Roundtable Flame/Discussion about Beliefs

[Mediumunwell]

I have really strong "universal" beliefs. I think the generalization that everyone has strong beliefs is a realistic world view imho.

I don't consider my view to be the only view or the best view. Anyway, I believe that it is possible to believe anything or believe in everything; even thoughts/beliefs that contradict themselves. I will try to explain this belief by relating it in a way to a Buddhist story that I will try to recall from memory.

In the story a man sits face to face with Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha, and asks about Nirvana. At the end of the conversation the Buddha asks the man to kiss his forehead. As the man leans forward the Buddha's face changes millions of times almost instantaneously. He changes into women and men of all races and into many different animals including a fish and even into an insect/s if I recall correctly. He kisses the Buddha, and he understands the meaning of Nirvana or he reaches it or something.

Anyway, I felt that this is one of the many stories that I could relate to. I could have even had previous knowledge of this story, whether I heard it in heaven or in a previous life. Yet, I might also believe that prior knowledge is illogical and that reason alone does/should prove that God and spirits do not exist. So, I also believe that this belief is correct. I would justify this belief through more conjectures such as: I do not think about God all the time, and therefore at certain times he does not exist. Now, I may feel the need to change my mind or counter this with: Just because I say it; that doesn't make it true.

Another contradicting belief of mine is; believing in God gives me purpose. However, I agree with Jean Paul Sartre's quote, "We mean that man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world—and defines himself afterwards. If man as the existentialist sees him is not definable, it is to begin with he is nothing. He will not be anything until later, and then he will be what he makes of himself."

I have had this outlook (without the philosophy quotes background) for a few years now. That is only part of it, and it is very confusing. I think that taking philosophy did ease my unrestful thinking quite a bit, though. At least I think it did, or that something did, I think.

So, any thoughts?

Edit: I brought the word prophecy into this conversation after Eimtr mentioned the change of thought that is expected in 2012. This reminded me of something amazing I have researched for several years now. In my first experience with the Great Pyramid of Giza, I had to write an essay for a math class. More recently, I turned this into a power point for my History of the Middle East Class. Without further ado I resent you...

Pyramids of God and The Virtruvian Pyramid

 

[En_Fuego]

God is dead; we killed him. ~Nietszche

 

[The Wizard]

i think that god was created by people's mind just for pretending they're not alone in this world and to create some rules for their society...
i think that people don't need any religious beliefs, they need only their own mind(and of course i'm an enemy of conformism)

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

I think God could be a creation of man as a tool of control and if somethings like the tree burning, some people 'came from the skies' did happen and is not a tale, then I would consider them an advanced civilization, probably coming from outside this planet, and NOT 'some old guy living in the clouds sitting on the clouds with a circle aura around him..'

Recently some more earthlike planet even than the Gliese system was discovered, there could be more complex life than microorganisms or plants somewhere out there.

 

[Magtheridon96]

I think God could be a creation of man as a tool of control

Possibly.

NOT 'some old guy living in the clouds sitting on the clouds with a circle aura around him..'

Oh come on, who would believe that?


I believe in God because I chose to. Simple as that.
You can chose to believe in God as well. I know what's better for me as a human being. I want my life to have a purpose and so, I've given it one.

Plus, if we are to believe that for one thing to exist, it would need a cause, then we have to think about something that doesn't need to be created, and yet could have created a universe.

It would have to be immaterial, spaceless and timeless.

"Nothing" works here. But can "nothing" create "something"?
Well, light can create matter (Proven a few years ago), but that light would need an origin.

I chose to believe it's God.

The question of his origin comes to my mind, but hey, my choice bitches.

 

[En_Fuego]

Ohai, its the guy from the thread on Medivh's Tower "Poll: Are People Stupid?" That thinks people are stupid if they voted for Obama. Flame on

What?

 

[The Wizard]

People often say that believingin god helps their minds, gives them wisdom, etc.
And i think religion is that fog that covers human's mind. people can feel and think without any gods

 

[Mediumunwell]

I think you are both right >.>

I like both sides of the argument.

I love the light creating matter thing, although, it doesn't prove anything. Something about that is heart warming.

Plus, if we are to believe that for one thing to exist, it would need a cause, then we have to think about something that doesn't need to be created, and yet could have created a universe.

It would have to be immaterial, spaceless and timeless.

"Nothing" works here. But can "nothing" create "something"?
Well, light can create matter (Proven a few years ago), but that light would need an origin.

This all reminds me of Taoism, pronounced /Dow/ism.
Here is my creative paper in which I had to choose either a Western-thinker or a thought system and relate that world view to a creative work such as a song.

Creative Essay

Philosophy is a Greek word that translates into love of wisdom. Both parts, philo- literally meaning love and -sophy meaning wisdom, are hard to come by. I have a hard time contemplating what it means to know anything or just know of something, and an even harder time trying to know what love is. In 1984 Foreigner released a song called “I Want to Know What Love Is” in which a large group of people join in singing the chorus at the end of the song until it fades out. I have always wanted to know the way things worked realistically. Now I am trying to understand why things are to begin with. I find it hard to believe that it is possible to know things in such a way. For instance, if there is a God and he is all love, then is it or is it not possible to know him in this life. Perhaps I know God when I include all life in my moral web and act compassionately towards it. Doing so would be a virtuous act and follow the core values of Taoism.

“Taoism is classically viewed as the teachings of three men: Lao-tse (“Master Lao”), the author of the major Taoist classic, the Tao Te Ching, which is said to have been written around twenty-five hundred years ago; Chuang-tse (Master Chuang”), author of several works and founder of a school of writers and philosophers during the Warring States period, aproximately two-thousand years ago; and the semi-legendary Yellow Emperor, who ruled over forty-five hundred years ago, and to whom are attributed various meditative, alchemical, and medicinal principles and practices. These three were the great organizers and communicators of Taoist thought, rather than its founders; for as we have said, what is now known as Taoism began before any of them were born, in what Chuang-tse called the age of perfect virtue...”

Benjamin Hoff: The Te of Piglet

“Taoism is a way of living in harmony with the Tao, the Way of the Universe... Taoism deals primarily with the individuals relationship to the world.” By internalizing the ethical theories expressed in Taoism one stands to gain a life of harmony and spontaneity. "Mother Nature's Son" is a Lennon–McCartney song, written primarily by Paul McCartney and released by The Beatles on The Beatles (The White Album). This song is a great example of how the life of a Taoist might sound.
Similar to the title of the song “Mother Nature’s Son” is the Taoist idea that we have this connection with the Earth as if we are created out of the Tao. Lao-tse writes in the first chapter of the Tao Te Ching, “The mother or matrix of all is beyond naming.” What Lao-tse means is that is not possible to know the Tao just by speaking about it. However, the words “mother” and “Nature” are both used when describing the Tao. Knowing “The salt of the sea is in our blood; the calcium of the rocks is in our bones;” reminds us that we are composed of the same atoms and elements commonly found throughout nature. “At the heart of all nature is the mysterious Tao, which appears to do nothing but accomplishes everything, seemingly without effort. There is a restfulness in this and in our connection with the Earth...” Both Taoism and the song “Mother Nature” give comfort in letting everything follow its own nature.

Another connection between the song and Taoism is how both have an admiration of nature.

Sit beside a mountain stream--see her waters rise

Listen to the pretty sound of music as she flies.

Just these two lines of the song have many similarities with Taoism. Lao-tse does not speak metaphorically, and this song does not mean to be taken metaphorically, either. These lyrics are directly saying that there is a song to be heard as the water, (Mother Nature), “flies.” Lao-tse might advise learning from the song the water makes and don’t try “to set yourself against its immutable ways.” Water is one the most prominent symbols of Taoism because it accomplishes everything effortlessly, takes the path of least resistance, and “flies” just like the Tao. “This is the principle the Chinese call wei-wu-wei (or sometimes wu-wei), which literally means ‘doing without doing.’ To understand wei-wu-wei it is only necessary to look at how nature moves the natural system.” Observing nature can remind us that “we have time for planning, for joy, for thoughtfulness, for grieving, and for deep wisdom—in every day as well as in every year.” Tons of feelings and thoughts come from doing something as effortless as admiring nature, and I would assume that Paul McCartney had to of admired nature to write a song that comforting about it.

Lastly, I noticed that the song has only three verses and the chorus is just humming. Much of it is empty in a way. Emptiness is valued in Taoism as well, such as the space inside a house, or the value of emptying oneself and expecting to be filled. “What wears out is continually renewed.” I am unsure if this song or The Beatles themselves will or have ever worn out, so this might be a difference. On the other hand, both the song and Taoism are very simple.

Both the works of the Taoist masters and the song “Mother Nature’s Son” symbolize the “passive state of receptiveness” that is the way to happiness. I played guitar for much of my life and have always felt a desire to write a song while being outside in a peaceful place. I guess I’m a little lucky I have yet to learn piano in that case. I think the important thing to remember is that art comes from the appreciation of nature and to remember that nature came first.

 

[Ramza]

Men created Gods to control others, and to explain things they couldn't yet (or still can't) understand. It's what I dislike about religions the most. They don't look for answers, they evade them. They make up silly stories and ignore facts.
What I dislike as well is that most parents don't let their kids think for themselves. They start brainwashing them the second they're born. I mean, it's no coincidence that people share their parents' beliefs like 99% of the time.

 

[Mediumunwell]

@Ramza

Read my last post and post again >.>

You are the one that needs some facts

However, I think most of what you said is insightful.

Men created Gods to control others, and to explain things they couldn't yet (or still can't) understand... They don't look for answers. They evade them.

Of course this can be argued, but I'm not saying you are wrong. I like this, but I'm not saying you are right.

I don't like this...

They make up silly stories and ignore facts.

@The Wizard

I think your points are all valid. I like your contributions to this discussion. I will try to find some existentialist quotes to relate to some of your viewpoints.

 

[Ramza]

You're not making any sense.

 

[Ramza]

I wasn't referring to your OP when I said you weren't making sense. I was referring to this: ''You are the one that needs some facts''. What facts are you talking about?
And I'm not flaming or trolling. Anyone who's seen me posting before knows I'm not. Ok, maybe a bit with the ''silly stories'' thing. Could've worded that differently, heh.

 

[En_Fuego]

Beliefs are founded upon either faith or logic. what's there to discuss?

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

I for one hope that from all the stories about 2012 - cataclysm, conscious uprising, lifting to a new dimension, lots talk about some change in people - how about that event to be kill religion, this year? But it won't happen as I am realist and I can feel no change will occur. Some secrets need to be revealed first that can change one's belief system.

(Usually by saying smth won't happen, it happens so that's why Im saying it but I just double negated it, so .. oh nevermind)

 

[Mediumunwell]

Beliefs are founded upon either faith or logic. what's there to discuss?

Where does faith come from? Do you have prior knowledge that allows you to have faith? Do you learn things from others tales of experiences? Does your own experiences "create" your faith?

What is Logic? Here is one example of how two people might agree on a definition for the mind or logic from one of my philosophy essays:

“The mind, of course, is just what the brain does for a living”
Sharon Begley

I, Immanuel Kant, agree. This is precisely what our minds are made for. We can know things only as they appear to us, but we can never know things as they appear in themselves. For a deeper understanding consider space and time and categories of it including quality, quantity, relation and modality. This is the minds perceptions that allow us to speak of reality. Under the category of relation we experience things through a filter of causality because ours brains are structured to perceive the objects that present themselves as reacting through cause and effect. In summary, “reality is in my head, shaped by the pure concepts and categories of my mind.”

That is something for all the existentialists (realists.)

@Eimtr

I will see what I can dig up from my project that had to do with prophecy... This might take me a lil while. I did the project from memory and used pictures from power point to speak from. It was really cool, though. (It had nothing to do with the Mayan's >.< It was way more interesting.)

By the way, On the homepage of TheHelper.net I saw that this is the second year in a row that 5,000 black birds dropped dead all over Arkansas on New Years.

 

[En_Fuego]

So, where does faith come from? Do you have prior knowledge that allows you to have faith? Do you learn things from others tales of experiences? Does your own experiences "create" your faith?

Your faith is what you believe. It is grounded from what you have experienced and is co-dependent on the very paradigm that you view the world through (the other co-dependency being logic).

What is Logic? Here is one example of how two people might agree on a definition for the mind or logic from one of my philosophy essays:

Logic is empirical data and it's interpretation is co-dependent on the same paradigm as above that you view the world through.

mr subs, do you believe in deontology or utilitarian schools of thought? I'll assume deon. because of the Kant quote.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

@mr subs
Just to be clear, I do not know where the idea got from that because the Mayan calendar ends, some cloud frm space will come right on a man's schedule.. but I do not think this is what was meant, this is just misinterpretation.

Im not talking about it.. im talking about 2012 is considered to be a change of thinking and so on.. well I do not think any change of thinking will happen because some secrets havent been revealed yet.. other than the fact that countries are in crisis that seems to go to more and more countries, this world going to war in the future, not now, not this year.

 

[Ramza]

You still haven't answered my question, Subs.

 

[Mediumunwell]

@En_Fuego

Good question... For those who are not familiar...

- Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being.
- Deontological ethics or deontology is normative ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on the action's adherence to a rule or rules.
- Utilitarianism is an ethical theory holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes the overall "happiness". It is thus a form of consequentialism, meaning that the moral worth of an action is determined only by its resulting outcome, and that one can only weigh the morality of an action after knowing all its consequences.

I believe in both. I believe that rules can be or have been made, whether by God, the natural limitations of reality, or the laws of government, that can or have formed consequences to actions which we have the free will to perform, not perform, not completely perform, perform without consequences, perform in alternate dimensions and not perform in others and thus sometimes have consequences, or maybe we don't have that much free will and it is only an illusion that we do.

In this one, I chose to speak as if I were a believer in African Philosophy. on the same quote.

“The mind, of course, is just what the brain does for a living”
Sharon Begley

As a believer in African Philosophy, I disagree with this quote. I affirm that this statement personifies a “fundamental unity between theory and practice,” but I feel that it does not eliminate an "either/or" prejudiced view, and the statement most closely pertains to theoretical knowledge which is not valued in my beliefs. “I can know the world only by being immersed in it, not by attempting to stand apart from it and study it objectively.”

I don't necassarily hold the opinion I express as a believer in African Philosophy, as strongly as it may appear.

@Eimtr

O, I suppose I did misinterpret a bit. I will get back to you about what you meant asap. Also, I'd still like to bring up something this reminded me of, that I researched very thoroughly for several years. It has to do with prophecy. I don't want to spoil it more than that. And, its not really related to the Mayan calendar.

@Ramza

What I dislike as well is that most parents don't let their kids think for themselves. They start brainwashing them the second they're born. I mean, it's no coincidence that people share their parents' beliefs like 99% of the time.

I like this, a little bit. This is something new you added. This brings in another topic: nature vs nurture. However, I don't have much of an opinion on this. If you read my essay, you will see that I don't know what love is. I don't know the "right" way to raise a child. I don't really know what to say about this. This is a hard topic for me to discuss, but its the circle of life. You sayin you want to change it?

Sorry for not replying, this thread's topic is very broad, and I am struggling to keep up with everything. haha

The thing about facts was just a joke. When someone starts with stereotypes, I don't always respond as I should. My favorite quote is from Gandhi, "Be the change you wish to see in the world." So, I just feel that blaming others is sort of a scape-goat.

 

[Belgarath]

Consider your dreams. If you've ever had a lucid dream, you know that this experience shows you a fully fledged, developed and yet everchanging world which can be more colorful, vivid and sensational than the real world.
If you can be more awake and living in your dreams than you are when, meaning that your mind can technically create a "better" world than you can perceive while awake, to me, it just seems to say that there has to be something more than this world.
As to what it is? Who knows? Perhaps it's a never-ending dream?

 

[Mediumunwell]

I like this

 

[Gilles]

An article I enjoyed that slightly pertains to the subject.
4 Things Both Atheists and Believers Need to Stop Saying
Another:10 Things Christians and Atheists Can (And Must) Agree On

Out of curiosity, how many people would consider themselves relativists?

 

[w3.player]

I think that belief should never be tied to religion... because one's belief should be unshackled yet the religions only bind them to chains with certain ideas...

I agree with En_Fuego and yes... beliefs are founded on faith or logic. I also believe in the idea of a soul... we as humans have a soul... i don't know how to explain it.. it's just a belief and if you ask me to prove it i can't... but i think that this "soul" is something that we cannot perceive within our usual ways of seeing the world and yet this is something that somehow "drives" us. So to end my point, i think that our faith and logic come initially from our soul, and of course... they evolve depending on each other and on our experience.

About dreams... well i somehow have to agree with Belgarath... dreams are a way trough which we see a world different than the one we usually perceive (i will not say "than the real world") and maybe somehow there are worlds which to us might seem as dreams.

For a usual scientist the dream is a random subconscious pack of connections that make us see things and hear things in our head, but they are not real.

Others say that dreams are visions... others say memories from past lives.... others say "just dreams"... it all depends on perspectives. I myself think that dreams are simply ways trough which our brain relaxes... but i believe it is plausible that dreams might even be connections to other worlds... who is to say that isn't a possibility.

 

[The Wizard]

And different ideas of world creating.
something that say religion is ... just unreal(trere are a lot of other facts, and no fact for the creationism theory)
but i think scientific theory isn't ideal too.
people used to explain something understandable for them as god's deeds.
that's as old as human mind i think)

 

[Hoops]

"Hey guys, let's discuss religion on the Internet."

There were 38 things wrong with that sentence.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

@Eimtr

O, I suppose I did misinterpret a bit. I will get back to you about what you meant asap. Also, I'd still like to bring up something this reminded me of, that I researched very thoroughly for several years. It has to do with prophecy. I don't want to spoil it more than that. And, its not really related to the Mayan calendar.

Spoil it for me Or are you part of some nwo plan? XD

Yea speaking of research.. I've also acted as a filter of lots of things - filtering likely true from false/fake, from NWOs to UFOs, Nibiru to Reptilians who acted as Gods, but even after all research you do, when you look every day at the stars, the day, the daily life, it all appears a little bit too far-fetched like - wth this is so far from anything daily that it looks like a fiction (and majority of it IS). I'm almost losing even the current things I believe to be true, seeing the normal that is going on every day.

So even if you do a research even if you read some professor or researcher's work, it's nothing to call certain and darn it human is an evil being, how big LIARS.. Even I fell for some things, they are so darn convincing when you read more.. Greedy assholes! That's why I dont like humanity very much, it's evil! And it must
DECREASE in numbers

But yeah so what is this prophecy if you're willing to say, I wont laugh, dont worry :> (must be 'thinking' related since we're talking about thinking/philosophy not conspiracies)

 

[Magtheridon96]

Given infinite time, isn't it technically true that any event will occur?
I know this may seem unrelated, but it came to my mind when I read the word "prophecy".

 

[Hakeem]

I took Philosophy 101 last semester, so I think I will be able to help keep this discussion on track.

It's not up to you, and furthermore, if Philosophy 101 teaches you anything, I question your intelligence.

The floor is now open for ad hominem.

I think religion is that fog that covers human's mind.

It isn't. Humans are just naturally like that.

People can feel and think without any gods.

Not if such gods are necessary to perpetuate existence.

But otherwise, yes, God or not, we can easily observe that all are equally capable of existing, regardless and independent of their beliefs.

Men created Gods to control others.

What is this? Amateur hour? Religion was never even remotely necessary to control anyone.

to explain things they couldn't yet (or still can't) understand.

You know, I hear this one a lot too. I really have to wonder whether or not you can cite any remotely obscure bit of history to support this belief of yours.

They don't look for answers, they evade them.

Yeah, that is what it means to be human. All humans are this way. It is not unique to religious people in the slightest.

They make up silly stories and ignore facts.

Hence why making up things about God is one of the worst sins cited in, oh, probably most religions.

What I dislike as well is that most parents don't let their kids think for themselves.

What tips do you have on avoiding this process when you are a parent?

4 Things Both Atheists and Believers Need to Stop Saying

Shit.

10 Things Christians and Atheists Can (And Must) Agree On

Gold.

 

[Mediumunwell]

@Magtheridon

Yea, I believe that.

@eimtr

Ok, here we go!!!

First, you should read my essay from my Distance Learning college Pre-Calc when I was a senior in high school in 2008. My math teacher told us to write an essay on either polyconic shapes or the Pyramid of Giza. I was practically the only one that chose the Great Pyramid, and was absolutely the only one to mention the prophecy related to it.

Then, be blown away by my power point for my History of the Middle East class. If you wanna learn everything you have to go through and find the hidden slides. You can then preview the slide show from the current hidden slide you select to see it enlarged, but I don't know if you will see any of the other hidden ones if you continue. So, you will have to right click to end show and preview the next hidden one. I recommend viewing it regularly, and then finding all the hidden slides and background notes.

 

[HFR]

I believe in God and all that Christian stuff. That's all you should know.

Shit.

Aw, but it's Gladstone, he's usually awesome! Though I agree it's not as good as the second one.

 

[Gilles]

Shit.

Gold.

I actually preferred the former to the latter. I do however think the 10 Similarities actually provides good ideas and thoughts, while the 4 Things simply points out negatives on both sides and bashes them slightly. Slightly ironically.

 

[Hakeem]

I'm looking at it purely in terms of actually getting through to people. First one seems relatively useless in that manner, but is good for a cheap laugh. Eh, I'm not a fan of cheap laughs.

 

[Direfury]

For someone who's trying to be some sort of 'master debater', you're spouting alot of unrelated nonsense, subs. It's better to apply whatever it was you learned, to explanations of an area of expertise, or when someone says openly that they do not see the logic in whatever it is you're going on about.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

@Magtheridon

Yea, I believe that.

@eimtr

Ok, here we go!!!

First, you should read my essay from my Distance Learning college Pre-Calc when I was a senior in high school in 2008. My math teacher told us to write an essay on either polyconic shapes or the Pyramid of Giza. I was practically the only one that chose the Great Pyramid, and was absolutely the only one to mention the prophecy related to it.

Then, be blown away by my power point for my History of the Middle East class. If you wanna learn everything you have to go through and find the hidden slides. You can then preview the slide show from the current hidden slide you select to see it enlarged, but I don't know if you will see any of the other hidden ones if you continue. So, you will have to right click to end show and preview the next hidden one. I recommend viewing it regularly, and then finding all the hidden slides and background notes.

Never had an essay assignment in a maths class, sounds good. Im already past high school and past Bachelor in Uni wandering before I choose what area I want to study and then work which I may have finally realized this year, 2012.

A part of the AAT (will go through the episodes Se1 again and for 1st time in Se2-Se3) talks about the Pyramids, other monuments like Stonehenge, the pyramids in Peru, as a source of power. In fact, they are pointing to Orion constellation at some time, there definitely seems to have some kind of mechanism related to outer space. I see you haven't missed that as well.

So congrats on including things that I wouldn't as I wouldn't like being ridiculed in front of people, like theories not accepted by the general science. But that does not mean all of these things are true, just some are, one should approach objectively and accept either possibilities.

 

[Mediumunwell]

I thought I approached it all pretty objectively. I was never ridiculed. I was surprisingly very highly praised by my whole class, and my teacher. None of the pages with lots of text were on my original slide show. It was all basically only the pictures, and I just gave a speech from memory which surprised a few classmates, as well. I put all that text on there just for you, and anyone else that wants to learn about the pyramids.

What is AAT and Se1-3?

Congrats on maybe knowing where you wanna go next

 

[Hoops]

Hey! I'm really good at making ice sculptures. I'm good at making ice sculptures because I took a class in it.

Did I mention I took a class in making ice sculptures?

Well anyway, here's an ice sculpture I made.

I was basically praised by my whole class and my teacher for my skill in making ice sculptures.

1/4

 

[Kwah]

Oh what a bunch of clever and insightful intellectuals we all are. Hem, haw. Verily so.

---

But while we're maintaining some semblance of civility (likely a temporary state, I fear), I'll give my input.

First I'd like to identify as what I see a problem in this discussion. Nobody knows what the fuck everybody else is talking about. Because as far as I can see, nobody is saying anything interesting. This leads to a lack of points to actually debate about, besides to mildly debase everyone else while barraging each other with truisms and meaningless bullshit.

mr subs, as EroticSideburns has pointed out, your problem here is that it's coming across as an argument from authority, which is fallacious. You ideas need to stand on their own merit, your level of education is irrelevant to their truthyness. Also, we don't really want to see your PowerPoint presentation, and it probably won't blow our minds. Philosophy 101 is not the end-all of philosophical knowledge (it is in-fact, the very opposite!), and even if you had a PhD in philosophy (or are Rousseau!) it is still quite possible you're simply wrong.

Additionally, simply stating contradictions does not constitute a point, and it does not make you clever or insightful. In fact, it looks pretty silly from where I'm standing.

---

This being said, obviously the round-table nature of the discussion can save us from some more contentious attacks on personal opinion. But there still need to be actual opinions discussed, so that all participants can become more educated of each others beliefs.

---

Now onto my thoughts.

Science.

Science is the testing of ideas through observation and experiment.

Controlled and public observation and experiment.

I am a Bayesian empiricist. That is more or less the extent of my philosophical beliefs. Science is the only way we can arrive at truth.

Pulled from something I wrote on the topic a while back:

[...] unperformed experiments do not have results. Without observing what actually happens in any given situation, we can never discover new knowledge, but simply confirm our preexisting ideas. Thus, we can't know what will happen, and are uncertain, until the experiment is actually performed. Yes, we can reason what will probably happen, what has happened in the past, and draw generalizations from that but until this unique instance of the experiment is performed, there are no results, and there is no certainty. This time, it could be different. It probably isn't, but we don't know till we try.

---

In the goal of furthering discussion, I think you (we?) all need to work out what exactly the question we're considering is. If all this philosophy is the answer, what are we asking?

 

[Hakeem]

Kwah is basically right. Nothing is really being said here.

Don't insult [...] my philosophy teacher.

Where did I say or imply that in any manner?

Like a Sophist.

Ad hominem?

Do you know about Socrates and the story of Meno?

No, but I've learned the lesson to be learned from that story regardless.

Have you not even taken a philosophy class?

Precisely.

What do you know about knowledge and reality?

Damn near everything there is to know.

I don't care what you say, but at the same time I do. Can you deal with that?

With my hands tied.

;D

 

[Kwah]

by the way my power point isn't about philosophy. it has empirical data. so read it. then, when your mind is blown, thank the God you went from not believing in to feeling like a dumbass, but still not believing in because you think the universe revolves around you and because i could care less if you learn to tie your shoes much less learn something from me and thank me for it.

After all this work up about the power point, I took a look at it.

Firstly, the majority of it is not your own original work and is directly taken from this site. Your contribution was to make a collection of poorly formatted and arranged images to match this text, hoping that by writing a random collection of numbers and speculation on a page so it would look impressive. However, you cited your sources which makes me very happy.

I do not have the time to take up every slide of the power point with you. So I'll just do one. It is the one that I have an easiest time completely and totally refuting, and other portions of the powerpoint were more valid than this one. But not significantly so. Below is the offending image:

First, the formatting isn't mindblowing or amazing by any means. It's not bad, really. But if you're going to be giving it such praise and demanding that it will blow my world away, I expect something of remarkable quality.

So what is the factual issue? (besides the picture saying furlongs and the text saying inches) The Pyramids own date is one of the factors. In 2623 BC. This is not the system of dating used by the Egyptians. They did not date things relative to the birth of Christ. They also didn't used inches.

But if you want to theorize that it is some giant conspiracy and that this selection of numbers is relevant - I can refute that to.

Why WW1? Why the Exodus of the Israelites? Why not WW2? The crusades?
I can imagine a huge variety of dates and name important things that happened on them. Maybe if I used milimettres it will be 1066 - the invasion of William the Conqueror, and 1517 - The Protestant Reformation. There are enough units and dates that unless you can provide justification of why inches and why years/dates, this is completely meaningless. Also, given it only predicts past events and can only be used in highsight, I fail to see the point.

