Yes."the thing". I can guarantee we see and experience the stuff around us differently.
The indigenous people see and experience things like trees, animals, mountains and everything around them as verbs. That's their reality. That's not true in western culture. Is their reality less true than yours?
"the thing". I can guarantee we see and experience the stuff around us differently.
The indigenous people see and experience things like trees, animals, mountains and everything around them as verbs. That's their reality. That's not true in western culture. Is their reality less true than yours?
Your pretty good at telling others what they can and can't do.If they see it differently, then it's subjective, just as your viewpoint is. Thus, you can't claim that your viewpoint is real just because you find it enriching.
If it's spiritual related...don't even try. Things like Love and stuff like conscious awareness can't be measured.Tell me how I can examine something and measure how true it is.
Your pretty good at telling others what they can and can't do.
We are in total agreement about being subjective though. That's because the whole of the Human experience is subjective. Nothing new there.
I'm telling you, rather you believe it or not, the spiritual reality in which I live (which you have absolutely no clue of) has enriched my life.
Sure:Tell me how I can examine something and measure how true it is.
No .. I never said such a thing. I said their meaning of reality is assigned by way of belief."the thing". I can guarantee we see and experience the stuff around us differently.
The indigenous people see and experience things like trees, animals, mountains and everything around them as verbs. That's their reality. That's not true in western culture. Is their reality less true than yours?
.. (with your condition 4 there, being your response to your recognition of the Bible being 'myopic').4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
Prime Directive: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted.
Sorry... (with your condition 4 there, being your response to your recognition of the Bible being 'myopic').
Have a nice day.
Your writing is a bit opaque to me. Might be my fault. But either way.... not sure I can actually respond.The question arises: how might the limits one might poses as a criterion, be objectively tested for (ie: as existing)? Ie: in order to establish the objective existence of those limits?
Anything scientific thinking finds objectively untestable is a belief .. and so we are justified in classifying those limit criteria as being just that, ie: 'beliefs'.
It amazes me how you fail to comprehend option (4) contradicts your "Prime Directive".Sure:
1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own
Prime Directive: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted.
Maybe spiritual awareness isn't what you think.What I find it interesting is that for something that supposedly doesn't exist, the spiritual awareness of life has definitely enriched my life as I know it has for many others through the years. The question I have is how could that even be possible for something that does not exist? That's what I'm wondering.
Beliefs are stored in our subconscious minds where for some they serve a positive purpose for others not so much. The purpose is real, the belief doesn't need to be true beyond the purpose it serves.Yes.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?