Elbow beards
Well-Known Member
There's still people that think it's flat now mate, ask hodge.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Religion
- Thread starter idahoblues
- Start date
Magicpole
Well-Known Member
Ahem. While agreeing with your overall point, I can't let this bit go.
There's no evidence for that whatever. Sailors of all people knew the world was round because to prove it all they had to do was climb a mast.
The reason they disliked going out of sight of land was nothing to do with falling off the edge and everything to do with an inability to navigate their way back. A modern example would be setting off in a rocket from earth with no navigation instruments and being told to go out of sight of the earth. You'd say naff off at the very least.
I'm afraid there's a tendency to view people in history as being a bit thick. They weren't.
Ignorance is not thick. I never say they were thick. It was the common assumption, as was the world was flat, yet we know the Greeks(some) knew it was round. And Indeed calculated it circumference to an astonishing degree using shadows at noon.
Educated people in small numbers could tell but for the masses, it was a given. Until it wasn’t.
Ignorance is not thick. I never say they were thick. It was the common assumption, as was the world was flat, yet we know the Greeks(some) knew it was round. And Indeed calculated it circumference to an astonishing degree using shadows at noon.
Educated people in small numbers could tell but for the masses, it was a given. Until it wasn’t.
No, that's exactly the point. Anyone would have known for the very simple and obvious reason that from high up you can see further. Hence the point about climbing a mast. If the earth was flat, it wouldn't make any difference, ergo it must be curved.
You didn't need to be a Greek philosopher to know that, just an ordinary person. Or sailor. Hence they climbed them to see.
Thanks. I like this article as it suggests that there is still much we don't understand. And if humanity is drawn to explore this explore this through science, it feels natural for me that other fields might too.“Yet we do not have any idea what theory underlies either of them."
The main point if this sentence is the word Yet. In the history of our species it was but a blink of an evolved eye that we didn’t know where the sun went at night. Yet, we now know.
It was even later that most still thought the world was flat and to sail on the ocean would lead to us falling off. Yet now we know.
It was a thought away that disease and plagues were caused by demons, witches and foul air. Yet now we know.
Yet is not an open door for hunches, feelings and a self proclaimed connection with the universe that can never be tested and proven.
I will watch the film you put up Arfur me old mystical salt. I read a bit about it.
Look after yourself. :)
Anyhow, here is how one way of looking at this.
I have known conflict within myself - let's call this 'stress.' Basically much of life had been cycles of stress - then trying to fight this or get rid of it or trying to be 'chilled' or getting pissed/stoned whatever. Not so great and can be quite self destructive Then I cam to be aware that there is a state of being that is more peaceful, like a focussed state of relaxation. This is enjoyable.
Later it became apparent that there is a difference between 'I am stressed' and 'I am experiencing the 'grip' of stress.' In the former it is as though I identify with the stress so if anything come along that would end the stress then that would be the 'death' of me. In the latter I am just experiencing a state of stress and so if/as that stress is released I actually feel more alive.
Through this I discovered that, for example, when stressed I might eat unhealthily. I might notice this and then try to eat 'super-healthy' to compensate. But still from a state of stress. Instead I can let go of the stress and find I eat in a normal, balanced way. Different experiences.
So, what of stress? Not important? Maybe it is if one has known stress related disease whether physical or mental - in oneself or others that one is close to. One aspect of this might be states of inflammation that come from stress. If you like, then when stressed I can feel inflamed mentally and physically. These feel harsh. almost like 'hell on earth' one could say. And my inner 'devil' come out to play So letting of stress is practical - that doing so leaves one feeling more like 'heaven on earth' is a bonus, for sure?
