Just Wondering.

[Antlerman]

I think people who find messages from random patterns, such as supposed answers to prayers, ghosts, etc... are deluded that anything is going on but random probability. Read into that what you will.

No. You misunderstand. Yes, from your perspective it is delusion. But is it? Let me explain. Reading tea leaves for instance is an action which takes looking into random patterns as a mental tool to "unfocus" the otherwise analytical mind and allow the subconscious to manifest itself, to speak to the conscious mind. Have you ever just sat and cleared your mind and then suddenly, the answer presented itself to you? It's a lot like that, except on steroids.

 

This is what meditation does. It stills the busy mind and allows the messages of your own mind from deep within to surface and convey otherwise hidden or masked insights.

 

So, is that irrational? Is that delusional? Or is that simply doing something you are unfamiliar with and because it sounds so "weird" to you, you respond calling it crazy, or "delusional"? (That's how I hear this). You should really read some Jung sometime, unless you think he is delusional as well.

[Legion]

Jung

I wish I could back up your recommendation here Ant, but I don't like Jung. Never have. I don't like his take on the "shadow" of people. His treatise on "synchronicity" strikes me as being so much garbage.

 

If people want to entertain him that's their business, but I won't be doing it.

[Antlerman]

Jung

I wish I could back up your recommendation here Ant, but I don't like Jung. Never have. I don't like his take on the "shadow" of people. His treatise on "synchronicity" strikes me as being so much garbage.

 

If people want to entertain him that's their business, but I won't be doing it.

I wasn't intending this to be a discussion of the pro's and con's of Jung. The subconscious mind is something that isn't him alone, and what I said holds true to why simple aides such as unfocusing ones thoughts to expose hidden thoughts buried deep within is valid. As for Jung, "synchronicity" is one of those things that people misuse and misstate all the time. It's one of those popular New Agey things which support the Narcissistic Reality. I don't take popular takes on views as reflective of his actual views. As far as shadow persona, well, that's something I do think is quite valid. You think people don't try to suppress what we don't like about ourselves, consigning it to the shadows?

[Legion]

Oh, I certainly believe in the sub-conscious mind. And I believe that people have a "shadow" side. Although I am more likely to phrase this in terms of Native American mythology. I just don't believe that people should go about "feeding" their shadow.

[Antlerman]

Oh, I certainly believe in the sub-conscious mind. And I believe that people have a "shadow" side. Although I am more likely to phrase this in terms of Native American mythology. I just don't believe that people should go about "feeding" their shadow.

Well that's fine too. From what I know Jung struggled to put words to experiences he was newly exposing himself to, things which other cultures were more than already familiar with. So there is a bit of struggling to describe which by default was outside conventional descriptions. As far as 'feeding' their shadow, what do you mean by that? I think there is something valuable to said for recognizing and embracing that part of ourselves we'd rather not see. That seems something the West is programmed to do the very opposite - to deny and suppress our unwanted parts. That seems logical on the surface but the results can be quite bad. Is that what is meant by 'feeding' the shadow?

[Legion]

A Grandfather from the Cherokee Nation was talking with his grandson.

 

"A fight is going on inside me," he said to the boy.

 

"It is a terrible fight between two wolves."

 

The young grandson listened intently.

 

"One wolf is evil, unhappy, and ugly: He is anger, envy, war, greed, selfishness, sorrow, regret, guilt, resentment, inferiority/superiority, false pride, coarseness, and arrogance. He spreads lies, deceit, fear, hatred, blame, scarcity, poverty, and divisiveness."

 

"The other wolf is beautiful and good: He is friendly, joyful, loving, worthy, serene, humble, kind, benevolent, just, fair, empathetic, generous, honest, compassionate, grateful, brave, and inspiring resting wholeheartedly in deep vision beyond ordinary wisdom."

 

The grandson paused in deep reflection of what his grandfather had just said. Then he exclaimed; "Oyee! (in recognition).

 

Grandfather continued; "This same fight is going on inside you, and inside all human beings as well."

 

The grandson paused in deep reflection and recognition of what his grandfather had just said. Then he finally cried out deeply; "Oyee! Grandfather, which wolf will win this horrific war?"

 

The elder Cherokee replied, "The wolf that you feed. That wolf will surely win!"

[Noggy]

Its funny to me that people don't realize that pure rationality is a religion, too.

 

Do you strict rationalists believe that the rules of logic are actuslly based on anything other than unprovable axioms?

 

Logic and reason are a tool. To believe a tool holds the truth is poppycock. To believe that a single tool will allow you to discover the truth about reality is laughable. The universe isnt based on reason. It isnt based on mathematics. All of this is human creation, much like the mythos of abraham. Different rules, different styles.

 

To embrace one tool and to tout its superiority over another is fundamentalism. Every way has something to offer us. Middle way, bros.

 

 

[VacuumFlux]

It's far more logical "to me" to think this may be some type of group dream because at least I know dreams are possible.

 

I think part of the problem here is that you are using your personal experience of lucid dreaming as a proof of how real dreams can be. In another post I didn't quote, you said something along the lines of "everyone knows that dreams are real". Except, I don't have dream experiences anywhere near what yours are like. I have never had a lucid dream. The closest I had was one half-waking dream where I didn't like the way the plot was going, so I pushed the rewind button and rewrote the plot to give myself a happy ending. But... my experience of dreams is from waking up, when my dream mind and conscious mind co-exist and my conscious mind is trying to make sense of the dreams... and I wake up with an strong sense of WTF. Because my dreams make no sense, they have no consistency to them. The plot, the characters, the buildings - they all change mid-dream with no continuity. And 90% of my dreams are very clearly related to recent events in my life or the show I saw on TV that night. So to me, dreams are "obviously" just fragments and shadows of the real, reliable, waking world. They are my mind rehearsing how to deal with life, they are the process of repackaging my short-term memory in a useful for for long-term storage. To me, living in a dream world would be a nightmare without the possibility of anything as repeatable as science is. That's why the concept of this world being a dream makes no sense to me; "dream" doesn't mean the same thing to me that it does to you. When I replace that with "lucid dream" I have a better idea of what you mean, but since I don't share those experiences I'm still not sure if I really understand the concept you're trying to communicate. It's quite interesting to hear about and to think about about, but there's a chance I'll never be able to fully see your point of view just because humans aren't telepathic and language has limitations.

[Legion]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtNOkUdaWmw

[Yrth]

Its funny to me that people don't realize that pure rationality is a religion, too.

 

Do you strict rationalists believe that the rules of logic are actuslly based on anything other than unprovable axioms?

 

Logic and reason are a tool. To believe a tool holds the truth is poppycock. To believe that a single tool will allow you to discover the truth about reality is laughable. The universe isnt based on reason. It isnt based on mathematics. All of this is human creation, much like the mythos of abraham. Different rules, different styles.

 

To embrace one tool and to tout its superiority over another is fundamentalism. Every way has something to offer us. Middle way, bros.

then why not just drink the coolaid that will fuck you again in the morning? it's one [whatever] for another.

 

Yes, I do not take pagans / wicca / voodoo / christians / muslims / jews / -religions- seriously when they start talking about their religious beliefs. Yes, to that extent they are 'ghettohed' -- I would use the term 'quarantined.' That's what goes on in my own head -- on the forums, this section is like a bumper lane. Oh well. The chat is a gauntlet in real time, wear plate armor.

 

puppy -- have you fallen into the 'god of the gaps' trap? that is what it looks like.

 

super long thread folks. grats.

[Legion]

.. I do not take ... voodoo .... seriously ...

Oh, ooh, are you ever going to regret dissin' my beloved voodoo. Take some of this you s.o.b.

 

[lunaticheathen]

Wow, I did not know my emotional frustration would turn into such a long thread.

 

Anyway, now that I'm calmer, I know that no amount of moderation will ever prevent me from being upset. And that transferring anger from one part of my life to another isn't productive, but it does seem that it can stir up this forum quite a bit!

 

On one hand, I apologize for my rashness, on the other, so many great thoughts in this thread. I can't even get to them all today.

 

Mainly, I was expressing my frustration at feeling marginalized in an already marginal community. There may be nothing that can be done about this, other than fixing my own reactions to it. Obviously, I can't make anyone respect me. It would be nice if they did, and more respect all around would make the world a better place, but this is not in my power, or the moderators'.

 

From now on, when I feel the anger come back, I will do my best to just turn off the computer and walk away.

[Ouroboros]

Very good post LH.

[badpuppy]

Its funny to me that people don't realize that pure rationality is a religion, too.

 

Do you strict rationalists believe that the rules of logic are actuslly based on anything other than unprovable axioms?

 

Logic and reason are a tool. To believe a tool holds the truth is poppycock. To believe that a single tool will allow you to discover the truth about reality is laughable. The universe isnt based on reason. It isnt based on mathematics. All of this is human creation, much like the mythos of abraham. Different rules, different styles.

 

To embrace one tool and to tout its superiority over another is fundamentalism. Every way has something to offer us. Middle way, bros.

 

This is true, Noggy. I think some people think logic is a solid "science" that can't lead you astray. Two people can see things two totally different ways but both can have used solid logic to get there. Being logical doesn't mean being right. Something I wanted to show in my (rather long-winded and possibly obnoxious way) is that materialism isn't the only end-point a logical person can reach. So logic/rationality are not this perfect system because I'm sure Vigile and others here have used logic to arrive at their viewpoint as well. And while logic may not rate near the top of everybody's value system, I'm sure most spiritual people didn't just take a random leap of "illogic" to get where they are.

 

And much of my purpose is that, as Antlerman pointed out somewhere up thread a lot of people feel cowed into not sharing their views on things if they are too "spiritual" for fear of being treated like some kind of deluded moron or someone who can't use logic or doesn't understand the "facts" or etc. I would like more discussions to involve each person involved feeling free to share whatever their position is (both atheists AND those with spiritual views... I recognize both sides sometimes feel like they can't state their real view), and then to find a graceful place to end the conversation when it's time to without feeling that someone's mind must be changed or it's some kind of failure.

[badpuppy]

It's far more logical "to me" to think this may be some type of group dream because at least I know dreams are possible.

 

I think part of the problem here is that you are using your personal experience of lucid dreaming as a proof of how real dreams can be. In another post I didn't quote, you said something along the lines of "everyone knows that dreams are real". Except, I don't have dream experiences anywhere near what yours are like. I have never had a lucid dream. The closest I had was one half-waking dream where I didn't like the way the plot was going, so I pushed the rewind button and rewrote the plot to give myself a happy ending. But... my experience of dreams is from waking up, when my dream mind and conscious mind co-exist and my conscious mind is trying to make sense of the dreams... and I wake up with an strong sense of WTF. Because my dreams make no sense, they have no consistency to them. The plot, the characters, the buildings - they all change mid-dream with no continuity. And 90% of my dreams are very clearly related to recent events in my life or the show I saw on TV that night. So to me, dreams are "obviously" just fragments and shadows of the real, reliable, waking world. They are my mind rehearsing how to deal with life, they are the process of repackaging my short-term memory in a useful for for long-term storage. To me, living in a dream world would be a nightmare without the possibility of anything as repeatable as science is. That's why the concept of this world being a dream makes no sense to me; "dream" doesn't mean the same thing to me that it does to you. When I replace that with "lucid dream" I have a better idea of what you mean, but since I don't share those experiences I'm still not sure if I really understand the concept you're trying to communicate. It's quite interesting to hear about and to think about about, but there's a chance I'll never be able to fully see your point of view just because humans aren't telepathic and language has limitations.

 

I agree. I definitely think my personal experiences with dreams have informed my view. And I think everybody's views are probably a combination of all the things they've learned and experienced. In an individual personal dream you can end up with anything. If a "group dream" is possible like what I think this is, then I think there is an internal logic and repeatable science. I think it's rules of the dream. There are certain standard things you can do in lucid dreams that are usually the same across the "lucid dreaming community' (people online who get together to talk about their dreams and dreaming techniques). Like, for example, some lucid dreamers will try something like spinning in a circle to keep the dream scene they're in the same (or change it, I can't remember which now.) Several lucid dreamers have found this technique to work for them. Lucid dreamers also discuss ways to stay lucid, to maintain their logical thinking side in the dream, to change the scene, to fly, to communicate (with dream characters--some say they've had shared lucid dreams with other people which would prove non-local consciousness but... I can't say anything about that until I have one myself. So I am agnostic on that issue.) A lot of lucid dreamers find that physical normal speech like what we use tends to cause them to lose lucidity for some reason so they try a kind of telepathy inside their dream. It's really fascinating. The same techniques don't work for everybody but there is considerable overlap.

 

I think this world we live in is much more "solid" seeming, but even so, when we get down to the quantum level... reality seems a bit less solid and a bit less predictable. But on the big level it seems solid and predictable. It makes me feel like it's illusion... like the Buddhist concept of Maya. I know that idea disturbs a lot of people, but it fascinates me.

 

I mean, I don't think I can jump off a building and fly like I'm in The Matrix or something lol. Also, when i say dream, I say I mean it fairly literally because I don't want to be confused with a monotheist/creationist/IDer/whatever because I do feel very strongly that my view is very distinct from those views (not that I find something inherently WRONG with those views per se, it's just not an accurate description of my own). However, I'm not sure "how" literal my dream idea is or if it's also symbolic language for things I don't have words for. It just seems to make sense to me that all of this was projected by an ultimate mind and we're experiencing a group dream, like we are all "one" but we have the illusion of not being... because solipsism is the loneliest thing in the universe. But of course this is a "weird" idea, and it could be wrong. It's just what makes the most sense to me. (Which may reflect on my own weirdness LOL.)

 

But you're right... before my first lucid dreams I never would have thought this could all be another type of dream. That really shook up my frame of reference for what is reality. But in a pretty cool way. So I can see why that might seem like a bizarre interpretation to anyone who hasn't had those kinds of dreams.

[NotBlinded]

 

Let me explain it again:

 

Not all religions and beliefs are delusional.

 

But some are.

 

But not all.

 

 

The reason why I can say some are, is because there are articles in psychological journals drawing correlations between some extreme religious behaviors and views and beliefs and schizophrenia and delusional ideations. I looked as some earlier today. But that's not really important to this discussion.

 

I don't think the OP or you are delusional.

 

But I do think that Young Earth Creationists are.

Let me throw a little wrench in this Hans.

 

I don't know if you have read any of Joseph Campbell's Schizophrenia: The Inward Journey or not, but here is a little snipet from when he was asked to speak on schizophrenia.

My own had been a work based on a comparative study of the mythologies of

mankind, with only here and there passing references to the phenomenology of dream,

hysteria, mystic visions, and the like. Mainly, it was an organization of themes and motifs

common to all mythologies; and I had had no idea, in bringing these together, of the extent

to which they would correspond to the fantasies of madness. According to my thinking,

they were the universal, archetypal, psychologically based symbolic themes and motifs of

all traditional mythologies; and now from this paper of Dr. Perry I was learning that the

same symbolic figures arise spontaneously from the broken-off, tortured state of mind of

modern individuals suffering from a complete schizophrenic breakdown: the condition of

one who has lost touch with the life and thought of his community and is compulsively

fantasizing out of his own completely cut-off base.

Very briefly: The usual pattern is, first, of a break , away or departure from the

local social order and context; next, a long, deep retreat inward and backward, as it were,

in time, and inward, deep into the psyche; a chaotic series of encounters there, darkly

terrifying experiences, and presently (if the victim is fortunate) encounters of a centering

kind, fulfilling, harmonizing, giving new courage; and then finally, in such fortunate cases,

a return journey of rebirth to life. And that is the universal formula also of the mythological

hero journey, which 1, in my own published work, had described as: 1) separation, 2)

initiation, and 3) return:

A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural

wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the

hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons

on his fellow men.2

That is the pattern of the myth, and that is the pattern of these fantasies of the psyche.

Now it was Dr. Perry's thesis in his paper that in certain cases the best thing is to

let the schizophrenic process run its course, not to abort the psychosis by administering

shock treatments and the like, but, on the contrary, to help the process of disintegration

and reintegration along. However, if a doctor is to be helpful in this way, he has to

understand the image language of mythology. He has himself to understand what the

fragmentary signs and signals signify that his patient, totally out of touch with rationally

oriented manners of thought and communication, is trying to bring forth in order to

establish some kind of contact. Interpreted from this point of view, a schizophrenic

breakdown is an inward and backward journey to recover something missed or lost, and to

restore, thereby, a vital balance. So let the voyager go. He has tipped over and is sinking,

perhaps drowning; yet, as in the old legend of Gilgamesh and his long, deep dive to the

bottom of the cosmic sea to pluck the watercress of immortality, there is the one green

 

 

value of his life down there. Don't cut him off from it: help him through.

 

You can read the rest of it here: http://www.mindsprin...pbell-schiz.pdf

 

It does go on to distinguish between essential, paranoid and LSD induced schizophrenia. The paranoid doesn't usually return from the "journey" with anything useful if they return at all.

 

So, I guess the people that are able to journey into their psyches and return will bring with them the archetypes that build myths. My question would be then, are they really crazy or are they actually able to pull some things out that are common among all of us?

 

What I feel might be delusional is taking the visions, and their expressive motifs, literally.

[badpuppy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtNOkUdaWmw

 

I absolutely believe Christopher Walken is God. So... this computes.

[badpuppy]

Its funny to me that people don't realize that pure rationality is a religion, too.

 

Do you strict rationalists believe that the rules of logic are actuslly based on anything other than unprovable axioms?

 

Logic and reason are a tool. To believe a tool holds the truth is poppycock. To believe that a single tool will allow you to discover the truth about reality is laughable. The universe isnt based on reason. It isnt based on mathematics. All of this is human creation, much like the mythos of abraham. Different rules, different styles.

 

To embrace one tool and to tout its superiority over another is fundamentalism. Every way has something to offer us. Middle way, bros.

then why not just drink the coolaid that will fuck you again in the morning? it's one [whatever] for another.

 

Yes, I do not take pagans / wicca / voodoo / christians / muslims / jews / -religions- seriously when they start talking about their religious beliefs. Yes, to that extent they are 'ghettohed' -- I would use the term 'quarantined.' That's what goes on in my own head -- on the forums, this section is like a bumper lane. Oh well. The chat is a gauntlet in real time, wear plate armor.

 

puppy -- have you fallen into the 'god of the gaps' trap? that is what it looks like.

 

super long thread folks. grats.

 

I know that's what it looks like to you but NO, I question the whole materialistic assumption. You "might" say an IDer would be a "god of the gaps" or someone who accepts this physical world we're in is what it appears is positing "god of the gaps". Saying the reality is 100% NOT material is hardly gappy. It's a whole other grid.

[badpuppy]

Wow, I did not know my emotional frustration would turn into such a long thread.

 

Anyway, now that I'm calmer, I know that no amount of moderation will ever prevent me from being upset. And that transferring anger from one part of my life to another isn't productive, but it does seem that it can stir up this forum quite a bit!

 

On one hand, I apologize for my rashness, on the other, so many great thoughts in this thread. I can't even get to them all today.

 

Mainly, I was expressing my frustration at feeling marginalized in an already marginal community. There may be nothing that can be done about this, other than fixing my own reactions to it. Obviously, I can't make anyone respect me. It would be nice if they did, and more respect all around would make the world a better place, but this is not in my power, or the moderators'.

 

From now on, when I feel the anger come back, I will do my best to just turn off the computer and walk away.

 

I felt like you came to this forum to vent hurt/frustration because this was a safety zone, much like Ex-C in the broader sense is a safety-zone for those deconverting. To me it didn't seem like an inappropriate thing for you to do. You'd reached a limit and needed to get something off your chest. Thanks for trusting us and sharing.

 

And this has turned into an interesting thread.

[NotBlinded]

 

I agree. I definitely think my personal experiences with dreams have informed my view. And I think everybody's views are probably a combination of all the things they've learned and experienced. In an individual personal dream you can end up with anything. If a "group dream" is possible like what I think this is, then I think there is an internal logic and repeatable science. I think it's rules of the dream. There are certain standard things you can do in lucid dreams that are usually the same across the "lucid dreaming community' (people online who get together to talk about their dreams and dreaming techniques). Like, for example, some lucid dreamers will try something like spinning in a circle to keep the dream scene they're in the same (or change it, I can't remember which now.) Several lucid dreamers have found this technique to work for them. Lucid dreamers also discuss ways to stay lucid, to maintain their logical thinking side in the dream, to change the scene, to fly, to communicate (with dream characters--some say they've had shared lucid dreams with other people which would prove non-local consciousness but... I can't say anything about that until I have one myself. So I am agnostic on that issue.) A lot of lucid dreamers find that physical normal speech like what we use tends to cause them to lose lucidity for some reason so they try a kind of telepathy inside their dream. It's really fascinating. The same techniques don't work for everybody but there is considerable overlap.

 

I think this world we live in is much more "solid" seeming, but even so, when we get down to the quantum level... reality seems a bit less solid and a bit less predictable. But on the big level it seems solid and predictable. It makes me feel like it's illusion... like the Buddhist concept of Maya. I know that idea disturbs a lot of people, but it fascinates me.

 

I mean, I don't think I can jump off a building and fly like I'm in The Matrix or something lol. Also, when i say dream, I say I mean it fairly literally because I don't want to be confused with a monotheist/creationist/IDer/whatever because I do feel very strongly that my view is very distinct from those views (not that I find something inherently WRONG with those views per se, it's just not an accurate description of my own). However, I'm not sure "how" literal my dream idea is or if it's also symbolic language for things I don't have words for. It just seems to make sense to me that all of this was projected by an ultimate mind and we're experiencing a group dream, like we are all "one" but we have the illusion of not being... because solipsism is the loneliest thing in the universe. But of course this is a "weird" idea, and it could be wrong. It's just what makes the most sense to me. (Which may reflect on my own weirdness LOL.)

 

But you're right... before my first lucid dreams I never would have thought this could all be another type of dream. That really shook up my frame of reference for what is reality. But in a pretty cool way. So I can see why that might seem like a bizarre interpretation to anyone who hasn't had those kinds of dreams.

I had a lucid dream not too long ago and it really freaked me out! That was the first and only one. It is a strange feeling to know you are dreaming and then step on in to and go with it.

 

I wonder if Brahman is aware It's dreaming?

[badpuppy]

 

I had a lucid dream not too long ago and it really freaked me out! That was the first and only one. It is a strange feeling to know you are dreaming and then step on in to and go with it.

 

I wonder if Brahman is aware It's dreaming?

 

Maybe Brahman is the dreamer. Or... maybe it's like those Russian dolls where there is another one inside each one until you finally get to a teeny tiny one. I used to have some of those. I'm not sure what happened to them but they were pretty neat. I should look for them. I bet my mom has them.

[NotBlinded]

 

I had a lucid dream not too long ago and it really freaked me out! That was the first and only one. It is a strange feeling to know you are dreaming and then step on in to and go with it.

 

I wonder if Brahman is aware It's dreaming?

 

Maybe Brahman is the dreamer. Or... maybe it's like those Russian dolls where there is another one inside each one until you finally get to a teeny tiny one. I used to have some of those. I'm not sure what happened to them but they were pretty neat. I should look for them. I bet my mom has them.

 

I have some of those on my dresser.

 

That is an excellent way to look at unity, IMO. I like it.

[Vigile]

I think people who find messages from random patterns, such as supposed answers to prayers, ghosts, etc... are deluded that anything is going on but random probability. Read into that what you will.

No. You misunderstand. Yes, from your perspective it is delusion. But is it? Let me explain. Reading tea leaves for instance is an action which takes looking into random patterns as a mental tool to "unfocus" the otherwise analytical mind and allow the subconscious to manifest itself, to speak to the conscious mind. Have you ever just sat and cleared your mind and then suddenly, the answer presented itself to you? It's a lot like that, except on steroids.

 

This is what meditation does. It stills the busy mind and allows the messages of your own mind from deep within to surface and convey otherwise hidden or masked insights.

 

So, is that irrational? Is that delusional? Or is that simply doing something you are unfamiliar with and because it sounds so "weird" to you, you respond calling it crazy, or "delusional"? (That's how I hear this). You should really read some Jung sometime, unless you think he is delusional as well.

 

How this moved from beliefs to meditation is beyond me.

[Vigile]

Its funny to me that people don't realize that pure rationality is a religion, too.

 

Do you strict rationalists believe that the rules of logic are actuslly based on anything other than unprovable axioms?

 

Logic and reason are a tool. To believe a tool holds the truth is poppycock. To believe that a single tool will allow you to discover the truth about reality is laughable. The universe isnt based on reason. It isnt based on mathematics. All of this is human creation, much like the mythos of abraham. Different rules, different styles.

 

To embrace one tool and to tout its superiority over another is fundamentalism. Every way has something to offer us. Middle way, bros.

 

It's funny to me that so many in this section of the forum knock down strawmen and those outside the forum aren't allowed to defend.

 

Let's have an agreement. You guys can have your own private section of the forum and you don't use it to attack those outside it. If you have issues, then move them outside this area so they can be challenged.

[badpuppy]

Its funny to me that people don't realize that pure rationality is a religion, too.

 

Do you strict rationalists believe that the rules of logic are actuslly based on anything other than unprovable axioms?

 

Logic and reason are a tool. To believe a tool holds the truth is poppycock. To believe that a single tool will allow you to discover the truth about reality is laughable. The universe isnt based on reason. It isnt based on mathematics. All of this is human creation, much like the mythos of abraham. Different rules, different styles.

 

To embrace one tool and to tout its superiority over another is fundamentalism. Every way has something to offer us. Middle way, bros.

 

It's funny to me that so many in this section of the forum knock down strawmen and those outside the forum aren't allowed to defend.

 

Let's have an agreement. You guys can have your own private section of the forum and you don't use it to attack those outside it. If you have issues, then move them outside this area so they can be challenged.

 

I'm pretty sure no one is attacking you or atheists in general. Disagreeing with materialism or not liking when SOME atheists behave like jerks is not equivalent to "attacking you".