I can refute any other claim in the powerpoint in a similar method. This is not empiricism. This is not fact. This is the spread of sensationalist disinformation and conspiracy, and it makes me sad. Because I do love knowledge. And the encouragement of things like this is not conducive to knowledge, and it's not conducive to the betterment of people. And that's a damn shame.

---

I never said I was right in anything I have said. I never said I wasn't trying to lead you all astray into the depths of hell.

And I never said you claimed any of those things. I presented and supported/will support my opinion, which is contrary to yours. I will educate you about my beliefs, in the hope that you will understand them. This is what I'm trying to achieve. And if I can't convince you, that's okay. Because others will read this thread. And hopefully they'll read what I have to say, and be better people for it. One can hope, right?

---

Who fucking made you moderator? Start moderating (like the second half of your post) and stop trolling.

The second half of my post and the first are trying to do the same thing. Draw attention to the faults I've observed in the thread, and hope that we can address them and continue a discussion. I'm beginning to worry this isn't possible. This isn't trolling. This is me, discussing the things you've brought forth for discussion.

 

[Gilles]

Science.

Science is the testing of ideas through observation and experiment.

Controlled and public observation and experiment.

I am a Bayesian empiricist. That is more or less the extent of my philosophical beliefs. Science is the only way we can arrive at truth.

I assume therefore that you believe there is no moral truth?

 

[Hakeem]

Please help me make this thread better, and stop being so aggressive and pretentious.

That's what we're trying to do, in our own ways.

Do you care that you hurt people's feelings?

I dunno. Sorta. I know I'm supposed to, and I think I'm supposed to do something to ensure that doesn't happen if it can be helped, but I'm not really feeling it. I'm sort of disconnected lately. It doesn't feel like reality is really real anymore. Like it's just a technicality. A very constant technicality that you cannot dismiss, but a technicality nonetheless. I suppose it's interfering with my ability to debate this subject, but then I'm still finding the right words to say, even now. At least, I think they're the right words. I dunno. It's hard to tell what's what when reality itself begins crumbling from your periphery.

As it stands, you can really say whatever you like. That's how reality works as far as I can tell. You can literally do whatever you want and say absolutely anything. I'm not sure what happens after that. I guess what's really happening to me is that causality is breaking down in my mind. I'm no longer really perceiving it. Maybe this sounds like something that should worry me, or others, but really, it doesn't worry me. I see no reason to worry. About anything. Maybe because I've stopped perceiving causality. Maybe there isn't a cause.

I know, academically, that you're frustrated, and that you have every reason to be, and that my words probably wont really make sense to you such that you'll stop getting worked up, but I'm going to say them anyway because.

Because why, you ask?

I don't understand the question.

 

[Kwah]

I assume therefore that you believe there is no moral truth?

I'm not sure what you mean by moral truth.

Do I believe that as humans we have moral responsibility? Yes, certainly.

As a human aware of the capacity for suffering, I feel obliged to work to reduce said suffering. My ethical stance is largely Kantian (make your behavior the rule and all that). Allow as much individual autonomy as possible and good things like that.

Do I believe that morals exist outside of sentience, or are some external force? No.

 

[Instant Ramen]

I assume therefore that you believe there is no moral truth?

You mean objective morality, correct?

 

[fladdermasken]

Isn't it to give people feedback and help

Partially.

and not to make them look stupid?

Not necessarily, but most people wouldn't shun a perquisite.

stop being so aggresive

Where exactly did either one of them act aggresive? Inconsiderate, maybe.

But you're the only one who lashed out.

[...] and pretentious.

You know what? If you're not getting through to them, you could always present your case in a powerpoint and praise it for pages on end.

Do you care that you hurt people's feelings?

If I feel that it isn't warranted.

Now what?!

Yes, seriously. What?

 

[Mediumunwell]

Ok, since your last post to me actually made sense, I'll humor you.

After all this work up about the power point, I took a look at it.

Firstly, the majority of it is not your own original work and is directly taken from this site.

If you had read this thread or viewed the slideshow, you would know that I just added these parts of the slideshow for people to understand the presentation. I said earlier that it was nothing but pictures and "my work" was nothing but a compilation of pictures.

Your contribution was to make a collection of poorly formatted and arranged images to match this text, hoping that by writing a random collection of numbers and speculation on a page so it would look impressive.

I didn't say that I thought highly of my powerpoint, but I did think (just as you did) that I could (in my own words) "enlighten" the audience. On the other hand, perhaps my only true desire here now is to entertain. Lastly, did I not impress? Look at my rep from the only person I know of to view my power point from the hive. Again, I said my teacher and classmates praised me for my presentation.

Does my last sentence really offend you? If so, I truly question your "open-mindedness" and tolerance.

However, you cited your sources which makes me very happy.

I knew you would go back for more. You're questioning your own beliefs, now, aren't you?

I do not have the time to take up every slide of the power point with you.

If you're scared, say you're scared.

It is the one that I have an easiest time completely and totally refuting,

Of course the empiricist takes the easy way out.

Below is the offending image:

Take a chill pill. Be more like Winnie the Pooh and just go with it, man.

First, the formatting isn't mindblowing or amazing by any means. It's not bad, really. But if you're going to be giving it such praise and demanding that it will blow my world away, I expect something of remarkable quality.

I'm sorry that it didn't meet your expectations? Maybe you didn't give it a chance? If the formatting bothers you that much, I question your sanity.

So what is the factual issue? (besides the picture saying furlongs and the text saying inches) The Pyramids own date is one of the factors. In 2623 BC.

Great point! Ok so... I recently saw the word "furlongs" there and mean to take out, but have been busy. In my defense the power point was slightly different. That description was not there before, and the text (being different colors for a reason) was there to remind me that it had to do with something else that I was to explain to my audience.

About the Pyramids own date being a factor in the calculations:
I have researched and punched in numbers for a looong time regarding this. Pinpointing a construction date or renovation date (some believe Khufu/Cheops renovated it at some time around 2600 B.C. and that it was constructed thousands of years earlier). Run the numbers in the description regarding the date the pyramid was built. "The Pyramid was built 4,517 years ago in 2623 B.C. (Since there was never a year zero, an year must be subtracted)." The resulting year from subtracting 2012 from 4517 is one-hundred and eighteen years more recent. Plus fifteen because the web page was created in 1997 minus one since there was never a year zero, so now, it is 104 years off. Maybe, 104 years were lost in time. I dunno. Maybe, I'm forgetting something, or the guy that wrote the web-page is bad at math. Anyway, if the year that the pyramid was constructed was in fact 2623, then according to this source the Great Pyramid creates a prophetic timeline.

Another image that is strikingly similar from my power point has a different starting point for the timeline. On that picture, the timeline seems completely theoretical. Nonetheless, it starts at the "Creation and Fall of Adam." That, may or may not have been the one to choose, to get the easy way out. But, you were attracted to that data, you empiricist you. Again, that is from the hidden slides that are sort of plagiarised, but not really because they are not used in the slide show. Plus I had planned to ask permission to use the resource. I just haven't put an effort towards that, yet.

This is not the system of dating used by the Egyptians. They did not date things relative to the birth of Christ. They also didn't used inches.

That doesn't matter. I read that Enoch actually helped design the Great Pyramid. Enoch was an advisor to Khufu and he had visions on how it needed to be built. I forget where I got all this, but just bare with me here and keep an open mind. Enoch probably knew what he was doing had great significance, and may have even known that it was a monument to Christ. So, the pyramid may have been built in furlongs or cubits, which also have significance in memoralizing Christ in the Great Pyramid's stone measurements as mentioned in the attachments, but perhaps at the same time it was designed to be easily decripted with more standard measurements.

I believe that the word inch was derived from the name Enoch. I think I read that somewhere. Since, I don't feel like researching, here are two yahoo answers that I thought were most relevant for discovering the origin and thus the reason for the inch.

"The "standard" cubit and divisions of the standard were maintained by having artifacts. These artifacts were not used for active measurement, but rather for comparison to working standards or in this case rulers that were used for the field measurements. Artifacts are typically well cared for.

In modern times, there was a "standard meter" that was maintained at the BIPM in France (I believe) but the definitions for measures have changed to allow the reproduction of basic measurement units in the laboratory.

For more information try looking (in the US) at the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) website."

"what Brian said, I think the Egyptians originated those measuring units; a yard, a foot, a cubit, etc"

But if you want to theorize that it is some giant conspiracy and that this selection of numbers is relevant - I can refute that to.

No, I do not wish to theorize about conspiracies. I find arguing over trivial concerns whether they be fact or fiction to be nothing more than a giant waste of my time. Hence, my dissatisfaction, which I explained, with each person I named above.

Why WW1? Why the Exodus of the Israelites? Why not WW2? The crusades? I can imagine a huge variety of dates and name important things that happened on them. Maybe if I used milimettres it will be 1066 - the invasion of William the Conqueror, and 1517 - The Protestant Reformation. There are enough units and dates that unless you can provide justification of why inches and why years/dates, this is completely meaningless. Also, given it only predicts past events and can only be used in highsight, I fail to see the point.

Trying to show some authoritay?

I can refute any other claim in the powerpoint in a similar method. This is not empiricism. This is not fact. This is the spread of sensationalist disinformation and conspiracy, and it makes me sad. Because I do love knowledge. And the encouragement of things like this is not conducive to knowledge, and it's not conducive to the betterment of people. And that's a damn shame.

I never asked for your approval nor your dissaproval. Its a damn shame that your head is a lot smaller than you think.

Size

And I never said you claimed any of those things. I presented and supported/will support my opinion, which is contrary to yours. I will educate you about my beliefs, in the hope that you will understand them. This is what I'm trying to achieve. And if I can't convince you, that's okay. Because others will read this thread. And hopefully they'll read what I have to say, and be better people for it. One can hope, right?

Your opinion is not contrary to mine. As I said from the beginning I believe everything. I believe what you believe by not restricting myself to the chaos created by words used by those that are not enlightened, including myself.

 

[Kwah]

I knew you would go back for more. You're questioning your own beliefs, now, aren't you?

You citing your sources in no way manner or form made my question my own beliefs.

If you're scared, say you're scared.

I am not scared of the pyramids. I am not scared of your powerpoint.

Ok so... I recently saw the word "furlongs" there and mean to take out, but have been busy. In my defense the power point was slightly different. That description was not there before, and the text (being different colors for a reason) was there to remind me that it had to do with something else that I was to explain to my audience.

Furlongs is not just a word. It is a unit of measurement. The image shows the number of things in what I assume to be furlongs, not inches. This is inconsistent with the text below.

Trying to show some authoritay?

No. I am pointing out that there is no reason to believe what you have suggested versus the almost infinite possibility of other reasons. I *could* believe that the Pyramids are actually green and float and invented by a small tribe of Martians. There is as much evidence for that as for everything you suggest.

---

Finally, you write this:

Your opinion is not contrary to mine. As I said from the beginning I believe everything. I believe what you believe by not restricting myself to the chaos created by words used by those that are not enlightened, including myself.

This is what I want to focus on. I honestly don't care about the pyramids, because I think this is the root of our disagreement.

My opinion is not believing everything. Yours is.

These are contrary positions.

Allow me to explain why yours is wrong and harmful.

I'm going to explain what empiricism gives us, versus what blindly believing everything gives us.

Empiricism is quantifiable, pragmatically useful. By performing an experiment and looking at the results that we 'see' (in the full scope of our perception), we can arrive at something asymptotically approaching an accurate truth. This truth has these pragmatic benefits. Modern medicine, physics, sanitation, germ theory of disease. These are things that have saved and bettered what is quite probably hundreds of millions of lives.

That is the pragmatic benefit of 'truth'. And the only way it is possible to arrive at this truth is by the controlled experiment and observation of the universe around us.

Doing anything other than this does not arrive at truth, and is completely and utterly useless.

If I "take a chill pill and go with it", and start making shit up (my category for things which are not empirical), I will no longer arrive at truth. This may provide entertainment value, but if we take it as truth our decisions will not be based in reality. This is a problem. Because reality is a fact. It doesn't change based on our opinions.

By better understanding reality, we are able to better ourselves and better our quality of life. A non-empirical approach is one that doesn't result in truth, and doesn't result in sane, rational decisions.

The instant you talk about a way of knowing that isn't empirical, you stop talking about reality.

And I stop caring, because the question that I really care about is about reality. It's not about your imaginary world where this could have happened or might be true.

 

[Gilles]

You mean objective morality, correct?

Correct. Something is wrong by nature, not simply opinion.

 

[Skycraft]

I was going to make an interesting comment, but oh god the walls of text hurt my eyes.
Learn to simplify your sentences and paragraphs!

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

What is AAT and Se1-3?

Ancient Astronaut Theory. To me this the only logical explanation of all the biblical events if they really happened. Some theories talk about 'time travelers'. Well... I do not think Time Machines is really possible and the time travel that might be possible is teleporting, using 'wormholes' in space to shorten distance, traveling at the speed of light or faster. Passing distance in such ways is possible but Time Travel as in go to the Middle Ages.. no I dont think so. So that's why I stay open minded and this to me is the only explanation about God. It is the one that talks about the monuments being a soutce for PRODUCING energy, observatory, related to theor gods or if really people came from the sky. That does not mean that everything/nost proposed with this theory is absolutely correct. It is a theory like every other even the ones accepted worldly.

But that's the idea of a theory, to propose new ideas because establishing some ideas that one learns fro kids encyclopedia and school and denying that there could be other possibilities besides the one taught at school or whereever, is so DUMB and retarded that yeah many refuse to think of alternative ideas.. which is hilarious to me.

Lots of the already established science can be challenged, it is right about a lot of things there is evidence for it but is wrong to refuse alternatives to unclear and unsolved problems or just only considered to be solved when they remain a mystery.

THW isn't really the best place to discuss things that require 'thinking' because here the average post is, well, look around you in this Offtopic section.

 

[Kwah]

I'll clear up some misconceptions.

Believing everything (in the universe and a name for something that is both real and imaginary like "i" or quantam mechanics or the unseen) is quite different from believing everything you here and not thinking about the consequences in holding that belief strongly, through faith.

Quantum physics is not imaginary. i is not imaginary in the sense you think it is. Both of these things have real, measurable effects. If they didn't we wouldn't know they exist. ie: GPS's, or bird's magneto-reception (deals with quantum entanglement).

I mean how does another person's belief really effect you? Don't respond objectively, please.

If you mean to say, why am I bothering discussing things in this thread with you? There are two reasons really: one, the tiny, tiny chance that an argument on the internet actually has a reasonable conclusion. But the second, and more important in my concern, is not to convince you. Other people will read our discussion, and become educated on our beliefs. I don't want others to read your beliefs and assume they have some sort of philosophical legitimacy.

I am angered with the amount of disrespect you give me. What is it that is creating this hatred? I don't have a problem with atheism or empiricism or w/e the fuck you believe. WTF is the problem here?

Where is this hate you speak of? I'll admit at times I was perhaps more forceful than was tactful, but I think I don't disrespect you without reason. I point out the flaws I see in your belief system. And I try to explain my world view, which is the one I believe to be superior (hence, why its my view).

And what if caring about the pyramids gives you a lot more than data, such as eternal life?

What if? This is a question, not an answer. The answer to this question is that as far as I'm concerned they don't. And unless you can provide evidence that they actually do, saying that they do would be false. And I've discussed at great length why falsehoods are bad, and this disconnection from reality is bad.

You could be a demon yourself, how the fuck do yoou know everything around you is not an illusion. You don't, that is why you choose to believe it isn't, for your practical purposes.

This is a point I'm amazed you didn't cover in your Philosophy course.

What does it mean for 'everything to be an illusion'? Do I not actually exist? Are my thoughts not actually my thoughts, and do I not actually exist as a sentient being?

I think therefore I am, right? By nature of my existence, I exist. This is a fact.

Yes, my entire experience might not be what I think it is. But it doesn't matter. Because my experience, is my experience. Empiricism tells me about my experience. And all that we are ever capable of knowing is our own experience.

It doesn't matter if this is all a dream.

How is empirical data going to end this argument, by arriving us at the truth? Where is the data in an argument? Where is the truth in an argument? Where is your proof that I need to change? Why can't you live with the way I am?

This is an argument about the application of empiricism, versus not applying empiricism. If you don't accept empiricism as valid, I can hardly show you lots of data about when empirical conclusions have been correct versus non-empirical ones. (Hint: 100% to 0%). I won't live the way you do, I think it promotes falsehood. And falsehood is bad. It separates us from reality.

And if you think that my reasoning is all wrong because I don't have a reason, well, you're wrong.

If you arrive at a conclusion without justification, this conclusion is not justifiable. There is a very small chance that it is correct, but by no means is this likely or this method repeatable.