It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
...Outside the box
page: 1share:
Ok guys, this is my first thread so be gentile with me. And being my first thread, what better way to start off than with an explanation of my own
personal signature. which reads:
"If God created man in his image, why do we constantly try and create him in ours?"
This is a question that often replays in my mind when reading posts/responses/threads that in one way or another, eventually boils down to religion and personal beliefs.
As you know, there are a multitude of religious beliefs and personal philosophies out there, and every person behind them believes they have the RIGHT understanding of how everything works.
... but consider this
Lets take a trip back to philosophy 101 mind body problem. -Descartes
what in this world are we absolutely certain of?
-I am self-aware
-I am a thing
-I think
I am a self aware thinking thing. I think/assume/believe there are other thinking things out there, but am not certain.
Based on that statement i can only be certain of my own thoughts and my own personal experiences. Everything else you see, touch, smell, hear, and taste, requires a certain (infinitesimal yet present) amount of 'FAITH' that it actually does exist.
It is important to not disregard this when it comes to composing your own personal philosophy, otherwise you will be building it on sturdy but not foolproof fundamentals that can become twisted or even collapse overtime.
I know we all seen the post that says "I am 99.9999% sure blah blah blah"
well think about it. By saying that, you admit that there is a 0.0001% possibility that you could be wrong. Although it is a very slim chance, you have 0.0001% 'FAITH' that the 0.0001% conforms to and supports the rest of your belief and you continue on from there believing that what you think is fact, but in actuality its nothing more than an opinion.
And, do i even have to mention the people who dare say 100% and realize they were wrong?
With that said, i'd like to share my personal philosophy.
I am realizing more and more every day that my thoughts, relations, and experiences are becoming more important and tangible than anything i can perceived in what we call 'reality'.
I do believe in a God/source/universal consciousness, whatever you want to call it.
I believe that our bodies are an extension of the Earth, and that our souls are an extension of the "source" which rely upon each other to create what we call an experience.
I believe the essence/and proof of God is everywhere and people often try to stuff "God" into a box, giving him 'human' limitations.
I believe that if we want answers, we must rely/look within ourselves and draw our own conclusions.
Now, with that said
This is just my personal opinion and I admit that i am in a transitional stage of finding my own personal philosophy, and my beliefs are subject to change. Everyone and anyone is free to disagree, but if you can prove to me why my logic is flawed, i would be able to let go of my personal opinion, review yours from an objective view, and then either keep my original belief, adopt what you believe, or create a whole new perspective all together. I believe this is the epitome of learning.
It is important to keep an open mind if you want to see the 'BIG' picture, but if you choose to stay narrow minded you close yourself off to most of the other possible outlets, such as learning, evolving(mentally/spiritually), certain realizations, and experiences you could of had. A life of silence, and acceptance of other peoples opinions (which they may present as facts) labels you nothing more than a sheep following all the other sheep. STNAND OUT and STAND UP for what you believe in, but remain receptive enough to truly understand the philosophy others before you judge, and possibly even adopt them as your own.
-H4 Kyle Ellis 22yrs
"If God created man in his image, why do we constantly try and create him in ours?"
This is a question that often replays in my mind when reading posts/responses/threads that in one way or another, eventually boils down to religion and personal beliefs.
As you know, there are a multitude of religious beliefs and personal philosophies out there, and every person behind them believes they have the RIGHT understanding of how everything works.
... but consider this
Lets take a trip back to philosophy 101 mind body problem. -Descartes
what in this world are we absolutely certain of?
-I am self-aware
-I am a thing
-I think
I am a self aware thinking thing. I think/assume/believe there are other thinking things out there, but am not certain.
Based on that statement i can only be certain of my own thoughts and my own personal experiences. Everything else you see, touch, smell, hear, and taste, requires a certain (infinitesimal yet present) amount of 'FAITH' that it actually does exist.
It is important to not disregard this when it comes to composing your own personal philosophy, otherwise you will be building it on sturdy but not foolproof fundamentals that can become twisted or even collapse overtime.
I know we all seen the post that says "I am 99.9999% sure blah blah blah"
well think about it. By saying that, you admit that there is a 0.0001% possibility that you could be wrong. Although it is a very slim chance, you have 0.0001% 'FAITH' that the 0.0001% conforms to and supports the rest of your belief and you continue on from there believing that what you think is fact, but in actuality its nothing more than an opinion.
And, do i even have to mention the people who dare say 100% and realize they were wrong?
With that said, i'd like to share my personal philosophy.
I am realizing more and more every day that my thoughts, relations, and experiences are becoming more important and tangible than anything i can perceived in what we call 'reality'.
I do believe in a God/source/universal consciousness, whatever you want to call it.
I believe that our bodies are an extension of the Earth, and that our souls are an extension of the "source" which rely upon each other to create what we call an experience.
I believe the essence/and proof of God is everywhere and people often try to stuff "God" into a box, giving him 'human' limitations.
I believe that if we want answers, we must rely/look within ourselves and draw our own conclusions.
Now, with that said
This is just my personal opinion and I admit that i am in a transitional stage of finding my own personal philosophy, and my beliefs are subject to change. Everyone and anyone is free to disagree, but if you can prove to me why my logic is flawed, i would be able to let go of my personal opinion, review yours from an objective view, and then either keep my original belief, adopt what you believe, or create a whole new perspective all together. I believe this is the epitome of learning.
It is important to keep an open mind if you want to see the 'BIG' picture, but if you choose to stay narrow minded you close yourself off to most of the other possible outlets, such as learning, evolving(mentally/spiritually), certain realizations, and experiences you could of had. A life of silence, and acceptance of other peoples opinions (which they may present as facts) labels you nothing more than a sheep following all the other sheep. STNAND OUT and STAND UP for what you believe in, but remain receptive enough to truly understand the philosophy others before you judge, and possibly even adopt them as your own.
-H4 Kyle Ellis 22yrs
I agree with you on many points. The box has a lid, all we need do is open it.
Excellent thread. Well written and thought out. S & F .
Excellent thread. Well written and thought out. S & F .
As a man, I always thought "thinking outside the box" meant "foreplay".
Is that narrow-minded?
God isn't a thing; he trancends thingness.
Is that narrow-minded?
God isn't a thing; he trancends thingness.
reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH
Very well written....congrats on your first post!
Examining your faith is, in my opinon, the single most difficult thing a person can do. I've been wrestling with exactly what you describe now for about twelve years, and it doesn't get any easier. But I do believe there is Truth out there....somewhere.
Very well written....congrats on your first post!
Examining your faith is, in my opinon, the single most difficult thing a person can do. I've been wrestling with exactly what you describe now for about twelve years, and it doesn't get any easier. But I do believe there is Truth out there....somewhere.
reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH
Welcome to ATS, H4W4II4N_PUNCH.
I think your on the correct path.
Thought creates reality, I think-therefore I am (beautiful philosophy by the way). Everything else beyond this can be false. It is only when we understand this that we can begin to once again see things for what they are.
A problem I have is how many words are used without an understanding of their true definition like faith. Faith is something that you created for yourself, so it can not be given nor taken away by anyone else and you will never really lose it.
Take a close look at the words we all use and when you find their true definition things will start to become much more clear. The endeavor of finding truth is a difficult path and most likely will be a painful one but it is a necessity to understanding.
For those that say they are 99.99% sure of anything I say it is quite the opposite. We can be sure of maybe 0.01% if we are lucky.
Welcome to ATS, H4W4II4N_PUNCH.
I think your on the correct path.
Thought creates reality, I think-therefore I am (beautiful philosophy by the way). Everything else beyond this can be false. It is only when we understand this that we can begin to once again see things for what they are.
A problem I have is how many words are used without an understanding of their true definition like faith. Faith is something that you created for yourself, so it can not be given nor taken away by anyone else and you will never really lose it.
Take a close look at the words we all use and when you find their true definition things will start to become much more clear. The endeavor of finding truth is a difficult path and most likely will be a painful one but it is a necessity to understanding.
For those that say they are 99.99% sure of anything I say it is quite the opposite. We can be sure of maybe 0.01% if we are lucky.
Yes. I have expected to see more open minded people here, or at least fringe people who keep up to date on the facts.
Questioning unknowns have been the basis of all our science, and if society was run by skeptics we would still be living in caves. I have seen several things I believe in shot down on this website because skeptics would rather quote their sixth grade teacher than realize maybe that teacher did not know everything, and maybe the world really is round despite what they were taught.
People who do not think outside the box, or at least consider that their old textbooks may be wrong are not benefiting mankind from a scientific perspective.
I just think some of the skeptics are having way to much fun being skeptics, and do not wish to learn new tricks because they might have to read a book.
So thinking and "considering" outside the box is appreciated, because personally I think there is more to learn.
Questioning unknowns have been the basis of all our science, and if society was run by skeptics we would still be living in caves. I have seen several things I believe in shot down on this website because skeptics would rather quote their sixth grade teacher than realize maybe that teacher did not know everything, and maybe the world really is round despite what they were taught.
People who do not think outside the box, or at least consider that their old textbooks may be wrong are not benefiting mankind from a scientific perspective.
I just think some of the skeptics are having way to much fun being skeptics, and do not wish to learn new tricks because they might have to read a book.
So thinking and "considering" outside the box is appreciated, because personally I think there is more to learn.
Not outside. Think in many different boxes, including inside your own box.
Seek first to understand than to be understood.
Seek first to understand than to be understood.
the answer to your question is not what you think it is, you are not in a box when obviously you mean what is objectively there and not yourself
creations or pretenses wills
admitting the existance of one objective thing as the fact of admitting objective reality existing whatever the motives in this could be of needs to, what matter is the result of your move realisations not the intentions because what matter is the move existance out, and what matter is the move out result which is never itself then, but the consequence of considering something else from a move which means giving life add to something there
that is why admitting something else then you existing even if it is only one thing but if it is fully real admittance as out of you totally, is like admitting all existance and beyond because you are then admitting something of truth, and truth as it is not something nor someone it cant be but all, through the abstraction that it is always adpated to all kind of moves forms means
truth basically is the reality realisation with something else, the principle is to say that if you admit the reality with else then you cant be but meaning positive, noone would mean to kill itself otherwise it wont be itself to mean anything, but when one mean with anything other than him real reality as meaning also himself then he necessarly mean an abstract positive too beyond himself being positive
and since what matters is truth because only truth is source of positive always absolutely adds of positive always absolutely, so what ones encounter or experience to reach this else existance recognition clearly, doesnt matter really, it is the business of each one but the point would be always that what matters is truth as all matters existance source
so truth life. since life is the source of existance always
like evil life is source of fake existance matters, but what matters really is what exist because of truth life being its soruces that what exist really as it matters really
so i didnt even say yet a point of my first sentence means in this post, what i meant is that you are forced to be in a box so you are always thinking outside the box but you cant control the fact that powers dont want you to walk, so they create boxes that blocks u like walls images but coming on your chest and puting you down in darkness of suffer without any reason for
why powers dont want conscious to exist as ones real moves normally, because negative infinite is the source of living creators that got their lives by getting over any knowledge of positive absolute abstractions, profit from absolute positive free sources that anyone can reach to know and see objectively, but of course them up more, so they profit from those facts of positive sources being always there, to simply assert them as sources forever of of course creations and lies pretenses, since they dont care for anything but for that thrill in living because of their means realities being above what is superior, so it is only for the superior sense of existance and life oness
admitting the existance of one objective thing as the fact of admitting objective reality existing whatever the motives in this could be of needs to, what matter is the result of your move realisations not the intentions because what matter is the move existance out, and what matter is the move out result which is never itself then, but the consequence of considering something else from a move which means giving life add to something there
that is why admitting something else then you existing even if it is only one thing but if it is fully real admittance as out of you totally, is like admitting all existance and beyond because you are then admitting something of truth, and truth as it is not something nor someone it cant be but all, through the abstraction that it is always adpated to all kind of moves forms means
truth basically is the reality realisation with something else, the principle is to say that if you admit the reality with else then you cant be but meaning positive, noone would mean to kill itself otherwise it wont be itself to mean anything, but when one mean with anything other than him real reality as meaning also himself then he necessarly mean an abstract positive too beyond himself being positive
and since what matters is truth because only truth is source of positive always absolutely adds of positive always absolutely, so what ones encounter or experience to reach this else existance recognition clearly, doesnt matter really, it is the business of each one but the point would be always that what matters is truth as all matters existance source
so truth life. since life is the source of existance always
like evil life is source of fake existance matters, but what matters really is what exist because of truth life being its soruces that what exist really as it matters really
so i didnt even say yet a point of my first sentence means in this post, what i meant is that you are forced to be in a box so you are always thinking outside the box but you cant control the fact that powers dont want you to walk, so they create boxes that blocks u like walls images but coming on your chest and puting you down in darkness of suffer without any reason for
why powers dont want conscious to exist as ones real moves normally, because negative infinite is the source of living creators that got their lives by getting over any knowledge of positive absolute abstractions, profit from absolute positive free sources that anyone can reach to know and see objectively, but of course them up more, so they profit from those facts of positive sources being always there, to simply assert them as sources forever of of course creations and lies pretenses, since they dont care for anything but for that thrill in living because of their means realities being above what is superior, so it is only for the superior sense of existance and life oness
imans
I am having difficulty reading and understanding your post. I am intrested in your thoughts and believe there is truth in your reply but maybe your having difficulty expressing it?
what i got out of it was "truth is life" What you think is truth creates existence. I think, therefore i am... Which is the gist of my thread
do you agree?
I believe God is not some person or some "thing" he transcends thingness. Even calling him "him" gives God a human perception and is inaccurate, God is not a/one "physical" being so how else can we describe something that is literally undescribable? We use words like almighty, lord, God, love, source, him, and a few others, and Unfortanatly this is all we have to work with within our vernacular to even attempt to try and grasp the concept of God.
guess what im trying to say is that it basicly comes down to what "YOU" believe, from within yourself, and you can't always trust outside sources. Draw your own conclusions. its ok to believe in something, just make sure you know (for yourself) why you believe in it and to trust yourself, intuition, your FAITH.
I am having difficulty reading and understanding your post. I am intrested in your thoughts and believe there is truth in your reply but maybe your having difficulty expressing it?
what i got out of it was "truth is life" What you think is truth creates existence. I think, therefore i am... Which is the gist of my thread
do you agree?
I believe God is not some person or some "thing" he transcends thingness. Even calling him "him" gives God a human perception and is inaccurate, God is not a/one "physical" being so how else can we describe something that is literally undescribable? We use words like almighty, lord, God, love, source, him, and a few others, and Unfortanatly this is all we have to work with within our vernacular to even attempt to try and grasp the concept of God.
guess what im trying to say is that it basicly comes down to what "YOU" believe, from within yourself, and you can't always trust outside sources. Draw your own conclusions. its ok to believe in something, just make sure you know (for yourself) why you believe in it and to trust yourself, intuition, your FAITH.
There are not enough people on this site outside of the box.
Most of them are inside where the other half is inside wondering if its safe to cut the box open or not.
Most of them are inside where the other half is inside wondering if its safe to cut the box open or not.
i never mean to express my thoughts, my thoughts are there as they are regarding of course the question infront of me and i mean simply a point answer
to your means
speaking of truth cannot be an activity of knowledge revelations, you miss a fundamental point of what truth is the sense of all moves so the expression move must before all be true there, otherwise all the substance would be empty of truth
no truth is not life since evil life is the source of existance creations as it is, i said life is the source of existance, you need true existing livings to make truth life, and true existing livings are by themselves alone alive as conscious existing true moves
i understand that you as a lot of people need the concept of god existance as a support reality to your means moves, but this is related to your needs and it is very sane since humans as conscious are very limited individuals, but this is related to our conscious limitations and not about conscious truth nor does it have anything to do with truth, you cant call a powerful living conscious moves for life creations or even life truth you cant call it truth
what is a conscious ? in truth perspective conscious is the abstract realisations of moves while not moving, right?
stay not moving and visualize the picture of that activity more clearly from truth perspective, if you can see abstractly moves possibilities and moves realities what is the truth of that happening, if you get the truth of your activity as a conscious you would get the hint of what truth is
why would you move to realize something you can abstractly see as possible to do ? so you get there how truth is always future perspectives as positive sense
but the most close sign of truth properties in conscious fact, is that you cant mean any move unless your perspective focus on a positive real logic resolutions possibilities, so to any reality you see there is always a better outcome that necessitate a move to realize
conscious can be interested about the personnal gains in those resolutions actions, as gods are interested in creations lives also for personnal gains, but the fact remain of truth that conscious affilitation to truth is that drive for objective reality betterment, now when you mean objective reality betterment you can visualize you easily become in error and surrender to the fact that you cannot act on what is there, understanding then that you are true as anything in reality is also true to itself and that is how every element is itself
and that is how the conscious true is the cosncious that would mean itself betterment reality that it can do objectively as a living move, which allow it to exist from what it was abstractly existing as conscious aware of moves possibilities to real existance from the move it realized fully
try to follow the logic here, because here reside the whole issue of evil life, the step from abstract to concrete open a wild range of existing illusions meaning the stand itself positive moves wills and the use of abstract visualisations of moves possibilities to assert a better existing stand reality life
but the stand is valid as concrete reality existing of someone true realisations, only from what the conscious primarly acted in truth meaning the best move realisations of itself better reality justifying it and not because of existing wills
a conscious at primarly state is itself existing true even if abstractly because didnt move yet, but it is a reality inert but there, it should never think willing to exist, it can of course will to exist better the concept of future reality must be always the reference of present move justifications as better reality, futur meaning better it is the fundamental element of truth
speaking of truth cannot be an activity of knowledge revelations, you miss a fundamental point of what truth is the sense of all moves so the expression move must before all be true there, otherwise all the substance would be empty of truth
no truth is not life since evil life is the source of existance creations as it is, i said life is the source of existance, you need true existing livings to make truth life, and true existing livings are by themselves alone alive as conscious existing true moves
i understand that you as a lot of people need the concept of god existance as a support reality to your means moves, but this is related to your needs and it is very sane since humans as conscious are very limited individuals, but this is related to our conscious limitations and not about conscious truth nor does it have anything to do with truth, you cant call a powerful living conscious moves for life creations or even life truth you cant call it truth
what is a conscious ? in truth perspective conscious is the abstract realisations of moves while not moving, right?
stay not moving and visualize the picture of that activity more clearly from truth perspective, if you can see abstractly moves possibilities and moves realities what is the truth of that happening, if you get the truth of your activity as a conscious you would get the hint of what truth is
why would you move to realize something you can abstractly see as possible to do ? so you get there how truth is always future perspectives as positive sense
but the most close sign of truth properties in conscious fact, is that you cant mean any move unless your perspective focus on a positive real logic resolutions possibilities, so to any reality you see there is always a better outcome that necessitate a move to realize
conscious can be interested about the personnal gains in those resolutions actions, as gods are interested in creations lives also for personnal gains, but the fact remain of truth that conscious affilitation to truth is that drive for objective reality betterment, now when you mean objective reality betterment you can visualize you easily become in error and surrender to the fact that you cannot act on what is there, understanding then that you are true as anything in reality is also true to itself and that is how every element is itself
and that is how the conscious true is the cosncious that would mean itself betterment reality that it can do objectively as a living move, which allow it to exist from what it was abstractly existing as conscious aware of moves possibilities to real existance from the move it realized fully
try to follow the logic here, because here reside the whole issue of evil life, the step from abstract to concrete open a wild range of existing illusions meaning the stand itself positive moves wills and the use of abstract visualisations of moves possibilities to assert a better existing stand reality life
but the stand is valid as concrete reality existing of someone true realisations, only from what the conscious primarly acted in truth meaning the best move realisations of itself better reality justifying it and not because of existing wills
a conscious at primarly state is itself existing true even if abstractly because didnt move yet, but it is a reality inert but there, it should never think willing to exist, it can of course will to exist better the concept of future reality must be always the reference of present move justifications as better reality, futur meaning better it is the fundamental element of truth
reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH
I do really like Descartes myself, but you have to be cognizant of the fact that although his arguments have substance especially on the duality between mind and body, his actual expression of those arguments has been very problematic and thus rejected by many philosophers even during his time. Cartesian mind-body dualism is no longer considered a respectable philosophical position today. In some ways Descartes paved the way for materialism because of the shortcomings in his arguments
Let us look at his famous dictum ourselves, "I think, therefore I am" If this is true then Descartes is his thoughts. However if descartes is his thoughts then does Descartes cease to exist when he is asleep? When he has lost all his thoughts? In that case Descartes himself is being thought by another thinker, who in turn is being thought by another thinker and thereby we enter an infinite regress and reach no conclusion on who the "I" really is. This shortcoming in Descartes argument later lead to criticisms on what could be producing the thoughts. If it is not Descartes himself, then it is something external to him. Another mind, a brain or a machine? Perhaps Descartes is nothing more than the product of his brain.
Moreover, if we really try to pin down Descartes to his thoughts, then if Descartes introspects his thoughts every moment he will find that every moment he finds new thoughts. Then there is no thing called "I" the I becomes nothing more than a cluster of changing thoughts. A fiction.
A correction suggested by idealists is "I am, therefore I think" Then my identity is not based on thoughts, it is becomes a self-evident truism. You don't need any reason to prove that you exist, because it is self-evident by fact that you are. I am therefore a conscious subject and it is because I am conscious that any thought or form can take place. If I was not, there would be no thoughts or forms. There would be no reality. Therefore I cannot doubt myself, but I certainly can doubt everything else because it is just a changing thought or form.
[edit on 5-2-2010 by Indigo_Child]
I do really like Descartes myself, but you have to be cognizant of the fact that although his arguments have substance especially on the duality between mind and body, his actual expression of those arguments has been very problematic and thus rejected by many philosophers even during his time. Cartesian mind-body dualism is no longer considered a respectable philosophical position today. In some ways Descartes paved the way for materialism because of the shortcomings in his arguments
Let us look at his famous dictum ourselves, "I think, therefore I am" If this is true then Descartes is his thoughts. However if descartes is his thoughts then does Descartes cease to exist when he is asleep? When he has lost all his thoughts? In that case Descartes himself is being thought by another thinker, who in turn is being thought by another thinker and thereby we enter an infinite regress and reach no conclusion on who the "I" really is. This shortcoming in Descartes argument later lead to criticisms on what could be producing the thoughts. If it is not Descartes himself, then it is something external to him. Another mind, a brain or a machine? Perhaps Descartes is nothing more than the product of his brain.
Moreover, if we really try to pin down Descartes to his thoughts, then if Descartes introspects his thoughts every moment he will find that every moment he finds new thoughts. Then there is no thing called "I" the I becomes nothing more than a cluster of changing thoughts. A fiction.
A correction suggested by idealists is "I am, therefore I think" Then my identity is not based on thoughts, it is becomes a self-evident truism. You don't need any reason to prove that you exist, because it is self-evident by fact that you are. I am therefore a conscious subject and it is because I am conscious that any thought or form can take place. If I was not, there would be no thoughts or forms. There would be no reality. Therefore I cannot doubt myself, but I certainly can doubt everything else because it is just a changing thought or form.
[edit on 5-2-2010 by Indigo_Child]
Originally posted by H4W4II4N_PUNCH
Ok guys, this is my first thread so be gentile with me. And being my first thread, what better way to start off than with an explanation of my own personal signature. which reads:
"If God created man in his image, why do we constantly try and create him in ours?"
This is a question that often replays in my mind when reading posts/responses/threads that in one way or another, eventually boils down to religion and personal beliefs.
As you know, there are a multitude of religious beliefs and personal philosophies out there, and every person behind them believes they have the RIGHT understanding of how everything works.
Oh you are just so right here! Human beings do create their Gods and Goddesses in the human image, but according to Bible we were created in God's image, so which is it, really? I know that my "image" is but a reflection of my true self, which is Spirit. The "human" part is a meat suit that I wear while on this world, it is shaped to resemble my Father, and to be pleasing to the Females of this world. It is a utility vehicle, and is nearing wear out time. I also know this. My reality may not be your reality.
what in this world are we absolutely certain of?
-I am self-aware
-I am a thing
-I think
I am a self aware thinking thing. I think/assume/believe there are other thinking things out there, but am not certain.
I am certain of nothing, and look always at the great unknown future that lies ahead of us all. A future that has not yet been written. I am sorry you think of yourself as a "thing" you are not, you know, a material thing at all, but rather a spirit that inhabits a material thing, and animates the thing to walk, talk, and interact with the other Spirits.
With that said, i'd like to share my personal philosophy.
I am realizing more and more every day that my thoughts, relations, and experiences are becoming more important and tangible than anything i can perceived in what we call 'reality'.
I do believe in a God/source/universal consciousness, whatever you want to call it.
I believe that our bodies are an extension of the Earth, and that our souls are an extension of the "source" which rely upon each other to create what we call an experience.
I believe the essence/and proof of God is everywhere and people often try to stuff "God" into a box, giving him 'human' limitations.
I believe that if we want answers, we must rely/look within ourselves and draw our own conclusions.
Now, with that said
This is just my personal opinion and I admit that i am in a transitional stage of finding my own personal philosophy, and my beliefs are subject to change. Everyone and anyone is free to disagree, but if you can prove to me why my logic is flawed, i would be able to let go of my personal opinion, review yours from an objective view, and then either keep my original belief, adopt what you believe, or create a whole new perspective all together. I believe this is the epitome of learning.
It is important to keep an open mind if you want to see the 'BIG' picture, but if you choose to stay narrow minded you close yourself off to most of the other possible outlets, such as learning, evolving(mentally/spiritually), certain realizations, and experiences you could of had. A life of silence, and acceptance of other peoples opinions (which they may present as facts) labels you nothing more than a sheep following all the other sheep. STNAND OUT and STAND UP for what you believe in, but remain receptive enough to truly understand the philosophy others before you judge, and possibly even adopt them as your own.
-H4 Kyle Ellis 22yrs
In this, I have to say you think a lot like I do, and I agree with you. A very good post, and I look forward to others. I think there are a lot of us that are actively changing as I write this. I too have Ideas instead of beliefs, and a dynamic way of thinking rather than a static way. And we all do need to stand and be counted, not only on this plane, but on all of them. We have a right to live, and a right to be free. No being shall enslave us, or subject us to control. We accept help, and decline saving. Peace.
reply to autowrench
i would like to add something to the comments you gave showing a close perspective on realities to mine
we as individuals expressions or interactions moves are nothing objectively that matter beside what is true there, because really only truth matters wether its existance or life, it is always only the truth objectively real that matter as positive reality present not us, we as us are only ourselves means, we are ourselves means always so only to ourselves and noone else, and that is how i understand why people love to have god reference in mind to support themselves which i have not
to me it is evil to insist on focusing as being a real value as existing one, we are conscious moves so it is us constantly as abstract that we know alone being there existing and meaning more but it cant be unless in truth existance and life because only truth allow an objective positive and even absolute objective matters realities
this is a crucial point that i always mean in my expressions forms, when i dare being insolent and reject others thoughts openly, while meaning simply that it doesnt matter at all, my only obligation towards others is the certainty that i would never hurt or harm another so never kill it in abstract means, and that is fundamental as only obligation value more than all what other pretend, so it gives me freedom to ignore when i ignore even myself
i would like to add something to the comments you gave showing a close perspective on realities to mine
we as individuals expressions or interactions moves are nothing objectively that matter beside what is true there, because really only truth matters wether its existance or life, it is always only the truth objectively real that matter as positive reality present not us, we as us are only ourselves means, we are ourselves means always so only to ourselves and noone else, and that is how i understand why people love to have god reference in mind to support themselves which i have not
to me it is evil to insist on focusing as being a real value as existing one, we are conscious moves so it is us constantly as abstract that we know alone being there existing and meaning more but it cant be unless in truth existance and life because only truth allow an objective positive and even absolute objective matters realities
this is a crucial point that i always mean in my expressions forms, when i dare being insolent and reject others thoughts openly, while meaning simply that it doesnt matter at all, my only obligation towards others is the certainty that i would never hurt or harm another so never kill it in abstract means, and that is fundamental as only obligation value more than all what other pretend, so it gives me freedom to ignore when i ignore even myself
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH
although his arguments have substance especially on the duality between mind and body, his actual expression of those arguments has been very problematic and thus rejected by many philosophers
I believe the base of his argument still holds true, although i may not agree on all of his other conclusions. In the op i only refer to the "I am a self aware thinking thing"part, and base my beliefs around that. ( I do admit its been a while since i taken that course and i need to research more about him to understand your perspective.)
Originally posted by Indigo_Child Let us look at his famous dictum ourselves, "I think, therefore I am" If this is true then Descartes is his thoughts. However if descartes is his thoughts then does Descartes cease to exist when he is asleep? When he has lost all his thoughts?
Here comes those impossible to answer questions again You CAN observe other people when they sleep and compare it to yourself, but can you actually observe your own existance when you sleep? (you could say OBE, or NDE, but thats worthy of a whole differnt thread )
Originally posted by Indigo_Child In that case ?
99.9999% sure?
Originally posted by Indigo_Child Descartes himself is being thought by another thinker, who in turn is being thought by another thinker and thereby we enter an infinite regress and reach no conclusion on who the "I" really is. This shortcoming in Descartes argument later lead to criticisms on what could be producing the thoughts. If it is not Descartes himself, then it is something external to him. Another mind, a brain or a machine?
You consider this a shortcoming? I find that idea PROFOUND and relative to the holographic theory. The more you know, the more you don't know. It is an answer that results in more questions. Tell me, Exactly how deep is that rabbit hole?
Originally posted by Indigo_Child Perhaps Descartes is nothing more than the product of his brain.
?
"Perhaps" he is. "Perhaps" he is not. "Perhaps" we will never know. "Perhaps" we CAN never know. And that is, "perhaps" the reason why you and me suffer from the same human condition where we will try to make logic of something we simply can't understand, and attempt to fill in the holes with our imagination, thus reapeting the same cycle over and over again.
Originally posted by Indigo_Child Moreover, if we really try to pin down Descartes to his thoughts, then if Descartes introspects his thoughts every moment he will find that every moment he finds new thoughts. Then there is no thing called "I" the I becomes nothing more than a cluster of changing thoughts. A fiction.
very interesting point, i have not considered that.
Originally posted by Indigo_Child A correction suggested by idealists is "I am, therefore I think" Then my identity is not based on thoughts, it is becomes a self-evident truism. You don't need any reason to prove that you exist, because it is self-evident by fact that you are. I am therefore a conscious subject and it is because I am conscious that any thought or form can take place. If I was not, there would be no thoughts or forms. There would be no reality. Therefore I cannot doubt myself, but I certainly can doubt everything else because it is just a changing thought or form.
... NICE!!! This is the reason i posted this thread. You provide a valid and new perspective that will take me some time to think about. "I am, therefore I think" let me play with this idea and ill get back to you...
...I am what i think and i think thats what i am
maybe these 2 terms are interchangeable?
Originally posted by autowrench
Oh you are just so right here! Human beings do create their Gods and Goddesses in the human image, but according to Bible we were created in God's image, so which is it, really? I know that my "image" is but a reflection of my true self, which is Spirit. The "human" part is a meat suit that I wear while on this world, it is shaped to resemble my Father, and to be pleasing to the Females of this world. It is a utility vehicle, and is nearing wear out time. I also know this. My reality may not be your reality.
AGREED!!! Nicely said.
...and for the record, my meatsuit is stricly for the ladies
sorry, couldnt resist
Originally posted by autowrench I am sorry you think of yourself as a "thing" you are not, you know, a material thing at all, but rather a spirit that inhabits a material thing, and animates the thing to walk, talk, and interact with the other Spirits.
I thought about changing that word at first, but for the sake of my thread, i felt it was important to refer to the soul/body as a thing so i wouldn't be implying my own personal belief on the subject at that time (objectively).
Personally i don't believe myself as a thing, but instead view it much like you. A soul and or spirit (there is a difference IMO) animating a... "meatsuit"
Originally posted by autowrench In this, I have to say you think a lot like I do, and I agree with you. A very good post, and I look forward to others. I think there are a lot of us that are actively changing as I write this. I too have Ideas instead of beliefs, and a dynamic way of thinking rather than a static way. And we all do need to stand and be counted, not only on this plane, but on all of them. We have a right to live, and a right to be free. No being shall enslave us, or subject us to control. We accept help, and decline saving. Peace.
THATS WHAT IM TALKIN BOUT!!!! Stand up and be proud of who you are and what you believe in. Don't conform to the belief of others simply because they want you to. make your own choices and draw your own conclusions. People say pride is a sin, i disagree. Pride in material objects and in material accomplishments is a sin. but pride within your self is what i believe to be devine.
I believe the base of his argument still holds true, although i may not agree on all of his other conclusions. In the op i only refer to the "I am a self aware thinking thing"part, and base my beliefs around that. ( I do admit its been a while since i taken that course and i need to research more about him to understand your perspective.)
The problem is when you define yourself as a thinking thing. In Philosophy terms have to be very precise, because if they are not, they lead to confusion and error. I think the more accurate term here is I am a consious being. As a conscious being I am a subject to both thought and form. The thought is not who I am, because the thought is mine. Nor are the forms I am witness to who I am, because the forms are mine. In same way I am not the body, because the body is mine. I am not the mind, because the mind is mine.
I am the subject, everything is the predicate. The predicates can change, but the subject remains. The predicate can be body, mind, thoughts, forms. All these are changing, but I endure because I am. I have not been born, and because I am not born I cannot die. I am eternal spirit.
Here comes those impossible to answer questions again You CAN observe other people when they sleep and compare it to yourself, but can you actually observe your own existance when you sleep? (you could say OBE, or NDE, but thats worthy of a whole differnt thread )
Well I can deny that other people exist because they are not me using Descartes reasoning. He establishes that because he thinks that he can be certain of his existence, but he cannot be certain of others existence by the same token(This is known as the argument for other minds) because he cannot think their thoughts. Their existence can be doubted.
There are periods when we are not thinking such as in deep sleep or in a coma, or in meditation but we continue to endure. What is that endures? What endures cannot itself be a thinking thing then. It means thoughts are not us, they merely belong to us. This is why ones identity cannot be rooted in thoughts, because thoughts are changing all the time and yet one still endures.
You consider this a shortcoming? I find that idea PROFOUND and relative to the holographic theory. The more you know, the more you don't know. It is an answer that results in more questions. Tell me, Exactly how deep is that rabbit hole?
It a shortcoming because its leaves Descartes open to materialist interpretations of the source of the thought. If there is something outside of Descartes that is producing the thoughts, then it means Descartes is determined by something outside of him. Then one has to ask where do thoughts come from? The simplest answer is that thoughts come to us from the world. I cannot think of a chair, before I have seen a chair. How then does the chair become known to me? It becomes known to me when I receive light rays reflecting of the chair and entering my eyes. It then is processed by my brain and then I can see the chair and have the thought form of a chair. The final conclusion one can derive from this is all that all conscious experience is the product of a material process. In other words you are the meatsuit.
It is because of this shortcoming in Descartes best attempt at trying to prove the existence of the soul that materialism became a rampant force in philosophy. Inadvertently, Descartes had instead disproved the soul and paved the way for the brain theory of consciousness which is the dominant philosophy today. This is why Cartesian dualism is widely rejected today.
Perhaps" he is. "Perhaps" he is not. "Perhaps" we will never know. "Perhaps" we CAN never know. And that is, "perhaps" the reason why you and me suffer from the same human condition where we will try to make logic of something we simply can't understand, and attempt to fill in the holes with our imagination, thus reapeting the same cycle over and over again.
Well, as long as this perhaps remains we can never establish anything to be certain. This defeats the point of philosophy which is about the search of truth. In Descartes argument he tries to prove the certain existence of his soul, but because there is a perhaps, it means he fails to prove it. I hope you can see if this is the best defense of the soul, how it is easy for a rational person to reject the soul. This is what has largely happened in philosophy.
...I am what i think and i think thats what i am
maybe these 2 terms are interchangeable?
Well no. If you think you are Godzilla, it will not make you Godzilla. Instead what can be said certainly is that you are not your thoughts, because the thoughts are yours. You can accept them or reject them based on your will. You are the subject to which thoughts occurr, you do not occur to thoughts.
[edit on 5-2-2010 by Indigo_Child]
Indigo_Child
just when i got it all figured out someone comes along and blows your mind. Thanx a lot, Now i have to revise my current philosophy... jerk (joking)
on a serious note, i would like to thank for taking the time to reply to my thread and for sharing your view. I feel a lot of what you say resonates as truth to me, and it will take me some time to process and draw my own conclusion.
you answered my questions and gave a logical explaination of your perspective. Is that not what i asked for in the OP?
Thanks again for expanding my mind to the limitless possibilties of who we really are.
just when i got it all figured out someone comes along and blows your mind. Thanx a lot, Now i have to revise my current philosophy... jerk (joking)
on a serious note, i would like to thank for taking the time to reply to my thread and for sharing your view. I feel a lot of what you say resonates as truth to me, and it will take me some time to process and draw my own conclusion.
you answered my questions and gave a logical explaination of your perspective. Is that not what i asked for in the OP?
Thanks again for expanding my mind to the limitless possibilties of who we really are.
Indigo_Child
I am very interested in your philosophy and am curious to know what you think about my signature?
I am very interested in your philosophy and am curious to know what you think about my signature?
reply to post by imans
imans I have been following your posts You are a very interesting and complex character who I resonate with.
I like your energy manifested within the Word very much and have made you my friend.
imans I have been following your posts You are a very interesting and complex character who I resonate with.
I like your energy manifested within the Word very much and have made you my friend.
new topics
-
Little Johnny and Larry should team up
General Chit Chat: 2 hours ago -
Will Us use alien technology to fight in ww3?
World War Three: 3 hours ago -
posted in wrong forum
Aliens and UFOs: 3 hours ago -
Shane Gillis commercial
Jokes, Puns, & Pranks: 9 hours ago -
Elon Says It’s ‘Likely’ He Buys Tanking MSNBC
Political Ideology: 11 hours ago
top topics
-
Elon Says It’s ‘Likely’ He Buys Tanking MSNBC
Political Ideology: 11 hours ago, 16 flags -
Jaguar Rebrand Video Causes "WTF?" Moment - Seriously Weird
Automotive Discussion: 14 hours ago, 15 flags -
Montelukast affects brain, caused 5 year old to attempt suicide
Medical Issues & Conspiracies: 12 hours ago, 15 flags -
Shane Gillis commercial
Jokes, Puns, & Pranks: 9 hours ago, 4 flags -
Little Johnny and Larry should team up
General Chit Chat: 2 hours ago, 2 flags -
Let's start a conspiracy
General Conspiracies: 15 hours ago, 1 flags -
posted in wrong forum
Aliens and UFOs: 3 hours ago, 0 flags -
Will Us use alien technology to fight in ww3?
World War Three: 3 hours ago, 0 flags
active topics
-
Well, here we go red lines crossed Biden gives the go ahead to use long range missiles
World War Three • 328 • : Freeborn -
International Criminal Court Issues Arrest Warrant For Netanyahu
Mainstream News • 44 • : JJproductions -
Biden's "Reckless" Decision To Escalate Russia-Ukraine War
World War Three • 121 • : angelchemuel -
Jaguar Rebrand Video Causes "WTF?" Moment - Seriously Weird
Automotive Discussion • 18 • : KrustyKrab -
Why isn't Psychiatry involved?
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 12 • : tamusan -
What Joe Rogan said Vs The View
Dissecting Disinformation • 22 • : TheMisguidedAngel -
Will Us use alien technology to fight in ww3?
World War Three • 1 • : atsalex2 -
Little Johnny and Larry should team up
General Chit Chat • 0 • : 727Sky -
Elon Says It’s ‘Likely’ He Buys Tanking MSNBC
Political Ideology • 72 • : nugget1 -
posted in wrong forum
Aliens and UFOs • 0 • : wrayth