Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 8:28 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 4:01 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 5:40 pm

And don't you dictate to me, someone with ageless experience with the concept of what is God, with your dog shit waffle.

We've all got God opinions Dogfish. .

Where in this thread have I dictated to anyone? Your opinions on God which you keep spamming attention grabbing pointless threads about are ridiculous, because clearly you have no experience interacting with God...you ARE clueless.

The only dictating going on, is within the head of the one who is dictating to themself.
To accuse others of dictating is your own projection.

The voice in your head that you love to tell others about, the voice that you claim to talk to, the one you call God, or sage, or whatever, is actually you. You are literally only talking to yourself. There is no other voice in your head other than you.

But there is 'the thinking voice', and then there IS 'the KNOWING voice', BOTH happening within adult human bodies.

Being able to DIFFERENTIATE between the TWO then allows and gives one the ability to KNOW the DIFFERENCE between LISTENING TO God, or thee True Self, FROM just listening to "one's" own 'self', that is; just 'you'.

Obviously One KNOWS what IS True, Right, Accurate, AND Correct in relation to Life and the Universe, Itself, while the "other" is 'just you'. 'you' know, the one that, literally, only 'thinks' 'it' KNOWS.

And, OBVIOUSLY, if 'you' KNOW some 'thing' to be ABSOLUTELY, ACTUALLY, IRREFUTABLY True, Right, Accurate, AND Correct, then 'you' ALSO KNOW that EVERY one "else" could AGREE WITH and ACCEPT 'it' AS WELL, which MEANS that EVERY 'one' is IN AGREEMENT and ACCEPTANCE as One, which IS, AGAIN, just ANOTHER word for 'God'.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 8:28 am Then when you hear something like that put to you by another, you then accuse the other person of telling you what you do not like to hear, going off into a defence mode by accusing them of dictating to you something you deem as being contrary and counter-intuitive to that of your own beliefs.

It's ok for people to have different view points, ideas, beliefs and thoughts about things...

NOT necessarily so, and NEVER NOT ALWAYS.

That 'it' HAPPENS IS OBVIOUS, and just ANOTHER 'thing' that EVERY one CAN and DOES AGREE WITH and ACCEPT, as One. Which ALSO MEANS that 'that' is just ANOTHER ACTUAL Truth, which could NEVER be REFUTED.

Thus just ANOTHER KNOWING, which can be HEARD, and LISTENED TO, WITHIN 'the head'.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 8:28 am people have their own ways of expressing themselves as to the nature of their being

But absolutely EVERY person has the EXACT SAME so-called 'nature of 'their' being'.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 8:28 am and what they believe about reality, we all like to do that..but why be rude to them? why not just say you don't agree, and leave it there. Why do you have to resort to the heavy mob tactic of calling people attention seeking clueless spammers?

You accuse others of dictating to you, but then play the innocent of all possible dictation to others, but have no problem accusing other people of it, while proudly washing your own hands of it. Typical arrogant cock.


You come to this forum talking about how you talk to yourself which you call God, and don't seem to have a problem with that. But if someone else talks about their experience as to what God means to them....you go off on one of your boring unpleasant hissy fits in defence like a spoilt little brat. Calling other people attention seeking spammers who are clueless. I mean wtf, who died and made you God?

You are such a rude person, just a plain, ordinary, very basic, mostly dull person, who is hardly worth replying to at all because you exude nothing of any value or significance in the way of a decent personality I could ever relate to in any desirable or intellectual fashion whatsoever.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 5:27 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 5:14 pm
Just like you have no reason to think that God is remotely likely.

Yes.

There is not much point attempting to comprehend what a soul is or any notion of reincarnation without at least making an effort 1st to comprehend ways in which God or some intelligence at least could plausibly operate at the fundamental level of matter to facilitate such a thing.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 12:48 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 5:27 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 5:14 pm
Just like you have no reason to think that God is remotely likely.

Yes.

