Total posts: 2,193
-->
@Greyparrot
i agree with you that it's rare to come across a racist cop... but, i think there are a lot of cops that shouldn't be cops. This isn't a BLM issue, it's a human issue. You can't give this kind of power (cop power) to humans. Humans are sub-human.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I think the main question is... there are certain people that witness impossibilities, according to current science. Is it credible or not? Obviously, to any curious man, it is credible enough to be confused about the current state of reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
The main question I'd ask both of you is, do you think they would have pursued this at the cost of their lives? The records show they died brutally, but continued to worship until the end. I don't think I'd die for a lie, so this is the most compelling rebuttal I can think of.
This is the problem with looking at something so old. There could be many reasons 1) they didn't think they would die brutally; 2) their ego made them think they were above it all if people believed them; 3) maybe they did say they were lying in the end, but since they died... the killers got to write/spread the history of it and to save face they didn't retract the lie; 4) They may have truly been deluded to their own lie by the end... etc. Those 4 came to mind right off the bat.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
This is not just because Jeff made his interviews, this is actually something I have always wanted to do.In fact, one of my dream careers in a utopia would be a world renowned interview-focused journalist. I want to genuinely ask you about your outlook.Apply with the following:Name you want to be addressed with (including Mr/Mrs/Ms etc): (it can be your username)Religious label I affiliate with: (if you don't, state such)Motive to engage in the interview: (being understood, showing off, entertaining the audience, learning as you're asked to explain etc)In your opinion, if God/s is/are real, is/are he/she/it/they good, evil, neutral or a complex combination?The rest will be explored in the interviews and they'll begin based on your answers to this. I will evolve with your answers.Applying does not guarantee acceptance, I am free to decline applications.
Interesting man. You are creative with your forum use. Anyways, although i may not be on long (lots of irl stuff that needs my attention), i'll check back if you answer this.
Outplayz
I don't affiliate with any one religion... all of them may have hints of what i believe, but like what i believe, they are created by humans. Therefore, take each and mine with a grain of salt. Mine is a simulation theory, mixed with fictional realism, an infinite mind, and all being a part of consciousness. Something like that.
Just saying hi to you after awhile of not being on. I've debated my belief and other beliefs for years now... kinda bored of it. I've heard everything and the only conclusion that can be made is some sort of spiritual agnostic atheism... that's kinda what i've concluded at this point. But for this question i'm sticking with the spiritual side.
I guess complex would apply to my spiritual conjecture. Since i don't believe in a "god" per say. I think everything is god. God is everyone and everything, therefore it's you, me, everyone else here, everyone else in the multi-verse but god is also nothing since it's also the universe and the sun can't distinguish if it's something or nothing. It's like a video game, you have objects, you have NPC, you have the main character... it's all on a cd. It's all god (the cd being god)... this analogy can get deeper bc then the platform (console) is also god, all the way to the players, our earth, universe, etc... So, yes, complex.
Created:
-->
@User_2006
Cool man... i like the analogy and your speculation here. Very interesting way to look at it.
This can relate to us creating AI. We don't know what it will do when it gets smart and act like humans. Then, we need to make them die because if we don't, they will take over the world just because they want to survive.
With the above said however, i personally don't think this will happen... "taking us over" ... bc by the time we know how to make truly sentient intelligent A.I. ... we would have likely at this moment be cyborgs ourselves. I think humans merging with machine will happen before and/or close to the same time we create intelligent A.I.
Something interesting i thought is in the rebuttal to the fine-tuned universe argument. Bc some of the arguments against is that the rest of the universe is hostile to life. That's true, but it's hostile to biological humans. When we fully merge with machine... the universe is perfectly fine-tuned with the material needed for this age of machine existence. I'm not religious in any way... i just thought these things are interesting. A.I. in general is an interesting thing that just a few years ago no one even thought possible. Crazy what potential humans have. But then again, i always say it... our imaginations are a pretty powerful superpower.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
For those that don't work in hospitals or mortuaries, it's 20 times more likely you will know someone who had a baby in the last 6 months than someone who died from covid-19
The baby thing... just crazy. I don't understand why humans would want to bring a life into this world. I almost find it cruel.
Died from Covid? You're right, i know no one in that respect. Which is a good thing... hopefully it stays that way. But, considering how many die and the population size, that's not something unusual. It would be rare to know someone that died. I think the only measure of how bad this is, is keeping track of hospital admissions and hospital capacity. More than half of my family are doctors so they tell me... as of now, it isn't near as bad. People are getting laid off bc they don't have enough people in hospitals. That could change if infections blow up... but, we can only wait and see what happens. My uncle told me it can get bad if what we are being told about the virus is slightly right in its infection rate and death rate. But who knows at this point. I'm in Cali and it seems like are cases are blowing up recently but everything is still within capacity.
Also, i do know people that have caught it. No one personally. But my brother in law had two people at his work that tested positive. And, i ate at a restaurant that shut down bc an employee tested positive... shame, bc it's boom Mexican food, but it's shut down till July bc of the infection. So, i don't know anyone personally in family or friends, but i've heard of cases from people/places they know. I've been sticking to not going out (as i'm a gamer and produce music... all of my past-time activities are home based), so i'm not really worrying about anything atm. I just want people to be safe bc i do have people in my family with pretty bad preexisting conditions. It's all come down to my responsibility to be safe so i don't pass anything to them... whether it's Covid or even the flu.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Haven't talked to you in awhile. I guess i was just saying hi. Glad to see you doing good here. Peace man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
bruh
I know i know... it wasn't me yesterday. That was my Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde moment. I luv smoking and drinking together... but, i can only handle it once a week. I'll get in trouble if i do it anymore than that... and, good thing i don't have/use social media.
Created:
-->
@RoderickSpode
This is an interesting question overall. I was a bit drunk yesterday so i didn't think things through very much, but... now that i am, i'm just not sure.
Religion... or a belief that allows it, can turn a relatively good person into someone evil. For instance, something like witches are bringing in demons to this world. If i'm religious and truly believed a person "witch" is bringing demons into this world... (Demon being something really evil and bad) well, i wouldn't or shouldn't think twice in stopping this activity by either imprisonment or killing said witch. It would actually be almost a duty to kill off this person bc they are bringing demons. So... basically on those lines, religion can be dangerous. Which i think you've already heard these types of arguments.
More interestingly atheist. So atheism in a bad persons hand can be dangerous too. Of course, humans are humans. But, i think atheism is a little harder than religion to be dangerous for two primary reasons... one, there is no belief really that can qualify a bad idea (i.e. burning a person bc you think they're a witch) to being the right thing to do. You'd just label that person deluded and move on with your day. And second, there is no afterlife. So even a bad person may not want to kill someone or get caught and go to prison bc they realize this is their one and only life. Therefore, would they want to spend it in prison, and/or die and loss their only life.
Again, both can be dangerous. It's just which has more loopholes is my question. You brought up what do i believe... i believe everything is real. I'm sorta a fictional realist. Is my belief dangerous? Sure, in ways it is. Suicide isn't something wrong in my belief, it's a reset button. But thankfully, although i do believe what i do... i'm not sure. I'm also agnostic. Which is my whole point here. I have a spiritual belief that is awesome and i can't wait to see if i am right, but i also have an agnostic view that tells me in one ear you might be wrong so live this life to the fullest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
What makes ancient people more morally fallible? I'm not sure I follow.
