Sounds kinda Taoist to me.
Well, to be fair it might have been meant as a joke, since it was in response to this:
Well… I have reached out and touched a nerve… LOL! It’s good to see that so many of you are awake!
Leaving puberty, a man realises he is singular and so lives in his own world alone. Now he begins to build a nest in his world. The space/time for this man is only that which he can reach out and touch at any given moment, therefore his physical world is limited to that extent. However… the mind he seems to posses, has no such boundaries. The brain of the man is physical while the mind of that brain is… shall we say Spiritual. And herein is the condition that confounds the Athiest. (stop).
It appears that athiests do not posses the mental capacity (blocked) to discern between physical and spiritual, although the brain itself exists and functions by means of these two media. If you deny the spiritual, you deny thought itself… is this logical?
Gentlemen, none of us can deny thought.
Rational thought processes advance by means of “mind pictures”. Without this as fact, we can do nothing with the mind as it returns to the chaotic state from which it came. We are taught to take hold of the mind and direct it in the use of mind pictures so as by certain processes, to manifest the spiritual into the physical.
I do not stand as an opponet to the unbelievers position in any case, as I fully comprehend that we are all necessary to the whole. Spare me your firey darts all… such is profitable for nothing. I indeed have something to offer… see if you can find it, perhaps.
Tom W.
It was under the couch.
Oh, what a load of garbage. Atheists aren’t “confounded” by the mind. Nor are atheists too stupid to discern some difference between materiel an spiritual; we just don’t believe in the spiritual. At all. Because there’s no evidence that there is such a thing, or can be. Nor is the “spiritual” necessary to explain thought; we already have a nice physical brain that explains thought just fine.
Individually, I can understand the words. Is this some failed offshoot of the ELIZA program?
Spiirit, you have closed yourself off inside a very small box. Until you learn to look beyond cramped metaphor of spirituality, you will never grasp the wonders that the universe has to offer.
I am using a certain frame of approach to defray waste product conversation. If you understand the speech then you will get something out of it by your own ponderings of the subject matter. Also as you see… pertinent questions bring forth answers… tricks and throws get no resopnse. All statements put forth are meant for your edification… not mine.
The magic 8 Ball excursion was a bust.
Tom W.
Again, oh Teacher, your conclusions hinge on a strangled definition.
What, someone is paying you to dump conversational waste products in this thread?
How pretentious.
You have great faith in Wikipedia. I do not. Let’s leave it at that.
Nah, let’s say “mental”. Much more appropriate.
It’s “atheists” and “atheism”.
Beliefs are fine and no one is going “ape-shiat” about them. The issue is the refusal of the believers to examine their beliefs with reality based logic and reasonable methods and to acknowledge that no gods exist in reality, therefore their belief may be a personal choice, but it is no way represents what I call a universal truth - a truth that is independent of the human existence.
I don’t speak for anyone or any group. However, a blind refusal to accept reality has damaging consequences to society and has been the primary cause of most suffering in human history.
Not quite. People have beliefs for their emotional and ego gratification. The term “right” comes into play when one wants to extrapolate their personal fantasy into a possible universal truth. In the case of religion, this is a wrong claim because no gods exist and that’s a fact, not a matter of opinion.
Religion is the expression of human beings preferred behavior to band together and kill others and steal their resources. In modern times it has evolved into a system that is not as violent as it was in previous centuries, or in the beginning of recorded history. It now functions more as justification of violence and antisocial behavior rather than a direct instigator of such acts.
Beliefs are fine. On their own they’re irrelevant. When they become the reason for people to refuse to deal with reality then they become harmful and often dangerous.
I am an advocate for the expanded acceptability of use of Wikipedia as a research resource.
But even I balk at putting much stock in Wikipedia articles over topics about which there is much controversy.
And in no case is Wikipedia any kind of authoritative source. It’s not authoritative–it’s useful.
Wikipedia articles tend to be pretty decently cited, though. It’s not just some asshole’s opinion.
Personally, I think we saw enough variations of the “mission from God” stuff to conclude there must have been something to it.
I think W was probably fairly bright at one point, but that the booze and the coke caused enough damage to turn him into a Texas version of Ozzy. His later religiosity, inflexible moralism, incuriosity and general self-righteousness are all indications of diminished intellect and critical thinking skills.
Hmm, they do both have hot wives.
The existence of Religion depends on the belief in God(s) and counts on Atheism.
The existence of Atheism depends on the existence of Religion and counts on non existence of God.
The existence of Theism counts on the existence of God but doesn’t depend on Religion or Atheism.
The existence of Religion and Atheism depend and count on each other and count on Theism.
God’s existence doesn’t depend or count on Religion or Atheism but can count on the existence of Theism.
Religion doesn’t require theistic beliefs. There are nontheistic religions.
Atheism doesn’t depend on anything except an absence of belief in gods. It’s irrelevant to the atheist whether others have god beliefs.
If gods hypothetically existed, they would not need either religion or theists to sustain their existence.
It does? Consider a child raised by atheist parents in a non-religious school, and thus receiving no primary religious indoctrination. How is that child’s atheism dependent on anything?
Yes; atheism is the default. We all start out atheist, people become theists because they are taught that particular fantasy as children when they are young and gullible.