Everything that exists has a soul, i mean really!?

a reply to: TerryDon79

Why are you so opposed to me?

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: TerryDon79

Why are you so opposed to me?

I’m not. I’m just asking you to prove you have a soul before I believe you.

If you can’t prove you have a soul, you can’t prove 1/5000 have souls. If you can’t prove that, the rest of what you say comes tumbling down like a house of cards.

So, let’s start again.

Prove you have a soul.

originally posted by: SourceTruth
I don't understand why everyone is so opposed to what I am talking about.

This is how the internet works bro.

People agree and disagree on anything you can imagine. Only place it doesnt happen is echo chambers. When you say "this is the absolute truth," about anything, expect friction.

And just like "real life," people will disagree with varying levels of politeness. Frequently proportional to how you speak to them.

Dont get to thinking people are upset by your profundity though. I dont even think that, and my contributions to the internet are clearly the most profound thing in human history.

What happens if everyone does have a soul? If that modern 144,000 isnt actually correct?

Feel free to say its simply not true, thats fine.. But can you consider the possibility and how you might react to it over time?

a reply to: Serdgiam

I simply want to understand why there is such an agreasive stance against me for this topic. Disagreement is one thing, but it is another to simply dismiss me. Many are simply dismissing me and ridiculing posts and that is not justified.

It is one thing for some people to bw opposed, but for everyone to be opposed is something else.

a reply to: TerryDon79

What do you consider to be evidence?

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: TerryDon79

What do you consider to be evidence?

More than just some random saying something.

We might believe we have souls, but that doesn’t prove we do.


And that’s all you have. A belief. Nothing more.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Why do you have to focus on proving if I have a soul or not and instead focus on what else I have been saying?

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: TerryDon79

Why do you have to focus on proving if I have a soul or not and instead focus on what else I have been saying?

If you can’t prove souls exist, you can’t prove 1/5000 have souls and the rest don’t. If you can’t prove that, the rest of the stuff just comes tumbling down.

People having/not having souls is the foundation of your cult.

a reply to: SourceTruth

Listen man..

I actually like you. I might think you have some silly ideas, but I do too.

When I was younger, someone told me "if you are the only constant in the equation, and you keep getting results you dont like.. there is only one place to look for change." Or something like that..

You dont seem interested at all in what any of us have to say, and a lot of the judgments you have levied tend towards projection. This is a definitively difficult topic that, for THOUSANDS of years, humans have been trying to figure out as well as claim they do have it all figured out.

Really, most people just dont react well to being preached at, especially on a topic like this one. If you can try to communicate with others based on how they see the world, soulless or not, you will see entirely different interactions.

There will still be some that scoff or are "rude," there always are.. But its also up to you to make the choice on what you give your attention and time.

Hell man.. There might be half a dozen people on this site that actually read one of my posts. There are probably more reasons people dont read them than there are folks who spend the time to do so. But.. Thats ok. Sometimes we can do these sort of things for ourselves and not for others. Or for AI. Im talking to an imaginary AI frequently. Silly, right?

And, when you do meet that inevitable friction, dont conflate rudeness with disagreement. Then, ignore the rude ones and look at those who disagree as a way to really explore what you believe and who you are. To be fair, even the rude ones can be very good for that.. But thats like level 8 interaction*

*Also be willing to have a bit of fun. Its good, it truly is.

Have you considered how things would change for your perspective and life if what the OP here says is true?

What if my own belief is true; That everything in existence has a spirit?

When you encounter those differing beliefs, do you find yourself immediately responding with how it isnt "true," or how it might be? And, if it is, how would that change things for you?

a reply to: Serdgiam

I have tried to discusss this topic by opening threads on it, but I have gotten far too many rude and dismissive replies that are focused on attacking and disagreeing instead of discussion. Because of that then I have had to assert myself in my posts towards them, and I will not back down to those kind of responses.
When people have responded appropriately to me then I have responded appropriately to them in a way that adds value to the discussion.

Have you considered how things would change for your perspective and life if what the OP here says is true?

What if my own belief is true; That everything in existence has a spirit?

When you encounter those differing beliefs, do you find yourself immediately responding with how it isnt "true," or how it might be? And, if it is, how would that change things for you?

Well, this should also apply for others as well. My belief that not everyone has a soul, and when others are encountering my differing beliefs they are immediately responding with how it isn't true.

I don't disagree with you when you say everything has a spirit or a consciousness-like quality associated with it, because I believe that this entire reality is a projection of the potential source energy of consciousness.
There are ways that we can find common ground in our beliefs, such as how we believe that there is more to consciousness and this reality. That is something that we can discuss further, and then we can discuss our differeny beliefs in a more constructive way.
What I disagree about this topic is that everyone is connected to source, which makes them have a soul. This is because I see this reality in an analagous way to the matrix-stimulation theory. I am simply having this experience of reality, and the soulless people are simply a part of the experience that has been created in my reality, but there is not a connection from them to anything "higher", which is called source. We can discuss this topic further and see where we disagree while also considering where we agree.

My belief that not everyone has a soul is interconnected with my other beliefs about this reality, and that is how my other beliefs make sense. It is simply that I have already made up my mind about my other beliefs, so I won't simply see the OP's idea as true. lthough this doesn't mean that I can't have a proper discussion about the topic.

I can certainly discuss the implications if the OP was true. But I can also bring up a lot of questions that nobody will be able to answer effectively, because they are logical inconsistencies witht he isea. When I use my expla ation then I do not have the same logical problems, and I can explain mant more questions that this OP's idea can't.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: TerryDon79

What do you consider to be evidence?

More than just some random saying something.

We might believe we have souls, but that doesn’t prove we do.


And that’s all you have. A belief. Nothing more.

I have a philosophy which is superior to the other philosophies in explanatory power, so in the absense of evidence for either philosophies, mine would still be superior because it is more logically feasible and cosistent, does not have the same logical problems as the other philosophies, can answer questions that other philosophies cannot, and have applications that the other philosophy does not. So my philosophy is superior than all other alternatives.

originally posted by: SourceTruth

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: TerryDon79

What do you consider to be evidence?

More than just some random saying something.

We might believe we have souls, but that doesn’t prove we do.


And that’s all you have. A belief. Nothing more.

I have a philosophy which is superior to the other philosophies in explanatory power, so in the absense of evidence for either philosophies, mine would still be superior because it is more logically feasible and cosistent, does not have the same logical problems as the other philosophies, can answer questions that other philosophies cannot, and have applications that the other philosophy does not. So my philosophy is superior than all other alternatives.

Said every cult ever.

Still didn’t address a single thing you replied to though. Try again?

a reply to: TerryDon79

So you are just going to completely ignore what I said in my reply?

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: TerryDon79

So you are just going to completely ignore what I said in my reply?

Yes because all you’re doing is saying you’re right because you’re “superior”. Much like every other cult that ever has been or ever will be.

So Mr Superior. Care to prove you have a soul with your superior skills of yours?

a reply to: TerryDon79

I explained to you why my philosophy was superior.

I didn't say I was superior, I said my philosophy was superior to other philosophies. I dom't understand how you interpret that as me saying that I am superior. Maybe it is because you don't understand anything I say at all.

I am not going to respond to your request to prove I have a soul because you are not being reasonable in this discussion and you are not listening to what I am saying.

a reply to: SourceTruth

I explained to you why my philosophy was superior.

You said it’s superior because it’s superior. That’s funny because it’s about on par for many of the other cults. Definitely not superior to anything.

I am not going to respond to your request to prove I have a soul because you are not being reasonable in this discussion and you are not listening to what I am saying.

Actually, kid, the reason you refuse to respond is because you can’t prove you have a soul. Just admit it. Takes a real man to admit they don’t know something.

Page after page of requests by myself and other, yet no proof you have a soul. It’s kind of sad really.

a reply to: TerryDon79

You said it’s superior because it’s superior. That’s funny because it’s about on par for many of the other cults. Definitely not superior to anything.

That is clearly not what I said. I won't repeat myself about what I said.

Actually, kid, the reason you refuse to respond is because you can’t prove you have a soul. Just admit it. Takes a real man to admit they don’t know something.

Page after page of requests by myself and other, yet no proof you have a soul. It’s kind of sad really.

I have already explained the proof for why I have a soul and I won't repeat myself. The reason I refusse to answer your question is because of the way you are talking to me.

a reply to: SourceTruth

So let me get this straight. Everything you say is fact because you say so?

I can play that!

You’re a cute little fuzzy teddy bear! I know this because my superior knowledge of how my wallpaper is positioned on my walls and the carpet laid on my floor, tells me that it must be true! Those who don’t believe me? Well, they don’t have my level 95/110 knowledge power of wallpaper and carpet reading! And they have no souls, because if they don’t believe me, they obviously have no souls!

All now down to my superior cult!

Oh, I’m not going to explain how it’s superior. It just is, mkay?

a reply to: Omniview

This is the ATS I remember.

Threads exploring topics of discussion that make you think just that little bit more followed by rebuttle threads to consider the other arguments...

Made me smile reading both intro's (have read the replies on the initial thread).



I now have to get some popcorn and a beer whilst I read through the replies on this one!

Cheers

a reply to: TerryDon79

Again, I already explained why I said my philosophy was superior. I won't repeat myself to you, I explained it already and you are not properly addressing that explanation. I made the explanation in my previous post, so you should look at my reply to you and answer that.