JB wrote:
That remark is evidence that they don't give a rats *** about our views, they just want to push their own upon us. So why should we share them? I was well aware of this months ago. It appears that their argument takes the form of: "Science cannot be used to support any type of spiritual idea and we will yell and scream and throw temper tantrums if anyone suggests otherwise!" Yet, where is the scientific theory that science denies all possibly spiritual views? I've never heard of any such scientific theory and I've been involved in science my entire life. Is this a new theory? I think it's extremly ironic that they often try to pretend that I'm the one who is misrepresenting science when in fact they are the one's who misrepresent science. There is no scientific theory or rule that states that science is incompatible with any and all ideas of spirit. So where do they come up with this idea? It's not from science, I can assure everyone of this. Unless it's a brand new theory that I've never heard about. Well, hint isn't a strong enough word but it's what I think you like to think you're doing. |
|
|
|
I think the broken up posts thing isn't working so well JB. I'm getting replied to less even though it should be easier for people to do so. Naw, I think your just wearing them out, good on you! When it was just me and creative we tend to get wore out first.
So BRAVO! Is that what this is all about? "Wearing them down?" If so, what is the purpose or end result of doing so? My purpose in answering all the questions is to provide information that will allow a better understanding of my views. What is the purpose in asking them? Well, for whatever it's worth, I have genuinely enjoyed reading your posts Sky. I have found much of what you have posted to be quite interesting and enlightening. You have helped me to gain some deeper insights into the various possibilities of the true essence of reality. People will praise you if you make them think they are thinking but abhor you if you actually make them think~ |
|
|
|
I think the broken up posts thing isn't working so well JB. I'm getting replied to less even though it should be easier for people to do so. Naw, I think your just wearing them out, good on you! When it was just me and creative we tend to get wore out first.
So BRAVO! Is that what this is all about? "Wearing them down?" If so, what is the purpose or end result of doing so? My purpose in answering all the questions is to provide information that will allow a better understanding of my views. What is the purpose in asking them? That remark is evidence that they don't give a rats *** about our views, they just want to push their own upon us. So why should we share them? |
|
|
|
I think the broken up posts thing isn't working so well JB. I'm getting replied to less even though it should be easier for people to do so. Naw, I think your just wearing them out, good on you! When it was just me and creative we tend to get wore out first.
So BRAVO! Is that what this is all about? "Wearing them down?" If so, what is the purpose or end result of doing so? My purpose in answering all the questions is to provide information that will allow a better understanding of my views. What is the purpose in asking them? I keep my goals a little more clouded though as it keeps things from turning into endless retaliation spirals. |
|
|
|
This leaves the interesting question of what reason there could be to behave morally if our bodies are not even a part of us so much as something we're using. Again, the car/driver analogy works fairly well here.
What reason is there for abiding by the “rules of the road”, if our cars are not a part of us but something we’re using? Because there are other drivers using cars and we’re all using the same roads, so we have (i.e. make up) rules that allow everyone the opportunity to use their cars to get where they want to go with minimal conflict. Does the body have airbags for the soul? Do the characters have airbags or do the players smash their (important part) open as it comes to a sudden halt and maybe snap their (connective part) in half as they recoil from it? Does a character in a game have airbags for the player? The questions don’t really apply. Though there is a well known game existence where characters in the game having airbags for the player makes sense: the Matrix. I can understand why you would steer clear of that but I can also understand why to steer clear of the whole notion of what you're proposing but it hasn't stopped you~ |
|
|
|
Just wanted to note that Bohm's ideas about The Holographic Universe also points to a concept that what we consider "reality" (i.e. "physical") has an underlying "non-pysical" nature. The Matrix?? LOLAs it doesn't say anything about individuals we're not precluded from having many others in the same situation. Exactly.
So it fits solipsism perfectly. |
|
|
|
I think the broken up posts thing isn't working so well JB. I'm getting replied to less even though it should be easier for people to do so. So BRAVO! Yeh its good to have some fresh meat in the forums. LOL Bushi and Creative tend to loose it from time to time dealing with such abstract ideas. They get frustrated. |
|
|
|
I think the broken up posts thing isn't working so well JB. I'm getting replied to less even though it should be easier for people to do so. So BRAVO! |
|
|
|
I think the broken up posts thing isn't working so well JB. I'm getting replied to less even though it should be easier for people to do so. Well I think it has to do with what you are saying not how you are posting it. Take this remark for example: I'm more on the note of "does our body have airbags or do our astral selves smash their (important part) open as it comes to a sudden halt and maybe snap their (connective section) in half as they recoil from it?"
