|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:06 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:11 pm
 |
|
|
|
CuAnnan TeaDidikai Quote: Only from outside a system can you see the system I contest this assertion on the grounds that living within the ecosystem allows me to observe the ecosystem. Actually, she's right. No self-referential system can contain all of the information needed to describe it.
The only justification I can currently see for it is an exclusion of self examination within the system or a disintegrated world view.
Could you explain it please? |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:52 pm
|
|
|
 |
TeaDidikai CuAnnan TeaDidikai Quote: Only from outside a system can you see the system I contest this assertion on the grounds that living within the ecosystem allows me to observe the ecosystem. Actually, she's right. No self-referential system can contain all of the information needed to describe it. This reads as ignosticism and I'm not seeing any demonstration as to why it is accurate. The only justification I can currently see for it is an exclusion of self examination within the system or a disintegrated world view. Could you explain it please?
I don't mean to be an antrho hound, but this is kind of the point of ethnography. An edic perspective allows you to see a lot of things you can't with an emic one, and vice-versa. Different subjects, of course, but similar theory. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:00 pm
|
|
|
|
demisara TeaDidikai CuAnnan TeaDidikai Quote: Only from outside a system can you see the system I contest this assertion on the grounds that living within the ecosystem allows me to observe the ecosystem. Actually, she's right. No self-referential system can contain all of the information needed to describe it. This reads as ignosticism and I'm not seeing any demonstration as to why it is accurate. The only justification I can currently see for it is an exclusion of self examination within the system or a disintegrated world view. Could you explain it please? I don't mean to be an antrho hound, but this is kind of the point of ethnography. An edic perspective allows you to see a lot of things you can't with an emic one, and vice-versa. Different subjects, of course, but similar theory.
Erm....*whoosh*
Could you dumb it down a bit? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 1:57 am
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai Why would how mortals perceive and define a being determine it's existence?
I don't believe in a difference between the dead and the living accept the form and its relationship to like forms. This means I don't believe what most people would consider death to be death.
A definition is a conceptualization. As a concept what people were telling me was god didn't make sense. It contradicted itself. As I believe in a rational universe I couldn't believe in there definition and still feel as if I was a rational being.
Though if you break it down even further reality is illusory, 0=1 etc.etc.
(all knowing all powerful creator of everything who some how gave us free will and still knows what we are doing anyways and all that christian stuff)
Quote: Why would your personal beliefs limit the ability of others?
My personal beliefs do not limit the beliefs of others but logic has its own mandates. My beliefs only follow logic as I see it thus are a belief. If you want to go into theory of knowledge I can but its a b***h. I do not believe that all would agree with me thus I state it as a belief and thus allow for people to dispute me without seeming pompous or in anyway making the claim that I Do limit others or that it is completely impossible.
By stating that what I am saying is a belief instead of this is reality I am thus not making the statement your trying to make me say at all.
Logically I see no way for a being to be all knowing given a few other stipulations such as there being a meaning to movement... the world is not a complete waste of time... etc. etc.
Quote: I contest this assertion on the grounds that living within the ecosystem allows me to observe the ecosystem.
I contest this statement by saying that your perception of that which you are a part of is flawed. Its the Observer affect it ruins everything. Look it up. Its all mixed in with quantum mechanics. While you observe you also affect thus what you are observing is never the same as what your observing. Your perception of it is also skewed and translated and altered by your personal bias's your will and desire. In a universe that is created by desire and dictated by it... this goes into alot of back information I don't feel like writting concerning one of the many views as to the possible composition of the universe... in anycase you alter your perception of your surroundings.
Quote: Which realms would these be? By what methods have these theories been tested and why are you using scientific terms to make your argument about that which is non-falsifiable sound better?
Some of my beliefs are based on quantum theory and other theories. As to Some of my beliefs are mostly observation and report. I did some extensive testing as to some of my beliefs. But if you Want me to break down my studies you Can if you want.
For the most part I did alot of testing of the Realms. The schema concerning existence that I use is based off of the world being a construct of
Will And Creativity/thought
I came up with it over time but I have found some pretty good evidence to support it since and I've found its been very popular in several traditions.
The belief stems from the concept that every individual is a soul... or a string of possibility/probability. This is also nick named a loci, or a point of reference. Each individual loci has a certain amount of ability to influence there surroundings. These over time develop thought or structure, structured associations based on will or desire and shaped by such. This belief system holds that souls or individual will would gradually construct a meaning to the universe and give it form. Some wills might have more ability to influence the surroundings then others thus having a stronger will or a larger loci or a larger thread of probability.
