# What is the Definition of a Soul?



## PadawanBater (Feb 10, 2010)

How do you define the soul?

Is there evidence to support the existence of a soul, or do you have to rely on faith to believe in it?

What are the implications of the fact that no two peoples definition of what the soul actually is are exactly the same, even though many of them claim to believe in exactly the same doctrines and dogmas?


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 10, 2010)

It's another unsubstantiated idea used to explain a natural phenomenon in the same way that air pressure closing a door in a house is explained away by some people as ghosts or Jesus being playful


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Feb 11, 2010)

You could think of it this way, the soul is the raw "you" while your physical body is merely a vessel to exist in the physical dimension. The soul is multidimensional, and much less limited than the physical body. In the soul you experience everything in its raw form, where as now its merely interpretations and electic impulses in your brain that show you everything around you. Not to mention that todays society keeps us even more limited so were stuck on an incredibly narrow path of existence in the physical realm. Say you lived in the game "pong" (2D) in a different time measurement that seemed to last for eternity, then you died in the game and all of a sudden you went back to being a person. You were controlling the game from your regular human self unknowingly, and were incredibly limited before going out and experiencing 4 dimensions and were amazed at 1st, but when you got back you realized it was just like the blink of an eye. Before you were born and after your physical body dies youll be a soul again.

All these super-skeptics ask for physical proof of the soul, but how are we supposed to show proof physical proof of something thats not physical? But at the same time, supposedly when you die in the physical realm and youre soul "leaves" your body it becomes something like 21 grams lighter. If you look for proof enough or something to make you truly believe then youll eventually find it. Ive done years of research on these topics, and personally experienced many of these supernatural things along with near death experiences, astral projection, etc. As far as Im concerned its definitely real, there is a soul. You dont have to take my word for it, do research for yourself and try to reconnect with this side youve been programmed to be disconnected from since the day of your birth.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 11, 2010)

For those interested in the "21 grams" idea.

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2007/03/does-soul-weigh-21-grams.html


You state that skeptics are asking for physical proof of something that isn't physical, and then you go on to state that it IS physical by assigning mass to it: 21 grams.


At least your posts are good for entertainment.


----------



## JoeCa1i (Feb 11, 2010)

have a read,it explains the soul,forgot which chapter.koo stuff.http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/loj/


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 11, 2010)

Links to fiction don't help the cause.


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Feb 11, 2010)

[youtube]SvLQgJpwdow[/youtube]

What is the Electric Field?


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 11, 2010)

The only evidence to support a soul are these: 1. You are asking a question, how else could this be done, other than some sort of natural phenomenon.
2. The work Massaru Emoto did with water crystals and intention!
3. Schroedingers uncertainty principle, which by all measures of certainty cannot be proven.

I guess the main problem is, is where did the universe come from? What is the medium in which we exist, why is there anything? So many faith based followers of the various religions don't realize that science is just best guess just as their beliefs were thousands of years ago. Whether there is an afterlife, who knows? I do know that some drug experiences have pointed toward that light, but just like how most humans will do feature scanning on their visual perception, they may do scanning like that on a mental level leaving them with the illusion that balls of light telepathically communicated to them that there is no death, they are just spirits. The only way to know for certain is by learning about quantum electro dynamics and the most recent advances is string theory or come up with your own scientific theory complete with a particle accelerator, three flavors of neutrino and the ever inescapable higgs boson.

All I know for certain is what I know for certain. The only guarantee you have in life is that there is something.

EDIT: I forgot to point out that any theory is as logical as the next, but solipsism is the ultimate rational. 
Peace


----------



## ^Psychonaut^ (Feb 11, 2010)

I think I simply have faith that there is more going on and more to life than what we are current aware of, the raw animal view of the meaning of life simply doesnt seem right to me, means there is no real point to anything. I admit this can simply be my own defensive mechanism to keep the 'organism' alive. 

I am curious if atheists take the raw animal view of life, evolution and nothing more than continuing the species with the world in its current state, there must be more meaning in their lives, which would essentially amount to being some kind of faith probably, to keep your own life moving? 

Of course there is no evidence to prove the existence of the soul, its hard to imagine it being proven actually, but personally I would probably just attach my faith in there being more going on to something like string theory, extra dimensions of existence which in current scientific theory is not a ridiculous idea at all as I understand it. I am not well read on it though and am just generalising, like most people of faith do; but then some physicists are Christians.


----------



## ^Psychonaut^ (Feb 11, 2010)

I crossed posts with Mr. Kush Man, feel I share similar sentiments to his post as well.


----------



## BigTitLvr (Feb 11, 2010)

To me, anything living and conscious of its life, IS a soul, NOT HAS a soul. 

So when they said, "The Titanic went down- 1,200 souls lost!" They mean 1,200 living, breathing beings died. But I don't believe that some extra, meta-physical part of them lived on past their death.

People ARE souls, animals ARE souls. Plants are NOT souls.

In Genesis, God was said to have "breathed life into Adam, and he BECAME a living soul". I don't think that actually happened, but that description is actually consistent with my belief. Adam BECAME a living soul, he was NOT GIVEN one.


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Feb 11, 2010)

[youtube]1q5Ly94IFUI[/youtube][youtube]Ie78VtBtwBI[/youtube][youtube]WpYeekQkAdc[/youtube]


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Feb 11, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> For those interested in the "21 grams" idea.
> 
> http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2007/03/does-soul-weigh-21-grams.html
> 
> ...


I said "supposedly", I heard this and didnt say I necessarily believed it myself.

I'm giving my personal beliefs on this, from years of research along with experiences I've had myself. You're obviously just some person that has had none of these experiences yourself and stuck to bias/skeptic sources (you use rationallyspeaking of all sources) to disprove these things and peoples personal beliefs. You're the type of person that goes to conspiracy and christian forums just to "troll" them. When you've actually had experiences like I've had and have learned what I've learned you'll think different.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 11, 2010)

You use the term skeptic like it's a bad word.

You know what the opposite of a skeptic is? A sucker.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> You use the term skeptic like it's a bad word.
> 
> You know what the opposite of a skeptic is? A sucker.


you dont honestly believe that do you? hehe ah...i used to be skeptical...then i grew up. 

the opposite of a skeptic is a "truth seeker" 

just because i dont immediately dismiss something as silly, doesn't mean that im a sucker. it means that i understand that everything is a possibility until it's proved to be false. 

as for the existence of the soul...well. i dont have to "believe" in having a soul. i KNOW i have a soul. the body is merely a vessel to get you to the next life. people are constantly thinking that they're body is *them* and its not. its just a physical object that allows our consciousness/spirit, whatever you want to call it, to live in a physical reality. thats it, thats all...so dont get too attached to your physical form...you wont have it for long 

edit to add* if you have a hard time understanding that concept...then im afraid theres not much i can do to help you. the answers to these questions come after a journey that only you can take. its not my job to provide other people with their proof. its your job to find your own proof. i had to work damn hard to understand these things, and struggle with spirituality versus intellect and logic. i have now found a balance. im not about to make that lesson any easier on someone else because the road to the answers is just as important as the answers themselves. too many people want to scream "SHOW ME SOME PROOF!" well heres an idea...how about you go find it yourself instead of waiting around for someone else to do it for you?


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> For those interested in the "21 grams" idea.
> 
> http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2007/03/does-soul-weigh-21-grams.html
> 
> ...


you say that as if we're not entertained by your posts haha.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 15, 2010)

You can say it's not your duty to provide proof, but if you make a claim for a "next life" without any supporting evidence, then it's just as foolish as the next person claiming they have a unicorn that shits rainbows in their living room.

Anyone can claim to have special access to knowledge of a supernatural realm. But even scientists die, and if you can speak to Aunt Gertrude about the big Jesus party, there are plenty of academics who should be able to do the same with those who came before them.

And yet.... there is not.

The only "proof" is 'Well *I* believe in it'.
Which is no proof at all.

You may deal in "truth". The wise person deal in facts.






sarah22 said:


> as for the existence of the soul...well. i dont have to "believe" in having a soul. i KNOW i have a soul. the body is merely a vessel to get you to the next life. people are constantly thinking that they're body is *them* and its not. its just a physical object that allows our consciousness/spirit, whatever you want to call it, to live in a physical reality. thats it, thats all...so dont get too attached to your physical form...you wont have it for long
> 
> edit to add* if you have a hard time understanding that concept...then im afraid theres not much i can do to help you. the answers to these questions come after a journey that only you can take. its not my job to provide other people with their proof. its your job to find your own proof. i had to work damn hard to understand these things, and struggle with spirituality versus intellect and logic. i have now found a balance. im not about to make that lesson any easier on someone else because the road to the answers is just as important as the answers themselves. too many people want to scream "SHOW ME SOME PROOF!" well heres an idea...how about you go find it yourself instead of waiting around for someone else to do it for you?


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> You can say it's not your duty to provide proof, but if you make a claim for a "next life" without any supporting evidence, then it's just as foolish as the next person claiming they have a unicorn that shits rainbows in their living room.
> 
> Anyone can claim to have special access to knowledge of a supernatural realm. But even scientists die, and if you can speak to Aunt Gertrude about the big Jesus party, there are plenty of academics who should be able to do the same with those who came before them.
> 
> ...


wrong again. were are you hearing this stuff? or are you just pulling out of your ass? lol. a wise person has learned to incorporate both spirituality of some kind and intellect in their life and created a balance. what people dont realize, is that in order for a person to truly be successful in life (and i dont mean "life" like society. you can succeed in society without much spirituality OR intellect), its important to have balance. there are people who are extremely religious, and tend to abandon all intellect and logical thought...then there are those who stick only to intellect and logical thought and abandon spirituality. neither of these types of people are getting the big picture because they're too focused on one thing more than the other. i like to have the big, whole picture, so i found a balance. im not religious, i dont necessarily believe in "god" the way most people do, but i understand spirituality in the sense that we are all part of something bigger. that our individual lives are absolutely meaningless in the grand scheme of things in our universe. i also understand that my consciousness/spirit/soul...does not die with my body. it continues on and changes forms. i cant prove that to you, and you cant prove me wrong. its just the way it is. if we dont agree, then thats ok, we dont have to. we're all able to make our own choices...i chose a life of balance and trying to understand all the things in the universe. some people chose to not attempt to understand all the things in the universe, and focus only on physical reality. nothing wrong with that...its just different choices 

i dont have to prove anything to anyone other than myself. if you want to know about the soul and spirituality and your own consciousness...pick up a couple books, do some google searches, and open your mind. its your job to find the answers you seek, not mine. and its not foolish for me to behave in this way. i personally think its a bit foolish to sit there asking for proof instead of actively going out and getting the proof yourself. why wait around for someone else to figure it out? do it yourself. 

also im not saying that all these things are going to be real and valid in your reality. they are real and valid in my reality, but we all experience reality differently. its based on your own individual perceptions and your own individual consciousness. thats why personal experiences and ideas and theories are all anyone has. 

i used to be incredibly skeptical and focused purely on science and fact. but i soon realized that i was missing something. i was missing a large number of pieces to my life's puzzle. the science was good, it made sense, but it couldnt explain everything. so i started to learn more about spirituality and found many of my puzzle pieces. and i've managed to fit them together in a way that makes sense to me, and makes me feel more whole and complete as a person.

edit to add* this statement here... "*You may deal in "truth". The wise person deal in facts"

*what if the facts are wrong? lol. you would believe a fact over the truth? modern science has only begun to scratch the surface on what we know as a species about ourselves, our planet, and our universe. theres A LOT of room for improvement and theres a pretty good chance that the science we know now is going to evolve and change over the years, just like we as humans do. so what happens when your "facts" are disproved? what will you do then? lol. you'll do what every other person on this planet does...you'll look for the TRUTH.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 15, 2010)

If you need something to fill the gaps in your knowledge that education is not yet able to fill, it doesn't make you spiritual - it makes you insecure.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 15, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> wrong again. were are you hearing this stuff? or are you just pulling out of your ass? lol. a wise person has learned to incorporate both spirituality of some kind and intellect in their life and created a balance. what people dont realize, is that in order for a person to truly be successful in life (and i dont mean "life" like society. you can succeed in society without much spirituality OR intellect), its important to have balance. there are people who are extremely religious, and tend to abandon all intellect and logical thought...then there are those who stick only to intellect and logical thought and abandon spirituality. neither of these types of people are getting the big picture because they're too focused on one thing more than the other. i like to have the big, whole picture, so i found a balance. im not religious, i dont necessarily believe in "god" the way most people do, but i understand spirituality in the sense that we are all part of something bigger. that our individual lives are absolutely meaningless in the grand scheme of things in our universe. i also understand that my consciousness/spirit/soul...does not die with my body. it continues on and changes forms. i cant prove that to you, and you cant prove me wrong. its just the way it is. if we dont agree, then thats ok, we dont have to. we're all able to make our own choices...i chose a life of balance and trying to understand all the things in the universe. some people chose to not attempt to understand all the things in the universe, and focus only on physical reality. nothing wrong with that...its just different choices
> 
> i dont have to prove anything to anyone other than myself. if you want to know about the soul and spirituality and your own consciousness...pick up a couple books, do some google searches, and open your mind. its your job to find the answers you seek, not mine. and its not foolish for me to behave in this way. i personally think its a bit foolish to sit there asking for proof instead of actively going out and getting the proof yourself. why wait around for someone else to figure it out? do it yourself.
> 
> ...



What you call spirituality, I call enlightenment.

I've never had a more enlightening moment in my entire life than when I realized I was an atheist.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> If you need something to fill the gaps in your knowledge that education is not yet able to fill, it doesn't make you spiritual - it makes you insecure.


thats it? lol thats your response? so education is going to teach us absolutely everything we need to know about our universe and ourselves? how? science hasn't even explained all these ideas. so how could what you just said even begin to make sense? unless of course you're some super evolved life form that already has all the information in the universe available to them...which you clearly dont, otherwise you'd be able to explain to me why it is that a soul cant possibly exist.  i think that waiting for someone else to hand deliver the proof you ask for on a silver platter is a little insecure. do you not trust in your intellect enough? you have to wait for someone else to figure this stuff out?


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> What you call spirituality, I call enlightenment.
> 
> I've never had a more enlightening moment in my entire life than when I realized I was an atheist.


its all the same thing to me...enlightenment, spirituality, to me they're one in the same. and personally (and i hope you dont take offence, i dont mean it to be that way)...i put atheists and very religious people in the same category. they're both extreme just different ends of the spectrum. neither of them have the whole picture. i used to follow atheism too. i was completely and totally into science and fact and claims that are measurable and can be proved. but after a while i realized that being that way, was limiting my view of the world. i dont like limits, so i opened up to new ideas, and now i feel limitless.


----------



## doc111 (Feb 15, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> its all the same thing to me...enlightenment, spirituality, to me they're one in the same. and personally (and i hope you dont take offence, i dont mean it to be that way)...i put atheists and very religious people in the same category. they're both extreme just different ends of the spectrum. neither of them have the whole picture.


I feel the same way. It's amazing to me that some of these atheists bitch about religious people being closed minded and yet they are just as closed minded, in some cases more so. Good post!


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

doc111 said:


> I feel the same way. It's amazing to me that some of these atheists bitch about religious people being closed minded and yet they are just as closed minded, in some cases more so. Good post!


thanks doc


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 15, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> its all the same thing to me...enlightenment, spirituality, to me they're one in the same. and personally (and i hope you dont take offence, i dont mean it to be that way)...i put atheists and very religious people in the same category. they're both extreme just different ends of the spectrum. neither of them have the whole picture. i used to follow atheism too. i was completely and totally into science and fact and claims that are measurable and can be proved. but after a while i realized that being that way, was limiting my view of the world. i dont like limits, so i opened up to new ideas, and now i feel limitless.





doc111 said:


> I feel the same way. It's amazing to me that some of these atheists bitch about religious people being closed minded and yet they are just as closed minded, in some cases more so. Good post!


You have to remember, all an atheist is, is "I don't know if there is a god". 

If there is a god, and we just can't fathom, perceive or understand it, it's irrelevant, what does it matter if it does or does not exist? There's no implication, except in the world these fundamentalists have dreamed up where they've twisted reality into this belief. If God does exist, he will understand my train of thought as I existed on Earth and he will understand exactly how I came to the conclusions I've come to. If it then chose to punish me for the act of honest inquiry, like I've said dozens of times before, I'll be glad to do the Devils dirty work in Hell because I would never worship, trust or love an entity that endowed me with the gifts we share as humans - curiosity, wonder, thirst for knowledge, etc. - then punished me for utilizing them.


----------



## doc111 (Feb 15, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> You have to remember, all an atheist is, is "I don't know if there is a god".
> 
> If there is a god, and we just can't fathom, perceive or understand it, it's irrelevant, what does it matter if it does or does not exist? There's no implication, except in the world these fundamentalists have dreamed up where they've twisted reality into this belief. If God does exist, he will understand my train of thought as I existed on Earth and he will understand exactly how I came to the conclusions I've come to. If it then chose to punish me for the act of honest inquiry, like I've said dozens of times before, I'll be glad to do the Devils dirty work in Hell because I would never worship, trust or love an entity that endowed me with the gifts we share as humans - curiosity, wonder, thirst for knowledge, etc. - then punished me for utilizing them.


Your beliefs are your beliefs and I respect them although I may not agree with them. There is this undertone of anger and resentment by a lot of atheists (not necessarily you). It's easy for somebody like me to see it because I'm fairly objective. I'm not religious but I'm no atheist either. I understand your frustration with organized religion. I share it. But I don't want to see all christians stripped of their faith and marched out into the streets and executed. Some atheists, and you know it's true, want to see that. It's ironic because many atheists want to do the same thing to christians that has been done to them yet somehow atheists are better????? That's pretty hypocritical IMO.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 15, 2010)

doc111 said:


> Your beliefs are your beliefs and I respect them although I may not agree with them. There is this undertone of anger and resentment by a lot of atheists (not necessarily you). It's easy for somebody like me to see it because I'm fairly objective. I'm not religious but I'm no atheist either. I understand your frustration with organized religion. I share it. But I don't want to see all christians stripped of their faith and marched out into the streets and executed. Some atheists, and you know it's true, want to see that. It's ironic because many atheists want to do the same thing to christians that has been done to them yet somehow atheists are better????? That's pretty hypocritical IMO.


And me, and morgen and all the atheists I know or have ever known would stand up against those that would push for such a thing. That's insanity. Executed? All I want, all 99% of us want is for these people to realize the comfort they get from their religion comes at an amazing cost to the rest of us. It's selfish. It's not fair, and it's any honest persons obligation to fight against ignorance everywhere.

There are fanatics in every group of people.


----------



## doc111 (Feb 15, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> And me, and morgen and all the atheists I know or have ever known would stand up against those that would push for such a thing. That's insanity. Executed? All I want, all 99% of us want is for these people to realize the comfort they get from their religion comes at an amazing cost to the rest of us. It's selfish. It's not fair, and it's any honest persons obligation to fight against ignorance everywhere.
> 
> There are fanatics in every group of people.


There are indeed fanatics in every group. And you're right, it is insanity, but some atheists want it. I guess I don't really understand your comment about comfort coming at an amazing cost. Whenever I used to get into trouble when I was little I would say "It's not fair". My mother would respond "Life isn't fair". Smart people pick their battles. Fighting ignorance, religion, and greed is noble I suppose but it's a losing proposition.


----------



## BigTitLvr (Feb 15, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> You could think of it this way, the soul is the raw "you" while your physical body is merely a vessel to exist in the physical dimension. The soul is multidimensional, and much less limited than the physical body. In the soul you experience everything in its raw form, where as now its merely interpretations and electic impulses in your brain that show you everything around you. Not to mention that todays society keeps us even more limited so were stuck on an incredibly narrow path of existence in the physical realm. Say you lived in the game "pong" (2D) in a different time measurement that seemed to last for eternity, then you died in the game and all of a sudden you went back to being a person. You were controlling the game from your regular human self unknowingly, and were incredibly limited before going out and experiencing 4 dimensions and were amazed at 1st, but when you got back you realized it was just like the blink of an eye. Before you were born and after your physical body dies youll be a soul again.
> 
> All these super-skeptics ask for physical proof of the soul, but how are we supposed to show proof physical proof of something thats not physical? But at the same time, supposedly when you die in the physical realm and youre soul "leaves" your body it becomes something like 21 grams lighter. If you look for proof enough or something to make you truly believe then youll eventually find it. Ive done years of research on these topics, and personally experienced many of these supernatural things along with near death experiences, astral projection, etc. As far as Im concerned its definitely real, there is a soul. You dont have to take my word for it, do research for yourself and try to reconnect with this side youve been programmed to be disconnected from since the day of your birth.


As someone who feels I wasted the first 20 years I my life in a strict religion, that my family is still blindly committed to, I have to say that as gullible as humans appear to be, many of us really do have to ask for more proof than a soul offers. We can't accept anyone who won't use the scientific method to describe their worldview. Otherwise, any belief you can imagine is acceptable.

Like, if we really do lose 21 grams of weight at death you can offer the 'soul hypotheses' for further testing, but just measuring 21 grams lighter is not proof of a soul. 

I think the soul concept is ancient and easy to believe, but usually only plausible if you believe in gods. Not just A god, but many gods, angles and demons- like religious dogma; there has to be a soul, or else what are they all fighting for?

But I don't define that as god. So I don't personally see humans as having a deeper spirit, any more then other animals alive. If someone could show me proof of any kind at all...I will consider it honestly and with open-mind.

Otherwise, it is really only our intelligence and consciousness (self-aware) that separate us from the other animals. That is what common ancestry would predict.




^Psychonaut^ said:


> I think I simply have faith that there is more going on and more to life than what we are current aware of, the raw animal view of the meaning of life simply doesnt seem right to me, means there is no real point to anything. I admit this can simply be my own defensive mechanism to keep the 'organism' alive.
> 
> I am curious if atheists take the raw animal view of life, evolution and nothing more than continuing the species with the world in its current state, there must be more meaning in their lives, which would essentially amount to being some kind of faith probably, to keep your own life moving?
> 
> Of course there is no evidence to prove the existence of the soul, its hard to imagine it being proven actually, but personally I would probably just attach my faith in there being more going on to something like string theory, extra dimensions of existence which in current scientific theory is not a ridiculous idea at all as I understand it. I am not well read on it though and am just generalising, like most people of faith do; but then some physicists are Christians.


As an evolutionist and an agnostic (the only defensible position, imo) we live in a raw, animal world. It is only our intelligence and consciousness that rises us beyond the animals. 

We should have all realized it by now. That we are beyond this flesh and bone. We are spiritual in mind- connected to each other in spirit of mind, not spirit of soul. But only because, if someone suggest we believe something, they must offer some sort of proof. Otherwise, we have to respect absolutely any idea, which is unacceptable when it comes to anything serious; like education or public policy.

So I think, when we die, like any other animal, we will return to the exact same condition we were in before we were born; nothing. All the people who haven't been born yet, they do not exist. And when they die, they will not exist...again.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 15, 2010)

Just because you're afraid of death and need to make things up to face the end does not make them real.

Science actually evaluates evidence. The afterlife stuff you're peddling isn't based on anything more real than a Stephen King novel.

I don't need to be an uber evolved being to know that you don't know shit about what happens after you die. Any claim you make to such effect just shows you to be either deluded or a liar.




sarah22 said:


> thats it? lol thats your response? so education is going to teach us absolutely everything we need to know about our universe and ourselves? how? science hasn't even explained all these ideas. so how could what you just said even begin to make sense? unless of course you're some super evolved life form that already has all the information in the universe available to them...which you clearly dont, otherwise you'd be able to explain to me why it is that a soul cant possibly exist.  i think that waiting for someone else to hand deliver the proof you ask for on a silver platter is a little insecure. do you not trust in your intellect enough? you have to wait for someone else to figure this stuff out?


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 15, 2010)

It's really very simple.
When you make claims about knowing about souls, the afterlife, "who" created the universe, and what happened before the universe came into being, yet offer no evidence to back it up, we're going to tell you to fuckoff and come back when you can show something to support it.

The best "proof" anyone of you has been able to offer is the bible...

A book written by anonymous authors, about subjects that none of the authors actually saw, based on oral traditions in an age where people weren't required to actually provide verification of their claims.

It's like worshipping the drawings of a 4 year old. 

edit: just for clarification, the 'you' is a generalized 'you', not a "you doc111" 



doc111 said:


> I feel the same way. It's amazing to me that some of these atheists bitch about religious people being closed minded and yet they are just as closed minded, in some cases more so. Good post!


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 15, 2010)

I only know one atheist out of a few hundred that would like to see all religious people dead.

But he would also like to see all people who walk slower than him in the mall dead too.

I'm strongly opposed to baseless and dogmatic faiths.

Believing anything just for the sake of believing in "something" is dangerous, if not for the originator then for those who it effects.

And that goes for ALL faith, not just religious.
I don't like political faith any more than christian or muslim faith.




doc111 said:


> Your beliefs are your beliefs and I respect them although I may not agree with them. There is this undertone of anger and resentment by a lot of atheists (not necessarily you). It's easy for somebody like me to see it because I'm fairly objective. I'm not religious but I'm no atheist either. I understand your frustration with organized religion. I share it. But I don't want to see all christians stripped of their faith and marched out into the streets and executed. Some atheists, and you know it's true, want to see that. It's ironic because many atheists want to do the same thing to christians that has been done to them yet somehow atheists are better????? That's pretty hypocritical IMO.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 15, 2010)

doc111 said:


> Fighting ignorance, religion, and greed is noble I suppose but it's a losing proposition.


Greed maybe, but headway is already being made against ignorance and religion.

As academics fight to instill critical reasoning faculties in future generations we will see better educated and capable youth. And religion is already losing it's numbers. It may not seem like much to most people, but there's a reason that religious leaders in North America and Europe are in a panic. That few percentage points of atheism that increased in the last decade is just the canary in the coal mine. The generation that follows is the internet generation, and those born after 1990 are much more savvy, drawn to science, and put off by religion.

Some churches in the US are already closing their doors.

I'm not sad to see them go.


----------



## BigTitLvr (Feb 15, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> its all the same thing to me...enlightenment, spirituality, to me they're one in the same. and personally (and i hope you dont take offence, i dont mean it to be that way)...i put atheists and very religious people in the same category. they're both extreme just different ends of the spectrum. neither of them have the whole picture. i used to follow atheism too. i was completely and totally into science and fact and claims that are measurable and can be proved. but after a while i realized that being that way, was limiting my view of the world. i dont like limits, so i opened up to new ideas, and now i feel limitless.


You are right about atheism and religious people being similar. But only in that they both require a leap of faith, just in opposite directions. 

To be either means you believe you've acquired enough evidence to make your mind up about the issue of god. Since their is no proof either way about god, only anecdotal argument, you have to begin to 'believe' at some point.

In the end, one can only be agnostic about the god question: waiting for more information... (god...not religion. religion is bullshit)

Meanwhile, you can choose to believe anything you want (including unicorns), as long as you admit you have faith, not proof. At that point, you have to stop talking with such certainty and admit it just what you think makes sense or would like to believe.

And that's perfectly legitimate, too. You have a right to share what you believe.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> You have to remember, all an atheist is, is "I don't know if there is a god".
> 
> If there is a god, and we just can't fathom, perceive or understand it, it's irrelevant, what does it matter if it does or does not exist? There's no implication, except in the world these fundamentalists have dreamed up where they've twisted reality into this belief. If God does exist, he will understand my train of thought as I existed on Earth and he will understand exactly how I came to the conclusions I've come to. If it then chose to punish me for the act of honest inquiry, like I've said dozens of times before, I'll be glad to do the Devils dirty work in Hell because I would never worship, trust or love an entity that endowed me with the gifts we share as humans - curiosity, wonder, thirst for knowledge, etc. - then punished me for utilizing them.


that would be agnostic, being unsure about gods existence. atheists believe that there is absolutely no god


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Just because you're afraid of death and need to make things up to face the end does not make them real.
> 
> Science actually evaluates evidence. The afterlife stuff you're peddling isn't based on anything more real than a Stephen King novel.
> 
> I don't need to be an uber evolved being to know that you don't know shit about what happens after you die. Any claim you make to such effect just shows you to be either deluded or a liar.


what makes you think im afraid of death? why do you keep making assumptions about me being scared and insecure when you dont know me? 

im not afraid of death in the slightest. im excited for it. 

and im not peddling anything about the afterlife. im telling you that *I* will have an afterlife and that *I* have a soul and thats it. im not saying that you do or that you will. your reality and my reality are different because our consciousnesses are different. 

you also just said that i dont know shit about what happens after i die, so sweetheart...neither do you. so you cant tell me its all BS because you dont know either lol. i dont profess to know things that other people dont know. im professing that i know this to be true for me, and for me alone. i dont make any assumptions or conclusions about other people and their lives. 

you're speaking as though you truly believe that science has already explained everything in the universe, by saying that these things are no more real than a novel. science has explained a lot of things...but it hasnt explained everything. if one day a scientist is able to prove to me with hard core data that is sound and organized and makes sense, that there is no such thing as the afterlife and there is no such thing as a "soul" (and keep in mind people use the term soul differently. i equate soul with spirit or consciousness) and they can fully explain every personal experience i've had, then i will reevaluate my position. because im about being open to all possibilities. so if one day im proved to be wrong..then im proved to be wrong. i'll deal with it, im not arrogant enough to think that im always going to be right. but as of yet science has not proved me wrong, so i'll continue on my path...


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> I only know one atheist out of a few hundred that would like to see all religious people dead.
> 
> But he would also like to see all people who walk slower than him in the mall dead too.
> 
> ...


dude, i assure you that i would love to see religions go as much as you do. im not religious in any way. my personal theory is that the universe itself is god, i dont believe in some guy on a cloud with a thunderbolt. i just have had enough personal experiences for me to know that there is more to reality and this world and our existence than what meets the eye. im not saying that being religious is good, im saying its good to be open to all the possibilities that the universe has to offer.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 15, 2010)

BigTitLvr said:


> You are right about atheism and religious people being similar. But only in that they both require a leap of faith, just in opposite directions.
> 
> To be either means you believe you've acquired enough evidence to make your mind up about the issue of god. Since their is no proof either way about god, only anecdotal argument, you have to begin to 'believe' at some point.
> 
> ...


agreed. when it comes down to it, i would have to classify myself as agnostic because i dont know what exactly will happen when i die, i just know that certain things make absolute sense for me, and i have my personal proof to understand my position on it all. i cant prove that another person has a soul. and i cant prove *to* another person that *i* have a soul. but i can prove to myself that i have a soul...and i trust myself and my instincts to make the correct choice for me. i dont think that my spiritual path is the right path for anyone other than me. i just think that its important to see the whole spectrum of possibilities...not just focus on one end or the other. why do people have to be *either* spiritual or intellectual? why cant we be both? balance is important for me to feel grounded and whole. just like i cant have the light without the dark, or wrong without right, or cold without warm...i cant have the spirituality without the intellect or the intellect without the spirituality. i need both to be balanced.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 16, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> that would be agnostic, being unsure about gods existence. atheists believe that there is absolutely no god


Everyone is agnostic. I happen to believe there is no God because logic doesn't permit it. It's as simple as that. Omnipotence is impossible. (holy shit that might be a tattoo in the future!)


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 16, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Everyone is agnostic. I happen to believe there is no God because logic doesn't permit it. It's as simple as that. Omnipotence is impossible. (holy shit that might be a tattoo in the future!)


while i dont agree with the concept of god the way churches teach it, i do feel very strongly that there is some sort of higher power. i personally feel that the universe itself is this higher power. i think that the universe is god, and its always existed. that there isnt a beginning to it, and there wont be an end to it. thats just a personal theory of mine, i clearly dont know for sure because im not as old as the universe lol.


----------



## drumbum3218 (Feb 16, 2010)

Not completely unsubstantiated. They've [u know, "Them" ,"those guys" lol no here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_MacDougall_(doctor) ]done tests where they weigh a person on his/her deathbed and the person loses a small amount (21 gram theory) of weight once they leave their body. Some call it the soul, others consider it just energy, like the laws of conservation of energy/mass. energy/mass may neither be created nor destroyed. Meaning its transformed. What if that loss of weight is just air under pressure/temp. in our body that dissapates once we die? Like steam rising from a pot of boiling water, or vapor subliming off ice. Somebody on here was saying how any two persons ideas of a soul differ. That's very true, any two people's perspectives on anything are going 2 drastically differ. What does the world look like out of my eyes? How does the color purple look, seen from your body, as opposed to anothers eyes or perception? Some people are color blind, so what looks like brown to me and what the color-blind kid calls brown, they are the same, but completely different? What does the world look like to a dog? How well can any of us really understand anything at all? We can pretend. Its all relative. Its like our bodies are parallel universes or something. We all experience similar things in completely different ways. We couldnt have the same thing happen to us at the same time, because we have a different point of view and perception, and reaction time. I see a meteor fall from the sky, u see that same meteor but from a different angle and percieve it differently, having a completely unique experience, but is it not similar cuz we saw the same meteor fall? Did we even see the same meteor fall, i saw my "meteor" and u saw your version. I need sleep..


----------



## drumbum3218 (Feb 16, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> i personally feel that the universe itself is this higher power. i think that the universe is god, and....


I have a similar theory, what if what we call the universe, is the body of god? Maybe even gods, like a colonial organism, or we're inside god, who's walking (i prefer to imagine god flying) through his own environment or "universe", so our entire universe is just a gnat in another swarm. What if there are nanoscopic beings inside each of us that have the power to contemplate their own existence, and call us their god? Just a thought, I don't know anything so I try not to dwell on any one idea in particular. But i favor this one, that everything gets infinitely smaller (true you can keep dividing anything, theoretically, like a number, infinitesmally), and also infinitely bigger, to no end


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 16, 2010)

drumbum3218 said:


> Not completely unsubstantiated. They've [u know, "Them" ,"those guys" lol no here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_MacDougall_(doctor) ]done tests where they weigh a person on his/her deathbed and the person loses a small amount (21 gram theory) of weight once they leave their body. Some call it the soul, others consider it just energy, like the laws of conservation of energy/mass. energy/mass may neither be created nor destroyed. Meaning its transformed. What if that loss of weight is just air under pressure/temp. in our body that dissapates once we die? Like steam rising from a pot of boiling water, or vapor subliming off ice. Somebody on here was saying how any two persons ideas of a soul differ. That's very true, any two people's perspectives on anything are going 2 drastically differ. What does the world look like out of my eyes? How does the color purple look, seen from your body, as opposed to anothers eyes or perception? Some people are color blind, so what looks like brown to me and what the color-blind kid calls brown, they are the same, but completely different? What does the world look like to a dog? How well can any of us really understand anything at all? We can pretend. Its all relative. Its like our bodies are parallel universes or something. We all experience similar things in completely different ways. We couldnt have the same thing happen to us at the same time, because we have a different point of view and perception, and reaction time. I see a meteor fall from the sky, u see that same meteor but from a different angle and percieve it differently, having a completely unique experience, but is it not similar cuz we saw the same meteor fall? Did we even see the same meteor fall, i saw my "meteor" and u saw your version. I need sleep..


i say the same thing...my reality and your reality are going to be different. no 2 people are going to view reality exactly the same way...because we all have our own separate consciousness with which to view it.


----------



## doc111 (Feb 16, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Greed maybe, but headway is already being made against ignorance and religion.
> 
> As academics fight to instill critical reasoning faculties in future generations we will see better educated and capable youth. And religion is already losing it's numbers. It may not seem like much to most people, but there's a reason that religious leaders in North America and Europe are in a panic. That few percentage points of atheism that increased in the last decade is just the canary in the coal mine. The generation that follows is the internet generation, and those born after 1990 are much more savvy, drawn to science, and put off by religion.
> 
> ...


You are living in a dream world. Religion isn't going anywhere. Sorry to disappoint you but religion has been around since the first humans stood erect. Religion and superstition will follow mankind into whatever blackhole or cosmic disaster ends our existence.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 16, 2010)

Religion has already left in some places.
Scandinavian countries have as high as 80% atheism in their communities right this minute.

The better the education of the populace, the less religion there is.

And sure, North America has a lot of college students, but it has a very high density of people who need help counting change for a vending machine.

You bring up the level of education here and atheism is sure to follow.



doc111 said:


> You are living in a dream world. Religion isn't going anywhere. Sorry to disappoint you but religion has been around since the first humans stood erect. Religion and superstition will follow mankind into whatever blackhole or cosmic disaster ends our existence.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 16, 2010)

^^But first you have to dramatically change the education system... Its not for most people, just a small percentage of achievers.

As well maybe most of you have lay heed to the concept that religion is just a extremely shotty, and misguided version of scientific advancement. I mean it is pretty clear. Scientist have been like what cops are supposed to do, interpret the information and enforce the laws. The only thing that religious institutions, pseudoscientific groups and scientific discoverers have in common is trying to decipher the why something exists at all, and that something does exist. This force of creation, or GOD if you will, its all we are able to know about, the details regarding its creation are somewhat muddled in uncertainty, but at least the deepest fringes of science are attempting to discover that and not laying all honor to an anthropomorphic entity.

Sarah22, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you aren't contributing to this saying, "I know whats what and no one can change my mind, but I am willing to give up my beliefs if someone can map my entire life with meaning and....." Sending lots of mixed messages and giving no room for compromise.

I'm not going to say I know what a soul is, or that they even exist because I know the mental capacities of my person and that strictly isn't possible. Try to humor me for a second, imagine a box, its in 2d. Now imagine a cube.... wow its also in 2d. The fact is 3d is beyond the grasp of human comprehension, by the time our field of vision is full a screen style image is rendered, its a flat image with the illusion of depth. Now to say you know how, or that, some part of us is extended past our 4-dimensional realm, into a high dimensional state is pure delusion. I don't even think the leaders in unified field theory are that confident. 

EDIT: You can even project a 4d square, a tesserect, using 3 dimensions onto 2d so as to see it.

Now to say that you know you have a soul, maybe I don't have one, we have different realities is a complete inaccurate attempt substantiation. The truth is that the universe follows what I call the All or Nothing philosophy. The idea being that the universe came from the big bang, and extended as fractals would, now where the trick is is whether there is my single mind in the universe, as the only truly thought processing being, me. Or did the universe always exist and it is all just a meaningless chaotic sequence of events. Either way it doesn't rationally effect me, having one as a truth or the other doesn't lead to any conflict in thought processes as most religious institution have been determined to defend.

Peace

PS I also deeply accept the possibility that the universe doesn't exist at all, I am just entertaining myself.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 16, 2010)

Mr.KushMan said:


> ^^But first you have to dramatically change the education system... Its not for most people, just a small percentage of achievers.
> 
> As well maybe most of you have lay heed to the concept that religion is just a extremely shotty, and misguided version of scientific advancement. I mean it is pretty clear. Scientist have been like what cops are supposed to do, interpret the information and enforce the laws. The only thing that religious institutions, pseudoscientific groups and scientific discoverers have in common is trying to decipher the why something exists at all, and that something does exist. This force of creation, or GOD if you will, its all we are able to know about, the details regarding its creation are somewhat muddled in uncertainty, but at least the deepest fringes of science are attempting to discover that and not laying all honor to an anthropomorphic entity.
> 
> ...


thats not exactly what i said. i said that if someone is able to solidly prove to me that my soul doesnt exist and i dont have one, i'll reevaluate my position. i didnt say that i would give up anything. i'll reevaluate to see it from another perspective and then i'll find my happy medium. there will be absolutely no giving up what i know, but i'll willingly accept new ideas as possible and not immediately discard them because they dont yet make sense to me or because i dont like them. at the current moment i have a soul. its been around for centuries, i have memories of the bodies my soul has been in in the past. i dont care if anyone believes me...its what i know to be absolutely true for myself and it exists in my reality. but im saying that even though at the current i know these things to be true, the future can change. im willing to be open to other possibilities even if they counter what i know now. i never said i'd give up anything. but i have said that i would compromise by being open to new ideas.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 16, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> thats not exactly what i said. i said that if someone is able to solidly prove to me that my soul doesnt exist and i dont have one, i'll reevaluate my position. i didnt say that i would give up anything. i'll reevaluate to see it from another perspective and then i'll find my happy medium. there will be absolutely no giving up what i know, but i'll willingly accept new ideas as possible and not immediately discard them because they dont yet make sense to me or because i dont like them. at the current moment i have a soul. its been around for centuries, i have memories of the bodies my soul has been in in the past. i dont care if anyone believes me...its what i know to be absolutely true for myself and it exists in my reality. but im saying that even though at the current i know these things to be true, the future can change. im willing to be open to other possibilities even if they counter what i know now. i never said i'd give up anything. but i have said that i would compromise by being open to new ideas.



That doesn't make any sense to me. You seem to be contradicting yourself a few times. 

Truth is true because it's objective. You say "true to me" a few times in your explanation, but if it's true, in the real meaning of the word, it would be true for all of us. Your truth is the same as my truth, regardless of our personal beliefs.

Also, I was wondering why you believe in something unproven, the soul, until it's disproved? (when clearly something that doesn't exist cannot be shown to exist in reality only to be proved it doesn't exist... I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this, it's the exact same argument theists present for the existence of God).


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 16, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> That doesn't make any sense to me. You seem to be contradicting yourself a few times.
> 
> Truth is true because it's objective. You say "true to me" a few times in your explanation, but if it's true, in the real meaning of the word, it would be true for all of us. Your truth is the same as my truth, regardless of our personal beliefs.
> 
> Also, I was wondering why you believe in something unproven, the soul, until it's disproved? (when clearly something that doesn't exist cannot be shown to exist in reality only to be proved it doesn't exist... I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this, it's the exact same argument theists present for the existence of God).


thats where we differ in opinion. just because something is true for me, doesnt mean it will be true for another person. we dont all live in the same reality. i live in my reality and you live in yours. we have separate consciousnesses and therefore we're going to perceive reality differently. and like i've mentioned before, i use the word "soul" and "consciousness" interchangeably. 

i know i sound contradictory to you...but to me it makes perfect sense lol. and really thats all that matters to me in the end. as long as i make sense to me, and i understand what i think and feel, it doesnt exactly matter that others dont understand.

science and faith will always contradict each other. i've found a way to live in the middle, so that i get equal parts of both. i found a way to resolve my inner conflict of science vs spirituality. i used to feel that everything has to be able to be proved by science in order for it to exist. i've experienced things recently (the last few years) that have shown me that, at least for the moment, science cannot explain every experience that i have. perhaps in the future they'll find some sort of explanation...but i cant predict the future, so im living moment to moment. and in this moment, i have a soul. maybe in another moment in the future i wont i dont know because the future isn't here yet. but right now, in this exact moment of space and time, i do.


----------



## doc111 (Feb 16, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> thats where we differ in opinion. just because something is true for me, doesnt mean it will be true for another person. we dont all live in the same reality. i live in my reality and you live in yours. we have separate consciousnesses and therefore we're going to perceive reality differently. and like i've mentioned before, i use the word "soul" and "consciousness" interchangeably.
> 
> i know i sound contradictory to you...but to me it makes perfect sense lol. and really thats all that matters to me in the end. as long as i make sense to me, and i understand what i think and feel, it doesnt exactly matter that others dont understand.
> 
> science and faith will always contradict each other. i've found a way to live in the middle, so that i get equal parts of both. i found a way to resolve my inner conflict of science vs spirituality. i used to feel that everything has to be able to be proved by science in order for it to exist. i've experienced things recently (the last few years) that have shown me that, at least for the moment, science cannot explain every experience that i have. perhaps in the future they'll find some sort of explanation...but i cant predict the future, so im living moment to moment. and in this moment, i have a soul. maybe in another moment in the future i wont i dont know because the future isn't here yet. but right now, in this exact moment of space and time, i do.


Don't worry. I don't think we're gonna be able to prove or disprove whether we have souls. Not any time soon anyways. Check this thread out. We had an interesting discussion about perception and reality:

https://www.rollitup.org/spirituality-sexuality-philosophy/290727-perception-reality.html


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 16, 2010)

doc111 said:


> Don't worry. I don't think we're gonna be able to prove or disprove whether we have souls. Not any time soon anyways. Check this thread out. We had an interesting discussion about perception and reality:
> 
> https://www.rollitup.org/spirituality-sexuality-philosophy/290727-perception-reality.html


looks like a good thread, thanks Doc  i'll check it out. 

and actually i believe that quantum mechanics has attempted to somehow define the consciousness or the soul with the quantum immortality idea. they obviously cant prove it fully because someone would have to be willing to commit suicide to test the theory, but theres been a lot of info floating around about it. some agree with it and some dont...but thats the way the world will always be. we'll never be able to agree on everything. 

proof is a funny thing. someone can prove that in *their* reality i dont have a soul...but i dont live in their reality, i live in my reality


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 16, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> ....and actually i believe that quantum mechanics has attempted to somehow define the consciousness or the soul with the quantum immortality idea. .../QUOTE]
> 
> It has made strides, though not intentional the ability to observe is a force that cannot be ignored when creating a governing equation theory.... one of the grandfathers of QED commented on the similarities between it and eastern theology and mysticism.
> 
> ...


----------



## Brazko (Feb 24, 2010)

"This state of affairs is bound to remain paradoxical as long as we adopt the static few of composite 'objects' consisting of 'basic building blocks'. Only when the dynamic, relativistic view is adopted does the paradox disappear. The particles are then seen as dynamic patterns, or processes, which involve a certain amount of energy appearing to us as their mass. In a collision process, the energy of the two colliding particles is redistributed to form a new pattern, and if it has been increased by a sufficient amount of kinetic energy, this new pattern may involve additional particles." - The TAo of Physics

just finished watching "Masters of the Universe" on the Sci Channel, and they were discussing String theory and how the probabilities of 11 dimensions existing, even some as small as simple points curved like donuts in space. This is what they also speculate as the reason the force of gravity is weak because it passes through each dimension and is fairly weak on the plane we exist, or more less to say simply aware of...


----------



## Rodey (Feb 24, 2010)

Soul is superficial. It does not exist. What I believe that exist is something that I see. The concept on the existence of soul is just a product of man's thoughts and is purely out from the explanation of scientific studies.


----------



## rollmeUPoneSCOTTY! (Feb 24, 2010)

Rodey said:


> Soul is superficial. It does not exist. What I believe that exist is something that I see. The concept on the existence of soul is just a product of man's thoughts and is purely out from the explanation of scientific studies.


uh excuse me? baking powder?....lol ---> "...the soul does not exist"


now, as Vincent Vega would say... "that's a bold statement."


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 25, 2010)

it is a bold statement. but i can also understand how its bold for me to say that souls do exist. some people just arent spiritual. they dont believe in anything that they cant see or touch, and while i think thats a very sad way to look at the world and at ourselves, i cant tell them any different. its their choice. usually people who arent spiritual dont have any personal experiences to reference. i never used to be a spiritual person, then a whole lot of things started happening that i couldnt explain and i was no longer able to deny that there is more to me, the world and the universe than what i can see and touch.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 25, 2010)

I think it's just as illogical to say souls do exist or souls don't exist. Nobody knows for sure either way. Reality isn't subjective.


----------



## doc111 (Feb 25, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> I think it's just as illogical to say souls do exist or souls don't exist. Nobody knows for sure either way. Reality isn't subjective.


How do you figure reality isn't subjective? I'd say that reality is very subjective. To say reality isn't subjective seems to me to be a typical arrogant human statement. The only thing each of us has to go on is our own perceptions which creates our individual realities. This, of course, is one of those things which can't really be proven or disproven and thus makes the subject moot.


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Feb 25, 2010)

I agree with about everything sarah22 said in this thread. Reading through your posts on here I see that we have a lot in common and our beliefs are about the same.

I also used to be a pretty big skeptic and not really spiritual. I was always open minded, but sometimes you need to see proof for yourself to really believe. Years ago I had a series of experiences that couldnt be explained normally, which led to confusion and curiosity. The curiosity led to doing research to try and get to the bottom of the experiences. Ive now been doing research for years and have read up on most the spiritual and metaphysical topics, throughout the past years Ive continued to have more paranormal and supernatural experiences. These were not 'hallucinations' and 95% of the time the experiences have happened randomly, a few things I have made happen myself.

If I were to list every one of these experiences on here it would take hours, but I dont have the time and there are some that I really dont feel like talking about. But the experiences pretty much consist of: premonitions, having dreams and thoughts that actually occur later, astral projecting (again just 2 nights ago), lucid dreaming, seeing ghosts, UFOs, having the whole atmosphere of a place change when I enter and seeing lights dim or light up, having light bulbs blow up when I near them, feeling presences, seeing orbs, 'feeling' when people die (Ive known people died days before I found out), knowledge from past lives and universal knowledge from the akashic records and many other things. Ive actually had a head/brain mri and ct scan done and Ive been evaluated mentally in the past, nothing is wrong with me, and no Im not some weirdo making up things, hallucinating or trying to get attention. Im just a person who these experiences started happening to or maybe Im more in tune with then than the average person?

And what did I learn from all of this? all of these things are real. Ive done research on everything from the supernatural topics, conspiracies, string theory, aliens, spirit realm, etc most of it is true the hoaxes become obvious after a while. Over 90% of whats going on around us we cant notice normally. The physical plane which we exist on is very shallow and narrow compared to the whole picture, modern society keeps it even smaller. Im not sure of how much freedom we have as Ive noticed that almost everything happens for a reason and theres no such thing as a coincidence. A big part of it that Ive noticed with people who are more 'in tune' is simply the fact that they realize a lot of these things are happening while the same things could happen to others but they just dont realize the connection between things.

At the same time there is a "balance" which sarah22 also mentioned earlier that you have to keep between the physical and the spiritual (more deeper things, etc). Ive been on both sides of the fence, there were times where I was too much into the physical which can cause problems, and then there were times I was too much into those deep topics and the spiritual side which also caused problems to my life and health, especially 1-2 years ago. The physical plane existence can be seen as 'holographic' in the matrix, etc but its real as well.

I know this was long but relating back to the thread topic, you really have to experience and know for yourself like what happened with me and others like sarah22. There is a soul, there is definitely existence after your body dies and before you were born. When you research these topics I know they can be 'sobering' and 'scary', trust me I went through those phases to the extreme. Keep the balance, gain knowledge that your comfortable with, dont be scared, there is nothing to fear or panic about, live your life and just be the best you can be while having fun and enjoying your life.


----------



## afrawfraw (Feb 25, 2010)

As an Atheist, I see no difference between "soul" and life.


----------



## afrawfraw (Feb 25, 2010)

How reality is observed is subjective...I think when they say "reality" they mean current environment...

THE reality VS YOUR reality...


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 25, 2010)

doc111 said:


> How do you figure reality isn't subjective? I'd say that reality is very subjective. To say reality isn't subjective seems to me to be a typical arrogant human statement. The only thing each of us has to go on is our own perceptions which creates our individual realities. This, of course, is one of those things which can't really be proven or disproven and thus makes the subject moot.


Exactly, the stuff that makes up "my reality" or "your reality" is irrelevant to what actually is reality. The stuff that we can prove is what is reality.


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 25, 2010)

What is a soul?

Hmmm.... a soul is the culmination of man's wishful thinking. It's the get out of jail card we slip ourselves "hoping" it will be honored.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 26, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> I agree with about everything sarah22 said in this thread. Reading through your posts on here I see that we have a lot in common and our beliefs are about the same.
> 
> I also used to be a pretty big skeptic and not really spiritual. I was always open minded, but sometimes you need to see proof for yourself to really believe. Years ago I had a series of experiences that couldnt be explained normally, which led to confusion and curiosity. The curiosity led to doing research to try and get to the bottom of the experiences. Ive now been doing research for years and have read up on most the spiritual and metaphysical topics, throughout the past years Ive continued to have more paranormal and supernatural experiences. These were not 'hallucinations' and 95% of the time the experiences have happened randomly, *a few things I have made happen myself.*
> 
> ...


you have no idea how AWESOME it is that someone else has experienced these things too. i actively alter my reality at will all the time. the only time i find myself unable to alter reality by sheer will is if im ill, or very tired. but if im neither of those...its easy peasy lol. i've sighted a craft, i've seen and experienced paranormal occurrences, i've had more "psychic" experiences than i can count...i've probably had at least 1000 premonitions (im counting as far back as i can remember. the number could be higher, i've been working at this for years) of future events come true. and most of them are very very small things (knowing when someone is going to call, knowing what others are thinking, knowing when bad things are about to happen, etc)...but im still making accurate predictions. i think that essentially the reason you and i experience these things is because we allow ourselves to. we're open to the possibilities, and obviously we pay close attention. i think that most people have these experiences too...they just maybe dont take as much notice to them, or they just brush them off. i find that people who are able to "tap into" the universe and the energies within...are able to experience things that are not on a physical level. and everyone is able to do that...just that some people choose not to. its ok though..it makes a cool parlour trick when you can make predictions, and will things to happen lol. my close friends have experienced these things with me too. my best friend just doesnt even pay attention anymore, shes just used to "weird shit always happening around sarah" haha.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 26, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Exactly, the stuff that makes up "my reality" or "your reality" is irrelevant to what actually is reality. The stuff that we can prove is what is reality.


thats an interesting way of looking at it. but thats assuming that all science is right. and while im a firm believer in sciences being hugely helpful, we make too many assumptions. what if one day down the road we learn new things about science that completely change the way sciences are viewed and used? will people be open to that? or will they say...your science is wrong and my science is right? its ALL subjective and open to interpretation. 

people (not trying to be rude, but particularly atheists) tend to cling to science as its the 100% fool proof way to explain the whole universe. but people are assuming that science is always true, always correct and its never wrong...which just simply isnt the case. you're putting your faith in science just as strongly as people put their faith in god. and i can understand why its better for some to do that, because its physical, and its measurable, etc. but im saying...what if the sciences that we have now...are wrong? or they cant fully explain everything? i just cant see how its useful to put all my eggs in one basket so to speak.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 26, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> thats an interesting way of looking at it. but thats assuming that all science is right. and while im a firm believer in sciences being hugely helpful, we make too many assumptions. what if one day down the road we learn new things about science that completely change the way sciences are viewed and used? will people be open to that? or will they say...your science is wrong and my science is right? its ALL subjective and open to interpretation.
> 
> people (not trying to be rude, but particularly atheists) tend to cling to science as its the 100% fool proof way to explain the whole universe. but people are assuming that science is always true, always correct and its never wrong...which just simply isnt the case. you're putting your faith in science just as strongly as people put their faith in god. and i can understand why its better for some to do that, because its physical, and its measurable, etc. but im saying...what if the sciences that we have now...are wrong? or they cant fully explain everything? i just cant see how its useful to put all my eggs in one basket so to speak.



Look, what you are proposing is simply not possible. The scientific method prevents it from happening. Things that are wrong do not get passed on as credible science, and if they do, it's extremely short lived and somebody figures it out really fast. 







People who use this argument bring up stuff like the Earth being flat - "scientists were wrong when they thought the Earth was flat, they could be wrong now!" - it was not the scientists who thought the Earth was flat... it was the regular joe's walking around without any background in science at all... then the actual scientists came along, ran some tests, and figured out that the Earth is round.

Same thing with the Earth being the center of the universe, except the church was so reluctant to accept that, they tried and convicted Gallelio for heresy. 

That is how it always is. The scientists figure the stuff out. You're worried about stuff that might be wrong getting passed off as stuff we think is right? Like I said, impossible. If you disagree, give me some examples.

Science doesn't rely on faith. You might be putting your faith into some scientists when you take their word for the work they've done because you can't actually physically verify it, but that can all be, and is, corroborated and verified amongst the community, that's why it exists, that's why we have international science academies. There are thousands of scientists all competing against each other and trust me, if someone makes a mistake, it's the scientists who point it out.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 26, 2010)

Science is always wrong! Didn't you know that? Of course you did!

Yes, science can never be truly correct because of course experience is ineffable. To try and define experience is a practice in futility. Water is no more a liquid, than it is wasser, no more than it is h2o, but of course there is one truth, be it sophists or a scientists. I am well aware of the kind of experiences you are talking about with respect to dreaming and mortal intuition but these things happen to everyone and there are nuances in theory that allow these experiences, such as quantum entanglement, the measurement problem, wave particle duality, the Zeno effect and Schrödinger uncertainty principal. It seems you are still to accept the high school versions of science which really don't apply in this age.

To just discredit science is wrong just as much as it is wrong to completely discredit your experiences, allowing you aren't fabricating a small portion. I think at best we are skilled presenters and we should treat each other that way.

Peace


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 26, 2010)

afrawfraw said:


> Science CONSTANTLY admits it was wrong...Hmmmm.


Examples??


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 26, 2010)

Mr.KushMan said:


> Science is always wrong! Didn't you know that? Of course you did!
> 
> Yes, science can never be truly correct because of course experience is ineffable. To try and define experience is a practice in futility. Water is no more a liquid, than it is wasser, no more than it is h2o, but of course there is one truth, be it sophists or a scientists. I am well aware of the kind of experiences you are talking about with respect to dreaming and mortal intuition but these things happen to everyone and there are nuances in theory that allow these experiences, such as quantum entanglement, the measurement problem, wave particle duality, the Zeno effect and Schrödinger uncertainty principal. It seems you are still to accept the high school versions of science which really don't apply in this age.
> 
> ...


i agree with this post. i know that science proves many things, and has been an incredibly helpful resource for us to use as a species. i plan to become a scientist. but thinking that something has to be able to be scientifically proved in order to exist is really a small minded way of thinking. and i agree that high school sciences arent as applicable in this age as they have been in the past. science is constantly growing and changing and improving all the time. so instead of simply clinging on to old ways...that certainly worked in the past...im ready to keep evolving and changing myself and my stance on things like science and spirituality, so that i can stay current and up to date with the times. its important to give personal experiences credit as well. they're a big part of the picture. to simply discard personal experiences is rather silly...thats probably how most sciences are created....through personal experiences and other ideological theories.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 26, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> but thinking that something has to be able to be scientifically proved in order to exist is really a small minded way of thinking.


This statement doesn't make any sense to me.

How could something exist if it was not proven to exist in the first place?


----------



## PeachOibleBoiblePeach#1 (Feb 26, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> You could think of it this way, the soul is the raw "you" while your physical body is merely a vessel to exist in the physical dimension. The soul is multidimensional, and much less limited than the physical body. In the soul you experience everything in its raw form, where as now its merely interpretations and electic impulses in your brain that show you everything around you. Not to mention that todays society keeps us even more limited so were stuck on an incredibly narrow path of existence in the physical realm. Say you lived in the game "pong" (2D) in a different time measurement that seemed to last for eternity, then you died in the game and all of a sudden you went back to being a person. You were controlling the game from your regular human self unknowingly, and were incredibly limited before going out and experiencing 4 dimensions and were amazed at 1st, but when you got back you realized it was just like the blink of an eye. Before you were born and after your physical body dies youll be a soul again.
> 
> All these super-skeptics ask for physical proof of the soul, but how are we supposed to show proof physical proof of something thats not physical? But at the same time, supposedly when you die in the physical realm and youre soul "leaves" your body it becomes something like 21 grams lighter. If you look for proof enough or something to make you truly believe then youll eventually find it. Ive done years of research on these topics, and personally experienced many of these supernatural things along with near death experiences, astral projection, etc. As far as Im concerned its definitely real, there is a soul. You dont have to take my word for it, do research for yourself and try to reconnect with this side youve been programmed to be disconnected from since the day of your birth.


 Right on man,,That's the way I see it


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 26, 2010)

How can something be proven to exist when it doesn't? Fits exactly the same.....

The belief in a soul is based on absolutely .... nothing.

Wishful thinking. Desperate thinking.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 27, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> This statement doesn't make any sense to me.
> 
> How could something exist if it was not proven to exist in the first place?


im sure that lots of things exist that we have no proof of. considering we've still not discovered every little thing about this planet alone, and then take into consideration all the other planets out there...possibilities are endless. but when you take the stance that the only things that are real are the things we've been able to prove...you limit yourself and your view of the world.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 27, 2010)

But Sarah I think what he is saying, with out speaking for him of course, is that to say you know about something that one couldn't know based on how he understands the world, a scientific, and you are trying to describe something that can't really be described.

Which I think says alot about religion and spirituality. That if you think you know something, keep your mouth shut and you might be right.

Peace

EDIT: Oh, just a couple of brain ticks. I read back and someone said something about researching all the pseudosciences and now are able to believe in a spirit or soul. Well I just have to say that if you look for anything for long enough eventually you can find a rule to make it fit, it is the cornerstone of psychiatric delusion.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 27, 2010)

i thought this was interesting...on how someone wanted proof of science being proved wrong...lol. perhaps this is a start? the title of the article says "The first test that proves general theory of relativity wrong" its a good article and an interesting outcome of experiment... 

http://refreshingnews9.blogspot.com/2010/02/first-test-that-proves-general-theory.html

im just saying...science is a great resource...but its constantly changing. we cant just simply rely on current sciences all the time. 

and thank you MrKushMan. i'll learn to shut my mouth. i hate arguing with people, especially about something that people will never agree on. but i think that what i attempted to do was encourage people to think outside the box so to speak...but im going to start minding my own business. changing my way of thinking from being in one extreme to having balance has improved my life significantly and i had hoped that i could maybe help others do the same. i thought that everyone could benefit from balance but im clearly wrong. and i apologize for my arguments in this thread. i have no business trying to tell anyone else anything.


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 27, 2010)

Science is constantly changing because science constantly CHECKS itself for accuracy. That is a polar OPPOSITE of religion. Religion assumes a conclusion and then works backwards to make it fit. Which of course doesn't work at all. 

Luckily there is a catch all carny phrase to keep the sheeple on board.... no proof is needed...it's an act of faith. Except that faith is based on .... nothing.


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 28, 2010)

but but but.... we KNOW there's a soul because we just... we just KNOW....

Now imagine if Einstein tried to explain relativity that way.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 28, 2010)

Of course a soul in the ideological sense doesn't exist but the idea about there being an OTHER, or a continuation of sensation after the body dies is a real possibility.

I mean what if reality is just a blanket, and the light you see coming through the blanket, projects things that exist but merely on a different dimensional percept. Or if when you die your brain or mind pulls itself, or a portion, through the fabric of reality as if squeezing though a membrane due to osmotic pressure.

Peace


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 28, 2010)

What if...possibility...ideology... those are the tip off words that you're into superstition and supposition.

Time travel is possible. Is it probable? Absolutely not.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 28, 2010)

But thats where your wrong, if the standard model of elementary particle physics has taught us anything its that we need to suspend our beliefs on what is possible, and instead ask why the environment is showing us what it is. 

Your example of time travel not being probable, however possible. I agree completely, but once again have some subtle details, for instance based on the many world interpretation every possible quantum state of the universe exists simultaneously meaning if one were able to travel to these other universes you would in fact be able to time travel. But escaping this universe is where your problems lie.

If QED has shown us the basic building blocks of reality, then self prophecy is one of the most important constituents of life. 

I mean based on the fact that the world is unknowable, and by studying the nature of the reality I reside in I can determine that Intention Theory exists, then by proof though contradiction the universe is in fact a solipsism. 

As well you saying that its not possible is just as credible as me saying it is possible, and based on reiteration dynamics nature is reflected in intuition.

Peace


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 28, 2010)

The problem you have with using science as a comparison...is that....science uses real data and indicators to guide it. 

The concept of a soul isn't based on any indicators what so ever. 

Apples and oranges friend.... science doesn't make up a conclusion first and then work backwards....not without a heavy indicator.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 28, 2010)

I completely understand what you mean, but just consider that 11 dimensions are needed for the standard model to work correctly, some of which are built into everything, but we have no way of measuring them. As well as quarks, which can't be directly observed we only have the ability to infer their existence.

The concept of soul doesn't start from no where either....Also remember that science hasn't been able to conclusively disprove its existence, I am not saying turn to Buddhism and give away all of your possessions, but keep in mind that you hang on to this world to whole heartedly, then your transition through the death experience may be a tad frightening.

Its all philosophy but all needs to be seen as a reliable source of description. You are kind of getting hung up on the details, I am interested in the mind of God.

Peace


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 28, 2010)

have any of you smoked DMT? i think thats the closest we can get to knowing what death feels like without actually dieing. because when you die your brain floods with DMT...so the experience would essentially be very similar. I haven't tried it as of yet, because i feel its a substance that truly requires some mental preparation and research, but i definitely plan to.


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 28, 2010)

I'm sorry, but what is to be learned by "trying" to experience death. What is to gained? Just be patient....the real deal will come to you. Sooner than you wish probably. 

Death is the real equalizer....the true pattern of chaos and randomness. 

No plan...just death. 

Just like everything else on this planet ... born with an unknown expiration date. That is what drives religion at it's core....that underlying current of undeniable truth and inevitability, motivates myth, religion, soul.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 28, 2010)

But sir science tries to say that everything does have an expiration date........ and it is all predictable.

Peace

EDIT: And you as a person who doesn't believe in one kind of spirituality or another, is pretty conservative with your experiences it seems. Not try DMT, what are you CRAZY!!!


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 28, 2010)

death could not possibly come sooner than i wish. believe me...its years too late already. 

and i would love to try DMT...and yes...im crazy  actually...many of the things people talk about regarding DMT are things i see on a daily basis in dreams anyway. my consciousness likes to float around the universe from time to time. lol

i can understand though why others wouldnt want to try it. it can (from what i've heard, read, etc) be a really intense experience. a lot of people are afraid of death so they dont want to experience it any sooner than necessary.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 28, 2010)

@ Sarah, the amount you need to smoke is insignificant to the amount released while you dream, and order of magnitude less than when you NDE.

@Jax, maybe taking the drug that makes you experience death will make you realize a truth about reality and cause your life to be much more tolerable with all of this great insight....

Buddhists believe that the soul enters the fetus at 49 days after conception, interestingly DMT is produced in the fetus on the 49th sunrise after conception. 
How about the fundamentals of doaism having intrinsic parallels with quantum theory, even explaining certain phenomenon thousands of years before modern science. Including entanglement and wave particle duality.

I agree that religion fouls the good nature of people, and like I said earlier that just because there is some relevance not to go out and join a church-cult, but keep considering with open eyes.

I heard a quote today and I think its symbolic of our role a people; Its about casting bread on the water and seeing what is brought in. Thats all we have to try and do with our experiences, toss some bread out onto our murky waters and explain to others what approaches from beneath the surface and over the horizon.

Peace


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Feb 28, 2010)

So what youre saying is that man was scared of the idea that death was 'the end' and that he would cease to exist in every way after death, so he made up the idea of the soul?

Possible, but could it have been that they discovered the soul some other way? There is billions of people throughout time that have seen ghosts, many that have come into contact with people who are physically dead, many who have actually died for a time that come back and speak of a place, many who have had intense experiences on different substances that speak of another place, many respected people who believe in the soul and the soul realm, many who have thoughts and memories from 'past lives'. After all that its hard to understand what type of person wouldnt at least consider the fact that some part of us lives on after we die.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 28, 2010)

Mr.KushMan said:


> @ Sarah, the amount you need to smoke is insignificant to the amount released while you dream, and order of magnitude less than when you NDE.
> 
> @Jax, maybe taking the drug that makes you experience death will make you realize a truth about reality and cause your life to be much more tolerable with all of this great insight....
> 
> ...


so do you think that natural DMT experiences are more powerful or less powerful than smoking it?