There is not much point attempting to comprehend what a soul is or any notion of reincarnation without at least making an effort 1st to comprehend ways in which God or some intelligence at least could plausibly operate at the fundamental level of matter to facilitate such a thing.

Having to believe in one unlikely thing in order to understand another also seems a bit pointless. It doesn't matter; I'm not on a quest for enlightenment, or anything, I'm just curious.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:22 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 12:48 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 5:27 pm
Yes.

There is not much point attempting to comprehend what a soul is or any notion of reincarnation without at least making an effort 1st to comprehend ways in which God or some intelligence at least could plausibly operate at the fundamental level of matter to facilitate such a thing.

Having to believe in one unlikely thing in order to understand another also seems a bit pointless. It doesn't matter; I'm not on a quest for enlightenment, or anything, I'm just curious.

Well then perhaps we should look at what it is that makes such a concept as God unlikely to you. Certainly I am more perplexed in knowing it exists, especially where so much suffering appears to be happening.

So beyond that, what else makes you think it unlikely? (if you are still curious)

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:28 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:22 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 12:48 pm

There is not much point attempting to comprehend what a soul is or any notion of reincarnation without at least making an effort 1st to comprehend ways in which God or some intelligence at least could plausibly operate at the fundamental level of matter to facilitate such a thing.

Having to believe in one unlikely thing in order to understand another also seems a bit pointless. It doesn't matter; I'm not on a quest for enlightenment, or anything, I'm just curious.

Well then perhaps we should look at what it is that makes such a concept as God unlikely to you. Certainly I am more perplexed in knowing it exists, especially where so much suffering appears to be happening.

So beyond that, what else makes you think it unlikely? (if you are still curious)

Just my own experience of living in the world, and my observations of what the laws of nature allow, and what they don't. Some things can and do happen, and some things never happen. We are born, we hang around for a while, and then we die. There has never been an exception to that process, so until I see evidence to the contrary, that is what I take to be reality. As for suffering; it is just an inevitable part of being sentient.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:47 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:28 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:22 pm

Having to believe in one unlikely thing in order to understand another also seems a bit pointless. It doesn't matter; I'm not on a quest for enlightenment, or anything, I'm just curious.

Well then perhaps we should look at what it is that makes such a concept as God unlikely to you. Certainly I am more perplexed in knowing it exists, especially where so much suffering appears to be happening.

So beyond that, what else makes you think it unlikely? (if you are still curious)

Just my own experience of living in the world, and my observations of what the laws of nature allow, and what they don't. Some things can and do happen, and some things never happen. We are born, we hang around for a while, and then we die. There has never been an exception to that process, so until I see evidence to the contrary, that is what I take to be reality. As for suffering; it is just an inevitable part of being sentient.

Yes. But is death the end? Death of an individual is what it says on the tin, but death of what that deceased individual did is impossible, because that individual's actions were causes that fed into the interminable network of causes and effects.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:53 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:47 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:28 pm

Well then perhaps we should look at what it is that makes such a concept as God unlikely to you. Certainly I am more perplexed in knowing it exists, especially where so much suffering appears to be happening.

So beyond that, what else makes you think it unlikely? (if you are still curious)

Just my own experience of living in the world, and my observations of what the laws of nature allow, and what they don't. Some things can and do happen, and some things never happen. We are born, we hang around for a while, and then we die. There has never been an exception to that process, so until I see evidence to the contrary, that is what I take to be reality. As for suffering; it is just an inevitable part of being sentient.

Yes. But is death the end? Death of an individual is what it says on the tin, but death of what that deceased individual did is impossible, because that individual's actions were causes that fed into the interminable network of causes and effects.

Is it too unfathomable to consider that at the most finite sub-atomic scale of matter, where that of our perception of the nature of reality sits upon, there is an intelligence?

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:53 pm
Yes. But is death the end? Death of an individual is what it says on the tin, but death of what that deceased individual did is impossible, because that individual's actions were causes that fed into the interminable network of causes and effects.

