[QUOTE=Mangetout]
That’s pretty much the same as saying there’s not really any such thing as religion, just people instead.
[/QUOTE]
You got that right. Religion, science, countries, etc., a very long list, are ideas in the minds of those who associate themselves. Can you even imagine the existence of science with no scientists. Just a null. Our world is a world of ideas, and thoughts about those ideas. I have said many times your thoughts are very important to your wellfare and your future. Choose them carefully.
[QUOTE=Vinyl Turnip]
In other words, at a certain age one begins to believe things unsystematically? I.e., with no underlying rationale whatsoever? That hardly seems like something to look forward to.
You are correct, though: that is often one of the unfortunate side effects of aging. Progress is being made in treating Alzheimer’s, though. (Using science, of all things!)
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Bayard]
Nope. Science is a method for finding fact. Philosophy and literature are concerned with truth. “Truth” is what comes out of facts.
I’m trying to figure out a polite way to untangle this statement, but I admit defeat. I do hope that I never reach the point at which I stop consulting facts before making a decision.
[/QUOTE]
Facts can be known in hundreds of ways, including personal experience.
[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
Spiritualism is born out of fear of the unknown, seeking to fill in the gaps between the observable and the hidden. Those who depend on spiritualism cannot bear to live in a a universe where events seemingly happen without explanation, so they fill in the blanks with fantasy, then demand that all respect their faith in the unprovable.
Science embraces the unknown, and when there is no explanation for phenomena, science is not afraid to say, “I don’t know”. Science uses this recognition that there are things we can not yet explain as a motivation to discover evidence to support new theories and ultimately expand human knowledge.
Spiritualism has no such motivation to improve itself; it is a stagnant, dead end that can never grow beyond it own limitations. Those who cling to it do so out of the fear of trusting their own ability to reason and understand from observable evidence. I pity those who have abandoned the power of reason to take solace in mythology; they are no better than a drunk who feels happier when he drinks.
[/QUOTE]
You have a view of spirituality exactly opposite of what it is and does. Spirituality teaches love, compassion, caring.
[QUOTE=Lobohan]
So he isn’t a true Scotsman at all, eh?
Actually, you’re confused because you accepted outrageous claims of psychic power based on no proof at all. And on top of that, you’ve re-labeled gullibility as “Spirituality” and are actually touting it as a virtue.
You seem to be handwaving a lot in this thread. If you can’t find any proof, it might be because there isn’t any.
[/QUOTE]
There is enough proof of psychic ability to convince most people in this world. There is evidence of life after death, separation of brain and spirit, and lots of other spiritual principles. I regret that skeptics won’t even discuss the subject calmly and with interest. It is like Emmaneul said: “they stand in the middle of a brilliantly lit room with their eyes tightly shut yelling for someone to turn on the lights.”
People usually bounce around from one belief system to another looking for what is missing in their lives. After many years, and sometimes many lifetimes, they become sick and tired of looking. At that point when they are open to truth, it comes to them, not in rolling thunder, but in a small voice they never heard before.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
There is enough proof of psychic ability to convince most people in this world. There is evidence of life after death, separation of brain and spirit, and lots of other spiritual principles. I regret that skeptics won’t even discuss the subject calmly and with interest.
[/QUOTE]
If someone really has “proof” and “evidence”, why not go see the JRF mentioned at the beginning of this thread and pick up a cool $1,000,000? If I read correctly the offer is still open for a couple of years.
Oh wait, it could not be just what YOU call “proof”. It would have to be what scientific opinion accepts as “proof”. Darn it all!
[QUOTE=lekatt]
There is enough proof of psychic ability to convince most people in this world. There is evidence of life after death, separation of brain and spirit, and lots of other spiritual principles. I regret that skeptics won’t even discuss the subject calmly and with interest. It is like Emmaneul said: “they stand in the middle of a brilliantly lit room with their eyes tightly shut yelling for someone to turn on the lights.”
People usually bounce around from one belief system to another looking for what is missing in their lives. After many years, and sometimes many lifetimes, they become sick and tired of looking. At that point when they are open to truth, it comes to them, not in rolling thunder, but in a small voice they never heard before.
[/QUOTE]
Or conversely, you are completely and utterly wrong and self-deluded. You claim that “spirituality” is the result of emotional maturity. What if it’s the result of ignorance and hopeful feelings over logic and rationality?
I have hundreds of years of science behind my stance. What evidence do you posses that doesn’t involve ignorant people giving anecdotal accounts?
[QUOTE=lekatt]
There is enough proof of psychic ability to convince most people in this world. There is evidence of life after death, separation of brain and spirit, and lots of other spiritual principles. I regret that skeptics won’t even discuss the subject calmly and with interest. It is like Emmaneul said: “they stand in the middle of a brilliantly lit room with their eyes tightly shut yelling for someone to turn on the lights.”
People usually bounce around from one belief system to another looking for what is missing in their lives. After many years, and sometimes many lifetimes, they become sick and tired of looking. At that point when they are open to truth, it comes to them, not in rolling thunder, but in a small voice they never heard before.
[/QUOTE]
The still small voice I heard said “If it looks like made-up stuff, and it walks like made-up stuff, and it quacks like made-up stuff, then it probably isn’t a real duck.”
But then, I heard this voice long before I reached emotional maturity, perhaps because I never wasted time hunting around for some made-up belief system to fill some hole in my life; I would prefer to fill my holes with reality or not at all.
[QUOTE=Lobohan]
Or conversely, you are completely and utterly wrong and self-deluded. You claim that “spirituality” is the result of emotional maturity. What if it’s the result of ignorance and hopeful feelings over logic and rationality?
I have hundreds of years of science behind my stance. What evidence do you posses that doesn’t involve ignorant people giving anecdotal accounts?
[/QUOTE]
Picking the one that seems more logical:
Well, I know spirituality is real because I have experienced it. But you think it is all ignorant people giving anecdotal accounts. What they give is their personal experiences. Don’t you realize that every tiny piece of knowledge was once the personal experience of someone. To deny the reality of personal experience is to deny your own existence. There is no other way you can be in the world except through your own personal experience. Do you really not exist at all?
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Well, I know spirituality is real because I have experienced it.
[/QUOTE]
I took some LSD about 40 years ago. I personally experienced David Crosby smiling down at me from the sky. Therefore, he must have been real.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Picking the one that seems more logical:
Well, I know spirituality is real because I have experienced it. But you think it is all ignorant people giving anecdotal accounts. What they give is their personal experiences. Don’t you realize that every tiny piece of knowledge was once the personal experience of someone.
[/quote]
But, humans are easily fooled. It sure looks like Criss Angel is walking up the side of a building. But I know not to trust my observations. I have no idea how he does the trick, but is it not more logical to believe that it’s a trick than to believe that the law of gravity does not apply to Mr. Angel?
Question: how do you, lekatt, separate the fake psychics from the real ones? Presumably, you don’t believe everyone who claims to be a psychic. So, in your mind, there must be a way to separate the ones you feel are real from the fakes. How do you make that call? Please give examples of the real and fake psychics.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Facts can be known in hundreds of ways, including personal experience.
[/QUOTE]
So anything I experience is a fact? My perceptions are perfect? I can’t be fooled? All magic tricks are real? The girl is really sawed in half and put back together?
Wow. Whoda thunk?
Science is such a waste. No point in doing an experiment if you know what is right already.
Peace and love, Leroy. My eyes have been opened. The Dark Ages were such a wonderful time to be alive, weren’t they?
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Picking the one that seems more logical:
Well, I know spirituality is real because I have experienced it. But you think it is all ignorant people giving anecdotal accounts. What they give is their personal experiences. Don’t you realize that every tiny piece of knowledge was once the personal experience of someone. To deny the reality of personal experience is to deny your own existence. There is no other way you can be in the world except through your own personal experience. Do you really not exist at all?
[/QUOTE]
Closed-minded egotism says that the individual’s interpretation of their observations must be correct.
Non-solipsistic reason says that other people’s interpretations of their observations are to be weighed in addition to the individual’s; though the individual’s own interpretation is more valued than the anecdotes of others, it remains reasonable to believe that in cases where the massive majority of other people’s interpretations agree to a repeatably high degree of detail, that the majority conclusion is likely the correct one, even if it does not agree with the individual’s own conclusion.
(And if spiritual experiences agreed to a repeatably high degree of detail, there would only be one religion.)
[QUOTE=hotflungwok]
And yet another thread driven into the ground, like a clown without a parachute, by lekatt.
[/QUOTE]
Hey, if you have a comment you’d like to make about Randi setting a withdrawal date, bring it.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
You have a view of spirituality exactly opposite of what it is and does.
[/QUOTE]
Yet it is based on my personal experience, so it is universally true, and you must therefore respect it.
I went out for chinese food for lunch and got a fortune cookie that made me think of this thread. The fortune read: Doubt is the beginning of wisdom, not the end.
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
I took some LSD about 40 years ago. I personally experienced David Crosby smiling down at me from the sky. Therefore, he must have been real.
[/QUOTE]