This view point is very useful in conceptualizing the creation of the universe as the construct of an individuals will (that would lay the base pattern, or the atomic pattern) yet still allow other wills to work through the pattern through certain vehicles or bodies.
Each time a certain amount of energy (the strings of probability) has the same base pattern and consistently interacts with other strings creating a similar base pattern this would be a realm.
The actual testing for this has been mostly the affirmation of other people seeing these realms and various tests concerning interaction with the realms. As far as I am aware to interact with a realm you would have to adjust your base pattern to the realm.
The akashic records, the spiritual plain, all that stuff all names for the same place just each place is organized differently and has a different pattern and construction. Some are denser then others. So those are the realms
I performed various color tests to affirm the persons sight who were observing these realms.
Quote: Please do not project. I often know when people lie, thank you.
Your god then... all knowing immortal omnipotent being?
I'm sure you know whether or not I'm lying now... or of course you are capable of perfect knowledge?
You can Guess and be very accurate... but knowledge to me is something completely different which is generally unattainable. You can get very close to obtaining it though.
We are talking about Beliefs right? I didn't think we were supposed to dissect people's beliefs being all PG and respectful like. Though I don't know... I always find it fun.
Quote: Who really bases their care on our concept of harm when applied to the worshipers. If someone breaks a covenant and is harmed for it, they made their choice.
Who You said... WHY I believe I just said I did ^_^
Sometimes they are harmed without breaking any said convenant
Sometimes worshipers are duped... sometimes spirits pretend to be gods just to gain influence over a person and make there life hell. Plenty of people are duped by the fake phony angels who look like they're all made of light or are all powdery white. People are duped when caressed by nice feelings or promised grandiose things or even just wrong place wrong time hey look you get b***h slapped by something you can't see.
Quote: Perhaps those people shouldn't be trying to prey on spirits. stare
Almost every person I have met whether they know anything of spirits or not has probably at some point without there knowing had a spirit try to use them for energy. Its easier to pray on the oblivious or the deluded and I have to say plenty of practitioners get the brunt of this. They can open themselves to all sorts of things under the guise of spiritual advisors... and people blindly trust beings they know nothing about because its comforting to believe in something yet they can also be twisted by the spirits and changed slowly by their supposed protectors.
Quote: My problems stem from your internal contradictions more than anything else. As for the initial question, I likely would never have gotten past the first part of his statement, since after a couple of attempts at explaining the fallacies in play would have left me bored.
My problem with your response is that... its quite obvious that you didn't really seem to get what I was saying or the foundation for my beliefs and what I was basing them on.
As beliefs are very complex things that you would probably have to be well versed in to understand... and I added the disclaimer that you probably wouldn't understand if you weren't well versed in the whole spirit realm look at the world... I feel as if it was definitely a good idea to have that disclaimer there.
It was necessary. Though next time I will put the disclaimer at both the top and the bottom of the statement so that individuals who aren't versed in the subject don't get confused by my beliefs.
P.S. I talk the way I do because I've gone to college and I'm at heart an atheist thus I actually had to "prove" that this is the way things are before I even half excepted it.
I hear of things and I apply what knowledge I have of science to those things to try to find valid ways of testing them within the proper context. Like the realms can only be tested in the context of what the realms are. I'll provide some links latter concerning some of the subjects here... I'm quite tired now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:06 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:28 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:30 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:46 pm
|
|
|
|
demisara I don't mean to be an antrho hound, but this is kind of the point of ethnography. An edic perspective allows you to see a lot of things you can't with an emic one, and vice-versa. Different subjects, of course, but similar theory.
I think the further posts will help explain the position better.
CuAnnan TeaDidikai Could you explain it please? . I'm afraid I only just about grasp it with all the meds I'm on. Normally it makes perfect sense and I can go a good job explaining it. But right now?
That it would rely on either a disintegrated world view or ignore the self examination that would allow for the observations to become part of the larger context.
Ishtar Shakti I don't believe in a difference between the dead and the living accept the form and its relationship to like forms. This means I don't believe what most people would consider death to be death.
So, this portion of your position rests on your personal appeals to authority?
That you are somehow in a position wherein what you say becomes objective reality for no justification beyond you believe it?
Quote: A definition is a conceptualization.
Not always. In some cases, it is an expression of an observation. For example, blue is a refraction of light reflected at around 440–490 nm. (Folks correct me if my understanding of color science is off. That uni class was so long ago. gonk )
Quote: As a concept what people were telling me was god didn't make sense. It contradicted itself. As I believe in a rational universe I couldn't believe in there definition and still feel as if I was a rational being. Though if you break it down even further reality is illusory, 0=1 etc.etc. (all knowing all powerful creator of everything who some how gave us free will and still knows what we are doing anyways and all that christian stuff)
See, your inability to fathom something does not mean that this is not possible. Further- "what people were telling [you] was god" may not have been anything more than their unsupported personal opinion.
Quote: My personal beliefs do not limit the beliefs of others but logic has its own mandates.
Quote: My beliefs only follow logic as I see it thus are a belief.
Quote: If you want to go into theory of knowledge I can but its a b***h.
Quote: I do not believe that all would agree with me thus I state it as a belief and thus allow for people to dispute me without seeming pompous or in anyway making the claim that I Do limit others or that it is completely impossible. By stating that what I am saying is a belief instead of this is reality I am thus not making the statement your trying to make me say at all.
Which really isn't how things work around here.
Quote: Logically I see no way for a being to be all knowing given a few other stipulations such as there being a meaning to movement... the world is not a complete waste of time... etc. etc.
Again, you're arguing from ignorance. Your inability to fathom something does not make it impossible. And for the love of all things cute and fuzzy, stop abusing the word logic to make yourself look smart or credible. It's bordering on insulting.
Quote: I contest this statement by saying that your perception of that which you are a part of is flawed. Its the Observer affect it ruins everything. Look it up.
Quote: Its all mixed in with quantum mechanics. While you observe you also affect thus what you are observing is never the same as what your observing.
Quote: Your perception of it is also skewed and translated and altered by your personal bias's your will and desire.
Quote: In a universe that is created by desire and dictated by it... this goes into alot of back information I don't feel like writting concerning one of the many views as to the possible composition of the universe... in anycase you alter your perception of your surroundings.
Quote: Some of my beliefs are based on quantum theory and other theories. As to Some of my beliefs are mostly observation and report. I did some extensive testing as to some of my beliefs. But if you Want me to break down my studies you Can if you want. For the most part I did alot of testing of the Realms. The schema concerning existence that I use is based off of the world being a construct of Will And Creativity/thought I came up with it over time but I have found some pretty good evidence to support it since and I've found its been very popular in several traditions. The belief stems from the concept that every individual is a soul... or a string of possibility/probability. This is also nick named a loci, or a point of reference. Each individual loci has a certain amount of ability to influence there surroundings. These over time develop thought or structure, structured associations based on will or desire and shaped by such. This belief system holds that souls or individual will would gradually construct a meaning to the universe and give it form. Some wills might have more ability to influence the surroundings then others thus having a stronger will or a larger loci or a larger thread of probability. This view point is very useful in conceptualizing the creation of the universe as the construct of an individuals will (that would lay the base pattern, or the atomic pattern) yet still allow other wills to work through the pattern through certain vehicles or bodies. Each time a certain amount of energy (the strings of probability) has the same base pattern and consistently interacts with other strings creating a similar base pattern this would be a realm. The actual testing for this has been mostly the affirmation of other people seeing these realms and various tests concerning interaction with the realms. As far as I am aware to interact with a realm you would have to adjust your base pattern to the realm. The akashic records, the spiritual plain, all that stuff all names for the same place just each place is organized differently and has a different pattern and construction. Some are denser then others. So those are the realms I performed various color tests to affirm the persons sight who were observing these realms.
Quote: Your god then... all knowing immortal omnipotent being?
I said I can know when someone is lying. I made no mention of how I came into my knowledge. For example, I can observe the truth of a matter- for example, witness an action that a person then lies about to me. I thus know they are lying.
Your hasty generalization compounded by your inability to conceive of any instance where your limited perspective isn't enough is horribly flawed. Perhaps you should be more thoughtful about your claims.
I'm not going to dignify the rest of your absurd strawman.
Quote: You can Guess and be very accurate... but knowledge to me is something completely different which is generally unattainable.
Quote: We are talking about Beliefs right? I didn't think we were supposed to dissect people's beliefs being all PG and respectful like. Though I don't know... I always find it fun.
Welcome to The Rehab Center.
