Im 99.9% certain your conscious does not let you belive 99.9% of what you think you do

a reply to: vethumanbeing
What makes you think there is any purpose other than reproduction?
I know, it makes you feel better to think so. But other than that.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing
What makes you think there is any purpose other than reproduction?
I know, it feels better to think so. But other than that.

Reproduction? If that was the point of having sex I'd have 1000's of children as a result of it. Its about the connection of the Orgasm and how it relates to the terrible pain and pleasure of directly plugging into the AUO (absolute unbounded oneness). You have never had sex and lost all sense of time and space with another?

a reply to: vethumanbeing
Who said anything about sex? Get your mind out of the gutter.
You were talking about purpose. I thought you meant, you know, the purpose of life. Amoeba reproduce, no sex involved.

As far as I can see, the purpose of life is to reproduce.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing
Who said anything about sex? Get your mind out of the gutter.
You were talking about purpose. I thought you meant, you know, the purpose of life.

As far as I can see, the purpose of life is to reproduce.

For lower animal or life forms that do not have 'conscious thought' perhaps; those would be more of an instinctual type. I would imagine some of them (males) derive pleasure with ejactulation (not sure about the females of that specie). Monkeys and humans and dogs masturbate. Purpose of life is *number one* perpetuate it within all species. Some of us are to be fodder for others, its called a balanced eco-system.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Purpose of life is *number one* perpetuate it within all species. Some of us are to be fodder for others, its called a balanced eco-system.

Seems you agree with me. But that seems to conflict with this statement:

That is the human being "LAZY" regarding the reason for its being. You may know nothing definitively because you are not engaged in the dialog (with your higher selves). What are you; an accident of birth, or creature of evolution (have no clue as to your purpose?).

Unless you are saying that the perpetuation of life is a "higher purpose." But that just sort of happens naturally, the "lazy" way. Doesn't it? Don't really have to think about it too much.

I have experienced all of what you suggest, I thought of the same type of things when I was younger until I had several experiences myself which took away all my doubts about things completely. Now there is no little voice in my head any more, and I don't have any doubts about certain realities, including the existence of God.

The voice of doubt has been defeated.

originally posted by: frostie
Im making a bold claim that it is impossible to make yourself fully believe anything (other than fact of course and sometimes not even that), and I belive, or almost

, that your conscious will not allow you to fully believe what you think you do.

Why do you think that because your conscious says as you say then somehow that means it is the norm? You got one thing right... your reality is your own, and it is kind of a mistake to apply that to everyone... just saying...

Im also going to make a claim that people try to subliminally shut up that voice in the back of their head by doing practices like going to church.
Dont get me wrong many people attend church to practice their faith, but im sure we all know of some people who go just to "shut up their concious" if you will, and fool themselves into thinking they dont doubht a bit of scripture.

It's called faith, which you do not have, so I would think it is hard for you to comprehend...

Maybe im just a paranoid skeptic or maybe im just using my own brain to know whats going on inside yours!
I personally would like my conscious to roam free and let him think whatever he wants.

And if your conscious says there is a god what are you going to do?... lol

originally posted by: Phage
What makes you think there is any purpose other than reproduction?
I know, it makes you feel better to think so. But other than that.

What about the masses who care little about reproduction? There is a rather big fundamental change taking place in many parts of the world where people choose not to reproduce. I would suggest that the purpose of life is survival, and if reproduction facilitates your survival then it is a goal, but when a person no longer sees reproduction as a positive part of "their" survival then it is no longer important to them. Case in point... abortions...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

vhb: Purpose of life is *number one* perpetuate it within all species. Some of us are to be fodder for others, its called a balanced eco-system.

Phage: Seems you agree with me. But that seems to conflict with this statement:
" That is the human being "LAZY" regarding the reason for its being. You may know nothing definitively because you are not engaged in the dialog (with your higher selves). What are you; an accident of birth, or creature of evolution (have no clue as to your purpose?)."

Phage: Unless you are saying that the perpetuation of life is a "higher purpose." But that just sort of happens naturally, the "lazy" way. Doesn't it? Don't really have to think about it too much.

Never said its purpose was 'higher' unless it depends on the rung of the ladder you exist to provide for a greater predator. You could call that one 'greater' God; YOU as a conscious being: ITS cherished creation far above all other specie of the planet that can conceptualize a creator will not; or refuse to do so; to even attempt acknowledging ITS form of being. You did not create God (except to express your idea of it give humanity an idea of a creator being), it created you as its own best expression of itself. I am always aware and thinking; I am not of the Buddhist type.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

You did not create God (except to express your idea of it give humanity an idea of a creator being), it created you as its own best expression of itself.

Nope I didn't create God. Don't require there to be God to justify my existence, either. I know that many do. Don't know why that is though. I'm here. We're here. That's good enough for me.


But you did just express a very tight little circular argument there. I know, you didn't think of it yourself. It's a necessary aspect of the construct of a creator. I also understand that the logical failure of the argument is of no concern to you. That does puzzle me.

a reply to: Xtrozero

What about the masses who care little about reproduction? There is a rather big fundamental change taking place in many parts of the world where people choose not to reproduce.

What about those who care little about any other "purpose?"

The decision to not reproduce is not really relevant. It is a manifestation of the human ability to reason (and, in some cases, environmental pressures). The purpose of life is to reproduce itself.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

vhb:
You did not create God (except to express your idea of it give humanity an idea of a creator being), it created you as its own best expression of itself.

Phage: Nope I didn't create God. Don't require there to be God to justify my existence, either. I know that many do. Don't know why that is though. I'm here. We're here. That's good enough for me.
But you did just express a very tight little circular argument there. I know, you didn't think of it yourself. It's a necessary aspect of the construct of a creator. I also understand that the logical failure of the argument is of no concern to you. That does puzzle me.

What do mean I did not think of it myself as a necessary aspect of the construct of a creator? What is the logical failure of the argument and of course it is of concern to me.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

What do mean I did not think of it myself as a necessary aspect of the construct of a creator?

I mean that it was not your original idea that the creator created everything and that everything is an expression of that creator. I mean that it the basis of the idea that there must be some purpose to existence.

What is the logical failure of the argument and of course it is of concern to me.

The logical failure is that it is a circular argument. We are the product of a creator which created us as an expression of itself. How do you know that? Because we were created by that creator. How do you know that? Because we are the product of a creator...

I said it doesn't concern you because the circularity is so obvious. So I assumed you were aware of, but disregard it. I may have been mistaken though, perhaps it had not occurred to you.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

vhb: What do mean I did not think of it myself as a necessary aspect of the construct of a creator?

Phage: I mean that it was not your original idea that the creator created everything and that everything is an expression of that creator. I mean that it the basis of the idea that there must be some purpose to existence.

It is my original argument speaking as/for God Aspect. I am a particulate of IT and allowed to speak in its behalf (so do you by the way).

vhb: What is the logical failure of the argument and of course it is of concern to me.

Phage: The logical failure is that it is a circular argument. We are the product of a creator which created us as an expression of itself. How do you know that? Because we were created by that creator. How do you know that? Because we are the product of a creator.

You are describing a perfect argument what does it being in meaning circular? Snake swallowing its tail? You know what this is. We are the product of a creator which created us as an expression of itself. How do I know this? Because God needs the human to validate its being. It is the only one that has the capability of language. You might try talking to it; it has many ideas; dreams and discontent regarding how it is being perceived. Its main problem is that very few believe it exists.

Phage: I said it doesn't concern you because the circularity is so obvious. So I assumed you were aware of, but disregard it. I may have been mistaken though, perhaps it had not occurred to you.

No thing OCCURES to me; ALL THINGS however DO. You assume too much that may be baseless/prejudiced/affecting your good opinion.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

I am a particulate of IT and allowed to speak in its behalf (so do you by the way).

I can speak for myself, thank you.

You are describing a perfect argument what does it being in meaning circular?

Logic does not go from A to B to A. Logic does not use B to demonstrate A which is used to demonstrate B. By that "logic" anything can be shown to be true.

How do I know this? Because God needs the human to validate its being.

Like I said.

You might try talking to it; it has many ideas; dreams and discontent regarding how it is being perceived.

How do you know that you are not talking to a subset of yourself? Of course, for you that means talking to God.

No thing OCCURES to me; ALL THINGS however DO.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

You assume too much that may be baseless/affecting your opinion.

I'm not the one making assumptions. Except for assuming that you understood that a circular argument is a failure of logic.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

vhb: I am a particulate of IT and allowed to speak in its behalf (so do you by the way).

Phage: I can speak for myself, thank you.

vhb: You are describing a perfect argument what does it being in meaning circular?

Phage: Logic does not go from A to B to A. Logic does not use B to demonstrate A which is used to demonstrate B. By that "logic" anything can be shown to be true.

Explain the IDEA of 'God Aspect' as logical/firm and not faith driven 'illogicl'.

vhb: How do I know this? Because God needs the human to validate its being.

Phage: Like I said.

And that was?

vhb: You might try talking to it; it has many ideas; and discontent regarding how it is being perceived.

Phage: How do you know that you are not talking to a subset of yourself? Of course, for you that means talking to God.

It is a finely tuned discriminatory process/delineation. For me that means I have to convince you that I am a clear channel and know to whom or what I am speaking to and the last would be myself (have no interest).

vhb: No thing OCCURES to me; ALL THINGS however DO.

Phage: That makes no sense whatsoever.

You assume nothing occurs to me is all; I say you are wrong.

vhb: You assume too much that may be baseless/affecting your opinion.

Phage: I'm not the one making assumptions. Except for assuming that you understood that a circular argument is a failure of logic.

Tell me the logic (God in so doing) created so many demi-gods perceived: Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Ra, Quezaquatl, ANU, Enlil, Enke, Moses/Abraham, Horus, Osiris, ISIS, Ma'at, Zeus, Odom, Thor? Here was the problem; everyone forgot someone else was behind these creations; the AUO that creates all possibilities.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Did I ever say that it is ok to be content with not knowing? Just because you are an agnostic doesn't mean you just sit and pretend like its not worth worrying about. All agnosticism does is make you admit that no matter what you might THINK is going on, you could still be wrong. That's all. That's why I used the adjective "definitively". No one knows anything about the universe definitively, even scientists.