Bc of the divide bw being someone and being nothing. If a lie could make you into someone, or give you a comfortable living... then, one would have lied through their teeth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Debates: 28
Forum posts: 7,551
4
5
11
Added06.26.20 12:45PM
-->@Outplayz
wtf
I know right. I was just peaking at that moment, sorry bro. Still am tho... to be honest. Two glasses of some good whiskey with a small bowl, small... two or one hit bowls... you are so good. I feel sorry for the rest that can't enjoy this... You're being robbed by something man. It shouldn't be illegal to feel good. Fck BLM, bring me ALM. Bc if some BLM people feel down, so do i... include me into this i matter business.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Bc i luv you... i just want to point out you're wrong. Christianity will never apply to me. But i am happy it applies to you. In a way, you are a NPC in my world, but that doesn't mean you aren't a character with your own story. I luv it.... but sorry, not exactly what you are doesn't apply to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
The best evidence is looking at people in power today.... they are corrupt, they want the pusy, they want the fame... they want the worship. And... we live in the best time in history. But humans still want this... imagine humans that lived during religious times.... do you really trust them? Are you kidding me.... they want it all. They want to be noticed. This doesn't erase everything they say... but it certainly erases credibility in everything they say being right.
Created:
-->
@crossed
As a person that has been addicted to these medicines... natural mainly... who knows. Although i went through hell with certain drugs, they also changed me in a deep way at first. They helped me realize things about myself that i never saw. But always, with every euphoric substance i've tried, always it ends in pain. What does that mean? Something that can help me so much also ends in showing me hell. What does that mean? I know now, but do you? if not, ask me questions... bc i am a poly-addict. And although that is the case, i think all drugs should be legal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
No, bc i can think of other reasons. That's the trick of spirituality... the dualistic realization that both natural and supernatural explanations can both be valid. Humans just stick to natural explanations bc they are easier... and to the "logical minded" more probable. But, that doesn't mean the latter is not the answer.
Created:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Humans are humans. It doesn't matter what you put next to their name in identity. A religion is more dangerous than atheism in my opinion bc most atheist don't subscribe to a belief. An atheist might think we can all be in a simulation. Or, an atheist can believe we are spirits. But it's all speculation and a point of good conversation. Religion is different however bc there isn't much room for discussion. I can't say i don't believe in god, but... i believe a simulation is probable. I'm already hated by said christian at a certain level for not accepting the minimum god theory. All atheism means is a disbelief in god. It doesn't mean said person can't be open minded, or even waiting for evidence for a god. Said atheist is open... religious people aren't open to alternatives. That's the danger. Bc if you live in the past, you are not evolving. And to me, that's dangerous bc humans in the past were sub-human to the standards of today... why look up to them?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
The answer is yes they know they come out of the Platform and that there are many beings or rulers, but they argue that they are the most High, each of them think they are the God everyone would want to parade under lol.
Everything you wrote is an interesting perspective. The way i look at it is looking at the humans that worship such entities. I find it very interesting that they cannot, for the most part, empathize with their gods. Their gods aren't even well defined. I think that's interesting bc it leaves it open. They could be as you say, or maybe they don't know and are just creators of that world. I just find it interesting it is beyond the worshipper's to properly define the god they are in to... and even more interesting that they think it's absurd or impossible... maybe it's bc they aren't right so they can't comprehend it... for if they were able to comprehend it, it would lead them away from their specific god and get them closer to an infinite consciousness type platform. They can't do it bc their platform is their reality, therefore, there is this reason they are incapable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
That's what I think is interesting about you, I'm still fascinated by these higher Beings but you think they are boring lol
This was interesting, never thought of it this way-ish.
can all work and fit into the universal infinite platform it doesn't have to be one or the other, God vs the platform theory problem.
Yes, I've thought of the platform in every which way. One thing about the multiple gods in the platform that is sorta a paradox that makes me ponder is how can you have two defined gods, like the Muslim and Christian god, in the same platform? Bc by definitions, they are both the supreme. Not only that, would these gods know they are one of many? Or would they not know? If they do not know, how do they fit their definitions? If they do know... are they aware they are limited as a one god (therefore not a god by definitions)?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mdh2000
***i saw these threads backwards so sorry if that's how i'm answering. I'll try to make it work.
The first question is does the universe require an intelligent origin to exist as it does.
Isn't this a bad place to start? What if you can both show it requires and it also doesn't require? For instance, my simple infinite paradox answer shows it requires. But i agree with you, we can change definitions of time and show it doesn't require. You see what i mean? I struggle with this too, bc anything i can say spiritually, can also be explained by natural means. For example, if it was a simulation... i can say evolution is bc we wanted to create every age of our experience... or, i can just say evolution is a natural process. Idk, this is just interesting to me and i think i may agree with you... bc i don't really think about the require angle bc we would be going into territories that are out there... in this specific subject, bc we would have to. So you can always stop me and say, you're going abstract so i don't have to listen anymore.. it's not required.
What do you mean my manifest?
Um, in the sense i brought it up... man, i really don't know bc it can happen in many ways. For instance, an arts creator manifests a character by imagining that character. Or, we can all have already manifested in that art way, are incorporeal, and manifest our character willingly into a reality. By manifest i guess i simply mean life being an incorporeal "something" that can manifest itself into realities. Then, more complicated, maybe life is in pieces, i am one character (piece), and can manifest. Sounds like to me i just mean an incorporeal life force, for the most part, becoming corporeal.
I believe that first, you should determine if there is something there, no point in deciding what you want on your pizza if the restaurant only sells steaks.
The problem is determining if there is something there isn't easy.
What exactly do you mean when you say platform?
Platform as to just what the absolute truth may be. Like heaven / hell / this reality would be the whole platform. Reincarnation of only this reality is a platform. Only our reality existing is a platform. When i look at it this way, it's just clearer to me the platform is probably a lot more complicated than these short single sentences allows and likely a morph just bc we can add infinity to the mix.
An interesting perspective, but frankly why assume that it has been done to us? What possible benefit do we gain from that assumption in terms of determining truth?
This is very subjective. I find benefits if the possibility is there, but you may not. It may actually be a detriment to your experience. Ultimately, at least i've found out, it only matters to those it matters to, which is interesting to me bc i've experienced something to reinforce my suspicions. I brought up a theory i had in the above answers so i guess i'll get to that. Let's say it's possible for us to enter a video game as a simulation. Say this game is a zombie shooter game. If i download into the game and know i'm in the game, wouldn't that change my experience? If you were in the game and didn't know... you would be freaking out at every turn. I know that sounds negative, but you would truly be having a zombie experience. We can both choose how to enter the game, but what if i wanted to know i'm in the game, but you didn't? Well, i would have hints and you would be able to disprove my hints... so we both have the experience we wanted. I highly suspect i'm in a game, and you don't. The experience changes with each of these little shifts. The interesting part is, if you say to me, well you didn't have your experience... but why would i (most of the time) pick a game i know exactly i'm fake in? My experience would be a boring mindless shooter at that point... it works better, or i think i would pick more often, to have hints rather than certainty. Ultimately, maybe that's just what this game allows. Maybe there are other games (realities) where i would know exactly what's going on... But this then gets into a higher platform, if the incorporeal self is immortal, then i think it would highly prefer a duality between mortality and immortality, forgetting and remembering... and many degrees thereof.
before you begin moving into speaking of what's probable, can you show the variables involved?
What do you mean by variables... or, maybe making it easier on me, from what i've said so far... what kind of variables are you looking for?
Generally, I tend to believe in starting with the base claim and working out. In theism that would usually be the claim of a creator god.
I respect that, but to me... when i hear "god" that is pretty extreme. I'd rather start out with the claims to how they got to their god so i can see if it's reasonable. Bc the definition of their god can be on to something, but all the fluff in-between can just be human fallibility... which i've concluded with organized religion btw, fluff.
Yet if you've got only speculation then why hold it as a belief (strong suspicion as you put it) rather than simply accepting it as a possibility and considering other lines of thought, other possibilities. Have you considered that you consider this argument the most probable because you haven't considered other ideas with enough of an open-mind or depth?
Very good question. I use to be blinded by what i thought i knew. Like i said, all of this i'm talking about... as early as i can remembering being able to think, i've suspected. I remember a memory when i was on the school buss for the first time, kids were bullying a kid in the back of the buss, and i was enraged that i couldn't use the "powers i knew" i had to stop it. Kinda think of superman or something being manifested into a reality where he lost his powers... that's how i remembering feeling looking at my hands. Very weird memory but of course just a memory. But of course all of this gives me a big head and some confirmation bias. I have however, in recent years, just laid off. I got to where i wanted with my belief, so now i'm listening to many others. Philosophers, scientists, etc. My thoughts have changed many times since, i'm actually confused now. I've found there are a few platforms that fit my belief... simulation theory, pantheism, infinite consciousness, Boltzmann brains... I'm actually having a ball having my mind blown now by others. I'm also listening to others that can debunk these... i'm just not convinced they're right. Like the many worlds hypothesis is basically one of the above platforms but limited to only what we know... so it could be, but i see it as limited. That's how i feel about the dissenter, just the same i feel about the ones that correlate with my belief... there's just something missing.
We exist, but why would you think we're existence? what's your reasoning there?
Oh i don't. I guess i just explained that poorly. I just think we exist and that is important. We are pieces of "existence" ... whatever the entire picture is. We can use what we know and even imagine bc we are part of existence.
The time paradox is only an issue if two criteria are met,
I agree with you, and admit i'm making a leap. I'm saying the leap is reasonable however. We do define time the way you explained. But, the way i look at it... even nothingness, nothing moving or being there, would be something moving in time if there was something after. We know there is something at least. And now i'm at the level where i don't think there was ever absolute nothing. That is a leap, but how i look at time and space and whatever is going on in it. The thing is, all of it would be in a linear sense... so just following down this rabbit hole... an intelligence just fits quite nicely when you look at it as a platform of infinite time, space, and whatever is going on in it.
Yet none of these imaginings holds any real weight, we're considering things we've no reference for, we're trying to understand a game without knowing what the pieces, board or rules are.
This is pretty crazy. I've always said this to spiritual people. My exact quote is "you a puzzle piece with a picture in front of you that you are trying to make... however, your friends (humanity) has thrown all their pictures into the mix... and, you're still trying to make one picture." You're just saying it in a "scientific" way.
So again, all we can do right now is come up with something reasonable. Like looking for the puzzle pieces that are of similar shades hoping it will one day find that one picture. Science is doing the same thing, they just have it easier bc they are looking at physical pieces.. and even they are having a hard time. Spiritual people have the invisible pieces.
I think i understand what you mean by variables now... i think the variables here are anecdotal accounts and our minds. Both of which i find have weight to them. Accounts would at least point towards "something." And our minds are wild man, we can imagine that it wouldn't make sense if there was no time. If that's right or wrong, us being able to imagine that is important imho.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mdh2000
A very good question. It's not a dodge, I never dodge a question or point, yet the fact is that I don't know what a universe without time would be like however that I can't imagine it, that I can't understand it, doesn't mean it's not possible or even that it's not probable.
This is great. I'm understanding how you are looking at it. I obviously can't really push any ideas into this that can't just be "dodged" ... i put that in quotes bc i know you're not dodging. Your position is reasonable. We can't know what a universe without time would be like bc we don't know it exists, or if it does... we don't have a way to access it to "know know." However, i think this is where our minds differ a little. I think it's easy imagining such a universe, and i think it is probable i'm right, off what we know. Something without time, is nothing right?.. If we just take it as what we know. I think there is significance in this for our imaginations and conscious, is kinda a literal superpower. We can imagine this, so why make it harder and more complicated than it needs to be (which only comes down to changing definitions of what time is)? We can do many things imagining implications of time (calling each by different names even), one being imagining what it would be without (timeless, empty, or whatever you'd call it). It's just changing definitions just like a comic book writer may call a time hero ... changer. Everything he/she does is change... but that's still manipulating what we know as "time." Therefore, i don't think it's insignificant that we can make these speculations. When it comes to "knowing" ... sure i agree with your angle, i've never seen it personally nor know if it exists... but, why throw out what i can imagine? I can make calculated speculations. I mean, all this could go either way if we keep changing definitions and calling time something else than what we see right in front of us. This does sound like the "look at the world it has to be designed" argument... but i think it's stronger bc we experience time and also know our imaginations are inventive and can imagine proofs.
Until we can observe and verify the traits beyond this universe speculation about it seems to be a fun thought exercise, but not much of a way to determine anything beyond speculation.
But like in anything, can't we say some speculation is better than the other? For instance, isn't it better if i get speculate about a simulation theory with you, rather than Christianity? Can't we both measure each speculation and think one is better or at least at this point seems more reasonable?
What makes sense to us may have nothing at all to do with what can be or is indeed what is.
Lol i really agree with you here... the only thing is i don't think about this angle much bc i've already accepted i can be wrong. I think it just comes down to my overall belief... i think we are something magical. Even if there is nothing beyond this, our imaginations alone are magical imo. Therefore, i don't think our ability to imagine these things is insignificant. I think it's highly significant in the grand scheme of things. Although, we are still infants... so ya, everything could be wrong... or maybe, there are small pieces we have caught onto... just like anything else, it's slowly getting there.
I'm still not seeing any way you determine likelihood.
Just imagining different platforms. Like any fictional writer would do for creating a reality. Then there is my experiences that kinda threw me in this direction, but i think you'll discuss that later so i'll discuss it when you bring it up... i'm going one quote at a time.
Yet we have no way of knowing that it's comparable to our universe at all in any way shape or form, we don't know that anything that applies here would apply elsewhere, we have no way of knowing that any conclusion we draw is more probable than any other due to lack of information.
This is interesting to me just bc of my ultimate speculation. I didn't want to bring it up so you don't judge me, but i think everything we have imagined exists in some form. It's extreme, but where i'm at. Therefore, i think there are absolute different universes to ours. My point isn't "knowing" ... which is a reoccurring sentiment i've seen. Knowing there is a reality where people can fly with wings... i don't 'know' it. But can i see a world where people can fly? Sure, why not... they'd just need wings. Is it possible? Sure why not?... of course my ultimate speculation gets crazy, but ultimately i'm not trying to know... maybe things are exactly how they are bc 'knowing' would be a detriment to this experience.
When you say tested what do you mean? What was the criteria of this testing?
It was in my moment, so i didn't have any instruments or stuff like that. Quick recap since i don't want to go through all of it. Kid said his house is haunted, i doubted him, i told him if it is than it should be able to manipulate my necklace, and it did. But before i asked him to tell it to manipulate the necklace... i sat down, observed the natural spin while holding it. Said go. It spun uncontrollably right. I still didn't believe so i told it to say stop the necklace from spinning. It stopped on command, i still wanted more proof so i said now tell it to spin left, it spun uncontrollably left. The only way it could have spun as hard as it did i would have had to do it... and i'm 90% positive i didn't move. 10%... maybe i somehow lost my mind and did... i don't know but i'm sure i didn't move. My test was stabilizing myself, observation of what's natural... then the directional commands... which all gave me the finger. I wanted to disprove him. In hindsight, i should have hung it on a lamp or something or recorded it... it just didn't happen that way. Which is interesting about these experiences... they just happen. Why? Idk know exactly but i have a theory if your interested in digressing into my "beliefs."