Does the body have airbags for the soul? I have no idea what you are talking about and I have read all three books by Robert Monroe about out of body travel. If you want to know about the astral world and the astral body try reading his three books. That post is me saying "we have traffic laws so we don't die horribly while driving" with that being a pretty significant issue for the whole spirit-body relationship he has described so far. It's obviously not a concern with the way you've dealt with the body question. |
|
|
|
I think the broken up posts thing isn't working so well JB. I'm getting replied to less even though it should be easier for people to do so.
|
|
|
|
This leaves the interesting question of what reason there could be to behave morally if our bodies are not even a part of us so much as something we're using. Again, the car/driver analogy works fairly well here.
What reason is there for abiding by the “rules of the road”, if our cars are not a part of us but something we’re using? Because there are other drivers using cars and we’re all using the same roads, so we have (i.e. make up) rules that allow everyone the opportunity to use their cars to get where they want to go with minimal conflict. I'm more on the note of "does our body have airbags or do our astral selves smash their (important part) open as it comes to a sudden halt and maybe snap their (connective section) in half as they recoil from it?" Does the body have airbags for the soul? |
|
|
|
Just wanted to note that Bohm's ideas about The Holographic Universe also points to a concept that what we consider "reality" (i.e. "physical") has an underlying "non-pysical" nature. The Matrix?? LOLAs it doesn't say anything about individuals we're not precluded from having many others in the same situation. |
|
|
|
Geez. Which kind of energy are we talking about? No kind, which is my point. It's an important distinction scientifically but I don't think many people here care about it. |
|
|
|
What a load of semantic crap.
Energy not physical, that was all I needed to read to know you are clueless. Energy is not physical? Is "matter" physical? If so, then what is E=mc2 all about? Matter IS energy... stored. Thing is we don't ever see "pure energy." We see manifestations of it as mass or temperature or motion. So? What's your point? So the question is a lot like asking if "blueness" is physical. Blue photons are but they aren't the same thing as blueness. |
|
|
|
Just wanted to note that Bohm's ideas about The Holographic Universe also points to a concept that what we consider "reality" (i.e. "physical") has an underlying "non-pysical" nature. The Matrix?? LOLThe belief is really the same thing with a coat of paint on it but I was trying to be less blunt about things. |
|
|
|
What a load of semantic crap.
Energy not physical, that was all I needed to read to know you are clueless. Energy is not physical? Is "matter" physical? If so, then what is E=mc2 all about? Matter IS energy... stored. Thing is we don't ever see "pure energy." We see manifestations of it as mass or temperature or motion. |
|
|
|
So after have damaged the brain of your body what words would you use to describe what happens to that unit? Is it still connected? Did it leave? Is it like the plug is all loosely connected and giving a crappy signal? That “loose connection” analogy is pretty good, although I think the car/driver analogy makes it a little clearer...
It would be like removing a couple spark plugs from the engine. The car no longer functions as well as it did before the sparkplugs were removed. But nothing has affected the driver. He still “sends signals” to the engine by pressing on the gas pedal. It’s just that the car now has some missing parts so it doesn’t work as well as it did before. Fits perfect. How dare you tell me my unique flower of an idea has been thought of before!? Oh wait, I understand that as creative as I am I follow patterns and better people than I have have pursued every pattern of wide appeal to it's conclusion or at least as far as I have long ago. It's the "spiritualist" group that wants it all to be new, except when being old gives it credibility... *I'm sure there are plenty of douchey atheists that swing the same way but I don't think any of the people here are one of them. |
|
|
|
Just wanted to note that Bohm's ideas about The Holographic Universe also points to a concept that what we consider "reality" (i.e. "physical") has an underlying "non-pysical" nature. The Matrix?? LOL |
|
|
|
This leaves the interesting question of what reason there could be to behave morally if our bodies are not even a part of us so much as something we're using. Your body is part of you. It is a manifestation of you. You learn to behave morally when you learn about the law of Karma and the Law of attraction. You reap what you sow. In this world there are laws of Karma and spiritual laws. You are free to experience good and evil as you choose. As you learn compassion and regard for others, you will ascend to higher worlds. You will eventually learn and evolve. |
|
|
|
This leaves the interesting question of what reason there could be to behave morally if our bodies are not even a part of us so much as something we're using. Again, the car/driver analogy works fairly well here.
What reason is there for abiding by the “rules of the road”, if our cars are not a part of us but something we’re using? Because there are other drivers using cars and we’re all using the same roads, so we have (i.e. make up) rules that allow everyone the opportunity to use their cars to get where they want to go with minimal conflict. |
|
|