There seems no reason to think it isn't the end of "I" and "you". The life of every individual sends out waves of cause and effect that will ripple on to eternity; is it not sufficient to just say that, rather than thinking of it as the individual persisting after death?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:03 pm
Is it too unfathomable to consider that at the most finite sub-atomic scale of matter, where that of our perception of the nature of reality sits upon, there is an intelligence?

It seems a reasonable speculation, but I can't see a reason to make the leap from, there could be, to there is.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:11 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:03 pm
Is it too unfathomable to consider that at the most finite sub-atomic scale of matter, where that of our perception of the nature of reality sits upon, there is an intelligence?

It seems a reasonable speculation, but I can't see a reason to make the leap from, there could be, to there is.

Fair enough, it would require evidence and for this intelligence, let's call it God, it requested us to have faith first for that evidence. Thus your curious quest may remain stifled.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 3:13 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:11 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:03 pm
Is it too unfathomable to consider that at the most finite sub-atomic scale of matter, where that of our perception of the nature of reality sits upon, there is an intelligence?

It seems a reasonable speculation, but I can't see a reason to make the leap from, there could be, to there is.

Fair enough, it would require evidence and for this intelligence, let's call it God, it requested us to have faith first for that evidence. Thus your curious quest may remain stifled.

Nope, the word 'intelligence' is a human concept. It doesn't exist outside of it's conceptual knowing.
There is no separate individual knower, there is only one unitary KNOWING.
The real world was here long before humans EVER existed, the universe never made a request to make the totality of the universe intelligent.

Humans invented God, humans imply separation, humans invented God as a concept known, there is no other way round about it. The word God is an artificially imposed supposition upon nothingness, at best it's a human story made of nothing but empty concepts, that know nothing, appearing as everything in this conception.

Humans are able to express themselves using words which caUSED an artificial (separation)...And the story went something like this...This is my pain, this is my pleasure, this is my joy, this is my hell, or heaven ...etc etc...the word 'me' or 'my' or 'I' are made-up concepts which is bascially just SOUND appearing out of silent unknowing nothingness.
The human body, or any sentient body is the sense organ of the experiencing of what is immaterial ...a psyche, a pain, a pleasure, or any other sensation or emotion..etc..all of which have no actual substance or location that can exist as an actual physical object/which is a just a concept known that cannot know anything, they are simply spontaneously self arising experiences for no one.

In reality, there is no 'my' implying separation where there isn't any.

In reality, there is no such thing as an 'I' making association with concepts. Concepts are an artificial overlay upon this immediate unknowing silent nothingness, appearing as everything, an illusion.

Knowledge can only point to the illusory nature of reality, it's not real, it's make-belief.

The make-belief does not mean nothing is happening, it just means it's not happening to any one, it's just happening to no one.

Even with the pretence of it appearing as though, it is happening to a 'me' ...is in reality, just nothing pretending it is happening to a 'me'

Senses and sensations are known to be an exquisite experience even so, or it could be the opposite, it could be excrutiating.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:05 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:53 pm
Yes. But is death the end? Death of an individual is what it says on the tin, but death of what that deceased individual did is impossible, because that individual's actions were causes that fed into the interminable network of causes and effects.

There seems no reason to think it isn't the end of "I" and "you". The life of every individual sends out waves of cause and effect that will ripple on to eternity; is it not sufficient to just say that, rather than thinking of it as the individual persisting after death?

With the reservation that individuals are soon forgotten, even the most famous get forgotten eventually, I agree it's sufficient. Except that there is no snappy phrase like 'life after death' to describe it. Can you think of one?

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 6:39 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:05 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:53 pm
Yes. But is death the end? Death of an individual is what it says on the tin, but death of what that deceased individual did is impossible, because that individual's actions were causes that fed into the interminable network of causes and effects.

There seems no reason to think it isn't the end of "I" and "you". The life of every individual sends out waves of cause and effect that will ripple on to eternity; is it not sufficient to just say that, rather than thinking of it as the individual persisting after death?

With the reservation that individuals are soon forgotten, even the most famous get forgotten eventually, I agree it's sufficient. Except that there is no snappy phrase like 'life after death' to describe it. Can you think of one?

This is, in essence, what Age calls the soul of a person, and I wouldn't have a problem with that, were it not for the word having a much more commonly thought of meaning. But no, I can't think of a snappy description.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:03 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 6:39 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:05 pm

There seems no reason to think it isn't the end of "I" and "you". The life of every individual sends out waves of cause and effect that will ripple on to eternity; is it not sufficient to just say that, rather than thinking of it as the individual persisting after death?

With the reservation that individuals are soon forgotten, even the most famous get forgotten eventually, I agree it's sufficient. Except that there is no snappy phrase like 'life after death' to describe it. Can you think of one?

This is, in essence, what Age calls the soul of a person, and I wouldn't have a problem with that, were it not for the word having a much more commonly thought of meaning. But no, I can't think of a snappy description.

I copied this from Dictionary.com

The literal meaning of the word soul is the spirit that’s believed to inhabit a person separate from their body—the spiritual self, as opposed to the physical self (this sense is reflected in the phrase body and soul).

In this sense, some believe the soul survives after the death of the body—in a form we might call a spirit or ghost.

Some people associate the soul with a person’s inner self or essence, or perhaps their personality, ego, or psyche.

Soul is often also used in figurative and metaphorical ways.

The phrase soul-searching means contemplating what a person feels in their heart (in the figurative sense) or conscience.

Soul is sometimes used as a way to refer to a person, as in Not a soul was left on board.

Expressions like old soul and creative soul emphasize a person’s sensibilities.

To say that someone has soul often means that they have spirit, courage, and passion. Someone who’s described as soulful is passionate or expressive.

Sometimes, soul is used to refer to the core or driving force behind something. This sometimes refers to a person, as in Kate is the soul of this operation. Heart is sometimes used in the same way, as is the phrase heart and soul.

Much more specifically, soul is often used to describe things involving Black American culture, such as soul food. The word soul is commonly used as a short way of referring to soul music.

What is the difference between soul and spirit?

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:29 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:03 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 6:39 pm
With the reservation that individuals are soon forgotten, even the most famous get forgotten eventually, I agree it's sufficient. Except that there is no snappy phrase like 'life after death' to describe it. Can you think of one?

This is, in essence, what Age calls the soul of a person, and I wouldn't have a problem with that, were it not for the word having a much more commonly thought of meaning. But no, I can't think of a snappy description.

I copied this from Dictionary.com

The literal meaning of the word soul is the spirit that’s believed to inhabit a person separate from their body—the spiritual self, as opposed to the physical self (this sense is reflected in the phrase body and soul).

In this sense, some believe the soul survives after the death of the body—in a form we might call a spirit or ghost.

Some people associate the soul with a person’s inner self or essence, or perhaps their personality, ego, or psyche.

Soul is often also used in figurative and metaphorical ways.

The phrase soul-searching means contemplating what a person feels in their heart (in the figurative sense) or conscience.

Soul is sometimes used as a way to refer to a person, as in Not a soul was left on board.

Expressions like old soul and creative soul emphasize a person’s sensibilities.

To say that someone has soul often means that they have spirit, courage, and passion. Someone who’s described as soulful is passionate or expressive.

Sometimes, soul is used to refer to the core or driving force behind something. This sometimes refers to a person, as in Kate is the soul of this operation. Heart is sometimes used in the same way, as is the phrase heart and soul.

Much more specifically, soul is often used to describe things involving Black American culture, such as soul food. The word soul is commonly used as a short way of referring to soul music.

What is the difference between soul and spirit?

The first definition on the list is the one I question: "some believe the soul survives after the death of the body—in a form we might call a spirit or ghost."

All the others are just figurative terms.