Does Man Exist?

You just have said you appreciate the rough and tumble of male discussion.
I see absolutely nothing in my post which I as a woman would find objectionable.
The truth of it is that you have no answer to my points and have chosen to lash out against my gender.
Some would say that is very "girlie".
I have to say I am quite disappointed.

 

Thinking outside the box doesn't include ignoring what has already been proven.
Anderson and the Grimm brothers and latterly the Marvel company already cornered that market.

 

Your comments about women USED to be pretty universal.
You need to get out more...intellectually speaking.

 

I

Just curious: who is the one person who you consider to be original?

 

We are speaking of something we made up. Does that mean it exists?

 

You can't stop, can you?

 

Why do you care? Is this some sort of reality soap opera?

 

So now you are going to define what thinking outside the box means?

Don't you get tired of this? It seems like you had some interesting things to say. Let the other stuff go. And why do you possible care about me one way or another? Do you also care about the other 8B people on the planet? Maybe we should find out what everybody else is saying?

 

Odd that you should say this off the cuff, as I am (from personal experience) more certain of Gods existence than my own. But I can't make a case for it. I just know that my life is like a dream, and I will pass away, but God will not. And that I know him in this life by his knowing of me, is my reconciliation, as he has awakened me from this dream of life to a cognizance that true life is in him.

I have not arrived at this via religion, doctrine, or reason, but by the sudden presence of his peace and spirit. I know you don't like your subject mixed with or diluted by talk of organized religion. But as organized religion is generally formalized gossip and rumor about the divine...I speak of my own knowing, neither taught to nor heard by me, that I should repeat a foreign or strange thing. And though it is not common to man. It is the truth.

 

"The Box" is by definition what is already known.
ISTM you aren't familiar with what is in the box, let alone what is outside it.
I do hope there aren't 4 billion misogynists.
I do care about the ones I come across. I leave my sisters to deal with the rest.

 

You have a medical degree. That doesn’t mean you were educated related to all the sciences. Dunning would say to Kruger — “You are vastly over-estimating the knowledge you possess related to your actual experience”. What have you actually learned as a student of Zen? Doesn’t seem like much.

Another direct example of misogyny. You can’t control who participates in “your” threads. I took your comment as an invitation to post on this thread again, even though I had decided not to.

Excellent response. +1

POT meet KETTLE.

Excellent response. +1]

From your words.

See the comment below.

Well then, let it go.

It’s true. If you say something he doesn’t like, he lashes out and if he is replying to a female, he attacks their gender. Not a very Zen quality I would say.

 

This is a wonderful post. It's how you feel and what you experience. No criticism, no non-sense. The non-intellectual is very powerful. All the truly great things in life are far beyond our abilities to convey.

The science folks seem as if they have forgotten how to feel. Everything has to be empirical and you do the math to see if what you are seeing or feeling is real. And it's not like I have anything against science, it's just a small part of a BIG picture.

 

First of all, you don't know how many degrees I have or what my education consists of. Secondly, and apparently, you have no understanding of Zen [I won't hold this against you because VERY few people do...other than the popularized misconceptions].

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about, so let's just agree to talk to other people.

 

All negative comments. That speaks volumes.

BTW, I have five daughters. I get it!

 

I think you got a warped view here as your claims about what science has found were what got you pushback.

Human history is full of those who are deeply religious making progress in exploring how this universe works - using, in fact developing, science.

 

I think it's time to start a new thread. Perhaps I will make it such that some of the folks in this group can feel completely comfortable.....

....let's see. How about a discussion about a woman who is feels thoroughly victimized by all the horrible men in the world but she finally meets a really nice guy who believes in science and likes to prove everything he says with mathematical formulas and ALWAYS provides documentation! AND, he is a card carrying member of AA [Atheists Anonymous].

He is quite the gentleman as he defers to her at all times and believes that women have always been victims and will always be victims even if the ongoing feminization of men reduces the male population to a pathetic caricature of that quality [strength of character] which used to define being a man. Now most young men are weaklings, not only physically, but in every other way, as well. And who needs a two parent home anyway?

On a real roll, this woman wins a discrimination lawsuit at her workplace as some outrageous guy actually had the gall to say hello and smile at her. On top of that, her town has awarded all victims reparations so she can now quit her job and do nothing...EXACTLY what somebody who has become completely dependent on everything outside of herself is qualified to do.

I think I'll call it...Trials and Tribulations In Wokesville: Chapter 1 It's All So Unfair!

 

I was hoping it was me so I could put it on my resume.

 

Let's say I have the most warped views in the history of views. What's your point? Why does this matter?

 

I'm fine with your rather outrageous views of spirituality, etc. Our government was designed to support people having such views.

However, discarding science would be a major disaster in terms of our understanding of how this universe works, our economic future, how we evaluate every decision we make, etc.

Religion doesn't include methods of analyzing the real world. Religion can't even analyze religion, as shown by the number of religions - in fact, the number of divisions of religions. That is, Christianity can't analyze Christianity.

We need to do better than that when addressing issues that affect our lives and futures here on Earth. Plus, we can. So, why would we choose NOT to?

 

Why don’t you list your degrees. What kind of Doctor were you?

iI know exactly what I’m talking about, it’s too bad you don’t understand.

 

Can we focus on what is important here?

 

Science isn't part of a picture. It is the only reliable method we have in trying to SEE the picture. We may be seeing only a small part of the picture but, truth be told, we don't even know how big the picture is.

 

What about the movie Contact with Jodie Foster? Science could not verify her experience.

There are limitations to science. We can’t reproduce every event. Injeun may be right. He can’t reproduce his experience for others so we will never know.

I tend to think that his experience is not valid since it’s simpler to believe so. It’s evidence for him but it’s not for me. He could be short of an essential nutrient or he could have a tumour. There are many reasons why he might have had that experience.

There are examples of the presence of god being experienced by people in laboratories when certain parts of their brain are stimulated so we can at least say that it’s possible to feel that way, however it also proves that it’s possible to feel that way when there is no god present.

 

No, come on; we've already covered this: our measurements, are "made up," but the sequentiality of events, is what defines the TIME dimension. (Someone could very easily, as an aside, use that same "made up" contention, about God).

Unless this is essential to your argument, why don't we move on to something else, instead of going around in circles. Though it does compromise one of your arguments-- that anything can be "proven"-- I think this is a matter of just your semantics, not being especially precise. To go back to your original premise, I would agree, for example, that we can be sure of nothing, not even our own existence. The problems, though, with that argument, are:
1) just the pragmatics; and
2) your not, that I saw, defining "God." For this other half of your argument-- that a better case can be made for God's existence-- at the very least, you would have to define God as the framework, in which all that we experience, occurs. Even this, would be a questionable foundation for God being "real," if we, ourselves, who "experience" things, within that framework, are not real. All that could be said, would be that if we are not real, something would need be generating all that we believe is real. But that argument could also be turned around, to say that, if we are real, then an equal case cannot necessarily be made, for God's existence (depending on how It is defined). Since we cannot, of course, know which of those two is true-- which was a basis of your argument, was it not?-- then this disproves the "God" part of your argument.

IOW, the only way we could say that a better case can be made for God's existence, than our own, would be to know that we are not real, ourselves, which even you admit, there is no way we can.

 

Keep in mind that our perception is not reality, therefore the "sequentiality" of events that we call time is not real, as well. It's just the way our brain attempts to deal with the overload of information.

The way I see it is that human beings have from the beginning come up with various systems of thought in an attempt to explain our perceptions. None of it really works very well for obvious reasons.

The key is in understanding the situation and hedging in light of it. There are other ways of attempting to access what is real much more productively. I use meditation as my primary tool. Even being able to filter out one's personal reality still leaves you with only a perception [something not very close].

So what's a human to do. You do the best you can by simplifying. Absolute Simplicity is Absolute Truth.

This is a situation where you take what the Universe gives. Despite our advancement technologically, people are still a mess intellectually, mentally, and emotionally. It seems to me that we could use less stuff and more contentment. Less