-->
@mustardness
I don't think he believes it... i'm not sure. I got the impression he thinks it lacks evidence from reading this thread.Creator is incorrect. You and him both reference an inferred cosmic "source" ergo a "creator".
I don't think he believes it... i'm not sure. I got the impression he thinks it lacks evidence from reading this thread.Creator is incorrect. You and him both reference an inferred cosmic "source" ergo a "creator".
I've gone into a bit more of the specifics behind what I mean by "Supreme Being" (prime, eternal consciousness and creator of the universe.)
Are my behaviors the same thing as my consciousness? You have observable evidence of people's behaviors but do you have observable evidence of their consciousness?
I'll shortly explain the source through an analogy i've heard, but ask me if you have further questions. So, everything is this source. It's like if you imagine everything was infinite sand. Everything exists in this sand. What we are is correlative to a sandcastle. But once that sandcastle collapses, it becomes one with the infinite sand again. It doesn't mean it's gone, it's just becomes everything again. So the source "god" is everything. It is no one thing, or person... it's like an infinite unbound incorporeal mind. It knows all stories, endings, people, universes, everything basically. It gets more complicated once i add in who we are to this source, but that's the sum of what i think the source platform is.
Are my behaviors the same thing as my consciousness? You have observable evidence of people's behaviors but do you have observable evidence of their consciousness?
Yeah, flip the refridgartor over on our toe. Oh but your wearing steel toes so you feel nothing.So you do have independently verifiable observable evidence of consciousness?
It gets more complicated once i add in who we are to this source, but that's the sum of what i think the source platform is.
Why would I need to grant you assumptions if the thing has independently verifiable perceivable observable evidence for it?
Is that because you reject 'i know...' statements in general or do you dispute 'i know i am conscious' specifically?But I would argue that we don't know we ourselves are conscious.
I mean, you can't confirm or deny my subjective experience, nor I yours
But I would argue that we don't know we ourselves are conscious.
Following on from the cogito, my consciousness is self-confirming. The problem is confirming there is anything else....you can't confirm you're conscious
Descartes' statements i find unconvincing. I don't see how yelling "I think!" In Latin is a valid proof of anything.
Lol, man you guys are going down the rabbit hole. The best thing i ever heard about consciousness was on the show Legion. It's a cool show if you haven't seen it. One of the characters starts going insane (the bad guys can warp realities). She starts doubting reality and tells one of the other characters how does she know any of this is real... the girl answered, "Bc when i punch people they fall down." Love that line.Following on from the cogito, my consciousness is self-confirming. The problem is confirming there is anything else.
You set a very low bar since no such evidence exists.Okay, so i think there is enough evidence to at least suspect there is a transcendent reality (dimensions beyond ours).
You're wrong... there is plenty of personal evidence. It just doesn't happen to you, and you don't want to listen to others. You are the definition of who you are. I honestly could care less... or, waste my time trying to convince you of something you've already made your mind up on. I personally don't think personal evidence is frivolous... you do, so cool. All i can say is listen to those that are for real... they are hard to find, but they're there. Obviously, even personal experience is muddied by greedy people trying to make money... and there are a lot more of them than the latter.You set a very low bar since no such evidence exists.