Yeah, an oral agreement today is the same as oral tradition, from thousands of years ago, allegedly... and of the same order, of the same veracity, the same vivid memory, the same details, the same... everything... Riiigghtt.... Redroad, if somebody can write fiction today, how easy is it to write fiction on the topic that is apparently thousands of years old? And you call that the same order of things? Oh, well... I had enough of this...
To the Tree of Life, that is where we are reunited with the truth and it's record, journey to it's root .. I know I am going out on a limb but none the less it is my truth
I have nothing against your truth, if it is a personal belief! But when we are trying to talk seriously about history, history of philosophy etc. C'mon...
What I was trying to say, of course, was that oral transmittance is not considered worthless even in today's world of written contract and law suits And like I said before, we are talking seriously about history because I just shared with you what my professor taught me in my US History class. Ever have one of those by any chance?
gorski, you might be surprised to know that I am sincerely interested in what you have to say and your journey/path through this life and when I say "all my relations" that includes you ..
Remember, that history is written by the conquerors, ALWAYS, thus meaning is not ALWAYS reflecting the truth.
BS, Socrate, like you are going to teach me that... FFS!!! Get a grip! What arrogance and patronising BS!!! There are limits to oral tradition. That is the point I am trying to make. As opposed to the thousands of years of not just written but also history corroborated from many sources in the Mediterranean-Western European area... And of course, I do not subscribe to "racial" and other prejudices, Redroad! To me, they are offensive! Which makes you my brother, of course! Unless you are a sociopath trying to kill me, rape or torture somebody and whatnot... In that case I reserve a right to defend myself and anyone else affected by such a sociopath... And sure, I am interested in various traditions, also! But being from a place that has limited written etc. evidence of whatever its history might have been - I have to give in to other sources... I mean, other than "my own" lot's "oral tradition" which is full of myth and very little verifiable evidence... It's a fact of life - if you ain't got it, well... you ain't got it! One has to find a way to live with it! However, if we are talking seriously, i.e. based is some serious, verifiable evidence, then sorry but...
gorski, if someone comes to you and says 'I had a dream last night and it was as vivid as anything I have ever experienced .. In the dream I was visited by (_________) and they said (_________) ' .. Would you consider this serious, verifiable evidence ? "However, if we are talking seriously, i.e. based is some serious, verifiable evidence, then sorry but... "
we may actually get to like each other here, even if we remain off topic... as for oral traditions, there is more than meets the eye.. they were maintained by people without pen and ink, and without msword on their pc`s, for centuries.. those folks had better memories for such things than we have today.. so it is not necessarily all wrong, gorski.. or unprovable.. schliemann dug up troy, after all, followong just thousands year old oral traditions.. any volunteers for getting back on topic, btw?
No one said it is ALL WRONG but that it has limitations... When I was studying (psychology, as it happens) we had tested the "oral tradition" in an open class, with lots of well pre-educated students and even then, it wasn't very encouraging, I must say... That is not to say it should be dismissed out of hand but...
In all fairness I will concede that oral tradition presently may be compromised in some cultures .. However it would also be unfair not to consider the consequence of electromagnetic energy or a cultures biological predisposition to being an instrument of such matters .. Who knows if humans weren't predisposed to a sixth sense in our history and only through lack of exercising it did it become diluted to a state we currently recognize or find ourselves challenging whether it ever was a part of who we are ..
There was no indication of "cultural bias" - quite the opposite, as these tests have been done everywhere with the same result... As for "biological predisposition to"... anything, really... Uhhhh... this is... I better stay schtummmmm....
Breathe deep just try to imagine even the possibility like with the Ethiopians having a disproportional amount of long distant runners per capita compared to other populations .. "these test have been done everywhere with the same result" I don't ever remember them coming to our reservation
Your way of arguing is not consequent. I highly doubt that you can deliver a series of tests that prove that it is the essence of a good dose out of the bong. Do you know that the speed of light is the fastest phenomenon in space-time, or do you believe the scientists that it is? If you deal with the methodology of science then do it all the time, please. Have you actually read the scientific papers to which I have referred to? Please don't get me wrong, I don't want to convince. It is you who has to make an effort to make up your mind (if you want).
I don't claim faster-than-light information travel. You do. So I can sit back and let you do your proof- or otherwise make my own assumptions about your claims.
You can make any assumption you want. "The experiment I had posted confronts science with an observable phenomenon at which cause and effect cannot be differentiated...the 'first' time" You should have additionally quoted. I said this experiment is conform to my experiences. And it is not conform to the special theory of relativity. Refer to the scientific papers of the experiment I referred my experiences to (#278) or let it go. As I have said I do not want to convince, I offer just options which can make up one's mind.
Would it be bold to assume that we both don't understand a single thing what they are talking about in those papers? Do you actually work in the field? I don't, so I can't even begin to verify anything about it. Cherry-picking some sentences because they contain the word "believe" is akin to re-building a cargo plane landing strip in the bush as a native - in hope of cargo planes arriving. As I see it, this is bleeding edge science stuff so unless you actually work on the front of researching this stuff, I think we both are grossly under-qualified to make any statements about it. I trust their findings to be peer-reviewed and tested by the scientific community and when we hear in the news that Einstein's theory was in fact wrong, then we can talk about it again. Until then, it's scientific business as usual and drawing any conclusions from it yet to "prove" one's point would be foolish. Remember my earlier analogy of science as walking through a maze, leaving breadcrumbs. Us layman are stumbling around in the foyer of the maze. Following the guys into the deepest dungeons of the maze would take us lifetimes. So we trust that what they do is sound because thousands of other people adhering to the scientific method are testing and verifying it. Trust is not faith, though. So please excuse me if I don't interpret some random sentences from the latest science report as proof for anything much less proof for spiritual beliefs.
You speak as if you have all the answers. You are not different from the person entrenched in their scientific opinion. Your opinion limited options don't exactly offer a solution. You are trying to push your ideas just like the next guy, but which one is correct no one knows!