As for the grounding video - I don't agree with it all but it is a principle that has been around for ages. And guess what? As I learnt to let go of stress I come to feel more grounded in a practical sense, here on earth. Having read the skeptics page well, for, one that just seems like a strange way to interpret what was spoken of. For two, it seem that many so called 'skeptics' don't actually understand what real skeptics were - they tend to just just question belief that don't fit into their own, which kind of misses the point surely? For three - and this seems essential - I would rather find out practical truth for myself than settle for the theoretical beliefs of a scientist or priest or teacher in a class room. Others may choose differently.
That is how I choose to live life. You don't have to agree and that's great. But for me to try to fit into what some folk insist is 'truth' on here would be pretty damn stressful and not such a kind way for me to live life. So fuck that for a game of soldiers.
Enjoy the mystery if one chooses - even if it's beyond the limits of commonly accepted 'understanding.' Sounds like freedom, no? And maybe contributed to leaving a rigidly dogmatic church?
Magicpole
Well-Known Member
Thanks. I like this article as it suggests that there is still much we don't understand. And if humanity is drawn to explore this explore this through science, it feels natural for me that other fields might too.
Anyhow, here is how one way of looking at this.
I have known conflict within myself - let's call this 'stress.' Basically much of life had been cycles of stress - then trying to fight this or get rid of it or trying to be 'chilled' or getting pissed/stoned whatever. Not so great and can be quite self destructive Then I cam to be aware that there is a state of being that is more peaceful, like a focussed state of relaxation. This is enjoyable.
Later it became apparent that there is a difference between 'I am stressed' and 'I am experiencing the 'grip' of stress.' In the former it is as though I identify with the stress so if anything come along that would end the stress then that would be the 'death' of me. In the latter I am just experiencing a state of stress and so if/as that stress is released I actually feel more alive.
Through this I discovered that, for example, when stressed I might eat unhealthily. I might notice this and then try to eat 'super-healthy' to compensate. But still from a state of stress. Instead I can let go of the stress and find I eat in a normal, balanced way. Different experiences.
So, what of stress? Not important? Maybe it is if one has known stress related disease whether physical or mental - in oneself or others that one is close to. One aspect of this might be states of inflammation that come from stress. If you like, then when stressed I can feel inflamed mentally and physically. These feel harsh. almost like 'hell on earth' one could say. And my inner 'devil' come out to play So letting of stress is practical - that doing so leaves one feeling more like 'heaven on earth' is a bonus, for sure?
As for the grounding video - I don't agree with it all but it is a principle that has been around for ages. And guess what? As I learnt to let go of stress I come to feel more grounded in a practical sense, here on earth. Having read the skeptics page well, for, one that just seems like a strange way to interpret what was spoken of. For two, it seem that many so called 'skeptics' don't actually understand what real skeptics were - they tend to just just question belief that don't fit into their own, which kind of misses the point surely? For three - and this seems essential - I would rather find out practical truth for myself than settle for the theoretical beliefs of a scientist or priest or teacher in a class room. Others may choose differently.
That is how I choose to live life. You don't have to agree and that's great. But for me to try to fit into what some folk insist is 'truth' on here would be pretty damn stressful and not such a kind way for me to live life. So fuck that for a game of soldiers.
Enjoy the mystery if one chooses - even if it's beyond the limits of commonly accepted 'understanding.' Sounds like freedom, no? And maybe contributed to leaving a rigidly dogmatic church?
I think we all feel stress and you’re right it’s how we react to it. I also have suffered from depression from time to time and my early reaction to it made it worse.
I now realise that my brain is wired this way and at times I take a dip, but rather than fight it, I go with the flow and it never gets as bad. It’s just a down time and much more manageable.
You do whatever makes you happy mate. I believe in a skeptical approach to claims of other worldly stuff. I am always open to evidence but not personal experience stuff. That is not enough for me at least. Abd especially other people’s.
Scientist will say, we don’t know about many things. New Age types, religious etc always and I mean always have an answer. An interpretation straight out of their or somebody else’s arse. That’s just not on. If these things are real, then why apart from personal feelings or faith can’t tgey be measured or even witnessed?
Live long and prosper my friend.
I appreciate your words and agree with a lot of what you write. But here's the problem - I don't agree with everything that you write. And this is wonderful. So what if I were to say (and I hope you don't mind this) that you come across as a sound bloke that genuinely gives a shit about people? Can I prove this scientifically with words and symbols and equations? No, probably not. But, at the same time, this feels ridiculously obviously true. Though you may beg to differ? Maybe we best wait 20 years for scientists to bring out an app to prove this? Right? Then we can speak to each other....I think we all feel stress and you’re right it’s how we react to it. I also have suffered from depression from time to time and my early reaction to it made it worse.
I now realise that my brain is wired this way and at times I take a dip, but rather than fight it, I go with the flow and it never gets as bad. It’s just a down time and much more manageable.
You do whatever makes you happy mate. I believe in a skeptical approach to claims of other worldly stuff. I am always open to evidence but not personal experience stuff. That is not enough for me at least. Abd especially other people’s.
Scientist will say, we don’t know about many things. New Age types, religious etc always and I mean always have an answer. An interpretation straight out of their or somebody else’s arse. That’s just not on. If these things are real, then why apart from personal feelings or faith can’t tgey be measured or even witnessed?
Live long and prosper my friend.
Magicpole
Well-Known Member
I appreciate your words and agree with a lot of what you write. But here's the problem - I don't agree with everything that you write. And this is wonderful. So what if I were to say (and I hope you don't mind this) that you come across as a sound bloke that genuinely gives a shit about people? Can I prove this scientifically with words and symbols and equations? No, probably not. But, at the same time, this feels ridiculously obviously true. Though you may beg to differ? Maybe we best wait 20 years for scientists to bring out an app to prove this? Right? Then we can speak to each other....
I do have badges from the scouts if that helps. Plus, I could provide a hundred people who would fall over each other to testify to my being a thoroughly brilliant human being.
Sadly, they are all on holiday, but they exist. :)
Hey snorky. Do you subscribe to the theories of a multiverse? Might not exist but maybe, just maybe, there is a universe within this in which arfurIs it just me that sees a dilating conceptual framework purporting to Magic/Arfur occupying the same space for mutually beneficial doings?
is not such a c*nt? I might happily call this the 'snorkyverse' if that be alright by you?
idahoblues
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 21,594
If you mean ‘botting each other’ yes I agree with youIs it just me that sees a dilating conceptual framework purporting to Magic/Arfur occupying the same space for mutually beneficial doings?
heh...anyhow beyond this debate, I'm more like 'what the fuck happened to america the brave' seems much more like...I dunno, will let you fill in those words. That kind of 'christianity' is....I do have badges from the scouts if that helps. Plus, I could provide a hundred people who would fall over each other to testify to my being a thoroughly brilliant human being.
Sadly, they are all on holiday, but they exist. :)
hope your back's well - free from pain. Wouldn't want to try something 'woo-woo' if I were you - even if it worked, it's surely much more important to keep an image of being a 'tough guy' on here?If you mean ‘botting each other’ yes I agree with you
idahoblues
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 21,594
Pwopper naughty me, thanks for inquiring about the back, better than it’s been in a long time. Regular stretching, massage and the odd bit of acupuncture really seems to be helpingheh...anyhow beyond this debate, I'm more like 'what the fuck happened to america the brave' seems much more like...I dunno, will let you fill in those words. That kind of 'christianity' is....
hope your back's well - free from pain. Wouldn't want to try something 'woo-woo' if I were you - even if it worked, it's surely much more important to keep an image of being a 'tough guy' on here?
dronefromsector7G
Well-Known Member
In the Snorkyverse, does Snorky have a big cock?Hey snorky. Do you subscribe to the theories of a multiverse? Might not exist but maybe, just maybe, there is a universe within this in which arfur
is not such a c*nt? I might happily call this the 'snorkyverse' if that be alright by you?
M
M
mat
Guest
A whole universe worshipping it apparently.In the Snorkyverse, does Snorky have a big cock?
Good stuff. When I speak of mystery then perhaps the greatest mystery is often that which is denied within - both 'dark' and 'light' aspects. Now, writing about this on here might not win popularity contests. Makes sense. If what is written touches on stuff that people choose to ignore/try to shut down/secretly dislike inside, then chances are it will be similarly unwelcomed outside. But this thread is about religion and so there can be a question 'what is holy?' For me it is not so much about going to church and listening to someoneI think we all feel stress and you’re right it’s how we react to it. I also have suffered from depression from time to time and my early reaction to it made it worse.
I now realise that my brain is wired this way and at times I take a dip, but rather than fight it, I go with the flow and it never gets as bad. It’s just a down time and much more manageable.
You do whatever makes you happy mate. I believe in a skeptical approach to claims of other worldly stuff. I am always open to evidence but not personal experience stuff. That is not enough for me at least. Abd especially other people’s.
Scientist will say, we don’t know about many things. New Age types, religious etc always and I mean always have an answer. An interpretation straight out of their or somebody else’s arse. That’s just not on. If these things are real, then why apart from personal feelings or faith can’t tgey be measured or even witnessed?
Live long and prosper my friend.
els's interpretation of a book. It is more about going through a process of opening to to and moving through what has been denied within - coming to feel a greater sense of ''wholeness.' I might call this a different kind of maturation process, that can come to be known through many different ways - the idea that the church/organised religion somehow has a monopoly on this is, well, not for me.
Beyond that, folk have been writing about the flat earth thing. Not my cup of tea but at the same time people throwing sticks and stones? Really? What does that prove to anyone? And the strange thing for me here is that I find that some seem to effectively insist that folk live by the 'rules' of denial - which feels like living life in a way that is somehow lacking a dimension. Would I want to prove this? Not really - if people want to find out they will, if they don't they won't. Having said that I do find that some pieces of music,writing and art can have more depth than others...
What is real has to be measurable? Ok - where do 'you' begin and where do you end? Are you just this body (if you, say, lose your hand or have a heart transplant are you still you?) or are you also your mind, emotions, beliefs, stories, memories, personality, a way of moving, stillness, silence, a name, a nationality, a series of numbers stored on various data systems (think identity theft)? What is the definition of 'you' and does it change - if it does change is it really you or...? So, fuck it. Too much stuff for me to understand, so I just try to find a way through life as best I can. That seems to have involved questioning heaps of things/ideas/people - maybe like a skeptic? Is this the 'right' way? I'm not sure 'one right way for everyone' actually exists and if it does then how do you really measure it?
Beyond that, folk have been writing about the flat earth thing. Not my cup of tea but at the same time people throwing sticks and stones? Really? What does that prove to anyone? And the strange thing for me here is that I find that some seem to effectively insist that folk live by the 'rules' of denial - which feels like living life in a way that is somehow lacking a dimension. Would I want to prove this? Not really - if people want to find out they will, if they don't they won't. Having said that I do find that some pieces of music,writing and art can have more depth than others...
People's problem with Flat Earth isn't that they don't believe them, it's that they are picking and choosing science to accept and ignore. It's a conclusion looking for evidence rather than vice versa. And it's extremely easily measurable, we've measured the Earths curvature for 3000 years.
What is real has to be measurable? Ok - where do 'you' begin and where do you end? Are you just this body (if you, say, lose your hand or have a heart transplant are you still you?) or are you also your mind, emotions, beliefs, stories, memories, personality, a way of moving, stillness, silence, a name, a nationality, a series of numbers stored on various data systems (think identity theft)? What is the definition of 'you' and does it change - if it does change is it really you or...? So, fuck it. Too much stuff for me to understand, so I just try to find a way through life as best I can. That seems to have involved questioning heaps of things/ideas/people - maybe like a skeptic? Is this the 'right' way? I'm not sure 'one right way for everyone' actually exists and if it does then how do you really measure it?
That's the Ship of Thebes argument. For all intents and purposes it doesn't matter where you measure you. The concept of you is personal and not very interesting scientifically because it's unfalsifiable.
Science is interested in determining the nature of reality as best it can. The scientific method is the best way we have of doing this. If people want to live their lives using other methodologies on determining reality then that's perfectly fine - but you don't get to call it science or scientific.
Hey snorky. Do you subscribe to the theories of a multiverse? Might not exist but maybe, just maybe, there is a universe within this in which arfur
is not such a c*nt? I might happily call this the 'snorkyverse' if that be alright by you?
If you mean ‘botting each other’ yes I agree with you
I do indeed Arf. Thank you.
I think the more common terminology would allude to you both obtaining a room Idaho.
Thanks. Fair points. I am curious as to this though "The scientific method is the best way we have of doing this." How can we know it is the 'best' way? A way, for sure - but, for me at least, I have seen so many version of 'my way is the best' that I began to question this. Maybe there is not one single 'best way' but rather the way that is best for each being in each moment? And would it be acceptable to look for any possible weaknesses in a model, so that it might evolve? If I were to call myself a scientist - and I don't - would it be acceptable to question whether life functions the same outside of controlled conditions as it does within them? In a way, is it possible that the choice for control itself can affect results? I don't know - maybe this is just my ignorance. If so, that is okay too.People's problem with Flat Earth isn't that they don't believe them, it's that they are picking and choosing science to accept and ignore. It's a conclusion looking for evidence rather than vice versa. And it's extremely easily measurable, we've measured the Earths curvature for 3000 years.
That's the Ship of Thebes argument. For all intents and purposes it doesn't matter where you measure you. The concept of you is personal and not very interesting scientifically because it's unfalsifiable.
Science is interested in determining the nature of reality as best it can. The scientific method is the best way we have of doing this. If people want to live their lives using other methodologies on determining reality then that's perfectly fine - but you don't get to call it science or scientific.
Edit : Just a further thought. Might this be a question of how humanity finds its way through this world? In this sense, some might choose to orientate themselves through a set of beliefs others might choose to orientate themselves primarily through a state of being? Not that either is particularly better or worse than the others but they will have different approaches to life and the question of truth?
Last edited:
Thanks. Fair points. I am curious as to this though "The scientific method is the best way we have of doing this." How can we know it is the 'best' way? A way, for sure - but, for me at least, I have seen so many version of 'my way is the best' that I began to question this. Maybe there is not one single 'best way' but rather the way that is best for each being in each moment? And would it be acceptable to look for any possible weaknesses in a model, so that it might evolve? If I were to call myself a scientist - and I don't - would it be acceptable to question whether life functions the same outside of controlled conditions as it does within them? In a way, is it possible that the choice for control itself can affect results? I don't know - maybe this is just my ignorance. If so, that is okay too.
Edit : Just a further thought. Might this be a question of how humanity finds its way through this world? In this sense, some might choose to orientate themselves through a set of beliefs others might choose to orientate themselves primarily through a state of being? Not that either is particularly better or worse than the others but they will have different approaches to life and the question of truth?
Well it produces the most reliability with the least amount of chaos.
The scientific method is badly understood most of the time, but it can be best summed up by two phrases - predictable and repeatable. Every hypothesis has to be able to pass those caveats; it must predict an event and then produce that event in such a way that others can replicate it. This is the democratisation of the human experience, you have to be able to replicate my findings and vice versa, it requires no "trust" in people. People are generally the thing that causes most of the problems in science.
It's why we call it the best as every experiment is self evidently true when shown to be true and if somebody disagrees then they follow the process and see if it is replicated.
There's many thinkers who look at weaknesses within the scientific method and like any model it does have a few. However like the saying goes about capitalism, it's not perfect, it's just better than all of the alternatives.