Your beliefs are not sacred cows.
And I have no respect for those who act in intellectual dishonesty- and those who act in error, while they are given a benefit of the doubt, are not beyond having their errors challenged.
Quote: Who You said... WHY I believe I just said I did ^_^ Sometimes they are harmed without breaking any said convenant
Quote: Sometimes worshipers are duped... sometimes spirits pretend to be gods just to gain influence over a person and make there life hell.
Quote: Plenty of people are duped by the fake phony angels who look like they're all made of light or are all powdery white.
Quote: People are duped when caressed by nice feelings or promised grandiose things or even just wrong place wrong time hey look you get b***h slapped by something you can't see.
Quote: lol... prey on spirits... I'm talking about people sitting in churches praying for the well being of there families. Worshiping a god asking said god to help them and offering up there will and there energy to that god.
Quote: Almost every person I have met whether they know anything of spirits or not has probably at some point without there knowing had a spirit try to use them for energy.
For some reason this strikes me more as a comment upon potential personal delusion or the quality of the individuals you associate with.
And just for shits and giggles, it reads as a biased sample.
Quote: Its easier to pray on the oblivious or the deluded and I have to say plenty of practitioners get the brunt of this.
Quote: My problem with your response is that... its quite obvious that you didn't really seem to get what I was saying or the foundation for my beliefs and what I was basing them on.
Quote: As beliefs are very complex things that you would probably have to be well versed in to understand... and I added the disclaimer that you probably wouldn't understand if you weren't well versed in the whole spirit realm look at the world... I feel as if it was definitely a good idea to have that disclaimer there. It was necessary. Though next time I will put the disclaimer at both the top and the bottom of the statement so that individuals who aren't versed in the subject don't get confused by my beliefs.
Quote: P.S. I talk the way I do because I've gone to college and I'm at heart an atheist thus I actually had to "prove" that this is the way things are before I even half excepted it.
Also, if you are hoisting this up as some kind of demonstration of authority, it doesn't work without proof of the validity of the education.
And for a minor personal suggestion, I recommend going back and taking a writing class and some formal logic.
Ishtar Shakti Specifically I believe in a Logical non Deterministic Universe Which many people would find to be a contradiction... but then this is a belief...
Quote: And Here... try to digest some Kant while your at it... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kant
And Plato was amazing for his era, but you'll pardon me if I don't hold his positions to be the end all be all of such philosophies.
Also- stop presenting that being an atheist has anything to do with half of the stuff you have posted. All atheism says is that you have a position on the existence of deities. Nothing more- nothing less. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:02 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:04 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:56 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:02 pm
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai Quote: I would be more inclined to state that it's simply intensely more difficult to observe a system from within, because elements can interact with you in ways that disrupt your observations (or you disrupt the system, damaging your observations' accuracy.) This is part of what I was trying to address with the comment about disintegrated systems as well. There are branches of science that look to have a complete lack of what they would call contamination. There are other world views that don't exclude the influence the observation generates by considering it contamination- integrated perspectives work with the basis that we don't live in a vacuum and build the model from there, allowing for commentary upon shifts within that which is studied from external influences.
But wouldn't there be some contexts wherein even your attempts to adjust your observation methods and/or models for your own effects/the system's effects on you would still be affected by these same things, further complicating the process and pushing the threshold further away?
Basically observational lateral moves for dealing with inaccuracies cuz the system touches even those moves and those moves disrupt things too.
Wow, even the summary was a ridiculous mouthful. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:42 pm
|
|
|
|
OMG I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.
You don't really actually argue much now do you and you only seem to be polite to people you know.
See all the little buzz words such as Seem
Nothing is actually asserted in my statement, and the first half is a question
Just because you didn't get something to begin with it pretty damn funny that you continue to do much of the same.
Quote: Why would how mortals perceive and define a being determine it's existence?
I never said that it would
Quote: Why would your personal beliefs limit the ability of others?
I never said this
Quote: I contest this assertion on the grounds that living within the ecosystem allows me to observe the ecosystem.
I ask for support. I ask for the validity of perception. I ask for you to prove that your observations are accurate.
Quote: Which realms would these be?
I explained this, I did not tell you to believe it. If you don't like my definition you don't have to accept it. I accept it because I've perceived it and other people have confirming my perception.
Quote: Please do not project. I often know when people lie, thank you.
I ask you to validate your knowledge and perception.
I ask you to tell me how I'm "projecting"
If anything you are projecting on me. You are inferring that I am projecting my inability on others while I would argue that you can never truly KNOW anything
Quote: Who really bases their care on our concept of harm when applied to the worshipers. If someone breaks a covenant and is harmed for it, they made their choice.
You asked WHO I answered I do
Quote: Perhaps those people shouldn't be trying to prey on spirits.
Talk about projecting XD
"a defense mechanism in which one attributes to others, one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or emotions"
You seem to do alot of this... I mean I keep seeing you do things then try to tell me I'm doing them.
I say something you tell me I mean something completely other then what I meant
It is interesting but really quite tedious. How about you reread what you write ^_^
Quote: So, this portion of your position rests on your personal appeals to authority? That you are somehow in a position wherein what you say becomes objective reality for no justification beyond you believe it?
When ever did I say that anything was ever true throughout my entire reply?
My words were specifically that people were contradicting themselves thus I didn't believe what they were saying
Also all words are concepts, all definitions are concepts because they are representations of things rather then the thing themselves. In this way all perception is a concept as it is a representation of an object not an object itself.
Quote: In some cases, it is an expression of an observation
And because its observed means its true?
It means that your Observation is true. Why would your observation be true. What makes your observation true. What is truth?
A person with schizophrenia may observe many things but others wouldn't consider there observations true. People can hear voices, or see things because they can't translate the information perfectly, accurately.
Light bounces off an object at a certain frequency. We run tests after test verifying, seconding, confirming, because our perception of events is true? Because we percieve the entirety of an event? Because we are even Capable of perceiving the entirety of event. We don't even perceive a fraction of what goes on in the world around us. We siphon through soo much information... and your going to argue that perception is the end all be all of existance. That its True, that you so flawed in your ability to retain information as you are could possibly Know all the tangents of existence
We use Multiple observers in order to verify information in order to make sure that Data is correct. That is what I used to test my information. This seemed like a better decision then what most people rely on, such as you and your own perception of events and Only your perception of events to know if someone is lying.
In this case you as a singular entity decided that someone is lying based solely on your perception. This seems like a really well thought out argument to you?
We use psuedo science constantly through out our lives to verify what we see hear and perceive because there is no way to know the actuality of existance. We rely on other people consistently and constantly to provide a context for how we see existance. We create illusory meanings and associations to items which have no basis accept through our societal frame work. All definitions are Personal things, they are our own conceptualizations of existence.
I use No Appeal to Authority. I don't even say that what I have seen is 100% accurate I just say it is more proof then any christian I have ever met has had.
As to your accusation that I used an argument from ignorance stop trying to misuse logic. I stated very explicitly that other peoples definitions contradicted each other and gave an example and rather then argue how the example Did not contradict itself you tell me that I am arguing that I am not creative enough to understand how that could exist?
Free will negates a deterministic universe. Why don't you argue how it doesn't instead of writing off my assertion as a logical fallacy
"may not have been anything more than their unsupported personal opinion" You somehow didn't think I knew this??? And you make assumptions consistently as to my ignorance. You just make assumption after assumption consistently and then still are trying to argue that my words mean something other then what they do. It seems like maybe your over compensating for getting something I said wrong thus instead of just letting it go you want to push the envelope because it hurts your ego.
Quote: Actually, you are. You're simply using weasel words to do so in hopes no one will challenge your flawed claims. Which really isn't how things work around here.
Wow ... you really are god. You just seem to be right even when your wrong. Infallible right?
I believe in a few things in existance for one reason and one reason alone. I would kill myself for lack of a reason to live otherwise and I stated that already. It was either death or belief and I flipped a coin.
A deterministic universe means that everything is predetermined... what meaning is there to movement then?
What reason is there for existence? It just is. Thus my involvement in it is absolutely pointless. I could stop being involved at any time and it would just be.
Why don't you argue the point of a deterministic universe?
Why don't you fathom how it is Possible!
If someone did fathom how it was possible then I wouldn't assert it. I only make assertions of any sort because I haven't found anything to negate it yet. If I found something to negate it then I would stop saying it. If I can't Fathom something I am not going to say that it is possible. That is the definition of being unfathomable.
If you can Fathom it why don't you go ahead and do so and thus actually argue.
The observer affect only relates how you as a person cannot know everything. Other then the fact that your perception works mostly on flawed biofeedback loops and you don't retain but a small fraction of what your body can possibly percieve you are also influencing your surroundings while they are being created changing and shaping them.
I'm not sure why your bringing up the disintegrated world view, its an observable phenomenon which implies that in order to fully conceptualize the world you would need all data including the data of the observer. Thats how its used in psychology, a system isn't a natural system as long as your In it affecting it.
Quote: "Your perception of it is also skewed and translated and altered by your personal bias's your will and desire. " The proof by assertion is getting a little tiresome.
So is your lack of saying anything of substance
Quote: Idiots ******** up. Thoughtless people ******** up. Sometimes people do get suckered. Unless there is no personal responsibility in the situation, it takes two to tango.
I thought there was some projection going on there
Quote: For some reason this strikes me more as a comment upon potential personal delusion or the quality of the individuals you associate with. And just for shits and giggles, it reads as a biased sample.
I've randomly surveyed people at a grocery store. I do alot of random surveys in grocery stores, its one of the ways I tested whether or not I could read people.
I justify the oblivious and deluded as I've talked to alot of deluded and oblivious people who didn't know they were having the energy leached out of them. I don't think a person Who Knew that they were having energy leeched out of them would continue to allow it to happen.
I have intervened on peoples behalves when I have seen this happened and I generally get thanked afterwards or the person just feels better/ is happier thus all is well.
Most of the people who I have met who weren't oblivious or deluded weren't being leeched... 2+2=4
It is easier to pray on oblivious deluded people because they don't know whats going on so don't stop it.
Sometimes they Want it to happen and think that something else is going on because the spirit is deluding them. They may be promised things. While I personally have not tested whether or not I could leech and dupe a deluded/oblivious person thus I don't know how much easier it may be I do know that its easier to affect deluded people. From several conversations I've had with others who do leech energy from people oblivious people are usually easier to leech ambient energy from. Its a mixed answer on oblivious people whether you can leech things other then ambient energy.
Soo... the end all fail of existance I have based it on mine and other peoples observations as There isn't very much to use to test anything on the spiritual or any other plane then this.
Quote: Do you labor under the impression that somehow having attended college makes your position more valid? Also, if you are hoisting this up as some kind of demonstration of authority, it doesn't work without proof of the validity of the education. And for a minor personal suggestion, I recommend going back and taking a writing class and some formal logic.
You said that I was using technical terms in order to make my position seem more valid. I replied that I talk like this because this is how I always talk unless I'm purposefully trying to sound uneducated to make people more comfortable or I'm joking around.
I think your whole demonstration of authority comment is projection and your lashing out at my post because your taking out misplaced past irritants out on me razz
Of course I'm probably wrong I just felt like teasing you
Want to argue particulars instead of just trying to label everything I say flawed? Or are you going to continue to not put anything real on the table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:24 pm
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti I was an athiest once I figured out what god was and was able to consider it. Then I figured out a different definition then what most people use and that definition seems to work better for me. Why would how mortals perceive and define a being determine it's existence? I don't believe in a difference between the dead and the living accept the form and its relationship to like forms. This means I don't believe what most people would consider death to be death. So, this portion of your position rests on your personal appeals to authority? That you are somehow in a position wherein what you say becomes objective reality for no justification beyond you believe it?
I don't see how this portion of the Ishtar's original post is saying anything other than 'I believe a deity exists when 'deity' is defined as 'x,' but I do not believe a deity/deities exist when deity is defined as 'y.'
TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti A definition is a conceptualization. Not always. In some cases, it is an expression of an observation. For example, blue is a refraction of light reflected at around 440–490 nm. (Folks correct me if my understanding of color science is off. That uni class was so long ago. icon_gonk.gif ) Ishtar Shakti As a concept what people were telling me was god didn't make sense. It contradicted itself. As I believe in a rational universe I couldn't believe in there definition and still feel as if I was a rational being. Though if you break it down even further reality is illusory, 0=1 etc.etc. (all knowing all powerful creator of everything who some how gave us free will and still knows what we are doing anyways and all that christian stuff) I see that this part of your position relies on an argument from ignorance likely based upon an appeal to authority/popularity or such depending on how you phrase it. See, your inability to fathom something does not mean that this is not possible. Further- "what people were telling [you] was god" may not have been anything more than their unsupported personal opinion.
I'm afraid the 0=1 went over my head.
TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti TeaDidikai Quote: I don't believe that anything can be all knowing. I think there is always a limit to knowledge and the more we act the less we know. If you watched every single reaction to every action and stood perfectly still perhaps you would be able to understand everything that was around you but the second you introduced a ripple to the mix the entire system changes. Why would your personal beliefs limit the ability of others? My personal beliefs do not limit the beliefs of others but logic has its own mandates. You're right. Though you do not seem to be familiar with them. Ishtar Shakti My beliefs only follow logic as I see it thus are a belief. Be so kind as to stop abusing logic as a concept in order to make yourself look good. It doesn't work when your position has so many fallacies. Ishtar Shakti If you want to go into theory of knowledge I can but its a b***h. By all means. Ishtar Shakti I do not believe that all would agree with me thus I state it as a belief and thus allow for people to dispute me without seeming pompous or in anyway making the claim that I Do limit others or that it is completely impossible. By stating that what I am saying is a belief instead of this is reality I am thus not making the statement your trying to make me say at all. Actually, you are. You're simply using weasel words to do so in hopes no one will challenge your flawed claims. Which really isn't how things work around here.
I don't see how Ishtar has done the action of which e is accused. E has not stated that others must conform to e's belief but rather that e has observed others and arrived at this conclusion on account of e's observations.
TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti Logically I see no way for a being to be all knowing given a few other stipulations such as there being a meaning to movement... the world is not a complete waste of time... etc. etc. Again, you're arguing from ignorance. Your inability to fathom something does not make it impossible. And for the love of all things cute and fuzzy, stop abusing the word logic to make yourself look smart or credible. It's bordering on insulting.
@ Ishtar - Why are these other stipulations necessarily there and why does that limit the potential all-knowing-ness of a Being?
TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti TeaDidikai Quote: Only from outside a system can you see the system I contest this assertion on the grounds that living within the ecosystem allows me to observe the ecosystem. I contest this statement by saying that your perception of that which you are a part of is flawed. Its the Observer affect it ruins everything. Look it up. I'll point out that The Observer Effect relies on a disintegrated world view. (Just to point out, affect and effect are two different things) Ishtar Shakti Its all mixed in with quantum mechanics. While you observe you also affect thus what you are observing is never the same as what your observing. I just thought I'd point out that quantum mechanics is one very specific field that has many elements that aren't applicable to the macro-world. Ishtar Shakti Your perception of it is also skewed and translated and altered by your personal bias's your will and desire. The proof by assertion is getting a little tiresome. Quote: In a universe that is created by desire and dictated by it... this goes into alot of back information I don't feel like writting concerning one of the many views as to the possible composition of the universe... in anycase you alter your perception of your surroundings. Did you notice that not everyone accepts a subjective reality wherein desire dictates reality?
@ Ishtar - As Tea has said, you are merely asserting a position. You have out-and-out made a claim. Back it.
TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti TeaDidikai Quote: You never know if someone's lying... spirits are no different then people in my eye's. Please do not project. I often know when people lie, thank you. Your god then... all knowing immortal omnipotent being? Your appeal to mockery isn't flying. I said I can know when someone is lying. I made no mention of how I came into my knowledge. For example, I can observe the truth of a matter- for example, witness an action that a person then lies about to me. I thus know they are lying. Your hasty generalization compounded by your inability to conceive of any instance where your limited perspective isn't enough is horribly flawed. Perhaps you should be more thoughtful about your claims. I'm not going to dignify the rest of your absurd strawman.
@ Ishtar -
"I often know when people lie, thank you." = I am an "all knowing immortal omnipotent being."
^ Does something seem off to you? It sure as hell does to me.
TeaDidikai Ishtar Shakti I'm sure you know whether or not I'm lying now... or of course you are capable of perfect knowledge? You can Guess and be very accurate... but knowledge to me is something completely different which is generally unattainable. More argument from ignorance. Again, stop projecting. Ishtar Shakti You can get very close to obtaining it though. We are talking about Beliefs right? I didn't think we were supposed to dissect people's beliefs being all PG and respectful like. Though I don't know... I always find it fun. You didn't read the stickies did you. icon_stare.gif Welcome to The Rehab Center. Your beliefs are not sacred cows. And I have no respect for those who act in intellectual dishonesty- and those who act in error, while they are given a benefit of the doubt, are not beyond having their errors challenged.
It's in the name of the bloody guild: Pagan Fluffy Rehabilitation Center. Seriously! rolleyes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