If it's repeatable then subject it to further testing, confirm what is happening and study further. If there's something there then you'll be able to verify and expand on what you know.
The kid thought it's a demon trying to kill him, he died a week later, i can't get back into his house, i've tried it many other times and it didn't work. I don't know how to test it in a repeatable way. I don't think these things work like that. Repeatable is something for understanding "simple" things in what we can see in our reality. I don't think that method is appropriate for something like this experience. But nonetheless, i experienced it.
when we get beyond this range however evidence suggests we're not so good, both our senses and our reasoning tend to become less reliable when working on the macro and the micro for example.
I agree with you. But i know myself, and i know on the reliability of these memories. The reason i say i wish i didn't have them is bc it's significantly changed my life... almost in a traumatic way bc you can't stop thinking about it on top of everyone telling me, it's a delusion, made up memory, etc. etc. Therefore, i kinda empathize with people that talk about crazy things that shouldn't happen... which btw, most i debunk or think they are drawing conclusions they shouldn't like it must be the "christian / muslim / whatever god." My whole point is towards what the "something" that happened is... i think it's clear there is something here.
(I knew someone who believed that if ghosts could be shown to exist that would prove that a god exists... Never got a clear explanation as to why).
Yep, like i said... i'm with you here. It just means something unexplained happened... can't draw an actual conclusion. But we can use them as an added tool. I'm actually a paralegal so i know the whole evidence and testimony thing. People are pretty wild. However, with very strong experiences, although they can exaggerate it, there are truths if the person actually experienced what they said they did. The problem with these types of experiences is the cause is often times "invisible" so you can't trace it. Like, how can i prove my mentioned experience other than testimony, and corroboration with one other that was there (which is why i usually only focus on this experience bc that is the only thing that makes it "stronger")?
Honestly, I can't speak to any of this without further information on your own experiences.
I went over it cliff note style, the only things i'm leaving out is how i was feeling, our conversations that lead to it, the environment, and some other connections, but the experience happened how i explained. I've looked at it critically and the only thing i can come up with is that i spun it unconsciously, it was a trick, or some invisible natural phenomena that just happened to go down exactly then. All of which, except for the last, i was aware of not to do... even watch the kids hands to make sure it's not a trick somehow. I was fully aware, yet it still happened... that's why it's one that has stuck with me as really unexplained.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mdh2000
I mean any intelligence force that created the universe. I don't see much point in discussing traits beyond the necessary until we can establish if there's reason to believe there is such an intelligence (or group of intelligences).
Well, wouldn't you need to figure out more traits that are 'more' accurate to what it truly is in order to be able to establish ways of finding it out? For instance, maybe it doesn't create but more so manifest things. Like a chess game on a god level scale. It knows if it manifests x humans in x time it will lead to y humans today. Therefore, it's not creation but manifesting intelligence into this reality to steer it. That would be tested way differently than lets say a simulation type god that created everything on a disk. Another thing about "necessary" ... i don't know how you define that. I guess it's not "necessary" to have a creator... could things just be happening? I guess it could, but it also could be the other way around. It's just if it is something, the implications of understanding what that something is may be important. For instance if Christians are right, it's important to repent. Therefore, with what we have... i think yes it's necessary to try to figure the abstracts out.
Pantheism then?
I didn't know what pantheism was when i thought of this platform, but i think something on those lines is kinda what im getting at, but i think it's more complicated. I think the entire platform is a "mind" ... but that's not even the right word. I think it's just a platform with many minds. Just like this reality. Just imagine Stan Lee being the lead mind, however, not the one mind but one of the minds in his own mind living multiple realities. Oh man, that sounded like a headache lol. Maybe, a simulation within a simulation within a simulation... the start being the absolute simulation that is every other simulation at once. Idk, many ways to look at the platform. As to evidence of suspecting it... i guess we can get to that.
Someone or something that causes something to come into existence.
So i would call this level one type evidence... we can do this, so why can't it be happening or have happened in other ways not known to us? Logically, if our minds exist, in an infinite platform, then each implication of our mind... intelligence, imagination, creation, etc... logically / probabilistic, has to exist. Let's say there once was a race of beings that created machines that they merged with, created a simulation, and are now living in infinite simulations in a cloud. That cloud is a god platform. Just simply being able to imagine this, and also seeing that there shouldn't be a reason why we can't do this one day, isn't it probable it has already happened? This is a simulation type argument, but it seems reasonable to suspect.
I rarely discuss specific religions
I agree with you and have looked at it kinda the same... but it's the contents of other beliefs that need to be proven to me before i start thinking about the head guy... so i'm kinda coming at it in the reverse. Which is cool. You look at this similar but from a different angle which i can def. respect.
An interesting speculation, but nothing more than that from what I have seen.
I will never be the one to say anything abstract i say is more than speculation... my personal hope is to come up with a platform that is as iron clad as i can get it as speculation. That's always been my goal anyways. I feel like for some reason my mind is hardwired to understand this abstract subject without knowing others... everything i say i've thought of on my own without much guidance. It's just a natural talent i have i guess... spiritual intelligence some others say, so i'll pride myself on certain things but never that i'm right bc i understand how i can be completely wrong if it turns out to be different or nothing.
I believe time is a property of this universe, but I see no reason to think that would change if the universe lacked any intelligent beings.
Well, we do define what we see... but i understand what you're saying. All i'm saying is... if we are existence, existence as defined it exists. So we can draw implications from it. An interesting implication to me is an infinite regress paradox and how a 'mind' added to the infinity would make the paradox moot. Would it still exist without us? Sure, but that is an interesting question within itself... does anything exist if nothing can define its existence? I don't see how that is any different than having nothing. Which is kinda the same thing i do with infinity and finite... infinity just makes more sense, a mind added to this infinity makes more sense... but that doesn't mean finite isn't the answer.
Yet how do we determine that time exists beyond this universe? How do you propose to establish that time isn't simply a property of our universe and that beyond that (for want of a better term), there is no form of time as we comprehend it? What makes time more than a property of our universe like gravity or the strong nuclear force?
If you mean how can i prove it... i can't right? I don't know in what form it may exist outside of this... all i know is that it exists as we see it. That's enough. I've just added it to the equation now. We can use our imaginations from there to figure out platforms with or without it. Without out it... well, what would exist right? We can imagine nothing as something without time, but can we? If it use to be nothing, then something... then even nothing spent time being nothing. I'm just using what i know of time to think of this... which we can do.
Here's one thing i don't agree with people that dissent from my view... that i can't anthropomorphize or use what i know exists in "this reality." Why not? Bc these are things i know exist. They are just tools. Bc if they exist here, then they would exist in something else... in another form? A little more of or less of? I don't know, but those are things i can think about. Comic book authors have really fine-tuned the implications of time... so, crap... there can be many implications, and why should i not be able to judge these implications in a probable way?
establish it applies to anything that may be other than this universe?
What would a universe without time be like? Is this just a dodge from my initial paradox answer or is it a real possibility to confront my speculation? Not being rude at all, just want to go with this thought experiment. I think something without time isn't anything... but, even nothing would be nothing moving forward... as we know, there very well could be no such thing as absolute nothing bc there is def. something right now... therefore, i don't think there is any reality without time. A "mind" navigating this infinite time just makes more sense then nothing being involved with the something... bc then we run into the paradox. Not saying my paradox answer is iron clad or anything, but these are many little evidences that lean me towards the possibility... so i'm listing them.
With such a large lack of information how can we hope to reliably draw any conclusions?
I understand how you are looking at it, but i'm not trying to draw a conclusion... i just want to know which is more likely. See, i think the platform with mind idea is more likely, therefore, i've now started to define what that means for me. I don't really care about the intricacies of the platform, more so who i am to it. I just need to know if it's probable, and i think it is. That's what you are talking to me more about, is it probable. From observation and thinking, i think we can give it a tiny leap towards probable although we don't have a proven platform (other than this reality - which is important here) to compare it with.
Not knowing what experiences you're talking about I can't exactly give much opinion.
I've explained my experiences in detail here and on other sites many times. I'm at a point where i don't really care to detail them anymore bc they are deep and i would have to write a lot. Let's just take one... asking something that is not there to move something, and it happens without a doubt. Whether it was a trick or something weird... the thing moved on demand, and while tested and provoked to do it multiple times. And btw, all of my experiences were sober... and if not, nothing in my system that would cause a hallucination, but i don't know. The mind is weird in how it works. The moving experience was with another however, so i can say it happened unless it was a duel hallucination... which is just a cop out at this point. Anyways, something moving something doesn't mean god, it just means something happened. The details of the experience are what's interesting to me.
But to this experience point, i agree with you... many many people are frauds. They want attention, have some kind of mental instability, want greed/money... sex, etc. Humans lie a lot. But i'm not lying, and quite frankly, i wish i was. So, throughout the years, i probably ask more people about experiences bc i don't want to think i'm the only one... that would lead me to some kind of Solipsism belief which implications are terrifying imo. So, i've asked and heard many weird things. My point is... are they all lying? Are they all mistaken? Maybe, but i think the sheer number of experiences would count as evidence bc only "1" needs to have actually happened. I think the odds of one being true as it stands, even if i ignore my multiple experiences, points towards "spirituality."
If there is no evidence to support the idea, then why suspect it strongly? If there is no evidence you can possibly present to others to support what you believe has been proven to you, then how can you hope to convince or influence others?
I personally strongly suspect it bc i have evidence... actually, through my eyes... it's hard evidence. It's proof at an individual level. I've done a lot of mental gymnastics to even ignore it on my own level and say it's weak evidence... but even at that point, things happened. But i understand why others can have a different position... i don't think you should strongly suspect it or suspect it at all. Remember, all i care about is "do i have an iron clad speculation." That's all i care about. I know i'm not at the iron clad level, but i like to think i'm on a reasonable level. The thing about my platform is ... i shouldn't be able to convince others. If i could convince Richard Dawkins of a god, he wouldn't be who he is anymore. All i care about is having a conversation with him where he says, "that's reasonable, but you're wrong." That's a W in my eyes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I call the platform Creator because that's what It basically is, that's where all mini-creators originate.
I know what you're talking about. I'd encourage you to define it and explain it further with others... but i understand how it's really nuanced so it's annoying laying it all out to hit a wall of semantics and attacks. When you say "creator" people still think "god" ... and worse, here in the west, that you're Christian or something, limited in your beliefs. It's an annoying thing we have to repeat bc so many people are blinded by the fringes... a problem in more than just spirituality.
What you said in this first paragraph is really interesting. I've changed my idea of spirituality a lot throughout the years, but it seems like you have come back to what i believed first. Mini-sources within a source platform. I didn't know how to say it that concise, but i read some of my earlier thoughts from DDO and that's basically what i was saying. I fell away from it a bit, but now i'm coming back to it again. It's def. an interesting platform.
These forums are a blessing and a curse!
Yeah, i've basically seen everything now throughout the years... which is why i'm a little bored of it. Every here and there you get someone that will have a good conversation. I think Mdh sounds like a reasonable person to debate with so far which is why i was curious to see his position a bit more. But to your last point... yeah, the whole infinite regress thing just stumbled in my mind one day. I thought, anyway you define time... in a linear sense, it hits the paradox. But with a mind, it doesn't. Actually, to be honest without sounding arrogant... i think i'm the only person that has stumbled on how this mind thing answers the paradox. I haven't been able to find anyone else that has seen it or talks about it. It's a really interesting correlation, so i'm glad you've dug deeper into it... i wonder if you learned it from me, or had the idea before... but in any case, it's one paradox that works within an infinite platform.
That is the beauty of creation you're right, only thing I don't like about it, is that people can be blind to the full potential of what is actually going on.
I wouldn't say they're blind, bc we are kinda both blind to each others position. It's like not understanding how any guy could be gay bc i think males are sexually disgusting. The interesting part to me is that everything we can give a spiritual explanation of can be explained by physical means (and both having there own set of troubles). It's very interesting that this duality exists and creates so many different types of characters bc it exists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
While Mdh2000 keeps presuming I have not made an argument or have not provided evidence I believe I've done both.
I agree with your evidence, but since it's abstract... the very nature of it means he can disagree with why you believe what you do. That's the beauty of infinity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mdh2000
For a Creator to be more specific.
We really have to define what that means. Bc i don't believe it's most logical there is a sky being creating everything. This "creator" thing i believe is something way deeper. I'm more inclined to believe "consciousness" is everything. What the implications of that are is pretty wild, and many times outside of what i can know. Maybe it doesn't even know how it came to be bc it always existed and there was never absolute nothing. I don't know. Maybe things just are. But specifically with creating... if creating can be as simple as imagination becoming "a" reality... i don't see how that is impossible, and actually more likely since a consciousness that can create and imagine in an infinite platform has pretty wild implications. Imagine us being immortal, fully merged with technology, and able to create any simulation we imagine. What does "creator" mean at that point? A very little correlation to "a" creator... as proposed by many religions. It would be a collective, it would be individual, it would be anything we can imagine... times that to infinity, creation simply has a crazy definition. Although "creating" is happening... not in a single creator setting. If you are arguing about that, i would take your side. I would not take the side of any one single creator / power definition. However, i always mention "a" platform. This platform can be called god / creator.. but the platform is simply the hardware / software that allows for what is... so, it's really not a one thing either. With all that, i think it's more logical that there is this platform so i'll try to keep on track with that... BUT
Remember to tag me. lol. I just skim through this site now so i almost missed your reply if Etrnl wouldn't have tagged me.
Yet this assumes time being more than a property of this universe doesn't it?
Why do we have to get so complicated? Sure, our intelligence is what defines time. We define time off what we see in the mass of the universe existing. Time is just going forward... it's simply that. Put whatever definition we want to it.. things are moving forward. If we lived in a magical universe where there were super-humans that can control time... it would have a different meaning. But whether you can mess with time, turn it backwards, or whatever... all those actions are just moving forward. My point with infinite regress is, without a mind... nothing should ever exist for it should never get to it in an infinite platform. So then we can just say our reality is the final point.. a finite universe, then... how long does that finite space exist? Yet, an infinite platform with a mind to traverse it... makes sense. For then it can be both infinite and finite for there is nothing outside of its imagination. This is one of a few things i would call evidence to lean towards "consciousness" being king in truth of "absolute reality"... When i say time... i simply mean moving forward. Nothingness, absolute, could have just been that until it became something... nothing can move forward as being nothing even if it doesn't have time as we would define it. Maybe there was once nothing, but now there is something. And i think adding a supreme consciousness to this space makes more sense than there not being one.
To further an analogy EtrnlVw begun. If you ask what is 2+2, it's better to say I don't know than answer with 5.
I said this earlier, this is where we both sound similar. I agree with you. I don't pretend i know what the platform is, or do i pretend i know any of the pieces of how, when, where, etc. It's beyond me. The only thing i can be certain of is my experience. That is where things get interesting bc if my experience is one where little truths are revealed... then, i have some expertise of saying x+y = z. X being me, Y being the experience, z being reality. But, this equation is only good for me. Adding other experiences to it would change it. I see reality the way i do bc it works with my experience... are there truths in it? Sure, and there is also fallibility. Which is why i can't make any "proof" like claims, only that this is where is stand to help the picture form from the collective. Etrnl is a lot further along then most theists, but i don't think he has all the exact pieces either. Therefore, your conclusion of just not knowing... i'm with you there. But, like i argue with many people that think there is no intelligence to this... i just simply disagree there. It seems imagination, a piece of consciousness as we know it, when added to infinity... is something pretty wild and more logical when added to the mix.
It may be interesting, but do we have any reason to believe it to be true?
I've caught myself on this many times now. Depends on how you define believe. I define believe a little different than the actual definition. To me it means i strongly suspect more than not... this is happening. So, i strongly suspect some kind of simulation theory mixed with some alcohol and weed, times infinity, is whats going on. What is that? Idk, all i know is i'm "one" of billions of characters that have existed in it. So, the only thing i should be focusing on is who my character is to this game. Everything else be damned. Bc in the end, the only thing that will have to deal with whatever it is... is me. Any other answer i simply wouldn't exist anymore. But if i do continue to exist, it's my character that i have to worry about. And personally, i've had some experience to reinforce that i am the center of this, and that there are things beyond what i've been told to be possible. So that's how i see reality now. I will never be an atheist by the strictest definition, but that's just my character and it makes sense bc i can't imagine being anything different.
Not to be rude
You are just being you. I am not trying to change that, just add maybe something you haven't heard. In a way, making you better at being you. There is no evidence i can present to you, but i don't know why you would think there would be in this realm. If i saw an incorporeal being talk to me and tell me exact things to do that get me to certain places in my experience, how could i ever prove that to you? All i know is that it has proved itself to me for some weird reason. But overall, sure there should be ways of zoning into this personal experiences one day to provide collective proof that they happen. I just don't think we're there yet or should we ever be? I don't know the answer to that. I just chimed in bc you seem to have a good head on your shoulders. In regards to evidence, i can't give you this evidence if it was anecdotal... however, like i tell many people that ask for this evidence... isn't it evidence enough that there are people like me that say there is this evidence?
Stuff has happened to me, a person i'd like to think with a logical head on his shoulders, that i cannot explain. They were "spiritual" in nature, they seemed to have intelligent implications, invisible forces... i just can't explain. But even if i take myself out of the equation, there are millions of reported cases of such experiences. Even if i ignore my own, even if i say all of them "but one" experience actually happened... just one being true holds crazy implications. I know this is some sort of logical fallacy... a majority one or something. But i'm not even saying that, i'm saying just one "ghost" sighting... if it actually happened, then that means ghosts exist. There are millions of reported events that go beyond what should be possible. Sure, i can say they are all mistaken identity... but, that's the thing, it's happened to me and i think bc of that... i actually started listening. So, ultimately it has me scratching my head. It most definitely doesn't point to a creator... but it does point towards something. I think what that something is is what we are trying to define as primitive apes at this point.
Ultimately, i take your i don't know position. But i do favor / think it is more logical there is an intelligence beyond ours and at a way higher capacity than what we know. It just makes more logical sense by simple things as what we can create or little things like the infinite regress answer i stumbled on. But can i know? Nope at this point. Can i "prove" it... nope, no strong evidence. I think people like me and Etrnl are simply just saying you can't say there is zero evidence however... anecdotal accounts, ideas, arguments, all that favor something beyond, or evidence nonetheless... just not strong. Etrnl believes this stuff with more confidence than i do, but i respect him for being exactly that bc i personally need it to continue to be my agnostic self. I don't know how i furthered your conversation with him other than to say what he knows and his logic is evidence in my eyes. I don't let each point go just bc i may disagree down the line for thinking i'm a vampire to the platform that will torture millions one day (inside joke).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mdh2000
And I keep pointing out that common sense is unreliable, that is why it should be supported by logical arguments and evidence.
I haven't been on for a little while on this site, but through some quick reading... i like this discussion going on. Etrnl and i share similar philosophy on this matter, with our little differences. I really didn't read your conversation with him enough to know what you two are talking about exactly, so if i'm way off on my assumptions i guess you can correct me. Actually, from the quick skimming of the convo.. you sound a little like me. I think you just think there is no evidence or logical enough argument for a "higher" intelligence.
I'm also agnostic on this matter. I don't know. Yet, to me it's logical there are other intelligence's beyond our earth/reality. Maybe similar to us or not... primitive or more advanced... it's impossible we are the only intelligence in infinity. Infinity is more logical than something finite as well. Although they both hold there paradoxes, i think infinity has less. Interestingly, when you add intelligence to infinity, it makes more sense. I'll give an example. Infinite regress would be a thing, but if you have something intelligent manifesting reality through conscious process, well, then you are not linear... therefore, it doesn't matter if you had one big bang and than us... all this intelligence would have to do is want to have this reality and be there. Consciousness isn't linear, time is without consciousness.
Anyways to why i quoted that specific line. If there is a platform beyond us, that manifests realities... i don't see how there could be "one" logical argument. It's like a video game. Which character has the truth, when each character is different. How would they prove we created them? Idk, Maybe it's just not time yet for us to prove a reality beyond ours. A logical argument leading to a pretty good truth may just not be in our present time. Yet, if there is a logical argument... then, we are at least the start of it. We may be putting the pieces together for the time there is one platform logical argument to what is beyond us. I think we should be trying to get to that, instead of lost on any one idea right now... we are still pretty monkey like. I have an assumption, a platform beyond us which is an infinite consciousness. I think a platform like that is the best we have right now.
As to evidence, if there is this infinite consciousness (IC), there should be some evidence. However, the complexities of an IC would make this part pretty wild. I've personally experienced event that should not be possible. Is that a delusion? Is that a hallucination? is it just something specific to me and my path? I think the last is most logical. However, it has nothing to do with you. How can we have an atheist scientist if said scientist saw a ghost? In an IC platform, everything exists... it would be everything and nothing. It would be the universe and the universe cannot distinguish bw something or nothing. That's why this platform is the most interesting to me at this moment.
Do i believe in a theistic god? No. Do i suspect consciousness/intelligence is everything... that is more logical than a god, but just as a platform. Not a who but a thing. But as to evidence, i've had unexplained events that follow a path of an invisible intelligence and/or some kind of psychic hard determinism. I can't say exactly what it points to, but it does have those elements. But i cannot "prove" my experience to you bc it is weak evidence in that it's just for me to see... but nonetheless, it's evidence. Then there are millions of others i've heard from that have had this kind of evidence... personal to their experience. Which makes sense. A character is a character, a personality is what it is... we can't all be the same, bc for our level of intelligence, that would be hell-like and not much of an experience.
Anyways, what am i getting on about. I think it is logical at this point to suspect more so there is something beyond our reality, times that with infinity... then it's probably pretty insane. I do not think it's logical to say there are no good arguments or evidence for it bc that is personal to you. It makes you your character... which is the paradox. If i could convince you of my logic and/or arguments... you wouldn't be the you, you are now. People are capable of this change of character... but is it in your story? Maybe yes, maybe you die as exactly who you were suppose to be to this reality. So when i say it is more logical there is some sort of platform, and IC being convincing to me... do you see it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Hey man, just checked in. Thanks for saying that, made me feel good. I check in to see what you guys are up to every once and awhile but i'm still concentrating on different things irl. Looks like Ethan got himself a suspension again lol. Hope it's not Perm. I'll try to join in on some conversations but for now, i've been in lock down which i'm taking the time to get better with music and games. Anyways, just wanted to say whats up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
I just saw this video and i agree with him and you... the dems are messing themselves up by being everywhere in their beliefs. It's too scattered while Repubs seem to know what they want and unite behind their guy. I wonder if Bernie wins, one side will get pissy and not show up to vote and/or vote right... or if someone else gets the nomination... Bernie side won't turn up. It's a mess on the left as i see it, but only time will tell if they can get their act together.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
I struggle to name one Republican president that reduced spending and bureaucracy and gave power from the federal government back to the states.Please, enlighten me as to how you believe we have gone hard right historically and you haven't gone hard left against us(not sure if you are arguing that as well). FDR and LBJ come to mind if not.
I have no idea. I was pretty drunk when i wrote all that so... there may be truths mixed with total idiocy (like i actually hate Pete). But, from what i observe, the right sticks to their guns a lot more than the left. The left seems to drift bw moderate centrism with a little left. It seems to me the left compromises a lot more with their ideas than the right does. That's why it's refreshing to see someone like Bernie bc he sticks to a very left position without compromise.
I'm really a one issue guy bc i'm mostly apolitical. But Bernie hits a lot of issues i wish were reality in regards to equality (and my belief that we are wage slaves). I hate his second amen stuff, but the whole corruption thing he goes against, and that so many are against him, i like that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I don't know why she can't just be honest and tell the other girl... "Yo, i don't believe you" Or "You're wrong" Religion man, it throw a wrench in things. The older women seemed more prepared, the young girl turned into an apologist... just for greed. At that point she became a lie. Throw your beliefs away bc someone is an idiot. I'm tolerant, but i would have spoken my mind and left her looking confused. She's the idiot for voting for someone she had no clue about... even though he spent millions. Dumb people just exist... no judgment, but they shouldn't be front news. Well, who knows... i did watch the whole video and laugh. Money is money in their world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Funny thing is... i took a first look at what i wrote. Lol, unintelligible at points 100%, but intelligible-ish (lol) if you know what part i was on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Plus i tuned in while it was already going. Not sure where i started typing. But if you follow it... i was writing first thoughts that came to my head listening to them in order. So the order is right, but i have no clue where i started.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Thanks for readying any of it. I just did it for fun. I don't even remember where in the debate i started typing. I just remember Pete was saying some G stuff. But i don't think the country is ready for a gay president.To be fair I only read about 20% of your post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Of course it's Friday night... i mentioned my joy of taking a mental trip on this night =)Only just now realized that this is a Friday night. What a great life lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
On a side note will you be voting in the democratic primaries and if so for whom?
The the first stuff you were saying... yes, i understand i may have been a tad bit too unintelligible. I was pretty messed up.. i might still be a little there =)
Who will i vote for ... the only logical choice is Bernie Sanders. He is extreme, he has stuck the same ideology for years. And i believe some of his ideological should be reality. Almost everyone else, i'm not sure if they are extreme enough. Pete is getting me interested but i think you should be sharp left against the right. The right has always been sharp right... i want to see how sharp left does.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Lol man.
I had some constructive criticism to offer but when I got to this part
Oh, come on. Bring on the criticism... that's what i love. If we are both reasonable, i bet some really good sht gets created. I believe minds evolve.
Created:
Posted in:
Butty guys argument was pretty good.
Yang, is passionate on drugs... tryin tho, still sell out bc he know's money is power. Hmmm about this guy.
Kansas girl needs to try a Norco. That would enlighten her.
Guns.... yes!!!
Sanders... This is how much i hate you... American people? Good answer. Uni bak... distribution? I'll debate you but yeah... nra doesn't represent my love for the 2nd amendment.
Biden: Fck your assault weapons ban. I, I, what else? People should go to jail... corrupt people, so yea... Biden?
Warren: So it's efficient to put the lights out... bad! Got it. I like her. Yeah, the people around you are corrupt... we know. It sucks. Bo ho for you.
right to choose...
Biden: Talking fast kinda unintelligible. Killing life... unintelligible. But seem like he don't give a f.
Warren: ...
zoned out.
Butty... Go dude. Preach those gang bangs.
Biden. Oh man... Period! Talking about this person, that person... who can do that. What Boomer? ...
Sanders: Wise ass mucha fuckin g.
Tom tom: There is something else going on!!! These repubs have some cool guns! Oh shit... take down repubs? I agree with you but you're also an idiot you dem rat?
Butty: Legalize marijuana... being called out. "These things are all linked" Hmmm. I like that.
Warren: I'm Persian and hang out with a wide diversity of friends. Too ambitious to force that on everyone. Just realize everyone is powerful no matter their color and let people just meet... equality, the message you learned from Bernie.
Yang: Give us some money back government... bc you are getting rich enough... agreed. Fk those robo calls... they owe me a percentage if i decide to buy from them... equality.
Bernie: racist? Come on... he's not. Stop throwing people in jail for getting high. That's a pretty good start. Drugs are good...in moderation (coming from an addict).I like him.
Biden: Go to Joe Biden dot com... bc i'm unintelligible.
Bernie: Friend of mine... bc i don't attack people... bc? I don't know this race stuff, but if it's happening it sucks.. that's a society issue that can be improved by Yangs "1k extra"
Warren: "18"... i don't know. Some are smart, some are idiots. in my opinion. But 18 legal, sure, why not. These people are the future.
Warren: Again, Biden... i forget. Warren: Seemed passionate. Problem with women with my bias.
Tom Tom: 400 years! Racism... yeah, they're dead. Humans are idiots. Give every money bc the government is dumb. Leaders, lol.
Yang: Low level income. They need a boost. Ubi. I agree.
Bloomy... as a Cali kid, his commercials are ignorable, but i see them more than anyone else... Money!!!
Warren... Does she hate billionaires? I kinda do, so you go you girl.
The nerd women... underground bitch! Teacher yes! A humble women. Yeah, sure... very good line, but stop dropping your site. That's a no-no boomers.
Bernie: Fck money! I have the people. Yeah, Bernie... you better be different. Bc you have me, as a chaos voter, interested.
Butty... Changes... we need majority. Heartfelt talking point. and yeah. Plus points from me bitch.
Bernie: Environment. right. Outsourcing. 1 dollar an hour, yeah... fck that country.
Kobby nerd women... best way to combat climate change...? don't let boomers have a say in the matter, in my opinion.
Tom Tom... Kill ma Persian dude that thought he's a g... bc he wasn't, but honestly, from my keyboard warrior status... He was a g. How do you fight that? That's beyond you tom tom.
Nerd girl: We should all get along.
DUBSTEP:
Yang: Just say it... people aren't money? They are and they aren't, my man. You know that.
Butty: Economic Equality...? hmmm. Whatch you say b.
Warren: Why only teachers? Good tho. Money into the people.
Biden... my bias... so, What? Never focused on money? Cool story bro. A lot of other people are going to school bro... anyways, everyone *3 ...
Sanders: We don't bail out out our own people. We are wage slaves... i hear you Bernie, that's why i like you. For the working class. I luv you but damn dude... you just a single human too.
