Are any of you here a Sensitive?
- Thread starter Canna Sylvan
- Start date
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Think it's an abuse of power to enforce that people not be called a piece of shit? You are okay with someone forging a signature to insinuate illegal sexual acts? Or are you just jumping at the chance to jab?
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Yes to the last one. Just like you did last time you lashed out at me lol
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Unless you can specify these ... I don't believe that. cn
Your saying so does not make it so. My experience has been that Heisenberg has been patient, dispassionate and relentlessly consistent. I recognize him as my superior in formulating and presenting a rational argument. My opinion. cn
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Its true. It was when we were talking about my friend. I showed Heis how his argument didnt make sense, he stayed silent for a good while. No attacks were going on, just arguing, then Heis jumped in out of nowhere with a flurry of personal attacks and name calling along with some points that were easily countered, then he wouldnt read my response to his points, thats what happens when Heis shows emotion.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
And this is from you strong understanding of science and the scientific method? You seem incapable of learning. There are many opinions, but science is a methodology, it doesn't hold opinions. Scientists do. Science investigates things like OBE, NDEs, ancient aliens. Science has thus far not found any credible evidence that they are anything more than natural events. Science is still open to more investigation. The people you choose to listen to, ignore the scientific method. If you have read much about the history of scientific advance, you would understand why and how we are where we are. You would understand that people want the answers regardless of where they lead and if that leads to a fact that consciousness can be explained as an emergent phenomena that evolved over millions of years and is 100% the effect of chemicals and neurons, you shouldn't be dismayed that we don't live on forever, you should be amazed at how incredible nature is.
That is my spiritual experience, when I look into a patch of sky with nothing there and see trillions of new worlds; when I marvel at the adaptations that have created such an incredibly diverse biosphere, I am in awe. If you believe we live on forever in new realms, that's fine and I will never be able to disprove it, it is unfalsifiable, which makes any positive claim without empirical evidence, which by nature of the definition of spiritual, is impossible, then we will forever be at an impasse. That you can't accept that and continue to believe that we are close minded idiots, then so be it. Just understand that there is good reason to remain skeptical about things that can't pass the rigors of the scientific method and be accepted by mainstream science; while at the same time, there are multitudes of reasons how uncritical thought can get you into trouble. An example of fringe thinking that was right might be helpful. Continental drift theory was soundly rejected by the mainstream, and probably rightly so because it lacked a testable mechanism. That changed with sonar examination of the ocean, new evidence, offers credible explanation, rejected hypothesis reworked with new data, plate tectonics has strong reliable confirmatory data. Give me something like that and my mind is changed and you are correct.
This is really the crux of all of our issues. You reject methodological naturalism, and at that point, we loose all common ground. You will never accept naturalistic explanations for everything, no matter how convincing, and in that way you become attached to dogma.
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Bro, seriously? tl;dr, gimme a break... lol I know Heis is the one that uses that, but I couldnt resist with you.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Should we bring up the fact that you religiously ignore strong arguments against things you have said. You shift to other topics, never addressing strong evidence AGAINST your beliefs, such as if there were special intervention in pyramid building, how do you explain the evidence that Egyptian kings used master architects and builders and used copper and stone tools and many workers, all of which we find in digs and evidence in papyrus. You don't. You ignore.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Why don't you respond for once instead of a joke then ignore?
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Because I would have to read it in order to respond to it. Duhh.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Why won't you read it? Scared you'll learn something?
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...thanks for the response, neer
When you say "the use of human will to catalyze an effect", you get to the heart of it. The material world being catalyzed is the whole human's world. To 'get' will, they say, is to master the lower forces. This (symbolically) moves consciousness up into the torso, where the heart is at the center. Instead of willing material objects to move, one wills other seemingly 'stuck' things. And, oh my, do I have tons of them 
Psychological aggregates make dams in the flow; and now science steps in. Heat, right? Most illness is psychosomatic, so... Cool things can happen in the grotto of the forum. I've learned a sht load of stuff from you and tyler and heis and doer and beef and mp and on and on about how to structure my thinking better. Really helpful in achieving any semblance of what my post reads 
(also, to hell with this formatting dam!)
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Already read it a million times before, as have many other theists, and we just arent buying it. Seen the abbreviations OBE and NDE and figured it would be another opinion and assumption on the subject, starting that conversation all over again. You think you have absolutely nothing to learn from the metaphysical side of the argument, Im just showing you the same ignorance.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...that makes sense. Those abbreviations have meaning only to classify experience. I guess for the sake of catalogues, and all that. How can you (all of us, that is) place words on consciousness? We can't. Math isn't a language without its slangs, so it can't work there either.
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
It is beyond words, its beyond anything, there is only experience and the words to describe those experiences.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Experience is meaningless when speaking in scientific terms. I've told you this personally half a dozen times.
That isn't an opinion
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
It would be very nice to see everyone acknowledge the fact that what is going on here is a bunch of advanced apes arguing about ideas, and some apes have better ideas than the other apes, and the apes with ideas that aren't consistent or contradict themselves get angry and offended. It's easy to pick out which apes here are really advanced, or need to go back to the ice age.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Fascinating, eye. I attempted to delineate between traditional magic and the "inner" sort, and you posit that it's a continuum (if I read you right). Do you acknowledge a delineation, and if so, how and where? I ask because I consider traditional magic to be at best unsupported by empirical observation, despite the wealth of legends (which, if you consider Jung to have a point, are retellings of and from the deep brain)....thanks for the response, neer
The one place I will directly disagree is in your assigning a psychosomatic basis to most disease. I have one of the best candidates for a psychosomatic disease ... clinical depression ... as it doesn't have an obvious pathogen or basis in anatomical degeneration/injury. My instance at least has sovereignly resisted any attempts at attitude management, positive thinking, and (I will confess to you) several different sorts of prayer.
My sisters believe in the psychosomatic basis for disease, and they use it as a bludgeon against those who are "living wrong". Imo that is nowt short of bigotry ... born of best intentions. And we all know where THAT road leads.
I have a personal fondness for NBEs.
cn
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
I think it's rude to ignore it considering I wrote it in attempts to help you understand some things. I'm not trying to sell you anything so there's nothing to buy, I said nothing about theism or atheism. You can only assume what I wrote because you saw some words? You brought up common ground, although it appears you aren't even interested in that. This seems to be a pattern with you, you read something partial that you don't like and fill in the rest with your imagined attacks. Fine, don't read it, do the same song and dance ignoring information that might be helpful. I guess your posts aren't worthy of being read either.
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Good thing science isnt the best tool to discover reality. Yes, I know what you have to say, you dont agree with the answers I provided, but instead of disagreeing you just say Im wrong, because science says so lol.