Thoughts from a Simple Man

[daws101]

Well, you won't be with me because I think religion has been an enormous positive for humans. I don't blame religion for bad things. People do bad things, not institutions.

No, I'm saying that until you can tell me what spirituality is then it's just a word. It means whatever you want it to mean and it conveys no information at all.

Many religions have been enormously positive, but religions are not the topic. They are evidence of human spirituality. You can pretend to be stupid and not understand what is meant by "spiritual" all day long, I can't stop you. I've defined it as whatever "thing" humans feel they are connecting to, that is greater than self, and which Dorito admits is inherent in humans, and all animals, for that matter. Now that I have defined the word for you, maybe you can show me some evidence that humans don't have it. Because all the evidence I see, from the very first civilizations we know of, until this very day, show that humans have always had a very strong and intrinsic spiritual connection to SOMETHING! This is called SPIRITUALITY! It is real, it does exist.

The question then becomes, is spirituality legitimate, do people actually make some kind of real connection? ...and again, the evidence suggests they do. You're not presenting any evidence to the contrary, you're just repeating your cries for some kind of physical evidence to "prove" a spiritual nature, and that is plain old illogical, if it could provide you with physical evidence, it would not be spiritual. Physical evidence is great and wonderful, it provides us with a lot of understanding in our material universe, but it pertains to our five senses, and spiritual nature is not really measurable by those.

As usual Boss is pulling his "spiritual connection" out of his rear end. It is all just a jumbo-jumbo, snake-oil, smoke-and-mirrors act to pretend that the trance state which exists in mammals (including animals) is some kind to "evidence" for the "existence" of his "creator". Furthermore it won't make the slightest difference asking him to provide anything substantive because he relies upon his superstitious "evidence" and accuses you of being wrong when you point out that it doesn't actually exist.

Having become a laughing stock in his original thread Boss is looking to hijack other threads in the vain hope of finding "converts" to his lost cause. Instead there will just be an even greater number of people laughing at his absurd "spiritual evidence".

the crowd goes wild!!!!!

 

[daws101]

As usual Boss is pulling his "spiritual connection" out of his rear end. It is all just a jumbo-jumbo, snake-oil, smoke-and-mirrors act to pretend that the trance state which exists in mammals (including animals) is some kind to "evidence" for the "existence" of his "creator". Furthermore it won't make the slightest difference asking him to provide anything substantive because he relies upon his superstitious "evidence" and accuses you of being wrong when you point out that it doesn't actually exist.

Having become a laughing stock in his original thread Boss is looking to hijack other threads in the vain hope of finding "converts" to his lost cause. Instead there will just be an even greater number of people laughing at his absurd "spiritual evidence".

...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity"

I didn't pull this out of my rear end, I pulled it from a quote you posted yesterday in this thread. It is acknowledgement that humans do attain some value in spiritual connectivity. I think this is a huge step for you, Dorito. I've been using it today as an example to show others, that there is something intrinsic and fundamental about human spirituality.

I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, I don't care what you believe. I won't sit here and let you lie about what isn't factual, and claim you know all there is to know, when you don't. How the hell can you be so arrogant as to proclaim you know what exists in the entire universe? Where is your peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist?

You can try and make fun of me, if that's what you think will work here, I don't believe it will. You're chortling to your own choir with that crap. I came out of the box here with a 4,000-post thread which had over 10k views, I am proud of that to be honest, and I don't see anywhere in the thread where you made a fool of anyone but yourself.

way too many grandes from starbucks...

 

[Foxfyre]

Well since you guys don't seem to wish to discuss the topic but rather make this a beat up on Boss thread, I'll mosey on. Have a good evening gentlemen. Unsubscribing.

 

[Boss]

As usual Boss is pulling his "spiritual connection" out of his rear end. It is all just a jumbo-jumbo, snake-oil, smoke-and-mirrors act to pretend that the trance state which exists in mammals (including animals) is some kind to "evidence" for the "existence" of his "creator". Furthermore it won't make the slightest difference asking him to provide anything substantive because he relies upon his superstitious "evidence" and accuses you of being wrong when you point out that it doesn't actually exist.

Having become a laughing stock in his original thread Boss is looking to hijack other threads in the vain hope of finding "converts" to his lost cause. Instead there will just be an even greater number of people laughing at his absurd "spiritual evidence".

...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity"

I didn't pull this out of my rear end, I pulled it from a quote you posted yesterday in this thread. It is acknowledgement that humans do attain some value in spiritual connectivity. I think this is a huge step for you, Dorito. I've been using it today as an example to show others, that there is something intrinsic and fundamental about human spirituality.

I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, I don't care what you believe. I won't sit here and let you lie about what isn't factual, and claim you know all there is to know, when you don't. How the hell can you be so arrogant as to proclaim you know what exists in the entire universe? Where is your peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist?

You can try and make fun of me, if that's what you think will work here, I don't believe it will. You're chortling to your own choir with that crap. I came out of the box here with a 4,000-post thread which had over 10k views, I am proud of that to be honest, and I don't see anywhere in the thread where you made a fool of anyone but yourself.

Ironic given that you are lying yet again about your "creationist agenda". Nowhere did I claim that the trance state was "spiritual" connectivity but this is just your typical distortion of what others posted to meet your nefarious "creationist agenda". Too bad you also lied by omission that 90% of that thread you are so proud of was about debunking your mindless drivel.

I don't need to make fun of you. You became an object of ridicule all by yourself and judging by the fact that you haven't learned anything in the 1st thread you are about to become one to an even wider audience.

So whatever you do don't let me stop you from making a fool of yourself again!

All you are doing is making my same argument, substituting the phrase "trance state" for "human spirituality." It is indeed ironic that you continue to argue with me on basis of semantics, while agreeing that humans do indeed gain benefit from this "trance state" they put themselves in.

Now the thread you keep mentioning is found on the Religion board, is entitled: Definitive Proof that GOD exists? It is posed as a question because the opening argument explains how we must first derive mutual agreement on terminology and understand the context of the question. The very first point being, if you do not accept or acknowledge spiritual evidence, you cannot prove or be convinced of spiritual nature. 90% of that thread, is people who refuse to accept spiritual evidence, making that very point for me. Nothing you, or anyone else, presented in that thread, refuted or debunked a thing I said in the OP. You continued to confirm my #1 point, over and over again. When you became frustrated, you resorted to ridicule, which you are again doing here. It's a pattern with you, as we can see. You state your unfounded opinion on something, and when it is challenged, you run for the ridicule bucket to dump a big load on your adversary.

I don't personally care if you want to post little emoticons of people digging or claim I am a laughing stock, I am very secure in the statements I have made, which you can't seem to refute with anything more than your opinion and more ridicule. The thing that baffles me about you, is how other people here seem to have some kind of respect for you as an intelligent debater. Maybe I am missing it, because you are about the most dishonest person I've ever encountered in debate, and dawsy has set that standard pretty high. In fact, you and he are about on the same level of dishonest smirkness.

 

[daws101]

...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity"

I didn't pull this out of my rear end, I pulled it from a quote you posted yesterday in this thread. It is acknowledgement that humans do attain some value in spiritual connectivity. I think this is a huge step for you, Dorito. I've been using it today as an example to show others, that there is something intrinsic and fundamental about human spirituality.

I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, I don't care what you believe. I won't sit here and let you lie about what isn't factual, and claim you know all there is to know, when you don't. How the hell can you be so arrogant as to proclaim you know what exists in the entire universe? Where is your peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist?

You can try and make fun of me, if that's what you think will work here, I don't believe it will. You're chortling to your own choir with that crap. I came out of the box here with a 4,000-post thread which had over 10k views, I am proud of that to be honest, and I don't see anywhere in the thread where you made a fool of anyone but yourself.

Ironic given that you are lying yet again about your "creationist agenda". Nowhere did I claim that the trance state was "spiritual" connectivity but this is just your typical distortion of what others posted to meet your nefarious "creationist agenda". Too bad you also lied by omission that 90% of that thread you are so proud of was about debunking your mindless drivel.

I don't need to make fun of you. You became an object of ridicule all by yourself and judging by the fact that you haven't learned anything in the 1st thread you are about to become one to an even wider audience.

So whatever you do don't let me stop you from making a fool of yourself again!

All you are doing is making my same argument, substituting the phrase "trance state" for "human spirituality." It is indeed ironic that you continue to argue with me on basis of semantics, while agreeing that humans do indeed gain benefit from this "trance state" they put themselves in.

Now the thread you keep mentioning is found on the Religion board, is entitled: Definitive Proof that GOD exists? It is posed as a question because the opening argument explains how we must first derive mutual agreement on terminology and understand the context of the question. The very first point being, if you do not accept or acknowledge spiritual evidence, you cannot prove or be convinced of spiritual nature. 90% of that thread, is people who refuse to accept spiritual evidence, making that very point for me. Nothing you, or anyone else, presented in that thread, refuted or debunked a thing I said in the OP. You continued to confirm my #1 point, over and over again. When you became frustrated, you resorted to ridicule, which you are again doing here. It's a pattern with you, as we can see. You state your unfounded opinion on something, and when it is challenged, you run for the ridicule bucket to dump a big load on your adversary.

I don't personally care if you want to post little emoticons of people digging or claim I am a laughing stock, I am very secure in the statements I have made, which you can't seem to refute with anything more than your opinion and more ridicule. The thing that baffles me about you, is how other people here seem to have some kind of respect for you as an intelligent debater. Maybe I am missing it, because you are about the most dishonest person I've ever encountered in debate, and dawsy has set that standard pretty high. In fact, you and he are about on the same level of dishonest smirkness.

does the word concise have any meaning to you?

 

[Boss]

Well since you guys don't seem to wish to discuss the topic but rather make this a beat up on Boss thread, I'll mosey on. Have a good evening gentlemen. Unsubscribing.

Yeah, see... this is what daws does all day now. He gets up in the morning, makes a cup of coffee, then heads over to USMB to see if anyone has posted about "God" anywhere, so he can wade in and wag his e-peen around. If he sees where I have posted, he has to fire off about 30 posts in a row, to demagogue the thread with one-liners and other assorted foolishness, so the posts that I made are well-hidden beneath his loads of crap. What they hate about me is, I don't get trapped into the religious debate they want to have. For all practical purposes, my spiritual views are atheistic, I don't follow organized religion. They aren't used to this, they typically get the same kind of Bible-thumper (no offense) commentary, which they can ridicule and pick apart, and when someone like me comes along, it blows their little minds.

This is why you see Dorito continue to use "creationist agenda" in quotes, as if that's something that has been said by me, when it's a fabrication of his own mind. He insists that I am a closet Christian, trying to hide my true intentions. I have explained to him, according to Christian doctrine, if I am a Christian who is denouncing the Biblical incarnation of God (which I have), that my immortal soul is destined for eternity in hell. Seems a bit of a high price to pay in order to fool a couple of nitwits on a message board. It never seems to dawn on him, that Christians aren't generally secretive about what they believe, they profess their beliefs very strongly. Still, he is convinced I am a stealth Christian, trying to fool him and condemning myself to eternal damnation in the process.

I think he thinks too highly of himself, to be honest.

 

[daws101]

Well since you guys don't seem to wish to discuss the topic but rather make this a beat up on Boss thread, I'll mosey on. Have a good evening gentlemen. Unsubscribing.

Yeah, see...

edited for false declarative statements and assumptions...

 

[The Irish Ram]

As usual Boss is pulling his "spiritual connection" out of his rear end. It is all just a jumbo-jumbo, snake-oil, smoke-and-mirrors act to pretend that the trance state which exists in mammals (including animals) is some kind to "evidence" for the "existence" of his "creator". Furthermore it won't make the slightest difference asking him to provide anything substantive because he relies upon his superstitious "evidence" and accuses you of being wrong when you point out that it doesn't actually exist.

Having become a laughing stock in his original thread Boss is looking to hijack other threads in the vain hope of finding "converts" to his lost cause. Instead there will just be an even greater number of people laughing at his absurd "spiritual evidence".

...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity"

I didn't pull this out of my rear end, I pulled it from a quote you posted yesterday in this thread. It is acknowledgement that humans do attain some value in spiritual connectivity. I think this is a huge step for you, Dorito. I've been using it today as an example to show others, that there is something intrinsic and fundamental about human spirituality.

I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, I don't care what you believe. I won't sit here and let you lie about what isn't factual, and claim you know all there is to know, when you don't. How the hell can you be so arrogant as to proclaim you know what exists in the entire universe? Where is your peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist?

You can try and make fun of me, if that's what you think will work here, I don't believe it will. You're chortling to your own choir with that crap. I came out of the box here with a 4,000-post thread which had over 10k views, I am proud of that to be honest, and I don't see anywhere in the thread where you made a fool of anyone but yourself.

We are made in the image of God. We are a triune. Body, spirit, and soul. Without spirituality, we are pottery. With it, we become a living, individual personality, a soul. For eternity.

 

[Derideo_Te]

...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity"

I didn't pull this out of my rear end, I pulled it from a quote you posted yesterday in this thread. It is acknowledgement that humans do attain some value in spiritual connectivity. I think this is a huge step for you, Dorito. I've been using it today as an example to show others, that there is something intrinsic and fundamental about human spirituality.

I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, I don't care what you believe. I won't sit here and let you lie about what isn't factual, and claim you know all there is to know, when you don't. How the hell can you be so arrogant as to proclaim you know what exists in the entire universe? Where is your peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist?

You can try and make fun of me, if that's what you think will work here, I don't believe it will. You're chortling to your own choir with that crap. I came out of the box here with a 4,000-post thread which had over 10k views, I am proud of that to be honest, and I don't see anywhere in the thread where you made a fool of anyone but yourself.

Ironic given that you are lying yet again about your "creationist agenda". Nowhere did I claim that the trance state was "spiritual" connectivity but this is just your typical distortion of what others posted to meet your nefarious "creationist agenda". Too bad you also lied by omission that 90% of that thread you are so proud of was about debunking your mindless drivel.

I don't need to make fun of you. You became an object of ridicule all by yourself and judging by the fact that you haven't learned anything in the 1st thread you are about to become one to an even wider audience.

So whatever you do don't let me stop you from making a fool of yourself again!

All you are doing is making my same argument, substituting the phrase "trance state" for "human spirituality." It is indeed ironic that you continue to argue with me on basis of semantics, while agreeing that humans do indeed gain benefit from this "trance state" they put themselves in.

Now the thread you keep mentioning is found on the Religion board, is entitled: Definitive Proof that GOD exists? It is posed as a question because the opening argument explains how we must first derive mutual agreement on terminology and understand the context of the question. The very first point being, if you do not accept or acknowledge spiritual evidence, you cannot prove or be convinced of spiritual nature. 90% of that thread, is people who refuse to accept spiritual evidence, making that very point for me. Nothing you, or anyone else, presented in that thread, refuted or debunked a thing I said in the OP. You continued to confirm my #1 point, over and over again. When you became frustrated, you resorted to ridicule, which you are again doing here. It's a pattern with you, as we can see. You state your unfounded opinion on something, and when it is challenged, you run for the ridicule bucket to dump a big load on your adversary.

I don't personally care if you want to post little emoticons of people digging or claim I am a laughing stock, I am very secure in the statements I have made, which you can't seem to refute with anything more than your opinion and more ridicule. The thing that baffles me about you, is how other people here seem to have some kind of respect for you as an intelligent debater. Maybe I am missing it, because you are about the most dishonest person I've ever encountered in debate, and dawsy has set that standard pretty high. In fact, you and he are about on the same level of dishonest smirkness.

Keep on that deep hole of yours and you might eventually find out but no one is holding their breath waiting.

 

[PratchettFan]

But sometimes religion and government are the same thing. I think most Bible scholars accept the story of Adam and Eve as allegory to explain why things are the way they are. At one point their 'eyes were opened' and they saw that they were naked and they were ashamed. And they clothed themselves. The implication is that all human beings since that time have clothed themselves because they are aware that they are naked.

Of course the story, like almost all Biblical stories, is highly nuanced and the symbolism goes far beyond mere nudity, but is the story a reflection of a sense of morality? I would think so. Scholars beieve it comes from some of the earliest manuscripts that are included in the Bible which likely places the story earlier than the invention of writing.

And perhaps you are correct that there is some sort of government in all civilizations but that is not as apparent in the archeological/anthropological record as are the religious expressions. It is the religious expressions that is so consistent in the record that we have to believe it was of great importance to the people.

The point is that a sense of good and evil, a sense of right and wrong, exists in all human cultures for as far back as we can trace a record. The conclusion is that it is not necessarily a learned trait of humanity, but something inate in the human creature who somehow recognizes the source of it as greater than himself/herself.

Humans clothe themselves because they have no fur and they freeze or burn if the don't. What is acceptable as clothing varies from culture to culture with nudity being accepted in tribes where the temperatures are warm. Mores related to clothing are far more likely to be about creating sexual tension and thus encouraging reproduction than about knowledge of our nakedness.

A sense of good and evil are entirely dependent upon one's position within a given society. The very same action can be deemed either good or evil based upon the circumstances. It is not about some great sense of right and wrong, it is about how the members of the society get along.

There really is nothing humans do that can't be explained without any spirituality involved. Human beings are animals and the bulk of their behavior is driven by instinct. Reproduction and survival, attract a mate and maintain your position within the group - that is what it is about.

That is not to say such a thing as spirituality does not exist, only that to claim it is a fact is absurd. The first step is to identify what it is we are talking about and no one has even come close to that so far. to this point it has just been pointing to a behavior - which can be explained from a biological perspective - and say "See. Spirituality."

But both Boss and I have defined spirituality in this context as a discernment of something greater than ourselves, a sense of the divine or supernatural or however one would choose to define that. And it is that same discernment that can be attributed to a sense of right and wrong that seems to exist in all normal human beings. The true sociopath with no sense of right or wrong is so rare he is easily seen as an anomaly and defective among our species.

And just as we cannot prove that other than via our own personal testimony and using the stated testimony and observed behavior of others as support for our testimony, you cannot disprove that our testimony is either absurd or fabrication or wrong.

A fact is a fact whether or not it can be tested and supported by any known methods invented thus far by humans.

Disclaimer: I am stating this as my observation that Boss and I are on the same page on this one single point. If I am wrong about his position, I invite him to correct my observation.

I point to your phrase - "however one would choose to define that." That really is what it boils down to. You are pointing to a behavior and assuming a cause which you cannot define or identify and call it spirituality. I concede the behavior, but that does not mean your assumption as to cause has any validity at all.

Understand I am not saying it does not exist. I personally believe it does, but my belief does not constitute proof nor does it make me right. All of the behavior can be explained rationally with no contact with anything greater than ourselves (that is not how I view spirituality btw, but that is another discussion).

Now, I agree a fact is a fact. That which is... is. However, what we are talking about is calling something a fact. A fact may be a fact, but simply calling something a fact does not make it one. A fact is a fact because it is, not because you believe it to be.

 

[PratchettFan]

Religion is a manifestation of human spirituality, you continue to conflate it with spirituality itself, and that is incorrect. Human spiritual beliefs far predate any known religion...or Government. Now we can bash and trash on religion all day long, for the most part, I'll be right there with you on that, some religions have been nothing but detrimental to man, and they have certainly had a history of violence and hate. But these are NOT human spirituality, they are byproducts of spirituality. Again, analogous to governments, some are terrible and reprehensible, some are noble and just.. we can't single out a bad example of government and condemn all forms of government, past, present and future. It's dishonest.

Well, you won't be with me because I think religion has been an enormous positive for humans. I don't blame religion for bad things. People do bad things, not institutions.

No, I'm saying that until you can tell me what spirituality is then it's just a word. It means whatever you want it to mean and it conveys no information at all.

Many religions have been enormously positive, but religions are not the topic. They are evidence of human spirituality. You can pretend to be stupid and not understand what is meant by "spiritual" all day long, I can't stop you. I've defined it as whatever "thing" humans feel they are connecting to, that is greater than self, and which Dorito admits is inherent in humans, and all animals, for that matter. Now that I have defined the word for you, maybe you can show me some evidence that humans don't have it. Because all the evidence I see, from the very first civilizations we know of, until this very day, show that humans have always had a very strong and intrinsic spiritual connection to SOMETHING! This is called SPIRITUALITY! It is real, it does exist.

The question then becomes, is spirituality legitimate, do people actually make some kind of real connection? ...and again, the evidence suggests they do. You're not presenting any evidence to the contrary, you're just repeating your cries for some kind of physical evidence to "prove" a spiritual nature, and that is plain old illogical, if it could provide you with physical evidence, it would not be spiritual. Physical evidence is great and wonderful, it provides us with a lot of understanding in our material universe, but it pertains to our five senses, and spiritual nature is not really measurable by those.

Ah.... "pretend to be stupid". It seems we have reached that point in the discussion. have a nice day.

 

[Boss]

I point to your phrase - "however one would choose to define that." That really is what it boils down to. You are pointing to a behavior and assuming a cause which you cannot define or identify and call it spirituality. I concede the behavior, but that does not mean your assumption as to cause has any validity at all.

Understand I am not saying it does not exist. I personally believe it does, but my belief does not constitute proof nor does it make me right. All of the behavior can be explained rationally with no contact with anything greater than ourselves (that is not how I view spirituality btw, but that is another discussion).

Now, I agree a fact is a fact. That which is... is. However, what we are talking about is calling something a fact. A fact may be a fact, but simply calling something a fact does not make it one. A fact is a fact because it is, not because you believe it to be.

Yet another profound post of pontification without one single instance of peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support it.

All of the behavior can be explained rationally with no contact with anything greater than ourselves

I disagree. The behavior of human spirituality. It can't be rationally explained without something greater than self. If it was figment of imagination, delusion, fake... it would have died out a long time ago as an attribute, it wouldn't have become our most defining attribute as a species, and the basis for all we've become. Now, there are a lot of irrational explanations, like the irrational notion that humans created spirituality to console fears of death, which other species simply don't exhibit. Or the irrational notion that man invented spirituality to explain the unexplained, before going on to invent math, science, physics, psychology, philosophy, quantum physics, etc., to rationally explain the unexplained.

You are pointing to a behavior and assuming a cause which you cannot define or identify and call it spirituality.

But it has been defined, you are asking for more specific definition. It's identified! Do you have some misunderstanding of what we're talking about? Are you having a personal problem comprehending "spiritual" or what? The word "spirituality" is used to describe a real human attribute that does indeed exist. If you need proof that people practice spirituality, turn on the TV Sunday morning and flip through the channels, you'll see humans practicing the attribute. Look for buildings with a funny looking pointy thing on top, usually adorned by a cross, (it's called a steeple.) In those buildings, you will find human beings practicing spirituality. So for you to continue arguing there is no proof of spirituality, is simply foolish. What you seem to have done here, is confuse "spirituality" with "spiritual nature" and you are arguing there is no proof of spiritual nature, not the attribute of spirituality.

However, you are wrong about that as well, there is plenty of proof that spiritual nature exists, it's just not physical proof. If it were physical proof, the spiritual would be physical in nature. Now, you ask, how do we evaluate spiritual evidence? Well, the same way we evaluate physical evidence, through observation. One of your 'fellow travelers' said it best: "...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity." So we see humans practicing spirituality, and it seems they gain some benefit from this, a sense of inner peace and connectivity. We have the testimony from billions of humans who practiced spirituality, attesting to the enormous benefits they gained.

Of course, you'll say this requires faith, and you'd rather believe in science. But science is dependent upon your faith as well. You need faith in your theories, faith that the physical principles of the universe will remain unchanged, faith that evidence is proof. If you applied the same criteria to spiritual nature, you'd believe in it as well. The reason you don't or can't, is because spiritual nature is not physical nature, and you only acknowledge physical nature.... in spite of all the evidence that spiritual nature exists.

 

[Alter2Ego]

My perspective of the world is a bit different.

Humans are incredibly interesting creatures. Homo sapiens the scientific call us. We make up ideas and concepts for us and everyone else to live by. Laws, beliefs, and morals don't exist without us. People argue to make them. The words we use were created by those who came before us, as well as the meanings these people attached to them. There's something about humans that is incredibly difficult to understand. Although we're born on some random rock in space, and our existences have no objective purposes, we seem to feel that our lives have some meaning. Then again, others feel (or understand?) that life has no real point. We're just, well, odd.

ALTER2EGO -to- WAKE:
That is incorrect. Laws and morals came from Almighty God Jehovah and therefore have preexisted humans.

The words we use were created by those who came before us, as well as the meanings these people attached to them. There's something about humans that is incredibly difficult to understand.

Humans did not create language. The credit for that goes to Almighty God. Humans simply expanded on what they were given.

Although we're born on some random rock in space, and our existences have no objective purposes, we seem to feel that our lives have some meaning. Then again, others feel (or understand?) that life has no real point. We're just, well, odd.

Which "randon rock in space" would that be? Never heard of that one.

BTW: If you feel your life has no objective purpose, why are you putting that on everybody else?

 

[Alter2Ego]

The concepts of right and wrong, too, were created by us. Like what we call "gods," we create all of these things that we live by. Out of the convoluted depths of what we call our "hearts," "minds," or "souls," we make all of these things, and learn about them in our own time.

I argue that there is no right and wrong. Laws have no meaning, because laws are fabrications. Morals, too, are made, not existing by themselves. We raise our offspring to have certain morals and values. This is true for atheists to the religious... every single human out there (I suppose). Morals and values, which are created, are the building blocks of all beliefs. Feelings are the result of chemicals in the brain, as well as all of the things we think and do. I don't understand how feelings exist, or what the triggers are. I'm inclined to believe that there is a scientific explanation for the existence of feelings. It may very well be the inability of the brain to cope with certain situations. Or empathy? If so I wonder what the scientific underpinnings of empathy itself would be (pinning down the material atoms and chemicals involved). When I think of humans I think of them as individuals in a strange and cruel world where they're expected to behave under the expectations and designs of those humans who lived before them. Humans are naturally scared; all have a certain level of fear deep within the unconscious mind. They are likely fearful of disobeying the orders their parents tell them, or the peculiar and unnatural laws society dictates for them. I have no regard for the law, because laws aren't real. Any person in a state of power, where others fear him/her, can scribble down some words and call it a law. Think back to any of the bizarre laws you've ever heard of; you may know of at least one. You may wonder to yourself, "Why would a law like that exist?" I think that people find certain laws to be natural because they feel that it resonates with their feelings, perspectives, and morals/values.

ALTER2EGO -to- WAKE:
You said there is no such thing as right or wrong and that it is all fabrication. Is that so? Then I can safely conclude that you do not have an issue with being a victim of crime. CORRECT?

BTW: Why do you refer to humans as being in a "cruel world"? That concept should not exist in your mind, being that there is no such thing as right or wrong or law. That comment about a "cruel world" is contradictory. Nothing should be considered cruel, because that suggests wrong doing. You did say that there is no such thing as right and wrong; remember?

 

[Pogo]

My perspective of the world is a bit different.

Humans are incredibly interesting creatures. Homo sapiens the scientific call us. We make up ideas and concepts for us and everyone else to live by. Laws, beliefs, and morals don't exist without us. People argue to make them. The words we use were created by those who came before us, as well as the meanings these people attached to them. There's something about humans that is incredibly difficult to understand. Although we're born on some random rock in space, and our existences have no objective purposes, we seem to feel that our lives have some meaning. Then again, others feel (or understand?) that life has no real point. We're just, well, odd.

ALTER2EGO -to- WAKE:
That is incorrect. Laws and morals came from Almighty God Jehovah and therefore have preexisted humans.

Wow. Big bad fonts, aren't you full of yerself.

"Incorrect" is incorrect. Opinions, especially a shaky one like this, cannot be proven true or false.
"Almighty God Jehovah" Almighty circular reasoning you mean.

The words we use were created by those who came before us, as well as the meanings these people attached to them. There's something about humans that is incredibly difficult to understand.

Humans did not create language. The credit for that goes to Almighty God. Humans simply expanded on what they were given.

Wanna buy a bridge?
Language was developed by Paleolithic humanity, specifically the females (who also developed other useful "apps" like agriculture and taxonomy and the concept of time measurement). Don't be absurd.