tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post2620442970907492621..comments2023-09-04T21:36:48.170+10:00Comments on The Site Formally Known As: Not That There’s Anything Wrong With That, Except Everything.Stubbadubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05333188150383405691noreply@blogger.comBlogger119125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-33286436127900373772008-11-05T12:12:00.000+11:002008-11-05T12:12:00.000+11:00Oh my goodness I'm with you there Patchie - ha...Oh my goodness I'm with you there Patchie - hand me some asprin please!<BR/><BR/>Boogey, it's religion, politics, sex and money you don't talk about. Yay for blogs & forums!<BR/><BR/>And Witchie, thank you - I don't have a copy of that, so I couldn't include the quote, one of my favourites :)Natashahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11801006808958653993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-85386373178475539252008-11-05T10:43:00.000+11:002008-11-05T10:43:00.000+11:00I think that hurt my brain bogeyI think that hurt my brain bogeypatchouligirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08347554818978381844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-45271549759815578222008-11-04T22:28:00.000+11:002008-11-04T22:28:00.000+11:00They will themselves to a certain pitch, just like...<I>They will themselves to a certain pitch, just like a sportstar psyching themselves up, or someone falling in love. </I><BR/><BR/>Yeah, but what you're saying still doesn't subtract validity from the state achieved. It's nonsensical to think that just because you can intentionally enter a state, it must therefore be self-delusion.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>There is no God; there is however humanity, with all its quirks and intricacies and mind-nimbingly awesome variances and states, some explainable, some not, but none of them needing a God. </I><BR/><BR/>Perhaps. But conventional science is pretty woeful at explaining consciousness and subjective experience, other than to dismiss it as merely the by-product of neuronal firing. <BR/><BR/>Considering we only ever experience the world subjectively, and even 'objective' scientific models only exist within that subjectivity, I consider consciousness holds a role of some primary importance in the way the world is structured. Which then leads to questioning people's experiences to lead to an understanding of subjective reality, and then to considering what many hold to be the quintessence of subjective reality - god, brahman, samahdi, kether, void, (whatever you like to call it).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-59724868442784239062008-11-04T22:24:00.000+11:002008-11-04T22:24:00.000+11:00mind-nimbingly Is that a nimble mind?And in refere...<I>mind-nimbingly</I> Is that a nimble mind?<BR/><BR/>And in reference to this entire debate I refer you to the Guide..<BR/><BR/> <I>Now it is such a bizarrely impossible coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the nonexistence of God. The argument goes something like this:<BR/> "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."<BR/> "But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."<BR/> "Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't though of that" and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.</I><BR/><BR/>Hence, God cannot exist, it is against the laws of logic, look at the Babel fish.<BR/><BR/>Oh, as you were.WitchOnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09562967775567670188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-15751950467704253352008-11-04T21:45:00.000+11:002008-11-04T21:45:00.000+11:00I had to go through all that stuff as a monk, and ...I had to go through all that stuff as a monk, and I reached these states that they talk about and to do my experience justice I'd need a whole book to explain it, but that's my best short version: They will themselves to a certain pitch, just like a sportstar psyching themselves up, or someone falling in love. <BR/><BR/>Boogeyman, I know exactly what you're saying, but I just think that the 'answer' is bleedingly obvious: There is no God; there is however humanity, with all its quirks and intricacies and mind-nimbingly awesome variances and states, some explainable, some not, but none of them needing a God. <BR/><BR/>You ask for "<I>investigating the experiences people claim to have of god </I> and I say that this investigation <I> must </I> start with the premise that there is no God.Perseushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11292281862441986618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-27868237588202807322008-11-04T21:20:00.000+11:002008-11-04T21:20:00.000+11:00The transcedental states they reach are willed. No...<I>The transcedental states they reach are willed. No scientific study required.</I><BR/><BR/>That statement says nothing about what a transcendental state is, or what you say they were willing. Are you saying they've been faking it for the last 2 millenia for shits and giggles? That meditation is just an exercise in self-delusion? <BR/><BR/><BR/><I> but on that logic, we can also investigate the fairies in the garden.</I><BR/><BR/>I'm talking about investigating the experiences people claim to have of god, as opposed to trying to factually prove god's existence. <BR/><BR/>One doesn't have to be a rigid physicalist to be a scientist, and subjective experiences are an equally worthy subject of exploration.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-6138777489904824522008-11-04T20:42:00.000+11:002008-11-04T20:42:00.000+11:00No joke, I used to be a Buddhist Monk. The transc...No joke, I used to be a Buddhist Monk. The transcedental states they reach are willed. No scientific study required.<BR/><BR/>Boogeyman: <I> Part of a scientific investigation though is not to presume something doesn't exist before investigating it </I>... but on that logic, we can also investigate the fairies in the garden. <BR/><BR/>We have to presume God doesn't exist, because presuming he might is holding all rational debate back. <BR/><BR/>Ramon: Boogey is right. Islam is Abrahamic. They concede it.Perseushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11292281862441986618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-85478555513160234342008-11-04T17:56:00.000+11:002008-11-04T17:56:00.000+11:00I hope you are right - I dont fancy being a ghost....I hope you are right - I dont fancy being a ghost. If you are wrong I'll come back to haunt you!patchouligirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08347554818978381844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-79795841722444328182008-11-04T15:44:00.000+11:002008-11-04T15:44:00.000+11:00Yes, each and every one of them. Once you're dead,...Yes, each and every one of them. Once you're dead, you're dead. Doesn't get much simpler then that.Stubbadubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05333188150383405691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-83922597424310849882008-11-04T14:59:00.000+11:002008-11-04T14:59:00.000+11:00So you're an agnostic too? Hehe. The thing is if...So you're an agnostic too? Hehe. The thing is if I or you ever did encounter a ghost, we couldn't prove it and everyone would question our sanity. So all the people who claim to have seen ghosts are all wrong? Is that likely?patchouligirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08347554818978381844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-31416499266401185912008-11-04T13:42:00.000+11:002008-11-04T13:42:00.000+11:00Still, the ghost thing bothers me - so many people...<I>Still, the ghost thing bothers me - so many people have seen things its a bit like theres too much smoke to not be a fire. When someone you know well tells you they saw something and you know they would have no reaon to make it up and arent even religious, you are inclined to believe them.</I><BR/><BR/>I used to see things. Strange terrible things. And then I stopped smoking pot and the hallucinations went away.<BR/>Just because people say things are true, doesn’t mean they are true, especially when there is an absence of scientific fact backing them up.Stubbadubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05333188150383405691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-23875828231269743032008-11-04T11:34:00.000+11:002008-11-04T11:34:00.000+11:00I used to have seances with an empty upturned chip...I used to have seances with an empty upturned chip bucket at school during lunchsquibhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10744419106501810243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-72017915128617227772008-11-04T11:26:00.000+11:002008-11-04T11:26:00.000+11:00Still, the ghost thing bothers me - so many people...Still, the ghost thing bothers me - so many people have seen things its a bit like theres too much smoke to not be a fire. When someone you know well tells you they saw something and you know they would have no reaon to make it up and arent even religious, you are inclined to believe them.patchouligirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08347554818978381844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-49931036477881794482008-11-04T10:34:00.000+11:002008-11-04T10:34:00.000+11:00I was diplomatic in saying 'outgrowth'. Imagine th...I was diplomatic in saying 'outgrowth'. Imagine the jihadists' response if I'd said 'cancerous growth'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-39687247953808823882008-11-04T10:23:00.000+11:002008-11-04T10:23:00.000+11:00Islam is an outgrowth of Judaism.Boogey, there's a...<I>Islam is an outgrowth of Judaism.</I><BR/><BR/>Boogey, there's an angry mob of jihadists at my front door, wanting to know where they should post their letter bombs.Ramon Insertnameherehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07367002511826523517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-65247025469147645392008-11-04T10:20:00.000+11:002008-11-04T10:20:00.000+11:00Isn't there a saying that you shouyldn't discuss p...Isn't there a saying that you shouyldn't discuss politics, religion and something else, because it causes fights. We break all those rules here.<BR/><BR/>PG, much of Buddhist philosophy was born in Vedic philosophy (which also underpins Hinduism), in much the same way that Islam is an outgrowth of Judaism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-11680193827041667962008-11-04T06:43:00.000+11:002008-11-04T06:43:00.000+11:00Yes Pers, good post. This is a bit like a modern ...Yes Pers, good post. This is a bit like a modern day village square where we can all sit on milk crates and smoke and ponder the universe. <BR/><BR/>I've often wondered if the Buddhists are on to something - not all of their beliefs, but some of them make sense and dont conflict with science. In particular, I like the idea of different planes of existence. That would explain phenomenon such as ghosts, which so many people have seen (including many non christians) but science doesn't have an answer for. And De ja vu - who hasn't experienced that? Or dreams? Are they simply and out-of-body experience? Have you ever felt like you were falling just before you woke up? Whats that all about? I dont really buy that I'm coming back as the neighbours cat and can't see myself giving up bacon and eggs or capitalism and orange isn't anyones colour, but some of their ideas might actually be right.patchouligirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08347554818978381844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-16846129808244424332008-11-03T19:28:00.000+11:002008-11-03T19:28:00.000+11:00And Pers,Thanks for posting this so we could all h...And Pers,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for posting this so we could all have a good ol' theological debate :)Natashahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11801006808958653993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-89166663551299714972008-11-03T17:58:00.000+11:002008-11-03T17:58:00.000+11:00Ahh PG, you caught me out - alas, I am also no his...Ahh PG, you caught me out - alas, I am also no historian (and was too lazy to double check it), sorry. I also agree with your statement about atheism, well said.<BR/><BR/>And Pers, unfortunately for you,I have not tried atheism - see PG's comment on same.<BR/><BR/>Boogeyman, Patch & MCL, I like your line of reasoning (about the faith thing, not the scientific stuff - I'm not getting into that) - much like my own, but much better articulated. However I think the debate on this topic has surpassed my ability to contribute, that said, I'm still enjoying it :)<BR/><BR/>Homesick, I agree with your faith good/religion bad thing<BR/><BR/>"When men see nothing over their heads they have always had a driving and desperate urge to find someone to put in the way"<BR/><BR/>"Science has proved so many impossible things that it would be a great mistake to rule out the supernatural just because we haven't sussed it out yet"<BR/><BR/>When it all comes down to it, I don't care what you believe if you're happy with it, just don't push it on me. I might not agree with it, I might think you're a looney, I might think you need to be locked away (if you believe in stabbing thine enemy for example) but I'm happy making up (or as Pers would say, not making up) my own mind in my own time.Natashahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11801006808958653993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-42756147126388498692008-11-03T17:20:00.000+11:002008-11-03T17:20:00.000+11:00Bollocks!!Bollocks!!squibhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10744419106501810243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-43975030614362422112008-11-03T15:34:00.000+11:002008-11-03T15:34:00.000+11:00True Ramon, but the experiences can be investigate...True Ramon, but the experiences can be investigated empirically.<BR/><BR/>For instance, a few years ago I read a study (for the life of me I can't locate it now though) where researchers had interviewed various Tibetan monks about meditation, and specifically about the state they called 'Samadhi'. The study fleshed out, via continued interviews with the monks, the notion of 'Samadhi' into what it was and what it wasn't. They also laid out the steps the monks stated one needed to perform to reach this state, and the subjective phenomena one would experience in this state (as opposed to different states). They then conducted a study of volunteers to perform those steps, who reported their subjective experiences, and found a significant success rate.<BR/><BR/>Such a study doesn't answer <I>what</I> a state like samahdi is, but it does represent a scientific approach to studying it, rather than leaving the definitions and methodology to New Age wankers wanting to sell books and seminars.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-7716644392111538762008-11-03T15:15:00.000+11:002008-11-03T15:15:00.000+11:00Agnostic, that is.Having made a complete goose of ...Agnostic, that is.<BR/><BR/>Having made a complete goose of myself, I'll now slink away.Ramon Insertnameherehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07367002511826523517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-27205514408554448852008-11-03T15:14:00.000+11:002008-11-03T15:14:00.000+11:00Investigate it scientificallyThe problem with this...<I>Investigate it scientifically</I><BR/><BR/>The problem with this, Boogey, is that science deals with the "natural" world, that is those phenomenona that can be analysed empirically.<BR/><BR/>Experiences that are spiritual or trancendental are, by their very nature, <I>super</I> natural and thus beyond the remit of science.<BR/><BR/>And I'm an agnostice, so yar snubs to the pack of you.Ramon Insertnameherehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07367002511826523517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-52498868927493404452008-11-03T14:16:00.000+11:002008-11-03T14:16:00.000+11:00Yet again you've gone with the weight of numbers c...<I>Yet again you've gone with the weight of numbers concept. "Like LOTS of people believe in God so like there must be SOMETHING..."<BR/><BR/>That's far less sceientific than anything I've said here. </I><BR/><BR/>FFS, you are deliberately and obtusely ignoring the point I'm making to reduce it to another, more simplistic but quite different explanation.<BR/><BR/>So I'll spell it out clearly. I'm <I>not</I> saying "x number of people believe in god, therefore god exists"<BR/><BR/>What I <I>am</I> saying is "x number of people have had experiences they regard as spiritual or trancendental, therefore they have experienced something out of the ordinary, therefore investigate it".<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Both Richard Dawkins and Mad Cat Lady have a decent approach... scientifically trying to work out why so many people believe in something that isn't there.</I><BR/><BR/>And just what do you think I've been saying, if not that?<BR/><BR/>Investigate it scientifically.<BR/>Investigate it scientifically.<BR/>Investigate it scientifically.<BR/><BR/>Part of a scientific investigation though is not to presume something <I>doesn't</I> exist before investigating it, nor to presume the non-existence of something you only have a woolly definition of in the first place.<BR/><BR/>Your attitude could be characterised as, "I don't believe in depression, therefore it doesn't exist, so I'm happy to investigate why all you people are sad, but you really should know that you're all just a bunch of whack-job sooks making stuff up."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2949589573125647543.post-90762119004266003722008-11-03T13:07:00.000+11:002008-11-03T13:07:00.000+11:00Perseus I strongly suggest never taking a holiday ...Perseus I strongly suggest never taking a holiday anywhere near the Caribbean... your dear sweet head would spin so hard it'd fly off.<BR/><BR/>On an island of only 25,000 about a good 80% are church-going SDA or Baptists. Hyprocrites most of them but hey, they still rock up on their chosen day dressed to the nines.<BR/><BR/>My eldest is starting to question the whole God V science debate as it is often played out in front of her on a daily basis (for the record we don't subscribe to any religious order).<BR/><BR/>I offered her a choice.. "What do you think ..did God make the world in six days or was it the big bang theory that you covered in school last week?"<BR/><BR/>Her answer was simple.. "The big bang theory just makes more sense Mummy, its more believeable"<BR/><BR/>I posed the same question with the Adam & Eve V Darwin and she came back with the same conclusion.<BR/><BR/>My point is that we adults search too deep and philosophise(wrongly spelt I know) too much and often miss what is plainly obvious.<BR/><BR/>Many need faith in their lives to make sense of it. Even AA uses the theory that you must believe/have faith in something greater than yourself in order to overcome an addiction. So be it. <BR/><BR/>But seeing as I personally do not need a religion in order to understand right from wrong, good from bad then all of em (religions) can back the fuck off.<BR/><BR/>Faith good (if you need it) religion very bad. I used to think faith bad, but after living here I now realise that there are people who need a fear/respect of something greater than themselves or anarchy would reign supreme in their lives.homesickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871859873854371963noreply@blogger.com