Philosophy Now Forum

please let's just not talk about it. i still can't come to terms with my mortality and the oblivion i am bound for, even after all these years. just now in reading this thread i wuz again gripped by that dreadfully cold, pointless and hopeless feeling i get when i am forced to reflect on my death and the eternal nothingness that will follow it.

i mean if u truly understand what that means dude... not just reading it but thinkin about the implications of that. it's crushing man. it's an existential sadness so heavy that its soul paralyzing, if only for that brief moment when genuinely thinking about it.

and it sucks man. none of us can imagine much less ever want to 'not be there', somewhere, existing. even death row inmates prefer to live in a cell to nothingness.

it's all so hopelessly pointless man. I'm bein sirius. i mean yeah we're all occupied and distracted right now posting or doing whatever, day after day... but it's comin dude. that day is comin and i just can't bear to think about it.

well i guess i would if i were giving an intro into existentialism course but u guys r supposed to know all this stuff. even the mannies and nicks and AJs know it, and r just being pragmatic and making pascal's wager. they don't really believe that religious stuff.

I'm bein sirius.

Dog? Mebbe. Star?

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 2:28 am please let's just not talk about it. i still can't come to terms with my mortality and the oblivion i am bound for, even after all these years. just now in reading this thread i wuz again gripped by that dreadfully cold, pointless and hopeless feeling i get when i am forced to reflect on my death and the eternal nothingness that will follow it.

i mean if u truly understand what that means dude... not just reading it but thinkin about the implications of that. it's crushing man. it's an existential sadness so heavy that its soul paralyzing, if only for that brief moment when genuinely thinking about it.

and it sucks man. none of us can imagine much less ever want to 'not be there', somewhere, existing. even death row inmates prefer to live in a cell to nothingness.

it's all so hopelessly pointless man. I'm bein sirius. i mean yeah we're all occupied and distracted right now posting or doing whatever, day after day... but it's comin dude. that day is comin and i just can't bear to think about it.

Well, that's genuine, honest fear-of-death. And it's a reality. That's not easy to face. So you have some courage, it would seem.

even the mannies and nicks and AJs know it, and r just being pragmatic and making pascal's wager. they don't really believe that religious stuff.

Try me.

I do believe it.

the only faith we can have is faith in a variation of an 'eternal recurrence' theory. but theories of souls possessing cumulative experiences and identities that live and die in an eternal cycle, are just superstitious nonsense.

but the eternal recurrence theory is not without a caveat. no matter how many times you exist, you can only ever experience one of those lives in that eternal chain of lives at a time. so, for all existential intents and purposes, the experience of the eternal recurrence or return is synonymous to the experience of one mortal life.

see what i mean? for the same reason you can't know now that you've existed countless times in the past, you wouldn't know the next time you existed after you die, i.e., some trillion years later a universe event happens again like the one we're part of now, and you end up happening in turn, etc., that you just got done existing a trillion years ago, and so on.

so, again, what solace or resolution do i get in considering it. the ER i mean.

damned if we do, damned if we don't. and I'm being generous here. the ER is not without scientific problems. but anthropomorphic theisms are, and have been since the enlightenment, undoubtedly out of the question.

when i wuz a philosophical rookie once upon a time i had a theory that there were human souls but that they stayed on the erf becuz they couldn't escape erf's gravity. the soul wuz like a disembodied assembly of the emergent properties of conscious experience but without sensory perception (as these assemblies would have no bodies or organs).

this would explain ghosts perhaps, or the existence of what are mistaken as angels and demons interacting with the physical world. there's nothing religious to any of this. these are just life form constructs that evolution produced. it just happened that the erf produced, if somewhat magically, a life form of some kind of essential awareness-ness that could experience itself and the world, disembodied, after it died its physical life... and/but could never leave the erf (unless it ghosted onto a shuttle obviously).

hey stranger shit has happened.

Okay let's say the sexual impetus or Eros that underlies the dynamic of asexual and sexual reproduction in even the simplest of creatures is really a kind of animating spirit force or something. The elan vital. A symbiote of sorts that possesses the physical organisms that inhabit the erf. Say somehow during the evolution of polymeric molecules that attracted and combined to form advanced molecules that eventually could replicate, some kind of autopoietic intelligence was generated. The organizing principle of self replication would express itself most basically as the sex drive... with unique complexities depending on the species.

At the level of the human being, this Eros is expressed most vividly, is the center of the personality and the enduring feature of the particular soul in life and after death. Or something like that. Fuck I can't even remember really what the details of this crazy theory wuz. I just remember thinkin souls couldn't leave the ref and there certainly wuddint any heaven or hell or transmigration or anything like that.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:10 am Again, as I've explained the majority have lost their sense of scale and relativity necessary to experience objective quality. People argue over belief systems without the experience of objective quality or the relation of phenomenon to its source. Why argue Christianity without distinguishing, even theoretically, its secular or transcendent origin?

For clarity, let's be specific. Do you think the majority of Christians reside in a cave'?

Do you think you reside in a cave?

Do you think you can discern who is and is not residing in a cave?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 1:44 pm Age

There are several reasons that oppose your approach. The first is that you don't appreciate the difference between knowledge and understanding and why you oppose understanding assuming you have it. The second is confusion over "I Am." God said that I am that I am Eventually the goal of human evolution begins with the transition of the plurality of human being into unity; "I AM" at a lower level. Some start believing they are God which is demonic.

That is why we cannot communicate.

Your ASSUMPTIONS here "nick_a" could NOT be FURTHER from what thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY, which makes what 'you' say and write here MOOT.

If 'you' EVER gain some 'humility' and some 'understanding', then 'you' WILL BEGIN to SEE WHERE and WHY 'you' are SO Wrong and SO BLIND here.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 2:28 am please let's just not talk about it. i still can't come to terms with my mortality and the oblivion i am bound for, even after all these years. just now in reading this thread i wuz again gripped by that dreadfully cold, pointless and hopeless feeling i get when i am forced to reflect on my death and the eternal nothingness that will follow it.

Don't give yourself a mental hernia while waiting for the inevitable. You won't feel a thing. I promise! It won't be like Prometheus having his liver shredded for all eternity.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:15 pm

Harry Baird wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:43 am you failed to respond.

I'm going to make two messages here, Harry: this one, to deal exclusively with procedure, and the second, after you decide, about the content. I'm not forgoing the content discussion; I'm just aware that procedure, at present, isn't salutary.

So let's decide this much, if we can. How do we want to talk to each other?

So far, we're in a kind of adversarial mode. I don't think that's profitable for us, especially in any discussion that aspires to take issues seriously and develop understandings carefully.

You said you didn't like any "Socratic" mode, or any "conversational" one. However, if we can't ask each other questions, and if we don't listen to each other and exchange ideas conversationally, I don't see how we're likely to go anywhere.

So I'm offering you whatever you would like: continue in the present mode, adversarial as it is, or opt for a more calm, unimpassioned, measured and conversational kind of exchange.

My personal preference is for the latter. I don't think anybody finds the former useful, or even particularly pleasant. But once the adversarial mode starts, egos tend to get involved (not accusing, just saying it generally happens to people this way)

'you' say this like the 'ego' in that body "immanuel can" does NOT get involved and does NOT get in the way.

Which is Truly laughable, from "other's" perspectives.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:15 pm and it becomes an issue of "wins" and "losses" rather than meaningful mutual progress. The barbs fly, the wording gets touchy, personalities get involved, and the ad hominem accusations fly.

Yes, VERY true. The CONDESCENSION and BELITTLING ALSO comes out of some VERY STRONGLY as well, and MORE SO in some than in others.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:15 pm But the two interlocutors have essentially given up listening to one another, so no progress is likely to happen...or even to be possible...after that.

Still, that mode of interaction is hard to give up, once one has started to adopt that tone and strategy, because it feels like a capitulation to somebody one has been practicing speaking abruptly to. It's difficult to de-escalate a habitual tone of conflict. But it can be done, if the two interlocutors are on the same page about that.

That's what I want to try to do here. So I want to offer you that option.

Some perceive this, AGAIN, as being VERY CONDESCENDING.

How about 'we' offer 'you' the option to CHANGE 'your' WAYS "immanuel can".

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:15 pm How do you want to proceed?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:09 am

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 3:07 pm The idea of an eternal Hell, then, is a 'pillar' that cannot be removed. The reason is obvious: if that pillar is removed the entire metaphysics could collapse.

That's no more or less true of the Doctrine of Hell than of any other doctrine, AJ. It's a whole package. It's not as if Christians can simply dispense with the Resurrection, or the miracles, or the Doctrine of Salvation, either. They're all part of a totality, of a worldview: one either believes God, or one doesn't.

AND, there IS the third option. That is; just REMAINING Truly OPEN, by NEITHER 'believing' NOR 'disbelieving' (in) God.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:09 am But I'm not worried about my "metaphysics collapsing." I think that's actually a pretty funny phrase.

Hold on to your knickers, and we'll see where Harry wants to go, first.

But 'we' have all been WAITING for 'you', here "immanuel can".

'you' CLAIM what "harry baird" said and wrote was NOT correct. So, 'we' have been WAITING for 'you' to FIX or Correct 'it'. That is; when 'you' fill us in in what is Wrong or Incorrect, from your perspective, to begin with.

By the way, what IS Wrong AND Incorrect in what "harry baird" has written and said here is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS. But, just like 'you', "immanuel can", "harry baird's" BELIEFS ALSO prevent and STOP that one from being ABLE TO SEE the CONTRADICTIONS, and thus is ALSO UNABLE to SEE, and UNDERSTAND, what thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY.

Just the BELIEF in "harry baird" that 'you', "immanuel can", are NOT OPEN and also can NOT SEE the CONTRADICTION/S in what 'you' SAY and CLAIM is HYPOCRISY to the EXTREME and a SELF-CONTRADICTION, in and of ITSELF.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:10 am

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:55 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 1:27 pm There are and have been a minority who for one reason or another came to realize they reside in Plato's Cave governed by imagination. If they have the need and courage they seek to understand why it is so and find the way out.

I think we can see the power and intoxication of imagination in all areas of human existence, including in Christianity and other religious beliefs, as well. Do you agree?

Do you feel that you can somehow discern those who are in such a cave?

No. I can only verify that I am in the cave and verify the reason for its hold on me

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 1:27 pmThat is why on philosophy sites The Cave allegory is never explored and those willing to do so without interpreting it into oblivion, are banished.

Well, #1, that's not why anyone is banished; and #2, the idea can only be explored honestly if it's not presented from the projection of someone else's 'cave'.

But it is impossible to do until a person experiences and admits they are in the cave. That is square one and essential to acquire understanding. People are banished because secular opinions are dominant. That is why Jesus said the world must hate him and knew he had to be killed.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 1:27 pmTo do so threatens ones reason to exist so is intolerable for secular sites.

Challenges to Christianity are typically not tolerated by Christians for the reason you attribute to secularism. Their belief system gives them a reason to exist, so they are resistent or unable to question it without bias. Does it really matter whether or not one believes in a god, in regard to whether or not one is functioning in a 'cave' (as you say)?

Again, as I've explained the majority have lost their sense of scale and relativity necessary to experience objective quality.

INCLUDING the one here known as "nick_a".

People argue over belief systems without the experience of objective quality or the relation of phenomenon to its source. [/quote]

WHEN, and IF, 'you' EVER get around to INFORMING 'us' of what 'your' VERY OWN views or BELIEFS are about what 'objective quality' IS, EXACTLY, and about this so-called 'relation of phenomenon to its source', THEN, and ONLY THEN, we WILL HAVE some 'thing' to, literally, LOOK AT and DISCUSS. Until then 'we' have NOTHING, REALLY.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:10 am Why argue Christianity without distinguishing, even theoretically, its secular or transcendent origin?

WHY speak in SUCH RIDDLES, WITHOUT SAYING ANY thing of ANY REAL 'thing' of NOTE WORTHY?

Also, NO one is 'arguing' "christianity" here.

Some people are just 'arguing' OVER their OWN BELIEFS and MISINTERPRETATIONS of what has been written in a book called 'the bible'.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 6:02 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:42 pm

Nothing like good coffee.



Is the objective awareness of the calling from the depth of our being determined by the mind or by the heart? This question could generate so much negativity that I would be kicked out for questioning the superiority of the mind as it pertains to AJs question "how to see."

"The heart" says Nick, intending that his reader will presume emotion is mystic truth.

No. The heart is the source of all our negative emotions arising from habit our species has learned in life.

This here is a PRIME EXAMPLE of WHY the adult human being', in the days when this was being written, had NEVER YET REACHED thee ACTUAL Truth of things. That is; and from what can be CLEARLY SEEN here, they would speak of or about 'one thing' but MEAN a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT 'thing'.

CONTRARY to POPULAR BELIEF, in the days when this was being written, 'we', of the KNOWING, KNOW that 'the heart' PUMPS BLOOD, and has absolutely NO influence on 'emotions' AT ALL. But, to these adults, the term, 'the heart', very frequently, was used in reference to 'emotions', and the term 'the mind' was used in reference to 'the thinking' or 'the thoughts'.

Which, as 'we' NOW KNOW is Truly LAUGHABLE, especially considering what thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY.

By the way, how is that for 'humility' "nick_a"?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am They arise from below or the same level Dualism arises from.

1. In Life there are NO 'levels'. There is ONLY thee One, United.

2. The term 'dualism' just refers to when human beings 'separate' thee One Thing, CONCEPTUALLY, into MANY 'things'.

3. When 'you' say and CLAIM, " 'They' arise", what is the 'they' word in reference to, EXACTLY?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am However Man has the capacity to receive emotional quality descending from above in the form of grace.

INSTEAD of just TALKING ABOUT 'it', HOW ABOUT 'you' START SHOWING 'it', WHILE EXPLAINING what 'it' IS, EXACTLY?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am This is a higher quality of emotion.

'What' IS, supposedly, a so-called "higher quality of emotion"?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am Some can experience higher emotions but many deny themselves the experience.

WHAT "higher" emotions? And, "higher" in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

'you', human beings, have, roughly, about 450 DIFFERENT emotions. As far as I am AWARE NONE of them are so-called "higher" NOR "lower". To me, ALL 'emotions' are JUST 'emotions', which come and go, or arise and recede DEPENDING ON what is HAPPENING TO or around a human body. Also, and let us NOT FORGET that what that body has previously experience plays a HUGE PART on HOW and on WHAT 'emotion' arises at ANY GIVEN TIME.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am In short, many prefer the struggle between the negative emotions of cave life to be called "right" and only a relative few can transcend the power of negative emotions through the higher power of grace to "see" what controls them.

1. WHY do 'you', "nick_a" just TELL 'us' WHAT CONTROLS 'us', instead of all of this ALLUDING TO TALK of 'yours'?

2. Contrary to POPULAR BELIEF, again which existed in the days when this was being written, there are NO, laughably, so-called 'negative emotions'. ALL 'emotions' play a role in Life ENLIGHTENING one to what is going on around 'them' or to 'them', as well as GUIDING 'them' to what IS Right and what IS Wrong in Life. ALL 'emotions' are like a 'sign post' or 'signals' IN Life.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am Here's a cockeye'd question for the Hell can't be forever crowd.

If nuthin' you can do, no matter how evil, warrants eternal punishment, then how can anything you do, no matter how good, warrant eternal reward?

AGAIN, here is a PRIME EXAMPLE of just how absolutely Truly SELFISH the adult human being REALLY WAS, back in those OLDEN DAYS, when this was being written.

The terms 'hell', 'eternal punishment', 'heaven', and 'eternal reward' have absolutely NOTHING AT ALL to do with just one individual AND separate human being NOR person. Rid "yourselves" of this MISREPRESENTATION, STOP BELIEVING that these terms and words apply to 'you', INDIVIDUALLY, OPEN UP, AND THEN 'we' can MOVE ALONG here to FIND OUT 'what' THEE ACTUAL TRUTH IS, EXACTLY.

Until then KEEP BELIEVING whatever 'you' like, AND KEEP fighting/arguing over YOUR BELIEFS. If thousands of years of NOT PROGRESSING is NOT ENOUGH 'evidence' AND 'proof' that THAT WAY does NOT WORK, then I do NOT KNOW what else 'you' NEED.

Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:58 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 am Here's a cockeye'd question for the Hell can't be forever crowd.

If nuthin' you can do, no matter how evil, warrants eternal punishment, then how can anything you do, no matter how good, warrant eternal reward?

It won't and can't in either case. There reigns only the supreme neutrality of oblivion. Whether you were St. Francis or Hitler makes no difference. We all get buried in the same cosmic landfill. Saint or sinner makes no difference to nature which has no reference to any moral judgements or belief systems.

ABSOLUTELY EVERY one of 'you', adult human beings, DO 'good things' AND 'bad/wrong things'. 'you' are ALL EQUAL in this regard.

Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:58 am When you're dead, you're no better than anything else that died...which doesn't bother me in the least.

WHEN, what is Wrongly called and thus a MISNOMER, 'you are dead', then ABSOLUTELY NONE of 'you', in that state, COULD EVER BE 'bothered'.

As just POINTED OUT EVERY one of 'you', in that state, are NO better off NOR worse off than ANY 'thing' else, in that state. NONE of 'you' are AWARE of ABSOLUTELY ANY thing AT ALL, ANY MORE.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 1:10 am

There reigns only the supreme neutrality of oblivion.

This might be the only thing we agree on, Dub.

I'd like Valhalla, myself: drinkin' & wenchin', but I thinkin' oblivion is what it is for all of us.

WHY ONLY "think' this?

Is there ABSOLUTELY ANY thing ELSE that even REMOTELY SHOWS or SUGGESTS ANY thing else OTHERWISE?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 1:10 am which means: get your licks in today!

AND, 'getting your so-called 'licks in today' is WHY 'hell' WOULD continue on FOREVER MORE.

WHEN 'you' adult human beings STOP 'trying to' GET what 'you' can OUT OF Life, to satisfy your OWN personal VERY GREEDY behaviors and ways, then, and ONLY THEN, 'heaven' can START to BEGIN, or BEGIN to START, and THEN could GO ON, FOREVER MORE.