DescentBB

I thought this might go in Commentary because it might get a little off for the Cafe.

wikipedia wrote:Manifesting is a term often used in New Thought and New Age circles to refer to the belief that one can by force of will, desire, and focused energy, make something come true on the physical level. For example, the Indian guru Sathya Sai Baba is famous for allegedly manifesting objects out of thin air.

Manifestation is something I've been attempting/practicing for the last year or so. It seems to be working out. Wow, theres so many things I want to say and ask about it I dunno where to start.

Mostly I want to say and get it over with, that I am not in any way referring to the literal Siddi function of thinking about a new car and one appears in your driveway. I'm talking about the little things, the course of life. This is the way I see it in a few examples:

Christian Prayer
Let's say a person who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ really needs a raise at his job because he foresees financial trouble and doesnt want to see his family suffer. This is a selfless act, and one of complete faith. He is constantly praying to Jesus to solve this situation at any time. He then finds a briefcase on the street stuffed weith $100 bills.

Wiccan Ceremony
This girl who just broke up with a crazy violent girlfriend wishes that he won't be able to be around her or hurt her. She casts something called a binding spell in a carefully orchestrated ceremony weith his name. All she wants is peace and harmony. She does this continually. She displays faith in what she believes. The next week the boyfriend is locked up for years because of other crimes.

New Ager
A woman is interested in starting her own business but can't properly pool the resources or people to operate with. She meditates, lights candles and incense, etc, and focuses on meeting good people for business. The next day she's kicking it with experienced men and women at a resturaunt.

The common issues between these three people is that they were performing some sort of personal connection. They all applied themselves in ways that let faith do work for them. So I think for a second, what is faith? It might be a certain energy that radiates from your body when you actually believe something, and maybe that energy effects the area you want effected.

Now look back at the examples. I'll give them all credit that it could all be luck or coincidence, but none of the people got exactly what they wanted. That doesnt mean they didnt want what they got. The man was praying for a raise but got a load of money free. The girl just wanted the guy to leave but he got arrested.

Topic fly-off -> Do you think possibly that these were the thoughts of Jesus and he was trying to tell people that with actual faith you can do anything? That "heaven" (a state of joy, maybe) can be attained through him and his teachings? Maybe he DID die on a cross and raise again because he was the first to properly be able to convert his own reality to a better one?

Maybe he was able to reach that state of getting a new car in his driveway. Think about the water to wine. That would have been a great thing.

But the thing with my honest faith system has flaws. You're sleepy or stoned or just not paying attention while going down a flight of stairs. You hit the bottom but you think you have another to go and kinda stumble. Everyone's done it. But if you had honest faith in the next step being there, wouldn't you have changed reality and had no problem down the stairs?

I really want to know what you guys think about this. It's been something on my mind for a long time.

hi: i don't think i have really met you yet.

i really want to talk about this too... but i am really tired right now, but some thoughts right away (i have written a few novels in the E & C tonight... so forgive me)

[spoiler]if you didn't already read, i am a resident 'anti-christian', but to qualify, i am more of an anti-organized religion person really. i think i know a fair deal about stuff... but take what i say with a grain of salt. [/spoiler]

i don't like your christian example, a truly christian person would probably not just take that briefcase and run. beyond the obvious... it's just poor form in general. but in a similar of example of manifestation through prayer, it is a debate as to where coincidence ends and 'divine intervention' begins, which is the case with all of your examples.

now... in manifestation through 'faith' in general... it is common to think of this as energy but those who view reality as a harmony of energies. you are posing the question of whether they changed reality through their belief in faith? this, cannot be so in most of my studies of manifestation, which typically states that you must USE your own belief in your ability to change reality, and therefore, reality cannot be changed through your faith in <insert religion here>.

now, talking about jesus, in your topic fly-off, you are wondering about jesus as a prophet, not the 'son of god', which would bring in new questions on his 'teachings'. there is no doubt, that it has been questioned that he was in fact a man, and only a man, who lived as a prophet of god, born of a woman and man, and was the worlds loudest voice in christian doctrine to date. of course, if that was the case, it would not be his belief in his own ability to change water into wine, or perform any miracles for that matter, but his belief in god. interesting question that has been posed before... and still not answered.

as to the 'phantom step', well, if you are sleepy, drunk, or stone, do you really think you are in any position to go bending reality anyway.

fyrephile wrote:as to the 'phantom step', well, if you are sleepy, drunk, or stone, do you really think you are in any position to go bending reality anyway.

rofl!!

Hey my name is SilverFJ I played descent one through descent three and stopped playing the game a couple years ago. I was in the clan DmC for the majority of my time. I've been posting on the DBB since about mid 1999 but left and come back a few times. It appears that for most of your time here I've been in rehab so I havent gotten to read a lot of your stuff. But it's good to meet you.

With the subject though, I would like to reiterate I'm also an anti-organized religon man, I belong to the Fraternal Order of Freemasons, while being a faith-based organization is isn't "religon". I want to know if it is faith in general, and not directly the channelling of the power of God (of whom I don't believe in), but faith in the capability to do certain things.

As to what the man decided to do with the case full of cash, I dunno. The issue was that he was desperately putting out some sort of energy which made things go his way.

Agreeing with your statement, I believe that all reality is but a hormony of energies. Bill Hicks said it best. (Today a young man on acid) realizes that reality is energy that moves to a slow vibration, life is but a dream and we are the creation of ourselves.

