Further evidence for previous claims
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-10-2010, 07:15 PM
 
Further evidence for previous claims
To those in the previous post who doubted my claims about the perceptive universe, here is some further evidence; generously donated by a 'real' forum, that evaluates assertions and does not insult- like ChristionsAngel.

"Materialism and naturalism are false.
Materialism is flawed because it recognizes the emptiness of imagination, abstraction, concept, value, thought, and idea, but fails to recognize the emptiness of perception as well. All material, object, form, duality, cause, effect, and phenomena, are also empty. Science reveals that what materialists refer to as "material" is empty of any of the things it is perceived to be. It is but one aspect of the subjective universe, and no less valid than other aspects.

Materialism is unsound, because, as science is now indicating, material itself is an illusion of perception, and is empty.

Naturalism is false because it is also an illusion of perception, but also because it stipulates regularities, laws, and predictable happenings throughout the universe of perception, that are themselves a product of the perception itself. Yet, if these qualities are a product of the system, and have no overlap to other systems, or second-order influence over the system, then what becomes "natural" is contextual, depending on the behavior of any given system, and "supernatural" as behavior that violates the behavior of a system (a contradiction), and thus is just another way to talk about the validity, and invalidity of ideas about materialistic perceptions.

They themselves cannot exist metaphysically, or non-contingently.

For this reason, materialism, and naturalism miss the mark, because they infer things about the rules of a perception, and imagine that they hold objective, metaphysical, non-contingent existence, when they do not.

All is empty. "
Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2010, 07:49 PM
 
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
That "real" forum being > Ghana Discuss No more real than TTA. Just different. Angel

And, isn't it custom to link a source when posting other peoples intellectual property?
Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2010, 09:15 PM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
(21-10-2010 07:15 PM)frederick_wittman Wrote:  To those in the previous post who doubted my claims about the perceptive universe, here is some further evidence; generously donated by a 'real' forum, that evaluates assertions and does not insult- like ChristionsAngel.

"Materialism and naturalism are false.
Materialism is flawed because it recognizes the emptiness of imagination, abstraction, concept, value, thought, and idea, but fails to recognize the emptiness of perception as well. All material, object, form, duality, cause, effect, and phenomena, are also empty. Science reveals that what materialists refer to as "material" is empty of any of the things it is perceived to be. It is but one aspect of the subjective universe, and no less valid than other aspects.

Materialism is unsound, because, as science is now indicating, material itself is an illusion of perception, and is empty.

Naturalism is false because it is also an illusion of perception, but also because it stipulates regularities, laws, and predictable happenings throughout the universe of perception, that are themselves a product of the perception itself. Yet, if these qualities are a product of the system, and have no overlap to other systems, or second-order influence over the system, then what becomes "natural" is contextual, depending on the behavior of any given system, and "supernatural" as behavior that violates the behavior of a system (a contradiction), and thus is just another way to talk about the validity, and invalidity of ideas about materialistic perceptions.

They themselves cannot exist metaphysically, or non-contingently.

For this reason, materialism, and naturalism miss the mark, because they infer things about the rules of a perception, and imagine that they hold objective, metaphysical, non-contingent existence, when they do not.

All is empty. "

I've now read both of your threads and I have no idea what you're talking about. I think think this is something we have in common.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2010, 10:10 PM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
1.- You are quoting something as an unquestionable truth, just a mumbo-jumbo that dont make any sense and written by an unknown guy on a random forum.
2.- I dont know if this guy is desperate for making a point here or this is some kind of "civilized" trolling.
3.- I think you are a troll.
Peace.

"The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
-Georgia Harkness.

"La fe es patrimonio de los pendejos. (Faith is patrimony of the dumbfucks)."
-Diego Rivera
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2010, 12:08 AM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
Gooble-de-gook seems to be a fitting term for Frederick's prattle.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2010, 06:15 AM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
What gets me is that you are quoting some unnamed person (which gives you absolutely zero credibility), and this mystery person is saying things like "science reveals", and "science is now indicating" without citing his/her source (which also gives this mysery person zero credibility). Very unimpressive. To impress this forum, you'll have to do WAY better.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2010, 07:41 AM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
(21-10-2010 07:15 PM)frederick_wittman Wrote:  "Materialism and naturalism are false.
Materialism is flawed because it recognizes the emptiness of imagination, abstraction, concept, value, thought, and idea, but fails to recognize the emptiness of perception as well. All material, object, form, duality, cause, effect, and phenomena, are also empty. Science reveals that what materialists refer to as "material" is empty of any of the things it is perceived to be. It is but one aspect of the subjective universe, and no less valid than other aspects.

Meaning, please. Define your terms. Don't just post vague gibberish and claim victory. Also, provide links to where "science" (as if it is some monolithic entity) disproves materialism.

Quote:Materialism is unsound, because, as science is now indicating, material itself is an illusion of perception, and is empty.

Proof, please, or stop talking.

Quote:Naturalism is false because it is also an illusion of perception, but also because it stipulates regularities, laws, and predictable happenings throughout the universe of perception, that are themselves a product of the perception itself. Yet, if these qualities are a product of the system, and have no overlap to other systems, or second-order influence over the system, then what becomes "natural" is contextual, depending on the behavior of any given system, and "supernatural" as behavior that violates the behavior of a system (a contradiction), and thus is just another way to talk about the validity, and invalidity of ideas about materialistic perceptions.

They themselves cannot exist metaphysically, or non-contingently.

For this reason, materialism, and naturalism miss the mark, because they infer things about the rules of a perception, and imagine that they hold objective, metaphysical, non-contingent existence, when they do not.

All is empty. "

Care to explain what any of this means, or are you going to continue posting vague nonsense?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2010, 09:29 AM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
Two questions. 1 - why begin a new thread to continue a conversation you began in a previous thread which was still active? 2 - Huh?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2010, 03:22 PM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
(22-10-2010 09:29 AM)gamutman Wrote:  Two questions. 1 - why begin a new thread to continue a conversation you began in a previous thread which was still active? 2 - Huh?

Did anything he said make any sense? None did to me. So then I won't expect his actions to make sense either.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2010, 04:28 PM
RE: Further evidence for previous claims
I swear this post sounds like a post from the world's most boring politician.

This feels like a philosophical argument based on theism resulting in a gargle of words.

Nothing is absolute, obviously , especially in a universe this big. This is a straw-man argument that removes the grid in an attempt to flaw the data.

Materialism is a point of view but a good one that takes into account existence as perceived through human senses.

As for Naturalism , it obliges impartiality beyond one's subjective views. If you are incapable of this go back to riding a pink unicorn in the Strawberry Kingdom.

Read more , gargle less - please.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: