Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Ten Truths and Irkle's analysis are webs (fabric of reason) spun by the spider (mind). Look at the intricacy of the pattern of reason. I get dizzy just looking at its web.
The spiritual approach is not rationalization, the use of reason to figure things out. And like knitting, the web of naturalism has to begin from a starting point, the premise, that anchors the mind-made story together.
For the benefit of LearnMe, I found the quote below from the internet.
"Before you can actually start knitting, you need to create a row of simple loops around your needles as a base. This process is called cast-on or casting on. Think of it as a stable fundament, much like when you build a house."
The Ten Truths relate and are anchored to the human being, a creature invented by scientism. Nature is a mystery akin to the Tao that cannot be told. Scientism is the mother of the ten thousand things each of which has a rational cause laid out in its bible, the book of knowledge.
I am not a human being. I am a mystery. I know not where I come from. And this is the correct approach to seeking the truth about what I am. Reason cannot be used in this inquiry because it needs a starting point, a base assumption from which to begin.
For still more about what my Ten Truths are and/or are not along with a good deal more explained about all this, since it seems you are interested enough to comment as you do, I also recommend you review my original thread titled Ten Truths.
Meanwhile, I'm doing what I can to understand what you mean or what you can be thinking when you explain "the human being is a creature invented by scientism." I think I see why you and others have piled on your criticisms of my Ten Truths the way you, Irkle and Co. have been doing during my absence. Always fun to tag team like that. Don't you think?
The atheists and pragmatic "realists" here do rely on "scientism" because it is the only basis they have for contemplating our Reality, myuen. Mysticism is such an alien realm they simply are not equipped to even begin to grasp the perceptual and experiential differences. Way too abstract for them. That would be the reason for coining the word, "woo."
Using rational arguments is absolutely shocking? I suppose you would rather get a spiritualist on the witness stand to get in touch with the victim and ask who did it? Or what about a ducking stool for the alleged murderer?
I see you've been kept busy attempting to keep a place for rational argument in this thread and/or forum, and I also see why some of the other threads went quiet. This one seems to have absorbed the attention while I was gone for reasons that give me a bit of a smile.
Most spiders I've observed are well able to leave their web when necessary or appropriate, but either way the spider is pretty good at spinning it's web for the purpose it does. Ah for the love of analogies and the different perspectives that spin them! Gotta love it!
In fact, most of the time I've ever seen spiders, they're not in their web.
The atheists and pragmatic "realists" here do rely on "scientism" because it is the only basis they have for contemplating our Reality, myuen. Mysticism is such an alien realm they simply are not equipped to even begin to grasp the perceptual and experiential differences. Way too abstract for them. That would be the reason for coining the word, "woo."
I see you've been kept busy attempting to keep a place for rational argument in this thread and/or forum, and I also see why some of the other threads went quiet. This one seems to have absorbed the attention while I was gone for reasons that give me a bit of a smile.
regarding mention of "attempting to keep a place for rational argument" in post above, consider this:
"It is when we insist most firmly on everyone else being 'reasonable'
that we become ourselves, unreasonable" ---from the Way of Chuang Tzu
This would be another example of litmus test for a person's ability to get paradox and layered meaning.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-16-2023 at 12:18 PM..
You see nothing contradictory about Jesus asking God to forgive our ancestors for the most savage and brutal treatment imaginable yet telling us God wants us to put people to death for merely "speaking evil ???? Do you even notice the inconsistent and contradictory things in the Bible????
Is seeing what is contradictory with regard to religion now somehow a matter of importance?
Lots of catching up to do in this thread, and plenty to just skim right over as it seems the topic has gone from facts and truths to how we feel about things, like what is the mind of Christ and whether we're for the death penalty. Lots to catch up on indeed and maybe tomorrow as what is in my mind has me going elsewhere now.
Here's to the thinking in all it's amazing forms. Until perhaps tomorrow. Here's to the truth of these matters whatever they may be and however best we may come to know them.
I find it fascinating however that Athiest's will use emotional arguments against the existence of god when convenient ie how can god allow pain, misery and suffering etc. Concomitantly they want to apply logic against the existence of god when it doesn't apply.
Perfectly stated.
Puzzles me no end as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
