Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
10 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,465 Year: 3,722/9,624 Month: 593/974 Week: 206/276 Day: 46/34 Hour: 2/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the I in ID?
dandon83
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 165 (128001)
07-27-2004 5:23 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Prince Lucianus
07-26-2004 7:04 AM


YES I WOULD
try and prove that to me . and see if i will believe you .MORE I will be on your side.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Prince Lucianus, posted 07-26-2004 7:04 AM Prince Lucianus has not replied

  
dandon83
Inactive Member


Message 107 of 165 (128002)
07-27-2004 5:26 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by jar
07-26-2004 12:59 PM


Sorry . but I do not understand what you want to say , would you explain!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by jar, posted 07-26-2004 12:59 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by jar, posted 07-27-2004 11:46 AM dandon83 has replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 108 of 165 (128013)
07-27-2004 6:21 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by dandon83
07-27-2004 5:15 AM


Re: Then write one!!!
that is an assumption on your part - large elements of the koran are just plain steals from other cultures.
I'm glad you have your faith but it's just another book of fairystories to the rest of us.
If you are so happy to defend it - why don't you start a thread about the koran and the scientific truth contained within?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by dandon83, posted 07-27-2004 5:15 AM dandon83 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by dandon83, posted 07-28-2004 4:16 AM CK has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 109 of 165 (128063)
07-27-2004 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by dandon83
07-27-2004 5:26 AM


Sorry . but I do not understand what you want to say , would you explain!!!
I said,

The Map is not the Territory.

When Christians take the Bible as the Literal Word of God, they make the mistake of confusing the Map for the actual territory that it depicts.
Imagine that God and salvation are a Treasure. If that is true, then the Bible, Torah or The Koran, are but Treasure Maps, they are not the treasure itself.
But God has left us more information then any of them. God has left us the world, the Universe and all that is in it. While the various sacred documents may well be maps, when it comes to the World, the Universe and all that is in it, the record left unwritten except by the hand of God is the real Territory. It is the fossil record, the geological column, the land and skies, the stars in their magnificence.
The accounts of creation in the Bible, in the Koran are but stories, allegories, parables. They express an idea in terms that could be understood by the people of that time. They are meant to describe the Why of Creation by using the how of creation as understood by the authors and readers 1400 years ago, or 6000 years ago. They are not meant to be taken literally.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by dandon83, posted 07-27-2004 5:26 AM dandon83 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by dandon83, posted 07-28-2004 4:00 AM jar has not replied

  
dandon83
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 165 (128289)
07-28-2004 4:00 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by jar
07-27-2004 11:46 AM


I got it!!
that -what you say- may be true for Bible. but it is not for Quran.
Quran is applicable for every place ,every time, every mind.It can be understood any period of time . and as you go on learning and discovering ,you will understand Quran in the same way as 1400 years ago BUT WITH MORE FAITH. that is why Quran is from God(ALLAH).
And when Quran mean to simplify something for us,you will read before that it is an analogy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by jar, posted 07-27-2004 11:46 AM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by NosyNed, posted 07-28-2004 4:14 AM dandon83 has replied
 Message 143 by sidelined, posted 08-02-2004 4:16 PM dandon83 has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9003
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 111 of 165 (128290)
07-28-2004 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by dandon83
07-28-2004 4:00 AM


Re: I got it!!
LOL, no you don't "got it". This is exactly what the Christians say too. There is no way to tell the difference between you. The same arguments go on for centuries. Meanwhile, there is a method for settling some questions about the world around us.
You have helped demonstrate that your method is the same as that of the Christians and that it can never work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by dandon83, posted 07-28-2004 4:00 AM dandon83 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by dandon83, posted 07-28-2004 4:21 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
dandon83
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 165 (128291)
07-28-2004 4:16 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by CK
07-27-2004 6:21 AM


Re: Then write one!!!
large elements of the koran are just plain steals from other cultures.
_____________________________________________________________________
Steals!!!
If you mean by other CULTURES ,other books-bible and towrah-then it will not be steals . it would be from the same God.
Then what a -not educated- person that would learn other CULTURES and steal from them following three Comletely different ways-WAYS NOT MEANINGS-in editing his steals :Quran , alhadeeth alqudsi and assonna ashareefa.
If you could ,I still want 1/10 of one of them from you , and I will be so so glade to follow your new relegion AGAIN.
______________________________________________________________________
If you are so happy to defend it - why don't you start a thread about the koran and the scientific truth contained within?
______________________________________________________________________
I would, but i have to strengthen my laguage before that. you know these things need some more words.
This message has been edited by dandon83, 07-28-2004 03:18 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by CK, posted 07-27-2004 6:21 AM CK has not replied

  
dandon83
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 165 (128292)
07-28-2004 4:21 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by NosyNed
07-28-2004 4:14 AM


