I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-08-2015, 11:51 PM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
Wait...you can make money off of threads? I've totally been doing this wrong...



We all have our own battles, Matt. Sorry your childhood was rough - mine certainly was no cakewalk. But honestly, I don't know too many people who say "my childhood was fanfuckingtastic!"


Just understand baseless assertions are going to be met with requests to "prove it."

And since when is drinking chai tea a spell?


Anywho, welcome.

"If there's a single thing that life teaches us, it's that wishing doesn't make it so." - Lev Grossman
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Nurse's post
23-08-2015, 01:01 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
Chai tea on its own isn't a spell. I was trying to make an example of how multi compound science methods are used to be sold to Wiccan's or new age people as "magic". And when anyone tries to debunk them as science they act like it proves their claims. One method works like this. A dopamine high ends in a dopamine crash. And if timed right it can lead into a serotonin high if met with a light dose of over the counter melatonin sleeping aid. Mixing that with a milky substance for maternal memories to kick in and in some people you get a reaction in psychology. "NOT MAGIC" I don't know what that reaction would be. But I would guess it would vary from person to person. So there are "light workers" who capitalize on peoples ignorance by using basic science and hypnosis. Humans have such quality long term memory function compared to animals that we unlike them can easily be hypnotized over long time use of meditation.

I don't think being a light worker would be such a bad thing if it was just more secular. People need medical intervention that can take up to 10X-100X the time a doctor can devote to a patient in a month. And insurance can only be billed a limited number of times in a cycle.

So what I want to get across is that I seem like a con man who knows what a con man should have said if he was an ethical person. I've read up on some of this stuff and I have to say that it sounds like if a doctorate only took 6 months of study but was overly generalized to cover advanced doctorates such as psychiatric instead of just general medicine. That means 5% of the study time but still that is 10 times as much knowledge as the average person knows about how there bodies work.

I offer such services but only to the extent that I would ask a friend to talk to a doctor about it. I'm the kind of guy who tells people "you might want to get that mole looked at. Its been getting bigger and just because they started as harmless doesn't mean they won't turn cancerous". And "its actually pretty affordable to get removed. You have your basic over the counter removal for $25 or a cheap general surgery option for less than $200".

Again not offering magic. I just know more than the average person about basic psychiatry which gets me in trouble with Atheist, Evangelicals and new age alike.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 01:04 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
Matt, you seem like you could be alright. My advice to you *especially* on this forum, is to grow a thick skin. Other than that I think you'll be fine.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
23-08-2015, 01:10 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
Again I'm not a substitute for a doctor. And yes that is a disclaimer on this whole thread. I'm just happy with it even if I'm alone in it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 01:11 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
(23-08-2015 01:04 AM)morondog Wrote:  Matt, you seem like you could be alright. My advice to you *especially* on this forum, is to grow a thick skin. Other than that I think you'll be fine.

Thanks I'll try.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 01:21 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  I don't think you understand.
Oh no I really really do, I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt. Which I will continue to try to do as I read more of your response though I'm not making any promises.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  By the logic of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" And "basic claims require basic evidence" I'm not investing much into it.
That you write in vague no commitment terms does not mean you are not making an extraordinary claim. You are making a claim that a mystical (a word with no clear meaning and zero evidence to back up it's existence) sentient (describing it as wanting or not wanting something implies some degree of intelligence) force (vague to the point of meaningless) which is an extraordinary claim which requires extraordinary evidence. Or at least some proper definitions of what those words even mean in the context you are using them.
Being purposefully vague does not absolve your burden of proof.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  I don't have any leaders at all. And only spend money on things that can be used for another purpose.
I have no idea what relevance this has to a request for evidence to back up your unsubstantiated claims. I fear this will be a pattern as I keep reading.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  I don't have proof of any "force" Other than the claim....
Claims are not proofs or evidences. If one is being intellectually honest and logically sound the time to believe a claim is AFTER one has evidence that it is true and not before. You are welcome to believe what you like but in the absence of good reason to believe it, which you lack, the belief is irrational by definition.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  that any "force" would be so far beyond human understanding that I "believe" that it "wouldn't" want a personal relationship with us.
You are attempting to wash your hands of the burden of proof by defining it as unproveable but unless you can offer some evidence that it is in fact beyond human understanding, and not just something that does not exist, then you have no justification to make such a claim. It's also not internally consistent as you say it's beyond human understanding ...and then you go on to list traits you think it has.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  I've not made the claim that I can predict things with this theory. Therefore I'm not bound to produce evidence.
To be as polite as I can: No, that is entirely wrong. It's the making of the claim that requires you to produce evidence to justify the claim, not anything to do with predictions. So yes as soon as you made a claim to the existence of a force you were required to produce evidence to back that claim up if you wanted anyone to find what you wrote in anyway realistic and not a personal delusion. Also that's not a theory by the very definition of the word theory which leads us to....

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  And in case you didn't know, there are a lot of theories that get past hypothesis stage simply because they didn't make big claims.
Again..being as polite as I can: this is just completely wrong. A hypothesis becomes a theory when the available data supports the hypothesis after testing. The size of the claim.....makes literately no difference as if there is no evidence to support the hypothesis it does not become a theory. A theory is only a theory when it has demonstrable, testable, and falsifiable evidence to back it up. That's the whole basis of the scientific method. I really can't stress how wrong what you typed is, and I really don't mean that as an insult at all, it's just objectively false it's the total opposite of the scientific method.
In fact your hypotheses is not even a hypothesis because the way you have presented it is unfalsifiable which is entirely unscientific. it's not a theory, it's not even a hypothesis it's just....a baseless assertion really.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  However, I've never been able to get along with closed minded atheists before as they tend to have never heard of the things that make me a valued human.
Either you think requests for evidence makes a person close minded (they really really really don't by the way) or this has utterly nothing to do with the sentence you responded to.

You seem to have a mind set that if people disagree with you, don't accept your explanations, or don't have the same capacity for accepting things without proof that you do that they are "close minded". This says far far more about you then it does about anyone else.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  I naturally am able to think of counter possibilities of any structured concept much easier than most people. Which is why I was never able to develop well within an evangelical church. I don't have the "intelligence" to predict that Christianity is wrong from my Christian home schooled perspective. which would be a lot required as I did say "home schooled". And no one in my life ever reached out to me to convert me to "alternative views" I'm just naturally brilliant at thinking outside the box. Which got me held back at home schooling by pissing off Christian home school group teachers into punishing me for "doubt" which was actually just how my brain works.
Absolutely none of this has one iota of baring on my request for evidence in support of your claims so I fail to see the relevance. LOTS of people are good at thinking outside the box, almost every single fiction writer HAS to be good at it, but nothing of what you just wrote removes your burden of proof. We are still back where we started.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  I have Aspergers disorder and don't conform easily. My child hood was tormented by stay at home mom's that spank kids in the name of "God"... Some spanking sessions would go on for hundreds of spankings at a very young age for me. And sadly new age people view me as an "indigo child" because of my different type of brain. So I find a much easier time talking to new age people even though I don't share there gnostic views. The reason I came here was in hopes of finding atheists/agnostics that can see intelligence aside from school based education.
While I certainly sympathies with the hardships of your life I still fail to see the relevance this has with my request for evidence to support your views. You still have a burden of proof to meet for your beliefs to be rational and your hardships in no way reduce that. There are definitely other forms of intelligence other than "school based education "however that's the one we use to determine fact from fiction, that's the one that informs the scientific method which is the ONLY demonstrably accurate way of determining the truth of a claim.

Let me put it another way: You say you are good at thinking outside the box correct? Well I need you to think outside your own opinion and perception for a second if you will. Treat yourself like a 3rd person, an outside and unbiased observer, and answer me a single question.
What is the demonstrable evidence between the claim made in the OP and a delusion/misapprehension? In what way are they functionally different, and how can an impartial observer tell the difference?

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  It always seems to be something with automatic argumentative subtext in this community.
Asking you to prove your claims is 100% perfectly reasonable in ANY setting and thinking otherwise says a lot about your world view if that is in fact the case.

This community values evidence, logic, reason, and a factual demonstrable representation of reality if you don't then maybe you should stick to the New Age woo peddlers who will entertain any idea no matter how ludicrous or baseless it is. Here be people who actually care if what they believe is accurate.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  I just want some healthy discussion rather than debate.
Asking for you to justify your Op is a perfectly reasonable thing to do in a healthy discussion. In fact blindly accepting your claim WITHOUT investigating is basis, value, accuracy, or substance will NOT get you a good discussion it will just get you a big giant pointless circle jerk where you never have to ever question your own views. If you want a coddling head back to the New Agers.

If you can't handle the most basic of questions then you don't have a place in the discussion to be perfectly frank.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  Now that is about all I have to say about your three periods that described my problems I've had with the atheist community over the past 5 years.
Which was A giant waste of both our time because I never asked you for your life story I asked you for your evidence to support your belief. Again this community values evidence, logic, reason, and reality accurate views, you clearly don't seem to. It's no wonder you like talking to New Agers more then Atheists: we actually will hold your feet to the fire when you make claims you can't prove.
You have confused an unwillingness to accept or entertain every nonsense idea that floats our way with being close minded. That is not the case, not now nor has it ever been the case.

(22-08-2015 10:41 PM)magic matt Wrote:  Always the same thing that drives me away it seems...
I asked you a single question. A single very basic very open ended question. If that's all it takes to drive you away from this community (and here is where my politeness is entirely at its end) maybe you need to sack the fuck up and stop being a giant whiny pussy and join the conversation like a goddamn adult?

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
23-08-2015, 03:30 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
Whiskey, I think you're giving him a much harder time than he asked for. He is not trying to convince us that this thing he believes in really exists, he's just simply saying that something inside him tells him that it does. Come on, most of us have been there at some point. This is on "Positive Atheism" anyway.

Yes, he may have made some weak arguments and mistakes but I think he's just having a hard time expressing himself.

That said, my spidey senses are tingling on this one for some reason. I see some familiar patterns. But I'll just leave it to that for now.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 03:59 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
(23-08-2015 01:01 AM)magic matt Wrote:  Chai tea on its own isn't a spell. I was trying to make an example of how multi compound science methods are used to be sold to Wiccan's or new age people as "magic". And when anyone tries to debunk them as science they act like it proves their claims. One method works like this. A dopamine high ends in a dopamine crash. And if timed right it can lead into a serotonin high if met with a light dose of over the counter melatonin sleeping aid. Mixing that with a milky substance for maternal memories to kick in and in some people you get a reaction in psychology. "NOT MAGIC" I don't know what that reaction would be. But I would guess it would vary from person to person. So there are "light workers" who capitalize on peoples ignorance by using basic science and hypnosis. Humans have such quality long term memory function compared to animals that we unlike them can easily be hypnotized over long time use of meditation.

I don't think being a light worker would be such a bad thing if it was just more secular. People need medical intervention that can take up to 10X-100X the time a doctor can devote to a patient in a month. And insurance can only be billed a limited number of times in a cycle.

So what I want to get across is that I seem like a con man who knows what a con man should have said if he was an ethical person. I've read up on some of this stuff and I have to say that it sounds like if a doctorate only took 6 months of study but was overly generalized to cover advanced doctorates such as psychiatric instead of just general medicine. That means 5% of the study time but still that is 10 times as much knowledge as the average person knows about how there bodies work.

I offer such services but only to the extent that I would ask a friend to talk to a doctor about it. I'm the kind of guy who tells people "you might want to get that mole looked at. Its been getting bigger and just because they started as harmless doesn't mean they won't turn cancerous". And "its actually pretty affordable to get removed. You have your basic over the counter removal for $25 or a cheap general surgery option for less than $200".

Again not offering magic. I just know more than the average person about basic psychiatry which gets me in trouble with Atheist, Evangelicals and new age alike.
Chai means tea. Saying chai tea is just saying tea tea in two different languages.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Slowminded's post
23-08-2015, 04:01 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
(23-08-2015 03:59 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 01:01 AM)magic matt Wrote:  Chai tea on its own isn't a spell. I was trying to make an example of how multi compound science methods are used to be sold to Wiccan's or new age people as "magic". And when anyone tries to debunk them as science they act like it proves their claims. One method works like this. A dopamine high ends in a dopamine crash. And if timed right it can lead into a serotonin high if met with a light dose of over the counter melatonin sleeping aid. Mixing that with a milky substance for maternal memories to kick in and in some people you get a reaction in psychology. "NOT MAGIC" I don't know what that reaction would be. But I would guess it would vary from person to person. So there are "light workers" who capitalize on peoples ignorance by using basic science and hypnosis. Humans have such quality long term memory function compared to animals that we unlike them can easily be hypnotized over long time use of meditation.

I don't think being a light worker would be such a bad thing if it was just more secular. People need medical intervention that can take up to 10X-100X the time a doctor can devote to a patient in a month. And insurance can only be billed a limited number of times in a cycle.

So what I want to get across is that I seem like a con man who knows what a con man should have said if he was an ethical person. I've read up on some of this stuff and I have to say that it sounds like if a doctorate only took 6 months of study but was overly generalized to cover advanced doctorates such as psychiatric instead of just general medicine. That means 5% of the study time but still that is 10 times as much knowledge as the average person knows about how there bodies work.

I offer such services but only to the extent that I would ask a friend to talk to a doctor about it. I'm the kind of guy who tells people "you might want to get that mole looked at. Its been getting bigger and just because they started as harmless doesn't mean they won't turn cancerous". And "its actually pretty affordable to get removed. You have your basic over the counter removal for $25 or a cheap general surgery option for less than $200".

Again not offering magic. I just know more than the average person about basic psychiatry which gets me in trouble with Atheist, Evangelicals and new age alike.
Chai means tea. Saying chai tea is just saying tea tea in two different languages.

Yabbut... my Twinings teabag totally says Chai Black Tea on it. Tongue

"If there's a single thing that life teaches us, it's that wishing doesn't make it so." - Lev Grossman
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 04:36 AM
RE: I'm happy with Mystic Agnosticism
(23-08-2015 04:01 AM)Nurse Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 03:59 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  Chai means tea. Saying chai tea is just saying tea tea in two different languages.

Yabbut... my Twinings teabag totally says Chai Black Tea on it. Tongue

Yeah, I can see that "chai" is used to describe a special bland of black tea.

Chai (pronounced as a single syllable and rhymes with 'pie') is the word for tea in many parts of the world. It is a centuries-old beverage which has played an important role in many cultures.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: