God On The Brain

[Guest]

O.K., Speak to the mystic and theist audience then.

Here?

The mystics and theists here have a pretty good understanding about where I am coming from already, IMO.

"Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw
your pearls before swine." (Matt. 7:6)

 

[Guest]

Q :

What is the point in me trying to explain the meaning of such 'revelations' as predictions of the second coming of Christ, the kingdom of God, and the battle of armageddon to an audience of people who ascribe no meaning whatsoever to anything outside of science?

I dearly wish there was an audience here who were interested in these things, but there is not. The audience here is only interested in trying to prove that all religious mythology is meaningless claptrap and most of philosophy is pointless.

 

[Peskanov]

UCE,

----
quote:
Well, actually no. I get a very different view on this in my day-to-day life. I live in a city that is packed with mystics, pagans, artists and the like. Brighton is well-known for it. A surprisingly large number of people both believed me and were interested in what I had to say, some of them on a highly intellectual level.
----

I have not much doubts about the intellectual level of mystics. I have read the writtings of some of them, they all seem to have strong curiosity and deep of thought.
But being intelligent and being of pragmatic nature are different things.
I am just saying that pragmatism (not materialism) make people reject revelations.

----
quote:
There are reasons for why it appears like this. They are not so much influenced by previous ones, as they are all attempting to communicate the same things. Times change, so the format of the messages change, but ultimately they all try to serve a similar purpose.
----

That's subjective. If you want to find common issues between revelations, you will sure find them. But what value give you to differences?
Are you underrating them because them could be human error introduced by the receiver of the message? This has important meaning as well; if you admit error in a revelation, you admit you don't know what it's true and what is not...

----
quote:
Well, if one is the direct recipient of such a revelation then one is in a rather different situation. For a start, there is little room for doubting that the revelation is real. Other people can think I am telling lies, it is more difficult to tell myself that it didn't happen. Extracting meaning from them isn't so straightforward. There needs to be a context.
----

Few people here will think you are lying. Most of them will think is illusion, chance, or a combination of both.
Your history is quite similar to the history one of my favourite fiction writters: Philip K. Dick.
All Philip 's books deal with reality being a complex, elaborate illusion hidding something much more important.
My surprise came when I read his biography. His books mostly are reflections of his own experiences, which have some resemblance with the ones loki mentioned. Some of the strange happenings in his life even has witness...
However, you seem quite sure about the world being an illusion, while Philip wasted all his life divided beween a full rejection or full acceptation of the received messages.

----
quote:
There is a great deal I could explain about the mechanisms involved, and indeed the meaning. The problem is that materialists are totally incapable of believing the events themselves are anything more than elaborate fantasy, let alone being able to understand the meaning of the events. To be blunt, the materialists are being left behind to a certain extent. Vast numbers of people whose beliefs are routinely dismissed as nonsense by the 'skeptics' understand all sorts of things that the skeptics are quite incapable of grasping, because they lack the conceptual framework to make sense of them.
The skeptics see only the bathwater. They make no attempt to look for the baby.
----

Skeptics are seeing a different baby...But as I said; this not a question of materialism, but of coherence. A pragmatic person can dismiss revelations because of his contradictory nature; there is no need to be a materialist.

 

[Guest]

Peskanov :

I accept that from a pragmatic point of view that revelations are of little use.

That's subjective. If you want to find common issues between revelations, you will sure find them. But what value give you to differences?
Are you underrating them because them could be human error introduced by the receiver of the message? This has important meaning as well; if you admit error in a revelation, you admit you don't know what it's true and what is not...

The answer to this is complex. Nothing is what it appears to be. Part of the problem is that the message has to be of a form that makes it understandable to people, and this causes the message to be distorted. Few of us are ready for the naked truth.

Few people here will think you are lying. Most of them will think is illusion, chance, or a combination of both.

Fair enough. But just imagine you found yourself in the kind of situation that Moses did, or Joseph Smith. Revelation recieved in physical form. Not much room for chance there. Something happened to me that really was not far from this. The day before it happened I would have maintained that it was impossible.

However, you seem quite sure about the world being an illusion, while Philip wasted all his life divided beween a full rejection or full acceptation of the received messages.

I arrived at my current worldview after many years of science and skepticism. I had a very good understanding of physics, of the psychology associated with belief, and to a growing extent also philosophy. I knew exactly why I believed the things I believed. So when strange things started happening to me I had to find a way to interpret those strange things without abandoning all that I had learned beforehand. I had to find a way to make sense of all of it together. So I had no choice but accept that the world was an illusion and that all consciousness was linked together. It was the only way it could all make sense. However, a full acceptance of the messages doesn't just involve an intellectual learning process. It also requires an acceptance of the need for total selflessness. But I am a human being, and I am a humanist. Ultimately, an acceptance of the meaning of the messages involves a level of self-discipline of which I am incapable. I am not fit to be a preacher. I do my best to be a philosopher.

 

[Q-Source]

Here?

The mystics and theists here have a pretty good understanding about where I am coming from already, IMO.

"Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw
your pearls before swine." (Matt. 7:6)

Oh, you have to work on that Ego thingy that makes you look stupid.

Otherwise, you'll never reach enlightment, Darling.

 

[Q-Source]

I dearly wish there was an audience here who were interested in these things, but there is not. The audience here is only interested in trying to prove that all religious mythology is meaningless claptrap and most of philosophy is pointless.

BINGO!

If you believe so, then why are you wasting your time here?

 

[Guest]

Oh, you have to work on that Ego thingy that makes you look stupid.

Very true.

Otherwise, you'll never reach enlightment, Darling.

I do not deserve to reach enlightenment, Darling.

You shouldn't make me laugh out loud at work. People are beginning to think I am strange.

 

[Guest]

BINGO!

If you believe so, then why are you wasting your time here?

Well...I'm not wasting my time here. Many of the people here are trying to prove that all religious mythology is meaningless claptrap and most of philosophy is pointless. They aren't neccesarily succeeding in doing so.

edited : What would be the point in preaching to the converted?

 

[hammegk]

BINGO!

If you believe so, then why are you wasting your time here?

But who can resist synchronicity???

 

[Peskanov]

UCE,

----
quote:
The answer to this is complex. Nothing is what it appears to be. Part of the problem is that the message has to be of a form that makes it understandable to people, and this causes the message to be distorted. Few of us are ready for the naked truth.
----

Either this or it is a form of illusion. No wonder most people choose to see it as illusion.

----
quote:
Fair enough. But just imagine you found yourself in the kind of situation that Moses did, or Joseph Smith. Revelation recieved in physical form. Not much room for chance there. Something happened to me that really was not far from this. The day before it happened I would have maintained that it was impossible.
----

There is always room for delusion from an objective POV. Not from a subjective one, of course. If I have the security of receiving a revelation I have it and that's all.

----
quote:
I arrived at my current worldview after many years of science and skepticism. I had a very good understanding of physics, of the psychology associated with belief, and to a growing extent also philosophy. I knew exactly why I believed the things I believed. So when strange things started happening to me I had to find a way to interpret those strange things without abandoning all that I had learned beforehand. I had to find a way to make sense of all of it together. So I had no choice but accept that the world was an illusion and that all consciousness was linked together. It was the only way it could all make sense.
----

Again, there is always 2 interpretations, revelation or delusion. Phil couldn't choose between them, which carried him to nearly having 2 different personalities.
I had a strange experience some years ago, which it's dificult to describe. A sort of an avalanche of ideas falling in my mind in a very short lapse of time. If you have read about Rousseau, he describes an experience which fits mine quite well. I think he called it an "the illumination".
At this time I was already of very pragmatic nature, and the nature of the ideas I "received" was not mystical. However, maybe if I was of religious or mystical nature, my experience would have been very different!

 

[billydkid]

Now this....

Peskanov :


The answer to this is complex. Nothing is what it appears to be. Part of the problem is that the message has to be of a form that makes it understandable to people, and this causes the message to be distorted. Few of us are ready for the naked truth.

Now this I find especially irritating. Why on earth would anything/everything appear to anything other than what it is. Is it part of some sort of cosmic conspiracy? Does the universe say to itself "Hell, I guess I'll just disguise everything to appear to be something other than what it is." I will grant that it would total overload to percieve every imaginable aspect of anything and everything one might encounter, but I think it is absurd to suppose that what we percieve is some sort of a mask obscuring it's true nature.

You mentioned Joseph Smith. As it happens, old Joseph recieved his visit from the angels and his gold tablets not far from where I am sitting at this moment. Funny about Joseph and every single person like him - they receive these tangible objects form the other side and without exception they are misplaced before anyone else can verify their existance. Damn, these profits are just God awful unlucky or forgetful. And if I remember correctly, old Joseph felt it necessary to dictate from his tablet from behind a screen for some reason. Hmmm, wonder what that was all about. But you, decent folks should just take Joseph and all those like him at their word. Makes sense to me.

 

[Q-Source]

edited : What would be the point in preaching to the converted?

The problem is that you refuse to tell us the most exciting part of your preach.

You keep us asking and asking, you're mean

It is like reading the Bible with no miracles.... he, he.

 

[Guest]

Billy

Now this I find especially irritating. Why on earth would anything/everything appear to anything other than what it is.
Is it part of some sort of cosmic conspiracy?

I deeply sympathise with you. How could there be a cosmic conspiracy?

All I can say is that however counter-intuitive and backwards and unbelievable and irritating it may appear to you, from your POV a 'cosmic conspiracy' is not very far from a true evaluation of the situation. It isn't a cosmic conspiracy, but it certainly looks like it. Sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction. Sometimes in order to understand something you need to understand its context, and out of its context it just appears incomprehensible.

Does the universe say to itself "Hell, I guess I'll just disguise everything to appear to be something other than what it is."

Something very close to that, YES. But unless you understand what it is you will not be able to understand why it has to be hidden.

I will grant that it would total overload to percieve every imaginable aspect of anything and everything one might encounter, but I think it is absurd to suppose that what we percieve is some sort of a mask obscuring it's true nature.

Again, I sympathise with your reasons for taking this line.

You mentioned Joseph Smith. As it happens, old Joseph recieved his visit from the angels and his gold tablets not far from where I am sitting at this moment. Funny about Joseph and every single person like him - they receive these tangible objects form the other side and without exception they are misplaced before anyone else can verify their existance.

Well, in my case I deleted the tangible evidence partly because I didn't want to admit what was happening was happening. I did not know how to react. But it doesn't really matter, because had I publicly displayed the evidence it would have been dismissed as a fake i.e. only I knew the circumstances regarding the arrival of the evidence. To anybody else it was either put their by me, or somebody hacked into my computer.

Q :

You keep us asking and asking, you're mean

Always leave the audience wanting more.....

You know precisely what will happen if I say more than I have.

 

[scribble]

The problem is that you refuse to tell us the most exciting part of your preach.

You keep us asking and asking, you're mean

It is like reading the Bible with no miracles.... he, he.

Q-Source:

You are very insightful. PErhaps UcE will recall when he first came to this place, and I was desperate to learn from him. I begged him over, and over, and over to tell me what it was he knew, what it was he was trying to tell us.

Finally he attacked me in a series of e-mails that were incredibly rude and accused me of being stupid, never being able to understand, etc, etc.

Ever since then, UcE and I have been at each other's throats.

Be careful how far you push him for knowledge -- he may snap on you as well. Usually when you are just about to reach that point where he either reveals everything or you realize he is full of crap.

-Chris

 

[scribble]

But it doesn't really matter, because had I publicly displayed the evidence it would have been dismissed as a fake i.e. only I knew the circumstances regarding the arrival of the evidence. To anybody else it was either put their by me, or somebody hacked into my computer.

Gee, my recollection is this document contained the ANSWERS to the DEEP QUESTIONS you were pondering at the time.

I'd think if it was the Real Deal, that would have been self-evident. After all, the questions you were pondering at the time were absolutely fascinating -- as well as your answers to them. Unfortuantely, you refused to ever explain. And now, two yearsish later, we still have progressed exactly zero steps in your philosophy.

Always leave the audience wanting more...

Wanting *anything* you mean.

-Chris

 

[Guest]

Q-Source:

You are very insightful. PErhaps UcE will recall when he first came to this place, and I was desperate to learn from him. I begged him over, and over, and over to tell me what it was he knew, what it was he was trying to tell us.

Finally he attacked me in a series of e-mails that were incredibly rude and accused me of being stupid, never being able to understand, etc, etc.

Ever since then, UcE and I have been at each other's throats.

Be careful how far you push him for knowledge -- he may snap on you as well. Usually when you are just about to reach that point where he either reveals everything or you realize he is full of crap.

-Chris

Actually, Chris, you have been at my throat. Personally I see you more like an irritating insect. Not worth getting upset about, if you know what I mean.

Peace, brother.

 

[scribble]

Actually, Chris, you have been at my throat. Personally I see you more like an irritating insect. Not worth getting upset about, if you know what I mean.

Agreed, and you aren't worth getting upset about to me anymore, either. I just wanted to warn some folks about your game, so they won't waste all the time I did getting to the end of it.

Peace, brother.

[/B]

In my book, one EARNS the right to call me Brother. You do not have that right.

(and who calls an 'irritating insect' a brother?)
-Chris

 

[Q-Source]

You are very insightful. PErhaps UcE will recall when he first came to this place, and I was desperate to learn from him. I begged him over, and over, and over to tell me what it was he knew, what it was he was trying to tell us.

Finally he attacked me in a series of e-mails that were incredibly rude and accused me of being stupid, never being able to understand, etc, etc.

Ever since then, UcE and I have been at each other's throats.

Be careful how far you push him for knowledge -- he may snap on you as well. Usually when you are just about to reach that point where he either reveals everything or you realize he is full of crap.
-Chris

Chris,

Is it possible that this is true?. I find it hard to believe that Geoff can be rude just because someone asks him information.
But, if this happened to you, then you know what you're talking about.

In my case, I am not begging for knowledge. I don't think anyone of us has the ultimate Truth. But if we look here and there, maybe we can find something that we can consider the Truth ™.

Geoff's revelations belong to him. He needs to keep them sacred because they hold his beliefs system.

I am not so naive to think that someone's revelations will influence my own dogmatic beliefs.

Anyway, thanks for the advice. Stay around.

Q-S

 

[LeFevre]

Chris,

Is it possible that this is true?. I find it hard to believe that Geoff can be rude just because someone asks him information.
But, if this happened to you, then you know what you're talking about.

Q-S

UCE gets real emotional at times (the cheering comment that he later took back when he was calm) as we all do. He did get pretty down in the gutter there a long while back. IIRC that is one of the reasons he started to post as Juggler, cause Geoff as UCE back in the day was a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ ass.

That and having scribble question his zero=infinity

I like the calm UCE

 

[Martin]

and who calls an 'irritating insect' a brother?

Another irritating insect?