Is it normal that i break religion down to make "everyone" agree with me?

38% Normal

PART I.

We are humans. Or are we? Either way we have a name and title we give ourselves in our respective civilization and species. What I have done is break down every single religion into a set of thoughts that "no one person" can disagree with. In the entire world.

1. Weird things go on in peoples minds, or the actual environment, by ESP, 3rd eye, Chakras or "ghosts", things moving or presences. Feelings that something is watching you, spirit guides or guardian angels. UFO's or "aliens", extraterrestrials and otherworldly beings. Angels and Demons; someone or somebody describes experiences all over the world. Schizophrenics hear voices, see hallucinations... Some people guffaw, and then have a out of body experience or "near-death event" where something strange happens, become avid believers. Astral projections, lucid dreaming and meditation. Too many accounts have been reported, images and stories for some grain of truth not to have been in the original planting. So we can agree that people have weird things going on in their heads or something in the environment is actually being invaded by some other type of disturbance either mentally or by other means.

2. Almost all religions believe in a SOURCE or Alpha of all things. Some great being or light, energy or conscious creator that upholds or simply...exists as a benevolent harmony of all things. Whether jealous or malicious, good or evil this is fact among almost all religions. For religion is the belief in something other than yourself. Usually without probable proof of existence either, just the utilization of faith. Most people describe faith as "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". This deity, immortal, god or spirit is a benefactor the religion, the basis for what should be strove for, and the omnipotence that guides it's followers to their paradise, heaven, nirvana...salvation.

Voting Results

38% Normal

Based on 34 votes (13 yes)

Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!

[ Report Post ]

Comments ( 37 )

Ono

12 years ago

I think i'm having a stroke.

Comment Hidden ( show )

1

1
NeuroNeptunian

12 years ago

...I read it but you did not explain the question.

Comment Hidden ( show )

1

1
- flutterhigh
  
  11 years ago
  
  I know I'm three weeks late, but this is the funniest thing I've ever read on IIN.
  
  Pseudointellectuals are the best. I read as far as "We are humans. Or are we?" before I had to stop laughing, catch my breath and get some popcorn.
  
  Let me break it down for you. Basically, this college freshman has finally discovered that there is an overarching structure to most religious mythologies, and in diluting their content to the point of complete insubstantiality they claim that it cannot be disputed.
  
  It's analogous to a psychic telling you, "I bet I can describe your entire life. It starts with birth and ends with death. Sometimes, things happen in between." Except with far more imprecise quasi-mystical terms thrown in. Hold for applause. As you can very well see, people eat it up because people love bullshit.
  
  Don't waste your time with this stuff - learn to discern. I've seen more interesting musings from first-year philosophy students. But my favorite part is when they put the Big Bang theory in quotation marks.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
  - Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
    
    11 years ago
    
    *Applauds*
    
    Congratulations, you made a funny. Now, since I see this..."flutterhigh", has actually posted to a thread without the respect of replying to the actual poster, they indeed have no respect.
    
    So I will reply akin.
    
    First off, never even finished the thread, this is not even half of the picture I was painting, so your grossly oversimplifying the book you haven't read completely yet. Neuroneptunian wanted me to explain the entire question I had in this first thread, and I simply couldn't do that it for the simple fact my fingers would fall off and it would be too long. So I broke it to a simple statement as you can see with her and my continued conversation, I said the very same thing you said (She wrote me off after that because I didn't explain it all, even though I told everyone explicitly that it was Part I). Yes, it is all a scam made of money, fear and guilt. Figures. Second, yes when you grow up in a Pentecostal religion that suffocated you from birth, you see life differently. No thanks to your obvious scoffing and arrogance of me and people who go through the deep moral guilt and fear of blasphemy from youth, thank you for noticing I escaped luckily enough from it. Third, FYI I put the word "theory" in quotation marks you human orifice, not BIG, and not BANG. Get it straight. Finally, I do have more "philosophical musings" that you probably would have a hard time disputing, and since your so high on your pedestal, why don't you come down and teach me a lesson. I'm always eager to learn, especially from someone who replies with such callousness.
    
    Listen dude, this religion thing was one of the first things I came upon, so stuff it just because you've been on something that I just came too. Your arrogance can and will be your downfall if you let it. Someone is always better than you, and I know your not challenging me, but don't encourage me, because I will soak you up like a Brawny Paper Towel Commercial. Aha. Ha.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    -2
    
    -2
    - Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
      
      11 years ago
      
      Oh btw, I do understand the analogy. So in saying my "Holy Grail" as you bastardized my...yes naive position on subsidizing the principles of religion into a prism...I understand....doesn't need anymore pursuing. If only everyone believed that. I believe I just wish I could get even Islamic extremists, and closed off Amish to agree to something. I guess I should leave that to the diplomats of peace in the Middle East I guess....
      
      Oh and if we are all atoms vibrating constantly at the molecular level, and by quantum theory no atom is in one place at one time what does that mean? If we see, but don't "actually" see with the retina simply because the brain only interprets through fragmentation and then reorganization of what is reflected through from the pupils, then what is this reality we are perceiving? Also if this was the only reality then why do we have lucid dreams? Ever had one? By saying are we humans I meant what truly is this existence? Is this are only form? Are we human? I think no...It's only what we give ourselves as a name but it is directly compatible to bacteria giving themselves a name when they were created in a lab and already given a name, but they are not conscious of it because they cannot perceive the bigger reality. Or existing while not existing is even bigger...Schrodinger's Cat is one example. Just musings Flutter.
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      -2
      
      -2
      - flutterhigh
        
        11 years ago
        
        Haha, you're so angry! This is more than I could have asked for.
        
        I didn't reply to you because I had little interest in engaging in an inane month-old discussion (or more accurately, vague diatribe with the occasional poster chiming in with "hmm interesting" or "what the fuck?"). You should be glad, I've given you the first substantial feedback here - I think you're at least clever enough to see that nobody can decipher your drunken ramblings. You remind me of my grandfather at Christmas, but with better bladder control. And clearly you aren't drinking eggnog - rubbing alcohol, I presume?
        
        With regards to your first "point": I'm grossly oversimplifying the unfinished book of your gross oversimplification of dozens of books you've skimmed? This isn't a scam for money or fear, it's a scam for self-esteem. Here's how I can tell. At this point, you're throwing around terms you are clearly only tangentially aware of with the hopes of scaring me into submission. Schrodinger's cat, for example, does not merely "exist while nor existing" - the point of the thought experiment was to question the validity of the quantum mechanics you're pretending to understand by arguing that if a wavefunction collapse is dependent upon observation, then the logical extrapolations of that become nonsensical. It was more of a refutation of quantum principles than sense itself - Schrodinger was arguing that it made no sense. God forbid he ever posthumously comes across your posts.
        
        With regards to your second "point": Eh, pass.
        
        With regards to your third "point": I know, and that's what I was referring to. This brings me back to your Wikipedia-level understanding of the terms you're using, because I'm not sure you realize that the word "theory" means something very different in the field of science. It does not mean speculation. It refers to an empirically corroborated set of descriptions of patterns. Gravity is a theory too. But it's ok, many high-functioning preschoolers make this mistake.
        
        With regards to your final (?) "point": I'm sure your diary is absolutely riveting, but I'm not interested in spellchecking it.
        
        With regards to your post-final "point": Maybe they'd agree if you reduced your claims even just a little further. Tell them "YOU ALL BELIEVE THINGS" and then no one person in the entire world could disagree! Isn't that what you want? For everyone to agree with you?
        
        With regards to your wince-inducing adulteration of quantum physics: You're either referring to the concept of a superposition of eigenstates (it does eventually collapse, you know), or Heisenberg's uncertainty. Either way it's nonsense. Yes, you're very clever to have figured out that our senses are fallible channels through which we interact with reality, it's not as though that question hasn't been debated for millennia in the form of empiricism vs. rationalism. The point about humans you clearly stole from a fourteen year old's poetry chapbook does not effectively question reality - we are human solely because that's what the word means. Language is tautological like that. Read Wittgenstein if you haven't already (haha, who am I kidding. You haven't).
        
        Anyway, thanks. This has been hugely enjoyable. Let me preempt you by taking a note from the troll's elementary handbook: this will be my last response. I will not respond further. And to preempt your ego: yes, it's totally because I'm stupid and I just can't comprehend the magnitude of what you're saying. Sleep well.
        
        U >:( B?
        
        Comment Hidden ( show )
        
        1
        
        1
        
        -
        
        Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
        
        11 years ago
        
        Thank you. Let me tell you I am far from angry, as I must laugh at loud at that statement and this conversing. I give acquiesence to someone who can explain some things to me on here. I am again going to point out that religion is a scam of, and here using your logic of "self-esteem" FOR MONEY. For if it was just for self-esteem then they wouldn't need the talents of silver and gold in the outcome would they? The end goal IS money. A scam of self-esteem FOR money. We are both right. Also, naturally as your callous behavior suggests, I knew you couldn't say more than "meh" on the fact that some people die believing in something that grips more than a billion people today. I escaped the vortex of thought. Thank me and me myself.
        
        Wow Grampa? Am I really that bad? whew that's harsh. I must admit you sound like you pulled out your dark socks and arm warmers for this one. Sweatband included no punches PULLED.
        
        Gross oversimplification of books I've skimmed? I read btw, magazines are for skimming and I read those. College reading level by 7th grade but wasted it on science fiction novels. Bit of a procrastinator so take your pick on how far behind I may be...but time waits for no man and I understand life more than ever to take advantage of it. No, the gross oversimplification of a mind you have no idea of how much potential exists in it. Gross oversimplification by disregarding anything more I am saying by arrogantly stating that the "presiding" paragraphs (yes they were heavy heavy)you just wrote will be your last. I will not have the last laugh I humbly give admission to, but I am sure you may read this; so know you are making me stronger and I thank you for it.
        
        There is no diary my guy. Little bit to masculine for that. Dreams of lucidity is as far as that goes. Be not the hypocrite either.
        
        I do NOT pretend to understand quantum theory, mechanics or any of the kind. I have simply read up on some of the points it consists of. I take no credit or say I am anywhere near proficient at it's principles. I do know what a thought experiment is and a famous example: Throw a Spear into Space
        
        You can use them in philosophy too. I am not a scientist, just a beginning philosopher on cognitive theory. Never read Wittgenstein, but have you ever read Stephen Laberge? You might find it interesting, for you never answered one of my questions by the way.
        
        Comment Hidden ( show )
        
        0
        
        0
        
        Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
        
        11 years ago
        
        So what happens when the states of measured position do actually collapse?
        
        Now you touched upon what I am directly focusing on for my studies. P.S I am not in college at this point have no philisophical training whatsoever except my own beginning musings. This is my alpha stage and I would like to say I am going to be focused on Epistemology and Ontology. Empiricism vs Rationalism being a study from epistemology I would also like to say I would be more inclined toward rationalism. Cognitive sourcing for reason and what we sense is directly the reason why we sense. Without the conscious there would be no senses to describe. I believe animals pin their cognitive solutions more deeply from the unconscious state of mind i.e reflexes, instinct and so on. We humans have a much larger battery of recognition of self, identity and that alone gives us the solutions to create a more expressive view of who we are.
        
        I spell pretty good dude lol
        
        Comment Hidden ( show )
        
        -1
        
        -1
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  12 years ago
  
  Look at the first word I put before the "We"....that might explain partially I do hope.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  -1
  
  -1
  - NeuroNeptunian
    
    12 years ago
    
    No. It doesn't.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0
    - Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
      
      12 years ago
      
      Then I am sorry, for it seems if only at this moment that you look at pride more than reason as a means to communicate with for before "We" comes "Part I". It means the question will be answered in due time, please allow patience to be your virtue as Rome was not built in one day.
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      -1
      
      -1
      - NeuroNeptunian
        
        12 years ago
        
        No, I mean I don't understand your question, could you restate it?
        
        Comment Hidden ( show )
        
        0
        
        0
        
        -
        
        Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
        
        12 years ago
        
        Of course. As you can see every religion has a set of values. A mode of principles. A program of thoughts. Call it a doctrine or a series of epiphany's all have a dogma, and if you are offended by such words then flexibility in religion towards free thinking is a highly accepted art form. If that takes the edge off then as I state there is a strict regulation and scrutiny towards what ideas are acceptable and those that are not. All have their separate belief system and they adhere to it faithfully.
        
        I have figured a format of thought patterns that "all" religions identify with, no matter how different their worship or acknowledgement of "what is"....is.
        
        Further, those thought patterns I have taken and put together into a organized chaos (more on that later) that subsequently illuminates every thought pattern that identifies over and through the stigmas that hold an idea that they all are different. Not by any means grossly stating that all religions are the same through and through, but all hold a certain "code" that resonates throughout every one of their respective existences in human life.
        
        Comment Hidden ( show )
        
        -1
        
        -1
        
        See More Comments =>
piman

12 years ago

Wow. I cannot comprehend the amount to hate you are receiving on this thread. You are clearly very intelligent and open minded--two great traits. I rather enjoyed reading this post. The points you elaborated upon were very agreeable.

Comment Hidden ( show )

-1

-1
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  12 years ago
  
  I thank you piman. If it is hate I bring then I open gladly to it for hate and love exist as emotions from heart. Truth is what I seek for, and that is in any form. I am glad you see some agreeable nature in what I am speaking of, encouragement is very much appreciated. Honestly it is then that I speak to you that involvement will give much more for your contemplation palate as the future becomes the present every second.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
1000yrVampireKing

11 years ago

I know you are trying to be a good (whatever religion) but some people are not going to believe in god. However if this does not work take pride in the fact you tried!

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  11 years ago
  
  To the contrary, I do not believe in any said religion...this was only to break the religions down into their basic principles, explain then that they are all the same in the core; just different faces for the same message.
  
  The true message I believe is that you do it yourself.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
  - 1000yrVampireKing
    
    11 years ago
    
    Not exactly true in all cases. However most religions as a whole say to be a good person.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0
    - Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
      
      11 years ago
      
      And you are right also I was a bit blantant in that last comment that they are all the SAME message with a different face...it's been a long thread for me
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      0
      
      0
poof!gone122

11 years ago

Can you make a documentary of this? Because I find you very intriguing and I would love to hear this in words because to me and the way I read, all the words jumble together on a computer screen, no matter how much I zoom in.
But seriously, I would love it if you made a documentary of all this!

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  11 years ago
  
  Poof!gone122 that is the most flattering thing anyone has ever said to me honestly...no doubt you are honest from taking the actual time to request such as from me. As for wordplay, I have not finished explaining all concepts, theories and opinions for the benefit of the doubt and would like nothing more than to oblige. I would be honored in no small way, contact me if such a use as me is still validated by you to instill some knowledge of the theories I have experimented with.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
Q8i_girl

12 years ago

ok lol so to break religion down into making them aethiest or what you think is in your mind that u want them to agree with u

i think there will be a bad chain reaction if a person's faith destroyed if u think about it for example when a person who fears " god " or any god or spirit and that person becomes very friendly , caring and does the right thing

so if this person starts to question the existance ? then he starts to wonder is it ok to run over people and animals with a car, or steal things or kill his or her daughter and son due to debt or whatever and ignore the sick and needy

even though u may argue there are crazy people in every religion that causes trouble so thats why u dont trust anyone thats stereotyping because even though start a group and recruit just a reminder there will always be a rat that will sneak in and take over and will try to control pple aswell

i know this because i watched and analysed their actions its kinda like when for example a religious book says dont drink because its bad , so a bad guy sees pple following the book of rules so he sneaks and changes things into saying ' oh one drink is fine ' or ' one kiss is ok even more '

so the pple will take a sip, then another and then another and then they get the full and be drunk because they cant control themselves . i find it also strange that they as in the " people who are use to following the book and then the fraud "

KNEW ... knew that it was wrong and the DID read it was wrong AND ofcourse its obvious it does'nt make any " common sense " when the guy says some crazy things.

so u many lead or attract a group like i said before either one person takes over or either its the groups decesion to go against " you " .

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  12 years ago
  
  Hello Q8i_girl, glad to be shared your outlook. To start off mildly speaking, no...I do not wish to make religion atheist or spiritualist. That would indeed be an ordeal that none would accept literally. For to be religious is the antithesis of atheism. I am not here to argue that water is fire, or a platypus is Arctic fox. I am here merely to outlay observations of each and every religions themes of belief. What you would call their basic core elements or foundation cornerstones that without they would simply not exist...in the same format. Fortunately or unfortunately for all accounts that is not the case and so manifests this thread.
  
  Freewill is ultimate. Do you know why a human being would follow a "book" not written by themselves on most accounts. Fear in the being's mind is definitely a contender as it is a corralling factor we all can acknowledge and will discuss later. Example: Brimstone and flames i.e. the pitchfork does it for millions in this society in some religions. It is not what one wants to do, but what one is not to do. All fears aside, then there are those that sincerely "wish to do the right thing", which I must apologize profusely for what I am about to say because it is the truth. Morality, is unerringly based on an individuals time and location. What the "right" thing to do 750 years ago is not necessarily considered the right thing to do now in the proclaimed 21st century. So your vigilante demeanor is focused and directly influenced by your culture, society that you are born into and by the observation of time just another human specimen following what they've been encouraged by. This means that what you think is wrong (running animals over) can be considered right by a tribesman who is looking for a sacrifice to their Gods or God. This then would directly take your chain reaction of what "you" think is bad if they drop their "morals" query overboard simply as it will happen anyway without the question of existence helping because not all "Gods" have the same "morals" that they follow. As to the heightened violence from morally free individuals I do have a template of ordinance similar to a free society structure that outlines what is termed acceptable and what is not. I will and can explain that later but the question is would you rather live as close to free as possible or choose to follow what others say?
  
  I apologize for length I might add, many things you brought up require more than a short, straight answer I feel in this case. Corruption is a creature that unannounced beheads tradition of thought. To lead for pleasure will become ensconced in an individual or ring of leaders in due time. Almost unavoidable, that is why cognitively speaking, it is so valuable to question what seems to be as what is. For some pictures do speak a thousand words but leave twenty thousand more unsaid. As for infiltration with who leads, psychologically you are correct. There inevitably will be one to scheme an overthrow. Group psychology is a fickle thing that with a strong mind can be joined into a powerful force. Though as one strong mind comes so comes another, so their will always be those, a balance is required Q8i_girl and one who is aware will seek to deal as dealt.
  
  Come see what it is I unravel, and as I untangle, more will seem to become as coming apart. In time, the coils though will enlighten a secret path, which will indubitably lead to the head of a snake. Fear not a hydra or a Medusa, as a head of snakes is altogether another ordeal, but if Perseus or Heracles had not the courage then such as would have never been removed from men's minds as nightmares of reality.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
Immune2BS&way2Illuminated

12 years ago

The concept of question is to ask for new knowledge. Question is an inquiry about a subject, topic in which more light can be shed upon. The question is it normal that I can break down religious principles into a format that all religions can agree with. In this entire world if your Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or Catholic, Morman or Christian. All can agree to these principles and I will show them as we go along. If you are impatient this thread is not for you, as I will go along many paths in this thought experiment but the main theme will never disappear.

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
myownopinions

12 years ago

Well I can't really say that's normal or not, so I voted no as in... yeah, just no. You didn't 'break' religion down. You just stated that things go on in people's mind and in the environment and that almost all religion has some 'higher power'. Sure, I guess I could agree with you on that, but I still don't agree with certain religions in and of themselves.

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  12 years ago
  
  myownopinions indeed, you also must look at the word before the first "We" in the outlook. There is a beginning and an end. Just because I have not filled your being with understanding on every "Part" of what I am saying does not justify your simplification statement that I have not broken anything down. Must I fulfill your wishes as I am your genie at your set pace? Observe and be patient before concluding facts about half of a novel.
  
  Why race to the water and say it is good to drink when you do not know where the source of the water is?
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
Immune2BS&way2Illuminated

12 years ago

3. We must all come from something. Even if you view it as nothing more than a Big Bang "Theory", or a Creation manifested through outright intelligence. Everything exist, or existed before something else. It can literally go on and on and drive you crazy when you know this existed before this existed before this existed. When you then add in the why, you fall into the philosophical musings of many great minds before you as to the origins and meanings of the word Life. Aside from that, as to the human being then you ask where did these and they come from? Over 2500 years ago you must say obviously their parents. So you must conclude that wild goose chase with the simple question. Where did our parents ancestors come from? We ultimately must conclude, by direct confession of those we hold as the geniuses of our society, that you cannot theoretically.."put the finger" on exactly who, or what they were. Science can say that this happened 32,000 years B.C.E, but do you really believe a man can correctly interpret without one single doubt what was directly going on fifty million years ago? Archaeologist find evidence, but not the entire jigsaw puzzle; history is written by the victors etc...so on. We all come from something, whatever it may be to you, you "know" it's "somthing" for lack of a better word. Some substitutions? Call it God, The Source...Cosmic forces creating by complete accident the perfect soup of life. Either way each one has not been proven or disproven because as stated before, theoretically cannot be because no matter how intelligent you are...no human has had a life span of four billion years.

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- myownopinions
  
  12 years ago
  
  If everything existed before something else, then what existed before the original "Source". If you're talking about 'we' as in everything, then this could possibly be not true, but if you mean 'we' as in humans, then I can probably agree with you on that.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
  - Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
    
    12 years ago
    
    Correct I do mean 'we' as humans. If you do want the subject of all matter and it's origination please oblige with some format and I unashamedly flourish out of your way as you proceed with such a vigorous agenda.
    
    As to what existed before the existence of what exists now that is entirely why I bring the matter up (Humans mind you of course but think of the great picture). "Are" you able to tell me what existed before the existence of existence? Wouldn't that be existence though if it's existing? Of course it would. So something existed before something else existed and it almost wants to make you entertain the idea of infinite existence (More on that later also) but also if there is an existence before the existence of existence which would I reiterate, again would make it an existence then is there a source? If everything comes from something then where is the beginning?
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0
Immune2BS&way2Illuminated

12 years ago

To all listening I do intend to continue this thread of thought upon thought. For I do believe in something if nothing else. To find out these meanings and why I state them so, follow my thoughts and walk with me. I will show another path, a road that each can absorb in their own thoughts and possibly...we can agree to something in this world besides the basis of gravity. Which as some do know can and is being disputed this very moment. Not saying that is the only thing that is wholly agreed upon but see the drifting wood that I am trying to imply to your sense.

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
suckonthis9

12 years ago

1) Not all people are religious.
2) Many of these things apply to people who are not religious.
3) Some of these things do not apply to people who are not religious.
4) Not everyone agrees with you.

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  12 years ago
  
  Suckonthis9 I honour your brusque scrutiny, but I made it very clear that I am speaking of religious matters, and further on the more...this is only Part I. So if you do know where I am going with this thread, please acknowledge your extra sensory perception so we all may take apart in learning your infallible four step wisdom more clearly.
  
  To enlighten you, I phrased it "I break religion down to make "everyone" agree with me" on purpose to invoke such as your response as I knew some would believe I am just another devout orthodox who believes one thing over most. Let me now introduce that "I" am not a monotheistic or polytheistic individual. I am a cognitive explorer with genuine interest in exploring the human psyche and how it has evolved over the 5-6 documented millenia of human history. Ontology and Epistemology is what I endeavor in on some accounts, so naturally I do not exclude phenomena such as sixth sense, or parallel dimensions. Altogether complicated but as quantum theory goes nothing is as what it seems, so inquisitive nature is a must for ignorance is bliss until the hammer of knowledge falls on the unwary.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
  - suckonthis9
    
    12 years ago
    
    I commend you on your endeavour. Please continue...
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    2
    
    2
tbiM20

12 years ago

What is the question? What you stated are your observations of religious practices and human psyche... are you asking us to agree or disagree with you?

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- Immune2BS&way2Illuminated
  
  12 years ago
  
  Yes correct tbiM20 that is a very good observation yourself. Also look at the first word before "We" as it begins my observations but also denotes the possible continuance of a subject not many can tread with immunity. As to answer your 2nd question of course it is your decision to agree, disagree, or agree to disagree but if you find that these first rough drafts of written thoughts are ludicrous already...promptly let me know of your flat out contempt of such.
  
  If not then get ready for the obvious invitation I am sending for the sequence of these conversations to descend to ending without out too much hostility. Namaste
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
Immune2BS&way2Illuminated

11 years ago

Now, Someone "tried" to school me, but only ended up explaining a couple things about quantum theory in which I was able to garner more information about. All I ever said about quantum theory is that atoms seem by scientific accounts of observation, to exist for the layman...in two places at once. An eigenstate of an atom only happens when observed...and so the wavefunction collapses and measuring of the actual place in time can then be calculated. Simply put, they know now where an electron molecule may be. I made a half-hearted example about Schrodinger's Cat only to compound what I meant by my uncertainty about what our existence actually "is." NOT to say I was an undergraduate from some prestigious philosophical university. Or an accomplished theorist with several years of quantum evaluations under my belt. Schrodinger, he was right about it not making any sense. That is all I meant for I believe our reality is not defined enough for my Pandora. "Someone" then tried to say suddenly I was a wanna-be professor and was trying to throw words around just to try and "scare" them. Entirely mis-calculating what I meant by the silly feline Ex.

Also, they basically made fun of a person who figured out religion is a scam made for money to be gained. They laughed in arrogance at my life-changing revelation and made it seem the most simple equation ever formulated. What they don't seem to realize is that they are not a true master, for a real master must acknowledge that his student does not possess his proficiency in whatever skill he may be teaching. Or there would be nothing for him to teach. Someone who does not understand yet basic fractions will in no case feel linear equations to be any more simple of an endeavor to accomplish. A mathematician professor arrogantly stomping around a room of his students is a beast of nature that would probably run in panic when his life was threatened. Also in the way the response was written...throwing around "Uncertainty equations" and "Wittgenstein's" was hypocritical by far. It seems someone presumed, and assumed ignorance, and so unwittingly was doing what they "thought" I was doing. Throwing around weighty words to try and "scare" someone they believed was ignorant of what they were explaining.

Astoundingly, there is more. The Big Bang "Theory" is indeed a theory, in both senses of what they partially explained. There is Creationism and Evolutionism and the Big Bang, falls under Evolutionism as it's parent. You see it does not matter if the Big Bang Theory, by the "scientific field" is defined as an (and I like this one) "Empirically Corroborated Set of Descriptions and Patterns." What matters is, IS IT A FACT PROVEN INSATIABLY? No...as a matter of fact it is not. Probable, but not proved without doubt. For then Creationist around the world will have to give up their ground. Not saying "their" view is any more probable than the cosmic nova, but you get the picture. So in saying, their "theory" is nothing more than that like I said in the first place. A theory. Speculation. Speculation of a set of patterns that give ample ground to debate validity...but still nonetheless a dam theory.

I take no regret from these conversations. I learn more with each passing individual. This is thoroughly enjoyable, and I am offended one would actually think that I would become ANGRY from just mere speculation of thoughts on an online site that discussed so many controversial and outlandish topics? Why, I would be mad at myself if that indeed happened. Flutterhigh, please get my memo, for I would be afraid you would never come back to lay down your Zeus hand on us poor mortals. I enjoyed your speel. Zilchy and Spunkkowsky it was. Either way I am not finished with this thread, and I am almost ready to continue my next installments of thought. I hope all that read this are enjoying all that has been said so far and are definitely ready for more. Biter!

Comment Hidden ( show )

-1

-1

Are You Normal?

Is it normal that i break religion down to make "everyone" agree with me?