----------



## morgentaler (Feb 28, 2010)

So, a few questions for our authorities on souls....

1) What is your evidence for the existence of a "soul" or a consciousness that persists after death?

2) What happens to the soul when you sever the corpus collosum, and under observation you see two distinct personalities operating in the hemispheres of the brain? Personalities that not only differ in their perceptions of the world (visual and linguistic) but also in their reactions and tastes.

3) What happens to the soul when the brain receives severe physical damage which changes the singular personality of the individual, as in the case of Phineas Gage, and others?

4) What happens to the soul when Alzheimers strips the individual of all memory?

5) If personality, memory, and consciousness may be obliterated but the "soul" lives on, what is the function of the soul and what benefit does it provide you in relation to people who have previously died and no longer have any association to you? How then, does the soul have any more intrinsic value than an LED light?


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Feb 28, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> *death could not possibly come sooner than i wish. believe me...its years too late already. *
> 
> and i would love to try DMT...and yes...im crazy  actually...many of the things people talk about regarding DMT are things i see on a daily basis in dreams anyway. my consciousness likes to float around the universe from time to time. lol
> 
> i can understand though why others wouldnt want to try it. it can (from what i've heard, read, etc) be a really intense experience. a lot of people are afraid of death so they dont want to experience it any sooner than necessary.


Why do you think the bolded? Sometimes I think the same, for a lot of reasons. Im not alive the same way I was when I was a kid through high school. At the same time I know theres a lot of things I still have to experience here. Im not scared of death and being physically dead because I know all will be well after that, but Im still somewhat scared of dying itself.

Ive been wanting to try DMT as well, for years now. Ive read some amazing experiences on it, especially on erowid.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 28, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> Why do you think the bolded? Sometimes I think the same, for a lot of reasons. Im not alive the same way I was when I was a kid through high school. At the same time I know theres a lot of things I still have to experience here. Im not scared of death and being physically dead because I know all will be well after that, but Im still somewhat scared of dying itself.
> 
> Ive been wanting to try DMT as well, for years now. Ive read some amazing experiences on it, especially on erowid.


i'm not afraid of death. not at all. i think im a little excited for it. im not as suicidal as i have been in the past couple years (i have issues lol. i was in outpatient treatment for over a year), but i'd still welcome death with open arms. im not running out to kill myself or anything, but if it happened, i'd be ok. the only thing regarding death that actually scares me is what would happen to my family if i passed. what scares me, is how they would feel, cuz of course i'd never want them to hurt. 

i watched a video online once, and it was someones dmt trip, with computer graphics. they took the things they saw and created a video of the trip with computer art...many of the things in that video were things, and places, i'd seen before. not on DMT, just in dreams and visions. so it makes me wonder sometimes, where these places are, if we can all see the same, or similar things. they cant just be in my own personal head, otherwise i'd be the only one who can see them.


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 28, 2010)

Mr.KushMan said:


> But sir science tries to say that everything does have an expiration date........ and it is all predictable.
> 
> Peace
> 
> EDIT: And you as a person who doesn't believe in one kind of spirituality or another, is pretty conservative with your experiences it seems. Not try DMT, what are you CRAZY!!!


Hardly what I mean at all. Death is random but constant. You may die being born or you may live to 100+ ... there's no way of knowing. 



sarah22 said:


> death could not possibly come sooner than i wish. believe me...its years too late already.
> 
> and i would love to try DMT...and yes...im crazy  actually...many of the things people talk about regarding DMT are things i see on a daily basis in dreams anyway. my consciousness likes to float around the universe from time to time. lol
> 
> i can understand though why others wouldnt want to try it. it can (from what i've heard, read, etc) be a really intense experience. a lot of people are afraid of death so they dont want to experience it any sooner than necessary.


That's too bad you have that attitude. You can always remake urself ... at any age. It's never too late, and don't let anyone tell you different.



Philly_Buddah said:


> So what youre saying is that man was scared of the idea that death was 'the end' and that he would cease to exist in every way after death, so he made up the idea of the soul?
> 
> Possible, but could it have been that they discovered the soul some other way? There is billions of people throughout time that have seen ghosts, many that have come into contact with people who are physically dead, many who have actually died for a time that come back and speak of a place, many who have had intense experiences on different substances that speak of another place, many respected people who believe in the soul and the soul realm, many who have thoughts and memories from 'past lives'. After all that its hard to understand what type of person wouldnt at least consider the fact that some part of us lives on after we die.



Ur getting there.... Man for survival reasons has been endowed with a sentient mind, capable of contemplating death. It's a blessing to be sure, but as with yin & yang, there is a price to be paid. It is a primordial fear planted deep in our core wiring. There is a certain bliss in not understanding mortality. The burden needs a crutch and man has developed,perhaps necessarily, little tricks to cope with the such knowledge.

We live on a planet which demands death from each other constantly. Most things on the planet end up being eaten alive. We kill millions of animals each year to sustain ourselves. We drip in blood....all of us. Vegetables too....all must die. This is the place we live. We and only we realize this....so we need an out. 


The "out" is of our own creation.


----------



## sarah22 (Feb 28, 2010)

edited to clear out this post...i changed my mind. i wasnt comfortable discussing that experience here...


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Feb 28, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> So what youre saying is that man was scared of the idea that death was 'the end' and that he would cease to exist in every way after death, so he made up the idea of the soul?
> 
> Possible, but could it have been that they discovered the soul some other way? There is billions of people throughout time that have seen ghosts, many that have come into contact with people who are physically dead, many who have actually died for a time that come back and speak of a place, many who have had intense experiences on different substances that speak of another place, many respected people who believe in the soul and the soul realm, many who have thoughts and memories from 'past lives'. After all that its hard to understand what type of person wouldnt at least consider the fact that some part of us lives on after we die.


I feel the ghost sensationalism is a little to brittle in nature to have any grounds in philosophy even. I reduce that to a neurological function human are hardwired with, it is visual scans where by they try to identify faces. Being such a psychologically demanding experience, strong psychedelics, I could see a synesthesia like effect over the brains function.



morgentaler said:


> So, a few questions for our authorities on souls....
> 
> 1) What is your evidence for the existence of a "soul" or a consciousness that persists after death?
> 
> ...


1) There is no direct evidence, just as there is no direct evidence for quarks to exist. But we do know that the conscious observer will effect the experiment, everything in life being an experiment.

2)&3) You are splitting hairs, clearly severing the machine that make consciousness possible will have adverse effects on the acting body......

4) Once again, its very hard to say.

5) The soul could be the subjective part of the collective mind that not only created the universe but is the universe. 

Or maybe its the ability to surf through the fourth dimension, picking a path along the many quantum states, you leave people and people leave you and in the end you die alone.

Or maybe as I said earlier in the thread, its like a plane that just needs to reach a certain speed before it can take off and create a buffer between thoughts and memory. And its just the mental scanning in the depths of a conscious psychoactive trip, in hopes of sanctuary from this cold dark world.

As you can see in the few rational versions of possibility there are several possible values of a soul, while at the same time being no more important than the LED, they say energy can't be created or destroyed, it must be like that for a reason.

Be it a freak chance occurrence when the universe finally cooled able to form the electron, photons, quarks and bosons that make up the reality we can understand and detect, or a way to ensure our minds are at play.


The point it who knows.

Peace


----------



## CrackerJax (Feb 28, 2010)

The soul is the product of a subjective mind.


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Feb 28, 2010)

CrackerJax said:


> Ur getting there.... Man for survival reasons has been endowed with a sentient mind, capable of contemplating death. It's a blessing to be sure, but as with yin & yang, there is a price to be paid. It is a primordial fear planted deep in our core wiring. There is a certain bliss in not understanding mortality. The burden needs a crutch and man has developed,perhaps necessarily, little tricks to cope with the such knowledge.
> 
> We live on a planet which demands death from each other constantly. Most things on the planet end up being eaten alive. We kill millions of animals each year to sustain ourselves. We drip in blood....all of us. Vegetables too....all must die. This is the place we live. We and only we realize this....so we need an out.
> 
> The "out" is of our own creation.


What does this have to do with the other things mentioned in my post?

If youve never had any real experiences like that I can somewhat understand why you would be as skeptical as you are, but that doesnt change the fact that billions of people through time have. Many of those times others were there and witnessed and experienced the same thing.



Mr.KushMan said:


> I feel the ghost sensationalism is a little to brittle in nature to have any grounds in philosophy even. I reduce that to a neurological function human are hardwired with, it is visual scans where by they try to identify faces. Being such a psychologically demanding experience, strong psychedelics, I could see a synesthesia like effect over the brains function.


How do you explain when multiple people experience and see the same thing? Theyve caught ghosts on camera, and their voices on audio, numerous times. If not proof of the soul, at the very least this certainly opens up the possibility that we do exist in some way after we die physically, if not proves it.


----------



## PadawanBater (Feb 28, 2010)

Dude... ghosts on cam? Paranormal Activity doesn't count as scientific evidence... Sorry but fail.

Ghosts, demons, souls, ect. all in the realm of the supernatural.


----------



## sherriberry (Feb 28, 2010)

the same as an easter bunny...

bullshit

dna is your desires... no one teaches you what tastes good, what smells good, who looks hot...

but all that stuff is heriditary, and subject to a slight mutation.

dna, and your brain, is what you are, what you like to do, and who you want to be... including impressing your parents or people around you (all genetic desires that bring success)

if you flip any of your desires to a polar opposite, 9 times out of 10, youd be dead in no time.

If you DONT want to impress chicks, if you DONT like the taste of sugar or fat, if you LIKE to piss everyone off, if you like the taste of dog shit...

rest assured... those dna codes that say GREAT IDEA... would be lost, because you would be dead long before you become sexually mature, and those amazing codes would be lost for good.

And thus the reason we have the wants we do.

And each person is simply a mutation of the quantiative amount that they WANT different things.

So some people want something over another...

and thus people have different priorities, and different desires.

that simple

Personality, soul, spirit, blah blah blah..

its all the same.


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 1, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> What does this have to do with the other things mentioned in my post?
> 
> If youve never had any real experiences like that I can somewhat understand why you would be as skeptical as you are, but that doesnt change the fact that billions of people through time have. Many of those times others were there and witnessed and experienced the same thing.
> 
> ...


I think it's more about who wants it more. People see and believe what they need to. There are degrees of belief in superstition. Mine is quite low...perhaps nonexistent. Yours (for any number of reasons) is quite high. 

The facts are, there is no scientific data that ghosts are real. The human mind can project all sorts of things, and that is why under careful scientific observation....ghosts fail to appear. It's in the human mind, not in the physical world.


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Mar 1, 2010)

CrackerJax said:


> I think it's more about who wants it more. People see and believe what they need to. There are degrees of belief in superstition. Mine is quite low...perhaps nonexistent. Yours (for any number of reasons) is quite high.
> 
> The facts are, there is no scientific data that ghosts are real. The human mind can project all sorts of things, and that is why under careful scientific observation....ghosts fail to appear. It's in the human mind, not in the physical world.


I used to be a skeptic too, then I started having these experiences more and more often. This happened randomly, I knew next to nothing about the supernatural and did no research on them before they started happening. It scared the sh*t outta me when it started happening, I definitely didnt 'see what I wanted to see'.

If the human mind can project all sorts of things than how is it that ghosts have been caught on video and audio devices? How does it explain how multiple people can view the same thing than describe the same exact thing? Ive seen ghosts before, Ive heard them, both alone and while others were present. I know people now who investigate hauntings and Ive seen the video and audio myself.

I dont 'want' for these things to exist, Ive just seen enough evidence for myself to know that they do exist. You come off as either a person who hasnt had any of these experiences, or you have and your just trying your hardest to put them off as 'nothing' for whatever reason, maybe you dont want to believe or your scared I dont know. I do know that theres places on the planet you could go to and youll have no choice but to believe theres more.


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 1, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> I used to be a skeptic too, then I started having these experiences more and more often. This happened randomly, I knew next to nothing about the supernatural and did no research on them before they started happening. It scared the sh*t outta me when it started happening, I definitely didnt 'see what I wanted to see'.
> 
> If the human mind can project all sorts of things than how is it that ghosts have been caught on video and audio devices? How does it explain how multiple people can view the same thing than describe the same exact thing? Ive seen ghosts before, Ive heard them, both alone and while others were present. I know people now who investigate hauntings and Ive seen the video and audio myself.
> 
> I dont 'want' for these things to exist, Ive just seen enough evidence for myself to know that they do exist. You come off as either a person who hasnt had any of these experiences, or you have and your just trying your hardest to put them off as 'nothing' for whatever reason, maybe you dont want to believe or your scared I dont know. I do know that theres places on the planet you could go to and youll have no choice but to believe theres more.


Post it up dude, why are you holding out?


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 2, 2010)

You may have not liked the content..... what I mean by *see what they want to* is in the interpretation of the event. 

It's much easier and in ur case preferable to think the event is "outside" of you instead of "inside" of you.


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Mar 2, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Post it up dude, why are you holding out?


I would post it if had it myself, I would have to get permission from the people I know who have it.



CrackerJax said:


> You may have not liked the content..... what I mean by *see what they want to* is in the interpretation of the event.
> 
> It's much easier and in ur case preferable to think the event is "outside" of you instead of "inside" of you.


Youre still not touching the part about multiple people viewing and experiencing the same thing and describing the same exact thing. When you all see a white mostly transparent shape of a person that moves the same as a regular person, hear the persons voice whos not 'there', and see shadows of human outlines that dont belong to any of you what other explanation is there? especially when they do these investigations and they rule out everything else.

Not just the ghost experiences but many of the other experiences I have had been when I was with other people and most the time they experience the same thing, the only things that I usually experience alone are the things that are 'inside' meaning things I can see and experience that the average person cant.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 3, 2010)

I'll touch that part.

The physical structures of the brain are consistent across the species except for minor deviations due to mutation or trauma.

The perceptions of these similar structures are also similar. The reliability of these structures is also limited in scope, and parties to a perceived event can be led to believe they saw what they in fact did not see.

Penn and Teller would be happy to provide you with various examples of this, should you chose to do further research.

As for "ruling out everything else", as soon as you say "what other explanation is there" to a shadow of a human outline you've pretty much slapped your gullibility up on a billboard for the world to see. If pareidolia is enough to fix your opinion on the matter, then reason isn't going to work.



Philly_Buddah said:


> Youre still not touching the part about multiple people viewing and experiencing the same thing and describing the same exact thing. When you all see a white mostly transparent shape of a person that moves the same as a regular person, hear the persons voice whos not 'there', and see shadows of human outlines that dont belong to any of you what other explanation is there? especially when they do these investigations and they rule out everything else.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Mar 3, 2010)

The synapses are constantly changing, you only retain a brain shape for about 10 minutes at most, and while dreaming the change can be in constant flux.

No two, discernible observers can compare their perception to infinitum, it just isn't possible.

I admit when I have a sense of something greater, maybe I am painting or writing, and "Don't worry, Be happy" turns on on my iTunes shuffle(Which isn't actually random), I understand why one would think that the universe is depicted for them. But at the same time I understand that it is just a cosmic, indeterminable chance. 

Maybe the song doesn't exist and its all just brain play,or blanket reality, or it does exist and it just happens to be its time to turn on.

I openly accept the possibility the external world exists while maintaining that I can never prove that as fact. I think people should be taught this in school.

Peace

EDIT: Pareidolia is the word I was looking for in an earlier post. Perception scanning.


----------



## greensister (Mar 3, 2010)

The soul is a made up magic energy person that people who are afraid of mortality invented because they didnt understand thermodymanics or any laws of energy conservation. Why and how people buy into that crap nowadays is a mystery to me.

Its also some funky music that makes you want to be outta sight!!!


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Mar 3, 2010)

Well if you want to pull thermodynamics into this then you would know that things get more complex not less complex. For a perception to go from brilliant colors and sounds to nothing disobeys a law of entropy.

Einstein said, that math can't describe reality, only its quantities. This should be taken in, as it truly captures the power of perception, that its just to perfect. What we see isn't truly what is being measured, but an interpretation of it. 

Peace


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Mar 3, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> I'll touch that part.
> 
> The physical structures of the brain are consistent across the species except for minor deviations due to mutation or trauma.
> 
> ...


Its not just the human species, theres been other animal species who react to these things as well. Ive seen many different animals react to these things in different ways, dogs, cats, fish, etc and Ive heard stories from the people I know of many more different kinds of animals. Similar brain structures reacting to so-called 'pareidolia'? I have hundreds of stories from experiences and have seen more than enough myself to know that these things are real.

Im 'gullible'?. I have a genius level IQ, I am a 'healthy' skeptic and Ive done years of research on many topics, the hoaxes, all the BS becomes pretty obvious when youve reached this level. One difference between me and you is Ive already been where youre at now, years ago. I was a skeptic, tried to put these things off as 'nothing' or explain them away with outdated, flawed logic that leaves no room. Until youve actually witnessed these experiences first hand yourself to the extent that I have, you have no credibility even speaking on this topic.


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 3, 2010)

Yes....don't forget that like minded ppl hang out together. Then there is group pressure, and it may not even be a conscious choice.

Last, but not least..... as Philly tries to somehow jump from a mental episode to proof of a soul  ... none of it so far has been verified by science. It is not observable. 


Then there is memory recall (sketchy at best) and cognitive dissonance.

It all adds up to NO PROOF. Not even a probability. All evidence points to the end of life ... no continuation what so ever. 

Would I like to continue? Sure, who wouldn't ... and that is the motivatrion behind all the wishful thinking. This brings us back to religion/myth. 

Is there anything behind the curtain? UNKNOWN....

Is there a curtain? UNKNOWN....

Writing it down doesn't make it true. {Religion)


----------



## sarah22 (Mar 3, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> Its not just the human species, theres been other animal species who react to these things as well. Ive seen many different animals react to these things in different ways, dogs, cats, fish, etc and Ive heard stories from the people I know of many more different kinds of animals. Similar brain structures reacting to so-called 'pareidolia'? I have hundreds of stories from experiences and have seen more than enough myself to know that these things are real.
> 
> Im 'gullible'?. I have a genius level IQ, I am a 'healthy' skeptic and Ive done years of research on many topics, the hoaxes, all the BS becomes pretty obvious when youve reached this level. One difference between me and you is Ive already been where youre at now, years ago. I was a skeptic, tried to put these things off as 'nothing' or explain them away with outdated, flawed logic that leaves no room. Until youve actually witnessed these experiences first hand yourself to the extent that I have, you have no credibility even speaking on this topic.


i agree with you...that people who havent had personal experiences just dont hold that much credibility. you cant really judge these things until you've experienced them for yourself. i think thats true in ANY area too. like i had a friend who, during the height of her depression, was a self-harmer. i didnt understand that because i hadnt been through it, now that i've been through it myself i get it 100% and any of my previous thoughts on the subject have changed drastically due to having personal experience.


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 3, 2010)

Personal experience and delusion are two different things.

I don't mean to offend anyone, but how could you guys possibly say something exists without any evidence to support it? Don't you see how absurd that is? 

Essentially what you guys are saying is "it exists, you just haven't discovered it yet". If it does exist, and I have not discovered it yet, then it's irrelevant and as far as I can perceive, it does not exist.

If I can't perceive something existing, then it doesn't in the very definition of the word, as our perceptions are what dictates what is real and what isn't. And like I said, it isn't subjective.


----------



## sarah22 (Mar 3, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Personal experience and delusion are two different things.
> 
> I don't mean to offend anyone, but how could you guys possibly say something exists without any evidence to support it? Don't you see how absurd that is?
> 
> ...


lol i dont think its absurd at all. i dont like to look at life through a keyhole. its incredibly difficult for me to understand your take on this too. to require proof for absolutely everything or it didnt happen...if you got hit in the hand with thin air, hard enough to dent your fingernail...what in the world would you think? really? what would you think? you're standing there...in front of a shelf in the basement looking for something, and all of a sudden you have pain in your hand, specifically one finger, and it felt like you'd been hit in the hand by something solid, even though nothing solid touched you. and that dent was visible to not only yourself but other people. how would you explain that?


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 3, 2010)

sarah22 said:


> lol i dont think its absurd at all. i dont like to look at life through a keyhole. its incredibly difficult for me to understand your take on this too. to require proof for absolutely everything or it didnt happen...if you got hit in the hand with thin air, hard enough to dent your fingernail...what in the world would you think? really? what would you think? you're standing there...in front of a shelf in the basement looking for something, and all of a sudden you have pain in your hand, specifically one finger, and it felt like you'd been hit in the hand by something solid, even though nothing solid touched you. and that dent was visible to not only yourself but other people. how would you explain that?


I would mark it up to unknown and move on. 

My question to you is, why would you conclude you knew what it was at all when you didn't? It's one thing to say "I don't know" and an entirely different thing to believe you do. One is honest and one isn't.

Again, I don't mean to offend you at all.


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 3, 2010)

The "happening" isn't in question.

The analysis is.


----------



## one11 (Mar 3, 2010)

CrackerJax said:


> The "happening" isn't in question.
> 
> The analysis is.


 
for being such an atheist...u sure like hanging out in the religious threads dontcha...


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 3, 2010)

one11 said:


> for being such an atheist...u sure like hanging out in the religious threads dontcha...


Someone needs to quarantine the infection of religious ignorance.


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 3, 2010)

The thread asks a question ...


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Mar 4, 2010)

The existence of ghosts, spirits, reincarnations, etc has all already been proven a long time ago. You may have not heard about it but even if you havent experienced these things, do enough research on it and youll find it.

There has been people, even recently, who have recalled past lives and the other person was proven to have existed. Many of these were investigated thoroughly and there was no other way for the person to know these things.

As I said there has been ghosts caught on video and audio devices along with being detected other ways. There have been ghosts seen that look exactly like a person, clothes and everything, and that person was found to have existed before, they saw a picture of them after and it looked identical. This has happened thousands of times. I have experienced and researched enough to go on with examples for hours, but I know people have to experience it themselves and do their own unbiased research to reach the truth.

Either accept it or not, but the fact is there is more. The super-skeptics are a product of todays society, manufactured, brainwashed, and blinded. Theyre in the same category as religious hardcore creationists. Neither of them are balanced or open minded.


----------



## fulbright (Mar 4, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> The existence of ghosts, spirits, reincarnations, etc has all already been *proven* a long time ago. You may have not heard about it but even if you havent experienced these things, do enough research on it and youll find it.
> 
> There has been people, even recently, who have recalled past lives and the other person was proven to have existed. Many of these were investigated thoroughly and there was no other way for the person to know these things.
> 
> ...


       

Alright, seriously. If this has been PROVEN, then where are the facts. Don't give us stories you've heard through seven different people. Give us verifiable FACTS. Show me a successful study done on the paranormal that passes the muster of the scientific world.

I've read at least two separate requests for facts from you and you've yet to give any.

There is a difference between you saying there is proof and showing the proof. Maybe you don't get that. 

"There have been..."
"There have been..."
"There have been..."

WHERE? SHOW US!!!!


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Mar 4, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> The existence of ghosts, spirits, reincarnations, etc has all already been proven a long time ago. You may have not heard about it but even if you havent experienced these things, do enough research on it and youll find it.


Look for anything hard enough and you will be able to justify it. There was a person that did testing with mentally handicapped children and adults, they were told to do a series of tests with many possible correct answers. He spent his life proving not that these kids are geniuses but that you can create an equation to make any set, math, a rule.



Philly_Buddah said:


> There has been people, even recently, who have recalled past lives and the other person was proven to have existed. Many of these were investigated thoroughly and there was no other way for the person to know these things.


So they couldn't have known these thing, how did they investigate?.....



Philly_Buddah said:


> As I said there has been ghosts caught on video and audio devices along with being detected other ways. There have been ghosts seen that look exactly like a person, clothes and everything, and that person was found to have existed before, they saw a picture of them after and it looked identical. This has happened thousands of times. I have experienced and researched enough to go on with examples for hours, but I know people have to experience it themselves and do their own unbiased research to reach the truth.


Thats some pretty sad evidence, "We maybe saw something and it looked like.....HER!!!!"




Philly_Buddah said:


> Either accept it or not, but the fact is there is more. The super-skeptics are a product of todays society, manufactured, brainwashed, and blinded. Theyre in the same category as religious hardcore creationists. Neither of them are balanced or open minded.


Sure I am willing to accept there is more, and I do agree that a great number of people are engineered by society to think they know how the universe relates to itself, that goes both ways now though.

At the same time I am sure there are tens of thousands of scientists that would be more than ecstatic to find a ghostly phenomenon but sadly it just isn't in the cards. If there were proof of an afterlife we would know.

Einstein said that he couldn't see the meaning in a spirit devoid of a body.

I think the problem is that people have a very concrete view of reality, where the truth is that its not that concrete, is more of a smear. You can never really know where its going to land, but you can make guesses and calculate your heart out.

Once again I will reiterate; I accept the possibility that the external world exists while maintaining that I can never be sure.

Peace


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 4, 2010)

He's got Bible proof. Which means he believes it and that makes it proof.


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 4, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> The existence of ghosts, spirits, reincarnations, etc has all already been proven a long time ago. You may have not heard about it but even if you havent experienced these things, do enough research on it and youll find it.
> 
> There has been people, even recently, who have recalled past lives and the other person was proven to have existed. Many of these were investigated thoroughly and there was no other way for the person to know these things.
> 
> ...


Why would a ghost wear clothes and why would the clothes it's wearing appear transparent? Did the clothes die too or something..?

What is the purpose of a ghost? 

How does one become a ghost?

Why is it every single time without fail when an atheist or a skeptic asks for proof of something someone claims to be real - the automatic position is "you just haven't experienced it"? - that's what mine and Sarah's entire conversation was about, whether or not the reality we are both experiencing is subjective or objective - the REALITY is it's OBJECTIVE - our interpretation of events is what is SUBJECTIVE. Therefore someone claiming they know what the experience was better than someone else who experienced the exact same thing is absurd. That is why we need data, observations, PROOF of the event. You're feelings or interpretations don't amount to that because that's all it is. I cannot examine it or experience it just like you did, so you cannot use that as any kind of poof or evidence to support your position.

We need OBJECTIVE proof.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Mar 4, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Why would a ghost wear clothes and why would the clothes it's wearing appear transparent? Did the clothes die too or something..?
> 
> What is the purpose of a ghost?
> 
> ...


Yes but this is all assuming that there is experience beyond your own. Which I think is the real definition of soul.

Peace


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 4, 2010)

Does it strike anyone as odd that almost every answer given so far is inconsistent down to almost every detail?


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 4, 2010)

He was flailing two pages back.....

I'm guessing he didn't think it through from the beginning. Once truly examined....it all falls apart....some folks can't take that very well.


----------



## shnkrmn (Mar 4, 2010)

Here's some objective proof: 

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Antiques-collectables/Museum-pieces-artifacts/auction-275074040.htm#qna


*TWO CAPTURED GHOSTS *



Current bid: $1,500.00





Reserve met
Closes: Mon 8 Mar, 9:46 pm
 Listing #: 275074040
 
Min next bid: $ Place Bid Auto-bid  


#otherImages { height: 86px; visibility: hidden; } 
 
Photo 1 of 
   
   







 View full size photos  











Captured ghosts from our house 

Captured by an exorsist from a spiritualist church 

one spirit we believe is a man by the name of Les Graham, managed to track down a photo. He died in the house in the 1920's. 
Exorsist believes this spirit likes to make himself known and spook people. but he is not a very strong spirit. 

The other spirit came from when me and my partner stupidly did an Oujia Board. We believe it is a little girl who likes to move things and turn things on and off. Exorsist says she is VERY strong and if left will get stronger. 

We have had no activity since they were bottled on July 15th 2009 . So i believe they are in the bottles. 

They are bottled with holy water as aparantly the water dulls the spirits energy, sort of puts them to sleep. 

To revive the spirit, i have been told that you pour into a little dish and let it evaporate into your house. 

I just want to get rid of them as they scare me. But someone might like these to play with. 

So if you like ghosts, heres two real ones! Please read the questions and answers for this auctio


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 4, 2010)

Apparently.....


----------



## mindphuk (Mar 4, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> The existence of ghosts, spirits, reincarnations, etc has all already been proven a long time ago. You may have not heard about it but even if you havent experienced these things, do enough research on it and youll find it.
> 
> There has been people, even recently, who have recalled past lives and the other person was proven to have existed. Many of these were investigated thoroughly and there was no other way for the person to know these things.
> 
> ...


Interesting that people take the position of skeptical inquiry with scientific empiricism and attempts to portray them as deluded as creationists in order to support their own pet bullshit belief. 
Sorry bud but the standards for empirical evidence is the same for all religion and pseudoscience including your ghosts. Claiming that we don't know because we haven't researched it like you when talking to people that you don't know is profoundly stupid. You have no idea my experience and knowledge and I would put it up against yours any day. 
Sorry but anyone that has verifiable evidence for life after death has a Nobel Prize waiting for him.


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Mar 7, 2010)

One of the main points is this. You say you want proof that ghosts and spirits exist. And just how am I supposed to prove this to you through an online message board? And do you seriously expect me to consider, let alone take on your beliefs on this through a message board being that Ive actually had many of these experiences before and thoroughly investigated them? Ive heard every argument against me in this thread before and considered all of them thoroughly, the experience, the truth is more than words and your biased logic.

The fact is that you simply cant imagine exactly what something is going to be like until you see it and have proof for yourself. Its like trying to explain something to somebody in words who has never been through that thing before, be it youre trying to explain what your first sexual experience feels like to a 9 year old virgin or an intense psychedelic drug experience to somebody whos never even been as much as drunk before. Or just any future event or situation they could possibly go through, you can even have the thought as Ive had about future events but the actual experience is indescribable.

Now, I feel I rightly assume that none of you have been through any of these experiences because if you did Im almost positive you wouldnt be acting like you do and as skeptical as you do.

So what can I show you online through a message board so that you believe in ghosts, spirits, etc? Im reaching out to the people I know to get the ghost and audio video, which if I do get Ill put up. But then again you werent there and you cant be sure if its altered or a hoax. Ive already shared some of my personal experiences, which just proves it amounts to nothing unless the person goes through it themselves. I can spend hours looking for links and articles I saw years ago that spelled it out pretty well (which Im looking for at the moment). 

Then theres the question of do I honestly care about what people on an online forum think or if they believe me? Not really, but when I have free time these topics are interesting being that I have numerous first hand experiences, know people personally who have gone through many as well, and Ive done years of research on these topics.

One thing that I will say is that you have to understand the power over you and your beliefs. Your beliefs right now can completely change within a few months or years. I should know, it happened to me. You can sit there and deny all that Im saying, for whatever reason I dont care. But know that what Im saying is not some BS or Im just making it up or doing this for fun. Theres much deeper things going on. Even Ive personally had experiences Im not comfortable sharing with anyone, Ill leave it at that. Ill put up that video and audio as soon as I get it, itll be at least a week through if I put it up. In the meantime Ill look for the links and other "proof" that might change your mind.


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 7, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> *One of the main points is this. You say you want proof that ghosts and spirits exist. And just how am I supposed to prove this to you through an online message board?* And do you seriously expect me to consider, let alone take on your beliefs on this through a message board being that Ive actually had many of these experiences before and thoroughly investigated them? Ive heard every argument against me in this thread before and considered all of them thoroughly, the experience, the truth is more than words and your biased logic.


To illustrate the issue I have with this, I'll give you an example... Can you name one thing that does exist that you _could not _prove on a message board? Why are ghosts or souls any different? That is the point. - if it's real, it should be clear to everyone, not just those who *think* they experience the phenomena. If you can't prove it, it might as well not have happened.



> The fact is that you simply cant imagine exactly what something is going to be like until you see it *and have proof for yourself*. Its like trying to explain something to somebody in words who has never been through that thing before, be it youre trying to explain what your first sexual experience feels like to a 9 year old virgin or an intense psychedelic drug experience to somebody whos never even been as much as drunk before. Or just any future event or situation they could possibly go through, you can even have the thought as Ive had about future events but the actual experience is indescribable.


This is not proof of anything though, it's just unknown experiences you attribute for whatever reasons to ghosts... What you have is anecdotal evidence and vague memories of the event. I know how unreliable vague memories are, people believe they've experienced all kinds of illogical stuff because of it.



> Now, I feel I rightly assume that none of you have been through any of these experiences because if you did Im almost positive you wouldnt be acting like you do and as skeptical as you do.


When I was a kid I thought I experienced the same kinds of things all the time. There is a logical, rational explanation for everything if you just give it enough thought, I guarantee it. Your mind is already programmed to attribute things that are unknown to you, things you can't figure out on the spot for whatever reason, to things like ghosts or spirits or whatever because it's already embedded into our culture. When you hear a noise at night your mind is already thinking "GHOST!". When you see something unknown flying through the air your mind is already thinking "ALIEN!". Same kind of thing. But like I said, if you give these things enough thought, ghosts and spirits, souls and ufo's (alien powered) are just illogical. That is why we require more evidence than just "I saw this thing this one time.." or "I know a guy who..."... 

I need to measure stuff, test stuff, review the data... All it ever comes down to is "it's a personal experience, you won't understand it until you've experienced it", when I already explained, I have experienced it, exactly the same kinds of things you're talking about, except I reasoned my way out of it and decided there's no way it could have been a ghost - if it was, why haven't I seen it since? Like I mentioned before, I could come up with dozens of different reasons why ghosts specifically just are not logical, invisible clothes and limbo in "middle Earth" and such...
 


> So what can I show you online through a message board so that you believe in ghosts, spirits, etc? Im reaching out to the people I know to get the ghost and audio video, which if I do get Ill put up. But then again you werent there and you cant be sure if its altered or a hoax. Ive already shared some of my personal experiences, which just proves it amounts to nothing unless the person goes through it themselves. I can spend hours looking for links and articles I saw years ago that spelled it out pretty well (which Im looking for at the moment).


Exactly right. Until I can actually measure something it's pointless. 



> Then theres the question of do I honestly care about what people on an online forum think or if they believe me? Not really, but when I have free time these topics are interesting being that I have numerous first hand experiences, know people personally who have gone through many as well, and Ive done years of research on these topics.


I'm interested in hearing about what you would consider to be the most compelling story you have, and why you think it was ghosts or whatever? Seriously. 



> One thing that I will say is that you have to understand the power over you and your beliefs. Your beliefs right now can completely change within a few months or years. I should know, it happened to me. You can sit there and deny all that Im saying, for whatever reason I dont care. But know that what Im saying is not some BS or Im just making it up or doing this for fun. Theres much deeper things going on. Even Ive personally had experiences Im not comfortable sharing with anyone, Ill leave it at that. Ill put up that video and audio as soon as I get it, itll be at least a week through if I put it up. In the meantime Ill look for the links and other "proof" that might change your mind.


Looking forward to it.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 7, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> To illustrate the issue I have with this, I'll give you an example... Can you name one thing that does exist that you _could not _prove on a message board? Why are ghosts or souls any different? That is the point. - if it's real, it should be clear to everyone, not just those who *think* they experience the phenomena. If you can't prove it, it might as well not have happened.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 A few decades ago blackholes were only a theory. Some astronomers and astrophysicts laughed at the idea of such a bizarre thing. It's not really a theory anymore.........science readily accepts that they exist but no one has ever seen one. In fact you can never see one because of their very nature but most scientists will tell you that they are real. Just something to think about.


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 7, 2010)

doc111 said:


> A few decades ago blackholes were only a theory. Some astronomers and astrophysicts laughed at the idea of such a bizarre thing. It's not really a theory anymore.........science readily accepts that they exist but no one has ever seen one. In fact you can never see one because of their very nature but most scientists will tell you that they are real. Just something to think about.



Things that don't exist and things that we can't _visually detect_ are two completely different things. We can detect black holes, there are measurements and observations.

There is NOTHING for ghosts or souls. Not a stitch.


----------



## mindphuk (Mar 7, 2010)

doc111 said:


> A few decades ago blackholes were only a theory. Some astronomers and astrophysicts laughed at the idea of such a bizarre thing. It's not really a theory anymore.........science readily accepts that they exist but no one has ever seen one. In fact you can never see one because of their very nature but most scientists will tell you that they are real. Just something to think about.


yet I can detail the empirical evidence that supports the existence of black holes here in this thread.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 7, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Things that don't exist and things that we can't _visually detect_ are two completely different things. We can detect black holes, there are measurements and observations.
> 
> There is NOTHING for ghosts or souls. Not a stitch.


Who's to say what exists and what doesn't? We can't prove souls exist and a few decades ago we couldn't prove blackholes existed. Science is still in its infancy.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 7, 2010)

doc111 said:


> Who's to say what exists and what doesn't? We can't prove souls exist and a few decades ago we couldn't prove blackholes existed. Science is still in its infancy.


The difference is there was scientific evidence for black holes.
The concept of black holes was derived from evidence of objects that were warping space where nothing could be seen. 
So the data was examined extensively.

Souls are a mythical construct back from the time when people were still arguing over what they were going to call the Gods they were making up.
The concept is not based on evidence, nor is there any evidence to support it. So whatever you want to say about souls, it has no basis in fact or evidence but is purely supposition whose only backing is in religious mythology.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 7, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Things that don't exist and things that we can't _visually detect_ are two completely different things. We can detect black holes, there are measurements and observations.
> 
> There is NOTHING for ghosts or souls. Not a stitch.


Don't forget the part where it was claimed that the soul is 21 grams!

If it has mass, it's detectable, measurable, and testable.

Don't you love people with no grasp of the natural world?


----------



## doc111 (Mar 7, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> The difference is there was scientific evidence for black holes.
> The concept of black holes was derived from evidence of objects that were warping space where nothing could be seen.
> So the data was examined extensively.
> 
> ...


Has science tackled "souls" yet? I have no idea if I have a soul or not but I'm typically arrogant as most humans tend to be so I feel like there is "more" than what we can See, smell, touch, measure or quantify. I aren't smart like you mr morgentaler but I gots me sum edumucation too.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 7, 2010)

doc111 said:


> Has science tackled "souls" yet? I have no idea if I have a soul or not but I'm typically arrogant as most humans tend to be so I feel like there is "more" than what we can See, smell, touch, measure or quantify. I aren't smart like you mr morgentaler but I gots me sum edumucation too.


Feel like there's more than you can sense all you want.

But once you pull something out of imagination, stick a name on it, start to define it and give it special properties, and attach it to other mythological constructs without any evidence for it puts you right in the camp with the folks who think demons cause illness.

If you feel that you can provide evidence that would indicate the presence of said object without directly observing the object then do so.

That's how other theoretical constructs became fact.

Without the evidence it's just another lame Stephen King novel.


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 7, 2010)

doc111 said:


> Has science tackled "souls" yet? I have no idea if I have a soul or not but I'm typically arrogant as most humans tend to be so I feel like there is "more" than what we can See, smell, touch, measure or quantify. I aren't smart like you mr morgentaler but I gots me sum edumucation too.



Why would you "feel" like there is more than what we can detect with our senses? 

Why does this matter? If we can't detect it, doesn't that essentially mean it's not real?

What is your definition for _non-existence_? 

That might seem like an odd question to answer, but I'm just wondering what your criteria for something being _real_ is?


----------



## shnkrmn (Mar 7, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Feel like there's more than you can sense all you want. That's how other theoretical constructs became fact.



Decontextualizing because I can.


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Mar 8, 2010)

Thousands of scientists lied to the entire world about something like global warming, just to give a recent example. Do you really think the discovery of proof of the existence of something like ghosts, souls, etc would be broadcasted to the public?

If anything they would try to hide it even more after they discovered it to be true and hide any ways to detect that theyre real. Same thing with aliens, demons, etc anything like that. People are taught to think all of that type of stuff is a joke or myth and only believe whats "officially" released, by the same people who are hiding it from them at that. The system is set up like that from the day youre born, some people think for themselves and dont believe every little thing theyre told.

There are hundreds of people who have tried to come out to the public with proof of these things. Most of the more serious ones have been killed, died 'mysteriously', especially in cases involving proof of intelligent alien life. People are followed constantly, under surveillance, made out to be crazy or have their lives/credibility ruined, etc. Ive seen it happen myself.

Very few of the experiences I had could be explained any other way. The fact that most come out to be true will make you go crazy since these things arent supposed to exist. Ive went through and investigated almost all of the more serious experiences that I had and none of them could be explained in any 'normal' way. Im not the type of person to just hear a bump in the night and think "ghost!" or see a light in the sky and think "aliens!". I have a life and dont think about this stuff 24/7 but theres not really a way to get away from it when these things continue to happen randomly. I tried my hardest in the past to forget about it or become ignorant and put the experiences off as nothing. Its impossible, the fact is that these things do exist and the experiences were very real. Thats the reality its no use staying in denial.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 8, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Feel like there's more than you can sense all you want.
> 
> But once you pull something out of imagination, stick a name on it, start to define it and give it special properties, and attach it to other mythological constructs without any evidence for it puts you right in the camp with the folks who think demons cause illness.
> 
> ...


I'm not trying to sell anyone on "souls". It doesn't matter to me what you believe. I'm not some evangelist trying to preach fire and brimstone to fear you into believing in the divine. I've already said numerous times that I'm not religious and I don't know if there's more. I feel like there may be. What's wrong with that. I don't go around saying demons are causing illness. Ridicule me all you want. It's not going to change my feelings or beliefs. I just think it's funny how closed minded some of you guys are. You leave no room for the possibility of souls or gods or afterlife. Maybe none of it exists, I don't know. I don't go to church and I don't believe a lot of the crap being put out by religion. My whole point is just because science hasn't been able to prove something exists doesn't mean it doesn't exist. That's all I'm saying. 



PadawanBater said:


> Why would you "feel" like there is more than what we can detect with our senses?
> 
> Why does this matter? If we can't detect it, doesn't that essentially mean it's not real?
> 
> ...


I don't think it does matter........or it matters a lot. I don't go around "defining" things. I don't work for webster's and I'm not a scientist. I know what I've experienced. I've been through a long period where I was atheist. I've been to war, I've seen hundreds, maybe even thousands of people die. When you watch another human die in horrible ways it changes something in you. Call it fear of death, call it whatever you want. As I said to morgen, I don't care what you believe but you guys paint everything in black and white............I don't believe it's that simple. I try to keep an open mind and I damn sure don't go around trying to ridicule people for their beliefs (and some surely deserve it). Mine come from my experiences in life, not a minister or a preacher or an Imam. Perhaps I am wrong. Only time will tell.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 8, 2010)

shnkrmn said:


> Decontextualizing because I can.


Except that the phrase you made it into is incorrect.

A theoretical construct is based on evidence. Not on things you imagine from lack of evidence.

Theories aren't just guesses or wild shots in the dark. They're what happens when a hypothesis grows up after being well fed by science.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 8, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> Thousands of scientists lied to the entire world about something like global warming, just to give a recent example. Do you really think the discovery of proof of the existence of something like ghosts, souls, etc would be broadcasted to the public?


Thousands of journalists lied...

And then you went 'full retarded'.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 8, 2010)

So if your neighbor likes to tell you about the little blue man in the medicine cabinet that tells him about the NWO conspiracy and protects him from the aliens, do you keep an open mind to him or do you say "Whoa, he's fucking nuts."

If he invites you in and you see a little apartment layout inside the guys medicine cabinet, with working amenities to scale, and an inch tall dog running around barking, do you start to think there might be something to the claim?

Nobody has shown the inch tall dog yet.
They're still standing in your doorway saying "He's real, and only I can see him."

If you want to say we can't discount souls "just because" then we can't discount anything, ever.

Except there's no more support for the concept of a soul then there is for an afterlife, or ghosts, or Barney being a real walking, talking, plush toy imbued with the memories of Ed Gein.






doc111 said:


> I'm not trying to sell anyone on "souls". It doesn't matter to me what you believe. I'm not some evangelist trying to preach fire and brimstone to fear you into believing in the divine. I've already said numerous times that I'm not religious and I don't know if there's more. I feel like there may be. What's wrong with that. I don't go around saying demons are causing illness. Ridicule me all you want. It's not going to change my feelings or beliefs. I just think it's funny how closed minded some of you guys are. You leave no room for the...


----------



## doc111 (Mar 8, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> So if your neighbor likes to tell you about the little blue man in the medicine cabinet that tells him about the NWO conspiracy and protects him from the aliens, do you keep an open mind to him or do you say "Whoa, he's fucking nuts."
> 
> If he invites you in and you see a little apartment layout inside the guys medicine cabinet, with working amenities to scale, and an inch tall dog running around barking, do you start to think there might be something to the claim?
> 
> ...


I love your little analogies! Well, I'll tell you what I wouldn't do. I wouldn't ridicule him. If he believes he has a little blue man in his medicine cabinet...............oh well. As long as he's not a danger to himself or anyone else I don't see a problem with his "belief". That being said, I don't think we are talking about the same thing here. You are talking about something that sounds like a mental illness as opposed to something millions, probably billions of people believe in. It's cool if you want to be mr. analytical and need to see proof of everything. I'm assuming you haven't been on this earth for a very long time and I am also assuming you haven't seen everything. Are these assumptions correct? If so then maybe try opening your mind. You've got to have some degree of faith that the scientists you rely on so heavily aren't lying to you. Human beings tend to do that a lot. Scientists are human beings last I checked. Case in point, global warming.


----------



## shnkrmn (Mar 8, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Except that the phrase you made it into is incorrect.
> 
> A theoretical construct is based on evidence. Not on things you imagine from lack of evidence.
> 
> Theories aren't just guesses or wild shots in the dark. They're what happens when a hypothesis grows up after being well fed by science.



Right you are! That's what quoting out of context is great for! Repeated often enough and you get sincere statements like 

"Thousands of scientists lied to the entire world about something like global warming, just to give a recent example."


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 8, 2010)

doc111 said:


> Scientists are human beings last I checked. Case in point, global warming.


Do tell about this case of yours?

I suppose you actually frequent the science sites that actually discuss the issues, instead of just reading the newspaper reports.

I've interned at a newspaper. If you think you're getting facts from reporters, you're sadly mistaken.

Reporters take sound bites and sensationalize them just enough to make someone want to buy the product so that the newspaper can sell advertising.

The trend of global warming, though slight, is real. Whether it's anthropogenic in nature is under debate. 

If you see any media format start throwing around the words "climate change" and "controversy", back away from them. As they do not understand the difference between changing climate (climate is ALWAYS changing) and the global warming debate.

If there is any deception involved in the 'global warming' issue, look toward the media and the spin doctors on both sides. Al Gore is just as much twisting the screws on the facts as anyone else, but that doesn't detract from the science indicating that there is a 30 year warming trend that should raise concern.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 8, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Do tell about this case of yours?
> 
> I suppose you actually frequent the science sites that actually discuss the issues, instead of just reading the newspaper reports.
> 
> ...


My point was pretty simple..........facts can be easily manipulated. How often are they caught? I totally agree with your assertions on global warming. I was in the fire service for 15 years. I dealt with the media all the time. I know full well how often they get it wrong as well as how substantive the content. 

We also tend to forget that we have only begun to scratch the surface of what science has yet to discover. Science is quite literally brand spankin' new. It's not without flaws as we are not without flaws. I believe it can never be without flaws as we can never be without flaws. You so firmly base all of your understanding and knowledge on a foundation which is rife with its own cracks...........so to speak. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a science hater. In fact I'm quite the opposite. I love science. I voraciously devour as much information as my little brain can assimilate. But I have to constantly remind myself that science isn't perfect either.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 8, 2010)

Not as new as you might think.

Ibn al-Haytham was utilizing scientific methodology 1000 years ago.

Galileo refined and standardized it 500 years later.

But in that 1000 years there's nothing to substantiate a soul, that consciousness is any more than a biochemical process, or that an afterlife exists. Never mind that X number of people believe souls to be real. If numbers mattered, the geocentric view of the universe would have been correct.
Should we accept the possibility of the soul with any more consideration than the possbility of unicorns, lycanthropes, and dragons?
At least dragon myth can be attributed to dinosaur fossils, unicorns to narwhal horns, and lycanthropes to porphyria.
The concept of the soul goes well with the carrot-and-stick philosophy of religion (you give now, we give back when you're dead) but is unsupported outside of religion. And religion is not exactly concerned with facts.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 8, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Not as new as you might think.
> 
> Ibn al-Haytham was utilizing scientific methodology 1000 years ago.
> 
> ...


Even if science is a thousand years old that is still very young. Our short life span makes it seem long but you should know this. Bacteria weren't discovered until the late 1600's and viruses weren't discovered until the late 1800's, yet they were still making us sick long before we knew what they were or that they even existed. I honestly don't know if any serious scientific work has been done to see if humans have a "soul". I find it quite interesting how you keep coming back to religion. It seems as if you think that anyone who believes they have a "soul" must be religious. I don't associate the two although I understand that most religions believe in "souls" as well. 

On a somewhat related note, I'm interested in what has caused this disdain for all things religious or spirtual. I imagine some Freudian catastrophe from your childhood may be the culprit. I think I understand your hardcore logic and reasoning, I just don't get your closedmindedness. Aren't most stoners the opposite?


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 8, 2010)

Dude, Doc, what's the difference between being "close minded" and "skeptical" to you? 

Also, you keep mentioning that scientists have flaws because they're only human. I totally agree with you - but the scientific method does not. It is essentially flawless. It is highly unlikely for bad science to be accepted by thousands of scientists as one of them would figure out what is wrong. If thousands of scientists cannot figure out what is wrong with something, it tends to be good science.

So while your observation that people can fuck up couldn't be more correct, science itself is golden. The system we've designed is exactly for that reason. Back in the day before scientists got together and started keeping track of everything they knew they needed to devise a system where human error doesn't play a part because that could seriously fuck up the results. Thus peer review and corroboration were born. 

There is no faith required in accepting the scientific facts. You don't need faith to be sure that the scientists aren't lying to you because their findings have been scrutinized and checked and rechecked over and over and over again by thousands of people much smarter than me who are specifically interested in finding errors in the work. 

All this without even touching on the implications of predictability science has to offer. -if I can accurately predict something is going to happen - that's science. How else could you explain it, because I can assure you, no human beings are capable of telling the future.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 8, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Dude, Doc, what's the difference between being "close minded" and "skeptical" to you?
> 
> Also, you keep mentioning that scientists have flaws because they're only human. I totally agree with you - but the scientific method does not. It is essentially flawless. It is highly unlikely for bad science to be accepted by thousands of scientists as one of them would figure out what is wrong. If thousands of scientists cannot figure out what is wrong with something, it tends to be good science.
> 
> ...


So are you saying that science has solved all the mysteries? We've seen everything there is in the universe and we have all the answers as a species? The scientific method may not be flawed by definition but you have humans carrying out said method which adds flawed into the equation. Until robots are doing all of our research it's all potentially flawed. Even then are robots perfect? Hardly. All we can do as laypeople is trust the articles. Trust the data. Trust the scientists. We simply don't have the time and resources to individually verify everything. Some things which were once thought to be true because science said so have turned out to be wrong. You can't separate the science from the scientist therefore it's all potentially flawed. 

I define skepticism as "I don't know if it's true but I leave room for the possibility". 

I define closedmindedness as "It's not true if I cant touch, smell, see, taste, measure or quantify it."

You're a smart dude I can see that but there are more bizarre things on this planet which science cannot or has not been able to explain.........can't explain! There are even more bizarre things awaiting us out in the universe. Bizarre beyond our wildest imaginations, I believe. I know you're young and I don't pretend to know what experiences you've had but trust me my friend, the more you learn, the more you will realize you don't know. Weird how that works. Trust me, the quest for knowledge and truth is an unending one. We will never have all the answers. It's just not possible. I just hate seeing someone as obviously smart as yourself being so closedminded about some things.


----------



## mindphuk (Mar 8, 2010)

doc111 said:


> So are you saying that science has solved all the mysteries? We've seen everything there is in the universe and we have all the answers as a species? The scientific method may not be flawed by definition but you have humans carrying out said method which adds flawed into the equation. Until robots are doing all of our research it's all potentially flawed. Even then are robots perfect? Hardly. All we can do as laypeople is trust the articles. Trust the data. Trust the scientists. We simply don't have the time and resources to individually verify everything. Some things which were once thought to be true because science said so have turned out to be wrong. You can't separate the science from the scientist therefore it's all potentially flawed.
> 
> I define skepticism as "I don't know if it's true but I leave room for the possibility".
> 
> ...


First off, what is a soul according to you? Yes, there are many things in this world we don't yet understand but the idea of a soul did not come about because of evidence but is a philosophical/theological construct. If something exists but does not affect the material world in any way, can you really say it exists? What is existence? We don't need to observe or measure something directly, science is very good at understanding things even through indirect observations, i.e. we can't detect it but we can see it's impact on the cosmos. 

In his book, A Demon Haunted World, Dr. Carl Sagan relates the story of the invisible fire-breathing dragon living in his garage. He asks, "what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true."

Right now the soul is the dragon. Until you come up with something that the soul does that cannot be explained by more conventional means, it is worthless. Granted, a soul might very well exist but if it does nothing, then it's existence is inconsequential. 

BTW, you might consider reading Sagan's book as it explains what skepticism is. 
Sagan presents a set of tools for skeptical thinking which he calls the "baloney detection kit". Skeptical thinking consists both of constructing a reasoned argument and recognizing a fallacious or fraudulent one. In order to identify a fallacious argument, Sagan suggests the employment of such tools as independent confirmation of facts, quantification and the use of Occam's razor. Sagan's "baloney detection kit" also provides tools for detecting "the most common fallacies of logic and rhetoric", such as argument from authority and statistics of small numbers. Through these tools, Sagan argues the benefits of a critical mind and the self-correcting nature of science can take place.​From wikipedia:
Contemporary *skepticism* (or *scepticism*) is loosely used to denote any questioning attitude,[1] or some *degree of doubt regarding claims that are elsewhere taken for granted*.[2]
The word _skepticism_ can characterize a position on a single claim, but in scholastic circles more frequently describes a lasting mind-set. Skepticism is an approach to accepting, rejecting, or suspending judgment on new information that requires the new information to be well supported by argument or evidence.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 8, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> First off, what is a soul according to you? Yes, there are many things in this world we don't yet understand but the idea of a soul did not come about because of evidence but is a philosophical/theological construct. If something exists but does not affect the material world in any way, can you really say it exists? What is existence? We don't need to observe or measure something directly, science is very good at understanding things even through indirect observations, i.e. we can't detect it but we can see it's impact on the cosmos.
> 
> In his book, A Demon Haunted World, Dr. Carl Sagan relates the story of the invisible fire-breathing dragon living in his garage. He asks, "what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true."
> 
> ...


I've read all of Sagan's work. Occam's razor is sometimes wrong, as demonstrated in the fictitious but otherwise entertaining movie Contact. I honestly don't care if any of you believe in the occult or the mystical. I don't care if you buy into religion or spirituality. The points I've made in this thread stand. We could spend the rest of eternity debating what a soul is or do they exist but I have much work to do in the garden, so enjoy this discussion and stick to your hardcore logic and reason.


----------



## Philly_Buddah (Mar 8, 2010)

morgentaler said:


> Thousands of journalists lied...
> 
> And then you went 'full retarded'.


Thousands of scientists lied.

Im curious to know what part of my posts are "full retarded" since everything I said in it was true. I also didnt know it was possible for a person with an IQ over 150 to even go "full retarded".

What I do see that I consider pathetic is 3-4 posters in this thread that go around to every thread like this just to debunk and disprove everyone while continuously disrespecting them and their beliefs while nitpicking every little word said. I dont believe in god like the christians do, Ive done research and I have plenty of arguments against it along with having absolutely no proof of a god from personal experience, yet you dont see me wasting all my time going all over the internet disrespecting people and their beliefs just because I dont believe in it.

You try to put everyone who believes in this off as crazy or incredibly gullible while you yourself are completely close minded and unfairly hold your basket of BS "knowledge" higher than everyone elses.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Mar 8, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> Thousands of scientists lied.
> 
> Im curious to know what part of my posts are "full retarded" since everything I said in it was true. I also didnt know it was possible for a person with an IQ over 150 to even go "full retarded".
> 
> ...


I believe its "knitpicking".

Peace


----------



## PadawanBater (Mar 9, 2010)

Philly_Buddah said:


> Thousands of scientists lied.


This has been a repeated claim here lately. To this I say; OK, but what about the ones that didn't...? Do we disregard the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of individually collected pieces of data by legitimate scientists? 

If you have 10 scientists, and one of them lies, do you then disregard the other 9 scientists work? Is all of _science_? 

This is what you guys are doing with your denial of climate change. Same thing the creationists do with evolution... Mentioned that to Cracker but I guess he didn't get the analogy...  



> What I do see that I consider pathetic is 3-4 posters in this thread that go around to every thread like this just to debunk and disprove everyone while continuously *disrespecting them and their beliefs* while nitpicking every little word said.


Make sure you realize the distinction... I never disrespect people _because of their beliefs,_ I disrespect them for holding such irrational beliefs that shape other aspects of their personality in negative ways. If I held a belief that said it's OK (encouraged in fact) to hate the "lifestyle" of anyone who listens to country music, should that belief be respected? 

The same logic applies to religious beliefs. In short, they don't deserve respect.



> I dont believe in god like the christians do, Ive done research and I have plenty of arguments against it along with having absolutely no proof of a god from personal experience, yet you dont see me wasting all my time going all over the internet disrespecting people and their beliefs just because I dont believe in it.


That's not the reason I do it. I visit forums like this and start these kinds of threads because they need to be started, people need to hear it. Our civilization has gone on too long with these insane beliefs getting passively passed off as moral and good and not to be touched, shaping the hearts and minds (for the much worse) of everyone it poisoned along the way...


----------



## greensister (Mar 9, 2010)

Mr.KushMan said:


> Well if you want to pull thermodynamics into this then you would know that things get more complex not less complex. For a perception to go from brilliant colors and sounds to nothing disobeys a law of entropy.
> 
> Einstein said, that math can't describe reality, only its quantities. This should be taken in, as it truly captures the power of perception, that its just to perfect. What we see isn't truly what is being measured, but an interpretation of it.
> 
> Peace


Einstien was also jewish, a very prminative and misogynistic monotheistic superstition. He may have known math and physics, but didnt know crap when it came to the afterlife. Just like everyone else.

What we percieve as complex, is simple in the universal context and vice versa. Order is chaos. Its all about perception. I actually exist a few seconds in the future, but im stuck where i am in what is called the present. Stupid shearing of the 4th dimension. Where did all my waves of probibility go?


----------



## greensister (Mar 9, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> Personal experience and delusion are two different things.
> 
> I don't mean to offend anyone, but how could you guys possibly say something exists without any evidence to support it? Don't you see how absurd that is?
> 
> ...


 
You cannot prove a negative.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 9, 2010)

PadawanBater said:


> This has been a repeated claim here lately. To this I say; OK, but what about the ones that didn't...? Do we disregard the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of individually collected pieces of data by legitimate scientists?
> 
> If you have 10 scientists, and one of them lies, do you then disregard the other 9 scientists work? Is all of _science_?
> 
> ...


Dude you're missing the point.  Science has not and cannot answer all of life's mysteries. Yes, we know that some scientists mislead, lied to, stretched the truth, whatever you want to call it. We have no idea how many other scientists have fudged their data. We can't be certain. You're probably correct that most of it is reliable but you still miss the point that science hasn't tackled every mystery. Even the ones that they have tackled, have they been extremely thorough and did they get it right. Peer review isn't perfect either bro. You keep acting like science is the end all be all. Modern science has been around for about a thousand years as morgentaler enlightened us in an earlier post. That isn't a very long time. There is still so much that science hasn't even touched. Things they haven't even begun to researched yet. You can go around disrespecting other people's beliefs and I can tell you what is going to happen. You are going to immediately turn people off and they won't even listen to what you have to say. You say you come to these forums and start threads like these because "they need to be started". If you are just assaulting peoples most intimate beliefs then you will accomplish nothing except belittling and pissing off the people whose minds you wish to change. Human nature bro, human nature. Keep in mind how you would feel when someone tells you your belief system is what's wrong with the world and is poisoning today's society. You would immediately shut down and wouldn't hear a word being said.


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 9, 2010)

Let's be clear about this.

Science CANNOT prove or disprove religion. The two systems do not connect in any way.

Science deals with the observable and testable.

Religion is simply a made up fantasy created by man, who is still quite primitive. You either believe the fantasy or you don't.

No one will berate you or think less of you (well not too much anyway) if you believe the fantasy. I can see where it may be a comfort in dealing with a chaotic and violent planet. 

It's when you tell me that it is TRUE. Then I have a problem with you. Keep it to yourself. 

It is the INSISTENCE of the majority of the religious that causes the trouble. 

Christianity unfortunately is a cult religion. Therein lies the problem.


----------



## shnkrmn (Mar 9, 2010)

Perhaps we should start a new thread discussing the Enlightenment and its consequences. If we dwell on the positive results of human endeavour freed from the blinders of theology we can better illustrate the advantages of freedom from religion without dwelling so much on the negative.


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 9, 2010)

I can honestly say that this country utilized G*D in it's forming and it worked. 

At some point man is either going to grow up, or become extinct.

If we do make it to the next level, it will be because we have dropped the myth and are able to deal with the reality of our existence here. 

It will not be a smooth transition. Enlightenment is not a light switch. More like a dimmer switch. I can see the light becoming stronger, but setbacks will be many. 

Blood will be spilled.

Not all will give up the fantasy without a fight.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 9, 2010)

CrackerJax said:


> Let's be clear about this.
> 
> Science CANNOT prove or disprove religion. The two systems do not connect in any way.
> 
> ...


I think a few individuals here keep misunderstanding my intent here. I am not religious. I don't go to church. I don't know if there is a soul, a god or an afterlife. What I do know is that science is not perfect. It's far from it yet some people want to act like "If science says it's true then it must be". That seems extremely closedminded to me. It also seems like people are saying that if something can't be quantified it doesn't exist. I agree that organized religion has its problems and I see the hypocrisy. I used this analogy in an earlier post and I think it's a good one: We hand't discovered viruses until the late 1880's yet they were making us sick since the first humans stood erect. For millenia humans speculated on the causes of illness but tiny little microorganisms probably weren't suspected until close to the time of their discovery. There is this overwhelming arrogance which seems to suggest we have acheived ultimate knowledge and wisdom as a species. How can we be so blind to see that we have only scratched the surface. The most exciting time for scientific discovery has yet to come. Who knows what discoveries are yet to be made that could change our entire view on life and our place in the cosmos? That's all I'm saying.


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 9, 2010)

What is true? Is there any way to actually know?

It is science however that is getting answers, not religion. Religion equals stagnation. It says it already HAS the answers, so I think you can have empathy with my position & response to that Doc.  You know me well enough.

I don't care what the issue is....politics, economics, social,religion .... if you don't know the ABC'S of something, it's not kosher to fill in X,Y,Z. At least not if you want to be a serious person. Some ppl don't want to be serious, I recognize that. I'm not talking about you Doc. I find you to be a thoughtful person. The church is geared to sweep up those ppl however and galvanize them into a tool for their own purposes. That I do have a problem with...very much so.

I'll say this. I'm not against religion. I am against ORGANIZED religion. I am against cults. Religions that stay within themselves and who don't have a recruitment desire of the world's population are FINE by me (think Buddhism or Judaism).

That's all I'm saying.


----------



## morgentaler (Mar 9, 2010)

Religion is going to suffer huge losses much sooner than you think.

Europe has already seen a substantial decrease in those who identify as religious. Why? Because the fastest cure for religion is exposure to other religions.

In a monolithic religious culture, it sustains itself by everyone patting each other on the back and saying "Aren't you awesome for believing the same unsubstantiated bullshit I believe?"

But when you have a dozen of those factions all trying to win people over, those who have analytical skills see the con for what it is.

And now we have the internet, which is increasing information density at a radical speed and making alternative viewpoints available to everyone - even those entrenched in Christian and Muslim strongholds.

Even though there has only been a small shift in percentage point growth toward atheism in both religions in the past decade, it's not statistically insignificant when you see that the shift has followed the propagation of internet culture starting in the mid-nineties.

The kids born after 1995 are going to be much, much harder for religion to keep a leash on.

As a side note, I heard an excellent argument yesterday, on the benefits of repealing the separation of church and state. As soon as church and state become a monolithic entity, the churches will set upon each other like rabid dogs and do the job of destroying themselves rather quickly.

Makes one almost consider supporting it.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 9, 2010)

CrackerJax said:


> What is true? Is there any way to actually know?
> 
> It is science however that is getting answers, not religion. Religion equals stagnation. It says it already HAS the answers, so I think you can have empathy with my position & response to that Doc.  You know me well enough.
> 
> ...


I agree with you that organized religion can be problematic (that's an understatement as well) and I never said religion provides answers in the same manner as science. We know that to be utterly false. Some have very logical and pragmatic minds while some are very superstitious. I think that trying to reason with religious zealots is a lot like reasoning with an anvil. I have met enough of these folks in my life to understand this simple truth: they have their faith and that is all they need. No amount of logic and reason is going to change these folks. I guess if eliminating religion from the world is the aim of some folks.................I say good luck; you're gonna need it. 



morgentaler said:


> Religion is going to suffer huge losses much sooner than you think.
> 
> Europe has already seen a substantial decrease in those who identify as religious. Why? Because the fastest cure for religion is exposure to other religions.
> 
> ...


Ya know what, maybe you are right. I disagree with most of your assertions but that's cool. It's part of what makes the world the amazing place that it is. The world is much larger than most of us can imagine (especially those who have never left their little habitat). The task ahead of you is a daunting one and I wouldn't try to tackle it but if eliminating religion is your aim, I wish the best of luck to you as well. You're gonna need it. 

Peace!


----------



## CrackerJax (Mar 9, 2010)

doc111 said:


> I agree with you that organized religion can be problematic (that's an understatement as well) and I never said religion provides answers in the same manner as science. We know that to be utterly false. Some have very logical and pragmatic minds while some are very superstitious. I think that trying to reason with religious zealots is a lot like reasoning with an anvil. I have met enough of these folks in my life to understand this simple truth: they have their faith and that is all they need. No amount of logic and reason is going to change these folks. I guess if eliminating religion from the world is the aim of some folks.................I say good luck; you're gonna need it.
> 
> Peace!


I agree. That's why i have often said that IF man makes to the next level, it will be without religion/myth. 

We may not make it, that is true enough.


----------



## mindphuk (Mar 9, 2010)

doc111 said:


> I've read all of Sagan's work. Occam's razor is sometimes wrong, as demonstrated in the fictitious but otherwise entertaining movie Contact. I honestly don't care if any of you believe in the occult or the mystical. I don't care if you buy into religion or spirituality. The points I've made in this thread stand. We could spend the rest of eternity debating what a soul is or do they exist but I have much work to do in the garden, so enjoy this discussion and stick to your hardcore logic and reason.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 10, 2010)

mindphuk said:


>


I would say that's a pretty good description of me.


----------



## fulbright (Mar 10, 2010)

doc111 said:


> I would say that's a pretty good description of me.


I would say your the one being called on bullshit.


----------



## doc111 (Mar 10, 2010)

fulbright said:


> I would say your the one being called on bullshit.


Could you please elaborate? I am not making any outrageous claims that I am aware of. Most of the people who have posted in this thread know me to be a skeptic so I'm taking it that way, but if you see something I don't I'd love to hear your take.


----------

