Total posts: 2,869
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I know how neural activity works, but what it doesn't do is transform into a conscious being, or a sentient observer.
No one has worked that out fully, but I began to sketch out a mechanism in my earlier post, which you omited from your reply.
I omitted it because it was not an explanation for consciousness and what you are, so it was not needed. "No one" (as you put) who is examining consciousness from a material medium no, will never work that out fully. The reason it is not worked out is because brains do not create conscious beings, they only confine ones experience to a body. Why tap dance around it when the soul can be fully articulated and understood how it enters and exists independent of physical forms?
Of course all that doesn't happen for fun - it evolved to help us survive and reproduce. That means the most important thing to represent in your brain's model of the world is your self. So each brain-owner has within their brain a global model of the world within which isan elemnt corresponding to their self. That arrangment is so familiar and inescapable to us that it is hard to put into words!Suppose that 'out there' is a red square but because of some glitch what gets encoded in your brain is a blue circle. You are going to be aware of a blue circle. I other words what 'seems to be' (ie blue circle) does not have be what is (red square).
All you really did was support my analogies about the brain being a conductor and component (like of a circuit board) and not a creator of conscious beings. I'm not denying the usefulness of the brain and what it does and how it correlates with our experience here. What I am denying is what you admitted above, it has never been worked out how consciousness exists, only that is not true for spirituality it has been articulated for a very long time.
I think it is impossible to put into words what one is aware of that we label 'self', but let's say that 'conscious being', 'sentient observer' comes into it..From the previous paragraph, the fact we seem to be conscious and sentient in a mysterous way doesn't mean we are really cnscious and sentient in that mysterus and seemingly impossible way; all it means is that our brains represent themseves as such.It may be impossible for brains to really implement consciousness as it seems to be, but not impossible for brains to support the repreentation of such consciousness.
It is not impossible because it is simplistic by nature. Being aware, conscious is precisely what it is, you are observing experiences. That is what a soul is, a conscious expression of the Creator playing in the worlds of duality. What distinguishes the soul, is the creative imagination and the perceptions the soul takes on through experiences.
Its the same difference as between making an actual faster-than-light space ship(impossible) and making a sci-fi movie about one (easy).
What is impossible is neurons firing creating a conscious being lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I'd say that is a more extrapolated version of what I said in my first post.
But it is vague because you said you don't know what that is. You don't need to be vague you can know precisely what all things consist of.
Divine spark.Hehehe
Well the soul is a conscious entity created by the One, so it's not just a spark, it's a being. This being or soul is sent as a seed out into the worlds of duality to experience life in the created worlds and to express that Divine spark. Do you know what that Divine spark is BTW? that "divine spark" departed in every soul is the creative imagination specifically. This is the spark that defines the uniqueness of the individual soul.
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Lol don't be shy about the S word. You'll be hearing it a lot in a religion forum, as well it's who and what you are so there is no escaping it TBH. I know you think about what people say if you can grasp the concepts but then you refuse to expand on it. You just rely on and return to your own brain, it then makes a funny noise like ffffffffff, and that is about the extent of your quest for knowledge.
Etrnl brings up baby souls turning into ummmmmm older better souls.My brain then explodes. And it makes a funny noise on its way out.
See, you caught that. Souls have a progressive nature and experience to them.....you registered it but then you never asked me questions about it. Come on, that's what this place is for, give it a try. We used to be boys, but I don't even remember the last time you replied to me. You never know, we could fix that brain problem for ya.
Created:
-->
@janesix
Are our bodies and brains a limiting device to filter out aspects of awareness?
Absolutely, very good perception. I call the brain a component/restrictor like you would have on a circuit board, it confines your experience to a physical body just like a circuit board controls the flow of electricity. The body or brain, is the interface between the soul and this world it is what connects you to this experience. So when you leave the body, you shed the physical form because you no longer need it to experience, only need it for this realm. However, you still have several other subtle bodies you will look through even when you pull back to the astral.
Did God do this to give us the experience of not knowing everything?
Sure, it helps to confine our experience so that we can focus our attention on minute things, that's kind of the point of creation really. It's also part of the human souls journey to begin at less conscious levels and work their way through a progression.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The OP was about the metaphor may be more acceptable to atheists than theists
Of course it's more acceptable to atheists because they hold a materialistic worldview, which means there really should be no reason we are here...I also don't accept it because you're believing things that are not the case. What reason do you really have to hold onto atheist psychology?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I get it, but again, it doesn't have to exist. You make it exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
You live that purpose everyday. I would assume that those who have accepted a Creator also have accepted there is a purpose in creating things. Again, that purpose can be any purpose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
While there is a huge grey area in the study and almost entirely unexplored field of 'what makes us aware' and complete obscurity regarding how to separate us from personhood-facade Artificial Intelligence (AI), there is still far more proven likelihood that it is the physical brain that causes the experiences personhood and not the experience that results in the brain.
Completely untrue and the evidence suggests otherwise, and if you have accepted that I'm going to assume you can explain then how that works. All studies can show and indicate are the results of conscious activity within the brain and I supplied an analogy why this is the case in this very thread, they can't prove or demonstrate that activity transforms into a conscious being and never will. How does the brain create a conscious being through some neurons firing? as you put it. That would be akin to believing your vehicle drives itself and somehow produced/created the driver...At what point can you show your accepted theory becomes a conscious living entity? I would appreciate though if you don't post links that you have never examined. I'm not doing all the work, I would be glad to explain how this works for ya. But first you need to either present and actual argument or ask me questions. Other than that thanks for the opinion. I am surprised however, that Mister conspiracy theorist buys into the status quo materialistic farce that a brain can create a conscious being with no proof or even a legit explanation as to how that is possible.
I never said an experience results in the brain, the bodies exist so that the conscious soul can experience through that body. Consciousness exists independent of the body, mind and brain. However, awareness always comes before matter and it is by that awareness that both we and the universes exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
As far as we can tell the machine came from nowhere and having done so ticks in futile purposelessness to an end, all for nothing.
We means who exactly? you mean Keith? because meanwhile the majority of the world has come to the obvious conclusion that we know where it comes from and what the purpose is. Keep in mind, a purpose is a purpose and it doesn't matter the purpose of the purpose lol. A purpose could be anything from a desire to a mega plan. Either way, your comment applies to you only because many have witnessed what is really going on here. So make sure you know it is you who knows nothing and has no purpose.
That is only an initial at a metaphor of the universe - no doubt it can be criticised and improved! The point it that I can imagine there are people who can and cannot accept it as a metaphor of the universe. If you can then you are probably an atheist - I suggest typical theists cannot accept that the universe is a pointless mechanism that runs for no reason with no purpose, no meaning nor goal to it.
So you would rather we pretend accept that we believe what you're saying? we aren't the ones in a state of denial because that would depend upon what is actually true and what actually is the case. if you know nothing as you claim, have no purpose in life so you say...why should we accept ignorance? perhaps you should step into the simplistic, glorious light of true undistorted awareness? the psychology of atheism doesn't have to exist, the atheist creates it all himself, then holds onto it, then claims it's others that are in denial and won't accept things.....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shed12
So it is something. I should instead say it (I) doesn't have any features except to observe and is only itself because there are things to observe. It is like the sky to the clouds; without the sky there wouldn't be any clouds, but the sky is only a something insofar that there are things in it.
What my topic is asking, is for you to articulate what that observer is and why it exists, where did your conscious being come from? what is it made of? of course I have my own propositions that is what we are going to discuss if you disagree with me. So yes, it sounds like you do in fact acknowledge that it is a something. That is a good start. It is more than a something though, you are a creative conscious entity. Everything you do and experience is the result of that reality first.
So again, I'm not arguing the difference between observed things and the observer. I'm trying to get you to look at what the observer is and why it exists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shed12
I don't have any qualities.
You will always have the quality of awareness, of being aware. That is a something, and that something is YOU. What you do and what you believe is not who you are, you are a creative, conscious being with or without a body. What you hear, what you see and feel is not who you are. You are the one observing all those things.
I am saying it is not a thing like observed things. The "awareness, consciousness or soul" doesn't have any appearance and isn't itself observable. Or else it would be observed and make itself not an observer.
I didn't say it was an observed thing or object. I said observER, not the things being observed. It wouldn't matter if the actual soul was observable or not, you are still aware that is what the soul is, your experience as an observer is a quality. However, that soul takes on bodies and layers of form to experience in the created universes.
If observation takes place all the time and there must be something that observes, then I guess I can't say the observer is nothing without also implying we do not observe. So instead I'll say that the things I observe also observe me and that observed things are not other than an observer or else without one there is not the other.
My point here, is that you are the observer...a being, a soul that exists independent of the human body. The topic I created was to point out what that is and where it originates.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The consensus is that when we see (take that as including hear,touch ,smell etc) something, signals from our sense organs travel to our brains.
I'm not arguing how the physical body works or what it senses and how those senses correlate with the human experience. I'm arguing for the one observing the senses of the body, the one that observes all experience through the bodies. The brain and body cannot create and is incapable of producing that inner awareness or conscious being that is impossible as it exists independent of the body, mind and brain and has been shown to for ages through NDE's and spirituality. My own experiences indicate it so as well. So why cling to a farce when you have always had the real thing?
There a pattern of neural activity is set up that encodes the information coming in from outside - that is some pattern of activity encodes "blue circle" which is different from how "red square" is encoded. Thus what we are aware of (or conscious of) is not really "objects out there" but of information, encoded as patterns of neural activity inside our brains.
I know how neural activity works, but what it doesn't do is transform into a conscious being, or a sentient observer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
It's actually deeper than this the way i see it. Bc it wasn't only for his friends. It was also for murders, rapists, and to prove this, evil people were right next to him (if that was left out it wouldn't be construed for everyone which is quite brilliant "bad" "evil" men were next to him). That is why i think it is genius. There is no other story that would cover everyone. If he had only done miracles, people would say he would only do it for people he likes. If he only said it, people would think he lied. To die a torturous death with the intention of it being for everyone leaves no room for doubt it was for everyone (especially since evil people were next to him and he said it's for them too). That's why i think there is no other story that one could tell that would be for everyone. In that, it's genius, but let's not forget i only think it's a story. With that said, i do respect how good of a story it was/is.
Great post I agree. Even though it could be said the name of Jesus is somewhat overrated I believe Jesus' actual actions are underrated. People underestimate what Jesus actually went through or allowed himself to absorb, he could have went and hid or ran off at the Garden of Gethsemane where he sweat blood but he went right into it without any fight or resistance. The passage where he sates "“My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” really shows the weight of this and the level of Jesus' courage and loyalty.
Death is a hard thing to overcome and Jesus not only talked it but actually went and surrendered to it. That is impressive. The same can't be said IMO for terrorists and suicidal "martyrs", where they might sacrifice their body in a fit of emotional rage and or have nothing to loose because of a shitty life. In the case with Jesus, he had plenty of time to premeditate it and as well He didn't have a miserable life, His motive was not rage but love, that also is impressive. There is a big difference between doing something out of rage and anger as opposed to going through with something out of love and surrender to set the standards higher.
Personally, I think Jesus existed TBH. For one, there is no legit motive or reason anyone would have made up this character and or lie about the Gospels. I think if Jesus hadn't actually existed the Gospel accounts would have never made it this far besides, there are too many factors that indicate that this took place. Now that being said, I'm not talking about the legitimacy of the authors and their testimony per say. I think it is more than likely a spiritual Master in the form of Jesus existed. As well, the Gospels have actual content and legit spirituality. Even if Jesus never existed one still has to deal with the content and meanings of the teachings, parables, illustrations, commands ect ect..
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
For fun, yes I was. Or better put, comparing it to how creation would operate under those circumstances to how it actually is. The 'looker" in this case would be the Creator , the one observing the "computer" and the forms within the computer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Interesting...welcome to the Creators (Gods) world, all except for one problem/scenario.....the Creator has an access point from the looker (the one observing the computer) to the lookee (one playing the game within the computer) through their channel of awareness. Kind of like a conductor if you will, where the current of awareness has access to all channels of electricity and form much like energy. In this scenario, the problem or illustration you listed no longer exists, the looker has access to all the lookee experiences. Imagine or propose for a moment that both the looker (observer of the computer) and the computer (characters within a game) were in fact a reality, only the very nature of the "looker" enabled it to experience what the people within the game experiences. Imagine the lookers nature more like energy or electricity without any embodiment rather just awareness, able to have access to that flow of electricity and infiltrate any experience within that computer.
In this way, there really is no distinction from the looker to the lookee other than the form the lookee takes on within the game. However, the observation or the awareness observing the experience is one and the same in both the looker and lookee, there is no difference as all observation has no isolated occurrence from the One observing everything within that computer and actually it was the looker that imagined and created the players within that computer to begin with. After all....no computer created itself or created games itself, rather the ideas were "uploaded" from an observer or looker. Whether the looker is simply watching or actually a part of the game it matters not, the experience is being observed either way. That is why the computer exists.
In your scenario.....why does a computer exist in the first place? who is the one looking at it? where did a computer come from and who is the one observing it?
The problem in your scenario is this....."Only the game was real. Only the game was shared experience. Only in-game places and people and items were quantifiable, able to be observed and verified"
From an observation standpoint, this is untrue. What the looker experiences is as real as anything within the game, possibly more so because the players within the game are the ones being observed, not the other way around...so what is more real? the ones that have no idea they are being observed or the one that lives in isolation observing everything? which observation is more real or quantifiable?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
It's a great idea, my vote is for the topics to be both visible as well as private. That way there really is no secrecy and people getting paranoid, it's an invite and everyone can read. This might encourage grumpy members or trolls to behave nicely, lest they get banned from a private group. This way, members both can have non invasive discussions and those that wish to engage know they have to be on best behavior.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shed12
I said observer.... Observer means you are the one observing an object or experience.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shed12
I mean it is not anything. It can be called you or I.
"You and I" is called awareness, consciousness or soul. It is a sentient, creative expression not a nothing. You are a something.
If it were something, it would be observable but it isn't. It doesn't have an appearance like observed things do.
Wait a minute, you ARE observing AT ALL times. What are you saying? at what point are you NOT observing?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Maybe I think I know, but I'm also fine with mystery.
It's not much of a mystery though because you know by direct experience even though you are believing an illusion. You are a conscious, aware being expressing itself in/through creation. The Creator is a conscious aware Being expressing Itself and it does that through and in creation. The soul is nothing more than a piece/channel of God, an expression of the Creator. Both the soul and God are one, they are the same in nature there is no distinction there. The only thing different is the form the soul is confined in, the perception and choices it takes on through experiences but the soul comes out of the heart of God and is God expressing Itself through the created worlds.
The soul is an individualization of the One to experience right through that channel or vessel of awareness to experience something away from the alone state. And God does this through many states of consciousness and layers of experiences, a soul can be nothing other than what it came from.
Close your eyes and get alone, that is what you are by nature. You are a conscious, creative being inhabiting a material body, but that soul, or conscious creative being is infinite, without form. The individualized soul is wrapped in layers, these layers confine the soul to its experience. These layers are known as spirit bodies or subtle bodies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
So, based on the definition of the word, your post makes no sense. Brains cannot observe, eyes observe
Lol, so when you close your eyes you are no longer observing? you no longer exist? try closing your eyes and see if that holds any water. So no, no eyes needed to observe or be the observer read that definition again. Without eyes you still observe and perceive your being, you still exist, you're an observer. Are you saying blind people do not perceive, or observe? They are both aware and conscious.
and then pass on that information to the brain for synthesis. So, the "observer" of the mind makes no sense because the mind is the working of the brain and we cannot observe that unless we have specific technologies to do so. So, the only "Who" that might be observing our "experiences" are other people.
Does this answer your question?
Read above, eyes are not needed for an observer. Ears are not needed for you to exist and observe, likewise you as an observer exist independently of the brain and body. Independent of the eyes, ears ect ect.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I get that you think the brain is the representation and not the means and that, in your eyes, neurons firing are merely physicalised soul-pulses but I'm sorry to say that it's more probable that it's the other way around as proven by neurological studies of people who had damage to the skull and such having severe alterations in personality.
I'm sorry dear Madman, that is speculation. Damage to the skull or brain would certainly impair the ability of the conscious soul to operate correctly within that body. That has no impact on the conscious soul, other than what that soul experiences through that body. At what point does neurons firing become a conscious entity lol? sorry that is not probable you should rethink that. Go back and read what I have written about the brain. Nothing has been "proven" by neurological studies other than there is activity in the brain. That's a consequence like measuring a circuit board and finding activity....not the reason for consciousness, not the reason or source of electricity. Show me the mechanics of neurons becoming a conscious being. How does that take place exactly? Why does the conscious being continue to experience after actual brain death?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
This is the way I see it, EtrnlVv, we are a part of God, but distinct at the same time.
I agree with that because we are essentially a reflection of the whole trapped within duality experiencing an individual experience so we are not in a form which perceives the All....but, the point I'm getting at is the very nature of what you are that we are from that "All", and the very nature of you is not distinct from God. Suppose I took a glob of clay (which represents myself) and created a little separate object of clay that had a form that was unique from mine, yet an expression of my own desires and heart....would that piece of clay no longer be clay?
