Parapher im not sure if perhaps you have misunderstood my point ? What i am pointing out is that in my opinion, as a non religous person the only omniscient being regarding me is me. I am truly the only person to know all there is to know about myself. I am not inferring ignorance or generalisation.
Yes, sid_16, right. Or Gravity. I am struggling with the English language all the time. But it's quite often that people actually confuse the real phenomenon with the corresponding idea of it. It is a matter of sense also. 'Force' is actually just another term (idea) of the same phenomenon. The fact that it has different terms in different languages is evidence that the 'expression' is not the phenomenon itself. In my job I read a lot of English scientific papers. But mostly papers that describe experiments, ways of synthesis, isolation of natural substances. The grammar in there is quite simple. ..was added at -15 degree Celsius and stirred half an our, was filtrated, was recrystallized, was evaporated, was characterized by NMR Spectroscopy... and so on. I am lacking of scientific English terms because that what our work group publishes worldwide will be translated by others. And especially when talking about 'god' I notice language is not sufficient, lol.
These types of conversations generally do not go well, and usually turn into a slagging match. It's a good thing that alcohol isn't involved; The odds are pretty good that there would have been a fist fight. Political conversations usually follow the same pattern, with somebody trying to change the others' viewpoint or not respecting the opinions of others. All things considered, this conversation went fairly well. Drinks were not spilled. Nobody lost any teeth. And, for the most part, people were civil. Just looking at the bright side... @alextheg: So true. Even those that are closest to us know relatively little about us.
For the record I apologize for my recent post in chatbox if I offended any one by pointing out that the scientist in the picture was in fact holding a piece of shxt I mean dung/coprolites in his/her bare hand .. If you fail to see the humor at least consider the contamination of the specimen collected .. http://rhamphotheca.tumblr.com/post/12864693620/giant-sloth-dung-pleistocene-epoch-the-giant
Given you weren't offended then all is well, right? .. Some may have been offended by me pointing out that this particular person who presumably is a scientist did not think it necessary to put on gloves prior to handling a piece of dung ..
So you feel it necessary to defend yourself from pointing that out because you imply that this scientist - and I don't know your thought, any scientist for that matter? - is actually not so clever and to be laughed at? Come on, is it kindergarten again? It's 100k-yr old dung. Worse things have been taken into mouths in this thread.
Then you might have huge problems, in parts of Asia they use cow dung and mud to make houses, by hand, instead of cement. By the way you can go right ahead and rant and rave about anything in science and religion and it wouldn't bother me one bit. What I would like to know is how some of you still see free will as possible ?
Ahahahahaaaaaa!!!! Now, that is seriously funny!!! MJ, I'm rarely drunk and when I were I was prone to crying, rather than fist-fighting, over the "fact that Hegel was right and Marx is still not on the agenda"... But I know what you mean, as I have had the sh*tty experience of dealing with drunkards who are then aggressive and violent... But no worries, I would normally be smiling and teasing everybody, except if you get me into deep philosophical debate...
Defense, no .. Return to a sometimes childish sense of humor yes often .. It is preventative medicine for sometimes taking myself way to seriously .. It is recommended by some scientific fields of study .. @R29k I play in the shxt daily when planting and preparing soil but I where gloves
Retired civil/solar engineer .. Keeping the open cuts on my hands out of the shxt is again preventative medicine ..
Rest assured, I was not speaking 'on your behalf' but thought your point about only you knowing yourself is key to respecting others. What followed was not an interpretation of your words but my own opinion about why we should not compartmentalize people. But you, knowing you better than I know you, already knew that from the get-go
Those who make dictionaries can't define God...lol Again your demanding everyone come from what partially informed civilization thinks is true? Doesn't sound fair does it? The laws of physics are not the laws of the universe cause there partial and only include the physical...lol The real universal laws are complete and apply to everything not just the physical, but your machine tells you otherwise I'm sure...lol How can you prove that energy isn't sentient in nature...lol You can't! God or energy is what life is made of hence its in all not just distributed...lol The laws of time supercede and govern the laws of space hence science is still totally not getting it cause they can't define time or eternity in their fictional theory of relativity that leaves out the main variable eternal time You guys are so stuck in science and never listen to anyone here with spiritual knowledge or indigenous wisdom It's like your ruling and governing others with incomplete understandings and totally threatened by what suggests completeness Misery loves company again ...lol Thread topic is about god not science for science and it's fanatics can't define god nor his will nor how creation works on a whole but your comfortable with partial science and if others aren't comfortable with being limited their the devil It's like you guys are on witch hunt ...lol No actual points have even been debated here, then Alextheg says he is in present which is unlikely and then that's not enlightenment...lol...when indeed if he was to actually experience the here and now (present) he would be enlightened cause the here and now (present) is where the cosmos is created from and it has an mental quality to it and a unlimited quality to it So again the limited want to describe the unlimited which constraines both reality and those who tune into it from within without outside apparatus...lol Just started a science thread for the limitation "experts" so they can solve the incompleteness of science and their believers and/or partial understanding slaves...lol Coming soon... The Official Science thread...lol (Upon approval of MDL moderation) This way we can come into your thread and assist you like your assisting with an discussion of God People helping people for the common good ...lol
Free will... yes, part of the main topic I think when the stage is completely set for the actors (humans) already -- assuming they had no active part in the creation/coming into existence of the universe -- what could be considered 'free' is already mightily limited and conditioned. If you're talking about freedom given the pre-existing conditions and the human condition itself, so a highly relative 'freedom', then yes, I would say history has proven that people do have such a 'free will.' To think otherwise, to think that Hitler came to this earth fated to kill Jewish people (or whatever that would be described as abstractly), I don't see how one could seriously consider that. So if, given all the conditions and limitations that signify the human condition, one could see a form of freedom in that condition, then I would say yes, people have free will. But perhaps there is some advantage or even grace to the human (or any) condition of limitation, in that it is perhaps like the fence around the play yard. Maybe you've read about this, but there was a study done on children who were playing in 1) a play yard without a fence, and 2) a play yard that was fenced in. The children, having inherent fears and cultural conditioning and other factors involved in how they were regarding their environment, tended to stay away from the edges of the play yard without a fence. On the play yard with the fence, they utilized every inch of the play yard and went all the way out to its edges to explore and play. So in one sense you could say those children had less freedom in the fenced yard, yes, but in another way they felt more free to experiment, play, and explore when the stage was already set for them and they understood what its limitations were (less unknowns = less fear). That doesn't really touch on God or a deity (or universal consciousness or whatever the terminology or concept) yet or how it would intervene or actively steer human activity (outside of already established universal laws and conditions). So if the question would be if human beings are receiving guidance or intervention from a transcendental or universal intelligence, I think each person can only answer that from personal experience in their own lives. It certainly isn't something science is raving about these days To not do away with all human experience from the beginning of time for a couple of hundred years of (most mechanistic) science, perhaps the ancients weren't really ignorant as some of the science thinkers seem to think, and perhaps there is a difference between wisdom and being informed. In other words, a person might still be wise in seeing how the universe relates to a particular culture and implement that in that culture, even if the 'facts' are off as most of us might see that today. Remember also, facts are not truths, they are data out which models are shaped, and, yes, are susceptible to change according to the times and places in which those facts are entertained. Personal experiences are always translated into contemporary cultural forms anyway. Today's society and technology takes millions of people working together on a global scale, that is something that came about over time and when the conditions for that were ripe. For a tribe or old Mesopotamian society or Amazon civilization, other necessities were at hand, so how could one expect them to come up with the same attitudes and ways of thinking we have today? But it doesn't preclude they did not have wise people living then, and that some might have deep insights into the nature of self and the universe. Using personification to relate to certain realities, energies, conditions, is not 'ignorant', it is rather personal. Even abstract thinking stays in the realm of symbolism (it actually becomes much more apparent that all thought is symbolic then), so if you personify a reality you are still practicing the symbolic mind, so in effect it may do similar things to a mindset and its coherency. This is why whatever you fill up the mind with, the coherency of it and discrimination between the forms it entertains (relationship) is what determines sanity and intelligence, since 'facts' are never 'true', and models can only be 'sound'.
Set the new science thread free like a bird escaping an cage to know what is real, not what is perceived is real through partial observation Moderators/admins continually allow metaphysical endevors to ongoingly be contested, because of current partial science footholds on what can be known, to be totally dissed but I post a thread where the same partial scientist fanatical endevors can finally step up an do some work to prove their fictional "theories" "correct" and you don't allow the same rhetorical engagement, and that is totally bogus dude! If your going to be apparently coming from and non-partial, non biased, non nazi point of view then for God's sake let a science thread exist to see what science has to offer beyond it's current partial observation state of being!? Does MDL really want to be known as a place that allows partial science to bash any information that is can't prove yet it wont allow a thread to be open where partial science had to teal with skepticism and constant opposition or heed? Sounds like MDL has taken position and lost neutrality and subjective perspective cause if there was an "science " thread and any opposition towards that would change the social norm or status quoe And if MDL is not about evolving or raising of consciousnesses then by all means please limits all discussions to just what science is regarding! Also if this controversial topic is set free them perhaps science worshipers will start to learn a new-founded respect for what they can't prove but what in honoring indigenous wisdom might imply!? Set the The Official Science thread free!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So they can deal with opposition and heed upon their "discoveries" and partially informative states of being Be fair and allow both's sides of discussion to experience debate and discussion! Yea