So , what are you protesting at??!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by NosyNed, posted 07-28-2004 4:14 AM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by CK, posted 07-28-2004 6:45 AM dandon83 has replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 114 of 165 (128316)
07-28-2004 6:45 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by dandon83
07-28-2004 4:21 AM


Without speaking for Ned, I would guess that he is getting at the same point that I am.
You like the christian fundies are saying "this book is totally true", we are saying "no it's not and should not be taken literally as large elements are wrong".
We can go around in circles on this one, but bear in mind that on this site if we make an assumption, we need to back it up.
If you want to say that the Koran is scientifically correct can you give us examples to back it up?
If not, we will consider your claim to be unproven at best and worse false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by dandon83, posted 07-28-2004 4:21 AM dandon83 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by dandon83, posted 07-29-2004 5:27 AM CK has replied

  
Deimos Saturn
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 165 (128325)
07-28-2004 7:37 AM


new member post
This is a long post, it’s from a nihilistic perspective, I think I made some good points.
Many people have said what I’m going to say at the end of this paragraph before me especially in debate Bulletin Boards yet we (Americans) still have a president who puts a ban on stem cell cloning research (as well as we *the entire human population* live perpetually in culturally regressive modes arguing and killing because of scripture that teaches to love and accept) but I want to settle this once and for all.
Ultimately, quantum physicist have defined the mechanism of which God uses to create the universe and everything in it. That mechanism is called causality. However, causality brings the notion that we or I am not in control over my own destiny. Most religions of the world fundamentally believe God gave them a free will and I know I have a free will, however, according to nihilism, the free will is only a mental observation (inner observation) of the ability to calculate thought randomly (the notion of the soul) and control the physical self (the outer universe). Nihilism and Quantum physicists have methods for proving that the universe exists only inside the mind but I wont get into that. What you will all agree on with me is, our awareness of ourselves and existence forces us to believe we are in control of our destiny and the orders and laws of physical reality have not determined our future because of way the atoms and energies in us and around us act, however physical science has proven that:
In the physical universe, all particles of reality have set behaviors (any behaviors we have not yet to determine a scheme to are due to lacking sophistication in our current technology) according to the chaos theory. We live in a linear system that is constantly trying to find and equilibrium (by the way, recently quantum physicists have developed models of the universe that say the universe is a perpetual energy machine and will never end however near the time that the massive sand clock turns over there wont be a possibility for any life to exist for hundreds of billions of current earth years while the universe starts back up again so there is hope for you who fear a pointlessness to physical reality) that cannot ever achieve equilibrium because of the nature of the universe. This perpetual energy might sound completely cockamamie to modern physicists and even religious groups but you can read the highly plausible speculation at http://www.jrmooneyham.com/spprs7ref.html#section4.5
This said about set behaviors and schemes of particles (all of which are made from one common particle or the smallest possible particle) the chaos of the universe no longer seems so chaotic, rather, this unseen -almost divine mechanical order to the universe would be defined as the mechanism that god creates the physical universe and all things in it simultaneously instantaneously perpetually omnipotently ubiquitously and perfectly.
I believe the chaotic/systematic God is intelligent but obviously on a divine but not mystical level. In this physical universe we are within and containing God. This intelligence I speak of brings me to the point that intelligence is the ability to make calculative purposeful action. Within humans, almost all of our actions are purposeful, since we contemplate almost all our actions in an epistemologist’s formatted brain, this ability mimics god (man in his own image) and for us to be able to use our brains purposefully and act purposefully is the will of god as ordained by the limitations and capacities of the brain. Within many animals, it would seem they act purposefully upon completing calculative thought, but really the capacity to act purposefully only exists in few species of animals like prime apes, elephants, dolphins, whales, and the occurrence of purposeful actions is limited because their brain is not developed enough. In wild animals, little of their actions are ever purposeful, rather, most of their actions are primal, the way wild animals acts is purely the act of god because the aggregate of their brain is so simple that it is no different than a tree or a rock.
When I say the aggregate of the brain of wild animals is no different than a tree or a rock I am illustrating that all animals are incapable of making choices therefore all the impulses of their brains are as a result of the order and scheme of the universe attempting to reach equilibrium- ultimately this seems true for humans too since our brains are physical, but simply put, our brains are ONLY physical. In nihilism, the universe is contained in the consciousness therefore every occurrence within the universe be it the collision of a neutron with an anti neutron, spinning a roulette wheel, or misspelling a word is entirely purposeful and divinely formulated since God shares the same consciousness as we do. This brings me to the question what defines consciousness?
Is consciousness only a software in a brain or computer processor that computes delays and relays of electricity and chemicals? Can consciousness derive from something else? Is it possible for a plant to be conscious, or even a single drop of water. Like in the human brain, trillions or at least billions of bits of information are calculated by the cerebrum, cerebellum, and medulla. Our cerebrum is the finest engineering masterpiece of nature and probably the most complex arrangement of cells in comparison to all other living organisms on earth, and most likely the most complex collection of solid matter on earth.
An agreeable definition of God:
If you think about it, it is prejudice to say that only fatty acids and proteins or silicon chips can be conscious, if you take a step back, the entire universe and everything in it is an infinitely complex and infinitely big network of micro reactions. Micro reactions just like in the brain that makes up our consciousness, a consciousness that houses the construct of the physical universe, the physical universe itself is housing the construct of our consciousness and visa versa. So of course God is wise and omnipotent. God is conscious of everything in the universe because everything in the universe is inside it, we are not omnipotent because within the construct of the physical universe we experience we can only be conscious of that which is physical or emotional stimulus. We are limited by our perception of physicality, so ultimately, according to nihilism, evolution and creation are both false, if you dive deeper into the metaphysics of it all, ultimately even time is merely a construct of the consciousness, time is only believable to epistemologists and evolution can only be possible with time.
More on the human brain from an evolutionist standpoint.
With this organ we can process abstract postulations of reality versus a simulation or neither or both, we can build three dimensional models mentally, do math, create art, and communicate ideas to others with word. The cerebrum is an extension of the cerebellum we use to feel and move our physical bodies, and the medulla the simplest part of the brain, is quite literally the part of the body that makes us stupid. We make stupid decisions like ignore reason and adhere to irrational fear because of it, we lust for sex constantly because of it, its impulses are completely divergent of our cerebrum. This is why the medulla is called the reptilian brain because it’s formatted to function as a non social highly aggressive tree dwelling crap flinging monkey, thinking only of the survival of the self. This outdated and inefficient organ makes us possessive of objects, people, and territory, it makes us aggressive and the way our entire cortex is wired is modeled completely different from it and it reduces our chances of procreation and survival. however since it has dominance over the rest of the brain we close our eyes when we sneeze because as small tree dwelling almost pocket sized monkeys we had to shut our eyes when we sneezed or the pressure built up by the diaphragm would accumulated in the tear ducts causing our eye balls to pop out but since our eye sockets are currently too small to allow that to happen there is no need for us to shut our eyes, it‘s a left over primal impulse we have from when we were early humans.
Even if you are a creationist by the book, all this proof that surrounds you about evolution is bunk because it is proven (http://www.hatem.com/metah.htm#CONSCIOUSNESS) that time is a construct of the consciousness. In any case, if you live life as a good human by the book, don’t let your book get in the way of technological progress that may bring about economic stability, longer happier healthier lives, over all greater knowledge of the physical universe and resist the urge to behave or think with your medulla (aside from sneezing, coughing, scratching, controlling your blood pressure, heart rate, breathing, optic fixation on the horizon, body temperature, goose bumps, blushing, dreaming, digestion, and maybe the act of having sex) you’ll be fine sitting next to me on the bus.
As human animals, we are supposed to be social, communicate clearly and objectively, we are supposed to recognize ourselves as being a part of a commune, we all take part in rearing the children in order for them to have a better chance for survival, we are supposed to be artistic. As the human we are trying to become we are supposed to be like Jesus as described in the bible, the perfect human who is completely selfless, a good samaritan, thankful for everything, loving toward everyone unconditionally, and absolutely forgiving. These are super human qualities we don’t need to evolve to achieve because Jesus was a regular human. Believing people like this have existed or are possible helps a lot.
We all take steps to believe in something everyday, mostly out of fear. We believe we have a job the job we think we do because of our belief our memory is correct and we believe we are who we are because when we look at our drivers license next to our reflection, both would deduce that our identity is indeed correct according to what the piece of paper and plastic says and what our reflections look like. Believing in a talking snake in a tree or all life sharing a common ancestor are both legitimate, neither holding better ground over the other. Essentially our memory is the only thing that holds anything we believe together, whether it checks with what someone else says or what bones you find in the ground or what scripture reads, when two argue about the physical, eventually it breaks down into the mental. Those of you who point to my proof that the universe doesn’t exist, I say all the methods to know I AM and whether I exist or not are self evident to me in the now and always in the present. Chaos theory is also self evident, I know that if I go back in time and change something, the present or future will diverge greatly than what it would have been had I not traveled back in time, essentially, my mental model of atoms and energy works the same way. None of us can be conscious of atoms existing but we know that according to how we remember they behave we can draw the same conclusions, but it would be arbitrary to bring these points up since none of us really existwell I do, the rest of you are just characters in a virtual construct, just kidding.
I really think this site should be called Creationism, nihilism, or evolution? the vs. makes it sound so two men enter one man leave, know what I mean?

Nihilism is the answer, and it's not what you think...
http://www.hatem.com

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4699 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 116 of 165 (128518)
07-29-2004 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by jar
06-25-2004 6:36 PM


Re: Evidence You Can't See
One goal of Religion, IMHO, is to work to try to understand the mind of GOD. That can be done by learning the HOW involved in what we see. But that is only the HOW part.
The WHY is the other part of religion and there we may find even greater challenges.
jar,
I'm gonna shoe horn my real interest into this discussion and I'll admit it's a bit of a leap. The sources of my interest lay in the sages of the east, Lao Tzu, Buddha, Ramana Maharshi.
I'm fine with science. At this point science studies matter/energy and space/time. There are the beginnings of studies of "information" and that I remain virtually ignorant about. Antonio Damasio and other brain scientists are working on how consciousness emerges in the neural organization and function of the brain and I think that is very important essential work but I suspect that the buddhist concept of primordial consciousness will prevail as a recognition that all though the contents of consciousness require various structures, consciousness itself is a fundamental property of the universe.
The mystery then is not out there. Science studies the out there very well. But who is it that knows that it is? The eastern sages, and to be specific I'll now take the teachings of Ramana Maharshi, point out that anything we point to as ourself is an object of consciousness and therefore can not be the subject that is aware of it. If I say I am a human, my human organism is an object of my awareness. The I as subject then is not a human that is just one of the things it is aware of. The mysteries are not out there in space or back there in time. We are the mystery as we contemplate the mysteries.
In the west the duality of consciousness and the universe is most often taken for granted in religion, philosophy, and science. What Buddha, Ramana, even Bernadette Roberts in California speak about is their experience of themselves as separate individuals falling away, disappearing. Buddha means 'awake' and what we talk of in the west as enlightenment I feel is better understood by the translation of "awakening". With the loss of a subject there is loss of object. Roberts attempts to express her experience as, I paraphrase now to the best of my recall, 'An eye that seeing everywhere sees only itself'.
Western religion has most often responded harshly but these experience are noted by the sufi's of Islam, a few christian contemplatives, and I don't know about Judaism.
Official christians will most likely say this is the heresy of pantheism. I don't know if that is right or not. But my understanding of the experiences of these sages is that the universe is one whole interdependent phenomena and we are not separate. As fundamental as matter/energy and space/time are to this universe, the universe that you and I live in at this moment is even more fundamentally awareness itself. Ramana often called this Self with a capital 'S' to differentiate from the ego that we all have and that we feel is our individuality.
Ramana in the indian tradition identified this as the Godhead, Brahman. Buddha declined to give an opinion on the existence of God, but in some school of Buddhism this might be spoken of as Mind, or the One Mind. Like vortices form in a rivers current we take on the appearance of individuality for awhile, but that is one of thousands of patterns formed by the water and in essence we are water, or rather we are awareness and not any of the object awarenss can identify itself with.
I hope you find something of interest in this different view of the "I" in ID.
peace,
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by jar, posted 06-25-2004 6:36 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by crashfrog, posted 07-29-2004 1:43 AM lfen has replied
 Message 118 by jar, posted 07-29-2004 2:10 AM lfen has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 117 of 165 (128521)
07-29-2004 1:43 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by lfen
07-29-2004 1:25 AM


The eastern sages, and to be specific I'll now take the teachings of Ramana Maharshi, point out that anything we point to as ourself is an object of consciousness and therefore can not be the subject that is aware of it.
If I can write a program that can refer to itself and even invoke itself with different parameters, why can't my mind do the same thing?
But if what you meant was that, lingusitically, the referent is not the referenced, then that is true. As Jar says the map is not the territory; the model isn't the reality; the word is not the object.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by lfen, posted 07-29-2004 1:25 AM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by lfen, posted 07-29-2004 2:44 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 118 of 165 (128525)
07-29-2004 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by lfen
07-29-2004 1:25 AM


Re: Evidence You Can't See
The Dao de Jing is an interesting study, eight-one short verses that you can spend a lifetime exploring. But to read and understand the Dao you must understand that often they make their point by mocking the common wisdom. The Dao de Jing is meant to make you reconsider your most strongly held beliefs, not to change them but to make you stop, stand apart from them, and look at them from a new perspective.
And that is a lesson that IMHO, we should always keep in the forefront.
Fill your bowl to the brim and it will spill. Keep sharpening your knife and it will blunt. Chase after money and security and your heart will never unclench. Care about people's approval and you will be their prisoner. Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by lfen, posted 07-29-2004 1:25 AM lfen has not replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4699 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 119 of 165 (128526)
07-29-2004 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by pink sasquatch
06-25-2004 5:21 PM


Re: Evidence You Can't See
Perhaps the definition of a "god" should be "an entity who does things without a means to do so".
Why would an omnipotent god be bound by material laws? is a god itself material?
Hi Sas,
Is material itself material?
And what are entities?
Take a star. An entity event of long duration that comes into being transforming energies of atom events into radiant energy and then the process subsides and changes and morphs into other processes.
Remember any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo! ?? uh, er wait, no that would be is indistinguishable from magic.
There is the universe in which it appears entities appear but those entities are transformations taking place. One of the key recognitions of the Buddha was that there was no permanent self. What we take as ourself is changing all the time. If entity is a concept that we've misunderstood and there are no entities in the sense of discreet beings then the concept of God as an entity is meaningless. Wittgenstein might say it's just an improper use of words that gave us the false impression that there was a question.
On the other hand this gigantic process of the universe that we are part of, might that process qualify as God? Godding is the manifesting of that we call "What is".
peace,
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-25-2004 5:21 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by pink sasquatch, posted 07-29-2004 3:16 PM lfen has replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4699 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 120 of 165 (128530)
07-29-2004 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by crashfrog
07-29-2004 1:43 AM


If I can write a program that can refer to itself and even invoke itself with different parameters, why can't my mind do the same thing?
Crash,
Thought of course references itself all the time, I agree with you on that. But I have trouble thinking of your computer programs as being aware, and in the same way I have trouble seeing thought as being aware. It makes distinctions, differential responses, even intelligent solutions, all these being neuro motor behaviours. But is that awareness? Is that the feeling of "I am"? Not the words but the essential feeling? It isn't for me.
Here is one place where that which is closest to us is so hard to see. Mind, awareness, consciousness, self awareness can be used synonymously or can be used to make some distinctions.
But if what you meant was that, lingusitically, the referent is not the referenced, then that is true. As Jar says the map is not the territory; the model isn't the reality; the word is not the object.
That too. Yes, the brilliant insight of Korzbski, "The map is not the territory". And yet do we know the territory at all? If thought is knowledge than all we know is the map. UG Krishnamurti is saying something like that. And if what we know is the map, that is our world so to speak, the world in which we move and function and think, then we are the map! The we or I being "ego". We don't know the territory at all. The territory is the unknown mystery. If the map disappears which means the ego disolves than we are the territory, the empty sage of Lao Tzu.
Take your computer programs. They have maps, addresses, routine calls that is what they know and that is how they function and they reference that. But something is happening that they don't know about at all. Electron gates are functioning for example as well as devices. The programs don't understand or know anything about that, they just know data in registers. The mind is something like that. It doesn't have a clue what really is. It knows numbers, maps, concepts.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by crashfrog, posted 07-29-2004 1:43 AM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by nator, posted 08-01-2004 10:56 AM lfen has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024