Printable View
Looking for that meaning ((the one that probably doesn't exist)) is what keeps alot of people going, and if the meaning is to keep going, then looking for a different meaning is a really good idea. lol. Physicists seem to think the meaning is to become god, to control the universe. To wiggle the vibratory strings that compose us all in such a way that they can control whats happens in this particular illusion. -laughs- I hope we get there.Quote:
Originally Posted by CocaCola
I appologize If I offended you or anyone, that wasn't actually my intention believe it or not. I think we've covered the fact that there will always be people believing and not believing in religion. I'm done with this thread though. :)
It's all so simple really... and there is no improbability of a "Guy" who "Lives" some place in the "Sky". (I really don't know why people decided he would be in the sky and not below ground... more bullshit, ya know? Oh wait, but GOD TODL IT SO... but how? OMG FUCK IT, it's too complicated :P)
I bet there are (or are least were.. maybe) religions that think god is underground.
We bury our dead. I wonder what started that trend.
Its cool. Hopefully one day we won't be able to say there are people believing in religion. It could happen. The day all people think for themselves and create their own realities. Play god all by themselves, with no need to admire an external one. Who knows. Thanks for the apology, as you did offend me, lol. And I apologize too for calling you a kid, I think we both weren't being accepting enough and just fed off eachother or something. peas.Quote:
Originally Posted by 420adultter
The concept of God is just to hard to fathom, like love... maybe that is why we are always in pursuit of it. but I'm done... that is it. It's the only reasonable explaination, to me.
I was thinking the same thing... we are what we make of ourselfs sub-concsiously. How do you know what you see as red, I see as Orange... or just something radically different. This can account for dreams... seeing into another reality? Seeing yourself as someone else perceives you? I don't know...
Love, love, love.
Love, love, love.
Love, love, love.
There's nothing you can do that can't be done.
Nothing you can sing that can't be sung.
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game.
It's easy.
Nothing you can make that can't be made.
No one you can save that can't be saved.
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be you in time.
It's easy.
All you need is love.
All you need is love.
All you need is love, love.
Love is all you need.
All you need is love.
All you need is love.
All you need is love, love.
Love is all you need.
Nothing you can know that isn't known.
Nothing you can see that isn't shown.
Nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be.
It's easy.
All you need is love.
All you need is love.
All you need is love, love.
Love is all you need.
All you need is love (all together, now!)
All you need is love. (everybody!)
All you need is love, love.
Love is all you need (love is all you need).
Yee-hai!
Oh yeah!
She loves you, yeah yeah yeah.
She loves you, yeah yeah yeah.
The thing is... maybe certain religions are on to something... I see religious people as being unreasonable because God defies reason. But there is no reason for existing... we just do... I mean, unless that reason is to become God. Goddamn!1
people choose their own meaning, there probably isn't even a universal meaning beyond progress, and each person has their own definition of progress. Timothy Leary tried to hook his brain up to a computer to keep it alive after death, phayld though. I think we'll succeed eventually though, if some clumsy scientist doesn't accidently drop one of the many superviruses we create first.
Two things would make us our definition of god, having an eternal conciousness, and being able to create conciousness at will. We're working on both. Because if 'artificial' conciousness made with a computer imitates 'real' conciousness in every way.. how is it artificial?
Lets play the game matrix style baby.
You and me, man... lol I know exactly what you're saying... that is what I believe adn what I ahve believed for some time now. I was even discussing with a friend (Who talks with me about this shit alot) and said that what if we're in the matrix? lol, I mean, who is to say? :D
lol, people on the same wavelength are always cool. Sorry though, I don't think we can rule the matrix together. I think if there are gonna be two people ruling it, it's gotta be a guy conciousness and a girl conciousness. For traditions sake or something.
And we are in the matrix, the creators of the matrix made the movie and made it somewhat cheesy so they could get a real big kick out of all the people saying "interesting but unrealistic..."
okay maybe not.. it was an interesting thought, but unrealistic.
lol, ignorance is bliss
Wow.... reading that was amazing. This is one deep conversation, but as someone said earlier, you can go insane pondering these factors. I agree with everything you said daisy. Just think if you thought about this on shrooms lol!
I'm pretty sure it all stemmed from shrooms... this is some pretty beshroomed banter in this thread.
Psychadellics caused all my original well thought out religious questioning. Before I liked the drugs, my questioning was just rebellion, but before I tried the good stuff ((pot, salvia, shrooms, hb woodrose)) my brain never really went too deep into why I didn't believe in god. It was more of "Well... i dont c him. So hes fake." But then one day I was smoking pot and thinking about it and I was like "Wow, that's a really infant like way of thinking of things.. mommy walked behind a wall! she's gone forever!" kinda thing.
beshroomed banters where it's at.
Sure, if Mommy walked behind a wall, you had actually seen her. You had real evidence that she exists. But if you don't have the slightest shred of evidence that fastastical beings like Santa Claus, leprechauns, unicords or gods exist, then it's only logical to assume that they don't.
What's really infantile, if you ask me, is leaning on an invisible friend/father figure during times of trouble rather than taking responsibility for your own life and your own problems.
BAM! IT IS ILLOGICAL TO EVER ASSUME!
ok that's my digs.
logic is illogical if it is based on ASSUMING something doesnt exist because you dont have proof.
logic is illogical by being based on assumptions and perceptions.
maybe emotional logic is even more redundant, but at least im going with my gut. it just seems more logical to go with instinct over "logic".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf
what? no it's not. it only becomes logical to believe something exists when there's pertinent evidence pointing to it's existence. If that logic were true, then it's illogical to assume there's no such thing as leprechaun's, fairies, klingons, mole people, and giant space jelly fish that roam the galaxy feasting on stars. anything my imagination can possibly conjure up can't be discounted by such logic. and until there's a logical reason, with real evidence towards god's existence, there's absolutely no basis for believing in his existence.
Quite the contrary. We make thousands and thousands of assumptions during our day, and most of them are founded on logic. For example, when I bite into a banana, I assume that it's not going to be crunchy. This is an assumption; I have no way of disproving the idea that someone has secretly created a crunchy species of banana and slipped me one. But based on my past experiences and the extreme unlikelihood of the alternatives, I'm going to assume that any banana I bite into is going to be soft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf
When I talk to my mother, I assume it's really my mother. I have no way of disproving the idea that she was abducted by aliens and replaced with a robot that looks and acts exactly like her, while in reality she is being held in Area 51 for experimentation. But I assume it's really her, and it's a logical assumption, since any alternative explanation of why there is a being that looks and acts like my mother is so unlikely that it would need substantial evidence to back it up if anybody is going to take it seriously.
So it's completely illogical to assume that there is no colony of turtles living at the center of the earth? I bet you assume that there is no such colony of turtles, but I bet you don't have any proof that the colony of turtles is not there.Quote:
logic is illogical if it is based on ASSUMING something doesnt exist because you dont have proof.
Logic is illogical? That's like saying red is green, or up is down. It doesn't make any sense to say logic is illogical. Assumptions and perceptions are all we have to go on in this world. We are given sensory input, and we have to figure out how the world works to the best of our knowledge. This is done by observing the given evidence and coming up with theories (models of how the world works) that explain the evidence in the most plausible way. Inventing beings and saying they have to exist just because nobody has proven that they don't exist doesn't get us anywhere.Quote:
logic is illogical by being based on assumptions and perceptions.
Huh? How is it "more logical" to choose intuition over logic? That's less logical and more intuitional. Less logic = less logical. More logic = more logical. Please try to pay attention to the language we've all agreed upon.Quote:
maybe emotional logic is even more redundant, but at least im going with my gut. it just seems more logical to go with instinct over "logic".
Let me put it another way. "Only mom ever comes around. I must not have a dad!" But logic tells us, in order for us to exist we must have been created (by mommy AND daddy, so even if we can't see dad, he's around, we know he's around and it would be dumb to assume he's not)Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneironaut
Well, first of all, no one did ask you. ((lawl.)) And second, Yeah, you're right big time about it being immature to not take responsibility for you own actions, good or bad. No one here is saying its not. You aren't replying to the real argument that's been made though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneironaut
I don't believe in a god (besides that the universe may be god seeing as its probably infinite and can clearly create conciousness, whether by chance or not, it's done it, and those are my only pre-requisites for god) but don't you think its rather godly in the first place for something to exist without creation? Which the orinal existant thing has done.
Did coincidence create the existence of existence? What created physics, the universe, the orignial energy? We'll never know, I doubt it was some guy outside space and time making it all like a painter makes a painting, but it is really fucking weird, no? If we're going to use observational logic, we know that things don't just pop up outta nowhere.
I'm not making the argument that theres some invisible guy with an iron mallet carving all the mountains, everyone seems to forget that. I'm just saying, things don't just appear in our experience, so for the orinal physical thing that the universe as a whole spawns from to have just appeared, thats pretty miraculous in itself. The universe is more likely to be a godlike figure then something outside of it directing it all.
Would it also no be only logical to assume that something exists when there's evidence pointing to its creation. Something was the original uncreated. Though I doubt its some god who knows when we're naughty or nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdevious
If you think back far enough, the VERY first 'thing' to exist, could not have been created, but simply existed. Godlike, though not the omnipotent knows when your naughty and nice god religions speak of, but still something that can defy all possible observations.
No, not quite. It seems that way based on our limited experience, but if you go back you're eventually going to hit a dead end in the chain of creators. To put it another way, if by logic everybody that exists must have been "created" somehow, then something must have also created the creator. And something must have created that creator. And so forth. At some point the chain has to be broken, and the theory of evolution provides an elegant and scientific solution to that problem, at least as far as life is concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by ADaisyChain
I wasn't replying to anything with that statement. I was just stating an opinion of mine.Quote:
Well, first of all, no one did ask you. ((lawl.)) And second, Yeah, you're right big time about it being immature to not take responsibility for you own actions, good or bad. No one here is saying its not. You aren't replying to the real argument that's been made though.
Yeah, I've often been perplexed by the question of why there is something instead of nothing. But proposing a "creation" by a pre-existing God doesn't really solve that problem. I have a couple hypotheses on why this might be. Granted, they're just wild guesses, but at least I admit it when I'm just guessing about the origin of the universe. It goes something like this:Quote:
I don't believe in a god (besides that the universe may be god seeing as its probably infinite and can clearly create conciousness, whether by chance or not, it's done it, and those are my only pre-requisites for god) but don't you think its rather godly in the first place for something to exist without creation? Which the orinal existant thing has done.
At the quantum level of our universe, everything is composed not of real entities but of probabilities. When we really try to examine the nature of a subatomic particle, what we find is not a concrete item but merely the probability that there is a particle at a particular location with a particular motion. The averages of all these probabilities, when viewed by creatures as large as ourselves, results in what we know as Newtonian physics. One interpretation of quantum mechanics, known as the "many worlds" interpretation, hypothesizes that a new universe is created for every possible outcome of every probability. There are a huge, maybe infinite, number of other worlds out there besides our own, with their own outcomes of every probability in all of history. So maybe originally there was an equal probability of there being nothing as there being something, and we happen to live in a world in which the latter probability was selected.
Or perhaps we are experiencing nothingness. Maybe, if you add up all the mathematical equations in the universe, when you add up all the matter and anti-matter, everything reduces to zero. To put it in other words: one plus negative one equals nothing, and we're living in the "one" part of the universe.
I can't prove any of this, and I'm not going to pretend any of it is true when I honestly don't know, but it's something to think about.
Actually, we do see things popping up out of nowhere. In a vacuum, there are pairs of particles and antiparticles popping out of existence all the time, and then quickly annihilating each other. Sometimes, like near the edge of a black hole, the particles will be separated, with one particle being sucked into the black hole and the other particle being ejected away from it. That might help explain where our universe came from, but then we have to ask why these pairs of particles keep showing up. I honestly don't know, and I'm okay with that. We may never know. But the "God" idea has not answered any of these questions. In fact, it just brings up a whole plethora of new questions, even when people manage to come up with a somewhat coherent definition of the term.Quote:
Did coincidence create the existence of existence? What created physics, the universe, the orignial energy? We'll never know, I doubt it was some guy outside space and time making it all like a painter makes a painting, but it is really fucking weird, no? If we're going to use observational logic, we know that things don't just pop up outta nowhere.
What do you mean by "godlike figure"? If you just mean something really amazing, I would agree with you. The universe is an incredible thing. Just the sheer size of it is mind-boggling, not to mention its infinite beauty.Quote:
I'm not making the argument that theres some invisible guy with an iron mallet carving all the mountains, everyone seems to forget that. I'm just saying, things don't just appear in our experience, so for the orinal physical thing that the universe as a whole spawns from to have just appeared, thats pretty miraculous in itself. The universe is more likely to be a godlike figure then something outside of it directing it all.
I like to call it the "universe" or the "cosmos", because those words are less confusing than something like "God" which has thousands of different definitions for different people (plus lots of people say it can't be defined at all). But if you want to call it "God" and show reverence for all of existence, I have no problem with that worldview. Just as long as you're not claiming it has powers we don't observe in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADaisyChain
this phrase seems to be one I hear constantly in god debates: "everybody knows something can't come out of nothing". but in fact, most people think something can't come out of nothing, when in fact recent breakthrough's in quantum physics have shown that atoms, which are comprised of subatomic particles, are comprised of their own condensed energy. that energy in itself is shown to have consequencial influence on physical mass, but posesses no real substance in itself. hence, the line between that which exists and does not exist is actually a very fine one when you really begin to understand the nature of existence. or more precisely, that which "is" and "isn't" isn't necessarily such a distinctively separate entity. the very nature of space itself, the core of existence, what we fooled ourselves into believing is "nothing" as opposed to our "something", is the true nature of existence.
-laughs- You guys are great. My brain is working at a thousand miles per hour right now. I'll respond after I've thought more, but I'm really impressed. And yeah, by godlike figure I just mean something that is truly amazing and defies all current explanation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADaisyChain
so you mean like..... jessica alba naked?