Ask Im_A

[Eudaimonist]

You turn the thread into first graders funny questions and funny answers.

Some questions deserve a serious answer, and some deserve a funny answer.

And I won't accept the answer about the ants because one of them was the one that recognised prophet Solomn although she was blind.

So, don't make fun of ants because they are smarter than some people.

I see that you are funny too.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[dnihila]

Some questions deserve a serious answer, and some deserve a funny answer.

I see that you are funny too.[/color]


eudaimonia,

Mark

I am funny
but I can't make fun of anything
I can laugh, I can smile
to you
but I will never laugh at you.
And that's a lesson, too.
I am funny
Even when the day is hot and Sunny
Even when sweat turns into blood
I am funny
For free smiles
For freedom
For free
With no money, I am funny.
With decent words, you show respect.
From you that's what I expect.
You are funny
Try then to make a baby smile
with no jokes to be told.
With no funny books to be sold.
Can you?
Can you be that person who is so funny?

 

[Futuwwa]

Then I don't see the problem. A finite age for the universe does not pose any problem for the statement that the universe was not created but has always been in existence as something like a "fundamental absolute".

But if it actually came to be in a discrete event, how can it be independently existing? There might not have been any "before" in a temporal sense, but there was in a cause-effect sense.

 

[Druweid]

Greetings!

Y'know, I realize this is Im_a's thread, but I really feel compelled to address this particular post. I feel some things are not being made clear, that any misunderstandings are unnecessary, and there are a number of "seeds" to the right answers right here in your post, Brinny. I realize some of this is out-of-order with your original post, so please bear with me, and I apologize in advance if I cause any confusion.

I find your reference to a "hammer" and "nail" most interesting. Have you ever heard of "Maslow's Hammer?" It refers to a person's approach, or ability to approach, problems in life. The concept originates from the quote, "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to treat all problems as nails."

I believe that this is what Eudaimonist is alluding to when he is referring to each person's worldview. The worldview of any given person is the "tool" that person uses to approach problems. But in truth, not every problem a person faces is a "nail."

You then go on to come within a hair's breadth of answering your own question:

empathizing, weeping with someone has nothing to do with beliefs or world view or philosophy.....it has everything to do with feeling for a fellow human being...

On this I couldn't possibly agree with you more, but what you seem to not understand or recognize is that very few people are capable of true, honest empathy. And while the ability to empathize has nothing to do with worldview or philosophy, in the absence of that empathy, the latter two is all a person has with which to work. At that point, yes, worldview would have to be at least somewhat compatible between two people, otherwise one would be basically trying to install a "lag bolt" with a "hammer." Oh, it can be done, but not without causing some amount of damage.

Also, I understand what Eudaimonist is talking about here:

I would try, in order to grasp at the right words. However, this would be a problem -- because sincerity would be difficult when speaking about things I don't believe in. I think that this would undermine my attempt.

I agree with him fully. If he was unable to either relate or empathize with a person, a false or insincere empathy would do little good, and possibly even more harm. And besides, Eudaimonist is most certainly not the type of person to be intellectually or spiritually dishonest.

Lastly, I have to tell you, especially with your reference to the late, great, Mr. Buscaglia, that while love, a true and honest love, is a wonderful and powerful tool for helping people, it is not infallible. I've known many kind, loving, and talented counselors in my lifetime, and none of them have a perfect success rate. Nor do *they* know of someone with a perfect success rate. So, if even those among the best cannot "reach" everyone, how much moreso for the untrained and/or untalented? Among these counselors, it is understood that there will always be those few people who don't want to be "reached." At that point, it's up to the counselor to accept that even with all the love possible, the best intentions, best resources, and best ability, you simply cannot save a person from themselves.

Warmest regards,
-- Druweid

 

[Eudaimonist]

But if it actually came to be in a discrete event, how can it be independently existing?

That's just it. It didn't come into existence at a discrete moment, as if there was nothingness a moment before. There is no before.

Rather, it started to change. All "discrete moments" exist in relation to the start of change, not compared to some external timeline. The universe does not exist "inside" of a timeline, as if time was a background for the universe. Time, or rather change, is an aspect of spacetime. Time is our way of conceptualizing change.

There might not have been any "before" in a temporal sense, but there was in a cause-effect sense.

If there is no before in a temporal sense, there is no before in any sense. Whatever existed at the start of change, it was only a cause, and not an effect. It did not need to be an effect -- it was "independently existing", as you put it.

If you want me to guess as to what it might have been, if loop quantum gravity theory is more or less correct, and all quantum entities are actually folds or relations between locations in the fabric of spacetime, then perhaps the start of change occurred when a supremely simple unfolded spacetime started to fold. That independently existing spacetime is still with us in a different form as our independently existing absolute.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[nesian]

A mental breakdown, most likely.

Hahaha, point taken ;D

Ah well, cheers for answering my pesky queries, some of which were downright purposefully senseless =P
<3 & cookies for atheists all around!

 

[brinny]

me and the multi-quote feature are at odds with each other....

thank you Druweid, for your response. Maybe i've been misunderstood or sumthin'.....it's not really as deep as all that....

it's just this:

when someone's thirsty, you give them water
when someone's hungry you give them food
when someone's naked and cold you give them clothing
when someone's hopeless you give them hope
when someone's oppressed you lift it
when someone's in pain you alleviate it
when someone's without shelter you provide it
when someone's crying you dry their tears
when someone's standing in the rain you give them an umbrella
when someone's without a smile you give them one of yours
when someone is alone, and dying, you look beyond yourself and with everything in you, from somewhere, do what you can to bring light to the darkness they're terrified of...

this last one reminds me of the scene in "Lord of the Rings" when Elwyn is holding Frodo, who's dying, and she says "the grace you have given to me, impart to him"...or something to that effect. The question is....would you, if you could, do the same?

 

[Eudaimonist]

it's just this:

when someone's thirsty, you give them water
when someone's hungry you give them food
when someone's naked and cold you give them clothing
when someone's hopeless you give them hope
when someone's oppressed you lift it
when someone's in pain you alleviate it
when someone's without shelter you provide it
when someone's crying you dry their tears
when someone's standing in the rain you give them an umbrella
when someone's without a smile you give them one of yours
when someone is alone, and dying, you look beyond yourself and with everything in you, from somewhere, do what you can to bring light to the darkness they're terrified of...

Really, it depends. I do not regard charity as some absolute duty. It is something I do in wise moderation, and that depends on my circumstances and my evaluation of the values, character, and psychology of the one I am helping.

In many cases, I will generously offer assistance.

this last one reminds me of the scene in "Lord of the Rings" when Elwyn is holding Frodo

Incidentally, that's "Arwen", not Elwyn. Tolkien buff here.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

Ah well, cheers for answering my pesky queries, some of which were downright purposefully senseless =P
<3 & cookies for atheists all around!

Thanks, nesian. Be well.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[brinny]

me and the multi-quote feature are at odds with each other....

thank you Druweid, for your response. Maybe i've been misunderstood or sumthin'.....it's not really as deep as all that....

it's just this:

when someone's thirsty, you give them water
when someone's hungry you give them food
when someone's naked and cold you give them clothing
when someone's hopeless you give them hope
when someone's oppressed you lift it
when someone's in pain you alleviate it
when someone's without shelter you provide it
when someone's crying you dry their tears
when someone's standing in the rain you give them an umbrella
when someone's without a smile you give them one of yours
when someone is alone, and dying, you look beyond yourself and with everything in you, from somewhere, do what you can to bring light to the darkness they're terrified of...

this last one reminds me of the scene in "Lord of the Rings" when Elwyn is holding Frodo, who's dying, and she says "the grace you have given to me, impart to him"...or something to that effect. The question is....would you, if you could, do the same?

Really, it depends. I do not regard charity as some absolute duty. It is something I do in wise moderation, and that depends on my circumstances and my evaluation of the values, character, and psychology of the one I am helping.

In many cases, I will generously offer assistance.



Incidentally, that's "Arwen", not Elwyn. Tolkien buff here.


eudaimonia,

Mark

you didn't answer the question Mark.

 

[Druweid]

Greetings!

.....it's not really as deep as all that....

How often have you ever been told, you don't give yourself enough credit?

when someone's thirsty, you give them water
when someone's hungry you give them food
when someone's naked and cold you give them clothing
(etc.) :: snip::

This reminds me of something I once heard spoken between a doctor and a psychiatrist:

Doctor: I don't envy you, your job.
Psychiatrist: Why? You're a talented doctor.
Doctor: Yeah, but I can SEE where my patients are bleeding.
​

You see, the doctor here is of a mind that is more like a technician than a philosopher. Sure, when problems are clear and obvious, so too are the solutions. And such solutions are as much a matter of logic and common sense as they are a matter of compassion.

...when someone is alone, and dying, you look beyond yourself and with everything in you, from somewhere, do what you can to bring light to the darkness they're terrified of...

As I mentioned before, to see (or reach) *beyond* oneself is a rare, and precious, ability. An ability that few people are able to master.

this last one reminds me of the scene in "Lord of the Rings"

"What grace is given me let it pass to him...let him be spared....save him." How apropos that you should identify with this quote. This "grace" of which she speaks is her immortality. A rare and precious gift that not many (well, in the LOTR world) could offer.

With respect to the OP of this thread, perhaps this is the direction your question should take to Im_a or any other non-theists. Earlier, when you referred to "you look beyond yourself and with everything in you, from somewhere," for you, that "somewhere" would be God and/or the Holy Spirit. So, would a non-theist or atheist be capable of a similar such empathy? And if so, where would that "somewhere" be for them?

In closing, let me offer another quote from LOTR that exemplifies the sort of compassion that I believe you are trying to express. When Sam and Frodo are nearing the end, beaten, bruised, and bone-weary, and Frodo is ever-so close to utter hopelessness:

Frodo: No, Sam. I can't recall the taste of food. Nor the sound of water. Nor the touch of grass. I'm... naked in the dark. With nothing. No veil ... between me... and the wheel of fire. I can see him. With my waking eyes.

Sam: Then let us be rid of it, once and for all! Come on, Mr. Frodo. I can't carry it for you. But I can carry you. And it as well.
​

Brightest blessings,
-- Druweid

 

[Eudaimonist]

With respect to the OP of this thread, perhaps this is the direction your question should take to Im_a or any other non-theists. Earlier, when you referred to "you look beyond yourself and with everything in you, from somewhere," for you, that "somewhere" would be God and/or the Holy Spirit. So, would a non-theist or atheist be capable of a similar such empathy? And if so, where would that "somewhere" be for them?

"Beyond myself" can mean three things to me:

1) The worldview of the human person I am trying to help.
2) The worldviews of wise human persons, e.g. Carl Jung.
3) A growth spurt in myself. "Beyond" would refer to a future self.

But there is one other interpretation:

4) An expansion in what I believe possible to myself. In this case I have the resources I didn't believe I had.

Honestly, I think most people sell themselves short. They attribute to God what was inside of them all along.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[brinny]

i don't know how that multi quote works.....

Druweid, i've always been like this...wondering about this...wondering about that....i keenly feel for those who are suffering or scared or trodden underfoot or bullied or sick...

when i was referring to the hammer and the nail...i was the nail, painfully so...i don't mean that i'd rather be a hammer to pound on someone else, but to not be hammered anymore.

it comes from this song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6i8HHrz2BI

 

[Druweid]

"Beyond myself" can mean three things to me:

1) The worldview of the human person I am trying to help.
2) The worldviews of wise human persons, e.g. Carl Jung.
3) A growth spurt in myself. "Beyond" would refer to a future self.

Mmmmm, well said.

But there is one other interpretation:

4) An expansion in what I believe possible to myself. In this case I have the resources I didn't believe I had.

Indeed! As necessity is the mother of invention, so to is she the inspiration for self-discovery. Would such resources ever be discovered if not for the need to address the inevitable difficulties of life, whether ours or that of another.

Honestly, I think most people sell themselves short. They attribute to God what was inside of them all along.

Perhaps, but then, have you ever caught yourself attributing to another's philosophy that which was in yourself? Certainly, the ability is within each of us, and the source of inspiration that leads us to that ability deserves it's due credit, but ONLY what is due, and nothing more.

Brightest blessings,
-- Druweid

 

[Druweid]

i don't know how that multi quote works.....

Curse you vile and despicable technobabble!!

Not to worry, Brinny. S'all good.

Druweid, i've always been like this...wondering about this...wondering about that....i keenly feel for those who are suffering or scared or trodden underfoot or bullied or sick...

Such empathy often comes as an inherent ability. It's difficult, though not impossible, to learn. For many, such as yourself, they are simply born with it. It is a blessing. And a curse.

when i was referring to the hammer and the nail...i was the nail, painfully so...i don't mean that i'd rather be a hammer to pound on someone else, but to not be hammered anymore.

I once felt as you do. I came to realize, though, that there are times when others will try to give no other choice but to be a nail to them. Finally, I acquiesced. But despite their most enthusiastic and prolonged beatings, I stood resolute. Still a nail, but as undamaged and undriven as before their beatings commenced.

it comes from this song:

I can relate. I'm a Simon & Garfunkle fan from way back.

Like a Bridge...
-- Druweid

 

[brinny]

Druweid.....the empathy is not inherent....it was what i learned after inexplicable pain....in that sense, i don't regret the pain....i was born oblivious to the pain of others...it didn't bother me if someone was in pain or not.

not following you about the nail thing....

 

[Druweid]

Druweid.....the empathy is not inherent....it was what i learned after inexplicable pain....in that sense, i don't regret the pain....i was born oblivious to the pain of others...it didn't bother me if someone was in pain or not.

When you said, in an earlier post, "i've always been like this...wondering about this...wondering about that..." I took the "always" as literal, and as relating to your ability to empathize. I apologize If I misread that post. Nonetheless, while I certainly am not trying to dictate who and what you are, please allow me to explain further why I believe your ability to empathize *might* be more inherent than you describe.

In your younger years, you were unaffected by the difficulties of others. But then, perhaps, you did not forget them either. Then later in life, when going through your own difficulties, an epiphany took place. You came to realize, in sudden, crystal clarity, why and how those difficulties related to you. You may have even felt some level of shame for not having been more empathetic at that time. So in a sense, you didn't learn to empathize so much as you learned to connect to the empathy already within you. But like I said, you may also be right in that it was learned from the beginning. These are just my thoughts, I could be wrong.

not following you about the nail thing....

How you view yourself, hammer or nail, may affect how you approach life, but it does not always affect how other people "see" you. There are people in this world who will try to treat you like a nail no matter what. In such an instance, I am personally of a mind to say, "so be it, I'm a nail, give me your worst," and despite their greatest efforts, they will not move me, nor will the damage me. In truth, I am neither hammer nor nail, I am water. Take your hammer and beat as furiously as you wish. Once you stop from exhaustion, you will see me become as peaceful, placid, and immovable as when you started.

Warmest thoughts,
-- Druweid

 

[brinny]

Druweid, i didn't feel shame at all..i just didn't care.....my heart was what changed...

and i gotta tell ya'.....i be no nail now....

 

[Futuwwa]

That's just it. It didn't come into existence at a discrete moment, as if there was nothingness a moment before. There is no before.

Rather, it started to change. All "discrete moments" exist in relation to the start of change, not compared to some external timeline. The universe does not exist "inside" of a timeline, as if time was a background for the universe. Time, or rather change, is an aspect of spacetime. Time is our way of conceptualizing change.



If there is no before in a temporal sense, there is no before in any sense. Whatever existed at the start of change, it was only a cause, and not an effect. It did not need to be an effect -- it was "independently existing", as you put it.

If you want me to guess as to what it might have been, if loop quantum gravity theory is more or less correct, and all quantum entities are actually folds or relations between locations in the fabric of spacetime, then perhaps the start of change occurred when a supremely simple unfolded spacetime started to fold. That independently existing spacetime is still with us in a different form as our independently existing absolute.


eudaimonia,

Mark

That's an interesting take on it. I will have to get back to you on this.