You're free to conclude whatever you want. I gave you the answer plain and simple, but it is too simple for your mind to accept it, because the answer shows the limitation of your mind and the ego must feel superior in any "debate/conflict" whatever you want to call it. A bit narcissistic, aren't you? Step away from the mirror,please. Again, hiding behind the walls of philosophy... Tell me, you all-knowing what's the "manly" thing to do? You should preach this to the Rothschilds, Rockefellers and others like them that kept this world in check for the last 200 years, denying the real progress of humanity. But then, Freud would have been just another patient of the mental hospital along with Darwin and such instead of being praised in the school books. Again and again: how can you understand a proof from n-th dimension when your brain operates only in 4D??? I know what I posted, is it you that to need to know. I suggest to you to read the book of Swami Vivekananda - Jnana Yoga. It will open your mind a bit. Maybe you'll understand and then you'll know.
At this point, I guess I'll have to thank you on behalf of all the contributors in this thread, for your mysticism. I cannot see that you have anything to support your views other than your desire to have those views.....thrusting upon us. so to speak.
No, Soccy, you are hiding all the time, big time, behind sweet nothings, as you are saying nothing, just spouting mythical nonsense which is not dis-/provable. My dead granny can "debate" like that. Get out in the open, gi's a bitta juice, so we can taste it for reaw, riiigh', then we can tew ya... As things stand, you have no leg to stand on, so simply laughable, as far as I am concerned...
You might consider me a mystic, if you need to tick a box. I don't. I am. Desire? Tell your granny I said "hello". Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...
To Socrate of 2012 As I've repeated it in many thread- arguing with the ignorant is like trying to wrestle with a jellyfish in the ocean. No matter how many tentacles you cut off there are always more, and there isn't even a brain to be stunned.
This is right. But I am not confused about science/ results of science. Science is identified by their results/findings and they are changing. The methodology of science is like a filter. Means their predetermination/rules limit what can be 'scientifically' refined.... I have only an issue when one brings up the term 'reality' or any other absolute. The idea of Einstein that gravity creates a curvature of space must have sounded like mystical nonsense to Newtonian's at first time, don't you think so? One should evaluate if Reason comes incognito as ego.
And again, so much confusion. Individual scientists are humans. They are not less flawed than any other human. Every scientist has his ego, some even have a lifetime project they try to solve. These things cause bias. If you spend a lifetime researching something, trying to verify your theory, passion plays a big role and can influence your viewpoint. That is exactly the reason why peer review is absolutely necessary. Every experiment, every poll, whatever, must make sure to remove the human bias. For example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment You are somehow assuming that when we argue against any god, we don't want it to be true because our ego doesn't allow it or some nonsense. Scientists would _love_ to have proof for a supernatural being. Think about what it would mean, how it would change everything. Religion would finally be based on facts. Science would change views in a heartbeat just as it changed when Einstein's theories came about. The fact is, there hasn't been any evidence so far, so the reasonable position to assume is that there are no gods. It's not because we wish so or can't handle an alternate truth, it's that the facts don't support your position. Science is true whether you believe it or not. Science _can_ change viewpoints, religion cannot. Edit: "Not believing something is true" is not "believing something is false". It's the reason atheism is not a belief system. If it were, "off" would be a TV channel. Edit2: Now take into consideration the human flaws, ego, bias, ... and you want to tell me that you, all by yourself, know things no one else knows, without bias, without thinking you know just because you wish you knew. How likely is that? If you had a single piece of evidence... but even that is lacking.
Belief in God requires faith, Science goes through changes faster than a baby goes through diapers. Takes more faith to believe science because it's never right. On one day it's This! and tomorrow it's That!
Of course, a medieval brain can't handle change. Gotta keep things simple and stationary for the simple and stationary folk. Progress sure doesn't come from such a viewpoint. Edit: Do you actually go to the doctor or do prayers fix everything for you? Or do you have a town shaman? Just wondering, as you despise science so much.
A zen master asked the disciple: -What is the truth? The disciple replied by slapping the zen master. The zen master smiled and said: -Welcome master.
Yamaoka Tesshu, as a young student of Zen, visited one master after another. He called upon Dokuon of Shokoku. Desiring to show his attainment, he said: "The mind, Buddha, and sentient beings, after all, do not exist. The true nature of phenomena is emptiness. There is no relaization, no delusion, no sage, no mediocrity. There is no giving and nothing to be received." Dokuon, who was smoking quietly, said nothing. Suddenly he whacked Yamaoka with his bamboo pipe. This made the youth quite angry. "If nothing exists," inquired Dokuon, "where did this anger come from?"
Its because of science 'change' as you stated that ''On one day it's This! and tomorrow it's That!'' you're posting this nonsense..not because of faith in God. You should have faith in God or any other things but don't criticize science.
Very well said. Quiet the mind and the ego will disappear. The student was still a student, but his ego was...a master.
To put it in Einstein's own words: "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." P.S. Guess what? ALL the scriptures say that and ALL the masters say that. P.S2: While your head is in Heaven, never forget that your feet touch the ground. L.E. I replaced "religious" books with scriptures, as JoeC said. That's the correct term: scriptures, it just didn't come to me at the time.
I die a little seeing someone give himself the name of Socrates (I assume Socrate is the correct spelling in his country) and then smear it with such ignorance, stupidity and mental incoherence. Putting on a costume to appear to be more than you are only works for a first impression, you know. If you can't back up the appearance with mental capacity, everyone will realize sooner or later what you are. What's really hilarious is that Socrates apparently received the death sentence for blasphemy, yet our "Socrate" is the complete opposite. What a disgrace. The world's energy problems could probably solved by the spinning of the real Socrates in his grave alone.