what is the main purpose of living?

Originally posted by spamandham

You can answer your own question simply be rereading what I wrote. It was only a single sentence, "This necessarily implies my beliefs are false as they are inconsistent with yours."

Are you sure I can answer my own question simply by re-reading what you wrote in only a single sentence?

"This necessarily implies my beliefs are false as they are inconsistent with yours."

What is it that necessarily implies your beliefs are false?

What does "This" (the first word of the sentence) refer to?

What in this sentence implies your beliefs are false if not for the simple fact they are inconsistant with mine?

So, in your perspective I should be able to deduct from your singular sentence that I did indeed imply your beliefs are false as they are inconsistant with my accepted beliefs, which I have neither stated in this thread, nor did I imply your beliefs are false.

Did I claim that anything you claim as true implies my beliefs are false, or did I qualify it. Why are you attempting to build a straw man based on removing that qualification? Is that what Jesus would do?

qualify it?

qualified what?

Yes, I took it to mean that whatever I claim to hold as true was the "This" that "necessarily implies my(your) beliefs are false as they are inconsistent with yours(mine)."

Jesus removing qualifications (that may or may not be claiming that anything I claim to be true may or may not be qualifying or implying that your beliefs are false) in order to attempt to build a man made of straw?

I got it now.

Your methods of delivering a message of clarity are enthusiastically nearing legendary status. Always amusing.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Are you sure I can answer my own question simply by re-reading what you wrote in only a single sentence?

I believe you have all the information you need to understand what that sentence means. It isn't very complicated.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
So, in your perspective I should be able to deduct from your singular sentence that I did indeed imply your beliefs are false as they are inconsistant with my accepted beliefs, which I have neither stated in this thread, nor did I imply your beliefs are false.

This isn't my perspective.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Your methods of delivering a message of clarity are enthusiastically nearing legendary status. Always amusing.

I suspect you aren't actually having a problem understanding it.

[edit on 1-11-2005 by spamandham]

ET, remember this little gem?

Esoteric Teacher
It is my contention that any individual who can not believe in any higher being can not contribute to any conversation that pertains to the will or intentions of someone/something that they do not believe has a will or intentions in the first place.

Considering I have nothing to contribute in these matters in your mind, I can only conclude your motivation is to win a debate point.

after twenty, thirhty years of life the main purpose of living might be emptying your mind.

Filling it with truths of self, and your own interests.

and comparing them with others without getting into fights. So both can learn something.

Might be another purpose.



this thread might be going off topic.

or this thread might show us of what we may become.

I'd say, both of you, show us what you stand for, and lets examine your
believes and thinking. We might get a lot out of it. All of us.

[edit on 2-11-2005 by alienaddicted]

this shows how foolish humans are

For me it's a belief that we are here to better ourselves through experience both good and bad.

To learn tolerance for others .

To learn to love unselfishly.

To be honorable.

To teach your children stength, courage and most importantly goodness.

There are many other things, I could rant away but the world does need more good people in it.











[edit on 3-11-2005 by Grimholt]

Originally posted by spamandham
ET, remember this little gem?

Esoteric Teacher
It is my contention that any individual who can not believe in any higher being can not contribute to any conversation that pertains to the will or intentions of someone/something that they do not believe has a will or intentions in the first place.

Considering I have nothing to contribute in these matters in your mind, I can only conclude your motivation is to win a debate point.

Yes, yes I do. And I still find it hard to believe that it makes logical sense to someone to express that there is no God, and in the same breath tell me what God's will is.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Yes, yes I do. And I still find it hard to believe that it makes logical sense to someone to express that there is no God, and in the same breath tell me what God's will is.

It is not necessary to believe in a god in order to analyze the purported nature of that god, any more than it is necessary to believe in Santa to analyze the character of Santa.

bout sucide bombing i feel tat why cant all just stop all this , humans have been fighting a pointless wars , i dont get it why do u want to kill? for revenge? or for beliefs wat if its all just an illusion, or show show tat u humans ARE FOOLISH ,everyone has their rights and wrongs , no body is perfect , humans are only perfect when united.

Because some thing are worth fighting for.

If a man harrassed your wife raped your childern what would you do?

If a man insulted you relgion and beliefs?

Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Yes, yes I do. And I still find it hard to believe that it makes logical sense to someone to express that there is no God, and in the same breath tell me what God's will is.

It is not necessary to believe in a god in order to analyze the purported nature of that god, any more than it is necessary to believe in Santa to analyze the character of Santa.

I'll acept that it may not be necessary to believe in a god in order to analyze.

Do you believe one could acquire the empathy necessary to view through the eyes of another observer when one does not believe in the existance of the other observer?

In other words, it is hard to imagine someone can effectively put themselves in someone elses shoes when they do not believe the someone else exists, nor do their shoes.

Can true empathy and compassion be void, but full comprehension obtained?

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Do you believe one could acquire the empathy necessary to view through the eyes of another observer when one does not believe in the existance of the other observer?

Empathy is not required. All that is required is an understanding of the purported nature of that observer. You have no more information in that regard than I do.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
In other words, it is hard to imagine someone can effectively put themselves in someone elses shoes when they do not believe the someone else exists, nor do their shoes.

Puleeeze. If gods exist, you are just as incapable of putting yourself in their shoes as I am. All you can do is project your humanity upon your understanding of their nature. I can do that just as easily. I can do it for Tom Sawyer, or a whale too.

"You mustn't take life too seriously: you'll never get out alive."

--Oscar Wilde (1892)

Originally posted by spamandham

If gods exist, you are just as incapable of putting yourself in their shoes as I am.

The first word in the sentence : "IF" defines the level of cognitive contemplation one is willing and therefore capable of understanding. Therefore to state one is incapable is based on only the perception you confine yourself to, .... but, yes, I am just as incapable as you, and just as capable as well.

All you can do is project your humanity upon your understanding of their nature.

No, I can have humanity projected upon understanding of nature.
or have understanding projected upon humanity.

I can do that just as easily. I can do it for Tom Sawyer, or a whale too.

But, you can not effectively tell me what a musician meant when they wrote certain lyrics without recognizing or accepting that the musician existed .... ever.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
But, you can not effectively tell me what a musician meant when they wrote certain lyrics without recognizing or accepting that the musician existed .... ever.

Of course I can if I know enough about the fictional musician. Believing does not provide any additional information, nor any additional ability to analyze.

Is it your contention that belief in the existence of a musician somehow provides you with more information than I have, or that it somehow enhances your analytical skills?

Originally posted by spamandham


Is it your contention that belief in the existence of a musician somehow provides you with more information than I have, or that it somehow enhances your analytical skills?

Absolutely.

There are levels of empathy that one can experience when one knows another exists, compared to the effort one would put forth to understand and comprehend the simple complexities of someone there is simply no need to have empathy or understanding for, because it would be a waste of time to contemplate the thought processes of someone who does not think, because they do not exist.


Someone's Brain:

Accepted Belief:
GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

Question:
WHAT DOES GOD THINK ABOUT THIS SUBJECT:

Only logical answer:
GOD DOES NOT EXIST. THEREFORE, GOD DOESN'T THINK.

Is it your contention someone can attribute known thought processes to a non-existant, non conscious entity?

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

Originally posted by spamandham


Is it your contention that belief in the existence of a musician somehow provides you with more information than I have, or that it somehow enhances your analytical skills?

Absolutely.

There are levels of empathy that one can experience when one knows another exists, compared to the effort one would put forth to understand and comprehend the simple complexities of someone there is simply no need to have empathy or understanding for,

Your argument seems to amounts to "I am willing to put more effort into this excercise than you". That a pretty baseless conclusion. All you are doing is assuming that you have more motivation than I, yet you don't know me from Adam.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Accepted Belief:
GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

Question:
WHAT DOES GOD THINK ABOUT THIS SUBJECT:

Only logical answer:
GOD DOES NOT EXIST. THEREFORE, GOD DOESN'T THINK.

Is it your contention someone can attribute known thought processes to a non-existant, non conscious entity?

Of course I can. God is not unique in the sense that he can be analyzed without first believing he's real. People play those games all the time with fictional characters with no problem.

If Yoda had shown up instead of Luke Skywalker to request the release of Han Solo, would Jaba have let him go? Do I really have to believe Jaba is a real individual to answer this question, or can I project the behavior I know about the fictional character without such belief just as eaily? Of course I can. Jaba would not have let Han go because Han was a trophy for him.

What do you think Jaba would have done?