Should We Expect a Higher Consciousness

[Guest end3]

4 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

So you enjoy selling the woo woo to children?

I enjoyed feeling as though I had contributed something positive and helpful to their lives in a way they were able to understand.

[TruthSeeker0]

4 minutes ago, end3 said:

I enjoyed feeling as though I had contributed something positive and helpful to their lives in a way they were able to understand.

Ah yes, much how I felt as a Sunday School teacher. Until I figured out exactly what kind of harm I was doing.

[Guest end3]

11 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

And as such, they have rightly developed empathy and understanding for others who experience difficulties. One of the best things that could happen in life to people is to experience a bit of difficulty themselves, for that very reason. What do you mean by 'success' or 'failure'? Being outcast or excluded is not success or failure, it's more a reflection of the people doing the excluding than the person that's excluded.

For example, success or failure in school, reading let’s say.  I had a classmate in first grade in 1970, that the teacher’s nickname for him was grandpa because he read so slowly.  He later became an MD.  I’m sure part of the kids called him grandpa as a result.  There is athletic success, aesthetic presence, all sorts of successes and failures per some given culture.  Yet all sides hold firmly to love.

[TruthSeeker0]

9 minutes ago, end3 said:

For example, success or failure in school, reading let’s say.  I had a classmate in first grade in 1970, that the teacher’s nickname for him was grandpa because he read so slowly.  He later became an MD.  I’m sure part of the kids called him grandpa as a result.  There is athletic success, aesthetic presence, all sorts of successes and failures per some given culture.  Yet all sides hold firmly to love.

Can you spell this out some more? How does 'yet all sides hold firmly to love' relate to it?

[Guest end3]

8 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

Can you spell this out some more? How does 'yet all sides hold firmly to love' relate to it?

Like I said, it’s my belief that as a result, the “failed” group then hold an empathy  for the like kind, and, as well as, almost a disdain for the “success” group.  Each group then thinks their method of love is the correct one based on their experience.

[Guest end3]

Didn’t do justice to your question TS, but love to one group meant acceptance regardless and love to another group was love because of qualities or abilities.  So one group touts one method of love where the other group touts something different.... yet both think “love” is important.  

[TruthSeeker0]

7 minutes ago, end3 said:

Didn’t do justice to your question TS, but love to one group meant acceptance regardless and love to another group was love because of qualities or abilities.  So one group touts one method of love where the other group touts something different.... yet both think “love” is important.  

Exclusion, or singling out people, isn't "love." If your point is that different people define love in different ways, point taken. Some of them just define love in certain ways because they've been brought up in that tradition, haven't examined it in depth, and haven't been able to form an independent moral compass. Yes, I'm referring to Christians.

[Guest end3]

What makes you think Christians have the lock on misrepresentation of love?  I think its reasonable to think love a graduated concept.  And I believe the Bible conveys that concept as well.

[TruthSeeker0]

4 minutes ago, end3 said:

What makes you think Christians have the lock on misrepresentation of love?  I think its reasonable to think love a graduated concept.  And I believe the Bible conveys that concept as well.

Do we have to go over this again? No, they certainly don't have the lock on it, nor did I say so. "God is love" is an oxymoron. That's as long of a description as I'm going to give. You have debated in the Lion's Den for long enough that I'm sure you're aware of the reasons why I, and most other people here, think that the christian god is anything but love.

[Guest end3]

5 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

Do we have to go over this again? No, they certainly don't have the lock on it, nor did I say so. "God is love" is an oxymoron. That's as long of a description as I'm going to give. You have debated in the Lion's Den for long enough that I'm sure you're aware of the reasons why I, and most other people here, think that the christian god is anything but love.

No sweat, you seemed to want to make it a part of your response.  I was just giving you the opportunity.  Yeah, I’ve got y’alls side down pat....thx.

[Realist]

End ... so if "love" is part of this higher consciousness, is "hate" part of it too?

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

7 hours ago, end3 said:

Right, but with a definition, a standard, we might find our perceptions and consciousness are understandable deviations.  Again, this imo is why Christ says know one another... commune. 

And again I point you in the direction of North Korea as an example of why that kind of thinking is flawed.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

7 hours ago, duderonomy said:

 

Yeah, you implied it. You implied it big time, and what you said here in response proves it, at least to me. Other readers can decide for themselves I guess, although I doubt that many would give a crap.

I don't want to argue. I just wish the political stuff would stay corralled in the ToT, and I'm only harping on it because you brought up the current POTUS.

 

I won't ask you to explain which great disaster(s) you are referring to as being the results of a large portion of the nation voting for him [Trump], or why you might look upon one or two or even twenty people voting for Trump with amused pity.  That is, I won't ask you to explain it here in the Lion's Den. 

 

But more to the topic, I think you might be conflating what End3 is saying about some supposed or imagined "higher consciousness" with what I've heard described as "group-think".

Myself, I tend to think the collective "Trump Derangement Syndrome" type of thinking is group think. He was a media darling until he said he was running for President, and then the group was told to hate him.

 

On the other hand, End asks if we should expect a higher conscientiousness, and I would say no. Sadly, Asshat is as far as life on Earth has evolved so far.

 

 

 

 

Fair enough.  Point taken.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

6 hours ago, end3 said:

Didn’t do justice to your question TS, but love to one group meant acceptance regardless and love to another group was love because of qualities or abilities.  So one group touts one method of love where the other group touts something different.... yet both think “love” is important.  

This is a false dichotomy.  There is at least a third group, possibly more.  The third group are the rejects who turn to hate and bitterness as the result of their experiences.

[TruthSeeker0]

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

This is a false dichotomy.  There is at least a third group, possibly more.  The third group are the rejects who turn to hate and bitterness as the result of their experiences.

Agreed. In some ways you can say there's as many groups as there are experiences. 

[Guest end3]

21 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

Agreed. In some ways you can say there's as many groups as there are experiences. 

Lol, think people.....the example was politics.  We are pretty much a two party system.  For convenience sake, you go to the right or the left.  But yes, ultimately, there are as many groups as there are people....

[florduh]

What is "higher consciousness" and why should we believe that one, however you define it, exists?

[sdelsolray]

2 minutes ago, florduh said:

What is "higher consciousness" and why should we believe that one, however you define it, exists?

 

Rule 9 from the Woo Woo Peddler's Manual:

 

"Do not define the terms you use when peddling woo woo."

[TruthSeeker0]

31 minutes ago, end3 said:

Lol, think people.....the example was politics.  We are pretty much a two party system.  For convenience sake, you go to the right or the left.  But yes, ultimately, there are as many groups as there are people....

Not everyone lives in the US and a two party system, thankfully. I was speaking outside of politics as it is.

[midniterider]

18 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I'd suggest that it depends on the situation.  Decisions such as career or which car to buy are best left to logic.   Deciding whether or not to throat-pinch a motherfucker, well, you're better off letting emotions take the driver's seat. 

 

Would you say that decisions ought to involve a combination of logic and feelings? Like a career choice. Does logic say I should do a job I enjoy? Or is that a product of feelings? Doesn't logic take into account the feelings (passion, desire) you have toward a career field?

 

 

 

 

[midniterider]

18 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

I'm looking at the thread heading and the latest posts, and I'm like, has this derailed or what.  Lol. This only caught my mind because I've sort of wrestled with this one myself. And have concluded they're both excellent and necessary, it just depends on the scenario or situation. I'm rather clear why I remained in religion so long - because I'm a high feelies person. Am consciously working on the 'use your logic more' part of things.

 

I derailed it. My fault.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

11 minutes ago, midniterider said:

 

Would you say that decisions ought to involve a combination of logic and feelings? Like a career choice. Does logic say I should do a job I enjoy? Or is that a product of feelings? Doesn't logic take into account the feelings (passion, desire) you have toward a career field?

 

 

 

 

Each to his own, I reckon. 

[TruthSeeker0]

5 minutes ago, midniterider said:

 

Would you say that decisions ought to involve a combination of logic and feelings? Like a career choice. Does logic say I should do a job I enjoy? Or is that a product of feelings? Doesn't logic take into account the feelings (passion, desire) you have toward a career field?

 

 

 

 

It's usually always a combination of the two and I think that that's good. I'm a person that will write out a pros and cons list when things are complicated, and that's mostly logic. But I have this sneaking suspicion that in some situations my feelings hold sway over the matter more than I'm aware of. Generally I trust them though so it's ok. But I think it's good to be aware of how you are coming to decisions. I don't think going on one or the other is a good idea, for example even in things like relationships. Sure you might have a ton of feelings but what if your logic tells you that in the long run that person doesn't have qualities or values that you find essential in a partner? Using both is just smart. 

[midniterider]

22 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

It's usually always a combination of the two and I think that that's good. I'm a person that will write out a pros and cons list when things are complicated, and that's mostly logic. But I have this sneaking suspicion that in some situations my feelings hold sway over the matter more than I'm aware of. Generally I trust them though so it's ok. But I think it's good to be aware of how you are coming to decisions. I don't think going on one or the other is a good idea, for example even in things like relationships. Sure you might have a ton of feelings but what if your logic tells you that in the long run that person doesn't have qualities or values that you find essential in a partner? Using both is just smart. 

 

That's where I'm at, also. Feelings take a beating on this website, but logic and feelings are intertwined and we incorporate both in how we proceed through life. I might apply logic, reason and critical thinking to destroy Christian ideas ... but my motivation to use logic in this case is driven by my dislike of Christianity. As a Christian it was obvious that there were some illogical things to it ... but I liked the feeling it gave (for a while). Logic did not get in my way with Jesus until later after deconversion when I turned against it. I turned against Jesus emotionally, then discovered it was illogical anyway, logic being great ammo for the dislike I already had.

 

Logic is colored by feelings and feelings are colored by logic. imo.

 

edited.

 

 

[Guest end3]

38 minutes ago, florduh said:

What is "higher consciousness" and why should we believe that one, however you define it, exists?

 

37 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

 

Rule 9 from the Woo Woo Peddler's Manual:

 

"Do not define the terms you use when peddling woo woo."

Well, we have a couple choices I'm guessing....one, logical systems produce output that seems illogical due to the extreme variations in input and environment.  YET, we seem to have a shared version of experience when we are describing or attempting to describe love.  Now why would that be.  I can logically accept the former, but not the latter.

 

With that said you old bastards,  I expect if there is a greater consciousness, we are endowed with that quality that says love is right and outside of love is wrong.

Then we would have to have the ability to see something bigger, the reason for the dichotomy....which we don't.  Actually we do in a sense, on our level.  Why we don't constantly choose that "spirit", Idk.

 

To summarize, we should expect something else because we have data that is not consistent with what we should expect.  Labeling it higher consciousness is arbitrary.  We could call it blue grapefruit....who cares.