|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:36 am
divineseraph Gravity is supposed to be a real thing- Now prove it exists. Show me gravity. Show me dark matter. Show me a singularity. All we can see of gravity is it's perceived effect. So it is with the Soul, and with God. What are the "perceived effects" of god and the soul? I can show you gravity - it makes things drop, it bends light. Dark matter is just as evident - we see it interacting with other matter. Singularity - that is what most likely existed in the past. It's like seeing a broken glass and demanding that I show you the whole glass. These things are very much evident. What you said was basically "Show me that air exists!". If you can't see something, it doesn't mean it's unprovable. God and the soul, on the other hand, are totally untestable concepts. What would the world look like if there was no soul, what would it look like if there was no god? There are no "perceived effects" of these things. It's along the lines of "Yeah, gravity exists, but it's caused by undetectable supernatural coils that pull everything together." It's redundant and not testable. Chieftain Twilight honetsly, i think that it is possible that either the Spirit will stay in one section of the now split rock, while the other remains empty. or perhaps, the empty rock eventually gains a Spirit of it's own. What is the difference between a rock that contains a spirit and the "empty" rock? There is no difference, it's a redundant concept.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:33 am
Artto divineseraph Gravity is supposed to be a real thing- Now prove it exists. Show me gravity. Show me dark matter. Show me a singularity. All we can see of gravity is it's perceived effect. So it is with the Soul, and with God. What are the "perceived effects" of god and the soul? I can show you gravity - it makes things drop, it bends light. Dark matter is just as evident - we see it interacting with other matter. Singularity - that is what most likely existed in the past. It's like seeing a broken glass and demanding that I show you the whole glass. These things are very much evident. What you said was basically "Show me that air exists!". If you can't see something, it doesn't mean it's unprovable. God and the soul, on the other hand, are totally untestable concepts. What would the world look like if there was no soul, what would it look like if there was no god? There are no "perceived effects" of these things. It's along the lines of "Yeah, gravity exists, but it's caused by undetectable supernatural coils that pull everything together." It's redundant and not testable. Chieftain Twilight honetsly, i think that it is possible that either the Spirit will stay in one section of the now split rock, while the other remains empty. or perhaps, the empty rock eventually gains a Spirit of it's own. What is the difference between a rock that contains a spirit and the "empty" rock? There is no difference, it's a redundant concept. It is all that is. And exactly like air, or gravity, or dark matter- We can see the effect. We can see the effect of the soul. We can see the divine order of God. We don't need to see them directly, in a physical form, to justify the possibility that they exist. Otherwise we can't accept gravity- It could be, after all, that all things are directed towards "Cosmic Down", rather than propelled towards objects of greater mass. Things stay on planets because of centrifugal force. You can "kill" matter by processing it- Like plastic or vulgar metals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:43 pm
divineseraph Artto divineseraph Gravity is supposed to be a real thing- Now prove it exists. Show me gravity. Show me dark matter. Show me a singularity. All we can see of gravity is it's perceived effect. So it is with the Soul, and with God. What are the "perceived effects" of god and the soul? I can show you gravity - it makes things drop, it bends light. Dark matter is just as evident - we see it interacting with other matter. Singularity - that is what most likely existed in the past. It's like seeing a broken glass and demanding that I show you the whole glass. These things are very much evident. What you said was basically "Show me that air exists!". If you can't see something, it doesn't mean it's unprovable. God and the soul, on the other hand, are totally untestable concepts. What would the world look like if there was no soul, what would it look like if there was no god? There are no "perceived effects" of these things. It's along the lines of "Yeah, gravity exists, but it's caused by undetectable supernatural coils that pull everything together." It's redundant and not testable. Chieftain Twilight honetsly, i think that it is possible that either the Spirit will stay in one section of the now split rock, while the other remains empty. or perhaps, the empty rock eventually gains a Spirit of it's own. What is the difference between a rock that contains a spirit and the "empty" rock? There is no difference, it's a redundant concept. It is all that is. And exactly like air, or gravity, or dark matter- We can see the effect. We can see the effect of the soul. We can see the divine order of God. We don't need to see them directly, in a physical form, to justify the possibility that they exist. Otherwise we can't accept gravity- It could be, after all, that all things are directed towards "Cosmic Down", rather than propelled towards objects of greater mass. Things stay on planets because of centrifugal force. You can "kill" matter by processing it- Like plastic or vulgar metals. I thought centrifugal force propelled things outward from the center? And anyway, our scientific theories are just that - theories. If we can predict natural occurrences based on the models we make, they are good models and we'll keep them until new evidence or observations provide better explanations. The existence of souls, however, explains nothing. One does not need to know if a creature has a soul or not before studying its behavior. Look at all these differing opinions on what kind of beings/things have souls. Clearly it's just an invented term. You can't predict a being's behavior based on its possession of a soul - haven't humans done "soulless" things?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:51 pm
