Why can't people accept that everything could be connected?

[StereoInstaller1]

troll'd

[E30Kaiser]

Well, obviously. Yes. It's everywhere.

That is a bold claim, and based on nothing, there is no proof as to the actual existence of "Love".

To take the bait, love is a product of evolution, and there's probably a nerdy evolutionary reason for it. Species/individuals that were passionate survived and reproduced because it was a successful trait. It's not even human-specific. But because I think that doesn't mean that I'm not a hopeless romantic, and that I'm not with someone I would do anything in the world for. Love it completely irrational at times - I wish you wouldn't jump to the conclusion that people without faith in a god are robotic evil people who don't want children. If that were the case, you wouldn't have to put up with us!

I would say that a lack of caring is a much better trait for spreading your seed. IE the species that just fuck like rabbits seem to do better than say gorillas.

Again, I don't think there's a need to - it clearly exists. But isn't everything relative to each individual? I look at the world with my eyes and my brain, as do you. Perception is reality.

As you say perception is reality, you are saying something that is a concept clearly exists in reality, which is not provable. Just like altruism you can't prove without a shadow of a doubt that the person who "loves" another person truly loves that person and would do anything for them no matter how selfless or demeaning. In the same way, God is a concept, a rather vague one at that and may or may not exist in reality.

[Ryan Stewart]

I never claimed such.

Science excludes things that cannot be proven through experimentation. Much of what is listed above includes elements of mysticism and require "faith" in such elements.

One caveat is science, unlike religion, believes that anything is open to change. Technically nothing is "proven" in proper science. Ideas are tested/replicated and accepted to be true as long as they can pass those tests. Once a new test comes along that messes it all up science goes, "welp, guess things changed."

The issue with religion is when a test comes along that messes things up they murder the creator of that test and supress any results of it. They also dont like testing in the first place, faith is the foundation.

Now on to string theory. Its a theory, meaning its an idea but has to be tested. They come up with theories in order to make sense of things enough to try and devise a test. Unless you know what you are looking for you dont know where to look.

[Ryan Stewart]

Not a joke, I'm sorry to hear you are so closed minded, and must already have all the answers your professors have given you. Please, share with us then. I must really need to be enlightened in your valued opinion.

Just because they dont accept those things doesnt mean they are closed minded. It just means they have evaluated claims and passed on them. The "open minded" argument was made by David Koresh, its also popular with the conspiracy theorists. They think that people should accept any bile that comes out of someone's mouth. I could say that monkey shit could be the basis for an all natural viagra that will not only make you erect but make you the master of pleasing women. So, if you arent willing to eat some monkey shit does that make you closed minded?

I think it does. :)

because some people need factual data or something they can "see" to believe in something. people have lost something called faith.

Maybe the people who NEED faith have lost something called factual data. Seeing as how science has this nasty habit of blowing up claims of religion I will consider some truth to the moment that religion manages to blow up claims of science, but in reality. Not in a Texas school book.

[Bill 84 318i]

That is a bold claim, and based on nothing, there is no proof as to the actual existence of "Love".

I disagree. It's just as real as fear and hate and all other human emotions. It's only based on my life experience as that's the only data I have to pull from, but I know it exists as I define it (don't ask me to, I don't know that I can put it into words). Maybe that's where we're not meeting, the definition.

I would say that a lack of caring is a much better trait for spreading your seed. IE the species that just fuck like rabbits seem to do better than say gorillas.

That's a fair statement. For species like rabbits, it obviously works pretty well. I hardly think they're around because of their predatory skill or supernatural defenses. Each species has different things that keeps them alive.

As you say perception is reality, you are saying something that is a concept clearly exists in reality, which is not provable. Just like altruism you can't prove without a shadow of a doubt that the person who "loves" another person truly loves that person and would do anything for them no matter how selfless or demeaning. In the same way, God is a concept, a rather vague one at that and may or may not exist in reality.

I should've said that people's perceptions are their own realities. You're getting vague, though, with the talk of god-as-a-concept and can't-prove-love-or-altruism thing. It's splitting hairs and missing the point, IMO. Maybe not vague, but I don't know what you're getting at.

[dirtysix]

because some people need factual data or something they can "see" to believe in something. people have lost something called faith.

I think you may have missed the point.
Also, it's a waste of time looking for spiritual 'faith' from me.

[E30Kaiser]

I disagree. It's just as real as fear and hate and all other human emotions. It's only based on my life experience as that's the only data I have to pull from, but I know it exists as I define it (don't ask me to, I don't know that I can put it into words). Maybe that's where we're not meeting, the definition.

This is a similar argument to the one I hear many Christians make in defense of their faith. While someone may say how do you know God exists? Their usual response is, "I can't define it very well, I just have my life experience to draw upon, and it tells me that it does." Who knows, maybe "God" and mysticism is hard-wired into most Humans the way "Love" is as you put it. It is older than civilization itself, and we are not the only species to exhibit signs of religious thought either, there is evidence that points towards Neanderthals doing the same. So who knows, maybe religion and the belief in mystical things is just some left over Monkey shit as Joe Rogan would put it.

I wouldn't say it is a product of evolution in a way that implies religious bee's would be more likely to succeed, but it may be something that ended up getting hardwired into us.

[Wiglaf]

connect the dots

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=171948

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=171934

easier to make friends with a right-wing wacko or a liberal socialist than it is to tolerate someone who refuses to believe in evolution.

[Bill 84 318i]

This is a similar argument to the one I hear many Christians make in defense of their faith. While someone may say how do you know God exists? Their usual response is, "I can't define it very well, I just have my life experience to draw upon, and it tells me that it does." Who knows, maybe "God" and mysticism is hard-wired into most Humans the way "Love" is as you put it. It is older than civilization itself, and we are not the only species to exhibit signs of religious thought either, there is evidence that points towards Neanderthals doing the same. So who knows, maybe religion and the belief in mystical things is just some left over Monkey shit as Joe Rogan would put it.

I wouldn't say it is a product of evolution in a way that implies religious bee's would be more likely to succeed, but it may be something that ended up getting hardwired into us.

I see where you're going with "both are concepts" parallel, but that's a bit too abstract for my taste. Love is a very tangible thing for me, and god is not.

I'm not saying I can't understand religion, or that it doesn't exist for a reason. The evolution of it and why it's still around is certainly fascinating, though. I think it's inherently human to want answers to questions like "why", and religion does that for a lot of things for a lot of people. Just not for me.

Dig Joe Rogan big time - caught his standup back in January and have a CD or two.

[markseven]

Evidently logical and/or rational is now synonymous with "closed-minded." I rely on evidence to draw conclusions. It has nothing to do with professors or education.

Respectfully, unless you have performed and analyzed all of the research and evidence yourself, you cannot be sure one way or another, unless of course you have faith in the science industry ;) As for "peer-reviewed", please see the AGW debacle.

Me on the other hand, I have myself performed and analyzed all the research on my Savior Jesus Christ. I'm actually more of a scientist than most scientists :pimp:

[briansjacobs]

ok Ill play your game. No, there is no such thing as love, since it can not be proven it does not exist. Now, where does that put your threory on god?

[Bill 84 318i]

Respectfully, unless you have performed and analyzed all of the research and evidence yourself, you cannot be sure one way or another, unless of course you have faith in the science industry ;) As for "peer-reviewed", please see the AGW debacle.

Me on the other hand, I have myself performed and analyzed all the research on my Savior Jesus Christ. I'm actually more of a scientist than most scientists :pimp:

That's a poor argument, and I think you know it. To take your logic a step further, I have to have faith that my TV is still in the other room since I can't see it right now.

Which AGW debacle are you referring to? The one about the emails at the University of East Anglia?

[briansjacobs]

Jesus was a zombie, what else would you call someone that comes back to life? as a scientist I estimate during the zombie appocalapse there will be 1,000,000 mesiahs....and I plan to kill them all!

[Fast Frankie]

if there is one thing I learned in life, it is that shit is not nearly as organized as you would be led to believe.

[ForcedFirebird]

A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive.

No matter how hard we try, we cannot convince the person next to us we are seeing the same thing. Even though we both see a light in the sky, you may see an alien, I may see an angel. Even though we both shake hands with the extraterrestrial, could either of us be convinced otherwise?

Yes everything is connected, but how, we have yet to understand.

Science has proven that in any chemical reaction, matter mass and energy cannot be crated or lost - if this is the case when one dies, what happens to that conscience? That matter/mass/energy has to be converted to something else, weather one of us believes that it goes to "heaven" and the other believes it become worm food, something HAS to happen to that energy. For all we know, our conscience may become part of our surrounding particles and we will understand everything, or it may just become heat as our bodies decompose -for argument's sake with the new theories on infinite dimensional space, we may continue our life through one of the variables that could exist if we didn't get run over by that bus; either way, whatever it is, it goes back into the cycle of life.