Who are you?

reply to post by NewAgeMan

Hi NewAgeMan,

what you have said here is essentially correct;

The spiritual person, is the nothing special, who although he/she isn't nobody they aren't any BODY in particular, what the Zen Buddhists call the no-self self. When self is undone, as in an "identity", the true self is realized, who is of course then free to just go back to being that particularlized "who", except with the awareness and the insight that that particular who isn't REALLY who they really are, not the true self, that's just an image projected, an "identity" which we've adopted. Aside from that there is no particular description ie: my name, my status, my sex, my car, my hair, etc. etc. which can even begin to possibly convery just who we really are

And I go along with this 100%...

But this statement…

and we don't KNOW who that is, only that it's a who and not a nobody

has been proven wrong to me, since I was shown these things, regarding the Self and Not the experience we have, portrayed as a 3D world involving the Form i.e. the "Individual Species" and the "Environment" it interacts with.

My real Self does Not involve "Thought", as “Thought” is a function of the brain, but One can know the Self if all human functions are put aside leaving the Self, which does Not "Think" and remains as the “Observer”.

This Self has No size or Shape, that is to say Non-Dimensional in that to know this, we observe from the "Centre" (The "Inner") having little or no knowledge of the All (The "Outer")

But on the other hand, the other end of your Mind (Conceptual) is the All and knows All.

We can Recall our Real Self experiencing the Outer Component which is then decoded by the brain to become memory of the experience of the Outer Component of the Self.

Its only a matter of time and you will discover this too, just as I have.

But I know there are others out there who know much, much more than me... LOL.

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller

I was editing - see my final edits, presented with humor, which I'd added before your reply. I understand, but I also understand that what you are suggesting we can understand, can't be understood, only experienced, only lived, "grokked", with what Terrance McKenna termed "felt experience", and neither can it be proven to another. Each can only find it on their own, for themselves, you can't really GIVE it to them, and if you could, they would simply push it back into your own face and say "thanks but no thanks". This is my most recent learning, but I'm learning. None of these things can be presented as fact or as an "I'm more right" or you're half right half wrong, or worse, I'm right you're wrong, the truth cannot function that way within the communication channel of the relativity of human being; Only authentic sharing, authentic listening and authentic sharing, with the aim of a mutual, sympathetic understanding, not even pet theories will suffice any more, not once authenticity steps into the fray, then we're really in trouble! Why? Because it's a double edged sword, not an easy thing to wield without suffering many cuts and bruises!

See, right there, I just took a swing at you in a way for suggesting first that I was only half right and second, that you know more than me, and if that weren't enough, that there are many many people who know WAY more than you!, that's a little bit of pride on my part, but instead of editing it for comfort, I'd rather just come out and admit it and communicate more directly and authentically, or maybe I'm still trying to prove myself better by doing this, look at that - anyway, point being is I'm trying to be more authentic, not just to prove something or be showy (which is part of our human nature), but to be true to myself and if possible, more authentically self expressed.

It's a real challenge trying to be anybody at all!

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Yes I see what you mean and go along with this too 100%, but if my real identity wishes any info to come into this experience i.e. this little universe, then it will bring this about no matter what my human thoughts are... LOL.

But on the other hand it is not so interested in things happening the other way around, understandable from what I have seen.

The experience we have of this world, has nothing to do with any human interpretation of this world, as its purpose is nothing like what the un-awakened person can perceive.

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller

There's a blind spot you have there however if you don't mind me pointing it out, and that is that we're all this being in one form or another, and therefore unconditional acceptance is the highest expression of such a being, there can be none of this "I'm awakened" as some sort of accomplishment, as you know it's just a phase of increasing conscious awareness, or of becoming consciously aware of how unconsciously aware we really are, relative to the real reality, something so far outside of our human conceptions, anyone who claims to see it, and experience it first hand, is truly a liar and inauthentic, or not real, not awakened.

Don't get me wrong when I say that and I hope I'm not projecting here at all, but I detect a blind spot, and don't forget that we and the things we work on are always a work in progress. Who I was yesterday is not neccessarily who I am today, nor you, or anyone. We surprise one another, or at least that's the way it ought to be, where the moment you think you've got someone else figured out or pinned down, lo and behold they show up as a new person to your dismay.

We ought never box anyone else in, allowing each person to demonstrate novelty in their self expression and therefore all judgements about awake or not-awake must be set aside, since we cannot in truth say what tomorrow will bring..

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller


I think your point might be however (setting aside my own projections) that the awakened consciousness is just the starting point, as a point within an infinite sphere of potential knowing and increasing awareness (domain of knowing), and, as a non-local, quantum holgraphic brainmind, is as much a reciever of information, as it is a transmitter, at all levels, and that's almost scary in its implications for the awakening person, who's like MY GOD, is there no end? And of course the answer to that is, "no, no end", and who would want it to?

So arriving at the space of nothing in the everything everywhere already always who is God (what else would it be, when we're talking about spheres of consciousness unto the infinite sphere of all knowledge), we are still left with a limited imagination, and this is where I veer sharply from my "new age" bretheren in advocating for an indespensible i-Thou relationship WITH the Absolute, since it would be both highly inappropriate, and highly insane, to think we ought to grow to the size of God, which wouldn't leave us any space for continual exploration for starters.. nor continual gratitude, learning, growth, mutuality, etc, or all the joys of what it means to be alive, and at least for the time being, to be fully human.

Some wish to leave everyone behind and just keep on climbing, addicted to mystical experience and esoteric knowledge, where the air gets thin, the head swims, and the whole mind and body, utterly exhausted, without even a single friend to share the view. I've tried going there, but there's no there there either, just the life we were given to live as we are, as created beings who, although not OF the world, are still very much IN it, even with unawakened people! Wake UP!

"God's thoughts are to us, as high as the stars are above the Earth!"

"His thoughts are, towards us, more numerous than the stars!"

(paraphrased from somewhere in the Bible it matters not)

I once inquired of a couple of Buddhist monks who were here in Vancouver last year, maybe for the Olympics, and while their English wasn't too good, I was able to pose my question to the one who acted as their representative (maybe he was the other guys master perhaps) - what is the purpose of Buddhism? What are you trying to achieve? To do?

His reply?

"Small. To be very small" and he was able to say it with good humor still intact, humbly.

I was very impressed by that, and it made me think about my own propensity to gradiosity and all this nonsense about God-realization and spiritual heights and gnosis and all the rest.

You outgrow it eventually, and wish to come down off the mountain to a nice base camp, if only for the company and the fellowship, the joy and the laughter.

I think many of us, particularly here at ATS and I don't mean you or anyone in particular, try to go way overboard even in their spiritual quests and risk losing the humor of being small in a very "cute" world and universe, imho. What a tragedy it would be to gain the whole world but lose our own sense of humor.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Perhaps I should explain a little better… with regard to your reaction to my last post to you.

There's a blind spot you have there however if you don't mind me pointing it out, and that is that we're all this being in one form or another, and therefore unconditional acceptance is the highest expression of such a being, there can be none of this "I'm awakened" as some sort of accomplishment, as you know it's just a phase of increasing conscious awareness, or of becoming consciously aware of how unconsciously aware we really are, relative to the real reality, something so far outside of our human conceptions, anyone who claims to see it, and experience it first hand, is truly a liar and inauthentic, or not real, not awakened.

See if I can put it another way…

There is in fact a purpose for this little universe and it is this…

All Opposites have to be available for the “Metamorphose of the Soul” to take place.

First the purpose for the rebirth of the Soul in the form of “The Man Child” (referred to in early Christianity as The Son of MAN) is to take the mind into another realm of experience in providing a “Mediator” between the two ends of the Mind (“Inner” & “Outer”). I have shown this little one (what I have called the matrix, some years before the Matrix trilogy came out) It is this “Cloned Soul” in the Centre of the Soul which is the “Mediator” between the two ends of the True Mind (I Sound like a Buddhist I know, but I’m not)

With this in the Soul, which is the Generator of our experiences through its “Geometric Processing System” it lends itself (The Mind dwelling in the processor) to “Bidirectional” editing of the experience.
Whereas in the past structure of the Soul shown here….



being just one stage of the reconstruction but is integral with the main frame or first born Soul referred to in some ancient writings as “The only begotten Son”, before the return of the MAN Child which has absolutely nothing at all to do with the Species but in fact refers to the Cloned Birth of the First Born Soul in each of the Souls as part of the Creation by the One True Mind.
The main frame Not shown in the above Drawing...

The original Processing Structure was in a Hexagonal Format and in ancient times was often referred to as Babylon which as you are aware there was a City on earth named after this.
At present the Soul exists in a Octagonal Format.

The human species has inbred what is known as “Double Logic” (the ol 666) which is the cause of our lack of knowledge and understanding. But this plays an important role in invoking the “Inner” Mind to call out or ask that big question everyone asks at some point in this experience which enables a stage within the Metamorphoses process of the Soul.

This then brings on by-directional communication via the “WORD” (Program Language of the Soul) to bring about the Birth of “The Man Child” within the Soul. So the Soul is “beheaded for the Word of God”, as it is put in Christian writings and the cloned Soul is then spun or woven into the Centre of the processors structure as I have shown in other drawings.

So the so called “Awakening” or “Quickening” refers to “The Metamorphoses of the Soul”, which includes the building of what we could call “Hardware” into the Soul and the following “Software” which is then down loaded into the Soul which then allows us bi-directional editing by both the “Inner” and “Outer” Mind of any experience.

I refer to the “Awakening” because we are really finding out or relearning about our “Root” from the beginning again to restore what the “Outer” Mind knows but also then / now in the “Inner” Mind as well, thus allowing free access to the main libraries of the Soul.

This includes all experiences of any Universe or world unlike any universe as well as access to all the manuals on anything the True Mind has experienced.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Sorry just noticed you wrote again while I was preparing my last post...

I can only think about the first post, it meant the most to me, about your self versus your self from 10 years ago.
I have -excessively- dwelt on the subject of time travel and the me of more than 20 years ago. I OFTEN fantasy and wish about either physically going back or getting thru somehow, to the younger me. When I was little, and owned some pet pigeons, I came down to the family kitchen table and found a poem (more sophisticated than a rhyming kid's) written in pencil on scrap paper, about pigeons. I asked everyone in the family who wrote it, and no one knew. It was a mystery.
So I imagine somehow writing a long letter to myself and physically getting it to me of lets say, 1990 or even 1980. All the things I did, all the people (guys) I fixated on, all the -disasterous- -wrong- priorities. I -don't- know (myself enough) if that me would have believed or feared a kook stalker.

reply to post by hypervalentiodine


I created a similar thread long time ago. Basically it's a "test".

We all know about Star Trek shows and their teleportation devices.

In an hypothetical situation the captain orders you to beam down to this planet. You know that you will be copied atom by atom, subatomic particle by subatomic particle, quark by quark, whatever else.

You balk. Why? You know your body will be destroyed on the ship but an exact duplicate of you will be on the planet. So What's the problem?

Suppose the teleportation device malfunctions. Your body isn't destroyed on the ship but an exact duplicate of you is created on the planet. Who, then, are you?

reply to post by NewAgeMan

I think your point might be however (setting aside my own projections) that the awakened consciousness is just the starting point, as a point within an infinite sphere of potential knowing and increasing awareness (domain of knowing), and, as a non-local, quantum holgraphic brainmind, is as much a reciever of information, as it is a transmitter, at all levels, and that's almost scary in its implications for the awakening person, who's like MY GOD, is there no end? And of course the answer to that is, "no, no end", and who would want it to?

Bingo you are onto it…

So arriving at the space of nothing in the everything everywhere already always who is God (what else would it be, when we're talking about spheres of consciousness unto the infinite sphere of all knowledge), we are still left with a limited imagination, and this is where I veer sharply from my "new age" bretheren in advocating for an indespensible i-Thou relationship WITH the Absolute, since it would be both highly inappropriate, and highly insane, to think we ought to grow to the size of God, which wouldn't leave us any space for continual exploration for starters.. nor continual gratitude, learning, growth, mutuality, etc, or all the joys of what it means to be alive, and at least for the time being, to be fully human.

The Sole purpose for all of Creation is as written it is for “Gods own good pleasure” which we all are a part of…
There is No end. An End is only in the form of a Book, and there are innumerable Books so many even if we are eternal will never experience them all as they are being created faster than we can experience each one…. LOL.

Some wish to leave everyone behind and just keep on climbing, addicted to mystical experience and esoteric knowledge, where the air gets thin, the head swims, and the whole mind and body, utterly exhausted, without even a single friend to share the view. I've tried going there, but there's no there there either, just the life we were given to live as we are, as created beings who, although not OF the world, are still very much IN it, even with unawakened people! Wake UP!

And is very, very sad….

I once inquired of a couple of Buddhist monks who were here in Vancouver last year, maybe for the Olympics, and while their English wasn't too good, I was able to pose my question to the one who acted as their representative (maybe he was the other guys master perhaps) - what is the purpose of Buddhism? What are you trying to achieve? To do?

His reply?

"Small. To be very small" and he was able to say it with good humor still intact, humbly.

Beautiful….

I was very impressed by that, and it made me think about my own propensity to gradiosity and all this nonsense about God-realization and spiritual heights and gnosis and all the rest.

You outgrow it eventually, and wish to come down off the mountain to a nice base camp, if only for the company and the fellowship, the joy and the laughter.

I think many of us, particularly here at ATS and I don't mean you or anyone in particular, try to go way overboard even in their spiritual quests and risk losing the humor of being small in a very "cute" world and universe, imho. What a tragedy it would be to gain the whole world but lose our own sense of humor.

And as you near your end of this Book, you return again putting those things of this world aside realising all was in vain (the human aspect)

The drunken one can Not see the pit and falls into its darkness.
The wise one leaves all behind knowing nothing can be changed and continues on as in the way of the Traveller….
As Jesus the Carpenter said, we were give from the babbling brook and become intoxicated.

At our end of this little book we sober up again to return home.

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine

Originally posted by RANDOMguess
Its simple when you realise you just using this slab of meat and your actually a soul. I don't believe is the creator of thoughts you just need your brain to control your body...everything else is you.

There is a very big trick being played on us and if you believe your are just mechanics like a robot, well you become greedy, selfish and will only pursue earth bound needs and everything else that satisfies you body.

Reading over what I just wrote makes me sound like an old lady, but I'm and 20 year old male boxer. I have just took the time to ask better questions plus read countless nde stories.

edit on 15-2-2011 by RANDOMguess because: (no reason given)

I was wondering when the 'soul' argument would come into it. Before I answer, may I ask what you believe your soul is? From your post I infer that you believe it is your substance, your personality, where your emotions and feelings originate. Is that correct? I personally do not believe in a soul, because your 'personality', the way you feel and interpret emotions and feelings, etc. derives from your brain.

You say your emotions derive from you brain, but couldn't the following be just as true. Say your soul is a ghost with all the attributes you have now in you body and possible more. You have these thoughts or conciousness always But to take part in this planet you need to be in a vehicle that is made of this planet. and it needs to be able to express sorrow happiness pain an so on. Yes when your thinking happy thoughts a certain part of the brain has more activity It doesn't mean it was born there. It may mean your soul needed away to bring it to life in its current vehicle.

So that brings me to my question for you. Have you ever done something really mean and been hit right in the stomach/chest with a whirling indent type feeling(to be clear I mean guilt). Or found out your partner cheated on you, It's the closest to physical pain but not pain. Personally I cannot intelligently believe that is the result of a chemical change that was born in my brain and travelled through the body, creating that guilt or heartbroken feeling.

This is not the video I wanted to show you about viewing auras, but its good. If you want I will search for the other video It has a dude that created a video camera that can see all the colours of your aura around your head/body and when he asks happy an sad questions the colour changes.

www.youtube.com...

Oh an check out Plato's arguments for the soul. One smart dude.

Originally posted by RANDOMguess

You say your emotions derive from you brain, but couldn't the following be just as true. Say your soul is a ghost with all the attributes you have now in you body and possible more. You have these thoughts or conciousness always But to take part in this planet you need to be in a vehicle that is made of this planet. and it needs to be able to express sorrow happiness pain an so on. Yes when your thinking happy thoughts a certain part of the brain has more activity It doesn't mean it was born there. It may mean your soul needed away to bring it to life in its current vehicle.

Well, if we go by that type of logic I suppose anything is possible. For me though, since the hypothesis cannot falsified I cannot accept it for any sort of truth. Furthermore, the idea falls into the category of Occam's Razor, or lex parsimoniae. In other words, it requires more complex and detailed assumptions to explain to origins of who we are as opposed to believing it originates from the brain - i.e. the simplest explanation is most often the correct one.

So that brings me to my question for you. Have you ever done something really mean and been hit right in the stomach/chest with a whirling indent type feeling(to be clear I mean guilt). Or found out your partner cheated on you, It's the closest to physical pain but not pain. Personally I cannot intelligently believe that is the result of a chemical change that was born in my brain and travelled through the body, creating that guilt or heartbroken feeling.

I have experienced both of those feelings. Particularly the heart break one. I once dated a guy who I fell very deeply in love with and who, by all accounts, felt the same for me in return. He got a job on the other side of the country and so I organised everything to move over there to live with him; I organised to transfer universities, jobs, everything. Then at the last minute he calls to break it off with me and I had absolutely no idea why. About a week later I found out he had not only gotten a new girlfriend in the 2 months he'd spent there, he'd also gotten engaged to her. It was probably the worst 2 or 3 weeks of my life. However, despite how intense that pain was, I am confident that it came from my brain. Our body's are pretty amazing things, the extent of what it can accomplish does not surprise me.

Oh an check out Plato's arguments for the soul. One smart dude.

Very. I have not read much of his work though. Currently plodding through a book by Galileo

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine

Originally posted by NorEaster
Information comes into physical existence as a result of something happening. One verb equals one informational fact. That verb can be active, passive or it can be a being verb. It doesn't matter to information. Information appears in direct response to something either occurring or being.

This is true, although I personally don't like to use the word 'fact'. Information that appears due to the action of one thing or another is interpreted with an inherent bias. The truth is something that we as a species can not obtain, since we cannot achieve our objectivity. We cannot separate our logic from our experiences and thus the way that we process information, be it visual, audio or otherwise, varies from person to person. In a sense, we automatically 'airbrush' what we perceive.

Yes, we do distort what we perceive, but the contextual environment itself is defined by the Informational Continuum that builds and collects in direct response to the activity within that environment. No perception whatsoever. Just raw fact-centric information.

Human Intellect and the perception response that causes it to emerge as its own informational representation is something very different than what I refer to as Resdiual Information. Both are informatiuon, but very different levels of internal and relative contextual sophistication. Like comparing a Little Leaguer wit a Major League ball player. Both baseball player, but nothing alike after that general description.

Blah Blah Blah

This is a quite eloquent and rather agreeable representation of identity. However, do you not think that shape comprises an aspect of how we identify ourselves?

Sure. Identity is achieved as a blend of contributing factors and historical aspects. It's that contextual slurry that ultimately defines who we are. We add to it every instant that we live as corporeal human beings. This is why we exist as corporeal human beings. This is a 2nd stage of human gestation. The fully developed and realized human being doesn't actually emerge whole until the corporeal placenta (the body and brain) is thrown away.

Once the corporeal Homosapien body finally dies, the human being is released into the informational realm (call it the spiritual realm if you wish) and its eternal existence as an aware and fully viable personality is begun.

Is you suggesting the existing of a soul?

The term "soul" implies that the person existed before the corporeal body and brain created it. I don't agree with that notion. The human being is an informational being, and information can only emerge as a direct result of event. That means that the soul - as a concept - exists only because no one's ever bothered to take the issue of where everything came from seriously. It's easier to just claim that all this stuff has always been. Logically, though, it can't make sense. Do te work, and you'll see what I mean.

Thanks.

This is a very well thought out response. Thank you for contributing

edit on 15-2-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)

reply to post by hypervalentiodine


I don't see how you can say may statement is less believable, because its not the simplest or there is an easier explanation for it. Especially when dealing with the most complex thing known to man(the brain) I tend to side with Einstein's quote "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler".

As for your comment "about that type of logic" Is that as opposed to systematic logic. You will always come to the same conclusions as main stream Science with that basic non reaching mind frame that's been handed to you."We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them" Einstein again, why not.

That sucks about your boyfriend. But at the same time its not cool to go through life like, Oh iv met this guy the chemical in my brain likes him, he stimulates this part of my brain and it make this happen. I hope three things now. 1 you don't think I believe this as a coping mechanism as I cant handle the reality. 2 you haven't adopted your attitude towards the soul because of your ex. 3 that you will find someone who is your soul mate.

The chemical activity we observe in the brain, is only the result of the functions of this biological "Interface" we call the brain, and its house keeping services regarding the species or body.

DNA itself, is a chemical based program, so of course the activity of the brain will be seen as electro chemical activity, but this is Not the generating source but rather the "Interface" (brain) activity.

So when one is declared clinically "brain dead", there is nothing to drive the "Interface" (brain) so it ceases to be linked to "Consciousness" or LIFE.

Then other chemical interactions take place, to break down the body structure (Rotting or decay).

If the brain was solely dependant on chemical functions, then what the hell do we feel when buried? (when we are so called dead) If all is driven Chemically only then we have a terrible time coming, when buried...

My guess is; we don't feel anything, because the species is separated from our true entity, which is the “Observer”, rather than what is being observed.

It is the Species and Environment, which are both being experienced, by the True Entity which is LIFE Not the Species.

There is Not a single part of the Species, I call my body, which knows me. That is "Me", being one of the "Partitions" (Children, even though I'm over 60 years of age, LOL.) of LIFE, True Mind, Mind Consciousness, spirit or whatever one wishes to call it.

Try this…. Note if your Hand or Foot is "Aware" of you?

Of course they aren’t, that is because there is a difference between your true "Entity" and the Species or flesh.

Tell me if the Foot or Hand is Aware of LIFE?

Religion doesn’t even have to come into this at all.

It is the Primate who tries to make a religion out of knowledge.

Originally posted by RANDOMguess
reply to post by hypervalentiodine

 

I don't see how you can say may statement is less believable, because its not the simplest or there is an easier explanation for it. Especially when dealing with the most complex thing known to man(the brain) I tend to side with Einstein's quote "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler".

As for your comment "about that type of logic" Is that as opposed to systematic logic. You will always come to the same conclusions as main stream Science with that basic non reaching mind frame that's been handed to you."We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them" Einstein again, why not.

That sucks about your boyfriend

. But at the same time its not cool to go through life like, Oh iv met this guy the chemical in my brain likes him, he stimulates this part of my brain and it make this happen. I hope three things now. 1 you don't think I believe this as a coping mechanism as I cant handle the reality. 2 you haven't adopted your attitude towards the soul because of your ex. 3 that you will find someone who is your soul mate.

I feel as though you have taken offence to my comment. I apologise if that was the case, as it was not my intention.

My point about Occam's razor was simply that theories regarding the existence of a soul, as with God, relies much more heavily on non-provable and non-falsifiabe assumptions. The idea that all of our emotions originate from the brain has a decent amount of scientific evidence to accompany it. Thus, while the brain is certainly a complex organ, the supposition that emotions and feelings are derived purely from interactions within the brain requires less assumptions and is, by that stream of thought, the more simpler and more obvious option of the two.

It might not be 'cool' for you, but for me it works just fine. Just because I believe in a rather detached notion of love, does not mean I am not capable of it and nor does it mean I cannot enjoy it or appreciate in just the same manner as someone who does not believe as I do.

To your three points:

1. I do not believe that of you, just as I would not assume it of anyone who shared similar beliefs. For some it is the case, for others it is not. Prejudice is a nasty thing in a sociocultural context. I do my best to avoid it.

2. Not the case. I'm very much over the whole situation. Though it hurt immensely, I moved on, just the same as I have in the past and have continued to do since. I have studied science at a tertiary level and research higher degree level for a few years now, so my attitude towards most things is very black and white.

3. As do I

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller


If the brain was solely dependant on chemical functions, then what the hell do we feel when buried? (when we are so called dead) If all is driven Chemically only then we have a terrible time coming, when buried...

The fear of nothingness used to plague me quite often as a child. I think mostly because I could not comprehend it and what we do not know or understand we instinctively are afraid of. These days I mostly ignore the thoughts and get on with my life while I'm still living yet. Even if it does turn out I'm wrong about the soul and about God(s), in my dying moments at least I know I will be able to say I lived my life while I had it and even though I don't believe it serves a higher purpose, I gave it my all.

It is the Primate who tries to make a religion out of knowledge.

Or perhaps more correctly, it is the primate who derives religion as a form of knowledge from areas where it was otherwise lacking an intuitive explanation (e.g. the creation of the world, the universe and all things within).

reply to post by hypervalentiodine


Sorry I am over 60 years old and seen it all before.... LOL.

I have been involved in Full time R&D for the last 17 years in a practical sense, involving interfaces with the mind so I guess I don't know anything about this..... LOL.

In addition I was declared medically dead for a period longer than 30 minutes in 1973, which is Not an uncommon occurrence in the Species.

So I guess I know nothing about this subject either… LOL.

No hard feelings, as I said I've seen it all before.... Time shows all things.

No no I most definitely did not take offence to your comments. Enjoyed them actually.

It might not be 'cool' for you, but for me it works just fine. Just because I believe in a rather detached notion of love, does not mean I am not capable of it and nor does it mean I cannot enjoy it or appreciate in just the same manner as someone who does not believe as I do.

I will have to disagree here being that I have come from not believing in the soul to the complete opposite. And had loved with the belief and without, and for me, well you know what I'm going to say(this is obviously my opinion and am not trying to take away from you).

I can see neither one of us will change our minds here especially with your science background. You have changed my opinion on one thing, I used to think all people eventually if they lived long enough would believe In a soul but maybe not.

"3. As do I" hey your not allowed to hope you find your soul mate, that goes against your argumentOnly kidding Thanks for the thought revoking reply's.

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by hypervalentiodine

 

Sorry I am over 60 years old and seen it all before.... LOL.

I have been involved in Full time R&D for the last 17 years in a practical sense, involving interfaces with the mind so I guess I don't know anything about this..... LOL.

In addition I was declared medically dead for a period longer than 30 minutes in 1973, which is Not an uncommon occurrence in the Species.

So I guess I know nothing about this subject either… LOL.

No hard feelings, as I said I've seen it all before.... Time shows all things.

I was in no way inferring you were stupid. You have your beliefs, I have mine. As you say, no hard feelings.