Quote: You can "kill" matter by processing it- Like plastic or vulgar metals. .... no? they arn't "killed." confused they don't become any less natural just because they are artificial. i have only recently come to this conclusion, and it was very difficult for me to accept, but we are natural beings using natural processes to turn natural raw components into new things. the only thing we can say about what happens to the Spirits of these things is that they merge, or perhaps just unify (the difference being whether they become One, or remain many yet within one object).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:53 pm
Artto divineseraph Gravity is supposed to be a real thing- Now prove it exists. Show me gravity. Show me dark matter. Show me a singularity. All we can see of gravity is it's perceived effect. So it is with the Soul, and with God. What are the "perceived effects" of god and the soul? I can show you gravity - it makes things drop, it bends light. Dark matter is just as evident - we see it interacting with other matter. Singularity - that is what most likely existed in the past. It's like seeing a broken glass and demanding that I show you the whole glass. These things are very much evident. What you said was basically "Show me that air exists!". If you can't see something, it doesn't mean it's unprovable. God and the soul, on the other hand, are totally untestable concepts. What would the world look like if there was no soul, what would it look like if there was no god? There are no "perceived effects" of these things. It's along the lines of "Yeah, gravity exists, but it's caused by undetectable supernatural coils that pull everything together." It's redundant and not testable. Chieftain Twilight honetsly, i think that it is possible that either the Spirit will stay in one section of the now split rock, while the other remains empty. or perhaps, the empty rock eventually gains a Spirit of it's own. What is the difference between a rock that contains a spirit and the "empty" rock? There is no difference, it's a redundant concept. ...? i'm not sure what you mean by "it's a redundant concept". you are not being clear. you asked for what i think the reaction is of a Rock breaking into two. i answered. the difference between a Rock that has a Spirit and an "empty" Rock is that one can be communicated to while the other cannot. because one has a Spirit and the other is without a Spirit. that's not redundant. it's a clear difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:20 pm
of course we have souls. i have no idea where they go once we die and they leave our bodies, but, i also think we're not particularly supposed to know
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:13 am
Eccentric Detective divineseraph Artto divineseraph Gravity is supposed to be a real thing- Now prove it exists. Show me gravity. Show me dark matter. Show me a singularity. All we can see of gravity is it's perceived effect. So it is with the Soul, and with God. What are the "perceived effects" of god and the soul? I can show you gravity - it makes things drop, it bends light. Dark matter is just as evident - we see it interacting with other matter. Singularity - that is what most likely existed in the past. It's like seeing a broken glass and demanding that I show you the whole glass. These things are very much evident. What you said was basically "Show me that air exists!". If you can't see something, it doesn't mean it's unprovable. God and the soul, on the other hand, are totally untestable concepts. What would the world look like if there was no soul, what would it look like if there was no god? There are no "perceived effects" of these things. It's along the lines of "Yeah, gravity exists, but it's caused by undetectable supernatural coils that pull everything together." It's redundant and not testable. Chieftain Twilight honetsly, i think that it is possible that either the Spirit will stay in one section of the now split rock, while the other remains empty. or perhaps, the empty rock eventually gains a Spirit of it's own. What is the difference between a rock that contains a spirit and the "empty" rock? There is no difference, it's a redundant concept. It is all that is. And exactly like air, or gravity, or dark matter- We can see the effect. We can see the effect of the soul. We can see the divine order of God. We don't need to see them directly, in a physical form, to justify the possibility that they exist. Otherwise we can't accept gravity- It could be, after all, that all things are directed towards "Cosmic Down", rather than propelled towards objects of greater mass. Things stay on planets because of centrifugal force. You can "kill" matter by processing it- Like plastic or vulgar metals. I thought centrifugal force propelled things outward from the center? And anyway, our scientific theories are just that - theories. If we can predict natural occurrences based on the models we make, they are good models and we'll keep them until new evidence or observations provide better explanations. The existence of souls, however, explains nothing. One does not need to know if a creature has a soul or not before studying its behavior. Look at all these differing opinions on what kind of beings/things have souls. Clearly it's just an invented term. You can't predict a being's behavior based on its possession of a soul - haven't humans done "soulless" things? Gravity is the best we can do, but it's not something that physically exists in a form we can actually see- We can only see it's effect. Same with, again, dark matter and singularities. They are basically saying "We're seeing this, it must be caused by something with the nature of THIS because of how it works." The soul is similar in that type of evidence. And one does not need to know if gravity exists as it is said that it does to study the chemical makeup of planets. One doesn't need to know how dark matter works to study the position of the stars. That's because while they are part of the same thing, you're not looking at the same thing. Not by it's possession of a soul, but by relative knowledge of how a soul works- Which is essentially psychology. Trying to make it a catch-all science is foolish, however, as no two people have the same mind, and no mind works in the same way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:16 am
Chieftain Twilight Quote: You can "kill" matter by processing it- Like plastic or vulgar metals. .... no? they arn't "killed." confused they don't become any less natural just because they are artificial. i have only recently come to this conclusion, and it was very difficult for me to accept, but we are natural beings using natural processes to turn natural raw components into new things. the only thing we can say about what happens to the Spirits of these things is that they merge, or perhaps just unify (the difference being whether they become One, or remain many yet within one object). Yes, they are. What happens when you boil a fertilized egg? Can you make a chicken out of it? What happens when you turn grain into bread? Will it grow wheat? It is spiritually dead. It still has spirit in it, in it's atoms, but it no longer has it's vitalization as what it was. So it is with metals and stones and everything else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:55 am
I still don't know what the supposed effects of a soul are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:19 pm
Artto I still don't know what the supposed effects of a soul are. Self awareness, understanding of context and subjectivity are a decent start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:27 pm
divineseraph Artto I still don't know what the supposed effects of a soul are. Self awareness, understanding of context and subjectivity are a decent start. Why wouldn't those be the effects of our brain?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:35 pm
Artto divineseraph Artto I still don't know what the supposed effects of a soul are. Self awareness, understanding of context and subjectivity are a decent start. Why wouldn't those be the effects of our brain? your argument, Artto, actualy paralels the main difference between Hinduism and Buddhism. that Consciousness is believed in Buddhism to be a product of the Material matter, while in Hinduism it is made clear through Logic that that doesn't make sense, therefore we must have a Soul. the Consiousness is something different from and sepperate of the Body. try reading the Baghavad-Gita to get an understanding of the "why".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:36 pm
divineseraph Chieftain Twilight Quote: You can "kill" matter by processing it- Like plastic or vulgar metals. .... no? they arn't "killed." confused they don't become any less natural just because they are artificial. i have only recently come to this conclusion, and it was very difficult for me to accept, but we are natural beings using natural processes to turn natural raw components into new things. the only thing we can say about what happens to the Spirits of these things is that they merge, or perhaps just unify (the difference being whether they become One, or remain many yet within one object). Yes, they are. What happens when you boil a fertilized egg? Can you make a chicken out of it? What happens when you turn grain into bread? Will it grow wheat? It is spiritually dead. It still has spirit in it, in it's atoms, but it no longer has it's vitalization as what it was. So it is with metals and stones and everything else. hm.... i dunno... i guess i'll have to realy consider this, but it seems like we don't have much to base it on other than philosophical speculations that we can make about it... confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:39 am
Chieftain Twilight in Hinduism it is made clear through Logic that that doesn't make sense, therefore we must have a Soul. Could you elaborate on this a bit, please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 3:20 pm
Artto divineseraph Artto I still don't know what the supposed effects of a soul are. Self awareness, understanding of context and subjectivity are a decent start. Why wouldn't those be the effects of our brain? Because it is absurd, to begin with- So our brain, in order to function, has to tell itself that it exists as an "I"? Our brain is supposed to tell itself that it is sad, with sadness chemicals that tell it it's sad, in order to know it's sad in the first place? It is cyclical and paradoxical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
