Total posts: 2,193
-->
@Shed12
Murdering a murder is committing evil to punish evil. In that it would be evil/good. It's still evil, but also good that something that is only evil got erased. Killing would still be evil. War is evil. But apply the above, one could be good and evil where one is usually only evil. For instance, if the war is to topple a ruler that is only evil... kills, imprisons, rapes, etc. Then something good is committing evil to stop that pure evil. The soldiers that fight for that pure evil would need to be evaluated individually. Why are they personally fighting for that evil? If it is so they don't get killed by said ruler then they are also committing evil for a good... to save their own lives. But they are still committing evil when they are killing another. There is also degrees of this and i think the degrees can be best described by forgiveness or thoughts of forgiveness. If one learns the solider's family would have been killed if he didn't fight... then even if he/she cannot be forgiven... a sense of understanding or a thought of forgiveness could follow. Pure evil however cannot be forgiven or it would be extremely very hard to forgive.Is any of this objective? I don't know if i could truly say that with certainty. We are the ones defining all this which would always point towards subjectivity. However, i think we would mostly always define the above mentioned evils as evil. Even someone that is evil would think it's evil if someone murdered them (well they wouldn't know), or did some form of imprisonment or rape. There could be degrees of it... maybe someone wants to be raped, in which case that would turn it good for them, but stay as evil for the one committing it. (*Edit: I just noticed this last example is tricky. The one committing it technically wouldn't be committing evil if the person wanted to be raped. It's an example of the evil/good in that case.)
This one answers your first question (basically an expansion on my brief description). Just thought i'd make it easier.
Created:
-->
@warren42
Yeah. I am most definitely a fan after binge watching their games on Youtube for like 3 days straight lol.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
So god is just reality and doesn't have any forms of consciousness? Bc that is what you are defining. If not... then by definition you are defining reality differently and that is a jump.
Created:
-->
@Shed12
I got sorta deep with Secular so i don't want to repeat myself. If you can't find it let me know and i'll repost it. But briefly, i find pure evil to be those evils i listed with no goodness behind it. Pure malicious. For instance, if i kill someone so they don't hurt/kill my sister... i committed evil for a good reason. There is good in it. Pure evil has no good silver lining.What is evil pure?
Why are there evil-doers?
There are many reasons. Brainwashing, mental illness, poverty, etc. We are all, or i should say, mostly all shades of evil. Almost all of us can commit evil acts given the right circumstances. Some people... are more malleable in that department. What i mean is... some people you can convince Republicans are evil and you must kill them or versa. I think that has to do with low iq and other mental handicaps... possibily other factors too. The point is, it's complicated. You will be lost forever trying to figure out why people do the things they do. You know some people drink their own urine bc they think it is a youth medicine? Some girls truly fantasy a guy breaking into their home, put a gun to their head and tell them to suck it? These people exist. Why? I can't be bothered trying to figure that out... or more specifically to understand them. It's just how it is. I have a spiritual view that can explain it sorta... but nothing definitive.
Created:
-->
@warren42
Cool. I was wondering if there is a video or game like that. I guess i can just appreciate the women's time for what they are... a great women's team. Plus... i would bang Morgan any day... She is a goddess. I guess that just messed with my head lol.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Oh yeah... i fully acknowledge it's an ad populum argument... And since i can't poll the majority of the world to prove it, i'm just left to hopefully suspect people find the things i listed as evil. It's seems to be true and i would be willing to bet it is... but that's about all i can do.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Well i told you how i define evil. So i strictly go off my own definition. I am well aware people, even maybe most, don't look at good/evil like i do. If i were to make a future bet with you, i would say people will realize what they are doing to non-violent drug offenders isn't good. I don't know that... it only fits in my definition that they aren't evil people. I'm only consistent as far as my own definition of good and evil go. I've just found that most people would agree those i listed are evil... however, they most certainly don't apply it like i do. I never said people interpret it as i do in the vast majority, just that a vast majority would agree those things are evil.So you agree with the majority about slavery but disagree with the majority about drug addiction and yet you feel that you are taking the moral position in both cases?