Same thing with the Creator, the soul is a piece or a tiny fragment/expression of God and then sent into the worlds of duality but all things come out of a singular Being or Reality. Kind of like these definitions below....
Brahman-
"connotes the highest Universal Principle, the Ultimate Reality in the universe.[1][2][3] In major schools of Hindu philosophy, it is the material, efficient, formal and final cause of all that exists.[2][4][5] It is the pervasive, genderless, infinite, eternal truth and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes.[1][6][7] Brahman as a metaphysical concept is the single binding unity behind diversity in all that exists in the universe."
Brahman is discussed in Hindu texts with the concept of Atman (Soul, Self),[10][17] personal,[note 3] impersonal[note 4] or Para Brahman,[note 5] or in various combinations of these qualities depending on the philosophical school.[18] In dualistic schools of Hinduism such as the theistic Dvaita Vedanta, Brahman is different from Atman (soul) in each being.[5][19][20] In non-dual schools such as the Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is identical to the Atman, is everywhere and inside each living being, and there is connected spiritual oneness in all existence."
Atman-
"is a Sanskrit word that means inner self or soul.[1][2][3] In Hindu philosophy, especially in the Vedanta school of Hinduism, Ātman is the first principle,[4] the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. In order to attain liberation (moksha), a human being must acquire self-knowledge (atma jnana), which is to realize that one's true self (Ātman) is identical with the transcendent self Brahman.[2][5]"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shed12
Nothing.
"Nothing" is an observer? or are you not an observer?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
No matter what you do or say I can never know or experience there being someone inside your head.
We are all alone in our experience as individuals and as God as well yes, that is not what I meant though. What I meant was that consciousness or the nature of consciousness can be articulated objectively and explained. It has an origin and it has a nature and that is not the brain. The brain does not create conscious beings, the brain simply confines our experience to this realm and to a body.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
My mind is the observer of my mind and body.
So you're saying then the mind is "you"? Would you consider that the mind is not an entity or a being (you) but rather mechanical in nature like a machine? kind of like a vehicle, where you are the driver and observer of it and not IT itself.....Can you show me the mechanics of how a mind (which I would assume you believe is created by the brain) produces or creates a conscious, sentient being? by what processes does products of matter become/transform into conscious awareness? I'd prefer you explain it and not paste some link because I'm going to ask you specific questions. I want to know at what point, does a product of matter, whatever it is becomes a living entity.
You can observe/control what takes place in the mind from an observation point just like you can control what you do with a computer or a vehicle from an observation point, or even a piece of machinery. The mind is more like a storage area that categorizes and labels what you experience through memory and emotions. Much like a library in fact and we both know libraries do not create conscious beings...….you are the observer (librarian) of the mind (library), the mind does not create your conscious awareness you are a soul that is looking through the mind and body, observing it from an observation point which is first conscious.
On the other hand and unaware, someone else could/can be controlled by the mind (machine) through the repetition of thought, perception and experience which creates behavioral patterns, not knowing they are following thoughts and emotions and those two things lead them like dogs on a collar unaware. Despite that, the mind (or brain) does not create consciousness or sentient beings, we can either control and use the mind, or the mind can eventually control the user and even terminate it in this experience, that is how powerful a machine the mind is but again, it is no more than a machine. The soul uses the mind to categorize and label its experiences in this realm through emotion and memory and the brain is the component that correlates and confines the souls experience to a physical body much like a circuit panel confines the flow of electricity to a building or machine. But electricity, the soul (consciousness) and energy exists independently of form and object.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
The conscious experience and the soul can both be articulated and communicated. Why not? they have a nature and an origin and so they can be known and explained. But from the source of spirituality, it's the only source that can expand on it and reach it. Consciousness has been articulated through spiritual sources for ages.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I dunno.Divine spark?Some would say.
You don't know what a soul is? or where consciousness originates?
Created:
Posted in:
"is the observer or the soul itself distinct from God (Creator)?"
Yes.
Can you show how that works? perhaps I should have asked, is the very nature of the soul distinct from the nature of God?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Without an observer, no experience would be possible. No thought, no emotion, no feeling could be experienced without an observer/knower of that experience in the same way a mind would be useless without someone observing that mind and making sense of things within it. Claiming the brain creates consciousness (which I'm assuming would be your position) is claiming the brain creates the one observing the experiences that you have. That means those who would claim that, are claiming the brain is an entity, or observer.... how does the brain create an observer and can you show how that works precisely? what activity/impulses within a brain could create an entity or observer is my question? and as you know of course, my position is that the brain does not create a conscious observer, rather confines the observers experience to physical form/body. That is because in all possible scenarios a brain as well as brain activity....neurons or electrical impulses could never create you as a conscious being, it cannot create a conscious observer. You (the soul) are the observer of the body, the body nor the brain did not create your inner being, you inhabited it.
The reason we can measure activity within a brain is because there IS activity within a brain just like there is activity within a circuit board. The brain is a component you use to correlate your experience here in this body but it is no more than a control panel or component it has no real awareness in and of itself, the brain is your connection/interface from the soul to the physical world just like a circuit panel is the connection of electricity to a building. It's needed to confine your experience and flow or consciousness but just like the circuit panel, it does not create electricity it only harnesses it and directs its flow and the same with the human brain of course.
"Descriptions like this also reveal why neuroscience will always struggle to study consciousness in all its private glory. How are we supposed to study something that is a "hidden hermitage"? We never actually see consciousness. All we see are its consequences in behavior. So when we look for the neural correlates of consciousness, what we are really looking for are the neural correlates of certain measurable behaviors that we think are closely related with consciousness"
This is correct above, you can't study a soul/conscious awareness with a material medium or ideology because it has no physical nature other than awareness and we see that awareness play out through the physical brain like we would see electrical activity in a circuit panel.... that "panel" regulates and controls that flow of electricity within that house or confined form for it to function as it does just as the brain does. What is being measured within a brain is just the consequences of the conscious soul experiencing through it, so that is all you are left to examine outside of spirituality unfortunately is activity within the brain. Unfortunately only because you don't want to acknowledge the origin of the conscious soul.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
I'd prefer the General Lee just for looks and I have always loved the old muscle cars but according to Wiki it may appear Kitt could have the edge...surely it's fictional but if we're going by the specs of the car in the actual shows...
Power System
"KITT is powered by the Knight Industries turbojet with modified afterburners and a computer controlled 8-speed turbodrive transmission. Specifications 0–60 mph in 2 seconds, standing to quarter mile 4.286 seconds. Electromagnetic hyper-vacuum disc brakes: 14 foot (4.25 m) braking distance (70–0 mph - 112–0 km/h)."
Turbo Boost
"Used in most episodes, a pair of rocket boosters mounted just behind the front tires that lifted the car, allowing KITT to jump into the air and pass over obstacles in the road. Also, occasionally, Turbo Boost was used to allow KITT to accelerate to incredible speeds in excess of 200 mph (322 km/h). The boosters could fire forward or backward."
Created:
Posted in:
So we read a lot about the misconceptions and passages within the Gospels that people don't like much or wish to debate. But, what are the passages, verses, teachings, parables or illustrations of the teachings of Jesus are your favorite or that you happen to like most? There aren't really any that I dislike, but there are definitely some that are my favorites. Post yours if you have any you really like...or want to discuss.
Created:
Posted in:
Atheists, who is the observer of the mind and body? is the "brain" the observer? who (or what) is observing your experience?
Theists (or spiritualists), who is the observer of the mind, body and emotions? is that "observer" distinct from the brain and the senses of the body (soul/spirit)? is the observer or the soul itself distinct from God (Creator)?
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
You never consider and or listen to my answers when they are really simple. Perhaps you think the equation is much more complicated than my answer? it's been years now, this is not a huge obstacle, but one in which should have been hurdled ages ago...when you asked it the first ten times.
Created:
-->
@mourningeyes
Well,I also agree that Women are "closer" to God.
In what way? all souls come from the heart of God and are an expression of the Creator...male or female, God is both the expression of masculine and feminine not one or the other. While I agree there are differences in the role of a female and a male, there is no such thing as "women are closer to God". First of all souls come from God, next it would depend upon the actual soul and what it is involved in and what spiritual level its at.
I didn't read all of the debate.(I didn't have time, yet!)Anyway, my mind went quickly to God is light (Credo prayer).And my thoughts about this are: that people have a tendency to separate things when they somehow are linked.
God is light and sound. The electric wave universe is created between two conditioned lights that bounce from one "end" of creation to the other but there is also the sound current not just the light of God. Both the light of God and the sound current flow through creation and back to its Source.
If God is light and when there is a thunder, the sound from a thunder is somehow also God (in the darkness let's say like this).
No not really, there is a difference between natural environmental factors and that of the nature of God. Thunder is generated by natural occurrence. Natural weather patterns and environmental affects have nothing to do with the actual nature of God.
What I mean is God is light, but there's also "light" in the darkness
God is all expression in creation there is nothin outside It, but individualized souls contend with duality in creation and as a result deal with Karma. However, there is no duality in the One, the Creator....only in creation where souls are accountable for what they do in a dualistic environment.
(the energy from the sound is quite inferior, the sound speed is lower, but it's just properties from it).Well, it's just a wonder.
Could be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Come one man....seriously? no parks, camp sites or weather besides winter?? you never hike alone or go on nature walks?
Created:
Posted in:
Why eat fruit?
"Fruit is a great source of fiber, nutrients like vitamin C, and offers antioxidants that can reduce inflammation in the body. Eating fruit on an empty stomach can allow us to take in as many as these benefits as possible."
"Fruit has been recognized as a good source of vitamins and minerals, and for their role in preventing vitamin C and vitamin A deficiencies. People who eat fruit as part of an overall healthy diet generally have a reduced risk of chronic diseases."
" The nutrients in fruit are vital for health and maintenance of your body. The potassium in fruit can reduce your risk of heart disease and stroke. Potassium may also reduce the risk of developing kidney stones and help to decrease bone loss as you age."
"Eating fruit provides health benefits — people who eat more fruits and vegetables as part of an overall healthy diet are likely to have a reduced risk of some chronic diseases."
- Most fruits are naturally low in fat, sodium, and calories. None have cholesterol.
- Fruits are sources of many essential nutrients that are underconsumed, including potassium, dietary fiber, vitamin C, and folate (folic acid).
- Diets rich in potassium may help to maintain healthy blood pressure. Fruit sources of potassium include bananas, prunes and prune juice, dried peaches and apricots, cantaloupe, honeydew melon, and orange juice.
- Dietary fiber from fruits, as part of an overall healthy diet, helps reduce blood cholesterol levels and may lower risk of heart disease. Fiber is important for proper bowel function. It helps reduce constipation and diverticulosis. Fiber-containing foods such as fruits help provide a feeling of fullness with fewer calories. Whole or cut-up fruits are sources of dietary fiber; fruit juices contain little or no fiber.
- Vitamin C is important for growth and repair of all body tissues, helps heal cuts and wounds, and keeps teeth and gums healthy.
- Folate (folic acid) helps the body form red blood cells. Women of childbearing age who may become pregnant should consume adequate folate from foods, and in addition 400 mcg of synthetic folic acid from fortified foods or supplements. This reduces the risk of neural tube defects, spina bifida, and anencephaly during fetal development.
Health benefits
- Eating a diet rich in vegetables and fruits as part of an overall healthy diet may reduce risk for heart disease, including heart attack and stroke.
- Eating a diet rich in some vegetables and fruits as part of an overall healthy diet may protect against certain types of cancers.
- Diets rich in foods containing fiber, such as some vegetables and fruits, may reduce the risk of heart disease, obesity, and type 2 diabetes.
- Eating vegetables and fruits rich in potassium as part of an overall healthy diet may lower blood pressure, and may also reduce the risk of developing kidney stones and help to decrease bone loss.
- Eating foods such as fruits that are lower in calories per cup instead of some other higher-calorie food may be useful in helping to lower calorie intake.
"Eating fruits regularly benefits your body as they are natural sources of vitamins and minerals, which are essential for the proper functioning of the body."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
As a vegetarian, I gotta eat mah fruits.
Lol, you should be fruitarian that gotta eat your veggies!
Fruits are good for getting the nutrients in you for married bedroom activities.I went there.It's true though.
They good for all sorts of things..
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Grugore
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Thank you Stronn, I was hinging my response on " naturalism- a theory denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance". Or..."the philosophical belief that everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted."
In this case, what would be the alternative to naturalism as defined above out of curiosity?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Lol doin good brotha. Don't be afraid to kick it up a notch that's why I supplied all the links and love in this thread, I love grapes too, that is one of my favs....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Dang I haven't heard of none of them. Thanks for the suggestions I'll check them out. Do you like survival documentaries?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
I know, this was more of an appeal to personal conduct. Maybe I was too literal about my point I wanted to make. The point is lost now so it don't matter anymore lol, "deluded" to one and all...makes no difference to me it just lowers the level of exchanges and debate. Like I said, everyone thinks the other side or other person is deluded so it's just a subjective opinion it adds no real weight other than insulting the other persons intelligence. If it has any real warrant, it still doesn't add anything to call someone that, everyone will see it in debate so I do not see it as something useful to label the opposing view.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
There is no origin, it is as far back to the wall as you can observe, it comes first and everything else comes afterwards. Your observation point is your conscious awareness, this observation point comes through the mind, body and emotions not the other way around. This is a superior view and so spirituality has always had the superior understanding and it will always be that way. Conscious awareness comes before creation, it was the first Source...what they label "spirit".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
IMO, not everything. There is a physical universe of mindless matter and forces that predate consciousness.
You don't know that any "forces" predate consciousness, because for one energy is present with conscious activity and therefore a Theistic proposition is very possible and probable....and you don't know that there is a universe of "mindless matter" that somehow predates the mind out of which "mindless" matter forms to produce a means to an end. And so....if the Creator is in fact first a conscious activity then energy has always been present because first conscious activity was present, they go hand in hand or one comes before the other so what force predates consciousness? Even in that scenario it is safe to say consciousness predates "forces" because it can be shown that thoughts (consciousness) creates energy and or vibrations. Unless you categorize awareness as a "force" consciousness could very well predate any forces of nature or affects of conscious activity you see in nature. There is nothing you could produce to show that somehow something predates consciousness, that is impossible because it is not so.
However many things do depend on consciousness, such meaning, mattering and values.
Perhaps they depend on consciousness because consciousness came first, first before anything that matters, anything that was created that has meaning or value.....did you know that consciousness does not depend upon a brain? but the brain depends upon consciousness like activity on a circuit board depends upon the flow of electricity? the source of electricity came before the components on an electrical board...same with conscious awareness. The brain confines/restricts your experience to a physical body it does not create it.
If a star goes nova in a universe devoid of consciousness it 'doesn't matter' - it is neither good or bad. But if a nova takes out a civilisation with all its art, history and culture that is a tragedy.
A star goes nova because it was first demanded that it do so through conscious activity because that was its purpose in creation. Taking out civilizations though does not depend upon any nova but first conscious thought which dictated it, a supernova is part of the process by which our universe maintains itself.
So I don't agree that everything derives from consciousness - but perhaps everything that matters does.
I agree with the last statement but the first is false, without conscious activity nothing would exist and nothing would matter but it does matter and it does exist. It is very probable that first there was a conscious reality, finding activity in the brain when the body is conscious does not in any way indicate that the body creates consciousness anymore than activity within a circuit board means it creates electricity so there is no real way for a materialist to proclaim so unless they reject spiritual evidences and sources. That is a conscious choice but a very limited one.
Created:
Higher beings and spiritual entities/personalities can manifest through embodiments that take on the role of a male or female and these are known as gods and goddesses or overlords and souls can have experiences with them on spiritual conscious levels but they all too come from a genderless, singular Reality and Creator. Masculine and feminine principle are only an expression of One Source which is neither or but both. The Creator embodies all things and all of life is within It and comes out of It.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
The real God is female. God is a feminine mother to reality.
God is also the masculine Father to reality as well....God possesses all things, because all of life and creation is an expression of this Source. So the Creator has both the feminine and the male principle, not one or the other. Because God IS a singular Unit and a singular Reality the male principle by nature is slightly dominant and because of that I would say that the Creator is both the male and female principle but the male principle is slightly dominant and more assertive/aggressive over the female principle and you see this play out in life, nature and our experience as a whole.....it does NOT mean that the male principle is better than, or somehow greater than the feminine role no not at all, simply more dominant by nature, and more assertive and controlling whereas the feminine principle is nurturing and passive. Much like other opposing forces....acidic and alkaline, hot cold, positive and negative, death and life, love and hate, male and female ect ect..
In creation there must be opposing forces, separation and contrast to have any experience away from a singular one. So just as the Creator divides the opposing forces negative and positive, light and darkness, "good and bad" ect ect likewise the male and female is divided in creation and the male principle by nature is more aggressive and dominant and that is how creation balances itself out between forces, the female principle balances the male principle but they both come from a singular Source which contains no separation, all things are within It, all things come from It. 'He, She, It, Creator"...whatever it is you wish to label It, It is neither male or female but both. So God is not just the feminine Mother to reality, God is also the masculine Father in reality, both are an expression of the same conscious Reality.
Created: