So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-09-2015, 05:44 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(24-09-2015 05:40 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(24-09-2015 04:46 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Duct tape and baling wire.

Actually, a break from the dang Gwynnies. Big Grin

Gwynnies gonna be jelly.

[Image: kristen_stewart.jpg]

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
24-09-2015, 06:50 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(24-09-2015 10:25 AM)Obie Wrote:  Consider the ocean.

The ocean rests on a floor. The floor is the bedrock of creation. It is infinite and immutable, unseen and unshakable. It is the unified field of infinite possibility.

Upon the floor rests an ubiquitous layer of invisible superfluidity. A self-referral, all-creative layer of “liquid natural law” that defines, supports, and allows all form that floats on its surface.

All that exists phenomenally, is supported by and gains differentiated form and functioning through its contact with this superfluid, super-intelligent layer called consciousness.

All that exists, is consciousness bound by form.

All that exists, is consciousness expressing through form.

All that exists represents intelligent form and functioning as it represents the layer of creation that is all-intelligent.

On the surface of the ocean all phenomenal creation rests, with each form displacing its individuated share of consciousness.

All that floats upon the ocean is equal and the same in that it is nothing more, nor less, than individuated form representing the same thing across all creation – consciousness.

All that exists is unified by the same level of creation – the fundamental layer of creation that gives rise to all that exists – the cosmic singularity, as it were.

As everything that exists is a differentiated expression of the same thing, then it can be said that everything is the same thing essentially.

Form is illusory and ephemeral. It does not reflect, nor define, nor locate essence.

The essence of all that is, is consciousness.

Consciousness is infinite.

It maps to the ocean floor of absolute possibility.

All that exists or that ever can or will exist, begins as an impulse from the absolute that is sent upward through the ocean of conscious, while gaining differentiated form and function along the way, eventually breaking the surface of the ocean and gaining phenomenal existence.

Mankind also floats on the ocean of creation.

Mankind also translates consciousness through form and functioning.

But mankind is unique in that mankind possesses higher mind functioning in which and through which he can both realize his consciousness and then manipulate it to produce and to create as he wishes and wills.

The creative process in man is expressed through body and mind.

Each man and woman is unique in their ability to create in relation to their individuated consciousness as it is expressed through their individual mind and body.

The more expanded, refined, and integrated in their consciousness, the more elegant, remarkable, and sublime their creations.

Thus, the individual ability to create rests upon their ability to translate consciousness in its most pure and powerful state – which is a function of how intimately connected their minds and bodies interface, via their consciousness, with the transcendent field of all possibility – the field of pure, powerful, unfettered possibility.

The incorporation of the transcendent field through the aegis of mind and body is a natural process – a byproduct of living – of experiencing – of processing experience – of growth.

It is a continuous and cumulative across multiple incarnations.

It can be facilitated and hastened through certain practices and disciplines.

Transcendental Meditation is one such practice.

Those who create most efficiently are those who are more pure, expanded, and integrated in their consciousness and as their consciousness maps more intimately to the source of consciousness, the ocean floor of infinite possibility.

The more closely connected to the unified field, the more efficiently our consciousness shortens the process of creation from impulse to manifest reality.

Were we to fully expand and to integrate our consciousness to cosmic proportions, to quantum proportions, then we could create from mere impulse, and eliminate the delay that mankind has come to accept as a necessary and natural part of the process of creation.

Levitation is merely one of an infinite number of impulses that can manifest as reality if introduced at the finest level of creation, and in the creative process.

Through human consciousness, anything and everything is possible, as human consciousness is “mapable” to the entire ocean of consciousness, thus, able to interface with the entire ocean floor.

Which means that mankind is essentially capable of mastery in the creative process, and he is able to create at will, and at the level of pure intention.

It is the natural process of creation.

Our severe limitations are unnatural, but have been accepted and indemnified as normal.

We are not all equal in our limitations.

But we are equal in our unlimited possibilities to express and to become.

Which is a function of expanding, purifying, and integrating consciousness.


You shouldn't create posts using the "Deepak Chopra Quote Generator".

Deep Sounding BS


You seem to think that our not accepting your unsupported assertions is the same thing as being dogmatic and close minded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Simon Moon's post
25-09-2015, 01:44 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(24-09-2015 06:50 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  
(24-09-2015 10:25 AM)Obie Wrote:  Consider the ocean.

The ocean rests on a floor. The floor is the bedrock of creation. It is infinite and immutable, unseen and unshakable. It is the unified field of infinite possibility.

Upon the floor rests an ubiquitous layer of invisible superfluidity. A self-referral, all-creative layer of “liquid natural law” that defines, supports, and allows all form that floats on its surface.

All that exists phenomenally, is supported by and gains differentiated form and functioning through its contact with this superfluid, super-intelligent layer called consciousness.

All that exists, is consciousness bound by form.

All that exists, is consciousness expressing through form.

All that exists represents intelligent form and functioning as it represents the layer of creation that is all-intelligent.

On the surface of the ocean all phenomenal creation rests, with each form displacing its individuated share of consciousness.

All that floats upon the ocean is equal and the same in that it is nothing more, nor less, than individuated form representing the same thing across all creation – consciousness.

All that exists is unified by the same level of creation – the fundamental layer of creation that gives rise to all that exists – the cosmic singularity, as it were.

As everything that exists is a differentiated expression of the same thing, then it can be said that everything is the same thing essentially.

Form is illusory and ephemeral. It does not reflect, nor define, nor locate essence.

The essence of all that is, is consciousness.

Consciousness is infinite.

It maps to the ocean floor of absolute possibility.

All that exists or that ever can or will exist, begins as an impulse from the absolute that is sent upward through the ocean of conscious, while gaining differentiated form and function along the way, eventually breaking the surface of the ocean and gaining phenomenal existence.

Mankind also floats on the ocean of creation.

Mankind also translates consciousness through form and functioning.

But mankind is unique in that mankind possesses higher mind functioning in which and through which he can both realize his consciousness and then manipulate it to produce and to create as he wishes and wills.

The creative process in man is expressed through body and mind.

Each man and woman is unique in their ability to create in relation to their individuated consciousness as it is expressed through their individual mind and body.

The more expanded, refined, and integrated in their consciousness, the more elegant, remarkable, and sublime their creations.

Thus, the individual ability to create rests upon their ability to translate consciousness in its most pure and powerful state – which is a function of how intimately connected their minds and bodies interface, via their consciousness, with the transcendent field of all possibility – the field of pure, powerful, unfettered possibility.

The incorporation of the transcendent field through the aegis of mind and body is a natural process – a byproduct of living – of experiencing – of processing experience – of growth.

It is a continuous and cumulative across multiple incarnations.

It can be facilitated and hastened through certain practices and disciplines.

Transcendental Meditation is one such practice.

Those who create most efficiently are those who are more pure, expanded, and integrated in their consciousness and as their consciousness maps more intimately to the source of consciousness, the ocean floor of infinite possibility.

The more closely connected to the unified field, the more efficiently our consciousness shortens the process of creation from impulse to manifest reality.

Were we to fully expand and to integrate our consciousness to cosmic proportions, to quantum proportions, then we could create from mere impulse, and eliminate the delay that mankind has come to accept as a necessary and natural part of the process of creation.

Levitation is merely one of an infinite number of impulses that can manifest as reality if introduced at the finest level of creation, and in the creative process.

Through human consciousness, anything and everything is possible, as human consciousness is “mapable” to the entire ocean of consciousness, thus, able to interface with the entire ocean floor.

Which means that mankind is essentially capable of mastery in the creative process, and he is able to create at will, and at the level of pure intention.

It is the natural process of creation.

Our severe limitations are unnatural, but have been accepted and indemnified as normal.

We are not all equal in our limitations.

But we are equal in our unlimited possibilities to express and to become.

Which is a function of expanding, purifying, and integrating consciousness.


You shouldn't create posts using the "Deepak Chopra Quote Generator".

Deep Sounding BS


You seem to think that our not accepting your unsupported assertions is the same thing as being dogmatic and close minded.



Our tendency, if not our temptation, is to formulate opinions and broad understandings based on who we are presently, and given the ground we have covered to a point - and then to defend our opinions and positions with the laser weaponry of reason and skepticism - when there are things, perhaps, that defy such left-brained technologies, and which are best left to a life of uncertainty - and of standing further back from the forest and squinting, as it were, that we first and foremost get an impressionistic sense of what it is we think we are looking at, and only then deciding if indeed, it begs dissection, rather than unqualified rumination in gaining a hold on what it truly represents.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2015, 01:59 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(25-09-2015 01:44 PM)Obie Wrote:  Our tendency, if not our temptation, is to formulate opinions and broad understandings based on who we are presently, and given the ground we have covered to a point - and then to defend our opinions and positions with the laser weaponry of reason and skepticism - when there are things, perhaps, that defy such left-brained technologies, and which are best left to a life of uncertainty - and of standing further back from the forest and squinting, as it were, that we first and foremost get an impressionistic sense of what it is we think we are looking at, and only then deciding if indeed, it begs dissection, rather than unqualified rumination in gaining a hold on what it truly represents.

Woahh, that's like far-out man.. Smokin


I really hope you're just trolling. Facepalm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EppurSiMuove's post
25-09-2015, 02:20 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(25-09-2015 01:44 PM)Obie Wrote:  ... best left to a life of uncertainty - and of standing further back from the forest and squinting, as it were, that we first and foremost get an impressionistic sense of what it is we think we are looking at, and only then deciding if indeed, it begs dissection, rather than unqualified rumination in gaining a hold on what it truly represents ...

It's hard to tell but it appears that you're saying there are things in the universe opaque to scientific scrutiny that are nonetheless detectable, and that we shouldn't even try to examine them scientifically because such examination wouldn't be fruitful, but if we "squint at it" we'll be able to figure out what it is.

And you don't see anything absurd there - if that's what you're contending?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Airportkid's post
25-09-2015, 02:46 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(24-09-2015 05:44 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(24-09-2015 05:40 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Actually, a break from the dang Gwynnies. Big Grin

Gwynnies gonna be jelly.

A couple of days without Gwynnies, I fall out of the sky and onto my ass into a thornbush. I'm miserable, depressed, and slept all day. So I can either be scatterbrained or a wet blanket. I knew I should have not started drawing that girl again. Undecided

(25-09-2015 01:44 PM)Obie Wrote:  
(24-09-2015 06:50 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  You shouldn't create posts using the "Deepak Chopra Quote Generator".

Deep Sounding BS


You seem to think that our not accepting your unsupported assertions is the same thing as being dogmatic and close minded.



Our tendency, if not our temptation, is to formulate opinions and broad understandings based on who we are presently, and given the ground we have covered to a point - and then to defend our opinions and positions with the laser weaponry of reason and skepticism - when there are things, perhaps, that defy such left-brained technologies, and which are best left to a life of uncertainty - and of standing further back from the forest and squinting, as it were, that we first and foremost get an impressionistic sense of what it is we think we are looking at, and only then deciding if indeed, it begs dissection, rather than unqualified rumination in gaining a hold on what it truly represents.

Exactly what you were told not to do. It doesn't make you sound intelligent, it makes you sound stoned as fuck. Science is the preferred tool to explore phenomena. To say that some things are beyond scientific rationale and are better left to uncertainty ain't saying nothing, especially around here.

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
25-09-2015, 03:04 PM (This post was last modified: 25-09-2015 03:40 PM by Obie.)
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(25-09-2015 02:20 PM)Airportkid Wrote:  
(25-09-2015 01:44 PM)Obie Wrote:  ... best left to a life of uncertainty - and of standing further back from the forest and squinting, as it were, that we first and foremost get an impressionistic sense of what it is we think we are looking at, and only then deciding if indeed, it begs dissection, rather than unqualified rumination in gaining a hold on what it truly represents ...

It's hard to tell but it appears that you're saying there are things in the universe opaque to scientific scrutiny that are nonetheless detectable, and that we shouldn't even try to examine them scientifically because such examination wouldn't be fruitful, but if we "squint at it" we'll be able to figure out what it is.

And you don't see anything absurd there - if that's what you're contending?

As an example, I have debated many times regarding the existence of a "god" and invariably people pointed to what they considered to be objective support such as the fact of a complex universe. That, in my opinion, is an attempt to define and to declare by looking at what is considered to be an objectively viable tree in the forest of the god question. I would submit that we should begin such possible inquiry by standing back from the forest and squinting as it were, and asking ourselves if we can first sense such a thing as god, at least based on popular definitions, and on a common basis - as one would think that such a universal underlying concept should be detectable on some sublime level. But as it unfolds, it is those who believe in god who claim to sense and to know that a god exists, which is of course a case of false logic and pretense - as belief becomes a pre-requisite to claiming existence. There are many open-ended queries that I feel should remain as such unless and until all might agree on some common basis, perhaps scientifically, and in the meantime, I feel we are better served in allowing a sort of organic and evolving approach in determining what may or may not be the case when it comes to the more ineffable phenomena.

I support you for your civility, which seems to be in short supply on this website.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2015, 03:42 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?




WOO WOO!

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2015, 03:42 PM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(25-09-2015 03:04 PM)Obie Wrote:  ... I feel we are better served in allowing a sort of organic and evolving approach in determining what may or may not be the case when it comes to the more ineffable phenomena ...

If I understood your OP you thought belief in a god premature because belief in something wasn't possible until you'd more or less seen or defined what to believe in, and nothing about any god has either been seen or defined (concretely), and I agree.

But you appear to believe in some some unseen undefined aspect of the universe that you just don't happen to call god, in direct contradiction to why you don't believe in gods.

It might be worth explaining detectable here so it doesn't trip up discussion: some things are directly detectable, but many things can only be detected by their effects, not directly. Several artifacts and phenomena have been predicted long before their direct detection, and some we don't think will ever be directly detected. But whether detected directly or indirectly, anything we consider real HAS been detected.

There is not one single example in all of science where scientists have put the lens cap back on the microscope and declared that something detectable wasn't just ONLY evidence of supernaturality but not even MAYBE evidence of supernaturality.

If something is detectable, whether directly or indirectly, it is ALWAYS accessible to scientific examination. There might be examples of detectable artifacts of the universe we as human beings may NEVER be able to adequately measure, or fully define, or fully understand. Our brains are only so many neurons and no more - there could be concepts beyond our capacity to grasp just as the brain of a cat would be incapable of playing a competent game of chess.

But what we CANNOT do is conjecture what such things might be precisely for the reason you gave in your OP for rejecting premature belief in a god - you can't pretend to define what is beyond your ability to define.

So what works best is to stick with what we can understand, and measure, and quantify, and see, even if indirectly. And to use science as the best tool yet developed to expand the breadth of what we do understand.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Airportkid's post
25-09-2015, 04:03 PM (This post was last modified: 25-09-2015 04:25 PM by Simon Moon.)
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(25-09-2015 01:44 PM)Obie Wrote:  Our tendency, if not our temptation, is to formulate opinions and broad understandings based on who we are presently, and given the ground we have covered to a point - and then to defend our opinions and positions with the laser weaponry of reason and skepticism

Who I am presently, with regards to existential claims, is a person that values demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument to evaluate whether a claim is worthy of belief.

One of my major goals, is to have as many true beliefs, and as few false beliefs as possible. I want my internal representation of reality to map as closely as possible to actual reality, in as much as we are able to perceive it.


Quote:when there are things, perhaps, that defy such left-brained technologies, and which are best left to a life of uncertainty - and of standing further back from the forest and squinting, as it were, that we first and foremost get an impressionistic sense of what it is we think we are looking at, and only then deciding if indeed, it begs dissection, rather than unqualified rumination in gaining a hold on what it truly represents.


Before we can state that there are any of these things that, as you say "defy such left-brained technologies, and which are best left to a life of uncertainty", we have to verify that there is even a phenomena to investigate.

And even if there is a demonstrable phenomena, the explanation does not, by default become your pet 'spiritual' explanation. At best, all we can say is "we don't know what the cause is".

Funny thing is, anytime one of these ineffable claims come up for even the most cursory scrutiny, there's no there, there. There isn't even a demonstrable phenomena to research, let alone probable explanations.

So, please let me know, what am I supposed to use to justify my belief in anything that you are claiming, if it is not demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Simon Moon's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: