offhand, another is the innate desire for self expression, which would employ an endless number of mediums. There are others that I know of. I absolutely agree with your observation that the lessons are different for everyone. And I'll use that observation to make another point. Not everyone is here to be healthy, wealthy and wise. That may not serve their intended purposes. Hence there is no one to free or save. Aiding them in their purpose may seem, and thus be interpreted, as an interventionist attempt to save them.

I have no idea what this means. "Not in a particular lifetime"? "All pain leads one back to happiness"? WTH does any of that mean? If your "theory" is even remotely correct, shouldn't humanity be overcome with neverending happiness by now? I mean we humans HAVE been suffering pain for thousands of years - why are we not reaping the rewards of all that ultimate happiness in 2022? Think of it this way, mikebike. Take all of the information that exists and create two mathematical sets; one for me and one for yourself. Your set will contain information which is not in my set, my set will contain info that's not in your set, and there will be an overlap which contains information that exists in both our sets. Finally, there will the rest of the existing information which will not be found in either of our sets. That visualisation should make it easy for you to see at least one explanation for why you have "no idea what it means." If you were taking a class on certain subject matter and there were concepts of which you were entirely unfamiliar being discussed would you a) politely ask questions or b) call the teacher a moronic dumbwit and hurl other insults?

Erm, I doubt the majority but would argue the loudest.

There's no need to free anyone, really. In truth there is never anything to "save." But that's an understanding that only comes with an understanding of what and who we truly are, and what the hell we're doing here in the first place. It is also true that one can only do for oneself. There's only one life to ever live. That is your own. And that is something you do the best with, too.

In my view the greater majority of the current mass accepted ideas are false in the sense that they do not reflect what actual reality is and how it works. Any idea which is not grounded in actual reality is inescapably bound to produce problems before it fails outright. (Think of jumping off a tall structure with the idea of flying.) The problem, as the profoundly perceptive Mark Twain so eloquently puts it, is this: “What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so.” While we have learned much regarding how reality truly operates and the laws by which it is bound (many thanks to science) we are still quite ignorant as to the many other laws which govern not only this reality but all others. Freedom is one such law. (Not that I view it as a law per se but as an inherent attribute of existence itself.) Those who attempt to suppress freedom do so with an at best limited understanding of this unalterable aspect of reality. The attempt to suppress freedom, as with all attempts to defy reality, is akin to jumping off a high precipice whilst having the expectation of flying. It is bound to lead to failure. After suffering disastrous and painful consequences, of course. Importantly, always keep in mind that Twain's astute observation is in prolific play in our world. And that the state of our world is always an absolute perfect reflection of those ideas which we hold, both individually and en masse. The further divorced the ideas which we attempt to employ are from the actual reality the greater the problems we can expect to encounter. All problems are, in fact, the unmistakable tell that an idea is in divergence with the true representation of reality. Now, in my mind there's much more to consider in order to give full justice to my explanation but from my vantage point I think we are witnessing the myriad results of an accumulation of some of the most disconnected ideas from reality that we have ever encountered in our long history. For instance, the idea that an individual can determine their sex despite the most obvious physical evidence presented by their own corporeal image. Please convince me that that idea will not lead to problems. It is my firm opinion that we, as a species, need to seriously begin examining those ideas which we hold in our heads with the express intention of reconsidering whether or not they have true validity. For it is unequivocally true to say that much of what we believe to be true and fact and take to be an unquestionable aspect of reality is, in truth, nothing more than a belief about reality. And so, in my estimation we are at a juncture at which, again, as a species we either correct our false assumptions of reality or succumb to the calamitous and destructive results of our current mass held and mass accepted distorted, misleading and inaccurate ideas of what reality is and how it operates. We have the freedom of choice. Always. Make the best use of it.

I should append the above to include anyone who refuses to set toe outside of the boundaries of reality they've set for themselves.

In my opinion, most of those who come onto this thread and gleefully disparage the beliefs of others have no interest and no intention of ever expanding their ideas beyond the boundaries of the box which science defines for them. They will learn nothing beyond what they currently "know" until they are capable of at least temporarily suspending their beliefs long enough to consider fresh and unfamiliar ideas. The only injustice they do is unto themselves.

They inflict themselves more than anyone else.

The crux of the disagreement between those of pure science and those of faith (who can also be proponents of science) revolves around the denial of the validity of subjective reality.

I had just downloaded Alex Harvey's discography yesterday and so am listening to the early albums. Harvey covered a lot of U.S. music in his early R&B days. The Blind Man is a traditional negro spiritual song based on the bible story of the blind beggar, Bartimaeus, from the Gospel of Mark, Chapter 10 (46-52). This '64 recording is most likely from a Hamburg club.

I may as well reply to the lot of you with a single post. Some of you might think that I'm religious and so are directing the above towards me. Perhaps with the sole intention of getting a rise outta me. I hate to disappoint but I'm not religious in the least. I'm just saying to save you guys the time and effort of posting things that don't affect me at all. Now you may enjoy feeling superior in that your concept and understanding of reality is spot on whereas what some folks here talk about seems far out there. Like Pluto ways, if you know what I mean. If that's the case then let me remind just how F'd up the world is today. Now you might be asking yourselves how it got to the deplorable and sad state that it's in. If that question draws a blank then consider for a moment that the current mass accepted ideas that got us here, of which most of you lot fevently believe in, are the cause of today's troubles. Now you may take objection with that assessment and if so I'll be happy to point out that most of the mass accepted ideas of how reality works, you know, the ones most of you lot subscribe to, when put together to come up with a cohesive and logically bullet proof picture to describe in minute detail this functional working reality you'd be amazed at how many universe-sized holes there are in the logic and how nothing ties together. Now if you're seriously interested in considering . . . I'm not talking about believing, just simply considering . . . an alternate explanation as to how reality actually works then think about this: if you were to delve into any subject matter with the intention of having some mastery over it do you think you could do it by reading a single sentence? A mere concept or two? A couple of paragraphs? In five minutes? An hour. Geez, would a day be asking too much? LOL I won't even get into the other myriad obstacles which cause otherwise very intelligent people treat unfamiliar ideas as if they were the plague. Anyway, if there's anyone of you who are seriously interested in expanding your understanding I'll happily engage. Otherwise, I'll conclude that you're just here to kill time.

mikebike, are you here to gain any understanding beyond you're current understanding? I mean, there's no problem if you're perfectly happy and satisfied with what you believe. More power to you. But if that's the case and you have no interest in altering your beliefs at all then why are you posting in this thread? It's a serious question.

I gave it a "laugh" reaction because of the twisted logic.

In my understanding we are soul. A soul clothed in flesh and blood. The Christian concept is that we possess a soul, as if it were some thing separate from us which we need to earn and then reclaim. We reside in a physical body and yet our body is not who we are. We are composed of cells and yet we are not any one of our cells. We can be broken down even further into individual molecules, which are themselves composed of individual atoms, which are composed of even smaller particles. The best explanation I've found is that we are a gestalt consciousness. In other words, our individual consciousness is aligned with other individual consciousnesses in a cooperative venture. I believe we have an incomplete and erroneous idea of identity. Not sure what you mean by having different parts of us in conflict.

I agree that pain does not guarantee growth. It can lead to, as you say, even greater pain. But I would aver that ultimately all pain leads one back to happiness. Perhaps not in a particular lifetime but in due "time" it's an eventuality.