Not a quote exactly. Maybe it's what I get for eating too many shrooms and listening to Tool

fyrephile wrote:this, cannot be so in most of my studies of manifestation, which typically states that you must USE your own belief in your ability to change reality, and therefore, reality cannot be changed through your faith in <insert religion here>.

When I speak of faith I talk about the actual meaning of the word, not as in a system of belief but the kid of faith you have in your girl not to sleep around on you. If you have that actual feeling towards a certain thing strong enough then why can't it happen?

long time FJ, welcome back.

I can speak for the Christain pov mostly as I am not either of the latter.

hehe, a real Christian would try to return the money. And stickly speaking from a Christian pov, God very very seldom answers prayers like that.

Witchcraft does exist btw and does infact work. It's also very dangerous and has been known to kill people. I advise leaving it alone. Again from a christian pov, it is forbidden to mess with.

New Age, hm.. first I'd like to say that there's nothing really "new" about it. It is really a form of eastern "mystisim" that has been re-packaged for American comsumption. "chanelling energy" as you can imagine in my understanding as it's going to sound cliche, but I see it as a "brand" of witch craft.


All that being said, I see what you're driving at. "Altering your reality" as you suggest through manipulation of "faith" or applying faith until you "get results" is really a form of [link=http://www.britannica.com/search?query= ... rce=MWTEXT]exsistentialism[/link]

Oddly enough, it's blown through the evengenlical church as the "Faith Movement" or "Name it and Claim It". It's a long story and silly, but it's bascially what you're describing.

Jesus put forth that he was/is the Son of God. I believe that. The bible teaches that the Holy Spirit of God raised Him from the dead. It wasn't reality manipulation.

Your question is sincere. and can also be viewed as searching for nivana of sorts and in which case you won't make it... you will never be "honest" enough in your faith to suceed. Millions have triend and i think some have claimed to attain, but I seriously doubt it.

as far as walking down stairs.. um.. just pay attention. That's the way life works. keep your eyes open and use your grey matter. Don't sweat the simple stuff or you WILL fail.

SilverFJ wrote:

fyrephile wrote:as to the 'phantom step', well, if you are sleepy, drunk, or stone, do you really think you are in any position to go bending reality anyway.

rofl!!

Hey my name is SilverFJ I played descent one through descent three and stopped playing the game a couple years ago. I was in the clan DmC for the majority of my time. I've been posting on the DBB since about mid 1999 but left and come back a few times. It appears that for most of your time here I've been in rehab so I havent gotten to read a lot of your stuff. But it's good to meet you.

indeed... you as well. i was in the {DMC} for a short time, but i'm not sure why (i remember being asked... joining... hanging out... and not doing anything, i remember talking to thundercat like... once... one time, maybe... i also remember joining some PPG chat flames... but it's all a blur). i started playing D1 on Kali shortly before the release of D2, and then regged Kali sometime thereafter... i was also in (WTF)... dorsola's week long clan of silliness... and the midnight squadron for a short time as well. i came and went a few times back then... then recently (november as my profile might suggest) came back again!

SilverFJ wrote: With the subject though, I would like to reiterate I'm also an anti-organized religon man, I belong to the Fraternal Order of Freemasons, while being a faith-based organization is isn't "religon". I want to know if it is faith in general, and not directly the channelling of the power of God (of whom I don't believe in), but faith in the capability to do certain things.

As to what the man decided to do with the case full of cash, I dunno. The issue was that he was desperately putting out some sort of energy which made things go his way.

Agreeing with your statement, I believe that all reality is but a hormony of energies. Bill Hicks said it best. (Today a young man on acid) realizes that reality is energy that moves to a slow vibration, life is but a dream and we are the creation of ourselves.

Not a quote exactly. Maybe it's what I get for eating too many shrooms and listening to Tool

fyrephile wrote:this, cannot be so in most of my studies of manifestation, which typically states that you must USE your own belief in your ability to change reality, and therefore, reality cannot be changed through your faith in <insert religion here>.

When I speak of faith I talk about the actual meaning of the word, not as in a system of belief but the kid of faith you have in your girl not to sleep around on you. If you have that actual feeling towards a certain thing strong enough then why can't it happen?

yeah... umm... i am too tired to really think about that... i'll be back tomorrow and see what i can do... salut.

Duper:
Yeah, I've just been thinking a lot about some weird stuff 'cause my brain won't let me stop thinking nowadays. I see where you're coming from with the existentialism, and my new path that I have selected is one where I can seek universal conciousness, basically I want the big picture. As an Aquarius one of my natural gifts is one of expanded (and sometimes oh-so-useless) thought.

I suppose you believe that witchcraft is a form of the devil? Are you saying that the craft in itself is a form of inert prayer to satan? I don't properly understand the concept of the dually sided battle so I don't really know what you mean when you say that "new age" is a form opf witchcraft.

Currently I'm in a myriad of different "faith options" but I really want to find the trtuth before I begin exalting it. My father was a baptist minister while I was growing up and I have sort of a stigma against christianity.

I need to smoke a cig.

SilverFJ wrote: Wiccan Ceremony
This girl who just broke up with a crazy violent girlfriend wishes that he won't be able to be around her or hurt her.

so wiccans are transsexual?


seriously, the "correct" answer to your question is one only you can answer.

i think the point is asking the right questions of yourself.

you sound like your on a good path of inquiry.

but i will try to offer honest answers.

your comparisons of faith: i think that faith can overcome everything in the life of the mind or "spirit" . But that's no license to break any old law of nature. as long as you have a physical body it is subject to physical laws. but the mind is free to be liberated of wordly suffering - if it is put to good use.

people lead better lives when they use discipline to observe a good system of beliefs and values. I think the system a person choses is less important than being sincere, disciplined, studious, open.

However, assuming prayer and divine intervention, clearly no one "manifests" any old thing, any old time. i think what you should ask is: How does the mechanism of prayer work? How are my prayers answered? What is it about prayer that it is the medium through which you commune with god? through divine grace? Why are some answered and others not?

Why should your faith or even prayer prevent you from falling down some stairs if you're not being careful? Perhaps, God gives you a good mind and body and expects you to make good decisions with it. I think God reserves grace for special moments, not to keep you from stubbing your toe

Joking aside, this brings up one last line of serious questions...

Freewill. Do we have it? Where you come down on that question is pretty important here. Even within Christianty there is much division. Calvin believed that not a hair falls from your head without God willing it. Dostoevsky believed that God was not omniscient, omnipresent, etc. i don't even have to tell you how heated that alone could get.

Are we able to make an authentic free act? If so, to what extent are we free?

These are all questions I think you should ask yourself.

SilverFJ, would i be right in saying that you are pondering something like this: If so many different religions have their own faith based reality manipulations, perhaps there is some kindof common esoteric ground they are all tapping into. a sort of common human potential that we all delegate to religion, but perhaps we should recognise it as a collectively HUMAN experience, that since so many religions claim to practice the art, perhaps it is not dependant on any particular religion at all but merely on some - perhaps ANY - expression of FAITH?

Kindof like an undiscovered science that we have as yet always delegated to superstition.

i believe this is a core belief of the "Human Potential Movement" - That faith-based powers are actually a construct of PSYCHOLOGY - but this in no way diminishes their power, rather it implies that there are vast and mostly untapped and NON-UNDERSTOOD powers locked inside the human mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_potential_movement

Myself, i'm pretty into the idea as well. StarWars was a pretty cool illustration of how engrossing the idea can be, and it probably introduced a lot of people my age to it as well. The FORCE was a faith based system, yoda was all about "do not try, DO! or DO NOT".

Part of my interest in psychology and whatnot is fueled by wanting to know what genetically* binds us together as collective humans, what is the nature of human spirituality, and what is the purest manifestation of it's essense.

*ie: when all the different religions and spiritualities are simmered down, what do they all have in common? What is the collective aspect of the human psyche that they appeal to, or tap into. That's why i'm so interested in the subconscious and Jung's theorys - particularly the one of the collective unconscious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious

Palzon wrote:so wiccans are transsexual? :p

heh, actaully yeah there ARE a lot of transexual wiccans. A lot of modern wiccan celebrations are merely celebrated as multi-cultural mass-acceptance celebrations.

roid wrote:SilverFJ, would i be right in saying that you are pondering something like this: If so many different religions have their own faith based reality manipulations, perhaps there is some kindof common esoteric ground they are all tapping into. a sort of common human potential that we all delegate to religion, but perhaps we should recognise it as a collectively HUMAN experience, that since so many religions claim to practice the art, perhaps it is not dependant on any particular religion at all but merely on some - perhaps ANY - expression of FAITH?

f***ing exactly thanks

if you're on to roid's last point there are many interesting considerations. The philosopher and mathemetician P. D. Ousepensky wrote much about higher dimensions and esoteric endeavors that make those higher dimensions accessible. his writings anticipate certain aspects of string theory regarding extra-dimensional space.

it is conceivable that there may be interractions with higher dimensions that could account for miraculous outcomes. if this were the case, and faith in general is a prerequisite, then perhaps more than one faith might lead to the same result.

how do we contemplate a 5th dimensional object? Ouspensky takes on this question and more.

man
these are things my brain's been aching about for a long time now wondering if i was f***ing enlightened or insane this solves a lot of things
thanks

interesting Palzon. This kindof stuff is precicely why i don't write off crazy ppl, as a lot of ppl who are considered schizophrenic have some of the most interesting ideas (or insights, depending on your point of view) on these subjects.

It's the whole \"the thin line between genius and madness\" thing. If you ask me, the 2 are not mutually exclusive - crazy people are not nesesarily stupid

E-Ka-Bong probably knows the kindof people i mean. I remember one particularly interesting guy who does sensory deprivation experiments on himself (among other things). He's built a series of live-in devices based on some very complex theorys he has (incl pyramid stuff etc), to sheild him from various forms of radiation (or something) while magnifying other types that allow him to communicate with other dimensions, aliens, or let him attain higher states of consciousness or somesuch. It's been a while so i can't quite remember the details, i just remember that he had put so much effort, money and research into his work that it stood out - and what i could understand of his theorys DID check out with what i already knew about neuroscience. I should look him up again and see what he's up to.


SilverFJ, i hope you keep at it now that you've discovered others share your interests.

lol !... One of my favorite slightly 'crazy people' is Terrence McKenna:

http://deoxy.org/t_camden.htm

Synchronicity is also something to test against the sequence of your experiences (just Googled the word); http://www.crystalinks.com/synchronicity.html

Lucid dreaming is another way to get 'what ever you want' ... sex, flying, cars, alien lifeforms,... being a dolphin... !

Silver FJ, I forget how many years you've been 'learning' at being alive..? For about 20 years now since I was just 20, I've believed one can 'conjure their fate', but one needs to know what the 'stuff' is that it can be drawn from. If you're like many people you'll take some risks to learn how it works, gambling with fate, learning some easy lessons or paying for it karmically, or just for the thrill find the boundaries that makes life more numinous and 'alive' with potential for more.

The universe is much more than this place we inhabit while awake and conscious. Much of reality is beyond time, beyond gravity, infinite, and interconnected before it 'appears' to us in the 4 dimensions of space and time where we are 'awake', and ego-bound, and 'separated'. .. But I should emphasize; Enjoy it while you're here, finding what is actually 'connected' for you !

SilverFJ wrote: I really want to know what you guys think about this. It's been something on my mind for a long time.

Hi SilverFJ. I think your questions and the responses so far are an excellent example of something unique about humans: We are physical creatures, but possess a very real need for a spiritual connection.

When the spiritual connection is broken, or missing, people try to re-connect anyway they can, (even those who may be unaware of their spiritual need), which sometimes leads to problems when the spiritual need is replaced with physical alternatives. The key to a successful existence is to properly balance the physical with the spiritual, but the spiritual connection must be made with the correct source, or problems can arise, and unfortunately overwhelm the individual with more confusion.

Jesus said (as literally written in the Greek), "Happy are the beggars as to the spirit." -Matthew 5:3. What did he mean by this? A beggar is an individual who is in need, and who takes action to fill that need. Begging for spirit implies two things:
1.that the individual is aware of his spiritual need, and
2.that he is actively trying to make a spiritual connection.

Jesus implies that in doing so the beggar would find happiness. One translation actually says: “Happy are those conscience of their spiritual need,” which really presents the meaning what what is stated in the Greek.

The manifestation question is linked to this spiritual need, and is an attempt to create a physical reality from a spiritual one, which could be viewed as an attempt to prove spiritual maturity by means of physical comfort or attainment. While our happiness is linked to both physical and spiritual conditions, the spiritually mature have less of a need for the physical. With the proper spiritual connection our lives tend to be less chaotic, and in-tune with the higher spiritual source, which can and does manifest itself in a very positive way in the lives of many people. James wrote: “Draw close to God, and he will draw close to you.” -James 4:8. Humans cannot create objects from nothing, they cannot change reality by wishing or thinking about it, which would be akin to telekinessis – the energy needed is beyond our present ability. But God does have that ability, and with the proper connection, this ability can manifest itself in our lives.

Shoku wrote:...but the spiritual connection must be made with the correct source, or problems can arise, and unfortunately overwhelm the individual with more confusion...
...Bible references...
...God...God...God

Isn't that merely a baseless scare advertising tactic though? - The "correct source" thing. I would challenge your "correct vs incorrect source" definition, there are as many valid answers to that as there are individual people and religions.

Which would bring us back to the point to the discussion: that although there is a lot of spiritual relativity - aspects and concepts which are NOT shared between religions. There are also some curious concepts which ARE shared between many religions - manifestation as SilverFJ described it is one such concept.

roid wrote:I would challenge your "correct vs incorrect source" definition, there are as many valid answers to that as there are individual people and religions.

It depends on how you mean that. There are certainly different answers to the question, but can they all be TRUE? Is there such a thing as absolute truth, or is truth simply whatever you want it to be?

Kilarin

roid wrote: Isn't that merely a baseless scare advertising tactic though? - The "correct source" thing. I would challenge your "correct vs incorrect source" definition, there are as many valid answers to that as there are individual people and religions.

Well, I would be a fool to put my faith in a film maker, but even George Lucas recognized two spiritual sources: the Force had a dark side, which jedi were warned about constantly. This plot device works because it is a recognizable condition of the real world, both physical and spiritual. Sometimes the dark side can look very appealing and pull the unaware into more chaos and eventual destruction, a la Darth Vader. And yes, Christians are warned:

“For Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming themsleves into ministers of righteousness. But their end shall be according to their works.” 2 Corinthians 11:14, 15.

“Finally, go on acquiring power in the Lord and in the mightiness of his strength . . . because we have a wrestling, not against blood and flesh, but against . . .the wicked spirit forces in the heavenly places.” Ephesians 5:10 -13.

Kilarin wrote:

roid wrote:I would challenge your "correct vs incorrect source" definition, there are as many valid answers to that as there are individual people and religions.

It depends on how you mean that. There are certainly different answers to the question, but can they all be TRUE? Is there such a thing as absolute thruth, or is truth simply whatever you want it to be?

Kilarin

When it comes to spirituality - yes, that IS the million dollar question.
I'd challenge anyone to be able to prove to me that their beliefs are the absolute TRUTH. You can't! In the end it will always come back to "well... i can't seem to convince you so i guess it's just a matter of what you want to believe". From what i've seen with religion, the truth IS simply whatever you want it to be.*

2.1 billion Christians can't be wrong.
1.3 billion Mulsims can't be wrong.
900 million Hindus can't be wrong.
etc etc etc

It's all just as TRUE to these people as it is to everyone else of all other religions. Is not saying "my religion is the true religion" merely implying that the billions of other people in the world are too stupid or blind to appreciate the truth? I suppose when your religious text says "narrow and cramped is the path, and few are those finding it" that's all the explanation you need to put your mind at rest eh?


* Modern mental health professionals agree that the human psyche needs a form of spirituality to remain mentally healthy. How provable that spirituality is does not seem to matter on the whole, it only matters that it does not remove us too far from our ID.
Why we need this sense of spirituality, we're not sure. It may be a vestigial throwback from our evolutionary past. Perhaps a genetic protection against living a meaningless existance which may lead to depression and suicide (both are bad for genetic selection). Whatever the reason, it need not nessesarily matter. Even if you believe that spirituality is (just as sex) an instinctual natural urge - that doesn't mean you can't use it for all it's worth. Sex is fun, and spirituality can make you feel great internal peace and happiness (if you can come to terms with the duality of human existance).

roid wrote:I'd challenge anyone to be able to prove to me that their beliefs are the absolute TRUTH.

But the question isn't "can you prove it?", the question is, "do you believe that absolute truth EXISTS?"

Let's take it out of the religious arena for a moment. If we were all arguing about the JFK assasination, we would get a lot of different answers as to the who, the why, and the how. Each side would claim they could PROVE their point, the other sides would dispute the facts. But does ANY of that change the fact that there WAS an actual WHO, WHY and HOW that is quite independent of any of our opinions about it. The event happened, and there is an actual truth about it, whether we can agree upon it or not.

Now lets step back INTO religion.

roid wrote:From what i've seen with religion, the truth IS simply whatever you want it to be.

So, are you simply saying humans can't agree upon religion, or that God doesn't "really" exist, so it doesn't matter what people believe (which your footnote would imply), OR are you saying that the truth about the universe is "flexible" and can be different for each person?

Please note, I'm not asking if it is ok for people to believe whatever they want, or if different belief systems might make different people feel "comfortable". I'm asking if the Atheist and the Theist can BOTH be right? Right as measured against the absolute truth of what IS. As measured against reality. Or is there no such thing as "truth" outside of our perceptions?

Kilarin

Shouldn't proof be the main backbone of a stong belief? I mentioned the "prove it" challenge because you seem to have a strong rational belief there IS an absolute truth. But why would you rationally believe this unless you had evidence of it?

If an absolute truth does exist, then it does exist. However, without evidence to prove any singular absolute truth, why would any rational person have a strong rational belief that it is the truth?

So until such time that such an absolute truth can be proven to be so absolute, is it not rational to stay skeptical? This is why i included in my list of possible Gods "Collective Humanity", which is along the lines of the Human Potentiality Movement: What if we ourselves are Powerful Gods who have merely not discovered/unlocked our own power yet - and as yet we have been confused by our own powers so we have suggested that there is some mythical entity out there who is the source - but really we ourselves could be the source of this power.

There is the vague possability that JFK could have concealed a gun that he used to shoot his own brains out. There is also the vague possability that he was hit by a meteorite or some other unlikely natural event. The absolute truth shouldn't be automatically assumed to be that JFK was killed by another person.
You see... the who could have been JFK himself (which would be like the self-god belief), or it could have been no-one (which would be like the belief of athiesm).

Kilarin wrote:

roid wrote:From what i've seen with religion, the truth IS simply whatever you want it to be.

So, are you simply saying humans can't agree upon religion, or that God doesn't "really" exist, so it doesn't matter what people believe (which your footnote would imply), OR are you saying that the truth about the universe is "flexible" and can be different for each person?

what i ment was that to people, what they believe to be the truth is simply whatever they want the truth to be. I didn't mean that whatever they believe to be the truth IS the truth simply because they believe it. People are not naturally completely rational beings.

If the Athiest and the Theist were both correct, then there would be no absolute truth. So no, they can't both be absolutely correct (according to our current understanding of the laws of traditional logic from which we get our definition of the word "absolute").
If traditional logic is your base, this is where you stop.

but i'll go on...

We do not absolutely understand reality. As insane as this thought may make some people: We do not even have a measuring stick of what Absolute is! So how can we compare our spiritual beliefs with reality using words such as "absolute truth" if we do not even have anything absolute in reality.

It is possible that there is no such thing as truth beyond our perceptions. It is also possible that TRUTH is a living mischievous infinity entity of the universe that controls human perception so that when we seem to understand the layers we have peeled off reality - TRUTH will add more layers in, smaller layers again.

You can go crazy (pun perhaps intended, perhaps not) with these kinds of theorys. Or you can have a lot of fun. Or both. It's probabaly no coincidence that the Joker archetype is oft insane, sometimes logical sometimes illogical, and often laughing . What is the source of his energy?


edit: sorry i may have got sidetracked. please call me out on anything i didn't answer.

roid wrote:sorry i may have got sidetracked. please call me out on anything i didn't answer.

No, I think you answered the question. If I am understanding you, then you are an "absolute truth" agnostic. You aren't certain if there is such a thing or not.

roid wrote:You can go crazy (pun perhaps intended, perhaps not) with these kinds of theorys.

And that would be a rational response. If there is no absolute truth, then reality is completely unknowable. There would certainly be no point in my discussing any issues with someone else, I can't learn from others because our realities do not necessarily have any relation to each other. Without the assumption of absolute truth, without that external yardstick of reality to measure our philosophies against, there is no point in having any philosophy at all. The only logical response to a universe without absolute truth is to slip into solipsism.

roid wrote:If an absolute truth does exist, then it does exist. However, without evidence to prove any singular absolute truth, why would any rational person have a strong rational belief that it is the truth?

The assumption that there IS an absolute truth has to be the starting point. There has to be something to discover before you can go looking for it. Once you have gotten to the point that you believe the universe is a rational place, THEN you can start working on exactly what the universe is, how it came to be, and what is your relationship to it. You can't do any geometry until you have you have postulated the point, the line, and the plane.

Which brings us back on topic to Shoku's comment about making certain you are connected to the "correct source". IF there is no absolute reality or truth, then yes, the question is meaningless. Correct for me may not be correct for you. But if reality is solid, if truth is absolute, then answering this question (what is the correct source) may be the most important thing we ever do.

Kilarin

Solipsism isn't so terrible if you can connect with a Hedonistic Gnostic* outlook (ie: accepting that learning, gaining knowledge, philosophizing and bantering (communicating) with others etc is REALLY FUN and even worth doing just for the fun of it)

I think therefore i am. If i always like thinking, then i will always like being. Therefore the point to philosophy and discussing anything with anyone else is simply because it's enjoyable. It's like having a \"wouldn't that be cool\" moment while watching a fictional movie. You know the movie is fictional, but for the time you are in it you are so engrossed that you are having the time of your life. No-one's that much of a killjoy that they can't suspend their disbeleif to enjoy a movie and then have fun talking about it afterwards

If Philosophy is solely the quest for rational absolute truth, then mysticism is likely something else entirely. And perhaps i'm a mystic.

I may have no commited idea what the nature of reality (or even my \"self\") is, but i still love sharing experiences with people if i suspend MY disbelief and plunge into their Absolute Truth world. \"Playing devil's advocate\" perhaps, but it's not really \"playing devil's advocate\" if you didn't have a side to begin with .
I don't need to be absolutely certain to express a viewpoint. And although i'd define myself as uncertain, my personal definition of \"uncertainty\" is probabaly still more \"certain\" than most people (since most ppl can't rationalise themselves outof the front door of their church and run screaming from any form of philosophical banter. grr).


*i don't really like the terms Gnostic and Agnostic because some definitions of Agnostic say that it means you don't KNOW, some say you won't COMMIT, and some say you just don't CARE. All very different definitions. my definition of GNOSTIC used in the first paragraph means simply \"urge to inquire and know things\"

But if reality is solid, if truth is absolute, then answering this question (what is the correct source) may be the most important thing we ever do.

yeah and it's fun . and if we actually do find a nice absolute truth then that will make a whole lot of people feel better about their lives then that's good too. Go Humanism woohoo!

roid wrote:Solipsism isn't so terrible if you can connect with a Hedonistic Gnostic* outlook (ie: accepting that learning, gaining knowledge, philosophizing and bantering (communicating) with others etc is REALLY FUN and even worth doing just for the fun of it)

You might want to read through Francis Schaffer's book "The God who is There" for an interesting point of view on this topic. Lewis also talks about it extensively in "The Abolition of Man"

The problem I have with Solipsism, and actually any non-theistic view of the universe, is the monstrous horror it leads to as a philosophical view of ethics.

Lets follow this reasoning through to it's only possible logical conclusion.
The assumption is that truth is relative, and the only reason to do something is that it makes you happy. If making other people happy makes you happy, fine and good, but if it didn't, there wouldn't be any reason to do it. Jeffrey Dahmer was happy eating people. That was his personal "truth". If there is no external "truth" to measure against, then his truth is just as valid as your truth. You can kill him because doing so makes you happy (or more specifically, because something he is doing is making you unhappy), but lets not pretend that you are doing it because he has done anything "wrong". "Wrong" can't have any meaning in this philosophy beyond "something that annoys me".

And no trying to pull any nonsense about you "ought" to do things that make the most people happy. Why should you be concerned with anyone else's happiness? What external standard could force you to care about other peoples happiness if you didn't want to? There ARE no external standards, only internal ones. Again, if making others happy makes you happy, fine and good, if not, there is no reason to bother with it.

The next line of defense will be that treating others decently is good for the survival of the human race. So? Evolution may be a law of nature, like gravity, but it doesn't have any "ought" behind it. Why should you cooperate with evolution? Or gravity? If you want to fall, jump. Gravity will work, and will pull you to the earth, but there isn't any "ought" behind it saying you shouldn't jump if you want to. And the same goes for evolution. If you want to help wipe out your own species, go for it. Evolution will not be violated, it will be confirmed. But there isn't any "ought" behind this law of nature. If your species is wiped out, what's that to you? Why "ought" you to care about your descendants? If your genes make you want to, fine and good, cooperate with them if it makes you happy, but don't pretend you are doing the "right" thing any more than you are doing something "right" when you empty your bladder when it is full. You are just doing what your urges TELL you to do for more comfort. If your genes told you to bash in the skulls of other peoples children so that your genes would have an advantage in the next generation, that would be JUST as valid of a reason to act. Or not act. None of it really matters.

This is the NIGHTMARE that we end up in without the assumption of an external authority behind ethics. There is no external yardstick to measure against. Anyone's view of "right" and "wrong" is just as valid as anyone else's. Osama Ben Laden is in our way, but he isn't "wrong". The kids who shot up columbine were inconvenient and annoying, but they weren't "wrong". The Firemen and Police officers who gave their lives on 9/11 were just doing what fulfilled there inner needs, they weren't "right" anymore than the terrorist flying the planes were "wrong". We have nothing to measure or judge between them, each individual is a law unto themselves and any standard other than "Thats what I happen to want" is completely meaningless.

This is the core and central reason I am a theist. You can not PROVE that the above view is wrong, Solipsism is internally consistent. But it is VERY conclusive that if there is no external standard, then the universe is a nightmare that is not to be considered. A meaningless and unspeakable horror that can not be accepted.

I call it "Puddleglums Choice". (It's a corollary of Pascal's Wager)

From "The Silver Chair" by C. S. Lewis:

"One word, Ma'am," he said, coming back from the fire; limping, because of the pain. "One word. All you've been saying is quite right, I shouldn't wonder. I'm a chap who always liked to know the worst and then put the best face I can on it. So I won't deny any of what you said. But there's one thing more to be said, even so. Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all those things--trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself. Suppose we have. Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones. Suppose this black pit of a kingdom of yours is the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one. And that's a funny thing, when you come to think of it. We're just babies making up a game, if you're right. But four babies playing a game can make a play-world which licks your real world hollow. That's why I'm going to live as like a Narnian as long as I can even if there isn't any Narnia. So, thanking you kindly for our supper, if these two gentlemen and the young lady are ready, we're leaving your court at once and setting out in the dark to spend our lives looking for Overland. Not that our lives will be very long, I should think; but that's small loss if the world's as dull a place as you say."

I can not PROVE that there is an external standard, an external judge, you can always retreat into solipsism in that debate and there can be no argument against that. But I WILL NOT live that way. If the universe is as meaningless as all that, then I am better off imagining that there is meaning than otherwise.

Kilarin

Load of crap. Sorry, I don't have time to get into why right now, so that's my slightly unfair answer for now.

Call it \"Synchronisity\" or something. For every case of synchronisity, there are probably hundreds of failures if not thousands.

Kilarin if i could break your post into 2 main related points:
1- The External source of Ethics.
2- I don't want to live in a world without X.

Remember i'm not an Atheist. I too find the idea of a chaotic dog-eat-dog world a horrible thought. This doesn't worry me much though because i have faith that the natural state of \"the human condition\" is a happy, utopian, peaceful state. I believe that most if not ALL societal problems are caused by social/mental diseases that have been self-perpetuated throughout society's history simply by our LACK of understanding about how the inner workings of the human mind & soul. ie: many mental conditions of the parents will encourage the propegation of those same mental conditions in the children simply through parenting style.
Jung said “Neurosis is always a substitute for legitimate suffering.” and i believe it. When we understand the nature of how the human mind and soul DEALS with suffering - we can steer it away from neurosis. I'd go as far as saying that it's the main premise of mental health care.

Thesedays i see people increasingly accepting psych theorys of the human mind/soul that point to nice things like EMPATHY as being important aspects of our psyches. I believe that as we understand more and more about the true nature of ourselves - we will begin to see that human nature is not so bad afterall and we can stop hating and hiding from our own \"pure\" nature.
So what i'm saying is that i believe that a natural (ie: genetic) INTERNAL source of ethics is entirely possible.

I can not PROVE that there is an external standard, an external judge, you can always retreat into solipsism in that debate and there can be no argument against that. But I WILL NOT live that way. If the universe is as meaningless as all that, then I am better off imagining that there is meaning than otherwise.

Exactly, there's no need to live without meaning, and you shouldn't even nessesarily WANT to! This is why i'm not a fan of Atheism. One of my favourite quotes of Jung is: “I have treated many hundreds of patients. Among [those] in the second half of life-that is to say, over 35-there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.”
Atheism to me is hiding from your own subconscious. This kindof supression of humanity's natural carnal nature i think is indicive of neurosis, just as Catholism's supression of carnal nature (ie: sex is bad) causes neurosis (that was more Freud's field).

I don't want you to stop believing.
I think \"faith\" is a deductive reasoning shortcut to truth. I use it too, ie: perhaps i am too eager to believe that human nature is inherently not so bad.

Science - ie: TRUE scientific method - bores me to tears. Let robots do it i recon. Pure Inductive Logic will never invent anything by itself - there's always a subconscious spurt of Deductive reasoning that puts it all into motion.

The difference between Inductive Reasoning and Deductive Reasoning is similar to Jung's \"functional\" theorys of personality types. Where when perceieving the world around them some people prefer to rely on Intuition (more freeflowing) while other people prefer to rely on Sensation (more rule orientated).

Faith/Intuition/Deductive-Reasoning is important. My world atm is a world without absolute truth. But i do yearn for absolute truth, i do. But i'm also fearful that if we discover the absolute truth - there will be nothing left to live for, for some people (perhaps myself incl) believe the journey is more important than the destination. I don't want to live in a world with nothing left to learn, a world with no imagination.

I'm not so frightened of this possability though (the possibility of running outof things to learn) that i will force myself to stop learning. I won't sabotage efforts to find the absolute truth. Because these efforts are fun enough in their own way. Sorry if i'm not being clear, what i'm saying is that we can still work together towards the Absolute truth - even though you believe there is one and i'm not so sure (and a little scared of actually FINDING that end of the rainbow), we can still work together towards it.

As i said to a Socialist Athiest friend of mine, \"I'm a terrible Athiest\"

For what it's worth, a lot of wiccan practitioners hold that will, focused by emotion and grounded in faith, is the entire force behind their magic. The rituals and spells are all focus tools. I would tend to err on their side of the arguement and say that it takes more than faith alone to do that sort of thing.

My opinions on it are far from solid though.

roid wrote:i have faith that the natural state of "the human condition" is a happy, utopian, peaceful state.

And they say Christians have a Blind Faith.

roid wrote:Atheism to me is hiding from your own subconscious

If God is just within our subconscious, then it doesn't much matter whether we believe in him or not, and the "spaghetti headed monster" would be perfectly adiquate if we just need to deal with an irrational subconscious itch.

roid wrote:what i'm saying is that we can still work together towards the Absolute truth - even though you believe there is one and i'm not so sure (and a little scared of actually FINDING that end of the rainbow), we can still work together towards it.

On that point, I think we are in agreement.

Kilarin

Important note: I originally made this post about a week ago, during the period when the DBB was undergoing its server move. During that time, it was apparently posted under the old server and did not appear here after the server move. Luckily, KoolBear was able to retrieve the post and e-mailed it to me a few days ago. I realize that it doesn't completely fit into where the discussion is now, and I'm sorry if this causes anyone any confusion, but I did put some thought into it, and so I didn't want it to be completely lost. Per KB's request, I'm also quoting mesh's response to this post that was also lost in the move.


Posted Wed Dec 28, 2005 3:04 am

I'll try to make at least a little contribution to this thread, from my perspective as a practicing Catholic, though I understand little of this talk of psychological potential, and even if I did, I'd probably just write it off as BS.

Regarding your example of the briefcase full of money, I really don't see prayer as working that way myself. When I pray to God for something specific, I don't believe that the intensity of my prayer or the length of time I spend praying has any sort of proportional effect on whether or not my prayer is answered. For example, in the past, I have prayed very long and hard for sick family members to recover, and yet those family members have died. Did I feel tested in my faith? Yes, to a certain extent, but I was able to reconcile what had happened. In the context of my own beliefs, I have no idea of what God's plan is for anyone, myself most of all. I had no idea whether or not He had felt it was time for my family members to be called home. I had prayed for them because I myself didn't want to let them go, because I wanted them to stay with me. I guess you could describe it as a form of selfishness, although I don't think that anyone at all would ever say it's a bad kind of selfishness. At any rate, my point is that I believe that God does answer my prayers, but the answers aren't always the ones I was expecting. I can't see the end of every situation, but God can, and I believe that God does what is right in the end. In the case of that suitcase, I don't think that the finding of that suitcase was the result of any mental severity of prayer, but because God felt that that was what was needed for that person.

I know that this is pretty much moot if you don't believe in God, but that's where I'm coming from, at any rate. As for the whole witchcraft thing, I don't really buy the existence of it at all; I certainly don't believe that anyone can cast any sort of "spell" on anyone else. (That's why people all up in arms over the Harry Potter books always crack me up; last time I checked, most of us can separate fiction from reality, and at any rate, I don't think spouting out random Latin phrases while waving a stick has ever worked for me. ) I really think that most new age/yoga/whatever is pretty much bull at any rate; there's a reason we have things like modern medicine.

Posted Wed Dec 28, 2005 5:16 am

mesh wrote:I am suddenly reminded of a quote from Shakespeare's Hamlet: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." (Hamlet 1.5.175-176).

I believe that, but the consequences are not so extravagant. The mind wishes to comprehend, but it can only do that insofar as the breadth of its knowledge is wide. Simply stated, one cannot point a finger at a cause from no more than one accepts. If we believe in christ then we will give him our prayers from coincidence. If we believe in sole material, then we will attribute scientific causation.

My point? Pray to God if you must but rest assured, coincidence is only a nail in the bucket, or a dust in the wind... Alexander the Great is now a cork in a wine barrel. Psychologically and statistically speaking we hold fast to the good things rather than the bad.

I'm just reminding people of the darkness because too much light often breeds adamantism.

P.S. Kilarin, I really appreciate your posts in this thread; I thought they were very insightful and well-worded. I especially enjoyed your use of a Narnia quote; few people have been able to express the actualities of faith like C.S. Lewis has. I really need to get around to reading Mere Christianity one of these days.

Top Gun wrote:my point is that I believe that God does answer my prayers, but the answers aren't always the ones I was expecting. I can't see the end of every situation, but God can, and I believe that God does what is right in the end.

Exactly! And you are way to kind about my extremely clumsy attempts to post, but thank you anyway.

Top Gun wrote:few people have been able to express the actualities of faith like C.S. Lewis has. Smile I really need to get around to reading Mere Christianity one of these days.

Absolutely, C. S. Lewis is the cats pajamas. C. S. Lewis helped to save my faith when I was going through a crisis in early adulthood. Mere Christianity is well worth the read, and so is Miracles, The Problem of Pain, The Screwtape Letters, The Abolition of Man, the Space Trilogy, and all the rest. If Lewis wrote it, it is WELL worth your time to read!

Kilarin