Nerd girl: Crying. Teaching about empathy. Cool. Promising fighting for people. just drop out and vote for Bernie man.. stop being a femnazi.
Tom Tom: Yo... are you talking to me? I hope he is talking about a raise. Again... bias to the wage slave argument. What are you offering you fkin billionaire btch??
MEDIA ... I CANT SAY BERNIE's NAME More THAN Zero times in support. Why? Why are they scared... that is intriguing. The old man kreepying on votes... does the working class really have it;... i digress? Show's legacy media's bias. Butty, Butty, Butty... he's vamping it, why.. fo sure gang bangs? Is he humble enough to know who's giving him that power? I don't know. Bernie, for years has been, Bernie... and i don't know, but i feel like i should support consistency... his views are perfect when you realize half of congress is other people, and ya, a right and left... interesting. Humans minds fighting for power. I hope that changes in the future bc i would like to have that battle with all of them... including Bernie.
MEDIA... Fireball, weed, and Vayvanse today. A good cocktail btw. Still haven't talked about Bernie in depth. Again... butty and joe, so empathetic. Media trying to paint that picture. But why? I want to trust butty but media and congress liking you is not good.
MEDIA... have you ever taken a pain killer? You've taken heroin. The only difference between you and me is that you are a normie and i am an addict. I have to battle wanting to chase that beautiful dragon.
Finally, i'm getting sober enough to not listen to this channels attempts at fictional political theater. Joe Biden??? LOL Ok, Boomers. Common teens, skip that high for a second and vote.
Unless tomorrow we get hit with a space rock... Goodnight! But if i say good morning, you owe me you fake btchs. Pay off my tolerance of your success. IDC, get the extra features (i bet a yacht is fun af but i digress)... as long as i have basic features you can have your fun. I recommend a gang bang... i think your husband will agree. Butty in iowa Lol. This is so perfect.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I construed that meaning from the first quote from Karl Popper from your link. I sorta like that whole quote.
Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Tolerance is subjective. There will always be something you become intolerant towards, then maybe become intolerant in your handling of it, or do it in a tolerant way. But i agree with that first quote... it is better to expose intolerant ideas and see where it lands among everyone. If it's really stupid, the intolerant person will be hit back and maybe get a revelation or maybe go crazy and bite society back. I like to think of myself as a pretty tolerant person, but even that that extent (actively trying to be tolerant) i have been confronted with situations where it is just darn hard to maintain that tolerance. It's just all human nature since we are all but evolved monkeys.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rbelivb
I think if anything... no one deserves to be a wage slave. If someone is working for you for 40 hours (or more) of their life, they deserve at the very least enough money to be able to take care of themselves.
Now this is nuanced and subject to some arguments, but overall that's my view. I look at it as a future human. What would humans in 100 or little more years look back and think we were crazy about and/or immoral... i think wage slavery will be one of those things. Possibly to the same effect of actual slavery.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ronjs
Why not...? What if god specifically created atheists, agnostics, spiritual people, and other faiths away from him bc simply he finds that more interesting? I mean, god knows exactly what its doing... past, present and future. Don't you think the urge to convert say an atheist to your views is more of a human phenomena and/or desire than a gods?Not likely
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Well, if we technically go off the "Omni-god" definition... you are staring at god, your bed is god, the air you breath is god, i'm god, your parents are god, etc. If you get what i mean. The funniest part is searching for god... wouldn't it be interesting that the reason why god has split up into creation is possibly to escape being god? It's funny to me bc humans try so hard to become god, feel god, be one with god, be god... if ultimately, the truth is god would like nothing more than to not be god.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Or, "whichever one you were led to believe."
That's true since we have humans of many degrees of intelligence. But i think if you do a little thinking on your own, you can create yourself in your own vision. At least, i turned away everything that was told to me to be true since birth... i guess i'm just not susceptible to indoctrination. There are many factors and degrees in this world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Whichever one you believe.So which is the right one?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
this I guess is the core issue for me.
For me too. That's why i'm largely agnostic spiritual... well, agnostic atheist spiritual. Atheist being towards religion bc i don't think any one religion knows and/or has the full picture.
I think the observer thing is a physics phenomena... which, one guy explains well but i forget his name. He was on Joe Rogan's podcast. Basically, he says it's different than what people think it is, but then when he explained it... it sounded like what people say it is lol. Idk, i will gladly admit my ignorance of science. But i think what you're talking about is the "observer problem" in relation to schrodinger's cat experiment. There is one scientist that believes in the many worlds hypothesis to answer this paradox... but the many worlds hypothesis just sounds like a watered down... well, what we are talking about.
I'm agnostic spiritual bc of your last questions. Ignoring the easiest answer... death = you're gone. If there something other than what could that look like? I think answering the questions of who you are to the platform is more important than trying to understand the platform itself. But it is fun, so i basically have two versions... god evolved or god has always been. God being the platform. Like i mentioned early, if it evolved, then it could just wake up out of nothing and go from there. If it's everything, then simply there never was/is truly "absolute nothing" ..
Interestingly, listening to the same scientist i think it was, even empty space is something. There is something going on everywhere in our universe. So, is it really expanding and outside of its expansion is absolutely nothing? I don't know... but it makes less sense to me. Two things don't make sense... one is all of this being finite, infinite fits better bc then finite you have to describe the "wall" that it all stops at. And, second, there once being nothing. If there ever once was nothing... i think consciousness is the only thing that can emerge from absolute nothing... everything else, to my layman understanding, seems like it needs something. It's a hard question we can only have a hypothesis/speculate on. But we do have powerful brains and are conscious and evolve... so maybe we're just not ready to know these answers yet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I remember watching this movie and this part (at 1 minute where ultron wakes up) gave my goosebumps bc i use to think god evolved in this way. Out of nothing came a question... who am i, where am i, etc., until god evolved to what it is today. Actually, there is really no way for me to know if that isn't what happened.
But what i am saying is that consciousness (in a different form then what we know) can come up in nothing. First there is nothing, then there is a thought, then that thought becomes everything. Although, it makes more sense to me that there was never absolute nothing... there has always been something and that something is an infinite something... in part conscious, in part not conscious... the idea here is the consciousness can manifest out of nothing. All it would have to do is ask a question... like the video. Who am i? Interestingly, if it happened in this evolved way... maybe that's why creation follows an evolved path too... bc every step of the way in god's evolution there are characters, so these characters are essential to get to the next.
So idk, god could have evolved, god could have always been, god could be everything... but the interesting thing is if consciousness is eternal, then there are a lot of paradoxes that it would cover, at least to me... makes sense of a lot of things if you correlate such a platform to what we know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Revelation or apocalypse is the revealing of what always has been, always is, and always will be.
I'm honestly trying to understand so don't misconstrue my questions for anything other. But i still don't get it and i am more confused now that you threw in apocalypse into the mix. Doesn't apocalypse mean end of the world? And how is revelation of what sounds like a past, present, future understanding apart from emotion or feeling? I would def. have a strong feeling towards the implication of my understanding of what you said... or is the trick not to have a feeling towards it? I'm confused.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
The way i worded what i said in that quote sounds like i was having a conversation with Ebuc ahaha.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Well, an infinite incorporeal type consciousness just needs to become aware... it doesn't need a cause. Like it was asleep and woke up. The obvious problem with that is from what we know... you need a brain for consciousness... but, that is what we know. Or of course, you're right too... it could just be how it is... there is nothing but existence and there was never absolute nothing. Who knows.. but as to your concern, it simply could have just woke up without a cause bc again, consciousness can do that.
Created: