Eternity or Oblivion: My Wager

[Gary Childress]

Which is better? Spending eternity existing or existing for only a finite amount of time? Is eternity in hell better or worse than oblivion? Or is it worth the gamble to try to go to heaven? If one believes in heaven, then it seems like there must be something other than heaven for the other half. That is then "hell" and if one is betting on a world of both "heaven" and "hell" then does the gamble not balance itself out--that one could possibly end up in "hell" as much as one might end up in "heaven"(possibly due to ignorance or bad luck)? Conversely, if one gambles on oblivion (no afterlife, only finitude in existence) then does one end up somewhere in between the two or outside of them (the null set)? The biggest drawback of oblivion seems to be that finitude is not necessarily an individual choice. If one chooses to focus on the short term--the fleeting moment of life--then perhaps one may end up causing more 'ecological' damage to the world as one does one's best to live the best life for the greatest amount of time (burning more resources, turning them into waste, or taking more good things and leaving more bad things for others to contend with).

These are two choices that can be made; finitude or eternity. And they both are either good or bad choices based on what is called 'reality'. If reality is one way, then perhaps believing in eternity is best. If reality is another way, then perhaps believing in finitude is best. Or can life be lived in such a way as to be lived 'well' in such respect as both finitude and eternity are equally 'good' choices for one to place his or her bet on?

[promethean75]

what leaves this 'god' dumbfounded is when a human being suffers so much - becoming incredibly strong as a result - that they are no longer afraid of 'hell' and laugh at the thought of it (@ 1:27)

nothing pisses 'god' off more than that, and there is very little in life that is better quality entertainment than this.

Remember, the devil knows 'god' more intimately than anyone else... knows all his little lies, his failures, his contradictions, his arrogance, etc.

[Gary Childress]

what leaves this 'god' dumbfounded is when a human being suffers so much - becoming incredibly strong as a result - that they are no longer afraid of 'hell' and laugh at the thought of it.

nothing pisses 'god' off more than that, and there is very little in life that is better quality entertainment than this.

Remember, the devil knows 'god' more intimately than anyone else... knows all his little lies, his failures, his contradictions, his arrogance, etc.

I suppose there is a sense of universalism vs particularism here or cosmopolitanism vs tribalism.

[seeds]

Which is better? Spending eternity existing or existing for only a finite amount of time?

Doesn't that pretty much depend on what one might do to pass the time if one existed eternally?

Is eternity in hell better or worse than oblivion?

Why would you even ask such a question?

Not only would oblivion be infinitely better than spending eternity writhing in agony in the fiery "hell" conjured up by knuckleheaded humans,...

...but oblivion would also be infinitely better than simply spending eternity on this planet - in these extremely limited bodies, regardless of one's circumstances (be they good or bad).

Or is it worth the gamble to try to go to heaven?

Other than the unfortunate (perhaps "hell-like") circumstances one might find oneself subjected to during one's temporary existence on this planet, there is no actual "Hell" awaiting anyone after death.

Furthermore, if our ultimate form is indeed designed to last for eternity, then I suggest that whatever situation awaits us following the event of death, it will be far more logical and purposeful than the silly mythological nonsense handed down to us from ancient minds.

As I keep insisting over and over again, it is time to leave the "old paradigm" visions of reality behind.

If one believes in heaven, then it seems like there must be something other than heaven for the other half.

There is no "other half," Gary, we're all in this together as equals (equals even with God, as difficult as that might be to believe).

And whatever awaits us following death,...

(be it eternal life in a higher [and better] context of reality, or eternal oblivion)

...it will be precisely the same for all of us.
_______

[Gary Childress]

Which is better? Spending eternity existing or existing for only a finite amount of time?

Doesn't that pretty much depend on what one might do to pass the time if one existed eternally?

Is eternity in hell better or worse than oblivion?

Why would you even ask such a question?

Not only would oblivion be infinitely better than spending eternity writhing in agony in the fiery "hell" conjured up by knuckleheaded humans,...

...but oblivion would also be infinitely better than simply spending eternity on this planet - in these extremely limited bodies, regardless of one's circumstances (be they good or bad).

Or is it worth the gamble to try to go to heaven?

Other than the unfortunate (perhaps "hell-like") circumstances one might find oneself subjected to during one's temporary existence on this planet, there is no actual "Hell" awaiting anyone after death.

Furthermore, if our ultimate form is indeed designed to last for eternity, then I suggest that whatever situation awaits us following the event of death, it will be far more logical and purposeful than the silly mythological nonsense handed down to us from ancient minds.

As I keep insisting over and over again, it is time to leave the "old paradigm" visions of reality behind.

If one believes in heaven, then it seems like there must be something other than heaven for the other half.

There is no "other half," Gary, we're all in this together as equals (equals even with God, as difficult as that might be to believe).

And whatever awaits us following death,...

(be it eternal life in a higher [and better] context of reality, or eternal oblivion)

...it will be precisely the same for all of us.
_______

I guess it comes down to which is better, to experience or not to experience. As a world dweller, I'm prone to think experience (even if it is bad) is better than no experience at all. However, as Epicurus alluded to, if one ceases to be after death, then the only time we have to worry or be fearful about death, pain, and suffering is while we're alive.

Of course, it all boils down to which is truly the case. Are we to believe that all the amazing complexity and dynamism of the world just popped up by accident or is there some creator behind it? And if there is a creator, then does that creator want anything in particular from us, or is that creator pretty much as interested in what we do as s/he might be interested in what a single-cell amoeba somewhere on Earth does? I find it likely that who or whatever created the universe (I assume a universe exists out there) is not all that concerned with our little planet and species. But who knows?

Either way, I just want oblivion. Heaven and hell and all the sometimes seemingly arbitrary demands and stipulations that go with earning them (or else avoiding them) seem overwhelming and tedious to me most of the time. I just don't have the energy or inclination to put that kind of effort into life anymore (going to church, doing charitable work, sacrificing for the sake of others, or whatnot, etc). I live ok. I'm comfortable. I have the basics covered for now, not much extravagance here. But sometimes I wish I had the gumption to go for extravagant things. They seem really tempting at times. I feel like I'm missing out on some really good things. But I guess there is equally bad to go with every good thing, maybe?

[promethean75]

in the future people are gonna live for hundreds of years if not indefinitely becuz they're gonna figure out how to keep all the junk from accumulating in the cells so that they keep reproducing. plus they'll all be machine augmented and shit too.

u do realize we just missed it, right? we're the generations that got the shit end of the stick. the last relatively mortal population of the erf. this pisses me off dude becuz we were so close. a few hundred years off, max. we all got fucked, gary.

[Dontaskme]

what leaves this 'god' dumbfounded is when a human being suffers so much - becoming incredibly strong as a result - that they are no longer afraid of 'hell' and laugh at the thought of it (@ 1:27)

nothing pisses 'god' off more than that, and there is very little in life that is better quality entertainment than this.

Remember, the devil knows 'god' more intimately than anyone else... knows all his little lies, his failures, his contradictions, his arrogance, etc.

The only god there is - is the god you make up.

The only you there is - is the one no one made up.

The rest is history, complete fiction.

'No one' made 'One'. 'One' made 'No one'.

[Agent Smith]

"What's on the menu?"

"Well, that's a very difficult question for me to answer Mr. Peterson."

"Why? what are we having for dinner? It's a simple question."

"What we're having Mr. Peterson is a feast, the likes of which has never been seen before."

"Hmmmm. Looks like I'm, we're, in for a treat. I can't wait."

"That's a compliment and I'll make sure it's conveyed to the chef."

"Something bothering you Ms. Pears?"

"No, no, I'm ok. Why do you ask? Do I not look ok?"

"Ignore my nephew Ms. Pears. He thinks he's an empath which he's most definitely not!"

"Hahaha."

"Aaah, finally! The food is here! Mr. Peterson, please, let's ... eat."

"It ... it ... tastes like ..."

"Yes Mr. Peterson, like ...?"

"It reminds me of ... of ... OMG! This can't be! It's ... it's ..."

"Paradise, Mr. Peterson?"

"Forgive me Mr. West, I must be allowed to leap in ecstacy, I must!!"

"You're my guest Mr. Peterson, be my guest. The ceiling's padded."

[Gary Childress]

"What's on the menu?"

"Well, that's a very difficult question for me to answer Mr. Peterson."

"Why? what are we having for dinner? It's a simple question."

"What we're having Mr. Peterson is a feast, the likes of which has never been seen before."

"Hmmmm. Looks like I'm, we're, in for a treat. I can't wait."

"That's a compliment and I'll make sure it's conveyed to the chef."

"Something bothering you Ms. Pears?"

"No, no, I'm ok. Why do you ask? Do I not look ok?"

"Ignore my nephew Ms. Pears. He thinks he's an empath which he's most definitely not!"

"Hahaha."

"Aaah, finally! The food is here! Mr. Peterson, please, let's ... eat."

"It ... it ... tastes like ..."

"Yes Mr. Peterson, like ...?"

"It reminds me of ... of ... OMG! This can't be! It's ... it's ..."

"Paradise, Mr. Peterson?"

"Forgive me Mr. West, I must be allowed to leap in ecstacy, I must!!"

"You're my guest Mr. Peterson, be my guest. The ceiling's padded."

It's a bit saddening to me that the only way you seem to be able to contribute to the conversation is through extraordinarily cryptic bits of what appear to be dialogues between indeterminate characters. I take it there's something dreadfully wrong on your end that you're struggling with, perhaps? If so, that could be a sign that it would do you good to get out of whatever milieu you are currently in.

From my own experience, sometimes a person can become extremely conflicted and experience cognitive dissonance from becoming involved in institutions or vocations that one later comes to realize produce evil. It may not be your fault if you didn't know what you were getting into or just how wrong it is to be involved in it and it's a difficult thing to go through but shows that the person who is conflicted and experiencing that cognitive dissonance at least has a conscious, even though that institution or vocation may afford the person a reasonably good and reasonably lavish living.

It's also difficult to walk away from such institutions or vocations that provide one with a good living. But in the end, I think (or perhaps hope is the better word) that it's better to have a reasonably clear conscience. A clear conscience produces clearer, more nonconflicting thoughts or allows one to better express themselves. I'll be happy to go into more detail about my own story with such things if it will help, but my first inclination is to believe that your abstruse remarks are a sign of conflict that denies you the ability to share openly.

If that is the case, then I will give you credit for being honest and not deluding yourself into believing that it's OK to do evil (if that is the problem you face). It's also difficult sometimes to be a "whistleblower" and I can understand that. Either way, evacuate the surroundings or blow the whistle, whatever you choose, but you need to get out of it in order to be able to talk openly with others.

I did the former and evacuated myself. So that's what I'll recommend to you (since you don't seem to be communicating why you are vexed and that's the only reason I can think of to be such a way). Don't feed evil and don't become a part of it. The further down the hole you go, the more you will have to do to successfully dig yourself out to where you can conscientiously share the truth with others. Blowing the whistle inside of evil institutions is noble if it is done in a way that helps all, but comes with greater sacrifice than extracting yourself as early as possible.

Just my thoughts based on personal experience in the face of scant evidence.

[Gary Childress]

"What's on the menu?"

"Well, that's a very difficult question for me to answer Mr. Peterson."

"Why? what are we having for dinner? It's a simple question."

"What we're having Mr. Peterson is a feast, the likes of which has never been seen before."

"Hmmmm. Looks like I'm, we're, in for a treat. I can't wait."

"That's a compliment and I'll make sure it's conveyed to the chef."

"Something bothering you Ms. Pears?"

"No, no, I'm ok. Why do you ask? Do I not look ok?"

"Ignore my nephew Ms. Pears. He thinks he's an empath which he's most definitely not!"

"Hahaha."

"Aaah, finally! The food is here! Mr. Peterson, please, let's ... eat."

"It ... it ... tastes like ..."

"Yes Mr. Peterson, like ...?"

"It reminds me of ... of ... OMG! This can't be! It's ... it's ..."

"Paradise, Mr. Peterson?"

"Forgive me Mr. West, I must be allowed to leap in ecstacy, I must!!"

"You're my guest Mr. Peterson, be my guest. The ceiling's padded."

It's a bit saddening to me that the only way you seem to be able to contribute to the conversation is through extraordinarily cryptic bits of what appear to be dialogues between indeterminate characters. I take it there's something dreadfully wrong on your end that you're struggling with, perhaps? If so, that could be a sign that it would do you good to get out of whatever milieu you are currently in.

From my own experience, sometimes a person can become extremely conflicted and experience cognitive dissonance from becoming involved in institutions or vocations that one later comes to realize produce evil. It may not be your fault if you didn't know what you were getting into or just how wrong it is to be involved in it and it's a difficult thing to go through but shows that the person who is conflicted and experiencing that cognitive dissonance at least has a conscious, even though that institution or vocation may afford the person a reasonably good and reasonably lavish living.

It's also difficult to walk away from such institutions or vocations that provide one with a good living. But in the end, I think (or perhaps hope is the better word) that it's better to have a reasonably clear conscience. A clear conscience produces clearer, more nonconflicting thoughts or allows one to better express themselves. I'll be happy to go into more detail about my own story with such things if it will help, but my first inclination is to believe that your abstruse remarks are a sign of conflict that denies you the ability to share openly.

If that is the case, then I will give you credit for being honest and not deluding yourself into believing that it's OK to do evil (if that is the problem you face). It's also difficult sometimes to be a "whistleblower" and I can understand that. Either way, evacuate the surroundings or blow the whistle, whatever you choose, but you need to get out of it in order to be able to talk openly with others.

I did the former and evacuated myself. So that's what I'll recommend to you (since you don't seem to be communicating why you are vexed and that's the only reason I can think of to be such a way). Don't feed evil and don't become a part of it. The further down the hole you go, the more you will have to do to successfully dig yourself out to where you can conscientiously share the truth with others. Blowing the whistle inside of evil institutions is noble if it is done in a way that helps all, but comes with greater sacrifice than extracting yourself as early as possible.

Just my thoughts based on personal experience in the face of scant evidence.

Or instead of evacuating or blowing the whistle, you could try approaching your superiors and talking with them to determine what is going on and if you will be able to trust the motives of your superiors. It may also help to get a clearer picture of what one is involved in, but getting a clear picture from the perspective of the perpetrator is VERY difficult to do in my experience. Superiors are often as much caught up in unclear thinking as you are and talking with them might get you fired, which could have negative effects on your ability to get employment elsewhere, but I didn't try that route. I just got out. If you try the route of talking to your superiors, feel free to let us know how it turns out. And if you can't clearly let us know how your discussion with your superior turns out, then I suggest that could be a reason to think what you are doing is indefensible.

Just some more thoughts. But perhaps I'm wrong in my presumptions.

[Agent Smith]

"What's on the menu?"

"Well, that's a very difficult question for me to answer Mr. Peterson."

"Why? what are we having for dinner? It's a simple question."

"What we're having Mr. Peterson is a feast, the likes of which has never been seen before."

"Hmmmm. Looks like I'm, we're, in for a treat. I can't wait."

"That's a compliment and I'll make sure it's conveyed to the chef."

"Something bothering you Ms. Pears?"

"No, no, I'm ok. Why do you ask? Do I not look ok?"

"Ignore my nephew Ms. Pears. He thinks he's an empath which he's most definitely not!"

"Hahaha."

"Aaah, finally! The food is here! Mr. Peterson, please, let's ... eat."

"It ... it ... tastes like ..."

"Yes Mr. Peterson, like ...?"

"It reminds me of ... of ... OMG! This can't be! It's ... it's ..."

"Paradise, Mr. Peterson?"

"Forgive me Mr. West, I must be allowed to leap in ecstacy, I must!!"

"You're my guest Mr. Peterson, be my guest. The ceiling's padded."

It's a bit saddening to me that the only way you seem to be able to contribute to the conversation is through extraordinarily cryptic bits of what appear to be dialogues between indeterminate characters. I take it there's something dreadfully wrong on your end that you're struggling with, perhaps? If so, that could be a sign that it would do you good to get out of whatever milieu you are currently in.

From my own experience, sometimes a person can become extremely conflicted and experience cognitive dissonance from becoming involved in institutions or vocations that one later comes to realize produce evil. It may not be your fault if you didn't know what you were getting into or just how wrong it is to be involved in it and it's a difficult thing to go through but shows that the person who is conflicted and experiencing that cognitive dissonance at least has a conscious, even though that institution or vocation may afford the person a reasonably good and reasonably lavish living.

It's also difficult to walk away from such institutions or vocations that provide one with a good living. But in the end, I think (or perhaps hope is the better word) that it's better to have a reasonably clear conscience. A clear conscience produces clearer, more nonconflicting thoughts or allows one to better express themselves. I'll be happy to go into more detail about my own story with such things if it will help, but my first inclination is to believe that your abstruse remarks are a sign of conflict that denies you the ability to share openly.

If that is the case, then I will give you credit for being honest and not deluding yourself into believing that it's OK to do evil (if that is the problem you face). It's also difficult sometimes to be a "whistleblower" and I can understand that. Either way, evacuate the surroundings or blow the whistle, whatever you choose, but you need to get out of it in order to be able to talk openly with others.

I did the former and evacuated myself. So that's what I'll recommend to you (since you don't seem to be communicating why you are vexed and that's the only reason I can think of to be such a way). Don't feed evil and don't become a part of it. The further down the hole you go, the more you will have to do to successfully dig yourself out to where you can conscientiously share the truth with others. Blowing the whistle inside of evil institutions is noble if it is done in a way that helps all, but comes with greater sacrifice than extracting yourself as early as possible.

Just my thoughts based on personal experience in the face of scant evidence.

Your diagnosis is correct. It's heartwarming to see peeps like you extend a helping hand to those who don't know the difference between red and blue.

[Gary Childress]

"What's on the menu?"

"Well, that's a very difficult question for me to answer Mr. Peterson."

"Why? what are we having for dinner? It's a simple question."

"What we're having Mr. Peterson is a feast, the likes of which has never been seen before."

"Hmmmm. Looks like I'm, we're, in for a treat. I can't wait."

"That's a compliment and I'll make sure it's conveyed to the chef."

"Something bothering you Ms. Pears?"

"No, no, I'm ok. Why do you ask? Do I not look ok?"

"Ignore my nephew Ms. Pears. He thinks he's an empath which he's most definitely not!"

"Hahaha."

"Aaah, finally! The food is here! Mr. Peterson, please, let's ... eat."

"It ... it ... tastes like ..."

"Yes Mr. Peterson, like ...?"

"It reminds me of ... of ... OMG! This can't be! It's ... it's ..."

"Paradise, Mr. Peterson?"

"Forgive me Mr. West, I must be allowed to leap in ecstacy, I must!!"

"You're my guest Mr. Peterson, be my guest. The ceiling's padded."

It's a bit saddening to me that the only way you seem to be able to contribute to the conversation is through extraordinarily cryptic bits of what appear to be dialogues between indeterminate characters. I take it there's something dreadfully wrong on your end that you're struggling with, perhaps? If so, that could be a sign that it would do you good to get out of whatever milieu you are currently in.

From my own experience, sometimes a person can become extremely conflicted and experience cognitive dissonance from becoming involved in institutions or vocations that one later comes to realize produce evil. It may not be your fault if you didn't know what you were getting into or just how wrong it is to be involved in it and it's a difficult thing to go through but shows that the person who is conflicted and experiencing that cognitive dissonance at least has a conscious, even though that institution or vocation may afford the person a reasonably good and reasonably lavish living.

It's also difficult to walk away from such institutions or vocations that provide one with a good living. But in the end, I think (or perhaps hope is the better word) that it's better to have a reasonably clear conscience. A clear conscience produces clearer, more nonconflicting thoughts or allows one to better express themselves. I'll be happy to go into more detail about my own story with such things if it will help, but my first inclination is to believe that your abstruse remarks are a sign of conflict that denies you the ability to share openly.

If that is the case, then I will give you credit for being honest and not deluding yourself into believing that it's OK to do evil (if that is the problem you face). It's also difficult sometimes to be a "whistleblower" and I can understand that. Either way, evacuate the surroundings or blow the whistle, whatever you choose, but you need to get out of it in order to be able to talk openly with others.

I did the former and evacuated myself. So that's what I'll recommend to you (since you don't seem to be communicating why you are vexed and that's the only reason I can think of to be such a way). Don't feed evil and don't become a part of it. The further down the hole you go, the more you will have to do to successfully dig yourself out to where you can conscientiously share the truth with others. Blowing the whistle inside of evil institutions is noble if it is done in a way that helps all, but comes with greater sacrifice than extracting yourself as early as possible.

Just my thoughts based on personal experience in the face of scant evidence.

Your diagnosis is correct. It's heartwarming to see peeps like you extend a helping hand to those who don't know the difference between red and blue.

I won't ask you for any more details. They are irrelevant to me at this point. Getting out of a bad situation is not always straightforward, depending on circumstances, I actually had some sort of breakdown and was sent to a psychiatric hospital by the agency psychiatrist. I couldn't handle all the moral dilemmas I perceived that I was facing. But after I went to that psychiatrist, I didn't return to the particular task I was doing at the time I went insane. I returned to that agency in another capacity for a couple more years. However, after reading up on things and learning more, I quit the agency entirely. I didn't tell them it was a matter of conscience for various reasons. I just told them I couldn't do the job and was moving on to something else. I wasn't 100% sure at the time what I was doing or why. It just felt wrong to me, so I quit.

Looking back, now that I'm outside, I feel like I made the right decision. But inside it's very difficult to see clearly. And there is always a possibility that there's something I didn't know and that leaving was not the right choice. But after doing enough research into dissident literature, I feel reasonably confident in my decision. Maybe if you read somewhere down the road something that convinces you that you should have stayed, you can reapply and explain to them that you did the soul searching that any conscientious human being would do and found the truth.

So far, the truth for me is that I made the right choice. I was basically an intern during college, working for none other than the US Central Intelligence Agency. I won't share what I did for reasons that I have sworn to secrecy upon leaving and I have kept that oath. As far as I know, what I did was routine and not so serious that anyone would find value in it anyway. However, it was almost an instinctive reaction that I had at the time. I literally had biblical premonitions or what some in the "mental health" field call "hyper-religious delusions." I was sent to a psychiatric hospital by the agency psychiatrist and put on Haldol, a very potent antipsychotic. My diagnosis at the time was "schizophrenia".

Later, after my breakdown, I did more reading of dissident views and have come to think that it was no accident that I had that breakdown. Call it instinct (my preference) or call it a warning from God (if you want to go that route). I feel like I made the right choice. Most of my reading was of Noam Chomsky and others. But I could not stay. At the time I made the choice to quit the particular duty of my position for mostly for mental health reasons. A couple of years later I finally quit the agency completely for reasons of conscience after all the reading. I really didn't realize the overall impact that what I was doing would have on my psyche or on other people in the world. It took a "wake-up call" of sorts.

Sometimes we don't realize something until the proverbial brick lands on our heads. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with that, as far as I'm concerned. In my personal experience, all you need to do now is find the right way out. There are many moral dilemmas involved in getting out of evil. To be honest, I wish I could say it has been all sunshine and roses for me since I got out, but it did require a sacrifice on my part. I could have made much better money further pursuing a career in that place. I chose not to because, for whatever reason, I chose to honor my conscience. I sleep better at night but I'm not making the money I could have. Everyone in our position faces similar sacrifices to whatever degree. There is every economic reason at present to continue with our line of work. However, I'd rather leave it up to individuals bound in those institutions themselves to make the choice for themselves whether they want to extricate themselves from such situations. I'm not a fan of violent punishment or retribution. It is my hope that others in positions similar to mine can make a quiet, peaceful transition, rather than wait for the curtain to fall.

I wish you luck if you decide to leave. I can't guarantee it's the right thing to do but from what part of the picture I've been able to piece together of my own experience it seemed like the right thing for me to do. Or maybe you do a different line of work with lesser consequences, I don't know. Again, look into it and do some soul-searching. It's a big decision and not one without some consequences.

As I say, you can also always confront your superiors above the table, in honesty, and tell them you don't want to do it anymore because it doesn't feel right but it's all your choice. You may have to deal with backlash or worse, depending. I hope they don't ship you off to a psychiatric ward as they did me. It hasn't been a picnic being "mentally ill" and doped up on powerful meds for 25 years. But I'm willing to put that behind me, (not that any court in the US would entertain an accusation by me that I may have been wrongfully institutionalized by a Federal Government Agency for just having a "nervous breakdown") You have to do what is best. And what is best, may not always mean, what will give us the best living.

Stay strong! It sounds like you are a good person and if we are to believe that Socrates paid the price in Athens for being a good person as Jesus did for allegedly being a "sinless" god (temporarily posing as human), then perhaps Socrates has paid the price for us to preserve our good nature without having to share his fate. I assume Socrates losing his life was more of a sacrifice for him than any alleged god-- nominally coming to some no-name town on Earth, healing a few dozen people in the area, and then "forgiving" those who crucified him--made. Socrates also predated Christ by centuries. I'm of the opinion that Christ was little more than a rip-off of Socrates' act, Socrates being a truer thinker.

[Agent Smith]

It's a bit saddening to me that the only way you seem to be able to contribute to the conversation is through extraordinarily cryptic bits of what appear to be dialogues between indeterminate characters. I take it there's something dreadfully wrong on your end that you're struggling with, perhaps? If so, that could be a sign that it would do you good to get out of whatever milieu you are currently in.

From my own experience, sometimes a person can become extremely conflicted and experience cognitive dissonance from becoming involved in institutions or vocations that one later comes to realize produce evil. It may not be your fault if you didn't know what you were getting into or just how wrong it is to be involved in it and it's a difficult thing to go through but shows that the person who is conflicted and experiencing that cognitive dissonance at least has a conscious, even though that institution or vocation may afford the person a reasonably good and reasonably lavish living.

It's also difficult to walk away from such institutions or vocations that provide one with a good living. But in the end, I think (or perhaps hope is the better word) that it's better to have a reasonably clear conscience. A clear conscience produces clearer, more nonconflicting thoughts or allows one to better express themselves. I'll be happy to go into more detail about my own story with such things if it will help, but my first inclination is to believe that your abstruse remarks are a sign of conflict that denies you the ability to share openly.

If that is the case, then I will give you credit for being honest and not deluding yourself into believing that it's OK to do evil (if that is the problem you face). It's also difficult sometimes to be a "whistleblower" and I can understand that. Either way, evacuate the surroundings or blow the whistle, whatever you choose, but you need to get out of it in order to be able to talk openly with others.

I did the former and evacuated myself. So that's what I'll recommend to you (since you don't seem to be communicating why you are vexed and that's the only reason I can think of to be such a way). Don't feed evil and don't become a part of it. The further down the hole you go, the more you will have to do to successfully dig yourself out to where you can conscientiously share the truth with others. Blowing the whistle inside of evil institutions is noble if it is done in a way that helps all, but comes with greater sacrifice than extracting yourself as early as possible.

Just my thoughts based on personal experience in the face of scant evidence.

Your diagnosis is correct. It's heartwarming to see peeps like you extend a helping hand to those who don't know the difference between red and blue.

I won't ask you for any more details. They are irrelevant to me at this point. Getting out of a bad situation is not always straightforward, depending on circumstances, I actually had some sort of breakdown and was sent to a psychiatric hospital by the agency psychiatrist. I couldn't handle all the moral dilemmas I perceived that I was facing. But after I went to that psychiatrist, I didn't return to the particular task I was doing at the time I went insane. I returned to that agency in another capacity for a couple more years. However, after reading up on things and learning more, I quit the agency entirely. I didn't tell them it was a matter of conscience for various reasons. I just told them I couldn't do the job and was moving on to something else. I wasn't 100% sure at the time what I was doing or why. It just felt wrong to me, so I quit.

Looking back, now that I'm outside, I feel like I made the right decision. But inside it's very difficult to see clearly. And there is always a possibility that there's something I didn't know and that leaving was not the right choice. But after doing enough research into dissident literature, I feel reasonably confident in my decision. Maybe if you read somewhere down the road something that convinces you that you should have stayed, you can reapply and explain to them that you did the soul searching that any conscientious human being would do and found the truth.

So far, the truth for me is that I made the right choice. I was basically an intern during college, working for none other than the US Central Intelligence Agency. I won't share what I did for reasons that I have sworn to secrecy upon leaving and I have kept that oath. As far as I know, what I did was routine and not so serious that anyone would find value in it anyway. However, it was almost an instinctive reaction that I had at the time. I literally had biblical premonitions or what some in the "mental health" field call "hyper-religious delusions." I was sent to a psychiatric hospital by the agency psychiatrist and put on Haldol, a very potent antipsychotic. My diagnosis at the time was "schizophrenia".

Later, after my breakdown, I did more reading of dissident views and have come to think that it was no accident that I had that breakdown. Call it instinct (my preference) or call it a warning from God (if you want to go that route). I feel like I made the right choice. Most of my reading was of Noam Chomsky and others. But I could not stay. At the time I made the choice to quit the particular duty of my position for mostly for mental health reasons. A couple of years later I finally quit the agency completely for reasons of conscience after all the reading. I really didn't realize the overall impact that what I was doing would have on my psyche or on other people in the world. It took a "wake-up call" of sorts.

Sometimes we don't realize something until the proverbial brick lands on our heads. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with that, as far as I'm concerned. In my personal experience, all you need to do now is find the right way out. There are many moral dilemmas involved in getting out of evil. To be honest, I wish I could say it has been all sunshine and roses for me since I got out, but it did require a sacrifice on my part. I could have made much better money further pursuing a career in that place. I chose not to because, for whatever reason, I chose to honor my conscience. I sleep better at night but I'm not making the money I could have. Everyone in our position faces similar sacrifices to whatever degree. There is every economic reason at present to continue with our line of work. However, I'd rather leave it up to individuals bound in those institutions themselves to make the choice for themselves whether they want to extricate themselves from such situations. I'm not a fan of violent punishment or retribution. It is my hope that others in positions similar to mine can make a quiet, peaceful transition, rather than wait for the curtain to fall.

I wish you luck if you decide to leave. I can't guarantee it's the right thing to do but from what part of the picture I've been able to piece together of my own experience it seemed like the right thing for me to do. Or maybe you do a different line of work with lesser consequences, I don't know. Again, look into it and do some soul-searching. It's a big decision and not one without some consequences.

As I say, you can also always confront your superiors above the table, in honesty, and tell them you don't want to do it anymore because it doesn't feel right but it's all your choice. You may have to deal with backlash or worse, depending. I hope they don't ship you off to a psychiatric ward as they did me. It hasn't been a picnic being "mentally ill" and doped up on powerful meds for 25 years. But I'm willing to put that behind me, (not that any court in the US would entertain an accusation by me that I may have been wrongfully institutionalized by a Federal Government Agency for just having a "nervous breakdown") You have to do what is best. And what is best, may not always mean, what will give us the best living.

Stay strong! It sounds like you are a good person and if we are to believe that Socrates paid the price in Athens for being a good person as Jesus did for allegedly being a "sinless" god (temporarily posing as human), then perhaps Socrates has paid the price for us to preserve our good nature without having to share his fate. I assume Socrates losing his life was more of a sacrifice for him than any alleged god-- nominally coming to some no-name town on Earth, healing a few dozen people in the area, and then "forgiving" those who crucified him--made. Socrates also predated Christ by centuries. I'm of the opinion that Christ was little more than a rip-off of Socrates' act, Socrates being a truer thinker.

Arigato gozaimus for the helpful tips. I'm sure it'll come in handy at some point in my safari.

[Age]

Which is better? Spending eternity existing or existing for only a finite amount of time?

Considering the Fact that IS ACTUALLY True 'you' WILL NEVER KNOW. This is BECAUSE 'you' are only AWARE for a finite amount of 'time'.

Is eternity in hell better or worse than oblivion?

AGAIN, 'you' are 'alive' and CONSCIOUS for a period of 'time', so, to 'you', there is NO 'eternity' of either.

Or is it worth the gamble to try to go to heaven?

NO one 'goes' to heaven. Heaven is CREATED.

If one believes in heaven, then it seems like there must be something other than heaven for the other half.

Saying 'things' like, 'believing in heaven', is like saying, 'believing in God'. That is; if one does NOT YET KNOW what 'heaven' or 'God' IS, EXACTLY, then there is NO ACTUAL USE in 'believing in them'.

That is then "hell" and if one is betting on a world of both "heaven" and "hell" then does the gamble not balance itself out--that one could possibly end up in "hell" as much as one might end up in "heaven"(possibly due to ignorance or bad luck)?

It was this kind of pondering WHY those human beings, back then, were SO LOST and SO CONFUSED.

They had NOT even WORKED OUT what the words 'heaven' and 'hell' MEANT, or REFERRED TO, EXACTLY, but they WOULD consider and wonder how to 'get to' one and NOT the other, or they would BELIEVE that NEITHER was even true.

Conversely, if one gambles on oblivion (no afterlife, only finitude in existence) then does one end up somewhere in between the two or outside of them (the null set)?

How could one, LOGICALLY and/or EMPIRICALLY, be, supposedly, 'in' or 'outside' of 'that', which one does NOT YET EVEN KNOW IS, EXACTLY?

Are 'you' here, "gary childress", even able to INFORM us of what the words 'heaven', 'hell', and 'afterlife' even MEAN or REFER TO, EXACTLY?

If yes, then WILL 'you' PROVIDE your ACTUAL ANSWERS?

If no, then WHY NOT?

The biggest drawback of oblivion seems to be that finitude is not necessarily an individual choice. If one chooses to focus on the short term--the fleeting moment of life--then perhaps one may end up causing more 'ecological' damage to the world as one does one's best to live the best life for the greatest amount of time (burning more resources, turning them into waste, or taking more good things and leaving more bad things for others to contend with).

HOW, EXACTLY, is or could DAMAGING ANY 'thing' cause or created 'the best life'?

These are two choices that can be made; finitude or eternity.

LOL 'you' NEVER HAVE A CHOICE here.

And they both are either good or bad choices based on what is called 'reality'.

Here we have ANOTHER word, which the ACTUAL MEANING OF these people, back then, had NO REAL IDEA NOR CLUE ABOUT, but YET they STILL spoke of 'reality', and argued about that word as though they KNEW what they were talking ABOUT, exactly.

If reality is one way, then perhaps believing in eternity is best.

Believing IN absolutely ANY 'thing', (besides, OF COURSE, the One Thing), is NEVER 'the best', as well as NEVER even being a necessity anyway.

Now, IF 'reality' is 'one way', like for example finite, then WHY, EXACTLY, would believing IN 'eternity' be, supposedly, the best?

If reality is another way, then perhaps believing in finitude is best.

Are you here trying to say that whatever way 'reality' IS, EXACTLY, then it is 'best' to believe IN 'that way'?

Or can life be lived in such a way as to be lived 'well' in such respect as both finitude and eternity are equally 'good' choices for one to place his or her bet on?

If one does NOT YET KNOW, FOR SURE, what IS IRREFUTABLY True, then WHY would it EVER be 'good' to CHOOSE 'one thing' OVER 'another thing'?

Also, WHY even have a 'wager' or a 'bet' on SOME 'thing', which one does NOT YET even KNOW the answer to?

WHY NOT just WAIT, PATIENTLY, and SEE what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY?

After all the ANSWER/S being SORT here are ALREADY KNOWN, by ALL of 'you', human beings. The ANSWERS, however, are just STILL UNCONSCIOUSLY KNOWN, by MOST of 'you'. That was; back in the days when this was being written.

[Age]

what leaves this 'god' dumbfounded is when a human being suffers so much - becoming incredibly strong as a result - that they are no longer afraid of 'hell' and laugh at the thought of it (@ 1:27)

'you' STILL seem to appear to ENJOY watching and seeing 'females' looking and/or feeling somewhat suffering, afraid, distressed, and/or being controlled by 'males'.

Anyway, and also, what makes 'you' think 'god' would EVER be so-called 'dumbfounded'? And, WHY do you use a small 'g' here?

nothing pisses 'god' off more than that,

HOW, EXACTLY do 'you' KNOW this?

and there is very little in life that is better quality entertainment than this.

So, to 'you', 'pissing god of', by OBVIOUSLY doing what is Wrong in Life, to "others", provides you with so-called "quality entertainment", right "promethean75"?

Remember, the devil knows 'god' more intimately than anyone else...

Who and/or what is the 'devil' and 'god', EXACTLY?

And, HOW, EXACTLY, do 'you' KNOW the 'devil' KNOWS 'god' more intimately than absolutely ANY one else?

knows all his little lies, his failures, his contradictions, his arrogance, etc.

If the 'devil' KNOWS absolutely ALL of 'god's', little, lies, failures, contradictions, and arrogance, then WHO KNOWS the 'big' ones? AND, WHO KNOWS ALL the lies, failures, contradictions, and arrogance of 'the devil'?

By the way, to 'you', "promethean75", is it NOT 'god' or 'God' WHO KNOWS ALL of the, big and little, lies, failures, contradictions, and arrogance of EVERY one, in other words ALL of 'you', human beings, including 'yours' here "promethean75"? And, it is REALLY NOT the other way around as 'you' propose here, "promethean75"?