| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
CosmicVibration 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 26 2014
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 1396
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: July 25 2020 at 10:10 |
I like that Einstein quote, but am not entirely sure what he
means.
What is the difference between cosmos and universe? Is cosmos a reference towards all of
creation, perhaps a multiverse and other undetected dimensions that may exist? Or is universe and cosmos synonymous and
interchangeable?
According to various ancient scriptures universes come and
go all the time. Our modern science is
strongly suggesting this as well; at least this universe may not be eternal and
have an expiration date.
There is theoretical science and experimental science. This should also be the basis of any
spiritual quest. All scriptures tell you
to go within yourself and seek the answers there. There are many ways, many tools and some crutches
that can be used for this. But it all
starts with mind control.. no, not trying to control someone else’s mind but
your own, which is probably harder.
Controlling the direction of one’s thoughts without
derailing is hard enough, but trying to just be, without any thoughts pooping, I
mean popping into your head is extremely difficult. How long can you last as an observer between
thoughts?
|
 |
Catcher10
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17845
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:21 |
 Logan wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
Logan wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.
I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.
This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website. |
I did a deeper a deeper dive on this I think in the Bertrand Russell thread, but belief as I've been saying I don't treat as synonymous knowledge (related and overlap, certainly, how much so and in what way depends on the angle).
Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife.
The question could be phrased as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" I wonder then how many would say I don't know.
Science isn't about proof, it's about evidence. Now I'm quoting myself from the Liberal Deacalogue thread since I got really into this there:
"The burden of proof is used in law and logic, and formal debate, and in logic means that one should adequately demonstrate a thing to be if not absolutely true, valid reasoning for the assertion (premises should be considered acceptable, relevant and sufficient enough to convince people who have no skin in the game that the conclusion/assertion logically follows), or something similar, been ages since I studied it. Of course what's considered valid etc. depends upon the person, but in logic (and mathematics) the propositions should support the conclusion in acceptable ways that should satisfy the standards of logical reasoning. Making arguments in formal academic logic does have fairly universal standards, and it is a closed-system of propositions (within particular frameworks).
In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof. It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation -- hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative -- they are subject to change."
I think you may be confusing the knowledge concept with belief.
When you say, "This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe" in your analogy you are asking a different category of question to the one I intended. Is there life outside of Earth? I would expect so, I think so, but I don't know (I remain ultimately agnostic on the matter). Do I believe that there is life outside of Earth? Okay, I must admit that I would want to answer in a more nuanced way than yes or no. It seems highly unlikely to me from a probability standpoint that we are alone in the universe. I tend to believe so, but that belief is held tentatively, and I recognise that we lack "proof". I feel that there is justification to believe, or assume, that there is life outside of Earth despite any lack of evidence. I think that it is a reasonable assumption, but it still an assumption.
Of course knowledge and belief are related concepts, and it is said that a sound belief is based on evidence as well, and the time to believe is when something can be demonstrated. Do I have sufficient evidence for a firm belief in extraterrestrial life, no. Am I convinced that there are extra terrestrials, I am reasonably convinced, but it is not held as a true belief because of the lack of evidence even if it is true.
There is a relationship between belief and knowledge of course and I do not mean to,or can I, fully separate the two. In fact knowledge is sometimes called justified true belief.
micky wrote:
Logan wrote:
don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....
|
yep! 
so "other" for me... much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...
yes and no man.. |
Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance.  |
Nahh, I'm not confusing "knowledge with belief". The word knowledge is to know....I don't know that there is an afterlife, never said I know there is or is not one. I do believe, but not know it exists.
This is getting too exacting of a conversation with having to define words like a lawyer does in trial...."what do you mean when you say NO..." LOL
The question is not scientific, I don't think you can apply that to the question or anyone's answer, because your right a belief is not science or math, its not exact....It's a hunch, a feeling and nothing more or less.
Those who do not believe in a God, do not know scientifically that a God does not actually exist...they merely believe or think or feel that no such being exists. Does a God exist? I don't know, but I believe a God exists...Is there an afterlife? I don't know, but I believe there is one. Everyone's answer here is valid, as nothing has been proven....yet. Carry on....  |
I'm not trying to prosecute you, I'd leave that to Ivan (though you are both Catholic so it might go well). Now Ivan and I, we had some major nit-picky arguments. Sorry if I seem dogged, just trying to understand your positions, (and perhaps better explain mine), as I would hope you would also be trying to do this with me and others. You've raised some points and at least one question and I have tried to address those adequately, and I hope that I've done so fairly. I have tried to understand your positions. I'm interested in all perspectives and I'm not trying to invalidate the belief or lack there-of. The question is not scientific, nor intended to be. It's of a philosophical nature. Not all who do not believe in a God also believe, think, or feel that a God does not exist. A point I've rattled on about too much already perhaps. There's a spectrum of belief-- some believe more strongly than others. Some are convinced that the after life exists, some are convinced that it doesn't, and there's a wide range of shades in between.
Some might never have even been exposed to a God concept and so have no basis to believe anything on the God front, others might be negative atheists (also known as weak, soft and agnostic atheism) who neither believe nor disbelieve in God. Ask them if they believe in God, and they are likely to say no. Ask them if they disbelieve in God and they are also likely to say no. As I've said, an individual can be in the position of neither believing nor disbelieving in the afterlife, which is akin to how one can not know whether or not there is an afterlife (be agnostic on the matter). My wife does not claim to know with certainty that God exists, but she is a believer. I can respect that. My atheism/agnosticism has been more of a problem for her than her theism has been for me, at least when we were dating (she being an ex-Catholic Born Again Christian). I tried to get her into a less orthodox/ more liberal-minded outlook by taking her to the Anglican Church that I liked to attend.
Whether or not everyone's answer is valid, not every argument is going to be valid or logically sound. Some arguments are more valid and logically sound than others (say deductively, that the conclusion logically follows from the premises). One can argue many metaphysical notions in a reasonable manner even if we cannot truly know something. |
That's a good post Greg, nothing there I would challenge, not that I want to do that anyway as I don't think this thread is about that or your question. My wife was also raised Catholic, we were married in our church before God and we both have a profound sense of appreciation for that moment (well more than a moment, heck an hour long mass then the marriage ceremony....I just wanted some wedding cake!! ). Ivan and I have not had any discussions on that, I really don't want to as they say religion and politics should not be discussed among friends  .
Cheers my friend...
|
|
|
|
BrufordFreak
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 25 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 8189
|
Post Options
Thanks(2)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:38 |
Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.
The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).
Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.
I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities. I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions. I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect.
We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.
|
|
Drew Fisher
https://progisaliveandwell.blogspot.com/
|
|
Snicolette
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 02 2018
Location: OR
Status: Offline
Points: 6039
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:39 |
I like the way you think, Drew.
|
|
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp
|
|
Psychedelic Paul
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 16 2019
Location: Nottingham, U.K
Status: Online
Points: 39999
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:52 |
BrufordFreak wrote:
Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.
The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).
Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.
I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities. I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions. I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect.
We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.
|
Those wise words sound like they could be the inspiration for a proggy 1970's-style concept album on the theme of higher consciousness. 
|
|
I prophesy disaster
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 31 2017
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 4778
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:58 |
Psychedelic Paul wrote:
BrufordFreak wrote:
Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.
The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).
Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.
I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities. I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions. I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect.
We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.
|
Those wise words sound like they could be the inspiration for a proggy 1970's-style concept album on the theme of higher consciousness. |
Or Maudlin Of The Well.
|
|
No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 15:47 |
|
I do not believe in an afterlife. I do not disbelieve in an afterlife. I hope there is an afterlife. I do not THINK there is an afterlife. Belief stems from people pretending to know what they do not know. I have never run across any indication that reality is altered in a metaphysical sense by belief beyond placebo effect. Thus, there is no need to prognosticate on whether there is an afterlife prior to experiencing it. I have not observed any compelling evidence of an afterlife. As there is no evidence of an afterlife, there is also no indication that there is a way to determine in advance whether an afterlife is automatically available to all or to select some few, or whether it is based on good behavior, faith, continual baptismal purification for the removal of sin (as with the beliefs of the Mandaeans), or whatever. Most mainstream Christians think that faith is the criterion for entry into an afterlife. Given what I have already said about belief, I clearly consider faith the least likely criterion. I am mainly concerned about life now up to and immediately prior to death and about others I leave behind.
|
|
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 16:12 |
Catcher10 wrote:
The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?Fear....? |
No, why do you choose to say Yes? Hope? Lack of belief is not abandonment of hope. Belief is a cognitive commitment. Lack of belief is simply an absence of a cognitive commitment. Not a denial. And yes, Fear (as in God-fearing and Hell) is something that Christianity has cultivated in concept. It is an act of projection to attribute it to the non-religious.
|
|
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
|
|
CosmicVibration
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 26 2014
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 1396
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 18:25 |
BrufordFreak wrote:
Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.
This is my understanding as well, thought generates energy and
energy coalesces into matter. However,
when the ego thinks the energy is usually miniscule and barely perturbs the
field.
Our true nature, our Soul, is omniscient and does not need to
think. It would be pointless, it already
knows everything. Thought is used only as a tool by the Soul to create anything
it wishes, even entire universes, the only limitation is imagination. Creation is the Souls playground..
The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).
Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.
Consciousness can exist without the material world but the
material world cannot exist without consciousness.
I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities. I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions. I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect.
We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.
I like the ocean
analogy.. God is the ocean and we are
waves on that Ocean, playing with storm of delusion. We think we are separate from the ocean, but
we are not. One day we will calm and unify
back with the ocean.
|
Edited by CosmicVibration - July 25 2020 at 18:27
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 18:33 |
BrufordFreak wrote:
Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.
The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).
Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.
I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities. I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions. I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect.
We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.
|
we have assumed control... we have assumed control... we have assumed control
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Catcher10
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17845
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 21:47 |
HackettFan wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?Fear....? |
No, why do you choose to say Yes? Hope? Lack of belief is not abandonment of hope. Belief is a cognitive commitment. Lack of belief is simply an absence of a cognitive commitment. Not a denial. And yes, Fear (as in God-fearing and Hell) is something that Christianity has cultivated in concept. It is an act of projection to attribute it to the non-religious.
|
I say Yes because I have zero fear in being wrong. Again, my question has nothing to do with religion. So if you say No you still have hope its Yes??
|
|
|
|
Snicolette
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 02 2018
Location: OR
Status: Offline
Points: 6039
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 22:06 |
I say yes, because I don't disbelieve in one.
|
|
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp
|
|
dr wu23
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20623
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 22:49 |
SteveG wrote:
Why wasn't "possibly" a choice?
I don't know anything as a fact, either way.
|
This.....an agnostic because I simply don 't know. The only tenable position imho.
|
|
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 35762
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 22:53 |
Catcher10 wrote:
Logan wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
Logan wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.
I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.
This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website. |
I did a deeper a deeper dive on this I think in the Bertrand Russell thread, but belief as I've been saying I don't treat as synonymous knowledge (related and overlap, certainly, how much so and in what way depends on the angle).
Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife.
The question could be phrased as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" I wonder then how many would say I don't know.
Science isn't about proof, it's about evidence. Now I'm quoting myself from the Liberal Deacalogue thread since I got really into this there:
"The burden of proof is used in law and logic, and formal debate, and in logic means that one should adequately demonstrate a thing to be if not absolutely true, valid reasoning for the assertion (premises should be considered acceptable, relevant and sufficient enough to convince people who have no skin in the game that the conclusion/assertion logically follows), or something similar, been ages since I studied it. Of course what's considered valid etc. depends upon the person, but in logic (and mathematics) the propositions should support the conclusion in acceptable ways that should satisfy the standards of logical reasoning. Making arguments in formal academic logic does have fairly universal standards, and it is a closed-system of propositions (within particular frameworks).
In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof. It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation -- hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative -- they are subject to change."
I think you may be confusing the knowledge concept with belief.
When you say, "This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe" in your analogy you are asking a different category of question to the one I intended. Is there life outside of Earth? I would expect so, I think so, but I don't know (I remain ultimately agnostic on the matter). Do I believe that there is life outside of Earth? Okay, I must admit that I would want to answer in a more nuanced way than yes or no. It seems highly unlikely to me from a probability standpoint that we are alone in the universe. I tend to believe so, but that belief is held tentatively, and I recognise that we lack "proof". I feel that there is justification to believe, or assume, that there is life outside of Earth despite any lack of evidence. I think that it is a reasonable assumption, but it still an assumption.
Of course knowledge and belief are related concepts, and it is said that a sound belief is based on evidence as well, and the time to believe is when something can be demonstrated. Do I have sufficient evidence for a firm belief in extraterrestrial life, no. Am I convinced that there are extra terrestrials, I am reasonably convinced, but it is not held as a true belief because of the lack of evidence even if it is true.
There is a relationship between belief and knowledge of course and I do not mean to,or can I, fully separate the two. In fact knowledge is sometimes called justified true belief.
micky wrote:
Logan wrote:
don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....
|
yep!
so "other" for me... much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...
yes and no man.. |
Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance. |
Nahh, I'm not confusing "knowledge with belief". The word knowledge is to know....I don't know that there is an afterlife, never said I know there is or is not one. I do believe, but not know it exists.
This is getting too exacting of a conversation with having to define words like a lawyer does in trial...."what do you mean when you say NO..." LOL
The question is not scientific, I don't think you can apply that to the question or anyone's answer, because your right a belief is not science or math, its not exact....It's a hunch, a feeling and nothing more or less.
Those who do not believe in a God, do not know scientifically that a God does not actually exist...they merely believe or think or feel that no such being exists. Does a God exist? I don't know, but I believe a God exists...Is there an afterlife? I don't know, but I believe there is one. Everyone's answer here is valid, as nothing has been proven....yet. Carry on.... |
I'm not trying to prosecute you, I'd leave that to Ivan (though you are both Catholic so it might go well). Now Ivan and I, we had some major nit-picky arguments. Sorry if I seem dogged, just trying to understand your positions, (and perhaps better explain mine), as I would hope you would also be trying to do this with me and others. You've raised some points and at least one question and I have tried to address those adequately, and I hope that I've done so fairly. I have tried to understand your positions. I'm interested in all perspectives and I'm not trying to invalidate the belief or lack there-of. The question is not scientific, nor intended to be. It's of a philosophical nature. Not all who do not believe in a God also believe, think, or feel that a God does not exist. A point I've rattled on about too much already perhaps. There's a spectrum of belief-- some believe more strongly than others. Some are convinced that the after life exists, some are convinced that it doesn't, and there's a wide range of shades in between.
Some might never have even been exposed to a God concept and so have no basis to believe anything on the God front, others might be negative atheists (also known as weak, soft and agnostic atheism) who neither believe nor disbelieve in God. Ask them if they believe in God, and they are likely to say no. Ask them if they disbelieve in God and they are also likely to say no. As I've said, an individual can be in the position of neither believing nor disbelieving in the afterlife, which is akin to how one can not know whether or not there is an afterlife (be agnostic on the matter). My wife does not claim to know with certainty that God exists, but she is a believer. I can respect that. My atheism/agnosticism has been more of a problem for her than her theism has been for me, at least when we were dating (she being an ex-Catholic Born Again Christian). I tried to get her into a less orthodox/ more liberal-minded outlook by taking her to the Anglican Church that I liked to attend.
Whether or not everyone's answer is valid, not every argument is going to be valid or logically sound. Some arguments are more valid and logically sound than others (say deductively, that the conclusion logically follows from the premises). One can argue many metaphysical notions in a reasonable manner even if we cannot truly know something. |
That's a good post Greg, nothing there I would challenge, not that I want to do that anyway as I don't think this thread is about that or your question. My wife was also raised Catholic, we were married in our church before God and we both have a profound sense of appreciation for that moment (well more than a moment, heck an hour long mass then the marriage ceremony....I just wanted some wedding cake!! ). Ivan and I have not had any discussions on that, I really don't want to as they say religion and politics should not be discussed among friends .
Cheers my friend... |
Thanks, I really appreciate it. I don't know when I'm making sense when I go nights without sleep, but that seems to be the time that I like to get philosophical and make topics such as this one or "Do you think that Mike Pence looks hot in that dress?" I've never really been much of one for debates. I guess that's why I say out of the Politics thread. I like a challenge when I feel there's some hope to understand each other, and sometimes one just wants to pull one's hair out cause it's like you're talking at cross-purposes and you can't get your ideas across. This is not one of those cases. Many of my favourite people have been Catholics,and I am comfortable attending Catholic Church -- although I guess I shouldn't take communion and I have. Hey, I was baptised a kind of catholic, just not Roman Catholic. I had a Catholic girlfriend at one time, and I went to Catholic Church with her.To be honest, had she been a Scientologist I likely would have gone to auditing even though Scientology makes me really uncomfortable. I wanted a church wedding, and I had my kids baptised at the church I was baptised and where I attended. It's about bringing them into a community. I'm comfortable in the Catholic Church cause it doesn't feel that different from the Anglican Church, I know what to say. Ivan, he of the vicious big blue font, was fun to argue with. We had a pedantic argument soon after I joined, and it was good, it was like trial by fire. If I could survive that wicked blue font, I could survive anything here.I wish all newbies could go through an Ivan hazing ritual. ;) I like Ivan; good guy. I have had transcendent experiences at more than one Buddhist Temple while in Japan and on hikes, and once at a church.. Whether that's just brain chemistry/ a physiological reaction, and I expect so, that doesn't negative the experience. I have felt a oneness with the cosmos so to speak -- as the man said to the hot dog vendor, "Make me one with everything." Church has been important to me despite my lack of belief (rather than disbelief, well I have genuine disbelief when it comes to some religious things). But I ramble... I have a very strong spiritual sense, or sense of the numinous, the transcendent, I might call it, and I have a had a very strong sense that there is some form of "being" beyond death, and have at least thought that I experienced signs of some kind of being after death on several occasions. So ultimately I nether believe nor disbelieve, but I want there to be something beyond and for it to be something good ideally.
|
|
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 35762
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 25 2020 at 23:02 |
dr wu23 wrote:
SteveG wrote:
Why wasn't "possibly" a choice?
I don't know anything as a fact, either way.
|
This.....an agnostic because I simply don 't know. The only tenable position imho.
|
It's not like I'm asking "Is there an afterlife?" To be agnostic deals with being without knowledge (we cannot know), I'm taking about belief or a lack of belief. If you read the thread, I went into this at some length. Hackettfan expressed my position well: "I do not believe in an afterlife. I do not disbelieve in an afterlife. I hope there is an afterlife. I do not THINK there is an afterlife." If you were to ask me if I believe in the afterlife then my answer would be no. If you were to ask me if I disbelieve in the afterlife, then my answer would also be no. If you ask me if I know that there is an afterlife, then my answer would be no. If you ask me if I know that there is no afterlife, then my answer would also be no. I know, so terribly negative. I don't know if there is or isn't an afterlife, but I don't believe in one. I have a lack of belief/ lack belief, and I lack knowledge. I'm just going to copy-paste something I wrote earlier in the thread: "Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do I disbelieve in an afterlife." I suggested before that if people have difficulty with the question, then perhaps consider it as "Am I convinced that there is afterlife?" Yes, or no. I'm an agnostic on all things, but that doesn't mean that I cannot feel comfortable answering" Do you believe X proposition?" and "Do you disbelieve X proposition." Quoting myself again from this thread, but I said that I don't believe anything with absolute certainty, and I prefer not to believe things without what I think are good reasons to believe in them. I am a sceptic. I don't claim to know what is possible or true in regards to many things. If the question were, "Do you believe that an invisible and intangible Santa Claus resides in my underpants" would the default position be "Yes" if or until the proposition could be demonstrated to be false? I wouldn't believe it, and not just because I'm wearing the underpants. That doesn't mean that I know it's not there as I can't see it or feel it, but the best time to believe something is when there is evidence and rational reasons to believe in them. A lack of belief makes the most sense to me when it comes to that which cannot be demonstrated, is not falsifiable etc.. I also don't know if an "afterlife" is possible. It might be impossibly. ;)
Edited by Logan - July 26 2020 at 00:06
|
|
|
|
progaardvark
Collaborator
Crossover/Symphonic/RPI Teams
Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 50966
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 27 2020 at 16:58 |
This is a subject that I have gone one way, then another, and then back again. I don't belong to any organized religion. I also don't consider the Bible a reputable source of information. I'm a big supporter of science, totally convinced of climate change, biological evolution, etc. Given all this, I think there is some curiosities about consciousness that have convinced me that our consciousness is capable of surviving the physical body and I am even considering that reincarnation may be a real phenomena.
The jumping point for me was the works that have come out of the University of Virginia's Division of Perceptual Studies. But keep in mind, I have much more to read from the literature on this subject.
So, I answered Yes to the question.
|
|
----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag
that's a happy bag of lettuce
this car smells like cartilage
nothing beats a good video about fractions
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Online
Points: 65248
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 27 2020 at 17:13 |
^ Then you must look into ~
|
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
Shadowyzard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 24 2020
Location: Davutlar
Status: Offline
Points: 4506
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 27 2020 at 17:24 |
|
In ancient Sumeria, the mythological decrees governing civilization and the Universe were called the 'meh'.
"Meh"...
https://twitter.com/weird_hist/status/1278502453927952385?s=20
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20604
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 28 2020 at 06:31 |
Tbh, sometimes I feel like I have enough problems navigating this life to worry about another one.
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17505
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: July 28 2020 at 08:12 |
BrufordFreak wrote:
... We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness. ... |
Hi,
Strange for me ... as big as the Universe is when you look out at the stars, and using a term like "Eternal Consciousness", assuming that this is the same in Saturn, Pluto and every other Galaxy out there ... it just doesn't add up FOR ME!
Cosmic Ocean ... of the human aura and awareness which likely surrounds this earth (from Robert Monroe!) ... but I would hardly EVER call it "Cosmic". It's an "Ocean" for the earth ... but not for the Cosmos!
"I'm an atheist! ... Thank God!" Luis Bunuel
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
