|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 27, 2007 8:16 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 27, 2007 11:13 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 27, 2007 8:21 pm
|
|
|
|
"Said that it shouldn't?" That's exactly what I was saying, that i encourage examining the foundations of people's opinions. And being outnumbered doesn't mean you can't ask somebody to justify their opinions. I'm not going to say that if you are in the minority it necessarily means you are wrong at all, however if you are in the minority AND unable to justify yourself it is generally a bad sign. Definitely not always, but in most things a majority held opinion is held because somewhere in there are some people who are very credible on the subject and have already long ago provided this evidence and gotten their position to be the widely accepted one even if most people have not themselves first hand seen the stuff the idea is based off of. Such as how the earth revolves around the sun for example. Most people have not been in space to observe this first hand and if they really wanted could possibly try to say every single space photo ever is a doctored image to make it SEEM like the Earth goes around the sun, however, if that was the most they had ever seen of evidence themselves, but yet it is still accepted mostly today that the Earth really does go around the sun. Ah, i'm out of time for the moment, if that doesn't seem to make much sense right now i'll try to clarify later.
Oh, and as for the asking the opposite questions, that would be kind of...a LONG and possibly often futile effort. Do you mean to say ask (in this case) what happens when you live? Or what doesn't happen when you die? In both cases, these are HUGE lists or things and don't really answer the question. Knowing what something is not generally does not tell you what it IS unless you know there is only a limited amount of possibilities. For example, knowing something is "immaterial" doesn't tell you what it is. It's not material, yes, but what is it instead of material?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 6:35 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:37 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:42 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:07 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:12 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:35 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:24 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:37 pm
|
|
|
|
Been there, done that long ago and many times enough as it is with giving these things a chance to present themselves. Without the conditions having changed any since I last found that nothing happened when I gave it a good ol' honest and open chance, I conclude that that's not advice worth taking unless you have some seriously radical new information you can prove to other people, such as myself, which would alter the situation and the things that play into the equation of if it would even be in the realm of possibility and not totally illogical.
And believing something enough that you think you see it still doesn't make something become real seeing as otherwise every dirty night gown under a kid's bed would actually really become a monster and every person to ever take hallucinogens and see something like a rainbow colored panda tap dancing in their living room would actually have such a thing there and it really could go and sit on an innocent non-high person who unwittingly wandered into the room. Also, the body does have a strong connection to the mind - people have actually caused physical malfunctions in themselves by being convinced they were sick for example as I'm sure you've heard of - so perhaps believing enough could make your eyes and your brain work together wackily enough that you really do think you see something, but again, that doesn't mean it is real. That thing you see may be seen alone and stand up to no other tests for if it is real, such as say that tap dancing panda my be seen by one man, but if he can walk right through it, that's a sure sign it is not in fact exactly what it looks like. You can usually trust your eyes, but looks can be deceiving so sight should not be believed when it goes against all your other methods of obtaining knowledge.
I also don't believe reality and thus the truth comes custom fit for each individual so that such a thing as "my truth" as opposed to everybody else's exists, but that's another story too and it's possibly even a named logical fallacy. (Things can be "true of" different people differently, like it is "true of" Dana that "I have red hair", and "true of" Paul that "I have brown hair," but not "true for" like facts of existence change from person to person.)
As a funny side note though, even what people I have met in real life who believe in mystic type stuff would say your recommendation would be useless for me. They claim I've never seen anything supernatural by myself (even when I tried giving it every opportunity) and that they never see anything supernatural in my presence and that they can't read my mind or do anything to really prove anything of a mystical nature to me because I'm a "void/null psychic" and I unconsciously emit very powerful stuff of some kind which cancels out or doesn't allow near me anything of such a nature. lol Excuses, excuses . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|