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Yeah... i agree. I don't think there is anything objective that i can prove or illustrate even. It all seems like a consequence of something personal such as empathy. Even slavery, "imprisonment" therefore evil, was once looked at as good. If we never evolved out of it... it may still be something good. It's interesting to me that we noticed it's evil eventually and how many people died to prove it is. I can't tell you there is any objective truth to it... i don't even believe there is... but i can tell you the evils i listed are evil by majority in most cases. That's really all i care about bc my only want in society is for more people to notice those are the top three things we should be fighting against. It's a prison reform thing, the obfuscation of evil i believe is what has lead to unjust prison sentences. A drug addict needs help more than anything, not to ruin his/her life by making them a felon... which i would bet is what leads to death for most addicts. But a lot of people think drug addicts are something evil... it's correlative to the same mistake we made with slaves in my opinion in regards to how our society treats them.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
If good and evil are truly "only" subjective than yes. But, there is a hint of objectivity to it. I don't think beating your kid to a bloody mess has ever been viewed as something good to a majority. Hitting for punishment however can be viewed as good... why are humans like that, i don't know at this point. Is there something objective going on? Or does the rule of not wanting it happen to you what gives it this sense of objectivity? Empathy too?By that argument if enough people believed that abusing children was desirable then it would be "good"?
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Okay now that's a jump. I can agree with you that there could be an ultimate reality that encompasses all realities. Fine, i can follow that logic. I personally attribute this ultimate reality to a higher consciousness, but in doing so, i also know that it's a jump to do so... why is the jump logical in your opinion?The Ultimate Reality is God.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
In that sense i go with the majority. Someone that finds showing skin to be more evil than rape is less than someone that thinks rape is more evil. The three i listed i would say the majority find more evil than other things. Of course i'm not basing this off any studies... i don't know if one exists, but i would bet the evils i listed have more of a fan base in defining them as evil.But without a standard someone could argue that showing skin is "more evil". That is my real point. That is why saying rape is evil isn't enough we need to know what about it makes it evil.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
I don't know if you read how i tied forgiveness into realizing bad vs. evil, but that is how i distinguish the two. If someone stole from you, given the facts, you can likely forgive them. If they stole your wedding ring, it will be harder to forgive but you can still forgive them. If they stole an idea from you and used it to succeed leaving you to become homeless... you may never forgive them or it's really hard to... at that point i would say it's closing in on being evil. Although this was a bad example bc i think theft is mostly something bad and not evil do to the fact in the vast majority of cases you can forgive.Forgiveness is one aspect of all that must be assumed in compensation for evil.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
That's definitely true. However, i'm sure the three listed evils i mentioned people find them harsher than something else they find evil like showing skin in muslim countries. That can be forgiven. Raping said person for showing skin cannot be forgiven or hard to forgive. That is why i use forgiveness as a measure. At least, that's how i describe it to someone that thinks everything is evil... it illustrates the different degrees.Only that everyone might be evil from someone's point of view.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Political systems often demonize others as well. And just to be clear drone strikes kill their fair share of inocent people.
Yes political systems do, but i don't think to the same level as religions and cults. Someone might think a leftist is ignorant and misinformed, but most wouldn't think said leftist is the spawn of satan and must be eradicated... unless of course said righty is religious. But i know what you mean, politics does divide people and the people that are quite literally dunces may look at the other political party as evil. The scary thing about religions and cults are that even smart people can fall under its effect.
Drones do kill people... that is evil. Not sure what you were trying to clarify there.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
So you just basically defined reality. However, how do you know this reality is the ultimate and only one? I believe there are multiple universes and that there are realities that are even more "ultimate" to this one. But since that isn't proven and only a hypothesis i'll only ask you this: What would it do to your definition of ultimate reality if there is more than one reality?
Besides that... You basically just said that this reality is the ultimate one. Although i don't agree, i can't prove my suspicions so i'll just say okay this reality is the one and only. Great, so we got that. How does god fit into the definition of Ultimate Reality? The way you are definition it doesn't suppose any god. And if i were to add a god into it... it can literally be any god.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
What does The Ultimate Reality mean?There is plenty that can be known about God simply by contemplating what The Ultimate Reality means.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Remember the way i look at it doesn't make it right... it's still an evil act. It depends on the specifics if there is any underlining good in doing the evil act. If you have to kill 10 people to save a bunch of high school girls they were trying to kidnap to sell on the sex market than i would say the evil act is justified. Unfortunately there are situations where we just have to be evil. It's ultimately interesting to me that almost every human is capable of this evil given the right situation. Some people are even more malleable which isn't a good thing... that's how you get people that strap bombs to themselves to go to heaven... To be honest, i only see religions and cults take evil to another level in the fact that they can justify killing another that, by most standards, is innocent and good. But they have found ways to brainwash people in killing good people by obfuscating the definition of evil... i.e. "none believers are evil." That's one way i meant earlier before i digressed that these groups can make evil worse.
My moral judgments are subjective but i truly think on a personal level they are almost objective... well, never objective but most people would think the three are evil acts. It's just this world that has gone to hell in a hand basket in regards to what counts as evil. I think groups like religions and cults are the biggest contributors to jacking the definition of what counts as evil. I really can't think of too many secular views that aren't cultish that justify killing good people by painting them as evil for not being one of them. In today's age anyways. Maybe Viking days but even then these cults played a factor.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Oh... right... I personally think knowledge and understanding the "ultimate reality" gets you closer to it and helps you even empathize with it (a thing lacking in many that have an imprisoned version of god)... but what do i know. I'm just a peasant that values knowledge and understanding. If you can't define your god then i have no interest in willful blind faith. To me, it's like finding a friend and not caring to know him/her.My faith is in The Ultimate Reality, not knowledge.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Yeah it doesn't seem like people care if it is evil or not. My bet is that on a personal level the vast majority would agree it's evil. They just justify it's for good when they do decide to go to war or kill others. Humans are weird creatures.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
I think the vast majority, i would bet above 90% of people in this world, would at the very least consider the things i've listed as bad if not evil. I think where the moral arguments start to become choppy is when you introduce what religion finds as evil. Religion finds stealing evil, sex evil, lying evil, etc... in any case, it's evil. That in my opinion is what muddies the water and makes it so difficult to talk about morality since the vast majority of the world is religious. When there is a large group of people that think homosexuality is just as evil as rape. People like this have obfuscated the definition of evil and make the conversation difficult... i also personally think that it contributes to the true evils by being a distraction but i digress (different topic). What i've listed as evil is most definitely subjective in the end of the day... but, it seems objective in that a vast majority would agree that those things are not cool when done to them or even someone else.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Well if you can't agree on the standards that i have already laid out then you just see things differently. I mentioned it's subjective at that point.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
But those evils are only evil in as much as you wouldn't want them to happen to you?
Yeah, that would be a big part of it.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
For the most part, but you have to clarify this standard. Bc some people truly might not care if they got raped or tortured and actually like it. That's why i don't say it like that and go more into illustrating how it's better understood through degrees of the three evils i listed.So is your subjective standard that you should not do what you wouldn't want to be done to You?
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Murdering a murder is committing evil to punish evil. In that it would be evil/good. It's still evil, but also good that something that is only evil got erased. Killing would still be evil. War is evil. But apply the above, one could be good and evil where one is usually only evil. For instance, if the war is to topple a ruler that is only evil... kills, imprisons, rapes, etc. Then something good is committing evil to stop that pure evil. The soldiers that fight for that pure evil would need to be evaluated individually. Why are they personally fighting for that evil? If it is so they don't get killed by said ruler then they are also committing evil for a good... to save their own lives. But they are still committing evil when they are killing another. There is also degrees of this and i think the degrees can be best described by forgiveness or thoughts of forgiveness. If one learns the solider's family would have been killed if he didn't fight... then even if he/she cannot be forgiven... a sense of understanding or a thought of forgiveness could follow. Pure evil however cannot be forgiven or it would be extremely very hard to forgive.
Is any of this objective? I don't know if i could truly say that with certainty. We are the ones defining all this which would always point towards subjectivity. However, i think we would mostly always define the above mentioned evils as evil. Even someone that is evil would think it's evil if someone murdered them (well they wouldn't know), or did some form of imprisonment or rape. There could be degrees of it... maybe someone wants to be raped, in which case that would turn it good for them, but stay as evil for the one committing it. (*Edit: I just noticed this last example is tricky. The one committing it technically wouldn't be committing evil if the person wanted to be raped. It's an example of the evil/good in that case.)
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Whatever The Ultimate Reality is, that is God.
"Whatever" it is? You are insinuating you don't know?
As I originally stated, what I say isn't good enough for you. You want me to fabricate something so that I can present you a created thing as God. That isn't what I believe, that is what you believe. I am not a pagan.
Again... so are you admitting that you can't define this god... you just think / know it is all of reality?
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
I define evil as malicious imprisonment, rape and murder and all the degrees thereof. For instance, torture would be imprisonment and possibly murder. Mentally harming another would be imprisonment. Beating someone up would be imprisonment. Sexual assault would fall under rape. Etc.
Lying to someone would fall under imprisonment but without malice it would just be bad not evil. Lying to someone resulting in death, rape, etc.. would fall under evil. That's how i distinguish the differences.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
I tell you what my faith is and you won't believe me or it isn't good enough.
No you don't... that's your problem. You don't tell me anything other than supreme this or that. You aren't defining what you believe therefore i have no clue what your talking about to even begin to think if it's good enough or not.
My God is The Supreme and Ultimate Reality.My religion is to abide in The Truth.
Vague, vague and vague. I also believe 'my god' is the ultimate reality. But i can define what i mean, you can't.
I believe that everyone is wrong and that God is right. I believe that anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.
How can you believe this when you can't even define your god?
The everyday Christian is in the classroom just like everybody else.
The everyday Christian is ignorant and anything but in a classroom setting... i would correlate it to a cult more than a classroom. They only know what is preached to them. The everyday Christian doesn't scrupulously study spirituality or even their own faith for that matter.
“Most Americans don’t know first-hand the overall story of the Bible—because they rarely pick it up,” McConnell said. “Even among worship attendees less than half read the Bible daily. The only time most Americans hear from the Bible is when someone else is reading it.”
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Why should I explain myself to someone calling me a liar?
I'm not calling you a liar... i'm saying you are being ambiguous and confusing to deflect from examining this god you believe in.
I am very open about my believe. I am very secure in what I believe.
Good for you, so am i. The difference is i can explain my beliefs and how they could be a possibility. I have attempted at letting you explain yours but since it truly isn't yours... i don't think you are able to and must fall back on a god of gaps type mentality. That's why you deflect.
I also don't believe you care. You, after all, have it all figured out.
I don't have it all figured out however i am quite obsessed in figuring it out. This has lead me to examine as many beliefs and philosophies as i've been able to. And the fact is... there are too many interpretations to learn them all... that's why i asked you about yours... but, you don't shoot straight buddy... that's your problem... thinking i don't understand or care is your misconception.
I am an unashamed Christian. I don't believe for a second you know what that means.
This could mean thousands of things and is still ambiguous. Are you the type that thinks Jesus turned water into wine or walked on water literally... or are you the type that thinks that is a metaphor, simile, analogy, etc... or are you the type that thinks that happened in another universe... or are you the type that thinks everything in the Bible mainly happened in heaven or another universe? etc... ad nauseam. Although, i am most interested in how you define god bc yeah... i think i understand "god" better than most... at least much better than those that call themselves Christian. I don't truly think you are like the everyday Christian, however, i have no reason so far to not suspect you are.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
I am not playing word games.
Yes you are. I personally think this is a deflection tactic. You are focusing on mixing words up and pretending like we just don't get it. This is to avoid the deeper questions of actually saying what you believe bc i just don't think you are capable in elucidating. I believe god is x. Like i've told you for me personally -- I believe "god" equals a higher consciousness. An eternal incorporeal consciousness and everything is a manifestation happening within this source. Succinctly done. Now you understand what i believe and you can lambaste it away. My job is to justify why i find this entity to be possible and i welcome any refutation bc i can explain myself as much as it's possible. But we can't even get there with you bc you would rather give us ambiguous sentences and terms. To me this comes across as you not being confident enough to address and justify your belief... bc i think you know where it leads assuming it leads to Christianity... which is just another fallible human creation and couldn't be any further from the Truth of the Absolute Reality. So you'd rather avoid getting there and just play word games. If i am wrong... then cut the games and explain yourself.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
The Ultimate Reality is God.
I can agree with a pantheistic view that everything is a manifestation of a higher consciousness.
The Ultimate Reality is whatever The Ultimate Reality is
This doesn't make sense. If we are saying everything is a manifestation of a higher consciousness then that is what it is. You don't need to try and get fancy with explaining it. Gold is right in that you don't say much when it comes to explaining it but then you assert implications that contradict what you are saying. You don't have to do that. All you can say is that it's possible that there is a infinite consciousness which we are all a part of. Call it god, i'll call it the source. Other than that... you are just playing word games in trying to explain it. "The source is whatever the source is" ... okay. Does that make sense to you? All i have to say is that there is a source... source being a higher infinite consciousness.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
The Ultimate Reality is by definition One.
I agree with you until you start defining things and talking about this god's attributes, etc. You say it does this or that, it is this or that. It's simple if you just keep it as all of reality is god. In a pantheistic sense, i agree. I agree that there is one universal multiversal consciousness and we are all part of this source. However, i don't agree that the Bible is the only means of understanding this source's spiritual reality. Also i don't agree that this source is a "who" ... it's everything therefore isn't any kind of individual. It doesn't answer prayers, it doesn't care what we do, it doesn't dictate heaven or hell, etc. When we die and become a part of it... we also become everything. Then, in order to have our next experience, we individualize within the source again and start moving away from being this source to make another individual journey in this realm or another realm where gnomes are real if one wants. So, this source is just the platform to all of our experiencing.
And because of this, God is savior of all worlds.
And there you go falling off your definition of this god; making no sense. It's everything, it knows everything, it knows every beginning and end... how does it save the world when it knows every characters story? It knows all of our destinies, it knows all of good and all of evil. It knows where this world started and where it will end. It doesn't save anything bc it is everything. Every wrong and right. Every animal and human. Every war and peace time. We are a book it has read a thousand times infinity times. There is nothing or no one it saves... saving yourself is up to you - the individual observer having this corporeal existence.. not the source.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
I personally think all of the above exist. But you forgot to put (s) next to god. God(s) exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Intelligent design has a process. Creationism is something random's will. ID would implicate everything was pieced together and evolved to get to this point. Creationism would implicate a wave of a wand and poof. Also, ID doesn't have to be just one entity, it could be more than one working to create which i like to have to possibility in the mix. It's mainly that ID is a process that each atom was intelligently directed and put together to make a larger creation. It's like finding the material, putting the computer together, making the computer stronger, then having complex video games vs. i thought of a game and poof here it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Same here. In degrees, creationism ranks last with me. First it's intelligent design where there was a process to get us here... and second would be accidental. After those it would be a mixture of ID and accident, and last possibly creationism... although it's very unlikely to me it is creationism. There is zero evidence and even observational in our reality... creation has a process.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I believe in intelligent design... not creationism.what is your gut feeling? Is it designed?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I think it is the same for both, 50/50. Fine-tune makes sense in design. Especially since the closer you get to us, the subjects of the painting, it gets more fine tuned. That is the same with art... the closer you get to the subjects, it's more detailed. So... it's definitely curious. But given how big our universe is and the possibility of multi-verses... accidentally could be just as likely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I have some criticisms. 1) it very likely could have accidentally happened... actually, the Stonehenge part is proof of accidents bc i doubt the ancients had this relationship on their minds when they made Stonehenge so that also could be an accident. Or, maybe they were just smart and understood the implications of building it that way... either way, it's all possible to have a natural explanation.
2) This sorta falls under the fine tune argument. It's curious that things are fine-tuned for life, but if they weren't we wouldn't be here. That is why i think it is a weak argument. Sure things are fine-tuned for life... but if they weren't we wouldn't exist. Therefore, out of millions of tries and one being right sounds like mere chance to me... or at least, could also be a coincidence as much as the latter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Don't misunderstand me, Outplayz. I'm not saying I think all claims of the supernatural are negative, but that I have no evidence to think they have merit. If you have evidence of something but can't share it, only one of us has evidence. That is not being close minded, but accepting evidence available to me to inform a coherent conception of reality.
Oh i'm sorry if anything came off as insinuating that your close-minded. I was actually being very cognizant to not say that bc i don't believe you are. I find nothing wrong in being a skeptic. Even myself, having gone through experiences, every time i've heard someone's impossible story i found myself doubting it. There is only a handful or less people i can think of that told me about a spiritual experience that i believed confidently. I am at default also a skeptic.
This is how i look at it. You have never experienced something so i understand the level of skepticism you have. Truly if i never experienced anything i would be the same. But i have so this shapes me differently in a way. Bc i am still guessing for convenience's sake. The experiences i had were pretty profound. Even if i can think critically of them i know i am making stuff up just to have an explanation. The way i look at it is that there is no way i am the only one. It could be, but i doubt i am the only one that has had profound unanswered experiences. So if there are other people that have had profound experiences as well to my level... and a lot of them, it's really hard for me to not consider it. I am assuming that others must have had profound experiences but i don't truly know. It could be somehow i am the only one... but, i don't like the thought of that... it would weird me out even more than i am already for having these experiences. So... i really can't look at it in any other way. But if others have had profound experiences... then it is unquestionable that something is going on, to me. I'm forced to believe this way and consider people's claims.
This answers your merit thing. I have really good reason to believe there is evidence. I get how hard it is for you to change who you are. Your life is shaped just as mine from your experiences or lack thereof in this situation. In one way, this is something really interesting to the point i can find people that have had experiences. I am actually pretty good after listening to someone for a little and their appearance, kinda knowing they may have had an experience. Bc it shapes you differently if it is profound... you can't stop thinking about it. It's kinda like mental abuse to be honest. One question is why do some experience it and some don't? I don't know... i have some ideas though but that's a different topic. With that said, it sounds like you are saying bc you haven't experienced it... then no one has, and/or you can't trust that they have to conclude it's any kind of evidence.
This is another way i am shaped differently. Not only can i sorta tell someone has, i hunt them down, and this is probably the only topic i care about asking a person when i meet them. I have asked a lot of people.. honestly to put my own mind at ease. Although it still doesn't work bc i am skeptical of their stories even... but, i have heard some really crazy claims. I don't mean to assume, but i don't think this specific question is one that is on your mind when you meet people... i mean, why would it be. Unlike you i'm obsessed with asking people just to get confirmation i am not the only person... and, it doesn't look like i am. I challenge you to make this topic one you ask if you are comfortable too. I have ever since i was old enough to ask... bc my first experiences were as far back as i can remember. So i've asked a lot of people in person which of course helps me read them as well. Although i can't tell if someone is truly lying... the frequency i've heard a claim, and some claims pretty profound... followed by tears in one i specifically remember... it's really hard for me to say there is zero evidence... and especially if i add to this everyone i haven't met. Weak evidence, i admit that... but evidence none the less.
Also, dont be so quick to say I cant understand where you are coming from. We have much in common - just not this! 😉
Well, i am trying to paint a picture of where i am coming from just so you understand why i truly believe there is evidence. I understand why you don't have this in common with me, but your OP asks why am i convinced... i feel like i should explain that as succinctly as i can. But to be honest it is hard to elucidate bc i know how this has shaped me differently than it has you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
So, testimony of experiences with god or the supernatural should not be accepted as evidence personal or otherwise, imo. ...present company excluded, of course! 😉😉😉
Again, this is if you are of the opinion that every single claim of the supernatural is a negative. Remember, technically only one needs to be true for there to be something to it. Should it be accepted as evidence, i would say yes... should it be accepted as proof, i would say no of course. Could there be a natural explanation.. i acknowledge that could be a case. What i've witnessed i couldn't find one other than deceiving myself that it never happened though. But i'd rather not use my experiences as some kind of extra evidence here only that these things happen and i'm just one of these people claiming something.
I'm also very skeptical of many claims bc i've seen how a large portion of the population is easily deceived and/or manipulated. I mean, there are a good number of videos that claim street magicians are using the devil's power to do their tricks. I mean... come on. But just bc these type of people exist, and i would admit muddy the water, i still think saying "all" of these experiences are negatives is just... not the right answer.
But of course you are the one weighing this so it's up to you. The thing about this kind of evidence is that it doesn't lead to any concrete conclusions. I can't just sit here and prove it to you. Although one of my experiences has corroboration... but that's never going to get to you anyways since we will likely never meet. But i'd like to say... by you saying "all" these claims are negatives you are alienating people that really could have gone through something. At least for me, it leaves me in an uncomfortable position bc i want to tell you that you're wrong... but i can't bc i know i can't prove anything. So just know that by saying they are all wrong, you've already shut yourself off to even testing the waters to see where it leads. By definition that would make you a skeptic, and i am fine with that... i think there should be more in this world. You'll just never understand where people like me are coming from.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
I am being honest with myself and i am not the only person that has had experiences...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Even if out of the millions of claims there has been only "one" claim where a person experiences paranormal phenomena is true... that is evidence, and further proof of it at least to that one individual. That was the point of that number... not that i believe that is the number.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
That's why i said it isn't a preferred avenue of evidence. At this point, it's all we have. Therefore, all you can do is evaluate the person and his/her claim. But you should for the most part be able to tell if they have a mental disorder, are liars, were on drugs, mistaken, lying, deceived etc ("negatives"). If they seem very serious and don't seem to be the type to lie... you can take their claim for whatever you want. This evidence isn't the type of evidence to make one sure... it's far from proof. Although, it may be proof to the person that witnessed it... everyone else can only weigh it how they see fit.
What i am saying is that while i believe many people could be negatives. There is a portion of people that aren't those negatives and actually are good people telling you what they witnessed. To me, it's unlikely that everyone that has witnessed something paranormal be a negative person. For every lets say 20 people that are negative, 1 is potentially positive. Or you may think that ratio is less, all i'm saying is i doubt every single claim comes from negative people. All you need, out of every claim that has ever been said, is one person that is a positive. The implications of just one person witnessing paranormal phenomena is pretty huge.
I always phrase spiritual phenomena as more than likely than not - never sure. From what i see and hear, it sounds like to me there is evidence to at the very least suspect something is going on that we aren't aware of, and further, that this something seems to exhibit intelligence in some claims. If you are of the opinion every single one of these claims are not true... then, that is how you weighed the evidence. I personally think that is not a fair assessment of the evidence, but then again... i can't prove it. But for me there is proof (although i don't see it that way) as well since i have experienced stuff so i am privy to this bias. That is why i am sure not everyone is lying bc i'm not. I guess all you can do is decide if you think everyone is lying/mistaken and i understand why you would think so... i probably would if i never experienced anything. Or, you can be curious to what these claims could implicate. That's where i'm at.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
You ask them to explain what they saw and evaluate the claim, and most importantly, the person. Thereafter you can decide if it qualifies as evidence or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
I've shared my experiences. If you think they are something i could mistake... then fine that's your decision. I was there and witnessed it. They didn't come across as mistakes and in one i have corroboration that it wasn't a mistake. So if the rest of them are, one wasn't. This really isn't about my experiences however. There are thousand of other claims. Me experiencing only brings me to the belief that not everyone is lying/mistaken. If you think "everyone" is... then that's a position i don't agree with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Not necessarily. Was it truly a gnome or something else? But if they truly did witness a gnome then yes... that would be evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
That's all good. But i am pretty sure a nutrivore diet is almost as healthy... bc that is lean meats and fatty meats but all natural... with a raw veggie and fruit diet. I guess it just adds meat to the diet you prefer but no processed stuff. It makes me feel the best anyways. There just isn't any proof of it yet since it hasn't been studied like the latter has. One thing i found interesting about cutting meat from your diet is that you would age slower. There is something in meats that promote the aging cells or whatever. But i'm Persian and we age well in general so i'm hoping my genes can step up for me there. You might be interested in these Podcasts... they just happened:
This is a raw foods guy vs. a meat promoting guy:
These are two scientists that are studying diets like the keto diet and the other guy has a cool eat whatever diet with the caveat of keeping track of what you eat:
The second one will give you all the information on what we know about meats so far from studies. The first one you might like bc it is a debate bw a meat eater and a vegan.
Created: