• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Nothing vs Everything

Kopji said:

Iacchus

Exactly the point of my first post about God being a galactic corporation rather than a single intelligence. We could posit a multitude of other possibilities in addition to the universe being a pervasive mind.
Click to expand...
Albeit things do have the tendency to come together for the greater good of the whole ... i.e., the wholeness itself signifying Unity. And, if there was a unified purpose, why couldn't that be construed as "One God?" ... Not that God would be incapable of having multiple facets which, could conceivably be mistaken for more than one God. And yet that needn't be a problem so long as the god of "the foot" doesn't override the god of "the mouth," so to speak. :D So, perhaps we could have a whole myriad of gods, and yet the only one God which proclaims, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."
 
Iacchus said:
You know something, I really don't care what you have to think. Since you have so clearly demonstrated your total lack of respect towards me in the past. Why should it make a difference now?
Click to expand...
Respect is not given. Respect is earned.
 
The definition is defined by the experience. And that's something I can't do for you.
Click to expand...
Definition is essential to communication. Without the attempt, no concept could ever be understood between two individuals.

But then communication is not really your intent. Like so many new-age pseudo-intellectuals, your not interested in two way communication, (that would require thinking and commiting to a definition of terms) your just here to spew your latest half thought-out idea in the interest of self-gratification.
And when we respond to your posts, you go running behind incoherent ramblings and winky emoticons.

Please have some dignity.
 
Throughout history, man's ego has created god as an answer to the unanswerable. It amazes me that some seemingly intelligent individuals cannot say they "don't know" without still attributing that unknown to some supreme being.
 
uruk said:

Definition is essential to communication. Without the attempt, no concept could ever be understood between two individuals.
Click to expand...
Experience is even more essential than definition, for without it, there would be "nothing" to define.


But then communication is not really your intent. Like so many new-age pseudo-intellectuals, your not interested in two way communication, (that would require thinking and commiting to a definition of terms) your just here to spew your latest half thought-out idea in the interest of self-gratification.

And when we respond to your posts, you go running behind incoherent ramblings and winky emoticons.
Click to expand...
Bummer ... . . That's a fly whisk by the way. ;)


Please have some dignity.
Click to expand...
So what does that mean, outside of what you think it should mean?
 
Belle said:

Throughout history, man's ego has created god as an answer to the unanswerable. It amazes me that some seemingly intelligent individuals cannot say they "don't know" without still attributing that unknown to some supreme being.
Click to expand...
So, does the fact that it amazes you imply that you do know?
 
Iacchus said:
So, does the fact that it amazes you imply that you do know?
Click to expand...

I shall take your intended snide comment as a compliment - for there is much I do not know, or presume to know... allowing for a much more interesting existence. I also do not have a problem admitting that I do not reconcile my lack of knowledge with unsubstanciated belief in the manipulations of some elusive super-intelligent being.
 
Belle said:

I shall take your intended snide comment as a compliment - for there is much I do not know, or presume to know... allowing for a much more interesting existence. I also do not have a problem admitting that I do not reconcile my lack of knowledge with unsubstanciated belief in the manipulations of some elusive super-intelligent being.
Click to expand...
You seem to "imply" that you know an awful lot about me, it sure sounds like you "know" something, which is rather arrogant and stupid.
 
Iacchus said:
You seem to "imply" that you know an awful lot about me, it sure sounds like you "know" something, which is rather arrogant and stupid.
Click to expand...

Thank you for a good laugh - your reply leaps over the edge of absurd...

Here you state that I "imply" that I know a lot about you, and then turn around to a direct assumption about me! Now THAT'S funny! ;)

Amazing...
 
Iacchus said:
Experience is even more essential than definition, for without it, there would be "nothing" to define...
Click to expand...
And experience without definition is incommunicable. So what's your point? Without you can communicate about your experience, it exists for you alone, "more essential" notwithstanding. And without communication with other humans, you got no sentience. No sentience, no humanity. You do the math.
 
Experience is even more essential than definition, for without it, there would be "nothing" to define.
Click to expand...
Fine and dandy but your evading the point. Without definition, you can't communicate. But like I said, your not interested in communication. This response confirms this.
Bummer ... . . That's a fly whisk by the way.
Click to expand...
And again, more incoherency and emoticons. You truely are a sad sight.

So what does that mean, outside of what you think it should mean?
Click to expand...
Well I knew you would not know what dignity is. When you experiance it, maybe you could finaly come to terms with what a definition is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom