For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Hilarious. Waste of time. Forget it.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 10:07 pmWell of course your not going to bother with the hard questions you have no answer for.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 10:04 pmI have no idea what "the question" really was. It was so nonsensical, so unrelated to anything I had said, that I quite frankly didn't bother.
Still not gonna.
Yeah it's always a waste of time when it suits you isn't it. So lets just forget it, better than having to think real hard for a change, or is there a quote out of the bible you can use to answer my question, that will always save your face from ever having to think for yourself.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 10:14 pmHilarious. Waste of time. Forget it.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 10:07 pmWell of course your not going to bother with the hard questions you have no answer for.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 10:04 pm
I have no idea what "the question" really was. It was so nonsensical, so unrelated to anything I had said, that I quite frankly didn't bother.
Still not gonna.
How can the one who does not see life experience any wrath being directed at him? Sounds like God will be harboring bitterness toward someone who is gone.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 8:50 pm
"The one who believes in the Son has eternal life; but the one who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.” (John 3:36)
Do you have a better explanation for the purpose of the soul? Some feel that there must be a purpose for the universe and our lives within it. Others deny it. I'm one of the minority who contemplates purpose introduced by others in the past and verify it for myself through deductive reason. I've found these people are far more intelligent then those lost in denial. To each his own.Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 9:15 pmYou can go wherever you like in your imagination, Nick, but just make sure you are back in time to haul yourself out of bed and get to work.Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 8:53 pm
Are we children of the earth or also children of the light? We are dual natured. Henri Nouman wrote:
"To whom do we belong? This is the core question of the spiritual life. Do we belong to the world, its worries, its people and its endless chain of urgencies and emergencies, or do we belong to God and God's people."
Doesn't it make more sense that the purpose of the human soul when we have one, is to receive from above and give to below? This means knowing how to take care of the earth from a higher conscious perspective rather then abusing it and justifying it through secular hypocrisy?
If you are talking about the metaphoric soul; the part of us that appreciates beauty, love, music and the like, I suppose its purpose is to make our lives richer. If you mean soul in the literal sense, then I don't believe there is any such thing.
I don't feel there is a purpose, but there's no reason why we shouldn't create a purpose for ourselves.Some feel that there must be a purpose for the universe and our lives within it.
If that's a problem, isn't it their problem?Others deny it.
I assume you do that because you find value in it, but others might value something different.I'm one of the minority who contemplates purpose introduced by others in the past and verify it for myself through deductive reason.
How can you be sure they are lost?I've found these people are far more intelligent then those lost in denial.
You say that, but you seem far from content that it should be so.To each his own.
OBVIOUSLY, 'you', "immanuel can", are NOT YET AWARE that the 'second coming' of "jesus"/'the Son' brings with it the UNDERSTANDING of what words like 'the Son' are in reference to, EXACTLY.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:53 pm
"The one who believes in the Son has eternal life; but the one who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.” (John 3:36)
OBVIOUSLY, and 'you' appear to NOT YET UNDERSTAND this ALSO "immanuel can", but if one BELIEVES that there is NO God, then to them there is NO God. So, to question "ones" 'self' if some NONE existing 'thing' BELIEVES we BELIEVE in some NONE existing 'thing' is ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY in the ABSOLUTE EXTREME.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:53 pm The novelist Robertson Davies said that the question we need to ask ourselves is not whether or not we believe God exists, but whether or not He 'believes' we do.
VERY TRUE.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:53 pm In other words, what we believe may change our eternal destiny. But what we believe will, of course, not change what eternal destinies actually exist.
Right. There's no logical connection between "created a bunch of stuff" and "epistemic convictions are necessarily objective" - not even if you were the only being in existence before you created the bunch of stuff.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:17 pmBeing the Creator and the Supreme Being?Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:13 pmThat's a weak grounding.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:08 pm In virtue of having created reality, and constituted it according to His design. There's no higher reference point.
Again, on this I refer you back to our years-old debate on the grounding of morality, which applies similarly to justice.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:17 pm But if, as you will say, it did not, then it would not help your own conception of "justice" at all.
The world cannot change what it is. Since we are as we are, everything remains as it is. However I can support those with understanding. Simone Weil wrote" "That reality is the unique source of all the good that can exist in this world: that is to say, all beauty, all truth, all justice, all legitimacy, all order, and all human behaviour that is mindful of obligations.Harbal wrote: ↑Sun Oct 02, 2022 12:24 amIf you are talking about the metaphoric soul; the part of us that appreciates beauty, love, music and the like, I suppose its purpose is to make our lives richer. If you mean soul in the literal sense, then I don't believe there is any such thing.
One doesn't need a soul to appreciate beauty love or music. People do it all the time even without souls.
I don't feel there is a purpose, but there's no reason why we shouldn't create a purpose for ourselves.Some feel that there must be a purpose for the universe and our lives within it.
If there is no universal purpose or purpose for life within it, would you agree justice must be defined as "might makes right". Take away the bs and justice is really survival of the fittest normal for any animal.
If that's a problem, isn't it their problem?Others deny it.
Yes, if you are on the losing side of the food chain, it is their problem
I assume you do that because you find value in it, but others might value something different.I'm one of the minority who contemplates purpose introduced by others in the past and verify it for myself through deductive reason.
I look for those putting in the efforts necessary to verify objective values. This differs from those arguing over theoretical subjective values.
How can you be sure they are lost?I've found these people are far more intelligent then those lost in denial.
Consider the chaos and hypocrisy of the world leading to the ultimate stupidity of war. It should be obvious that the darkness of the world lives in denial
You say that, but you seem far from content that it should be so.To each his own.
Harbal wrote: ↑Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:31 am
Maybe it's because I don't know the context in which that was written that I don't understand what is being said here. While truth and justice etc. all seem like desireable things, they don't have much meaning spoken of in the abstract. Can you explain what Simone Weil was thinking of when she wrote this, and something about what she meant by it?
Being helpful is no cause for apology.
I agree, on its own it doesn't say much. Nick is an authority on Simone Weil, so I was hoping he would be able to explain what it would mean when applied to the real world, as opposed to just being spoken of in the abstract.She is saying that all the good things in the world can only come from reality. I would like to add that reality is also the only place where all the bad things in the world can come from. In other words, what she says doesn't tell us much.
The only guide is our own conscience which is contingent on memory in the here an now. Knowledge on demand is remembering what already exists. Words are the memory of our own conscience, there is nothing in the bible that pertains to the immediate space of realtime reality, because realtime is ever new in every moment. To associate with past events is to dam up the natural flow of now, to get stuck in eddies which are obstacles to ever attaining the clarity of being which is always now.
Nick says "purpose of the soul". Psychologically ,purpose is synonymous with goal or meaning.Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 11:49 pmDo you have a better explanation for the purpose of the soul? Some feel that there must be a purpose for the universe and our lives within it. Others deny it. I'm one of the minority who contemplates purpose introduced by others in the past and verify it for myself through deductive reason. I've found these people are far more intelligent then those lost in denial. To each his own.Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 9:15 pmYou can go wherever you like in your imagination, Nick, but just make sure you are back in time to haul yourself out of bed and get to work.Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 8:53 pm
Are we children of the earth or also children of the light? We are dual natured. Henri Nouman wrote:
"To whom do we belong? This is the core question of the spiritual life. Do we belong to the world, its worries, its people and its endless chain of urgencies and emergencies, or do we belong to God and God's people."
Doesn't it make more sense that the purpose of the human soul when we have one, is to receive from above and give to below? This means knowing how to take care of the earth from a higher conscious perspective rather then abusing it and justifying it through secular hypocrisy?
I agree with this. Although some writings (from many books) can inspire us and broaden our thinking, they cannot surpass the potential and realization of what's available in every new present moment which can also inspire us and broaden our thinking.
Yes. It only makes sense that we can continue realizing more than what we've realized before. That does not diminish the value of the past for the past, or what we might learn by assessing it within the larger picture. But it seems a ridiculous mistake (to me) to idolize the past more than embracing the present moment.