Dave Ellis
Contributor
- Dec 27, 2011
- 8,933
- 821
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Do you people really expect replies like this to be taken seriously?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Nobody hallucinates. We contact the spiritual world.
The spiritual world is lame. I contact the super-spiritual world.Nobody hallucinates. We contact the spiritual world.
Do you people really expect replies like this to be taken seriously?
Why not? You say people hallucinate due to chemical imbalances in the brain. Fine. That is your paradigm.
I say it is actually the spiritual world flowing out through our mental sense perception. Drugs unblock the channels of perception for us to see more of this spirit.
Do you people really expect replies like this to be taken seriously?
Why not? You say people hallucinate due to chemical imbalances in the brain. Fine. That is your paradigm.
I say it is actually the spiritual world flowing out through our mental sense perception. Drugs unblock the channels of perception for us to see more of this spirit.
In short, Reality is my paradigm.
Have fun with those drugs.... I suggest you cut back a bit however.
Reality is of course a word that means different things to different people. How it is defined varies. Some people take as real what their senses register. Others go to professionals explaining to them aspects of expertise to which their dull minds are inadequate to discovering. Others turn to holy books.
How to adjudicate which path is the correct one? As a skeptic, I do not know the answer.
Drugs of course offer another paradigm. It is a well-known fact in science that reality is not fully how our mind and senses register it. Could it be that drugs act as less mediated form of perception into other realms or aspects of existence? I will not discount it. I say, as a skeptic, "we do not know."
Reality is objective
, and the best way to determine what is real is through independent verification. I don't buy into all this "it's real for me" crap... things are either real or they aren't. If they are "real" for you and nor real for everyone else, odds are very high you're delusional or simply wrong about what you believe.
I agree that reality is not fully how our mind or senses register it... our senses fool us sometimes and we get lots of things wrong. However, all drugs do is alter how our mind and senses operate. Either way, they're still not going to be any more reliable, and odds are they'll be worse at determining reality.
Whooa. Jumping the gun already are we? What does that even mean, "objective"?
Where are you pulling these odds from exactly?
All you've basically done is load assumption after assumption. Whether reality is objective, subjective, or something else entirely is not something we are at all privy too... speaking as a skeptic.
Objective is something that exists independently of your (or anyone elses) perception or opinion.
Observation of human behaviour.
If something within a persons "reality" is only real for that person and nobody else.... it's probably not actually real.
For example, if you think you are Napoleon and nobody around you agrees.... Your reality may be that you're Napoleon, however in actual reality you're mistaken or delusional.
How we perceive reality has no bearing on what is actually real. Whether we are correctly perceiving something, or not correctly perceiving it, it doesn't change whatever it is out there that is being perceived.
And that is your opinion that reality is that way.... And actually modern science in the form of quantum mechanics would put into question such a view. Things exist in an indeterminate wave-like state prior to someone making an observation and collapsing the wave-function into a determined outcome. Also, in the history of philosophy itself this idea has NEVER been a constant. Does a tree make a sound when it falls? Nobody knows. George Berkely built his philosophy around the idea that reality as we know it is entirely mind-created. There is no independent reality "out there."
Actually, you haven't reached that conclusion at all. We look at people in psychiatric hospitals and see that their reality is maladaptive. That's all. The most that we can say is that their reality is an ALTERNATIVE reality which doesn't sit well with reality AS WE SEE IT. We CANNOT say that they are mistaken in any absolutely certain sense. So, again, your conclusion is groundless.
Again, loaded assumption after loaded assumption. This view of yours may be very consoling to you. Just realize though that it has no more basis than your own opinion.
re·al·i·ty/rēˈalətē/
Noun:
So sure, it may just be my opinion, however the dictionary agrees with my definition.
- The world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them: "he refuses to face reality".
As for your tree falling idea, the answer is yes, it makes noise.
We can know that by leaving recording devices and waiting for a tree to fall after everyone's left.
Your Quantum Mechanics bit is irrelevant as well. Just because Quantum mechanics is "weird" compared to how everyday life goes, and things react differently than we'd expect, it's still working however it works independent of us. We may be correct or incorrect in how we're perceiving it, but it doesn't change what we're observing one bit.
As for George Berkely I'd say his idea is nonsense.
People in psychiatric hospitals (like you're describing) are delusional. It's not an "alternate reality", it's a completely messed up view of the reality everybody is in. And yes, we can certainly say someone who believes they are Napoleon is wrong. Napoleon has been dead nearly 200 years.
And the definition of reality based on the dictionary.... But whatever, right?
So? The dictionary is compiled according to the general usage of words. It doesn't say anything deeply philosophical about the nature of reality.
You don't know that.
That is still an observation. It's just mediated somewhat differently.
No, QM definitively shows that the nature of some aspects of reality are directly impacted by acts of observation. If you can't accept that, well, sorry. I don't claim to be an expert on QM, but some things about it are entangled with the act of us observing. So... no, it's not fully "independent." It actually is dependent on us to a large extent.
Interesting that you regard one of the most prominent philosophers ever of penning "nonsense." This to me shows you are not worth responding to regarding his ideas.
You basically do not know their reality, or whether or not it has any level of reality.
Dictionaries don't say much when it comes to actual intellectual debate. Only common usage of words. So, yeah, I say "whatever" to what the dictionary says regard reality.
Omnibenevolent implies benevolence to everyone by defenition. If he is only benevolant towards his friends he would be "like the pagans".And I want to point out, why does he have to help his enemies?
Omnibenevolent implies benevolence to everyone by defenition.
Not being benevolent toward someone wouldn't be a characteristic of being all good / benevolent. All good would necessarily imply no bad.Omnibenevolent means "all good"
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?