So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-09-2015, 08:37 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 08:27 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  We even have a couple outright crazies...but as long as they follow the rules, they remain.

(21-09-2015 08:30 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  That said, so long as you observe forum rules you won't get banned no matter how much of a douchebag you are. ... as several examples unfortunately illustrate.

You all hate me... Sadcryface2

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like houseofcantor's post
21-09-2015, 08:37 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 07:59 AM)Obie Wrote:  
(21-09-2015 07:38 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  From polls and threads on the past, this place with many of it's posters tend to be higher in the weak/agnostic-atheist category. There are of course some strong atheists and members here of the theists & of other proclamations.

For whatever reason or another this is the case. My conclusion though not definitively a great assessment, is that it is the case due to often a skeptical based nature of this atheist community here connected via the podcast/community type approach by this website(though plenty here have no connection to it and are merely here for it being an atheist forum)

I'm receiving the push back I expected. If I were to flat out tell everyone they are wrong, it would of course earn me a quick exit. Some positions are the product of long evolution and gaining subtle insight through soul maturation and extensive experience. I find knee jerk responses to be as pedantic and the fundamental religious arguments which are but blind assertions. But then , this is my first day, so I'll take it slowly and with many grains of salt. Thanks.

So you're going to imply that anyone who disagrees with you about your metaphysics lacks experience and has an immature "soul"? How attractive and compelling.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like julep's post
21-09-2015, 08:40 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 07:53 AM)Obie Wrote:  Max Plank, the supposed father of quantum physics postulated that the unified field and consciousness are one in the same.

It's not unusual for highly respected physicists to make complete fools of themselves when discussing things like intelligence and life. For example Roger Penrose and Steven Hawking. If what you say is true then I'll add ol' Max to the list.

But to balance this out you have physicists like Erwin Schrödinger and Eric Chaisson who have made some significant advances in our understanding in this regard.

We have at the moment absolutely no reason to suspect that quantum weirdness is required for consciousness. Basically it's just the physics equivalent of a god of the gaps argument. I don't understand so [quantum weirdness]-did-it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 13 users Like Mathilda's post
21-09-2015, 08:49 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 07:53 AM)Obie Wrote:  They all share the same presumptions that if it cannot be located and observed then it can't exist?

Not that it can't exist but that there's no reason to believe that it actually does. If there is reason to suspect something exists then the next step is to determine if there is any testable propositions that would support or deny the claim.

So far I haven't seen anything that supports the reality of dualism or any sort of afterlife and much that doesn't.

Quote:Doesn't it beg several questions such as the limits of our powers to know and to dissect? Of our type of consciousness and its inherent limits?

The question for is not "can it exist" but "does it exist". Talking about the former is like discussing whether or not Kirk broke the prime directive. It might be interesting, and even fun, but it says nothing about reality. For the latter you need evidence that supports the hypothesis.

Quote:Max Plank, the supposed father of quantum physics postulated that the unified field and consciousness are one in the same.

There are videos on youtube by Dr John Hagelin, a quantum physicist, supporting this.

I've seen some of his stuff but nothing other than speculation. Being an expert in one field doesn't mean you can't fall for woo in another.

Quote:It is quite easy to conclude that we are nothing beyond dust. I find that quite lacking and debatable.
[/quote]

Not liking a conclusion isn't grounds for accepting it if that's where the evidence leads.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
21-09-2015, 08:55 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
There are plenty of cursory clues that human consciousness transitions forward, but I appreciate the prevailing attitude/mindset and it isn't worth it to attempt this climb. I've done it way too many times. I of course understand where people come from as it represents an accepted norm which forms a defensible edifice of sorts which garners viability over time and becomes ever less impregnable. As a former TM Sidha I experienced and witnessed the quantum nature of consciousness, especially in the performance of the levitation sutra in large groups. All that exists is unified and supported by the same thread, or sap, as it were, of consciousness. All that is observable is differentiated expressions of the same thing, just as the many parts of a tree are expressions supported by the sap of the tree - the ubiquitous, unseen, super fluid connector between the unified field and the phenomenal - call it liquid natural law, if you wish. All form rises and falls back into the sea of consciousness that belies all that exists. All that exists is therefore connected sympathetically and vibrationally as it all floats upon the same sea of consciousness. The human mind has the innate capability to harness and to focus consciousness intelligently and intentionally to produce and to create. The only question becomes, does this ability and process end when we die. Or is death but a transition. It is understood that this universe is a closed system, that nothing is created nor destroyed, but merely changes form - including, or course, all matter and energy. In short, everything continues. I find it a bit incredible that the notion that there are transcendent aspects to our being human that cannot also continue.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2015, 08:58 AM (This post was last modified: 21-09-2015 09:11 AM by Airportkid.)
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 08:55 AM)Obie Wrote:  ... There are plenty of cursory clues that human consciousness transitions forward ...

And they are ... ?

That you refer to these clues as "cursory" is quite likely the strongest clue against where you think they lead:

cur·so·ry
ˈkərs(ə)rē/
adjective
hasty and therefore not thorough or detailed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Airportkid's post
21-09-2015, 09:00 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 08:55 AM)Obie Wrote:  ...
I find it a bit incredible that the notion that there are transcendent aspects to our being human that cannot also continue.

Crazy but true? Perhaps?

Do our atoms count as transcendent? That would be the only thing I'd accept as our continuance.

The molecules of a scrap-heaped laptop will eventually decompose but the atoms will remain hanging around for a bit.

Will the computer's consciousness-applications still function? Not so much.

No

EDIT: I'd accept 'our legacy' also would continue for a while e.g. knowledge but that will memetically morph over time, too.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
21-09-2015, 09:03 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 08:55 AM)Obie Wrote:  As a former TM Sidha I experienced and witnessed the quantum nature of consciousness, especially in the performance of the levitation sutra in large groups.

Why are you no longer a TM Sidha, whatever that is?

"Witnessed the quantum nature of consciousness" Rolleyes Christ.

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
21-09-2015, 09:10 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 07:59 AM)Obie Wrote:  
(21-09-2015 07:38 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  From polls and threads on the past, this place with many of it's posters tend to be higher in the weak/agnostic-atheist category. There are of course some strong atheists and members here of the theists & of other proclamations.

For whatever reason or another this is the case. My conclusion though not definitively a great assessment, is that it is the case due to often a skeptical based nature of this atheist community here connected via the podcast/community type approach by this website(though plenty here have no connection to it and are merely here for it being an atheist forum)

I'm receiving the push back I expected. If I were to flat out tell everyone they are wrong, it would of course earn me a quick exit. Some positions are the product of long evolution and gaining subtle insight through soul maturation and extensive experience. I find knee jerk responses to be as pedantic and the fundamental religious arguments which are but blind assertions. But then , this is my first day, so I'll take it slowly and with many grains of salt. Thanks.

Oh boy. Here we fucking go again. Another jackass who thinks they have something new to add to the conversation while simultaneously asserting that we haven't put any thought into our positions or come to conclusions based on long winded discussions. Fuck your suppositions about what we think and how we came to those conclusions.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes itsnotmeitsyou's post
21-09-2015, 09:10 AM
RE: So, tell me, is this place mainly strong atheism?
(21-09-2015 08:37 AM)julep Wrote:  
(21-09-2015 07:59 AM)Obie Wrote:  I'm receiving the push back I expected. If I were to flat out tell everyone they are wrong, it would of course earn me a quick exit. Some positions are the product of long evolution and gaining subtle insight through soul maturation and extensive experience. I find knee jerk responses to be as pedantic and the fundamental religious arguments which are but blind assertions. But then , this is my first day, so I'll take it slowly and with many grains of salt. Thanks.

So you're going to imply that anyone who disagrees with you about your metaphysics lacks experience and has an immature "soul"? How attractive and compelling.

You may phrase it as you like to attempt to marginalize me. I would say that we all differ in our maturation which of course implies that there are more more and lesser mature. the maturation process is ongoing and can be observed within a given life stream. I find it incredible that people can adopt a scorched earth type mentality and declare resolutely that there is no part of being human that cannot survive and continue to evolve. It precludes rationality and growth. It is obvious across this planet that this is a one room schoolhouse with a great disparity in advancement. If we all start out as blank slates, how can such ingrained disparities exist? Or could it be that the evolution of consciousness is very slow and deliberate and thus, it requires many transitions in and out of form to attain certain heights or levels? I could make a great many arguments but it would be misleading and suggest that it is by argument that I have arrived where I am, when indeed it is a point and place in my evolution. I am not alone, of course. Although it might appear so here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: